Language.
The Armenian language belongs to the group called Indo-European, of
which the Iranic and Indic tongues formed one branch, and Greek,
Albanian, Italian, Celtic, Germanic and Baltic-Slavonic dialects the
other great branch. Unlike most of these, Armenian lost its genders long
before the year A.D. 400, when the existing literature begins. Modern
Persian similarly has lost gender; and in both cases the liberation must
have been due to attrition of other tongues which had a different system
of gender or none at all. So the Armenians were ever in contact on the
north with the Iberians of the Caucasus who had none, and with the
Semitic races on the south and east which had other ways of forming
genders than the Indo-European tongues.
From the original Armenian stock can be readily distinguished a mass of
Old and Middle Persian loan-words. These are so numerous that for a time
Armenian was classed as an Iranian tongue. For more than a thousand
years, say until A.D. 640, Armenia was an appanage of the realm of the
Persians and Parthians. Until A.D. 428 the Armenian throne was occupied
by a younger branch of the Arsacid dynasty that ruled in Persia until
the advent of the Sassanids (c. A.D. 226), and the internal polity and
court administration of Armenia were modelled on the Persian or
Parthian. Accordingly over 200 proper and personal names in Armenia were
Old Persian, as well as 700 names of things. If we count in the
derivative forms of these words we get at least 2000 Old Persian words.
Often the same Persian word was borrowed twice over in an earlier and
later form at an interval of centuries, just as in English we inherit a
word direct or have taken it from Latin, and have also assimilated from
French a later form of the same. The Persian influence in Armenian was
already strong as early as 400 B.C., when Xenophon used a Persian
interpreter to converse. In some of the Armenian villages they answered
him in Persian. The Persian loan-words already present in Armenian as
early as A.D. 400 mirror the earlier political and social life of
Armenia. Thus many of their kings and nobles had Persian names; Persian
also were most words used in connexion with horses and the chase, with
war and army, with dress, trade and coinage, calendar, weights and
measures, with court and political institutions, with music, medicine,
school, education, literature and the arts. Many everyday words were of
the same origin, e.g. the words for village, desert, building and build,
need, rich or liberal, arm (of body), rod or goad, face, opposite,
wicked, unfriendly, discontented, difficult, daughter, eulogy, a youth,
wary, enjoy, unhappy, volition, voluntary, unwilling, blind, cautious,
blood-kin, coquet with, slumber, humble, mad, grace or favour, memory or
attention, grandfather, old woman, prepared, duty, necessary, end,
endless, superior, confident, mistake, warmth, heat, glory. The language
of their old religion was mainly Persian, but in the 4th century they
derived numerous ecclesiological words from the Syrians, from whom by
way of Edessa and Nisibis Christianity penetrated eastern Armenia. The
language of the garden and the names of plants were also Persian. They
had their own numerals, but the words for one thousand and for ten
thousand are Persian.
Yet more indicative of the extent of the Persian influence is the
adoption of the adjectival ending -_akan_ and -_zan_, added to purely
Armenian words; also of the preposition _ham_, answering to _con_ in
"conjoin," "conspire," added to purely Armenian words, as in
_hambarnam_, I take away, and _hamboir_, a kiss, a word which, strange
to say, the Iberians in turn borrowed from the Armenians. From Persia
also the Armenians took their names for surrounding races, e.g.
_Tatshik_ or _Tajik_, first for Arab and then for Turk, _Ariq_ for
Persians, _Kapkoh_ for Caucasus, _Hrazdan_, _Vaspuragan_, &c. The
Armenians call themselves _Hay_, plural _Hayq_; their country
_Hayasdan_. The Iberians they called _Virq_ or _Wirq_ (where q marks the
plural), the Medes _Marq_, the Cappadocians _Gamirq_ (Cimmerians), the
Greeks Yunes or Ionians; Ararat they call _Masis_, the Euphrates the
_Aradsan_, the Tigris _Teglath_, Erzerum is _Karin_, Edessa _Urhha_,
Nisibis _Mdsbin_, Ctesiphon _Tizbon_, &c.
When the Persian and other loan-words are removed, a stock remains of
native words and forms governed by other phonetic laws than those which
govern the Aryan, i.e. Indian and Iranic, branch of the Indo-European
tongues. Armenian appears to be a half-way dialect between the Aryan
branch and Slavo-lettic. Much, however, in Armenian philology remains
unexplained. For example the plural of nouns, pronouns and the first and
second persons plural of verbs are all formed by adding a q or k, which
has no parallel in any Indo-Germanic tongue. The genitive plural again
is formed by adding a _tz_ or c, and the same consonant characterizes
the composite aorist and the conjunctive. In all three cases it is
unexplained. In the verbs the termination m for the first singular at
once explains itself, and the n of the third plural is the Indo-Germanic
_nti_. But not so the second person singular ending in s, e.g. _berem_,
I bear, _beres_, thou bearest. This has a superficial likeness to the
I.-G. _esi_ in _bheresi_, "thou bearest." Yet we should expect the s
between vowels to vanish, and give us in Armenian _bere_. Perhaps,
therefore, an old variant of _esi_, similar to the [Greek: essi], lies
behind the Armenian _es_, thou art, and the _es_ in _beres_, thou
bearest. In any case it is clear that many of the oldest forms which
Armenian shared with other Indo-Germanic dialects were lost and replaced
by forms of which the origin is obscure. Perhaps a closer study of
Mingrelian and Georgian will explain some of these peculiarities, for
these and their cognate tongues must have had a wider range in the 7th
and 8th centuries B.C. than they had later when clear history begins.
The attempts made by S. Bugge to assimilate Old Armenian to Etruscan,
and by P. Jensen to explain from it the Hittite inscriptions, appear to
be fanciful. There is a large Semitic influence traceable in Armenian
due to their early contact with the Syriac-speaking peoples to the south
and east of them, and later to the Arab conquest. Much remains to be
done in the way of collecting Armenian dialects, for which task there
are written materials as far back as the 12th century over and above the
work to be done by an intelligent traveller armed with a phonograph. Two
main dialects of Armenian are distinguishable to-day, that of Ararat and
Tiflis, and that of Stambul and the coast cities of Asia Minor. The
latter is much overlaid with Tatar or Turkish words, and the Tatar order
of words distinguishes the modern Armenian sentence from the ancient.
It remains to say that classical Armenian resembles rather the modern
idiom of Van than of western Armenia. It was a plastic and noble
language, capable of rendering faithfully, yet not servilely, the Greek
Bible and Greek fathers. Often the Armenian translators, and especially
after the 5th century, rendered word for word, preserving the order of
the Greek. This literalness, though unpleasing from a literary
standpoint, gives to many of their ancient versions the value almost of
a Greek codex of the age in which the version was made. The same
literalness also characterizes their translations from Syriac.
Literature.
The Armenians had a temple literature of their own, which was destroyed
in the 4th and 5th centuries by the Christian clergy, so thoroughly that
barely twenty lines of it survive in the history of Moses of Khoren
(Chorene). Their Christian literature begins about 400 with the
invention of the Armenian alphabet by Mesrop. This was probably an older
alphabet to which Mesrop merely added vowels; but, in order to pacify
the Greek ecclesiastics and the emperor Theodosius the Less, the
Armenians concocted a story that it had been divinely revealed. Once
their alphabet perfected, the catholicus Sahak formed a school of
translators who were sent to Edessa, Athens, Constantinople, Alexandria,
Antioch, Caesarea in Cappadocia, and elsewhere, to procure codices both
in Syriac and Greek and translate them. From Syriac were made the first
version of the New Testament, the version of Eusebius' History and his
Life of Constantine (unless this be from the original Greek), the
homilies of Aphraates, the Acts of Gurias and Samuna, the works of
Ephrem Syrus (partly published in four volumes by the Mechitharists of
Venice). They include the commentaries on the _Diatessaron_ and the
Paulines, Laboubna and History of Addai, the Syriac canons of the
Apostles.
From the original Greek were rendered in the 5th century the following
authors and works. An asterisk is prefixed to those which have been
printed:--*Eusebius' _Chronicon_; *Philo's lost commentaries on Genesis
and Exodus, and his lost treatises on Providence and Animals, as well as
a great number of his works still preserved in Greek; *the entire Bible
(the New Testament is a recension after Antiochene Greek texts of an
older version made from the oldest Syriac text); *the Alexander romance
of the pseudo-Callisthenes; *_Epistles_ and _Acts_ of Ignatius of
Antioch; *many homilies of Gregory Thaumaturgus; *Athanasius (a large
number of works, many of them wrongly attributed); Irenaeus, _Adversus
Haereses_ and _Ad Marcianum_ (recently found); *Hippolytus' commentaries
on the Song of Songs and Daniel, and many fragments; *Timotheus' life of
Athanasius; Theophilus of Alexandria, various homilies; *Eusebius of
Gabala or Severianus, fifteen Homilies; *Cyril of Jerusalem,
_Catecheses_ and Letter to Constantine; *_Wisdom of Ahikar_; *the
_Apology_ of Aristides; Gregory of Nazianzus, thirty-four Homilies;
*Nonnus' work on Gregory (perhaps a version of 6th century); Basil of
Caesarea, *_Hexaemeron_, fifteen Homilies on faith, epistle to
Terentius, ascetic writings and canons, on the Holy Spirit, to
Cledonius, &c. Helladius of Caesarea's life of Basil; Gregory of Nyssa's
treatise on the Beatitudes, and many other homilies, Commentaries on
Song of Songs, *On Human Nature (Nemesius), panegyrics on sundry
Martyrs, and other works (but some of these versions belong to the
beginning of the 8th century); Epiphanius of Salamis, Commentary on the
Gospels, *_On weights and measures_, *_Physiologus_, canons and many
homilies; Evagrius of Pontus, Homilies and Ascetic works, Letters to
Melania, &c.; John Chrysostom, *Homilies and Prayers, in very beautiful
language; *Proclus, patriarch of Constantinople, many homilies; *Nilus
the Ascete, _On the Eight Spirits of Evil_; *Josephus, _On the Jewish
War_; Dionysius of Alexandria, *_Against Paul of Samosata_ and other
fragments; Acacius, bishop of Melitene, *_Letters_ to Sahak; Julius of
Rome (fragments); Zenobius, Homilies (? from Syriac); the _History_ of
Julius Africanus was perhaps also translated in this century, but it is
lost. To the 5th century belong the versions of the Nicene canons, of
which the Armenian text as preserved is barely intelligible, of the
eucharistic rites called of *Basil, *Chrysostom, *Ignatius and others;
also the *Hours or Breviary, the *Rites of Ordination, Baptism, of the
making and release of Penitents, of Epiphany, and perhaps the many rites
of animal sacrifice, for these are partly originals, partly versions of
lost Greek texts. A mass of martyrs' acts were also rendered in this
century, including parts of the lost collection made by Eusebius. Among
these the *_Acts and Apology_ of Apollonius restore a lost 2nd-century
text. The *_Canons_ of Sahak also purport to be translated from a Greek
original about the year 330.
The Armenians were so busy in this century translating Greek and Syriac
fathers that they have left little that is original. Still a number of
historical works survive: *Faustus of Byzantium relates the events of
the period A.D. 344-392 in a work instinct with life and racy of the
soil. It was perhaps first composed in Greek, but it gives a faithful
picture of the court of the petty sovereigns of Armenia, of the
political organization, of the blood feuds of the clans, of the planting
of Christianity. Procopius preserves some fragments of the Greek.
The *_History of Taron_, by Zenobius of Glak, is a somewhat legendary
account of Gregory the Illuminator, and may have been written in Syriac
in the 5th, though it was only Armenized in a later century.
*Elisaeus Wardapet wrote a history of Wardan (Vardan), and of the war
waged for their faith by the Armenians against the Sassanids. He was an
eye-witness of this struggle, and gives a good account of the
contemporary Mazdaism which the Persians tried to force on the
Armenians. *Lazar of Pharp wrote a history embracing the events of the
5th century up to the year 485, as a continuation of the work of
Faustus.
*A history of St Gregory and of the conversion of Armenia by
Agathangelus is preserved in Greek, Armenian and Arabic. The Arabic
edited by Professor Marr of St Petersburg seems to be the oldest form of
text. The Greek is a rendering of the Armenian. It is a compilation, and
the second part which contains the _Acts_ of Gregory and of St Rhipsima
seems wholly legendary. The Greek and Armenian texts were edited
together by Lagarde.
*The _History of Armenia_ by Moses of Khoren (Chorene) relates events up
to about the year 450. It is a compilation, devoid of historical method,
value or veracity, from all sorts of previous authors, mostly from those
which already existed in an Armenian dress. Some critics put down the
date of composition as low as about 700, and it was certainly retouched
in the late 6th century.
*A long volume of rhetorical exercises, based on Aphthonius, is also
ascribed to Moses of Khoren, and appears to be of the 5th century. The
*geography which passes under his name may belong to the 7th century.
Various homilies of Moses survive, as also of Elisaeus.
Gorium wrote in this century a *_Life of Mesrop_, and Eznik a
*_Refutation of the Sects_, based largely on antecedent Greek works. The
sects in question are Paganism, Mazdaism, Greek Philosophy and
Manicheism. A volume of *homilies under the name of Gregory the
Illuminator, but not his, also belongs to this century, and a series of
ascetic discourses attributed to John Mandakuni, who was patriarch
478-500.
Of the 6th and 7th centuries few works survive except anonymous versions
of the *_Acts of Thomas_ (perhaps from the Syriac), of the *_Acts of
Peter and Paul_, *of John (pseudo-Prochorus), *of Bartholomew, and of
other apostles; also of *the Acts of Paul and Thekla, *of Titus, *of the
Protevangel, *of the Testaments of the patriarchs, of the *_Gospel of
Nicodemus_, or _Acts of Pilate_, of the *_Book of Adam_, of the *_Deaths
of the Prophets_, of the *_History of Baruch_, of the *Apocalypses of
Paul and of the Virgin Mary, of the *Acts of Sylvester, and of an
enormous number of other similar apocryphs. Some of these may be of the
5th century. Two volumes of these apocryphs of the Old and New
Testaments have recently been published at Venice. To these centuries
belong also the versions of the Acts of the council of Ephesus, of
Gangra, Laodicea and of other councils. To the late 7th century belong
the *calendarial works of Ananiah of Shirak, who also has left a
*_chronicon_ compiled from Eusebius, Andreas of Crete, Hippolytus and
other sources. In the *_Letter-book of the Patriarchs_, lately printed
at Tiflis, are to be found a number of controversial monophysite tracts
of these and the succeeding three centuries, important for church
history. It includes a mass of documents relative to the churches of
Iberia and Albania. The chief literary monument of the 7th century is
the history of the wars of Heraclius and of the early Mahommedan
conquests in Asia Minor, by the bishop Sebeos, who was an eye-witness.
The *history of the Albanians of the Caucasus, by Moses Kalankatuatzi,
also belongs to the end of this century. To the middle of the 7th
century also belong the translations of Aristotle's treatises *_On the
Categories_, and *_On Interpretation_, and of *Porphyry's _Isagoge_, as
well as of voluminous Greek commentaries on these books; the version of
the *Grammar of Dionysius Thrax and an incomplete Euclid. The translator
was one David called the Invincible, who also wrote monophysite tracts.
At the end of this 7th century one Philo of Tirak is supposed to have
made the version of the *History of Socrates, unless indeed it was made
earlier. To this century also seems to belong the Armenian version of a
*history of the Iberians, by Djuansher, a work full of valuable
information.
The early 8th century was a time of great literary activity. Gregory
Asheruni wrote an important *commentary on the Jerusalem Lectionary, and
his friend *John the catholicus (717-728) commentaries on the other
liturgical works of his church; he also collected all existing canon
law, Greek or Armenian, respected in his church, wrote *against the
Paulicians and Docetae, and composed many beautiful hymns. *Leoncius the
priest has left a history of the first caliphs, and Stephanus, bishop of
Siunik, translated the *controversial works of Cyril of Alexandria
(whose _Glaphyra_ and commentaries, however, seem to have been
translated at an earlier period). He also translated the works of
Dionysius the Areopagite, commented on the Armenian breviary and wrote
hymns.
In the 9th century Zachariah, catholicus, the correspondent of Photius,
wrote many eloquent homilies for the various church feasts. Shapuh
Bagratuni wrote a history of his age, now lost. Mashtotz, catholicus,
collected in one volume the Armenian rituals.
In the 10th century (c. 925) the catholicus John VI. issued his *history
of Armenia, and Thomas Artsruni a *history of his clan carried up to the
year 936. Ananias of Mok (943-965) wrote a great work against the
Paulicians, unfortunately lost. Chosroes wrote a *commentary on the
eucharistic rites and breviary, *Mesrop a history of Nerses the Great;
*Stephen of Asolik wrote a history of the world, and a commentary on
Jeremiah; *Gregory of Narek his famous meditations and hymns; Samuel
Kamrdjtsoretzi a commentary on the Lectionary based on Gregory Asheruni.
In the 11th century the catholicus Gregory translated many Acts of
Martyrs, and John Kozerhn wrote a history, now lost, as well as a work
on the Armenian calendar; Stephen Asolik a *history of Armenia up to the
year 1004; *Aristaces of Lastiverd a valuable history of the conquest of
Armenia by the Seljuk caliphs. We may also mention a *monophysite work
against the Greek doctor Theopistus by Paul of Taron; *letters and poems
of Gregory Magistros, who also was the translator of the *_Laws,
Timaeus_ and other dialogues of Plato.
The 12th century saw many remarkable writers, mostly in Cilician
Armenia, viz. Nerses the Graceful (d. 1165), author of an *_Elegy_ on
the taking of Edessa, of *voluminous hymns, of long *Pastoral Letters
and Synodal orations of value for the historian of eastern churches.
*Samuel of Ani composed a chronicle up to 1179. Nerses of Lambron,
archbishop of Tarsus, left a *Synodal oration, a *Commentary on the
liturgy, &c., and his contemporary Gregory of Tlay an *_Elegy_ on the
capture of Jerusalem, and various *dogmatic works. In this century the
*history of Michael the Syrian was translated; Ignatius and Sargis
composed *commentaries on Luke and *the catholic epistles, and *Matthew
of Edessa a valuable history of the years 952-1136, continued up to
1176 by Gregory the priest. Mechithar (Mekhitar) Kosh (d. 1207) wrote an
elegant *_Book of Fables_, and compiled a *corpus of civil and canon law
(partly from Byzantine codes).
In the 13th century the following works or authors are to be
noticed:--*history of Kiriakos of Ganzak, which contains much about the
Mongols, Georgians and Albanians; *Malakia the monk's history of the
Tatars up to 1272; *Chronicle of Mechithar of Ani (fragmentary);
*Vahram's rhymed chronicle of the kings of Lesser Armenia; *history of
the world, by Vartan, up to 1269. In this century mostly falls the
redaction of a large fable literature, recently edited in three volumes
by Professor Marr of St Petersburg.
14th century: *history of Siunik, by Stephen Orbelian, archbishop of
that province 1287-1304; *Sempat's chronicle of Lesser Armenia
(952-1274), carried on by a continuator to 1331; *Mechithar of Airivanq,
a chronography; *Hethoum's account of the Tatars, and chronography of
the years 1076-1307. John of Orotn (d. 1388) compiled commentaries on
John's gospel and the Paulines, and wrote homilies and monophysite
works; his disciple Gregory of Dathev (b. 1340) compiled a *_Summa
theologiae_ called the _Book of Questions_, in the style of the _Summa_
of Aquinas, which had been translated into Armenian c. 1330, as were a
little later the *_Summa_ of Albertus and works of other schoolmen.
15th century: *_History of Tamerlane_, by Thomas of Medsoph, carried up
to 1447.
17th century, Araqel of Tabriz wrote a *history of the Persian invasions
of Armenia in the years 1602-1661.
In the above list are not included a number of medical, astrological,
calendarial and philological or lexicographic works, mostly written
during or since the Cilician or crusading epoch. The hymns used in
Armenian worship rarely go back to the 5th century; and they were still
few in number and brief in length when Nerses the Graceful and his
contemporaries more than doubled their number and bulk in the 12th
century. Most Armenian poems embody acrostics, and their poets began to
rhyme in the 8th century or thereabouts. Since the 15th century a
certain number of profane poets have arisen, whose work is less jejune
on the whole than that of the hymn and canticle writers of an earlier
age. Gregory Magistros (d. 1058) abridged the whole of the Old and New
Testaments in a *rhyming poem, and set a fashion to later writers. Such
works as *_Barlaam and Josaphat_. the *_History of the Seven Sages_, the
*_Wisdom of Ahikar_, the *_Tale of the City of Bronze_, were freely
turned into verse in the 13th and following centuries.
It will be realized from the above enumeration of works written in each
century that Armenian literature was purely monkish. There was no epic
or romance literature; although this was not lacking in the contiguous
country of Georgia, where there seem to have always been knights and
ladies willing to read and keep alive a literature of poetry and
narrative, not altogether suitable for monks, and more akin to Persian
literature.
Other forms of faith than the orthodox had a hold in Armenia,
particularly the Nestorian and the Manichean. Sundry works of Mani were
translated in the year 588, but are lost. Perhaps certain works of
Diodore of Tarsus survive, but the orthodox monks were so vigilant that
there is little chance of finding any other monuments than those of the
stereotyped orthodoxy.
The 16th century saw the first books printed in Armenian. A press was
set up at Venice in 1565, and the psalms and breviary were printed. In
1584 the Roman propaganda began its issue of Armenian books with a
Gregorian calendar. In the 17th century presses were working at
Lembourg, Milan, Paris, Isfahan (where in 1640 a large folio of the
_Lives of the Fathers of the Desert_ appeared), in Leghorn, Amsterdam
(where in 1664 the first edition of the Hymn-book, in 1666 the first
Bible, and in 1667 the first Ritual were printed), Marseilles,
Constantinople, Leipzig and Padua.
The press which has done most in printing Armenian authors is that of
the Mechitharists of Venice. Here in 1836 was issued a magnificent
thesaurus of the Armenian language, with the Latin and Greek equivalents
of each word. At that time there was no dictionary of any language and
literature to be compared with this for exhaustiveness and accuracy.
There are now Armenian presses all over the world, reprinting old books
or issuing new works, often translations of modern writers, English,
French, Russian and German.
The chief collections of old Armenian MSS. are: at the convent of
*Echmiadzin at Valarshapat; at Stambul in the library of the fathers of
St Anthony; at Venice in the Mechitharist convent of San Lazaro; at the
*Mechitharist convent in Vienna; in the *Royal library at Vienna; in the
*Paris Bibliotheque Nationale; in the Vatican library; in the British
Museum; in the *Bodleian; in the Rylands library; in the *Berlin and
*Munich libraries; *in Tubingen; in St Petersburg, and in the *Lazarev
institute at Moscow; at New Joulfa, the Armenian suburb of Isfahan.
Private collections have been made by Mr Rendel Harris in Birmingham
(presented to the university of Leiden); at Parham and elsewhere. A
printed catalogue exists of those marked with an asterisk.
AUTHORITIES.--F. Combefis, _Historia Monothelitarum_ (Paris, 1648);
Arshak Ter Mikelian, _Die armen. Kirche, iv. bis zum xiii.
Jahrhundert_ (Leipzig, 1892); H. Gelzer, "Die Anfange der armenischen
Kirche" in the _Berichte der Koniglich. Sachsischen Gesellschaft der
Wissenschaften: Historisch-philologische Classe_ (1895), p. 171;
Gutschmid, _Kleine Schriften_ (Leipzig, 1892), t. iii.; Langlois,
_Collection d'historiens armeniens_ (Paris, 1867) (the translations
often careless); E.W. Brooks, _The Syriac Chronicle_ known as
_Zachariah of Mitylene_ (London, 1899), p. 24; Dulaurier, _Recherches
sur la chronologie armenienne_ (Paris, 1859); Agop Manandian,
_Beitrage zur albanischen Geschichte_ (Leipzig, 1897); G. Owsepian,
_Die Entstehungsgeschichte des Monotheletismus_ (Leipzig, 1897);
Cardinal Angelo Mai, _Nova SS. patrum bibliotheca_, 6 vols. (Rome,
1844-1871), vol. ii. contains Latin version of Armenian canons;
Hergenrother, _Photius_ (Regensburg, 1867); Tchamchian, _History of
Armenia_ (in Armenian at Venice and English abridged translation
entitled _M. Chamich_ by John Audall, Calcutta, 1827); Domini Joannis
Onziensis, _Opera Latine_ (Venice, 1834); Nersetis Clajensis, _Opera
omnia Latine_ (Venice, 1833); A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus in the _Recueil
de la societe orthodoxe de Palestine_ (St Petersburg, 1892) (Armenian
correspondence with Photius translated); Enthymius Zigabenus,
_Panoplia, Patrol. Gr._ vol. 130, col. 1173; E. Dulaurier, _Histoire
de l'eglise armen._ (Paris, 1857); le Quien, _Oriens christianus_;
Mansi, _Concilia_, vol. 25; Steph. Azarian, _Ecclesiae Armenae
Traditio_ (Rome, 1870); A. Balgy, _Historia doctrinae catholicae inter
Armenos_ (Vienna, 1878); Clemens Galanus, _Conciliatio Ecclesiae
Armenae cum Romana_ (Rome, 1690); L. Alishan, _Sissouan, contree de
l'Armenie_ (Venice, 1893), in Armenian, but also in French
translation; _Recueil d'actes relatifs aux Armeniens_ (3 vols.,
Moscow, 1833); St Martin, _Memoires historiques sur l'Armenie_ (Paris,
1818); V. Langlois, _Voyage dans la Cilicie_ (Paris, 1861); H.G.O.
Dwight, _Christianity in Turkey_ (London, 1854); De Damas, _Coup
d'oeil sur l'Armenie_ (Lyon, 1887); H.F.B. Lynch, _Armenia_ (2
vols., London, 1902); J. Issaverdens, _Armenia, Ecclesiastical
History_ (Venice, 1875); E. Dulaurier, _Historiens armeniens des
Croisades_ (Paris); Giovanni de Serpos, _Compendio Storico_ (Venice,
1786); Garabed Chahnazarian, _Esquisse de l'histoire de l'Armenie_
(Paris, 1856); Gelzer, "Armenien" in Herzog-Hauck, _Realencyklopadie
fur protestantische Theologie_ (ed. 3, Leipzig, 1897); Hefele, _Hist.
of Councils_, vols. 3 and 9; F. Neve, _L'Armenie chretienne_ (Paris);
P. Hunanian, _Histoire des canciles d'Orient_ (Vienna, 1847); Gr.
Chalathianz, _Apocryphes_ (Moscow, 1897), and other works; Brosset,
_Collection d'historiens armeniens_ (St Petersburg, 1874), and
numerous other works by the same author; J. Catergian, _De fidei
symbolo quo Armenii utuntur_ (Vienna, 1893); Ricaut, _The present
state of the Greek and Armenian Churches_ (London, 1679); H.
Denzinger, _Ritus orientalium_ (Wurzburg, 1863); Fred. C. Conybeare,
_Rituale Armenorum_ (Oxford, 1905); F.E. Brightman, _Eastern
Liturgies_ (Oxford, 1896); P. Vetter, _Chosroae magni explicatio
missae_ (Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1880); L. Petit, articles on Armenian
religious history, councils, literature, creed and discipline in
_Diction. de theologie catholique_, cols. 1888-1968; F.C. Conybeare,
"The Armenian canons of St Sahak" in the _American Journal of
Theology_ (Chicago, 1898), p. 828; C.F. Neumann, _Geschichte der
armenischen Literatur_ (Leipzig, 1836); Simon Weber, _Die katholische
Kirche in Armenien_ (Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1903); Sukias Somal,
_Quadro della Storia Letteraria di Armenia_ (Venice, 1829); M.V.
Ermoni, "L'Armenie" in _Revue de l'orient chretien_ (for year 1896);
F. Tournebize, "Histoire de l'Armenie" (_ib._ 1902-3-4-5); R.P.D.
Girard, "Les Madag" (_ib._ for year 1902); H. Hubschmann, _Armenische
Studien_ and _Grammatik_ (Leipzig, 1883 and 1895). Grammars by
Petermann (in _Porta Orientalium Linguarum_ series), by Prof. Meillet
of Paris, by Prof. N. Marr of St Petersburg (in Russian), by Joseph
Karst (of the Cilician dialect). Texts of most of the Armenian fathers
and historians have been printed by the Mechitharists of San Lazaro,
Venice, and are readily procurable at their convent. (F. C. C.)
ARMENTIERES, a town of northern France, in the department of Nord, on
the Lys, 13 m. W.N.W. of Lille on the Northern railway from that city to
Dunkirk. Pop. (1906) 25,408. The chief building is the hotel de ville
with a 17th-century belfry. There are communal colleges for girls and
boys, a board of trade-arbitrators, a chamber of commerce and a national
technical school. The town is an important centre for the spinning and
weaving of flax and cotton; bleaching, dyeing and the manufacture of
machinery are among the other industries. Its industrial prosperity
dates from the middle ages, when, however, woollen, not cotton, goods
were the staple product.
ARMET (diminutive of Fr. _arme_), a form of helmet, which was developed
out of existing forms in the latter part of the 15th century. It was
round in shape, and often had a narrow ridge or comb along the top. It
had a pivoted or hinged vizor and nosepiece, and complete chin, neck and
cheek protection, closely connected with the gorget. It is distinguished
from the basinet by its roundness, and by the fact that it protects the
neck and chin by strong plates, instead of a "camail" or loose collar of
mail; from the salade and heaume by its close fit and skull-cap shape;
and from the various forms of vizored burgonets by the absence of the
projecting brim. It remained in use until the final abandonment of the
complete closed head-piece.
ARMFELT, GUSTAF MAURITZ, COUNT (1757-1814), son of Charles II.'s
general, Carl Gustaf Armfelt, was born in Finland on the 31st of March
1757. In 1774 he became an ensign in the guards, but his frivolity
provoked the displeasure of Gustavus III. and he thought it prudent to
go abroad. Subsequently, however, (1780) he met the king again at Spa
and completely won the monarch's favour by his natural amiability,
intelligence and brilliant social gifts. Henceforth his fortune was
made. At first he was the _maitre des plaisirs_ of the Swedish court,
but it was not long before more serious affairs were entrusted to him.
He took part in the negotiations with Catherine II. (1783) and with the
Danish government (1787), and during the Russian war of 1788-90 he was
one of the king's most trusted and active counsellors. He also displayed
great valour in the field. In 1788 when the Danes unexpectedly invaded
Sweden and threatened Gothenburg, it was Armfelt who under the king's
directions organized the Dalecarlian levies and led them to victory. He
remained absolutely faithful to Gustavus when nearly the whole of the
nobility fell away from him; brilliantly distinguished himself in the
later phases of the Russian war; and was the Swedish plenipotentiary at
the conclusion of the peace of Verela. During the last years of Gustavus
III. his influence was paramount, though he protested against his
master's headstrong championship of the Bourbons. On his deathbed
Gustavus III. (1792) committed the care of his infant son to Armfelt and
appointed him a member of the council of regency; but the anti-Gustavian
duke-regent Charles sent Armfelt as Swedish ambassador to Naples to get
rid of him. From Naples Armfelt communicated with Catherine II., urging
her to bring about by means of a military demonstration a change in the
Swedish government in favour of the Gustavians. The plot was discovered
by the regent's spies, and Armfelt only escaped from the man-of-war sent
to Naples to seize him, with the assistance of Queen Caroline. He now
fled to Russia, where he was interned at Kaluga, while at home he was
condemned to confiscation and death as a traitor, and his unjustly
accused mistress Magdalena Rudenschold was publicly whipped to gratify
an old grudge of the regent's. When Gustavus IV. attained his majority,
Armfelt was completely rehabilitated and sent as Swedish ambassador to
Vienna (1802), but was obliged to quit that post two years later for
sharply attacking the Austrian government's attitude towards Bonaparte.
From 1805 to 1807 he was commander-in-chief of the Swedish forces in
Pomerania, where he displayed great ability and retarded the conquest of
the duchy as long as it was humanly possible. On his return home, he was
appointed commander-in-chief on the Norwegian frontier, but could do
nothing owing to the _ordres, contre-ordres et desordres_ of his lunatic
master. He would have nothing to say to the revolutionaries who in 1809
deposed Gustavus IV. and his whole family. Armfelt was the most
courageous of the supporters of the crown prince Gustavus, and when
Bernadotte was elected resolved to retire to Finland. His departure was
accelerated by a decree of expulsion as a conspirator (1811). Over the
impressionable Alexander I. of Russia, Armfelt exercised almost as great
an influence as Czartoryski, especially as regards Finnish affairs. He
contributed more than any one else to the erection of the grand-duchy
into an autonomous state, and was its first and best governor-general.
The plan of the Russian defensive campaigns is, with great probability,
also attributed to him, and he gained Alexander over to the plan of
uniting Norway with Sweden. He died at Tsarskoe Selo on the 19th of
August 1814.
See Robert Nisbet Bain, _Gustavus III._ vol. ii. (London, 1895); Elof
Tegner, _Gustaf Mauritz Armfelt_ (Stockholm, 1883-1887). (R. N. B.)
ARMIDALE, a town in Sandon county, New South Wales, Australia, 313 m. by
rail N. of Sydney. Pop. (1901) 4249. It lies at an elevation of 3313
ft., in a picturesque mountainous district, for the most part pastoral
and agricultural, though it contains some alluvial gold diggings.
Antimony is found in large quantities near the town. Armidale is a
cathedral town, being the seat of a Roman Catholic bishop and belonging
to the joint Anglican diocese of Grafton; Armidale St Peter's, the
Anglican cathedral, and St Mary's, the Roman Catholic, are both fine
buildings. The town is the centre of great educational activity, its
schools including the New England girls' school, St Patrick's college,
the high school, the Ursuline convent and state schools. Armidale became
a municipality in 1863.
ARMILLA, ARMIL or ARMILLARY SPHERE (from the Lat. _armilla_, a
bracelet), an instrument used in astronomy. In its simplest form,
consisting of a ring fixed in the plane of the equator, the _armilla_ is
one of the most ancient of astronomical instruments. Slightly developed,
it was crossed by another ring fixed in the plane of the meridian. The
first was an equinoctial, the second a solstitial armilla. Shadows were
used as indices of the sun's position, in combination with angular
divisions. When several rings or circles were combined representing the
great circles of the heavens, the instrument became an armillary sphere.
Armillae are said to have been in early use in China. Eratosthenes
(276-196 B.C.) used most probably a solstitial armilla for measuring the
obliquity of the ecliptic. Hipparchus (160-125 B.C.) probably used an
armillary sphere of four rings. Ptolemy (c. A.D. 107-161) describes his
instrument in the _Syntaxis_ (book v. chap, i.), and it is of great
interest as an example of the armillary sphere passing into the
spherical astrolabe. It consisted of a graduated circle inside which
another could slide, carrying two small tubes diametrically opposite,
the instrument being kept vertical by a plumb-line.
[Illustration: From M. Blundeville's _Treatise of the first principles
of Cosmography and specially of the Spheare._