SG Heritage Dictionary

Armenian [Noun] Webster's Dictionary 1828

1. A native of Armenia, or the language of the country.

2. Armenian bole is a species of clay from Armenia, and found in other countries. But the term, being of uncertain signification, is rejected in modern mineralogy. [ See Bole .]

3. Armenian stone, a soft blue stone, consisting of calcarious earth or gypsum, with the oxyd of copper. It is too soft to give fire with steel, loses its color when heated, and does not admit of a polish.

Armenian [Adjective] Webster's Dictionary 1913

Of or pertaining to Armenia.

Armenian [Noun] Webster's Dictionary 1913

1. A native or one of the people of Armenia; also, the language of the Armenians.

2. An adherent of the Armenian Church, an organization similar in some doctrines and practices to the Greek Church, in others to the Roman Catholic.

Armenian Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary

CHURCH, a branch, originally, of the Greek church, residing in Armenia. They probably received Christianity in the fourth century. Mr. Yeates gives the most recent account of them:-- “Their whole ecclesiastical establishment is under the government of four patriarchs; the first has his residence in Echmiadzin, or Egmiathin, near Irivan; the second, at Sis, in the lesser Armenia; the third, in Georgia; and the fourth, in Achtamar, or Altamar, on the Lake of Van; but the power of the two last is bounded within their own diocesses, while the others have more extensive authority, and the patriarch of Egmiathan has, or had, under him eighteen bishops, beside those who are priors of monasteries. The Armenians every where perform divine service in their own tongue, in which their liturgy and offices are written, in the dialect of the fourth or fifth centuries. They have the whole Bible translated from the Septuagint, as they say, so early as the time of Chrysostom. The Armenian confession is similar to that of the Jacobite Christians, both being Monophysites, acknowledging but one nature in the person of Christ; but this, according to Mr. Simon, is little more than a dispute about terms; few of them being able to enter into the subtilties of polemics. “In the year 1664, an Armenian bishop, named Uscan, visited Europe for the purpose of getting printed the Armenian Bible, and communicated the above particulars to Mr. Simon. In 1667, a certain patriarch of the lesser Armenia visited Rome, and made a profession of faith which was considered orthodox, and procured him a cordial reception, with the hope of reconciling the Armenian Christians to the Roman church; but, before he got out of Italy, it was found he had prevaricated, and still persisted in the errors of his church. ...

Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary
[447 words — estimated reading time: 3 minutes]

Armenian church Encyclopedia Britannica

ARMENIAN CHURCH, The, is one of the oldest Eastern Christian churches not in communion with the orthodox Greek Church or with the Church of Rome....

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.)

9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 2, p. 548
[1,542 words — estimated reading time: 9 minutes]

Armenian language Encyclopedia Britannica

ARMENIAN LANGUAGE. The Armenian or Haikan language is an offshoot of the Iranian branch of the IndoGermanic family of languages. Its earliest stage is probably represented in the cuneiform inscriptions of Van, on which see Hincks, in Jour. P. Asiatic Soc., vol. ix. (1848), and Mordtmann, in Zeitschrift d. deutschen morgenl. Gesellschaft, vol. xxvi, (1872). The existing literature of the Armenians dates from the 4th century, and is essentially and exclusively Christian. The translation of the Old Testament by Sahag Bartevatsi, and of the N ew by Miesrob, are among its oldest monuments. The dialect in which this version is written, and in which it is still publicly read in their churches, is called the old Armenian. The modern Armenian not only departs from the elder form by dialectic changes in the native elements of the language itself, but also by the great intermixture of Persian and Turkish words, which has resulted from the conquest and subjection of the country, and by the character of inversion in the structure of its sentences. Of its two principal dialects,—the Western, spoken in Constantinople and Asia Minor, and the Eastern, spoken by the Armenians scattered over Tartary, Persia, and India,—the latter approaches more nearly to the idiom of the ancient language. According to Philostratus (Vita Apollonii, ii. 2), the Armenians had an alphabet of their own in the 2d century a.d., of which, however, no traces remain. The invention of the present alphabet is ascribed to Miesrob at the beginning of the 5th century; it is probably an amplification of the previous one upon the Greek system of arrangement, and consists of thirty-eight letters, the two last of which, 6 and f 1 were added after the 12th century. The order of writing is from left to right. The capital ...

9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 2, p. 549
[587 words — estimated reading time: 4 minutes]

Armenian literature Encyclopedia Britannica

ARMENIAN LITERATURE. With the exception of a few fragments incorporated in later writers, the pre-Christian literature of Armenia has totally perished. The early Armenians seem to have possessed a body of traditional and historical songs analogous to the Shah-nameh of Persia, the memory of which lingered long among the common people, especially in the province of Koghten. Portions of these have been preserved by Moses of Khorene, and investigated by several modern scholars (see Vebk Hnuin Hayasdani, i.e., Chants hist, et pop. de l , Ancienne Arménie, J. B. Emin, Moscow, 1850; Dulaurier, Peυ. des D. Mondes, 1852, vol. xiv.; “Etudes sur les chants hist, de l'anc s Arménie,” in Journal Asiatique, 1852). With the introduction of Christianity a great development of literary activity took place, which chiefly expended itself, however, in translations from the Syriac and Greek. Armenian students were found in Athens and Byzantium, Alexandria and Rome, and some of them attained celebrity in their chosen pursuits. To this tendency we owe the preservation, in Armenian, of many works that have perished in their original languages. Such are the Chronicle of Eusebius, some of the works of Philo, Bardesanes, Faustus of Byzantium, Lerubna of Edessa, &c. (see Wenrich, De auctorum Graecorum versionibus Arabicis, Armeniacis, dec., Leipsic, 1842). The 5th century was one of the most flourishing periods of Armenian literature. It was then that .Miesrob accomplished that modification and development of the Armenian alphabet which has frequently procured him the honour of being regarded as its inventor (see Fr. Muller, lieber den Ursprung der Armenischen Schrift, 1865). The Old Testament was translated from the Septuagint by Isaac or Sahak, the patriarch (critical edition, Ven. 1805). ...

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).

9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 2, p. 550
[866 words — estimated reading time: 5 minutes]

Armenian version Encyclopedia Britannica

ARMENIAN VERSION. The Armenian version of the Bible was undertaken in the year 410 by Miesrob, with the aid of his pupils Joannes Ecelensis and Josephus Pal· neusis. It appears that the patriarch Isaac first attempted, inconsequence of the Persians having destroyed all the copies of the Greek version, to make a translation from the Peshito; that Miesrob became his coadjutor in this work; and that they actually completed their translation from the Syriac. But when the above-named pupils, who had been sent to the ecclesiastical council at Ephesus returned, they brought with them an accurate copy of the Greek Bible. Upon this Miesrob laid aside his translation from the Peshito, and prepared to commence anew from a more authentic text. Imperfect knowledge of the Greek language, however, induced him to send his pupils to Alexandria to acquire accurate Greek scholarship; and, on their return, the translation was accomplished. Moses of Khorene, the historian of Armenia, who was also employed, as a disciple of Miesrob, on this version, fixes its completion in the year 410; but he is contradicted by the date of the Council of Ephesus, which necessarily makes it subsequent to the year 431. In the Old Testament this version adheres closely to the LXX., but, in the book of Daniel, it has followed the version of Theodotion. Its most striking characteristic is, that it does not follow any known recension of the LXX. Although it more frequently agrees with the Alexandrine text, in readings which are peculiar to the latter, than it does with the Aldine or Complutensian text, yet, on the other hand, it also has followed readings which are only found in the last two. Bertholdt accounts for this mixed text by assuming that the copy of the Greek Bible sent from Ephesus contained the ...

9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 2, p. 550
[526 words — estimated reading time: 4 minutes]