According to their own legendary history, in which ancient traditions are curiously incorporated with Biblical lore, the Armenians are descendants of Ξaik, a spn of Togarmah, the grandson of Japhet, who fled from the tyranny of Belus of Assyria and settled in the country which now, in their language, bears his name. The conquest of the land by Semiramis, and the revolt of Barvir against Sardanapalus, are the chief events in the early ages. Tigranes or Dikran is regarded as the contemporary and ally of Cyrus, and the history of his reign is recorded in detail. His son, Vahakin, who succeeded him, was celebrated for his strength, and was deified after his death. The dynasty came to an end in the person of Vahi, who was defeated by Alexander the Great, 328 B.c.

The Armenians threw off the Macedonian yoke in 317 β.c., and chose Ardvates as their king; but on his death, about thirty-three years afterwards, they submitted to the Seleucids of Syria. About 190 b.c., Artaxias, who had been appointed governor by Antiochus the Great, took advantage of that monarch’s defeat by the Romans and proclaimed Armenia Major independent. It was this prince who afforded an asylum in his court to the exiled Hannibal. The example of revolt was followed in Lesser Armenia by Zadriades, whose descendants maintained their position till the time of Tigranes IL, when their territory was annexed to Greater Armenia.

About the middle of the 2d century b.c., the great Parthian king, Mithridates I., who had already extended his empire over Syria, established his brother, Valarsaces (Wagharshag), in Armenia, and thus rendered him the founder of one of the most important branches of the Arsacid family. The new king greatly promoted the prosperity of the country by founding cities, establishing laws, and rewarding persons of talent. The most celebrated of his successors was his great-grandson, Tigranes II., who made himself master of Syria, the Lesser Armenia, and many Parthian provinces, and would, ’probably, have been the founder of an extensive empire had not the solicitations of his fathef-in-law, Mithridates of Pontus, brought him into collision with the Romans. In reward for the submission which he ultimately made to Pompey, he was allowed to keep possession of Armenia, with the exception of the provinces of Sophene and Gordyene, which were erected into a separate kingdom for his son, Tigranes. He ] continued a faithful ally of the Romans till his death, 1 about 55 b.c., when he was succeeded by his son, Arta- i vasdes, who, having adopted a more independent policy, was taken prisoner by Antony and carried to Alexandria, where he was afterwards beheaded by Cleopatra in 30 b.c.

A period follows of nominal Roman supremacy and actual anarchy; 170 independent’ families all asserting themselves to the best of their ability, and a few of them succeeding in establishing their petty principalities. At length a usurper, Erovant, an Arsacid by the female line, made himself in some sort master of all the kingdom about 58 A.D., and maintained his position till he was expelled by Ardashes (Exedarus), a more direct representative of the race, who was repeatedly dethroned and restored by Parthian and Roman interference, but managed to do something for the amelioration of his country.

When the Arsacids were driven from the Persian throne 1 by the Sassanid Artaxerxes (Ardeshir), Chosroes the Great 1 of Armenia naturally took up arms in their defence; and ‘ he maintained the contest till his assassination by Anag, an Arsacid prince of Persia, when Armenia became subject to the Persian dynasty, 232 a.d. In the massacre of the royal family which ensued, none escaped but Tiridates (Tirdat), a son of Chosroes, who fled to Rome, and afterwards, with the help of the Romans, established himself on the throne, 259 a.d. The first act of his reign was the persecution of the Christians, who had begun to take root in the country during the previous century. St Gregory, surnamed the Illuminator, was cast into prison; but the king being, as he supposed, miraculously cured of a dangerous distemper by the saint, the Christian religion was embraced by himself and most of his people. The introduction of Christianity tended to arouse the animosity of the Persians; and from this period Armenia became the theatre of almost uninterrupted struggles between that nation and the Romans, until Theodosius the Great agreed to cede to Persia the eastern part of the country, which was thence called Persarmenia, while the western part was annexed to the Roman empire. Theodosius nominated Arsaces IV., then nominal king of Armenia, governor of the western division; and the Persian king, to conciliate the people, appointed Chosroes III., a descendant of another branch of the Arsacids, governor of the eastern part. The rule of the Arsacids in Persarmenia ended with Ardashes IV., who was dethroned by Bahram V. of Persia in 428; and from that date Armenia ceased to be a kingdom, and was ruled till 632 by Persian marzbans or governors. The Persians had all along endeavoured to subvert Christianity, and for that purpose had recourse to the most cruel persecutions. Frequent insurrections were the consequence, one of the most remarkable being that which was led by Vartan (see Neumann’s History of Vor fan, by Elisoeus, 1830). From 632 till 839 Armenia was the scene of almost incessant struggles between the Greeks and Mahometans, while its own native prince3 added to the confusion by their rivalries and strife. Ashod, a member of the Pagratid family, which claimed to be of ancient Jewish origin, became master of Central and Northern Armenia about 743, and, being recognised by the caliphs as an independent prince, founded a dynasty which continued till 1079, when Cakig II was assassinated, and his kingdom incorporated with the Greek empire. Another family, which claimed the parricide sons of Sennacherib as its founders, held possession of the province of Vasburagan and some of the neighbouring territory, and maintained its independence till 1080, when it likewise succumbed to Byzantium. During the same period the district northwest of lake Van was held by the Mussulman race of the Merwanids,—called by the Armenians the princes of Abra-huni,—who gave a nominal submission now to the Byzantine government and now to the sultans.

Rhupen (Ruben), a relative of the last king of the Pagratid dynasty, retired to the north of Cilicia, and founded in the shelter of the Taurus a small principality, which gradually extended its boundaries to the Mediterranean, and became known as the kingdom of Lesser Armenia. The Rhupenians entered into alliance with the Crusaders, and formed, along with the kings of Cyprus, the last bulwark of Christianity in the East. They welcomed as allies the Mongolian hordes that overran Asia in the 13th century, and shared in the hostility and vengeance of the Mamelukes. The last king of the family, Leon, or Ghevond VI., was taken prisoner in spite of a Vigorous defence at Gaban in 1375, and, after six years of captivity in Egypt, wandered through Europe till his death, at Paris, in 1393. (See Langlois, Essai sur les rois de la dyn. Roupénienne, St Petersb., 1860; Documents pour servir à l’hist. des Lusignans de la P. Arm., 1859; Le Trésor des chartes T Arménie, 1863.)

About the middle of the 14th century the Kurds had possession of the south of Armenia, the Persians of the north, and the Ottomans of the west. The whole was subjected to the sway of Tim our, of whose cruelties a graphic account has been left by the Armenian, Thomas of Medzoph (see Nève’s Etude sur Thomas de MedzopK). It was mainly governed by Persian officials during the next century, the only national authority being the patriarch. Tn 1604 Shah Abbas, in his contest with Ahmed I., laid the whole country waste, and forcibly transplanted about 40,000 of the inhabitants into Persia, where they settled principally in Ispahan and New Julfa, as they fondly called the city which they founded. Since then the Armenians have had no political position as a nation, though they continue to form an important and valuable portion of the population in Russia, Turkey, and Persia, and their colonies have spread into almost all quarters of the globe. It was calculated, about 1850, that there were approximately four millions of Armenians in the world, of whom 2,500,000 were inhabitants of the Ottoman empire, 1,200,000 of the Russian empire, 25,000 in the empire of Austria, 150,000 in Persia and Azerbijan, 25,000 in continental India and the Archipelago of Asia, and the remaining 100,000 scattered in various countries (Dulau-rier). According to a recent statistician of Turkey (Lejean), there are 400.000 Armenians in the European part of the empire, of whom more than 200,000 are in Constantinople itself. Originally ∙a brave and warlike people, they have become distinguished for their peaceful character and their submissiveness to the government of every country in which they live. (See the articles of Dulaurier and Prince Dadian in Revue des D. Mondes, 1854 and 1867.)

See Saint-Martin’s Mémoires sur l’Arménie, Paris, 1818-19. Brosset’s Vοy. Archeοl. dans la Géorgie et dans l’Arménie en 1847-8, Paris, 1849-51; Boré’s “Arménie” in L’Univers Pittoresque; Curzon’s Armenia, London, 1854; Jaubert’s Voy. en Arménie, &c.; Mo-ier’s Zweite Reise durch Persien u. Armenien; Serpos’s Compendio storico concernente la naz. Arm.; Collection des hist, anc. et mod. de I' Arm., by Langlois; Recueil d’actes et documens rel. à l’hist. de la nation Arm., 3 vols., Moscow; Chamich’s History, trans, by Avdall, Calcutta, 1827; Phahnazarian’s Esquisse de l’hist. de ÎArm., 1856; Dulaurier, Rcch. sur la chron. Arm.; Goerres, Die Japhetitcn und ihre gemeinsame Heimath in Armen., Munich, 1845.

1. History.— This is divided into three periods, from 34 to 302 a.d., from 302 to 491, and from 491 to the present time. (1.) The first period is mainly legendary. The Church of Armenia claims an older than apostolic foundation. Our Lord, they say, corresponded by letter with Akbar, prince of Ur or Orfa; and the apostle Thaddeus, accompanied by Bartholomew and Judas, preached the gospel, and founded a Christian church in Armenia as early as the year 34 a.d. But whatever the value of these primitive traditions, Armenia could hardly be said to have a church at all during this first period, although there are evident traces of Christian worship in the country at a very early time. (2.) The historical founder of the Armenian Church was S. Gregory, called the “Illuminator.” He was a prince of the reigning family of the Arsacidae, who, having been converted to Christianity, was eager for the conversion of his countrymen. In his missionary work he endured many persecutions, but at last managed to win over the king of Armenia and a considerable portion of his subjects. At the king’s desire Gregory went to Caesarea, or Sis, and was there consecrated bishop of Armenia (302 a.d.) His successors afterwards assumed the title of . Patriarch, subsequently Catholicos, and under their rule the infant church grew and prospered. It had to struggle against the opposition of heathen fellow-countrymen and Persian conquerors, but it succeeded in establishing itself in the hearts of the people. The Bible was translated in 410 a.d. ; the Liturgy, said to be very old, was improved; and the Armenian bishops took part in several of the synods of the church, notably in the third oecumenical council (Ephesus, 431 a.d.) About 450 a.d. the Armenian Church suffered a severe persecution, which prevented any of the bishops being present at the fourth oecumenical council (Chalcedon, 451 a,d.), at which Eutyches and hià followers, the extreme opponents of Nestorius, were condemned. The Armenian Church never accepted the decisions of the Council of Chalcedon, and, in 491 a.d., the patriarch, in full synod, solemnly annulled them. This act led to the separation of the Armenian from the orthodox Greek Church. (3.) The period of schismatic existence divides into three—(a), from 491 a.d. to the middle of the 15th century; (δ), from the middle of the 15th to the middle of the 18th centuries; (c), from 1746 down to the present time. It is difficult to account for the schism of the Armenian Church; according to common report, the Armenians were Eutychians, and were virtually cut off from the church when the Council of Chalcedon condemned that heresy, but their own account of the matter in their authoritative documents is very different. They allege that they were misled by false reports when they annulled the fourth council; that it was reported to them that the council had decided in favour of the Nestorian heresy, and that this mistake was confirmed by a letter to the patriarch upon the subject from the bishop of Rome, in which certain words were used which might easily be interpreted in the Nestorian sense. The Patriarch Narses, in his letter to the Emperor Manuel Com-nenus, in 1166, distinctly repudiates the Eutychian heresy, but it is to be noted that, in defending the doctrinal views of his church, he employs the somewhat vague terms in use before the Council of Chalcedon, not those stricter definitions which were in use afterwards; he employs (rvppi^v;, for instance, in its pre-Chalcedonian meaning, not ίνωσις. However occasioned, the separation was gradual; Armenian bishops attended the 5th, 6th, and 7th oecumenical councils (2d of Constantinople, 553; 3d of Constantinople, 680; 2d of Nicaea, 788), and the church acknowledges the decrees of those councils as binding. Cut off from the Eastern Church, the Armenian bishops became all the more closely identified with their native country, and kept alive patriotic feeling in times of great national distress. In spite of many national calamities, foreign domination, internal dissensions, and even banishment, the Armenian Church preserved its character, doctrine, and discipline until the middle of the 15th century, when great dissensions arose which -resulted in a schism. These quarrels were occasioned by Jesuit missionaries, who endeavoured to make the Armenians adopt the doctrine, liturgy, and ceremonies of the Roman Church. They succeeded in prevailing upon a great number of the adherents of the Armenian Church to separate from the community and join the communion of Rome. The Catholic Armenians, as they are called, first became a separate community towards the end of the 16th century; their existence has proved a source of great weakness to the orthodox church, and through their exertions the old persecutions were revived. This state of matters went on until the middle of the 18th century, when the patriarch sought and obtained the intervention of Peter the Great of Russia. Since then the Armenian Church has found shelter under the protection of Russia. There is a reformation now going on in the Armenian Church, and a Reformed Church has arisen, which seeks to ally itself with the Calvinist Churches of Europe and America.

2. Doctrines.— These are almost identical with those of the orthodox Greek Church. The Armenians accept the first three, and the fifth, sixth, and seventh oecumenical councils, denying that of Chalcedon only, but, as has been explained, they, in their authoritative documents, reject the Eutychian heresy, which that council was called to condemn. The chief source of information as to the doctrine is contained in the letter of Narses above referred to. They reject the Western addition of filioque to the Nicene Creed, and deny the distinctive doctrines of the Roman Church.

3. The Liturgy is said to date from the 1st century, and to have been founded on that of the Church of Jerusalem. St Gregory remodelled it, and introduced the Nicene Creed, using that edition which contains the damnatory clause, and adding a conclusion of his own. Prayers of John Chrysostom and of Basil the Great were introduced in 430 a.d. Prayers are said for the dead, and entreaty is made for the pardon of their sins, but the church does not believe in purgatory, nor admit of indulgences. The holy days are Sundays, the chief feasts observed in the Eastern Church, and ten national saints’ days. Christmas is celebrated on the 6th of January, on the day of the Epiphany, and not on the 25th of December.

4. Sacraments.— The Church of Armenia has the seven sacraments: baptism, confirmation, the eucharist, penance, ordination, marriage, and extreme unction, Baptism is by immersion; the child is immersed three times; it is then anointed with holy oil, is confirmed, and partakes of the eucharist in both elements. Confirmation is administered to children immediately after baptism. The eucharist is administered in both elements to all members of the church; the bread is always unleavened, and the wine is not mixed with water. Confession must precede the partaking of the eucharist, save in the case of children under seven years of age. Penance consists of confession and fasting. Ordination is by anointing with the holy oil. The τnαrnαye service is almost the same as in the Greek Church. In extreme unction only priests are anointed with oil. Laity have the prayers said over them, but are not anointed.

5. The Clergy.— There is the threefold order— bishops, priests, and deacons; and there are three degrees of episcopal rank—the archbishops (chief among whom is the patriarch or catholicos), the bishop, and the vartabed, or doctor of theology, who has frequently charge of a diocese, with episcopal functions. The clergy are further divided into the black and the white. The black clergy are monks, and are alone eligible for the higher clerical offices; the white clergy include the parish priests and lower clergy. The clergy may marry before ordination, but not after; and a priest’s widow is not allowed to remarry. The priesthood is hereditary. During his father’s or grandfather’s lifetime the heir may follow a secular calling; but he must leave this and enter the priest’s office on the death of the priest he is heir to. There are four patriarchs, who have their seats at Constantinople, Jerusalem, Sis, and Etchmiadzin. The clergy of all ranks are supported entirely by the free-will offerings of the people.

Authorities :— The Life and Times of S. Gregory the Illuminator, translated, by S. C. Malan, 1868. (This is a translation of authoritative papers, and includes a short summary of the state of the Armenian Church. It is founded on authoritative documents.) The Divine Liturgy of the Armenian Church, transi, by S. C. Malan, Lond. 1870 (very carefully done). Histoire, Dogmes, Traditions et Liturgie de l'Eglise Arménienne, Paris, 1855 (fuller, but not so accurate). Codex Mysterii Missal Armenorum seu Liturgia Armena, Pome, 1677 (Lat and Armen. Later editions of the Liturgy published at Rome belong to the Catholic Armenian Church, and are worthless). (T. Μ. L.)

The 12th and 13th centuries form a second great period of Armenian literature, during which the influence of Syriac is again perceptible. Gregory Magistros, who introduced the Arabic system of versification into his native language, Narses of Lampron, Mekhitar Kosh (sec Joum. Asiat., 1841), John Vanacan {i.e., the Monk), Vardan the Great {Journ. Asiat., 1867), Vahram, and Sempad, are a few of the numerous writers of note. From the 14th to the 18th century there is a falling off, the most important work, perhaps, being Thomas of Medzoph’s History of Timour. In the 18th century a revival took place, which was mainly due to the Mekhita-rists of Venice (see Langlois, Notice sur le couvent Arménien de V île Saint-Lazare de Venise, Paris, 1863), and since then Armenian literature has acquired a development which is remarkable in the absence of national unity. Printing presses have been established in most of the cities where Armenians are numerous, the ancient writers have been published and studied, the vernacular literature has been enriched both by original productions and translations, and magazines and newspapers have been established in many of the centres of Armenian activity. The study of the Armenian language and literature by the savants of Western Europe has shared in the general development of Indo-European philology. The earlier labours of Rivola (1633), Villote, La Croze, Osgan, Villefroy, and Freret have been almost completely eclipsed by such men as Saint Martin (an Armenian by race), Dulaurier, Langlois, Boré, and Prudhomme in France; Nève in Holland; Emin, Patcanian,and Brosset in Russia; and Windischmann, Marie, Spiegel, Justi, Neumann, and Petermann in Germany.

See Somal’s Quadro della storia lei. di Arm.; Karikin, Hist, de lΛ lit. Arm.; Patcanian, “Cat. de la lit. Arm.,” in Mélanges Asiat., vol. iv. Petersb., I860; Neumann’s Versuch einer Gesch. der Arm. Lit.; Alishan’s Tableau succinet de l'hist. et de la lit. de VArm., 1860; Hamachod’s Chronological succ. of Arm. Patriarchs (in Armenian).