Author Archives: Admin

TRANSFORMATION OF TURKEY’S KURDISH POLICY IN 2024

The next Arab-Israeli conflict, which started after the terrorist attack against Israel carried out by the Hamas organization on October 7, 2023, in which Iran also joined, threatens to turn into a big regional war. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan predictably accused Israel of committing genocide against the Palestinians and threatened that one day Turkish troops would enter Israel the same way they entered Libya and Karabakh. And his foreign minister, Hakan Fidan, compared Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with Adolf Hitler. Turkish-Israeli relations have never been so strained, and Israel has lost its only regional Muslim ally, joining the Arab-Iranian anti-Israel camp. However, this policy of the Turkish president completely frees Israel’s hands to create a Kurdish state in the middle of the Middle East, which will be a pawn in the hands of Israel and the US, depending equally on Iran, Syria, Iraq and Turkey.

The Turkish elite is aware of all this, which is very well aware that Israel, with the help of the United States, is able to use the Kurds to create serious threats to Turkish statehood, especially since Erdogan has not managed to solve the Kurdish issue both inside the country and abroad in neighboring Syria and Iraq. Moreover, the number of pro-Kurdish deputies increases after each parliamentary election in the National Assembly, and the number of Kurdish mayors increases after each local government election. As for the Syrian and Iraqi Kurdistans, the plans to conquer them in a very short time and suppress the Kurdish liberation movement failed, and Turkish troops continue to suffer losses in those countries for 8 years, causing an economic, social and political crisis in the country. But the worst thing for Erdogan is that he cannot withdraw Turkish troops from those countries, because the Kurds will immediately create an independent state in those territories, which is already the most serious threat to Turkish statehood, because if the power in the Iraqi Kurdish autonomy belongs to Erdogan’s ally Barzani clan, then the master of the situation in Syrian Kurdistan is the structure created by the Kurdish Workers’ Party and under its influence, the Northern Syrian Federal Democracy (SDF). And now, most likely with information that the Israelis will launch the Kurdish issue, Erdogan and his political allies are forced to make concessions, even promising to discuss the issue of Abdullah Ocalan’s release if he calls on his party members to lay down their arms and self-disband. Although Ocalan is considered the president of the PKK, the real power there belongs to other members of the party, who of course will not agree to lay down their arms, because as they believe, another Arab-Israeli conflict, in which Iran is also involved, is a real possibility provides an opportunity to create an independent Kurdish state. In order to prevent all this, Recep Tayyip Erdogan in 2023-2024 had to go to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar to restore the relations he ruined and bring investments to Turkey, and he is also making unsuccessful attempts to reconcile with Syrian President Bashar Assad, most likely in order to create a united front against the Kurds. On the other hand, he is trying to prevent the Kurds from joint actions with Israel, realizing that this union can become a serious threat to Turkey.

The attack of November 27, 2024 and the subsequent overthrow of Bashar al-Assad’s government was the only logical solution to Erdogan’s Kurdish policy in Syria. By effectively extending his influence in Syria and bringing forces loyal to him to power, Erdogan has gained an insurmountable advantage over the Kurds, which allows him to first finally create a 30-kilometer buffer zone, and then, together with Syrian government forces, drown the Kurdish movement in blood.

TERRACED GARDENING IN ARMENIAN CULTURE
(Ethnographic study)

Terraced gardening is one of the important and unique branches of Armenian agriculture. Based on the relief features of the Armenian Highland, the possibilities of using water resources as well as historical and political events, for centuries, the Armenians, in addition to the flat areas, have used the slopes, creating various agricultural terraces. Armenians also created the terraced settlements, where the roof of one house served as a courtyard for the upper house. The panorama of similar settlements resembles an amphitheater․

The development of terrace gardening in some Armenian settlements is connected with conflicts between Armenians and Turks. Armenians, trying to avoid attacks from the Turks, tried to establish their settlements in mountainous, hard-to-reach places, where they also created terrace gardens. Except for this presented reason, the development of terrace gardening is also associated with the efficiency of using slopes. There are many slopes in the Armenian Highlands, and their use was a vital necessity since flat areas did not meet the needs of people. The use of slopes is characteristic of many peoples of the world, and Armenians are no exception in this regard.

Terraced gardening was widespread in many regions of Armenia. It is a typical feature of Alaverdi, Dilijan, Ashtarak, Yerevan, Yeghegnadzor, Goris, Berdzor, Akn, Arabkir, Zeytun, Hachn, Amasia, Ardvin, Meghri, Getashen, Baberd, Arduin, Akhaltsikh and other settlements. To make gardens on the slopes, they have built strong stone retaining walls, sometimes using mortar. The retaining walls collapsed from time to time and needed repair. The walls have a height of 1–3 m and are built with 2‒3 rows of stones. The retaining walls were generally inclined slightly towards the slope. In general, the garden was established in such a place where it was possible to make an irrigation system. Mainly on slopes near river valleys or in places where there are natural sources of water. There are also cases when stone retaining walls were built even in the case of arable land. This means how important was the land for the Armenian peasants.

In Armenian culture, terrace gardening is distinguished by its diversity of manifestations and originality. At the same time, differences in construction techniques, land use methods and forms of labor organization are noticeable between different regions.

ON SOME ISSUES OF DIPHTHONG FORMATION

Linguistics has suggested considerably different approaches with regard to diphthongs all of which can be summed up as follows: 1) A diphthong is the pronunciation of two vowels in one syllable (V1+V2) (N. Trubetzkoy, G. Trager, K. Pike, H. Gleason, A. Reformatsky, etc.) The following is yet another version of this definition – a diphthong is the pronunciation of syllabic sounds within a single syllable with only one component being syllabic (E. Aghayan). 2) A diphthong is the pronunciation of two vowels or a vowel and a semi-vowel (ṷ, i̭) in one syllable. In this case, it is not important whether the sonorant has the syllabic function of or not. (D. Jones, H. Acharyan, G. Ghapantsyan, etc.). 3) A diphthong is the combination of only a vowel and a (semi-vowel) sonorant (V+S / S+V) in one syllable (L. Bloomfield). Some distinguish between true and false diphthongs considering the combination of two vowels with equivalent components to belong to the first group, i.e., with no syllabic sound (L. Shcherba, J.Vahek, R. Budagov, etc.), unlike the three other types in which one of the diphthong components is syllabic (a nucleus of a diphthong). While these approaches regard a diphthong a minimum functional unit – a phoneme, another approach views a two-phoneme (= two-vowel) formation acting as one phonetic whole a diphthong. The components of a two-phoneme diphthong can be divided by a morphemic seam or can relate to adjacent syllables.

The key descriptions of diphthongs provide grounds for a broader understanding of the unit. Hence, a diphthong is the pronunciation of two vowels or a vowel and a syllabic sonorant as a phonetic whole, which phonemically can be equivalent to a complex phoneme uttered in the same syllable or to two phonemes divided by a morphemic seam and (or) two phonemes distributed between adjacent syllables. Based on this interpretation, diphthongs can be stable and non-stable: the former include two-vowel combinations uttered in the same syllable. The latter contain two-phoneme formations uttered in adjacent syllables and/or divided by a morphemic seam. According to the fullness of the sound, there are non-equivalent (with a syllabic component) and equivalent (without a syllabic component) diphthongs.

Following the given interpretation of the formation of diphthongs, the combination of a vowel and a non-syllabic (semi-vowel) sonorant in a single syllable is a diphthongoid rather than a diphthong.

THE PHENOMENON OF PARUYR SEVAK
On the 100th anniversary of his birth

This article is dedicated to the centenary of the birth of the Armenian writer Paruyr Sevak: a distinguished poet, literary critic, and interpreter. It offers a renewed characterization and interpretation of his artistic universe, emphasizing the distinctiveness of his poetic and scholarly contributions. The analysis situates Sevak within the context of his time while underscoring the enduring relevance of his works beyond their historical moment, framed through the lens of contemporary literary thought. Sevak himself once remarked: “We are getting old, Paruyr Sevak, we are getting old, my dear.” However, he did not reach old age, remaining forever 47. Had his “scissored life” not been prematurely interrupted, it might have been possible to celebrate his centenary in his presence. Tragically, his premonitions regarding an untimely death materialized on June 17, 1971.

Paruyr Sevak is a multifaceted intellectual figure. As a poet of profound insight, he also made significant scholarly contributions to the fields of literary history—particularly medieval literature and Sayat-Nova studies—literary theory, and criticism. Additionally, he bequeathed to subsequent generations high-quality translations of works by Spanish, Russian, and European authors. These spheres of activity were complementary rather than discrete. As an innovative poet and accomplished theorist, Sevak opposed poetic self-sufficiency, insularity, and the repetitive tendencies of traditional ashugh-style poetry. Yet, he acknowledged the brilliance of Sayat-Nova, whom he considered a leading poet of the late medieval period. With deliberate intent, Sevak sought to enhance the artistic prestige of Armenian literature, striving to overcome its limitations and align it with the global intellectual and artistic developments of his time. His ultimate aim was to position Armenian poetry as a peer among the literary achievements of the world’s leading nations.

The article further examines the distinctive features of Sevak’s figurative thinking, addressing key ideological, thematic, and aesthetic aspects of notable works, including Anlreli Zangakatun and Eradzayn Patarag. Special attention is devoted to several pivotal poems from the collections Mardy Api Mej and Yeghici Luys, revealing their thematic depth and interpretative layers.

THE MEANING AND IMPORTANCE OF A HISTORICAL FACT
In the context of the cognitive functions of the historian

In historical science, both the concept of historical fact and the role of the historian are theoretically crucial elements without which a well-founded, true history cannot exist. Without historical facts, there is essentially no history. A historical fact gains its significance when it demonstrates causal connections with other facts across time and space. Through systematic and logical presentation of these connections, it becomes possible to illuminate particular historical events or episodes, and more broadly, to construct a substantiated, content-rich, and scientifically sound historical narrative.

History as a science primarily studies the past of people and societies. Therefore, interpreting and presenting historical experiences and lessons holds practical significance for present and future generations. A historical fact represents an undeniable truth from the past that must not be subject to distortion or falsification. True history is built upon such historical facts.

History, as factual memory of the past, is preserved in diverse historical sources: written, oral (including narratives), material artifacts, and other documents. These sources can be classified as direct or indirect, primary or secondary in importance. Direct sources provide immediate coverage of events or phenomena in their temporal and spatial context, while indirect sources, though not directly connected to the events, can contribute valuable context and supporting information. Original sources generally offer the highest reliability and credibility.

Throughout history, various factors subjective, ideological, political, and class-based have led to distortions and falsifications of historical facts. Historical literature reveals that such falsifications have occurred across all countries and periods. Notably, the Soviet Union and its historiography in the 20th century exemplified systematic historical distortion in service of building a “communist society.” Our theoretical analysis draws primarily from episodes in Armenian history to illustrate these points.

A historian must possess various qualities and characteristics personal, professional, civic, and academic including proper education, professional expertise, a developed worldview, and understanding of environmental and social
conditions. Without professional historians, true history cannot be documented. The historian must: rely exclusively on historical facts, maintain high scientific standards, demonstrate moral consciousness and impartiality, master historical theory and methodology, select appropriate research topics, thoroughly collect, study, and evaluate sources.

Based on these principles, historians must present authentic history through meaningful analysis, providing scientifically grounded and comprehensive conclusions. Their work should offer educational value and guidance for present and future generations. Finally, while maintaining commitment to historical accuracy, historians must balance professional objectivity with appropriate recognition of national identity, when relevant.

ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY FEDERATION IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEMS OF THE NEAR EAST AND EASTERN EUROPE AT THE END OF THE 19TH CENTURY AND THE BEGINNING OF THE 20TH CENTURY

On the eve of the pivotal events of 1908-1909, which were crucial for the Constitutional Revolution in Iran, a debate unfolded within the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) Dashnaktsutyun regarding the party’s participation in the ongoing internal political struggles in Turkey. The party’s leader, Rostom, suspended his comrades’ revolutionary activities in Turkey while simultaneously encouraging the extension of similar processes in Persia.

For the ARF Dashnaktsutyun, the establishment of solidarity with the Persian constitutionalists was tied not only to the objectives arising from the party’s membership in the Socialist International but also to the recognition of the civilizational affinity between the two peoples. Meanwhile, the objectives of Russian imperialism and Pan-Turkists coincided on the matter of blockading and disrupting the prospects for Iran’s revival. Consequently, during this same period, the activities of Social Democrats and other revolutionary groups representing the Caucasian Tatars in Persia were fueled not only by the Russian Police Department’s intent to counterbalance the ARF Dashnaktsutyun’s actions but also by Turkish authorities, who sought to establish their presence in certain regions of Atrpatakan (Azerbaijan).

This was compounded by the ARF Dashnaktsutyun’s selfless support for the defense of Tabriz, led by Rostom and his associates, which culminated in the June 1909 victory of the Constitutional Revolution. Following this victory, during the formation of a new government, thanks to Yeprem Davtyan—known as the “Garibaldi of Persia”—the multinational revolutionary underground operating in the country began viewing the ARF Dashnaktsutyun and its leaders as military and political guarantors of the revolution’s success. However, unlike the Dashnaktsutyun, figures representing the Caucasian Tatars continued their intrigues behind the back of the Persian Constitutional Revolution.

The Young Turks also became increasingly active, attempting to counterbalance the revolutionary movement unfolding in Iran. Recognizing the exceptional authority and influence of Yeprem Davtyan, Chief of Tehran Police, as a potential hindrance to their efforts, the Young Turks sought to win his favor and utilize his extraordinary military talent, inviting him to Turkey to participate in the Italo-Turkish War or the Libyan Campaign.

By the end of 1911, deepening contradictions between the ARF Dashnaktsutyun and the Young Turks, coupled with the perilous situation developing around Persia between 1910 and 1912, made it unthinkable for Yeprem to accept such an invitation. While constitutionalists heroically repelled the return of reactionary forces, Tsarist Russia and the British Empire hastened to solidify the 1907 agreement dividing Persia into spheres of influence.

As a result, the leadership of the Constitutional Revolution, relying on the determination of Persian patriots and ARF Dashnaktsutyun fighters assembled in the Majlis, made a decisive decision. On February 2, 1911, they invited American William Morgan Shuster to Persia as the government’s financial adviser and chief treasurer. Shuster, a genuine supporter of Persian and Armenian revolutionaries and their heroic commander Yeprem Davtyan, played a pivotal role.

Although the subsequent attempt at revenge by Mohammad Ali Shah was thwarted by Yeprem Davtyan’s detachments, which defeated the Shah’s supporters and Turkmen tribesmen during the battles of September 1911, the Tsarist government, alarmed by Shuster’s reforms, severed diplomatic relations and sent troops to Persia on November 8, 1911. The weak and vulnerable Iranian government was forced to concede to the Russo-British ultimatum of November 29, expelling Shuster from Persia and dissolving the Majlis
on December 20.

It seemed as though the revolution had come to an end. However, as a symbol of the joint struggle of the Armenian and Persian peoples for freedom, Yeprem Davtyan continued his fight against reactionary forces until his martyrdom on May 6, 1912.

RUDOLF STEINER’S CRITIQUE OF KANT’S THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE

This article presents an examination of the critique of Kant’s epistemology by the Austrian philosopher Rudolf Steiner, the founder of anthroposophy. Steiner was once accused of presenting this critique in a disorganized manner across his various philosophical works; however, his aim was not to critique Kant’s epistemology per se, but to develop fundamental and coherent and foundational epistemological foundations. He believed this was possible on the condition of breaking free from the vicious cycle of concepts within Kant’s theory of knowledge and through the scientific elaboration of the foundational approaches to cognition in Goethe’s philosophy.

The primary goal of this article has been to classify and systematically analyze the most significant concepts of Kant’s epistemology that Steiner targets in his critique—either rejecting them, as in the case of the “thing-in-itself,” or imbuing them with new content, such as the concept of “experience.” According to Steiner, the failure of traditional theories of knowledge stems from their lack of a basis in the study of the nature of cognition, and the question “what is cognition?” does not precede the question “what is cognition?” Thus, we first address how Steiner defines cognition in “Truth and Science.” We refer to Kant’s classification of the cognitive process sensory, judgmental, and rational and note that, for Steiner, the sensory aspect is considered not as cognition but merely as perception. According to him, cognition begins with conceptual observation, while he views the observation of the thinking process as the highest form of cognition.

We also examined the genealogy of Kant’s theory of knowledge according to another of Steiner’s works, “The Secrets of Philosophy,” and highlighted the contradiction that, according to Steiner, Kant resolved by accepting the limits of cognition, leading to subjectivism and dualism. We then demonstrated how Steiner reveals the errors of dualism in “The Philosophy of Freedom” and characterizes it as a necessary intermediate stage to be overcome in the process of cognition. The world is given to us as duality, while cognition processes it into unity. Kant’s “thing-in-itself” is nothing but an empty abstraction; the supposed separation of consciousness from the “thing-in-itself” is an illusion. In cognition, the boundaries between essence and phenomenon dissolve, and the phenomenon presents itself to us as a manifested essence. Even if it presents itself to us as an idea, this is only at the initial stage of simple perception and observation of the phenomenon, whereas in the cognitive process, the impartial and objective nature of thought connects and unifies the diversity of perceptions and observations, resulting in ideas being recognized and ceasing to be merely ideas.

In this article, we also explored the differences between Kant’s and Steiner’s understandings of “experience” as defined in Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason” and Steiner’s “The Epistemological Foundations of Goethe’s Worldview,” demonstrating the new content that Steiner attributes to this concept, arguing that thinking should also be regarded as a fact of experience. We illustrated how Steiner describes the process of thinking becoming unrecognized due to the focus on the object, asserting that without thought, the image of the world cannot be considered either objective or complete, and that it would be entirely arbitrary to regard the sum of what we know about an object solely through perception as a complete whole, while the result of thoughtful observation is seen as something additional that has no connection to the object itself.

Theres is an attempt to show how Steiner refutes Kant’s approach that limits cognition based on the capacities of the human spirit, asserting that our spiritual organization inherently includes the ability for fully adequate knowledge of things; otherwise, knowledge would be impossible.

ON THE PROBABLE HISTORICAL PROTOTYPES OF HAYKAK AND HIS OPPONENT – 2024-3

Sargis G. Petrosyan (Gyumri)
Doctor of Historical Sciences

Keywords – inscriptions, Haya, Haykak, Rid-Teshub, Naram- Suen, Belokhos, Armanum, Apisal, Khutimu.

Summary

Eblaitic cuneiform texts testify that in the 3rd millennium B.C. there was a country Hutimu in the mountains of the Armenian Taurus. In Akkadian sources it is called Apisal. The roots of those toponyms are preserved in the Sasun districts of Hoyt/Hut, Salno-dzor (“Salno Gorge”), and Salna-lerink (“Salna Mountains”).

The Eblaitic texts also preserve the name of the king of this country in the form of Haya (Haia). Before him, the Eblaites called the king of the neighbouring known country Armi (Akkad.: Armanum, in the basin of the Western Tigris), who is identified with Hayk – ethnarch of the Armenians. Supposedly, the second Haya is the grandchild of the first Haya/Hayk, as he bore the name Haykak in Movses Khorenatsi’s “History of Armenia”. In the word Haykak we can see the name Hayk and the diminutive suffix -ak. No doubt Haykak (Haya the second) is the same person as the contemporary of Naram-Suen, the king of Akkad, Rid-Teshub (Rid- D IM), whom Akkadian sources consider the king of the country of Armanum.

At that time, when Rid-Teshub ruled the Apisal/Hutimu country, he led the struggle against Naram-Suen, that is why he was elected king of the Armanum country. In Movses Khorenatsi’s testimonies, Haykak’s adversary is a certain Belokhos, whose prototype (as an epic image) was undoubtedly the historical Naram-Suen. There is a mention that Haykak lived in the time of Belokhos and, having rashly arranged troubles, died in them” (Khorenatsi, I, 19). So Haykak, i.e. Rid-Teshub really died at the hands of Naram-Suen, in spite of the fact that in his inscription the Akkadian king speaks only about the capture of his adversary. As for Naram-Suen, he was eventually killed in battle during the invasion of Mesopotamia by the Kutian – hill tribes of the Armenian Taurus.