and Mahometans, while its own native princes added to the confusion by their rivalries and strife. Ashod, a mem ber 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 con tinued 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 north west 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 Byzan
tine 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 Mediter ranean, 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 ven geance of the Mamelukes. The last king of the family, Leon, or Ghevoud 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, Esaai sur les rois de la dyn. Roupenienne, St Petersb., I860; Documents pour servir a I 1 hist, des Lusignans dc la P. Arm., 1859; Le Tresor des chartes d Armcnie, 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 Timour, of whose cruelties a graphic account has been left by the Armenian, Thomas of Medzoph (see Neve s Etude sur Thomas de Medzoph). It was mainly governed by Persian officials during the next century, the only national authority being the patriarch. In 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 ia 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 approxi mately 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. Mondts, 1854 and 1867.)
See Saint-Martin s Memoircs sur I Armenie, Paris, 1818-19. Brosset s Voy. Archeol. dans la Georgie et dans T Armenie en 1847-8, Paris, 1849-51; Bore s " Armenie" ia L Univers P Moresque ; Curzon s Armenia, London, 1854 ; Jaubert s Voy. en Anncnic, &c. ; Morier s Zweite Heise durch Persicn u. Armenien; Serpos s Compendia storico concernentc la naz. Arm. ; Collection des hist, anc. et mod. de I Ann., by Langlois; Rccue.il d actes et documens rel.al hist. de la nation, Arm., 3 vols., Moscow; Chamich s History, trans, by Avdall, Calcutta, 1827 ; Phalmazarian s Esquisse de I hist. de I Arm., 1856; Dulaurier, Rcch. sur la chron. Arm. ; Goerres, Die Japhetitcn und ihre gcmeinsame Heimath in Armen., Munich, 1845.
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.
302 A.D., from 302 to 491, and from 491 to the present time. (1.) The first period ia 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 Arsacid3, 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 Csesarea, 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 his 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 1 5th century ; (6), 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 Comnenus, in 1166, distinctly repudiates the Eutychian heresy,
but it is to be noted that, in defending the doctrinal views