Author Archives: Admin

A NEWLY DISCOVERED PAGE FROM THE J. P. GETTY MUSEUM’S GOSPEL ILLUSTRATED BY MESROP OF KHIZAN – 2019-4

Emma L. Chookaszian
After his victory against the Ottoman Empire in 1604, Shah Abbas forced the Armenians of the region to migrate to his new capital, Isfahan. The Armenians prospered here quickly, establishing churches, schools, and monasteries. Traders, carpenters, metal craftsmen, and miniaturists played a very important role among the immigrants. As a result, Isfahan became a refuge for miniaturists from different provinces of historic Armenia, each bringing with them the stylistically recognizable traditions of their local school that were going to be further developed and refined on the new land.

ARMENIAN EPIGRAPHIC SOURCES OF IZMAIL: NEWFOUND ITEMS – 2019-4

Summary

Arsen E. Harutyunyan, Sergiu V. Matveev (Qishnev)
The Armenian community of Moldova was formed at least in the 10-11th centuries and developed in the 14-15th centuries after the establishment of Moldovian power in 1359. The town of Izmail previously located in the province of Bessarabia and at present within the region of Odessa of Ukraine, before its fortress having been taken by generalissimo A. Suvorov in 1790 it used to be one of the famous Armenian centers of Moldova where Armenians had several churches, were engaged in handicraft (especially in tailoring) and trade. About a dozen of epigraphs located in the Armenian cemetery adjacent to St. Astvatsatsin Church were still published by Christopher Kuchuk-Hovhannisyan at the beginning of the last century which evidence about once the dense Armenian community. One of the epigraphs is about the church rennovation activities which were accomplished in 1763, during the reign of Catholicos of All Armenians Hakob Shamakhetsi and by donations of local spiritual and secular representatives. The other epigraphs are epitaphs dated 1556-1749.

Unfortunately, those epigraphs have not been preserved but two epitaphs have recently been discovered in Izmail. One of them is situated in the yard of Maria Ivanovna’s house (Fuchik str. 184). It is dated 1725 and bears the names of deceased Friar Pilpos and probably his wife Khanghaz. The other tombstone is exhibited in the yard of Historical Museum of Izmail after O. Suvorov. It is dated 1758 and also bears the names of two deceased – Arzukhan from Bist Village (in Nakhijevan) and probably her husband Hovsep, son of Tsatur. The discovery of new tombstones again reaffirmed the active life of Armenian community in Izmail especially in the 18th century as well as served as an occasion to refer to the history of this Armenian colony and non-preserved epigraphic inscriptions in a new way.

THE VERBS OF THE ARMENIAN LANGUAGE MEANING CHANGE OF NATIONAL IDENTITY – 2019-4

Summary

Davit S. Gyurjinyan
In the old Armenian language, only three verbs were formed, meaning the transformation of ethnic identity: հրեանալ, պարթևանալ, պարսկանալ (“become a Jew, become a Parthian, become a Persian, accept their customs, language and faith”). In subsequent periods of the development of the Armenian language (and today too) 30 verbs were formed, uniting in the lexical-semantic subgroup of the verbs of transformation.

The semantic component of transformation refers to: a) national identity, b) religious identity, c) language, d) customs:

The word-formation basis of the verbs became: a) the names of representatives of neighboring countries or countries attached to Armenia (ռուսանալ, վրացանալ), b) the names of those nations and countries in which there were or are Armenian communities (լեհանալ, ռումինանալ), c) self-naming of Armenians – հայ (հայանալ), d) the names of religions, faiths and their followers (քրիստոնեանալ, իսլամանալ, կաթոլիկանալ).

The studied verbs mostly have one meaning, but there are also some that have multiple meanings: (թուրքանալ “1. become a Turk, 2. get furious”, etc.).

Most of the dictionaries have the verb հայանալ recorded “1. become an Armenian, 2. (rel.) adopt the Armenian-Gregorian faith”, however, many lexical units of this lexico-semantic group are not yet registered in the dictionaries. Verbs of ethnic transformation are of limited use, some are very rare, even in a single participial form.

THE PHONETIC ISOGLOSS OF ARMENIAN AND CELTIC LANGUAGES – 2019-4

(Levels of vowels, sonorants and “diphthongs”)

Summary 

Vazgen. G. Hambardzumyan
The Armenian and the Celtic languages present not only generalizations of phonetic (vowel, sonorant, and “diphthong”) isoglosses but also differences that so far have not been the subject of a separate study; our work is such an experience. These isoglosses are systemic and subsystemic in nature.

In this article, we bring together the Armenian-Celtic phonetic parallels, mostly based on the material so far accumulated, but also make partial adjustments and additions.

In traditional comparisons, their obvious patterns have been the focus of much attention. Our study reveals that there are a significant number of common rules (parallels) besides the traditionally cited, with exceptions and deviations from these rules that are, in their turn, definable, simply illustrative and justified by the full characterization of the phenomenon. This article has given some attention to this aspect of the problem.

The facts show that the subsystem of simple (“short”) vowels is not only broader in the given vowel but also substantially more substantive than the subsystem of compound (“long”) vowels, and it is well known that is justified in communication.

The subsystem of sonorants is characterized not only by the quantitative (“formal”) but also by the functional variety, which is generally a feature of the major part of Indo-European languages (three-way sonorant usage). In the Armenian-Celtic phonetic relation, the subsystem of diphthongs has little quantitative and functional expression.

The article is notable for its detailed analysis of the facts.

A detailed examination of the historical (and not just the phonetic) overlap between the Armenian and other Indo-European languages seems to us to be quite appropriate in terms of the totality of linguistic and social perceptions of individual societies.

THE MAIN ISSUES OF THE ARMENIAN IDENTITY – 2019-4

(In Hovh. Tumanyan’s publicity)

Summary

Sergey A. Aghajanyan
The article presents an analysis of the observations on the Armenian identity in one of the most important parts of Hovh. Tumanyan’s literary heritage – in publicity.

The study consists of three main parts and summarizing conclusions.
The first part briefly reviews the main content and stylistic features of Hovh. Tumanyan’s publicity. It is pointed out that the key issue of that publicity is the revelation of the defects characteristic of the Armenian identity and their causes, the mentioning of the means of overcoming them. It is also shown that the sociological professionalism, honest and sincere patriotism of the author is evident in them, even in line with present-day standards, which his contemporaries did not always correctly understand and appreciate.

The second part of the study illustrates and explains the socio-political circumstances by which acknowledgement Hovh. Tumanyan became an active figure of literary and public life, serving it also with his unique identity of a writer. His active civic behavior also manifested itself in publicity not only as a formed worldview, a complex set of raised issues, but also a publicistic style and vocabulary. In this sense the objectivity and debatableness, being brief but at the same time subtstantive, often also imagery is inherent to his articles, etc.

The most extensive part of the article is the third one (“The Defects of the Armenian Identity and Their Causes”), in which the Tumanyan observations of the national identity are presented in three groups: the collective identity of the Armenian, the identity of the Armenian people, the identity of the Armenian intellectual. In all three cases, they are shown by Hovh. Tumanyan with differentiated assessments and qualifications, persuasive reasoning of the defects, the proposed solutions being conditioned with the author’s worldview. The historical and anthropological observations of the great intellectual are emphasized in the study, especially because they show the sociological depth of his mind and the generalizing power of the formed truths.

In the Tumanyan observations of the Armenian identity there are many characteristics and definitions worth of wise mind that are the result of both historical experience, and the wonderful knowledge of the vital realities and human descriptions of his time. Particularly with the latter circumstance is conditioned my reflection on the theoretical problems of retrospective evaluation of the national identity and historical experience, since they have not been ignored as well in Hovh. Tumanyan’s observations. The optimism about the future of the Armenian people expressed in the author’s publicity and its utopian manifestation are not neglected in the article, too.

The study concludes with resumptive conclusions that emphasize the relevance of Hovh. Tumanyan’s observations on national identity in our day as well, which should give rise to serious reflections for the people on the road to independence, especially for intellectuals.

THE PARADOXES OF ECONOMIC DETERMINISM – 2019-4

The criticism of Marxist theory of socioeconomic formation

Summary  

Hovsep I. Aghajanyan
In their theory of socioeconomic formation K. Marx and F. Engels tried to present the patterns of human history. Marxism considered the basis for the change in these formations to be the operation of the law of the interaction of productive forces and production relations. According to this logic, Marx and Engels presented the history of social development as a sequence of the so-called primitive communal, slaveholding, feudal, capitalist and future communist social system. According to Marxism, socio-economic formations are determined by the relationship between the base and the superstructure. A basis is an economic system conditioned by proprietary relations. According to the nature of the basis, a superstructure is formed, i.e. set of political, legal and ideological relations. For this reason, Marxism considers the sphere of spirituality to be derivative with respect to the basis.

In the article it is shown that the Marxist theory of the emergence and transformation of private property and socio-economic formations does not correspond to reality. As a result of the analysis of the socio-economic, political, legal systems of Ancient Rome and Greece, it is substantiated that they were not classical slave-owning states. Marx and Engels explained the socio-economic, spiritual, cultural, state-political, i.e. contradictory and complex civilization processes from the point of view of class antagonism, the basis of which is the relationship of private property. The thousand-year history of mankind shows that such confrontations are just external manifestations of the underlying processes taking place within society. Moreover, on the basis of private property, internal incentives for human life are built, which, first of all, have spiritual and psychological motives, are manifested in the sphere of material production.

The main events of the history of mankind cannot be separated from the general process of civilization and presented as a controversial theory. Marxism, ignoring the processes of civilization, on the basis of possessive relations built the logic of transformation of the social system, which is conditioned with complex and contradictory institutional relationships. The key to revealing the essence of the transformation of society is the knowledge of the internal logic of civilization processes. Marxist criteria for assessing the nature of the social system do not work, because they are built on false and divorced from reality schemes. For this reason, Marxism did not pass the historical test, as it presented the internal motives of complex social events from the point of view of their external manifestations.

HOUSEHOLD/FAMILY IN SOCIAL THEORY OF MOSES KHORENATSI – 2019-4

Albert A. Stepanyan
Antique and Early Medieval (Christian) social theory is considered to be based on the concept of the isomorphism of the two principal components of social life – individual and social bodies. This approach reached back to the Sophists, Socrates, and Plato. In his treatise, Politics, Aristotle brought the concept of focusing attention on the household/family (oivjkoς) to fruition and finding in it the first (and the basic) form of social partnership (koinoniva) [Aristot., Polit., II, 1259a, 3 – 7]. He believed that the socialization of two opposite individuals – men and women – was only effectively formed within a family.

CONCEPTUAL FIELD AND SIGNAL SPHERE – 2019-4

Summary

David V. Gyulzatyan (Vanadzor)
The language sign is signaled and the language is re-awakened in us at the moment of signification, which is still identifiable by inner speech. Signification is a signal, a signal about the existence of the sign, of a total signedness, of the borderlines of the sign-sphere.

The signification (sign-attribution) is the reference of a sign, by the possibility of unit selection, i.e. the freedom allowed by the inner form of the language and its encoding, to an external object. The whole sign-related activity is sign-generation, which is a simultaneous process of language generation and speech generation. Only an unfinished beginning is characteristic of language generation and that beginning is always repeated at the signaling of each speech initiation. A signal is activated immediately before beginning a speech, at least in inner speech, and by the end of the speech, it outlines a domain of signs, called sphere of signals, borrowed from the language system and reflected on itself.

The sphere of signals is susceptible by the language system, by the conceptual field, which is largely situated in, but not limited to it and in whose bounds the signal itself lies dormant as a permanent possibility. The sphere of that which is signified comprises the poles of meaning and significance: without the latter (i.e. significance), there is no existence for the former (i.e. meaning), that which forms meaning is secondary. This function of formation allows significance autonomy, meaningless significance, while “significance-free meaning” is impossible. There is no unsignified meaning because meaning is a constituent part of the sign and there is no sign deprived of significance. The verb “to have” is the common knot of the concepts of “significance” and “meaning”, that is the common attribute of these concepts is their state of activity together with the “I have” signal. Their differentiating attribute is, from the perspective of meaning, passivity, with an additional signal of expressedness, while from the perspective of significance, it is activity, with an additional signal of formedness. The sign characteristic of significance is the doubled state of activity with the same class of possession (I have) and formedness, while the sign characteristic of meaning is the states of activity and passivity with the different classes of possession (I have) and expressedness. Meaning is expressed, significance is not expressed. Meaning has significance, significance can have a meaning. Meaning is expressed: significance can form meaning.

Sign-generation is dependent upon the co-guidance of internal form and encoding. Internal form is the channel through which the river of speech flows forward. The regulator that ensures consistency to this progression of speech flow is the encoding stemming from the language source that initiates a new beginning by pumping “the river” to opening new riverbeds, i.e. to changing the content of the inner form.

Judgment is a reunited concept of subject-predicate that had emerged by the disintegration of a uniform sign, while concept is a judgment subject to disintegration and reunification of a sign. Judgment is a breath-filled concept, a concept is a judgment that is breathless, but still apt to be breathed in.

The immobile proto-mover is in the language system, and only in its hyper-sphere, from which emerges the sign-generation of the language matter. The whole process of sign-generation is the harmonious linkings of consecutively actualizing sign elements in the intertwined domains of conceptual field and the signal sphere. The predicative beginning is in the hyper-sphere of the system, and its descent to speech expanse is the signaling of signification as a linkage of the worlds of language and extra-language.

The dense predicative composition of the hyper-sphere is the predicative linkage of the worlds of language and extra-language. The immobile proto-mover is in the hypersphere of the language system, in the once-unified Է/Est, which is the reflection of the Most High Է/Est upon the language, his existence in the language of which the entire activity of language signification springs forth and reaches its purpose by means of speech.

The Է/Est is the breath of the Most High, His trace, or rather, His protective righthand upon our language…

Education-THE SCHOOL IN THE FIRST AND SECOND REPUBLIC’S OF ARMENIA – 2009-3

A comparative analysis of the situation in 1918-1925

Gurgen V. Vardanyan
At the end of May 1918 the Declaration of the Republic of Armenia (RA) opened a new page in the history of the Armenian school. During two years of existence of RA the democratic changes in the sphere of education were aimed at the creation of the new national-state educational system. After the establishment of the Soviet power in Armenia C(B)PA did not continue educational reforms. Moreover, it followed a new policy of consistent adoption and realization of the legal acts and resolutions. Mostly they were directed towards the denationalized school system’s creation which would correspond to the new regime. In the 1920s the Soviet administrative system exerted efforts to impart the Communist ideology to Armenian pedagogy in order to turn it into a humble instrument. But the most part of Armenian teachers continued to educate pupils in the national spirit.

GENOCIDE STUDIES AS A SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE – 2019-3

History of origin and development

Summary

Suren A.Manukyan
Today, thirty years after the origin of the genocide studies we can assess the exceptional role it has performed in transforming from a small group of individuals into a field that involves hundreds of scholars and thousands of students, and also is one of the most dynamic and actively growing areas of social sciences.

After the creation of the term “Genocide” by Polish lawyer Rafael Lemkin, this definition was neglected by the scholars, and only a handful of experts continued to use the term in their research. For some time the field of genocide studies was shadowed by the study of the Holocaust, which began to flourish since the mid1960s. In the late 1970s, a group of scholars (L. Kuper, H. Fein, I. Charny, I. Horowitz) began actively to promote the study of genocides and the conference of 1982 in Tel Aviv became visible evidence of the emergence of the discipline.

The end of the Cold War and new genocides that took place in Rwanda and the Balkans drove growing interest to the subject and the development of the field. The search for mechanisms to prevent genocides has become one of the main issues of research, and prevention of genocide became a form of action and public pursuit.

Now genocide is endowed with all the basic attributes of a distinct academic field. Books about genocide are published in the best publishing houses, journals, textbooks, encyclopedias, readers, textbooks bibliographies are appearing permanently, seminars, round tables, conferences, web sites, research centers and international organizations embrace the field. Numerous universities offer courses on this topic. Several theoretical problems are considered, and new approaches are adopted.