Grigor Tatevatsy was one of the famous figures of mediaval Armenia. He was born in 1346 in Vayits-Dzor where spent his childhood. He began to study under Hovhan Vorotnetsy in 1370. Together with the latter, Tatevatsy went to Jerusalem and it was Vorotnetsy who ordained him archimandrite in the district of Daranaghy in 1373.
After Ovhan Vorotnetsy death, his talented student and collogue, Grigor Tatevatsy became the director of Tatev University, who owing to his extraordinary abilities was on e of the obvious organizers of Armenian schooling, when still his teacher was alive.
At the situationof gloomy politic and ruined-economy, it was clear, Tatev University couldn't be in a good condition.There was a lot of evidence about it in the handbooks.
The condition of the University got the worst after the death of director O.Vorotnetsy. Invading Syunik lands, Lanktamur bands began to kill people mercilessly, robbed and ruined, captivated women, old men and children. Tatev University's future existence was becoming impossible. Orbelyans, who were sponsoring and supporting the university, now had to care about their life. Epidemic of various illnesses were raging over the country, starvation was killing people, Being pursued Tatev Students were wandering here and there, always intemperate from parchment manuscript. A brave, diplomat strong-willing person was needed to be able to gather the dispersed lectures and students Grigor Tatevatsy's Vorotnetsy's clever student became the expected individual. A rather large amount of information was safe in the originals, but nothing is clear about the place and when he was born.
Tatevatsy was talented, had rich knowledge skilled speech, with strong character. He was one of the differently educated people, very well informed and skilled person not only in philosophical, divinity, natural, pedagogical and generally called inter-sciences, also painting and music.
It is worth mentioning that Tatevatsy was one of the medieval authors, who was described and praised so prodigally from the scientists. At first he gained those testimonies for organizing the university after H. Vorotnetsy death in the condition of Lanktamur bands invasion, and could continue and enlarge his fruitful scientific-pedagogical activity.
Gr. Tatevatsy was one of the famous faces in the XIV-XV centuries, and generally in the Armenian medieval teaching science. He had an idea, which was new in Armenia, and also internationally developed educational history for the period he lived in.
Tatevatsy wrote the work of "Constitution of Tutored", which was an unique occurrence in the Armenian medieval teaching literature. He had many disturbing questions about the modern life and tried to solve those questions in the way of tutoring. At the aspect teaching Tatevatsy's idea was most valuable, which was about organizing the educational and tutoring affairs according to the children's age and mental ability. So the educational material must be correspondent to the children's capacity and ability, also the tutorial problems and requirements must mostly be correspondent with the children's mental and spiritual ability. The principle of accessibility in Tatevatsy's pedagogical idea was most visible and he always used them.
In most accessions Tatevatsy speaks about the most variable human vices and opposes his registration about kind and virtuous properties. Many medieval Christian morals have the same idea and preached the same rules, but Tatevatsy is different, taught, followed and fulfilled his knowledge and moral-tutorial rules with people.
On Tatevatsy's opinion people create tutoring as "strength" for keeping human soul clean, for obstructing the evil but as a strong way to sow kind properties.
Gr. Tatevatsy was one of the most fruitful philosophers of medieval Armenia. He left many comprehensive works, which were including almost all the fields of philosophical knowledge in the period. For characterizing his ideology the most important works are "Girq Hartsmants" (Question Book, finished in 1397), "Qaroz Girq" (Preachment Book, finished in 1407), "Voskeporik", the commentaries of Aristotle, Porphyry, David Anhaght works and etc.
It is worth mentioning the divinity doesn't have a small place in Tatevatsy's work, a thing that was thoroughly natural and inevitable for medieval scientists and philosophers.
Gr. Tatevatsy pronounced social-political unique idea advanced also for his period. In his capacious works he left remarkable analysis about social-economic occurrences: the produce of material goods and the particularities of their creation especially are valuable for the history of economic thoughts. Tatevatsy has remarkable thesis and observations about concepts of value, price and profit.
The famous scientist was also a graceful poet. Tatevatsy was presented as the greatest representative of Tatev paintings. He was a notable specialist also in writing and music art and played a large role in the development and completeness of there theory.
Grigor Tatevatsy began his work as a scribe. Numerous manuscripts have survived with colophons written by him. However, his name as an illuminator is mentioned only once, in the Gospel illustrated ar the tatev Monastery in the year 1378. The Gospel was copied in 1297 in Eghegis, the "glorified capital" of Syunik. The Scribe of the Gospel, Hovhan,, excuted khorans (canon tables) and marginal illustrations in the same year. Simple plant and geometic designs prevail in the canon tables. In 1378, some one hundred years after its creation, the priest Sargis sent the manuscripts to the Tatev Monastery to be restored and illustrated by the illuminator Grigor.
The following miniature were painted at the same time: portraits of the four evangelists, titlepages and five thematic miniatures: the "Annuncation", " Nativity", "Entry into Jerusalem", "Crucifixion" and "Virgin and Child". The identity of the painter of these miniatures becomes clear from the colophon around the bay in the "Annuncation". The colophon clearly states that the paiunter is Grigor, a student of Hovhan Vorotnetsy. The colophons surviving, as well as general features of the miniatures, created in 1378, served as the basis for art historians to make the statement that all the miniatures made that year had been done by one and the same master, Grigor Tatevatsy. There are, however, certain stylistic differences, which suggest that yet another master, probably a student of Grigor Tatevatsy, also took part in the illumination of the manuscripts. In those miniatures Grigor Tataevatsy's influence is so strong that, at first glance, all Christological miniature paintings are taken as the work of one artist.
Taking the miniature the "Annuncation" created by Grigor Tatevatsy as a basis, we come to the conclusion that the portraits of the evangelists, the titlepages and the miniatures the "annuncation", "Nativity" have been created by Grigor Tatevatsy; the other three miniatures: Entry into Jerusalem", "Crucifixion" and the "Virgin and Child" by the student.
Esential differences which permit speaking of two painters and dividing the miniatures of the manuscript into two groups are expressed, by differences in ways of thinking, concepts and interpretation of form. In Grigor Tatevatsy's works, the figures, expecially those of the "Annuncation", are monumental and to a certain extent, dimonsenial. The folds of the garments are treated by means of colour, emphasizing the harmony and proportions of the body. The face is drawn with a sure, precise hand. As the second painter, his drawings are somewhat weaker and that is especially seen in the figure of the Virgin (in the "Virgin and Child" and "ceucifixion"). The execution of the figures is also not successful; theya re rather stocky and not so proportional. Flatness is stressed and is especially expressed in the folds of the garment; they are stiff and not at the flexible.
The compositional stucture of the page itself is also expressed by the differences in these two groups of miniatures. In the first group, (the portriats of the evangelists, the "Annuncation" and "Nativity"), the composition is encircled by homogenous ornamental frames. In the second group ("Entry into Jerusalem", Crucifixion:, "Virgin and Child"), there is no frame. On eof two sides of the composition have no ornamental frame decorations. It seems as if the painter, by means of this device, wants to free the picture of limiting borders, thus increasing the dimensional possibilities of the miniature.
The miniatures also differ in their colour-range. Grigor Tatevatsy preferrd dark shades of blue, brown, red and ochre; while the second painter preferred lighter shades. It must be said that the latter is professionally inferior to Grigor Tatevatsy.
The above-stated differences do not refute the presence of features common to both groups of miniatures, which were apparently conditioned by the commo aim placed before the painters. They tried to give the manuscript a complete effect, and so the student, in fulfilling this task, endeavoured to imtate his talented master and sometimes even meticulously copied his interpretation of imagesm harmony of colour and ornamens.
The more beautiful miniature of the manuscript is the "Annuncation", where Grigor Tatevatsy's talent, his great imaginative powers and originality are brilliantly expressed. (It is not at all incidental that he placed his signatutre on tgis miniature).
The "Annuncation" is depicted within a closed ornamental frame and the composition is well balanced. Its focal point is the small bay is which there is a jug of water. There are decorative arches to the left an fthe right of the bays. The figures are placed against an ornamental background, which give the composition balnce. The background, entirely covered with geometric and plant designs, depries the miniature of death. This lack is the reason why it seems as though the figures do not have sufficient space. This device stresses the monumentalism of the figures.
The image of Mary is quite espressive. Her features, face, eyes and especially thick eyebrows uniting over her nose, form an unusual arch, emphasizing the Armenian woman's ethnic type.
The angel and Mary are bound by the same action but they represent different emotional states, revealed also by menas of the colouring of the miniture. Warm red and yellow prevail in the clothing of the angel bearing happy tidings; while in Mary's garmant, the combination of cold blue and deep violet shows her contradictory feelings, that of joy and deep concern. Grat skill is displayed in depicting the figures, their gestures, and their movements. Somewhat elongated figures are remarkable for their shapeliness and proportions. Both the Virgin and the Archangel are distinguished by their grandeur and beauty. It is appropriate here to recall the definition of beauty given by Grigor tatevatsy, which is in consonance with the images created by him. "one should know that the beauty of the image becomes similar to that of the prototype revealed in three-fold manner:first in the proportionality of form; second in the balance of the parts, and third in proper radinece.
Gr. Tatevatsy was one of the most convex representatives of medieval Armenian science, who with his work denominated all created values of Armenian scientific thoughts in the developed feudal age. The unsteady political condition of the country, the barbarity of Lanktamur bands, overall poverty and starvation made a desperate situation for Gr. Tatevatsy and his students. Avoiding the frequent persecution of conquerors he had to often change the school place. They had also been to Vorotnavanq (1386), and even to the Shahaponq castle (1387).
In 1391 Tatevatsy again nestled in Aprakunyants monastery of Yernjak, but here also he had settled down in Tatev, with the invitation of prince Smbat Orbelyan. According to the above-mentioned evidence, a conclusion must be made that the conditions in Tatev were more favorable and the director enlarged his activities.
But it is worth mentioning, that in the years when Tatevatsy was an inspector, unfortunately the condition of already separated and the belittled prince's houses was worse in Syunik:
Though no more having the previous position and capacity, the representatives of the Burtelyan, branch of once powerful Orbelyan family did all they could to defend and support financially Tatev University.
At the end of XIV century Tatev and some neighbor villages were still under the control of Smbat, the grandson of Grand Burtel, and Gr. Tatevatsy often asked him for help in urge of need. So in 1390 when overall starvation was broken out in Syunik the principle went to place of Orbelyan to Smbat price, the son of Ivane, the grandson of Burtel for an organization of support for the students of Tatev University.
The period between Gr.Tatevatsy consolidation in Tatev and his death is considered the most fruitful, blooming time in University activity (1343-1409). The fame of Tatev School was so big, that from everywhere studious students were eager to go there.
Most of University students spoke proudly about being taught of Tatevatsy, they were educated and brought up under his control. The contemporaries decided the people education degree in comparison with Tatev School and many virtues were to the name of Tatevatsy . He had an authority in the political, social and religion life of the country.
Because of the political and economical hardships of the country Tatevatsy had to leave Tatev and went to Metzopa monastery in Archesh, So the mobile life of Tatev University was repeating itself, and this time the whole institution more than 100 students had to move.
At the beginnings of 1409, Tatevatsy nestled in Metzop again, from where after years owing to the support of his nephew and his well-deserved student Araqel Syunetsy bishop and others he returned to Tatev.
On the 27-th of December in 1409 about a month after coming back to Tatev, the famous director Gr. Tatevatsy died.
For the purpose of etemalizing the bright memory of the Tatevatsy, a group of people from the village of Brnakot in Syunik Tzghuk region under Hovakim bishop Syunetsy control built a mausoleum on his dust concluded in the hall of Tatev big temple in 1787. In a large inscription dug on the mausoleum Tatevatsy is called "seven-light principle", "second gold speaker", "blissful teacher", "the forth instructor" and other epithets.
For the honor of Tatevatsy before he died in 1401 Araqel Syunetsy built a stone cross.

Text is based on two sources:
Armenian Miniature, compiled by Alvida Mirzoyan, Yerevan, 1987, pp. 30–32,
A. Gzoyan, Tatev University, Yeravan, 2003, pp. 15–19, 34–39

.