Category Archives: MEMORY

THE MEMORY OF THE 1918 MAY HEROIC BATTLES – 2022-1

In the collections of the National Museum of Armenian Ethnography and Liberation Struggle

Arevik B. Melikyan
The article presents the personal belongings of the participants of the 1918 May heroic battles, preserved in the collections of the National Museum of Armenian Ethnography and Liberation Struggle.

Most of them are weapons and household items donated to the museum by the heirs of participants.

The aim of the article is to cover and popularize the personal relics of highranking commanders and self-defence fighters.

The article touches upon the personal belongings of one of the founders of the Republic of Armenia – Aram Manukyan, which were donated to the museum on June 24,1998 by his daughter Seda Manukyan.

The article also presents the history of personal belongings and documents of the command staff of the 1918 May heroic battles, for instance, the personal items confiscated during the trial of Movses Silikyan, as well as property, awards, nominal weapons and manuscripts of the general commander of the Armenian artillery of the May 1918 heroic battles – Colonel Christopher Araratyan.

The article also presents the description of personal belongings of the commander of the 1st battalion of the 5th regiment, Staff-Captain Vardan Jaghinyan, the commander of the battalion fighting at the bridge guard-station of Margara village – Yervand Mamajanyan, Navasard Veziryan – the favorite and reliable comrade-in-arms of (Zoravar) Andranik and Garegin Nzhdeh, Yervand Kyureghyan – a haiduc of Vaspurakan, signalman of the 5th infantry regiment Hmayak Khachatryan, machine-gunner Hakob Margaryan, militiaman Ruben Sargsyan, as well as participants of Bash-Aparan battle Mamikon Ter-Sargsyan, commander of the artillery battalion Samson Mnatsakanyan, artilleryman Gabriel Aharonyan, machine-gunner of the 6th regiment Karapet Vardanyan, militiaman Ruben Frangulyan, participant of the Battle of Karakilisa Hovhannes Baloyan and other participants.

POET STEPANOS DASHTETSI – 2021-4

Soseh B․ Poghosian (New Jugha, Iran)
Poet Stepanos Dashtetsi from New Jugha lived and worked in the second quarter of
the 17th – the first quarter of the 18th cc. During the forced deportation carried out by Shah
Abbas, his parents have been resettled from Dasht village of the Goght canton to
New Jugha, where he was born. The pseudonym Dashtetsi has been taken from here.

Dashtetsi received education at Amenaprkich Monastery of New Jugha, he was a student
of Stepanos Jughayetsi and was specialized in philosophy and theology. After
receiving the primary education in Isfahan, he studied at the high school of Vatican in Rome.

He mastered Old Armenian, Persian, Turkish, Georgian languages, as well as Latin
and Hindi.

In the beginning, Dashtetsi was a priest but later, due to some circumstances, he became a
merchant. He visited many countries: he was in Persia, India, Turkey, Greece, Italy and a
number of European countries. During his travels, he saw and learned a lot, and in this
connection he became circumspect, experienced, patient and wise.

The theological and polemical works of the author are most popular. Meanwhile, his
image as a literary and public figure would be incomplete without studying his poetry.

In the article we have examined Dashtetsi’s poems, which have been divided into
three groups: a) satirical and condemnatory; b) instructive and philosophical; c) love.

In the poems of the first group, he, ridiculing and condemning, points to the common
delusions among the inhabitants of New Jugha: hypocrisy, greed, worship of everything
foreign, ignorance and envy. In the poems of the second group, he tries to enlighten the
society through moral teachings. His poems on these two main topics are written mostly in
the eastern form of Tajnis in the New Jugha dialect.

Love songs stand out among the poems of Dashtetsi. They continue the traditions of
the medieval poetry with their depiction of the external appearance of the object of love and
suffering caused by the devotion of a lover.

17 poems of Stepanos Dashtetsi that have reached us with their content, form and
language are of great value both for the Armenian literary criticism and for the
dialectology, as well as for the study of the history of Armenian culture.

TRADITIONS AND MASTER – 2021-3

Modern culture of the khachkars of Artsakh based on the works of sculptor Robert Askaryan

Summary

Anush Safaryan
Khachkar is one of the unique symbols of Armenian identity. Khachkars were erected throughout the territory of historical Armenia, including Artsakh and Utik, as well as in Armenian colonies around the world. The figurative relief of the khachkars of Artsakh, which is represented by a combination of plant-geometric composition and human scenes and images, is one of the unique manifestations of the khachkar culture in general. The article is devoted to the modern culture of the khachkars of Artsakh on the example of the works of the artist and sculptor R. Askaryan, in whose works traditional images are clearly presented, but in a peculiar manner and interpretation. This primarily concerns the iconography of angels, which is devoted a separate paragraph in the article.

Based on a thorough analysis, we can conclude that the master in his works widely used the themes and images of classical khachkars, tombstones and carpets of Artsakh. However, if the structure of the composition of classical khachkars, tombstones and carpets is more complete and suggests that organizing the composition: the central image, the scene, “Ornament” or tree – have clear canons for the placement of constituent elements (for example, land animals should be located at the bottom, and birds and stars at the top), then the characters of the master’s works, individual motifs are freely placed throughout the structure of the composition. The master, according to certain logic, fills the space free of intertwined patterns. It is not always possible to find a mutual connection between these characters, which makes Askaryan’s works especially dramatic.

As an artist, R. Askaryan undoubtedly left his mark on the modern art of the khachkars of Artsakh, his “handwriting” is recognizable in all his works, at the same time being a distinctive stamp among other traditional and modern khachkars.

THE EFFORTS OF THE ARMENIAN DIOCESE OF CYPRUS TO PRESERVE ARMENIAN IDENTITY AND TO SOLVE SOCIAL PROBLEMS OF ARMENIAN REFUGEES IN THE 1920-1930S – 2021-2

Edgar G. Hovhannisyan

In the early 1920s, about 3500-4000 Armenian refugees from Cilicia and various settlements of Western Armenia settled in Cyprus. This completely changed the pattern of the Armenian community in Cyprus. In the mid-1920s, the Armenian Diocese of Cyprus was reorganized, and it finally transferred under the jurisdiction of the Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia. From 1920 to 1940 the Armenian Diocese of Cyprus was headed by Archbishop Petros Sarajyan. He played a huge role in the life of the Armenians of Cyprus. Through the efforts of Bishop Petros the community life of the Armenians of the island was reorganized, the bodies of the local national authorities were reconstructed, and the new Charter of the diocesan was approved. A new stage began in the life of the Armenian community of Cyprus.

One of the main tasks of the Armenian Diocese of Cyprus became the preservation of the national identity of the Armenian refugees settled in Cyprus, also the organization of their educational, religious and cultural life. One of the main tasks of the Armenian Diocese of Cyprus was to preserve the national identity of the Armenian refugees who settled in Cyprus, as well as to organize their educational, religious and cultural life. One of the urgent tasks was to solve the social problems and ensuring the livelihood of orphans and destitute refugees. The solution to these problems was immediately undertaken by the Armenian Diocese of Cyprus and the bodies of national authorities.

Thanks to hard efforts and the purposeful work of the Diocese of Cyprus and the national organizations of the island the Armenian refugees successfully overcame the existing challenges. Some decades later, the Armenian community of Cyprus was a small but well-organized and prosperous community of Armenian Diaspora.

THE SETTLEMENT OF THE ARMENIANS OF CILICIA IN CYPRUS – 2021-1

and the reconstruction of the armenian diocese of cyprus in 1920-930s

Edgar G. Hovhannisyan

The first mentions about Armenians in Cyprus date back to the 6th-7th centuries. During the reign of the Armenian Catholicos Gregory IV at the end of the 12th century the Armenian Diocese of Cyprus was mentioned for the first time. In the following centuries, Cyprus became one of the most important cultural and spiritual centers of the Armenians.

After the genocide, the image of the Armenians of Cyprus completely changed. The number of Armenians in Cyprus was not large before the Armenian Genocide. Several thousand Armenians displaced from a number of settlements of Cilicia and Western Armenia took refuge on the island of Cyprus. However, many Armenian refugees did not find favorable living conditions on the island and left for other countries. In the 1920s and 1930s, the number of Armenians in Cyprus fluctuated between 3,500-4,000.

The Armenian Diocese of Cyprus was mainly under the jurisdiction of the Holy See of Cilicia of the Armenian Church. However, at different times it was also subordinated to the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem and the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople. After the Armenian Genocide, the reconstruction of the Armenian Diocese of Cyprus was very important for organizing the community life of the Armenians of Cyprus. It was also very important to clarify the status of the Diocese of Cyprus in terms of subordination. It is worth to mention, that after leaving Cilicia, the Catholicosate of Cilicia lost all its dioceses except the Diocese of Aleppo. A number of obstacles appeared in that process. After a persistent struggle, the problem was finally resolved in the mid-1920s and the Diocese of Cyprus came under the jurisdiction of the Catholicosate of Cilicia. The Diocese of Cyprus became the first reconstructed diocese of the Catholicosate of Cilicia

After all this, the Armenian Diocese of Cyprus made enormous efforts to organize the community life of the Armenian refugees who settled in Cyprus and to preserve their national identity. The Primate of the Diocese, Archbishop Petros Sarajyan, played a huge role in this issue. He led the Diocese of Cyprus for about twenty years from 1920 until 1940, until he was elected the Catolicos of the Cilician See

THE MAIN ISSUES HISTORY OF ARMENIA IN GHEVOND ALISHAN’S SCIENTIFIC AND LITERARY WORKS – 2020-4

On the occasion of the 200th birth anniversary

Summary

Vardan G. Devrikyan
A comparative examination of the prose and verse literary works of Ghevond Alishan (1820-1901), editions of the original texts of medieval Armenian literature, as well as of works on historical geography and various historical issues shows that Alishan’s historiographical perceptions and his principles of choosing different topics in Armenian history were formed through the literary publications of “Bazmavep” in 1840-1850, then continued with various scientific and textological works.

The summary of Alishan’s more than half a century of scientific and literary activity became “Hayapatum”, in which Alishan presents the course of Armenian historiography from the pre-Mashtots period to the 18th century within the scientific understandings of the time, especially Movses Khorenatsi’s “Armenian History” defending against the negative hypercriticism of the time.

The worldview which conditioned Alishan’s scientific methodology and historical contemplation was formed in the Mkhitarist environment, where the centuries-old consecrated, sanctified notion that paradise used to be in Armenia and life originated and was restored for the second time after the flood underwent certain systematization.

This theory called “Paradise of Armenia”, which has become a unique national ideology, instilled in several generations of Armenians around the world the idea that the Armenian people have a mission to reclaim their homeland – the newly renovated paradise planted by God, and to rebuild it.

The volumes on the four provinces of Armenia – “Shirak” (1881), “Sisuan” (dedicated to Cilicia, 1885), “Ayrarat” (1890) and “Sisakan” (dedicated to Syunik 1893) were penned by Alishan with the same concept which occupy an intermediate place between geography and history.

The publication of these volumes was dictated by the literary and social issues raised in that period. It was a turning point back to the past and the history, when increasing censorship forced Eastern and Western Armenian intellectuals to express their words, national aspirations and desires in an allegorical way.

Just as the artistry of the narrative is observed in Alishan’s scholarly studies, so in fiction, especially in the third volume entitled “Hayruni” of the five volumes of poetry called “Motifs” (1857-1858), (dedicated to the Homeland) (1858), scholar Alishan poses a number of historical questions, which refer to the historical destiny and historical perspective of the Armenian people. These statements of questions bear in themselves the strong emphasis of the spirit of the Italian Revolution of the 1840’s.

MARCH 16 OR 18? – 2020-1

The signing deadlines of the 1921 Russian-Turkish Treaty of Moscow

Summary

Ararat M. Hakobyan-Doctor of Historical Sciences
Considering the issue of the deadlines of signing the 1921 Russian-Turkish “Friendship and Brotherhood” Treaty of Moscow from the distance of about a century, the following may be stated.

1. In the history of international diplomacy such cases are unique that the two internationally unrecognized states – the RSFSR and Kemalist Turkey, discussed and jointly decided on territorial-border issues of Armenia – an independent third state, without its knowledge and involvement. That is to say, the 1921 Treaty of Moscow is illegal and invalid and cannot contain any obligation for the successor modern Republic of Armenia to recognize that treaty.

2. The second political-diplomatic oddity that is the main focus of this publication is that the two negotiating parties – the Russian and the Turkish sides, dictated by their great-power interests, even falsified the exact day of the signature of the Treaty of Moscow. It was actually signed on March 18, 1921, but “March 16” is recorded on the document, and to this day this erroneous historical date continues to be circulated in historical literature.

Much related to the history and the fate of the Armenian people, the 1921 March 16 or 18 calendar games around the Moscow treaty date in diplomacy can be characterized as a peculiar historical falsification (fake) that shows once again that Armenia’s distant and close, sometimes friendly and allied states often resorted to violating the legitimate interests of the Armenian people, through seizing, dividing between each other and appropriating the vital territories of their historic homeland. The abovementioned episode is an instructive experience and lesson in the millennia-old Armenian history, from which one must learn, draw appropriate conclusions, gain historical and political experience on the way to the consolidation of our modern-day independent statehood.

THE FOUNDATION OF DPREVANK OF THE CATHOLICOSATE OF THE GREAT HOUSE OF CILICIA – 2020-2

And its role in the educational life of Armenian communities of Syria-Lebanon

Summary

Edgar G. Hovhannisyan-Candidate of Sciences in History
After leaving Cilicia, in 1930 the Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia was established in Antelias, Lebanon, which further gradually transformed not only as of the seat of the Catholicosate of Cilicia but also to the important spiritual center for the Armenian Diaspora. It is well-known that the formerly located orphanages under the auspices of the American Committee for Relief in the Near East were located in those buildings in Antelias. Following the demolition of those orphanages, the Near East Relief decides that these constructions are handed over for free to the Catholicosate of Cilicia, with an American $1 symbolic lease. The Catholicosate of Cilicia should use the estate as a school for the preparation of clergy and teachers. The newly opened Drepevank of Antelias would be a unique educational institution in the Armenian Diaspora. The role of school and education is crucial for the preservation of the Armenian identity in Diaspora.

The opening of Dprevank took place on October 12, 1930. As a result of important efforts, Dprevank has become one of the pivotal Diaspora educational institutions, which, in its turn, contributed to the strengthening and raising the role of the Catholicosate. In the course of time, Dprevank acquires Pan-Diaspora character.

 

GAREGIN SRVANDZTIANTS AND SADEGH HEDAYAT – 2019-4

A Comparative Examination of the Activities of Armenian and Persian Pioneers in Ethnography and Philology

Summary

Anahit I. Yahyamasihi
Ethnography and folkloristics as science formed in Armenia in the early 19th century and relatively late in the early 20th century in Iran and found their place in the cultural and art system. Garegin Srvandztiants and Sadegh Hedayat have their permanent place in Armenian and Persian literature.

Along with folklore studies, they traveled and focused on their native land, people’s lifestyle, beliefs, customs and traditions, spoken language, behavior and habits.

The Srvandztiants-Hedayat parallels show that literary critics of two different nations and faiths shared the same ideas, style, thinking, and taste in the field of collection of folklore.

Their literary talents had been revealed since their years of adolescence as they struggled vigorously against their own and foreign oppressors.

Srvandztiants’ and Hedayat’s greatest service was the organization of the collection of folklore – the popular word, and the effort to put it on a scientific basis. They were so profound in folklore and ethnography that they introduced them to the field of their artistic compositions. Their prose was just overflowed with people’s folklore.

G. Srvandztiants, with his collections “Written and Oral Compositions” (“GrotsBrots”), “The Door of David of Sasoon and Mher”, “About the Old and New” (“Hnots and Norots”), “Manana”, “With Taste and Smell” (“Hamov-Hotov”), presented himself as a profound researcher thus establishing the Armenian ethnographicscholarly teaching. And after the publication of Hedayat’s works of “Osane” (“Fairy Tale”) and “Neyrangestan” (“The Land of Wonders”), studies of ethnography and folklore gained new momentum in Iran.

Not only were the folklorists diligently involved in the study of folklore, they also encourag ed their close ones to be supportive and to cooperate. By their exhortation, many materials were saved from loss, and many researchers began to engage in folkloristic work. It should be emphasized that with their services, G. Srvandztiants and S. Hedayat, became the teachers of many in the field of respectively the Armenian and Iranian ethnography and folkloristics.

THE PLAN TO ESTABLISH AN ARMENIAN SETTLEMENT IN MADAGASKAR IN 1925-1926 – 2019-2

1940s Madagaskar Plan to Solve the Jewish Issue: A comparative Analysis

Summary

Edita G. Gzoyan

Key words – League of Nations, settlement of Armenian Refugees, Yerevan Project, Armenian Genocide, Madagaskar, French colony, Final Solution, Madagascar Plan, resettlement of the Jews.

The League of Nations played an important role in the resettlement of the Armenian refugees and formation of Armenian Diaspora after the Genocide. One of the initiatives of the League was connected with the saving of the Armenian refugees and their resettlement to other parts of the world. The rather interesting project of the Armenian refugees in Madagaskar was elaborated (1925-1926) as an alternative to the so-called Yerevan Project – the resettlement of Armenian refugees in Soviet Armenia. The project of resettlement of the Armenians in Madagaskar was not implemented due to lack of interest among the Armenian refugees and other concerned circles.

Meanwhile, if in 1925-1926 the League of Nations considered the resettlement of Armenians in Madagaskar as salvage to their refugeehood, then in 1940s the Third Reich viewed the transfer of Jews to Madagaskar as an alternative to Final Solution of the European question.