Category Archives: REVIEWS


Seyran Grigoryan, Vahagn Davtyan’s Poems, Yerevan, Armav Publishing House, 2021, 458 pages


Zhenya A. Kalantaryan
The review analyzes and evaluates the peculiarities, principles and criteria of
the method used by S. Grigoryan–the author of the mentioned book. It is observed
that Grigoryan necessarily takes into account both the time of writing the poem and
the time the poem covers, trying to uncover the linkаgе between the past and the
present. One of the important merits of the monograph is the search for the bases of
the structural and lexical layers of the poems in historical and folklore sources.
According to the literary critic, Davtyan builds his poems mostly on a folklore
basis, as a result of which poems reflect the folk worldview.

The article comments on the comparisons made by the author of the book with
the historical and folklore sources of the poems, as well as similar works by
previous poets. It is noticed that some cases of stylization, imitation, repetition
revealed by the literary critic, according to his own observation, Davtyan used for
his own interpretation of the material, thus bringing his personality onto the

The critique assesses S. Grigoryan’s comprehensive approach in revealing
both inter- and intra-genre features of the poems. The author of the monograph
examines the poems and comes to convincing conclusion comprehensively
drawing from all the branches of philology, including the history of literary history,
literary theory, literary criticism, textualism, etc. The monograph is deemed to be a
noticeable contribution to modern Armenian literature.


Albert Makaryan, Astghik Soghoyan, Hakob Paronyan as a children’s writer, Yerevan, “Armav”, 2021, 188 pages


Nvard Kh. Vardanyan

Armenian literary criticism is enriched with a valuable study. Most recently,
a remarkable monograph entitled “Hakob Paronyan as a children’s writer” was
published. The authors of the book are well-deserved scientists – Albert Makaryan,
the author of several monographs dedicated to the examination of H.Paronyan’s
works and Astghik Soghoyan.

The monograph is the first complete attempt to present the great Armenian
satirist Hakob Paronyan as a children’s writer. For the first time, the children’s
periodical founded by Paronyan, that is, the illustrated bi-weekly magazine
“Theater: Friend to Children” and the children’s literature published in its pages are

In the four chapters of the book the history of the publication of the
periodical is examined, the genres of children’s literature are studied. The study
clarifies that all the materials published in the periodical are entirely Paronyan’s
creations though they are signed by different pen-names. They were mainly
intended to admonish and instruct the children, so the themes are of cognitive,
morally philosophical, educational, instructive and pastime nature.

It is obvious that as children’s writer Paronyan prefered realistic genres
(realistic tale, tale-story, story, instructive stories and etc.) wishing to present to the
little reader the real notion of life and not to decive them by false stories and unreal
miracles. This principal is seen in elaborations of two fairy tales. For instance, the
tale “Red Varduk” has no happy end, which mostly underlines its instructive
nature. The authors of the study have also turned to the unique approaches to
education conditioned by gender.

The monograph is a new and fresh word in the field of Paronyans’ study: it
will surely be useful for th specialists in literature, literary theorists and for the
broad range of the readers interested in philology and children’s literature.


Ed. by Ye. Pampukian

Armen Ts. Marukyan
In 2017 in Antilias (Beirut), edited, with a foreword and noted by Honored Historian Yervand Pambukyan, the work of a member of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun Central Committee of Constantinople – a well-known publicist Shavarsh Misakyan was published, which is a collection of letters, articles and memoirs of the author. Based on the information obtained from the letters and articles of Misakian at the moment of the crime, the successive stages of the genocide policy pursued by the Turkish authorities in relation to the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire are revealed.

The indisputable value of Misakian’s work lies in the fact that in the fateful period of history for the Armenian people, the operational and reliable information sent by him from the Ottoman Empire informed the international community about what was really happening with the Armenian population, despite the misinformation about the mass extermination of the Armenian population spread by the Turkish state and its allies. In his letters and articles, he provided such information that at that time it was simply impossible to obtain from other sources, which was later confirmed and supplemented by documents and materials published later.

It can be stated with confidence that from the point of view of objective documentation of the history of the Armenian Genocide, Sh. Misakian’s work is a valuable source, the materials of which, when compared with other sources, will allow compiling an objective history of that crucial period for the Armenian people in a clear chronology.



Gevorg S. Khoudinyan

At the beginning of the current year, a collection of documents summarizing the letters and writings of the most prominent representative of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun’s first generation, Armenian famous hajduk leader Nikol Duman, was published in the “Vem series” edited and annotated by Yervand Pambukyan.

It includes Nikol Duman’s letters, his booklet entitled “Project of People’s Self-Defense” and small but valuable writings, photographs and other relics.

The documents included in this collection, which summarize the rich chronicle of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun’s military-revolutionary activity, not only have a narrow sourceological value, but also open a wide field of learning the experience and skills of the past for the current generation concerned with the defense of the Homeland.

The most interesting part of the reviewed collection is the letters and military instructions written by Duman from Yerevan during the bloody Armenian-Tatar battles in Transcaucasia during the years of the First Russian Revolution of 1905- 1907.

His activities in Yerevan in 1905 are taken as important by the fact that Duman was able to make a breakthrough in the extremely dangerous situation in the entire province of Yerevan after the brutal massacre of the Armenians of Nakhichevan. And if it were not for the extraordinary steps taken by Nikol Duman, a considerable part of the Armenians of the Ararat Valley would also have met the fate of Nakhijevan. Duman’s letters in those days show that he was able to properly analyze the causes of the Nakhijevan disaster and, through skillful steps, build a system of self-defense that allowed him to neutralize the quantitative and, in some parts, qualitative advantages of the enemy in much of the Ararat Valley.

The unique legacy left by the indomitable commander from Artsakh in the field of organizing ARF combat groups, which is a specific insight of the military-political content of the Armenian liberation war of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, from a distance of a millennium is presented to us as a timeless and lasting experience whose necessity is felt again by the new generation of defenders of the Homeland, who are really concerned about having a national army.


On the Treaty of Sèvres and the Arbitral Award of US President W. Wilson

Suren T. Sargsyan

At the end of 2020, a collective work for readers interested in the Armenian Question and the Armenian Cause – “The Treaty of Sèvres and the Arbitral Award of US President W. Wilson: A critical look from a 100-year distance” authored by historians representing various scientific and educational institutions of the republic was published.

The authors, both by means of examining their prehistory and history and by elucidating the efforts made to implement these documents over the past centenary,
have comprehensively observed and analyzed the Treaty of Sèvres and the Arbitral Award of US President W. Wilson, which are landmarks for Armenia and the Armenians from a distance of 100 years. Moreover, guided by the best traditions of investigative historiography, they have taken a fresh look at 100-year-old events to reveal the deep connection and reciprocity between the past and the present.

Referring to the political content of the Treaty of Sèvres and noting that it concluded a long series of reciprocal treaties between the countries that won and lost in World War I, the authors emphasize that Articles 89-93 of the Treaty restored the timeless right of the Armenian people to Western Armenia. It is emphasized that the de jure recognition of the Republic of Armenia was no less important not only by the allies who won World War I, but also by the defeated Ottoman Empire. It legally stated that the Republic of Armenia was the United Armenia, which united the two parts of Armenia.

The authors substantiately deny the falsity of the alleged replacement of the Treaty of Sèvres by the Treaty of Lausanne and present in detail the real content of the Sèvres-Lausanne passing. It is emphasized that from the point of view of international law, the Armenian rights were not only annulled by the Treaty of Lausanne, but in fact they were reaffirmed by Article 16 of the Treaty. At the same time, the Treaty of Lausanne did not recognize Turkish sovereignty over the territories allotted to Armenia by W. Wilson’s Arbitral Award. The legitimacy of W. Wilson’s Arbitral Award and the fact that it is legally timeless and inalienable are substantiated by an examination of declassified US archival documents.

“The Treaty of Sèvres and the Arbitral Award of US President W. Wilson: A critical look from a 100-year distance” collective work, despite the large number of its authors, has a rather solid structure, fresh and rich speech about “old” general issues, and quite realistic conclusions.


About a forgotten booklet and its unforgettable author


Gevorg S. Khoudinyan
A well-known figure of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun Varand Papazyan, an intellectual and a critically thinking person, has passed away. The Armenian community did not pay due attention to a small but very interesting booklet by V. Papazyan entitled “Armenian National Strategy”, which was published in 1993.

V. Papazyan’s study is not a monograph, but rather a concise synopsis, each title of which can be presented as a separate monograph. Such laconicism and conciseness of the text is characteristic of the intellectual sincerity of thinker V. Papazyan.

In the first title “National Crisis” V. Papazyan studied the process of the collapse of the USSR and its geopolitical consequences for the South Caucasus. According to the author, this process left open the question of our region’s belonging to a certain zone of influence, but so far it has retained the dominant influence of the legal successor of the USSR – Russia.

V. Papazyan in his research also touched upon the internal political processes of the early 1990s in Armenia. Presenting his vision of the history of the national liberation struggle of the Armenian people, the author moved on to the main parts of his work – “Political Strategy” and “Armenian National Strategy”. Here V. Papazyan formulated his idea of the unity of the Armenian political nation. V.
Papazyan was a principled opponent of the so-called diaspora identity of Armenians. For him, the homeland of the Armenians is United Armenia, and the first phase of its restoration is the struggle of Artsakh for reunification with the Republic of Armenia.



Ashkhen Ed. Jrbashyan-Candidate of Philological Sciences
The review addresses the main issues related to the new edition of the National Armenian Educational and Cultural Fund “Levon Shant. The Man and the Work”, dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the outstanding writer. The article gives a clear idea of the content, topics and structure of this publication. The members of the editorial board (Vachagan Grigoryan, Serzh Srapionyan and Vartan Petrosyan) placed in this book the memories of the people of different generations about Levon Shant; the authors give original, noteworthy assessments of his political and pedagogical activity. In addition, the publication contains valuable excerpts from outstanding literary works dedicated to Shant, which characterize and generalize the literary heritage of the great writer and playwright.

Particularly important are those articles and materials that are published in Armenia for the first time. The reader gets a fairly complete picture of Levon Shant as a writer, politician and educator.

The most valuable material, published in this book, is the autobiographical exposition of Levon Shant, recorded by Vardges Aharonyan in the USA from the lips of an already elderly writer. The reader gets informed about Shant’s childhood and youth, about the years of his studies in Etchmiadzin, about the periods of his stay in the Caucasus and Europe, about well-known political events and about some significant episodes of his life related to his formation as a writer. Many of these facts are well known, but the assessments of L. Shant himself, his worldview and experiences give great value to the autobiographical narrative. The reader makes sense about the environment of Constantinople, Tiflis and its cultural atmosphere, the life of large and small European cities and, finally, the years of the First Republic, which became crucial for the formation of Shant as a person and politician.

We can insist that this publication is a valuable contribution to the Shant studies.

Yeremia Tevkants (Ter-Sargsyants), Family Chronicle, book 8 (1868-1872), With the diligence of H. Gh. Muradyan, NAS RA Institute of History, Yerevan, 2018, 440 p. – 2020-2


Karolina M. Sahakyan
In the given review we refer to the eighth volume of the “Family Chronicle” by Yeremia Tevkants (Ter-Sargsyants), published by the Institute of History of the NAS RA in 2018, with the elaboration of senior researcher Hakob Muradyan. This is one of the best examples of the genre of memoirs and includes the 1868-1872 history of a long period of Armenian history, written by one of the most literate and knowledgeable theologians of the time, who was the witness and participant of the events and happenings described.

This work consists of an introduction, 71 chapters, a vocabulary and an index of personal names and toponyms. In each of the chapters, the author discusses his travels and activities, providing exclusive information about the places he visited, the people he met and the people he worked with.

The exact chronology of the events is preserved in the work, as well as the sources used, in which correspondence, such as letters, telegrams, etc., is of particular value.

The most valuable part of the reviewed work, perhaps, can be considered the “Bulletin of Provincial Oppressions”, which was prepared by the “Commission of Inquiry into the Oppressions of Armenia” in 1892 and submitted to the Sublime Porte. It was the first time that the National Assembly of Constantinople exercised its constitutional right to formally apply to the government to end the illegalities and atrocities committed in Western Armenia. This document, prepared on the factual basis of numerous petitions received from the cantons by the Patriarchate for about 20 years, formulated the issue of the Western Armenians, which became the Armenian Question and after the 1877-1878 Russian-Turkish war, it entered the phase of internationalization, becoming the subject of diplomatic relations and discussions.

“Family Chronicle” by Yeremia Tevkants put into scientific circulation by the efforts of Hakob Muradyan, besides being of great historical value is also an important source of demographics, ethnography, everyday life, religious, intrachurch and inter-church relations, as well as from the perspective of the study of the history of separate dioceses.

Ruben Safrastyan, Mustafa Kemal; The Fight Against the Republic of Armenia in 1919-1921 – 2019-4


Gevorg S. Khoudinyan
Although, over the past 100 years, the Soviet, post-Soviet, and Diaspora Armenian historiography has repeatedly touched upon separate episodes of the life and activities of Mustafa Kemal – the founder of the republican Turkey, including the history of the irreconcilable struggle against Armenia in 1919-1921, for a number of objective and subjective reasons no scientific view on that prominent political and military figure has been formed within us. The reason is that in the Soviet era we faced political barriers fed by the traditions of the Lenin-Ataturk friendship, and in the post-Soviet years the reality of insufficient study of sources and the lack of a certain concept of perception of historical-political processes in us. Almost the same superficiality and one-sidedness has been observed among Diaspora Armenian scholars, who have relied mainly on limited information about Mustafa Kemal in western sources.

Since the restoration of independence of Armenia, our historiography in assessing the life and activities of Mustafa Kemal should not continue to be guided by reconciliatory characterizations of the Soviet era, or merely a damnatory’s propagandistic mental pattern based on moral principles. In the process of building our own independent statehood, the scientific study of Turkey’s rich state-political traditions becomes paramount, leaving aside the starting points of worldviews on reconciliation and moral condemnation stemming from their concealed belief of the impossibility of achieving and surpassing them. Today we need to know, recognize, and understand the great and small secrets of our adversary’s successes over the last two centuries, so that tomorrow we can find the tools to counter them. On the basement of all this first of all lies the scientific task of comprehensive study of the life and activities of politician and statesman Kemal Ataturk.

In this regard prof. Ruben Safrastyan’s brochure entitled “Mustafa Kemal. The Fight Against the Republic of Armenia in 1919-1921” though not of a large volume, however is quite full of extensive questions and statements of issues and is in fact the first bold attempt. The author has succeeded in finding a clear inheritance link between the Young Turks responsible for the Armenian Genocide and the new Turkish leader who appeared in the political stage concealing their crime after the Armistice of Mudros. This has revealed one of the most essential principles of Turkey’s state policy to distinguish itself from the crimes committed by previous administrations and those already uncovered, but at the same time continuing to act with new methods under new conditions.

Therefore we think that in just a few months Mustafa Kemal’s conversion from the word “fazahat” condemning the Armenian Genocide to the genocidal vocabulary of the Young Turks on the eve of the 1920 autumn attack on the Republic of Armenia was not an expression of ordinary hypocrisy, as the author claims, but a shift in the toolkit of permanent expansionism characteristic of Turkish state policy. In the political statements of the past and present state officials of Turkey it is pointless to seek political principles with their western understanding; the latter have served and serve as instruments appropriate to this particular milestone of expansionism. In this context, criticism does not stand up to the assessment of the Turkish National Covenant carried out by Soviet scholars at the time as an attempt to cross the broad borders of the Ottoman Empire to the narrow boundaries of national statehood. The nation-state model adopted by Mustafa Kemal was, in fact, an attempt to modernize traditional forms and methods of Turkish expansionism, at the first destination of which its kernel was formed, with the unification of Anatolia and Western Armenia, but at the same time they mined the next zones of expansion outlined around it towards Syria, Cyprus, Thrace, Iranian Atrpatakan (Iranian Azerbaijan), Eastern Armenia and Western and Southern Georgia.

In this context, the author was able to reveal the secret instruction of Foreign Minister Mukhtar Bey on November 8, 1920 to the Commander of the Turkish Army Kâzım Karabekir on the “elimination” of the Republic of Armenia, which was one of the tangible manifestations of this process. The gradual demolition of Armenia inwardly and putting into game the existing Turkic ethnic enclaves for the purpose of its occupation had already been successfully completed in Kars and Nakhijevan, but had failed in Zangibassar and Vedi. In the Soviet period too, Turkey adopted a similar policy towards Armenia, which continued until the Karabakh movement. It is no coincidence, therefore, that they were not as angry in Baku about the departure of Azerbaijanis from Armenia as they were in Ankara. This policy continues today, with Turkey’s prompting to Azerbaijan concerning the latter’s manifested pretensions towards Zangezur, “Gökçe” and even “Irevan”.

NOTABLE WORK, On the Losses of Armenian People as the Result of the Genocide and the Methodological Grounds of Compensation Structure – 2019-3


Lilit Hr. Hovhannisyan

Recently an extensive work entitled ʻThe Losses of Armenian People in the Result of the Genocide and the Methodological Grounds of Compensation Structureʼ intended for the wide framework of people interested in the problems of the history of Armenian Genocide and Armenian claims, students and readers has been published. In its seven sections the political, economic and demographic consequences of Armenian Genocide are elucidated, the sizes of losses of the Armenian people in various fields of human activities are clarified, the ways of overcoming the consequences of the Genocide are outlined.

In particular, NAS RA Academician Ashot Melkonyan has thoroughly studied the process of international recognition of the Armenian Genocide and the issue of compensation in both historical, international-legal, as well as, political science dimensions.

The other authors of the collective work – NAS RA Academician Gevorg Poghosyan and Candidate of Sciences in History Gegham Badalyan, have carried out the study of the human losses of Armenian people in the result of the Genocide and its demographic consequences.

NAS RA Corresponding member Ararat Aghasyan has presented the irrecoverable losses of Armenian medieval architectural monuments, handwritten illustrated manuscripts kept in Armenian monasteries and churches, frescos, icons, bas-relief, khachkars and gravestones, values of applied art and secular fine arts in Western Armenia and the other territories of the Ottoman Empire in the result of Hamidian massacres and Mets Yeghern, as well as, the continuing policy of the destruction of Armenian cultural heritage in the Republic of Turkey.

Doctor of Sciences in Architecture Davit Qertmenjyan has studied the policy of the destruction of Armenian historical-architectural monuments during the Armenian Genocide and its consequences from the perspective of compensation issues for cultural genocide.

In the framework of the collective work Doctor of Sciences in History Armen Maruqyan has presented property and financial losses of Armenian people because of the Genocide and its consequences. He has also classified and systematized the section referring to practical suggestions of mechanisms and tools for overcoming the consequences of the Armenian Genocide.

Geologist Hayk Melik-Adamyan has studied the questions of depriving the indigenous Armenian people of exploitation of the mineral resources through the implementation of the Armenian Genocide in Western Armenia and its consequences, evaluated the degree of economic effectiveness of extraction of those resources.

Orientalist Anush Hovhannisyan has studied the process of deprivation of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and its continuation by the Republic of Turkey revealing its negative effect on the Armenians who remained in the territory of Turkey.

Lawyer Vladimir Vardanyan has presented the international-legal possibilities of bringing the Turkish state to political responsibility for the Armenian Genocide and overcoming the consequences of the crime.

Thus, the collective work ʻThe Losses of Armenian People in the Result of the Genocide and the Methodological Grounds of Compensation Structureʼ not only reflects the accumulated knowledge on the Armenian Genocide in the field of Armenology, but also can greatly contribute to designing pan-Armenian agenda for overcoming its consequences.