Author Archives: Admin

ARMENIA IN 1937 – 2017-3

Summary

Ararat M. Hakobyan

Key words – repression, J. Stalin, fear, interrogation, A. Khanjyan, treachery, trial, prison, A. Amatuni, Dashnak, anti-revolutionary, investigator, Troika, military tribunal, execution.

The collapse of the Soviet regime in 1991 put an end to the monopoly of the CPSU in the territory of the former USSR. Certain conditions were created in the post-Soviet space for the reassessment of certain pages of history. One of the similar periods in USSR, including Armenia, were the repressions of 1937.

We, as well as many researchers are convinced that the policy of repressions was not due solely to Stalin’s personality, his character and cruelty, but proceeded from the Marxist-Leninist doctrine, from the ideological foundations of the Communist Party, as according to their vision all anti-revolutionary, Trotskyist and other so-called «ideologically antagonistic» elements had to be eliminated so that the true communist society could be formed in the Soviet Union and, if possible, in the whole world.

The unique and difficult past of the historical and political development of tsarist Russia also left a mark on the dictatorial character of Soviet power, the successor to autocratic Russia.

The repressive policy was applied practically from the first days of the Soviet power, it lasted in the following decades, and the peak of the repressions was in 1937.

In the mid-1950s, when criticism of the cult of personality began, the blame for repressions was unilaterally imposed only on Stalin. This was done in order to somehow save the reputation of the CPSU. It is also obvious that other leaders involved in this black case, tried to avoid personal responsibility. The reality is that Stalin adhered and consistently followed the Leninist course, while other leaders, out of fear or out of conviction, approved of his policy.

After Stalin’s death (1953), the repressions were greatly reduced. As a result of changes in the international and domestic situation, repressions took a more hidden and mild form, the methods of violence and persecutions changed.

Based on the false position of further aggravation of the class struggle, the party-state bodies formed an unhealthy socio-political atmosphere of distrust, fear and betrayal, in order to put pressure on people. In consequence of this policy, people often reported to each other without any grounds to expose the so-called «enemies of the people».

Mostly through false testimony, torture during interrogations, falsification of signatures and other methods, «confessions» were often extorted, groundless accusations, court judgments were made. Judicial proceedings lasted only 15-20 minutes and military tribunals or Trojkas sentenced thousands of innocent people to 1 category (execution) and the second category (prison and exile).

According to available data, in 1920-1953 the total number of repressed people in Armenia was about 42,000. The most absurd is that the authorities of Soviet Armenia periodically received from Moscow a concrete plan on how many «enemies of the people» they should expose, and the Armenian government has always exceeded its plan to emphasize its adherence to the ideas of Marxism-Leninism and socialism. Planning the economy for the Soviet system can be understandable, but the fact that even the human life was planned, proves that the system was dictatorial.

Our observations of a thousand terminated and declassified court cases in the fund 1191 of the Armenian National Archive show that in the 1930s there were no political or anti-Soviet, terrorist, Trotskyist, Dashnak and nationalist groups and organizations in Armenia. The reality is that there were some individuals, writers and intellectuals in Armenia, who were concerned by the problems facing their country and the Armenian people, so they expressed a desire that the unjustly occupied lands of Armenia, such as Kars, Karabakh, Surmalinsky district, Nakhchivan and others were returned to Armenia.

80 years after political repressions, our observations allow not only to restore the historical reality and pay tribute to thousands of innocent victims, but also provide an instructive lesson for those who have dictatorial tendencies and send a message to democratic states and civil society so that they live and never forget about freedom and justice.

ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS ON THE ASSASSINATION OF DJEMAL PASHA – 2017-3

Summary

Aghasi P. Azizian

Key words – «Nemesis», Djemal Pasha, ARF Dashnaktsutyun, Stepan Tsaghikyan, Petros Ter-Poghosyan, Artashes Georgyan, ARFD Central Committee in Georgia, avengers, arrests.

In the fall of 1919 in the capital of independent Armenia – Yerevan, the 9th General Assembly of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun adopted a historic and daring decision to punish the Young Turks responsible for the Armenian Genocide and Musavatists who continued their policy in the Eastern Transcaucasus. This operation went down in history under the name «Nemesis».

On July 21, 1922, the Central Committee of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun of Georgia organized the terror of Djemal Pasha. Member of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun Party – Stepan Tsagikyan from Khotorjur (Sırakonak) was the chief responsible for the implementation of the operation. On his initiative, his compatriot, as well as a member of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun party, excellent marksman Petros Ter-Poghosyan and Artashes Gevorgyan joined the operation. Two members of the committee of the Georgian ARF Dashnaktsutyun center – Koryun Ghazazyan and Tigran Avetisyan, were monitored the work, organized meetings with people who knew Djemal and followed his movements and meetings through a whole network of intelligence officers.

The understandable silence of real heroes in the future served as an occasion for opportunists who were aware of some episodes of this heroic operation, to declare themselves assassins of Djemal. The presented documents undoubtedly confirm that the terror against Jemal was initiated and implemented by the Georgian Central Committee of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun – Dashnaks Stepan Tsaghikyan, Petros Ter-Poghosyan and their compatriot, nonpartisan Artashes Gevorgyan.

David Petrosyan. Narration, Media-text, Reverse Perspective Yerevan, YSU, 2017, 184pp. – 2017-3

Summary

Sergey A. Aghajanyan

Key words – Narration, speech, media-text, reverse perspective, essay, scientific method, term, identity, text, variant reading.

The summary presents the content and structure of the fragmented monograph «Narration, Media-text, Reverse Perspective» by D. Petrosyan. The work consists of three parts. The first section articles aim at finding out the connection between narration and reverse perspective in the context of mythical and rational time, space and memory.

The main problem of the second part is the dialogistic character of mediatext, inter-textual and inner-textual development where linear connections and relations from media to auditorium and vice versa are shown.

The final collection of essays aim at the synthesis of the previous two sections on metaphysical level. Here the peculiarities of author’s artistic perception of a human being are revealed.

A PATH TO SHIRAZ BY SAMVEL MURADYAN – 2017-3

Summary

Knarik A. Abrahamyan

Key words – Hovhannes Shiraz, poetry, literary criticism, literary continuity, monograph, creative history, biographer, comprehensive analysis.

Hovhannes Shiraz is an author who kept the figure of Newest Armenian Literature with his national shapes. And it’s something strange that his some creative characters were obscure for literary critics. Samvel Muradyan’s two toms come to answer many questions. In this article we have tried to show the scientific value of author’s research.

LONG-AWARE SCIENTIFIC WORK – 2017-3

Summary

Avag A. Harutyunyan

Key words – Ararat Uprising, Khoyboun, ARF Dashnaktsutyun, Kemalists, USSR, Reza Shah, Artashes Muradyan, Red Army, Soviet intelligence, blockade, defeat.

The monograph is devoted to the most important stage of the Armenian-Kurdish political and military cooperation, which until now has not been the subject of a special study in Armenian historiography.

In the context of the Ararat Uprising, ha have analyzed the political, military, chronical and geographical features of the Kurdish movement, the conditions for the awakening of the Kurdish national identity, the evolution of the Kurdish nationalist circles in the sense of cooperation between Hoybun and the AR Federation (Dashnaktsutyun), the mechanisms for forming the Hoybun, political goals of the new stage of the Armenian-Kurdish relations.

THE CLASSIC OF LITERARY CRITICISM – 2017-3

Summary

Petros A. Demirchyan

Key words – literary criticism, scientific character, historicity, system, rationalism, ideology, methodology, sociology, romanticism, literary school, literature history, literature theory.

The prominent literary critic, educator Sergey Sarinyan dedicated his longterm conscious life to the development of native literary criticism and to the development of literary criticism. His literary-scientific biography, covering more than six decades, went through the walls of the Institute of Literature after M. Abeghyan of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, from the post-graduate student (1949) to the Academician / 1996. The five-volume edition of «The Armenian New Literature History’ (1962-1979), the two-volume edition of «The History of Armenian Criticism’ (1985, 1998), were published by his active participation. He, by scientific sophistication and diligence specific to him, governed the third and fourth volumes covering the period of Armenian New Literature of the new six-volume ecdition of «The History of Armenian Literature’ the first of which was published in 2015 by the «Gitutyun’ Publishing of the RA National Academy of Sciences and the second one is almost ready for publication.

He managed to summerize his aesthetic-philosophical interpretations of the pages of two centureis Armenian Literature in the six volumes edition of his literary heritage devoted to literature history and theory, literary schools, literature methodology, and creation of classical writers’ works /1988 – 2015/. Based on the peculiarities of the time, the scientific search of that generation pursued a revision of values that seemed to be steadfast before, which implies the examination of the scientific material not only from the historical, but also the contemporary aspects of literary criticism and criticism, methodological commonality .the basis of which is science.

THE CHALLENGE OF STATEHOOD – AR Federation and the political status of both parts of Armenia in 1917 – 2017-3

Summary

Lilit Hr. Hovhannisyan

Key words – ARF Dashnaktsutyun, Western Armenia, Eastern Armenia, Transcaucasia, autonomy, independence, the right of nations to self – determination, H. Zavriyan, Rostom (Stepan Zoryan), Russian Provisional Government, Armenian question, Armenian separate army corps.

In 1905 «Caucasus Project» ARF Dashnaktsutyun brought up a proposal out of necessity to settle of the issue of Western and Eastern Armenia’s political status separately. In 1907 the idea was fixed in the Party program, and in 1914 it was approved by the Eighth General Assembly of ARF. It was set a task to achieve broad autonomy for Western Armenia within the Ottoman state, and to demand autonomy for Eastern Armenia within the Federal Republic of Transcaucasia; the latter was to be an integral part of the Russian Federative Republic. After annexation of Western Armenia by the Russian army in 1915 – 1916 only one change was made in demand of autonomy for Western Armenia – that is the word «Ottoman« was replaced by the word «Russian«, respectively. The claim of Western Armenia’s autonomy did not contradict to idea of it’s independence, moreover it was considered to be a feasible intermediate phase on the way of the real preparing for and attaining independence for the Western Armenia.

The victory of the February revolution in Russia in 1917 created prerequisites for the realization of the program aims of ARF Dashnaktsutyun. Thanks to the efforts of ARF, in particular H. Zavriyan, Lip. Nazaryants and A. Chilingirian, on April 26 (May 9) Russian Provisional Government adopted decision «On governance of the war by right conquered regions of Turkish Armenia«, by which the civil administration of Russian army conquered Western Armenia was withdrawn from the Caucasian authorities, as well as military authorities of Caucasian Front and was handed over directly to the Provisional Government henceforth the final decision on the province’s status due to the peace treaty. So, a status of a separate administrative unit in the Russian state was passed to Western Armenia. This decision, as well as the instructions, given by the Provisional Government on May 15 to the General Commissioner of Western Armenia, established a legal basis to consolidate Armenians in western armenian territories and to achieve the autonomy. In late 1917, about 150 thousand Armenian refugees returned to their homeland – Western Armenia. The socio – economic, political and cultural life of Western Armenians became organized and noticeably active.

It was important also to ensure the physical security and protection of Armenian population and Armenia not only from Turk’s and Kurd’s attacks and robbery, but also from the possible attacks of the Turkish army. For this purpose ARF Dashnaktsutyun (Rostom (Stepan Zoryan) and Lip. Nazaryants) made efforts to move the Armenian soldiers and officers of the Russian army to Armenia and create an Armenian separate army corps, due to the Provisional Government’s policy of the nationalization of the army. So was founded the Armenian national army. This played a decisive role not only to save the Armenian people from physical extermination during the Turkish invasion to Western Armenia and Transcaucasia in 1918, but also to restore the independent statehood on the small part of historical Armenia.

The problem of the political status of Eastern Armenia was essential as well for ARF. In the summer of 1917 the Party brought forth a project to the Russian central and Transcaucasian local authorities on administrative repartition of Transcaucasian region, worked out by Av. Shakhatunyan. According to the project, it was proposed to separate mountainous regions largely populated by Armenians from the Muslim – dominated lowland regions, so as to found an Armenian Canton in the Armenian highlands, including therein the Erivan Province, the mountainous – Armenian part of the Elizavetpol Province, the Akhalqalaq county from Tiflis Province, the Armenian part of the Borchaloo county, Kars and Kaghzvan counties of the Kars region. The Georgians and the Tatars were against the creation of the Armenian Canton, having territorial claims towards the Armenian territories, while the Provisional Government did not realize it because of its short existence.

In conditions of the Russian army’s defeats in Western Front, as well as the Provisional Government’s political crisis, the increasing Bolshevik threat the ARF Dashnaktsutyun raised the issue of self – determination and independence of Western Armenia, strengthening political ties with the US and European countries in order to obtain guarantees of international supervision, if necessary. But the realization of this idea became impossible in 1917 because of the Bolshevik government’s yielding policy towards Quadruple Alliance countries in the name of prompt signing of separate peace treaty, as well as the German – Turkish military and diplomatic pressure, the withdrawal of Russian troops from Western Armenia, the insufficiency of human, economic and military resources therein.

THE COUNCIL OF ALEXANDRIA IN 633 – 2017-3

Summary

Sargis R. Melkonyan, Samvel S. Mkrtchyan

Key words – the Council of Alexandria, Ezdras I, Emperor Heraclius I, Sergios I of Constantinople, Cyros of Phasis, Theodoros of Pharan, monotheletism, «mia energeia», «mia thelema», chalcedonism, antichalcedonism.

Almost all medieval Armenian sources report about the Council in Theodosiopolis/Karin in the first half of the 7th century with the participation of the Catholicos of the Armenian church Ezdras I and Heraclius, the emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire, where an unia was adopted between two sides. The same sources say that the Catholicos Ezdras was deceived by the Greeks in this Council and took chalcedonism. But a careful analysis of Armenian and Greek sources shows that the religious politics of the empire concerning the anti-chalcedonian churches of the Egyptians, Assyrians and Armenians were not completely chalcedonian. Unfortunately none of Armenian sources saved that document which served as a basis for the adoption of the union. But it was preserved the unional document with the Egyptian ant-chalcedonites, which was adopted in the local Council of Alexandria in 633.

In this article this union between Egyptian monophysites and chalcedonians is investigated in the context of the new unional politics of Eastern Roman Empire from the beginning of the VII century to 633. Its basis was the doctrine «mia energeia» (mia enjervgeia) of Christ. In this article has first been realized the Armenian translation of the unional text of the Council of Alexandria, which consists of nine chapters. It was also carried out a separate analysis of this document. As a result of it, mutuallyacceptable versions of several Christological controversial formulas between monophysites following Cyrill-Alexandrian traditions and chalcedonians were found.. In addition, it becomes clear that this unional document is not based on chalcedonism, because the basic Christological formulas were interpreted in the cyrilian sense and the formula «mia energeia» try to explain with the expression of St. Dionysius the Areopagite «theandrike energeia». There is no mention of the Council of Chalcedon in 451. These facts prove that doctrine laid at the basis of the unional politics of Emperor Heraclius and Patriarch Sergius in the first half of the 7th century was not exactly chalcedonism.

KAREN JEPPE AND ALEPPO RESCUE HOME – 2017-3

Summary

Edita G. Gzoyan

Key words – Armenian Genocide, forced transfer of children, League of Nations, Aleppo Rescue Home, Karen Jeppe, humanitarian assistance, Armenian women and genocide, eyewitness testimonies.

Forcible child transfer is one of the five genocidal acts listed in Article II of the Genocide Convention listed co-equally with acts of killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and measures to prevent births. Forcible child transfer was part of the Armenian Genocide administered by the Turkish authorities.

This article deals with the issue of forced transfer of children and women during the Armenian Genocide. It presents the humanitarian efforts of the League of Nations to save the Armenians from Muslim captivity. To this end the League of Nations established a Commission of Enquiry with its headquarters in Aleppo and Constantinople.

The Aleppo Rescue Home was administered by the League of Nation Commissioner Karen Jeppe who saved Islamized Armenians from the French zone of occupation. In the League of Nations Archives 1464 individual surveys of the rescued Armenians are kept, from which 573 were girls and women. These are eyewitness testimonies that represent the policy of forced child transfer during the Armenian Genocide. The testimonies of these female inmates also represent and affirm the organizational pattern of the Armenian Genocide.

IVAN AYVAZOVSKY – THE WORLD AS THE WIND FROM THE SEA – 2017-3

Summary

Ruben S. Angaladyan

Key words – Ivan Aivazovsky, Armenian community, Armenian themes, the spiritual and heroic history of Armenia, portraits of outstanding Armenians, Russian sailors, pulse of historical homeland.

The purpose of the work is to show how well the art of Ivan Aivazovsky (1817-1900) fits into the Armenian world and if the great seascapeist can be considered as a Russian as well as Armenian painter.

As a man, he was not alien to his roots, he felt like an Armenian and was proud of his creative and spiritual people. He greatly respected Armenian traditions, in fact, was brought up in a traditional Armenian family, and therefore the Armenian community was always top-priority for the artist. He created more than 40 canvases on Armenian themes. Some of them are dedicated to the spiritual and heroic history of Armenia, others are portraits of his family and friends, as well as portraits of outstanding Armenians – Catholicos of All Armenians Mkrtich Khrimyan, Minister Loris-Melikov, Mayor of Nor Nakhichevan Kh. Khalibyan.

He received encouragement, attention, and then – really high recognition in Russia. He loved Russia’s devotion to the sea, admiring the courage of Russian sailors. But he never moved away from the native Armenian people and wherever he was, he was always feeling the pulse of his historical homeland.