Author Archives: Admin

THE ENLIGHTENING PARADIGM OF THE RECOGNITION OF THE ARMENIAN PSYCHOLOGY – 2018-3

Summary

Nane S. Movsesyan

Key words – Identity; self-awareness; Enlightenment paradigm; ethnic self-awareness; national “I”; public and spiritual “We”.

In terms of ethnopsychology the Enlightenment paradigm of Armenian mentality was characterised by three stepwise approaches. In the first stage a critical approach to public “We” (M. Baghramian) was adopted as a basis followed by consideration of spiritual “We” in the light of ethics (Kh. Abovian). The second stage of ethnopsychology was characterised by a cognitive and critical (M. Nalbandian, Raffi, G. Artsruni) approach that studied the reasons of the main faults of national “We”, revealing lack of self-awareness and awareness about others, as well as, devastating consequences of national idealism. The third stage of selfawareness was first characterised by conjugative approach (Kh. Alishan) which affirmed that an Armenian was not only a bearer of national “I” with either faulty public or only spiritual “We”, but bothof them that survive inside him simultaneously uniting those “I”s in one system and thus creating the image of national “I” and collective “We” the main characteristic and peculiarity of which is the contradictory essence (H. Asatryan).

GENEOLOGY OF “5TH AVENUE” BY V. GRIGORYAN – 2018-3

Summary

Jenia A. Kalantaryan

Key words – imaginary; fictional spaces; cultural tradition; influence and individuality; autobiography; village prose, city prose; style, ideological direction; art of the narrative.

The article discusses metamorphoses of the tradition of creating imaginary fictional space (Yoknapatawpha, Macondo, Tsmakut) inthe prose of VahagnGrigoryan. It is shown that byobserving certain patterns, through the means of the ideological direction of his inquiry, peculiarity of his art of the narrative and particularity of style, he creates original prose that advantageously differs from the ones typical forprevious writers, as well as,distinguishes his work in the framework ofthe current Armenian literary landscape.

ARAM MANUKYAN’S COLLECTION OF LETTERS – 2018-2

Summary

Armen S. Asryan

Key words – liberation, individuality, work, Aram Manukyan, Western Armenia, weapon, ammunition, collection, people, motherland, ARF Dashnaktsutyun, letters.

On the occasion of 100 Anniversery Republic of Armenia the collection entitled “Aram Manukyan: Collection of Letters” is presented to the Armenian reader for the first time. It includes 354 letters by the famous freedom fighter of Armenian liberation movement, the founder of the First Republic Aram Manukyan written from November 1904 up to 1915: 325 letters are published for the first time. The collection is comprised, edited and commented by the historian YervandPambukyan, who has exercised a really tremendous , hard and thankful work dedicating to this job 14 long and tough years. Though Aram’s manuscripts are rather beautiful and legible but the deciphering of his letters’ numerous codes and digital cryptograms, the revelation of revolutionary pseudonyms, the commenting of forgottentoponymswritten in foreign language and personal names is, indeed, the hardest task and does need diligent work. Comments that are accompanying the collection from beginning up to the end have greatly eased the perception of the letters by simultaneously accomplishing the transmitted information. Aram Manukyan’s letters included in the reviewed collection were found from ARF Dashnaktsutyun’s archives in far off city of Boston.

GAREGIN I HOVSEPYAN. THE BLESSED PATRIARCH AND GREAT SCIENTIST – 2018-2

Summary

Sargis R. Melkonyan

Key words- Garegin Hovsepyan, Holy Echmiadzin, Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia, Antelias, Gevorgyan Theological Seminary, reformation of Armenian church, Maghakia Ormanyan, periodical “Ararat”.

In the given publication, which is the continuation of the article dedicated to 150 anniversary of Garegin A. Hovsepyan – the Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia, published in the previous issue of Panarmenian journal “Vem” analyzes the role of Garegin Hovsepyan and the programs put forward by him for the purpose of church’s reformation beginning from the end of XIX century up to the second half of XX century.

After finishing his education in Germany in 1897 he during 1897-1917 years came back to Echmiadzin and took rather serious offices, like, for instance the editor of official newspaper of Holy See and the inspection of Gevorgyan Theological Seminary. While taking these offices he came forth with programs for the reformation of Armenian Church which were mainly presented in different issues of periodical “Ararat” or in separate projects.

The analysis of these programs shows that Garegin Hovsepyan was offering to reform the church by paying attention on the following points,
a) reform of Holy See’s popular scientific periodical,
b) reform of parish clergymen’s education and election,
c) raising the role of science in church reform,
d) turning of Mother See’s library into central, fully Armenological library,
e) the active participation of the church into charitable and in various common social issues,
f) the need for reform of educational institutes and raising the role of school in Church,
g) revision and reform of the Church’s statutory system,
h) the need of acting publishing house for strengthening and securing the influence of Mother See of Holy Echmiadzin in different layers of the Armenians.

By taking into account the vast volume of the subject in the present publication we have only turned to reformative programs on a) Reformation of Holy See’s popular scientific periodical, b) Reform of parish clergymen’s education and election offered by Garegin Hovsepyan. We will turn to other points in the subsequent series of our article.

“LESSONS OF HISTORY OF THE ARMENIAN REPUBLIC IN 1918-1920” – 2018-2

Summary

Siranush G. Hovhannisyan

Key words – conference-dispute, lessons of history, world history, scientific discussions, question-reply, historical context.

On May 31 and June 1 at the initiative of “Vem” Pan-Armenian journal’s editorial staff in Paramaz Avetisyan’s Building of American University of Armenia namely in Alec and Mari Manoogians’ Hall a conference-discussion was held entitled “The Historical Lessons of Armenian Republic of 1918-1920 in the Context of the Generations’ Memories and Modern Challenges” dedicated to the 100 anniversary of Armenian First Republic. The event was held in the presence of numerous guests, in the atmosphere of really scientific discussions and exchange of views by different professional fields’ representatives. Scientific productivity was also promoted by the structure of the event: every stage of report was followed by the stage of question-reply due to which certain details of the themes were aroused. The conference ended with the presentation of books and round table discussions in the framework of which the main theme, namely, “The Formation of Armenian First Republic and its Decline under the Europian and Regional Light” was offered.

ARTSAKH-AZERBAIJAN CONFLICT – 2018-2

Summary

Aleksandr S. Manasyan

Key words – the Karabakh conflict, ethnopolitical confict, own legal basis of the problem, the problem of the legality of the Republic of Azerbaijan, legitimacy of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.

A century has passed since the issue of the conflict between Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan was included in the international political agenda. The conflict began in 1918, when the Turkish army invaded Baku, removed the legitimate authorities and established Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (ADR). The latter made unreasonable territorial claims, including the historical province of Armenia Nagorno-Karabakh (NK). Before this conflict there was not and could not be such a conflict, since in Transcaucasia there was neither a state with the name of Azerbaijan nor a people with such an ethnonym. First, with the support of the Turks, and then of the Englishmen who entered the region, ADR tried to subordinate NK by force. The problem took the form of an armed confrontation. Congresses of plenipotentiary representatives of NK population rejected these claims and declared NK as an integral part of the Republic of Armenia. A question that took the form of an international conflict was included in the agenda of the League of Nations. The struggle of the people of the NK for their reunion with Armenia was not pursued in the new geopolitical conditions, when the Bolshevik Russia returning to Transcaucasia forcibly included the NK in the borders of Soviet Azerbaijan with the status of broad autonomy. The NagornoKarabakh Autonomous Region was formed as a form of Soviet statehood. In the continuation of the uninterrupted struggle of the Artsakh Armenians in 1988, the Karabakh movement began to demand the reunion of the region with Soviet Armenia.

During the collapse of the Soviet Union, when the Republic of Azerbaijan (AD) adopted a Declaration on the Restoration of the State of the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan (existed in 1918-1920) and refused to be the legal successor of Soviet Azerbaijan based on the laws of the USSR and the principles of international law, deputies of all levels of the Soviets of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous District and the adjacent Armenian-populated Shaumyan district have proclaimed the independence of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (NKR).

Baku again took the strategy of a forceful solution of the problem. The conflict entered a new phase. The resolution of the problem, which took the form of an international armed conflict, turned out to be under the auspices of the OSCE.

The international experience in the settlement of such conflicts suggests that it is appropriate to divide the documents of the two types in the legal grounds of the problem by placing them in different packages. The first package may include documents on the problem, accepted by the parties to the conflict and recognized by the competent authorities for them.

The second package is the documents adopted by international institutions that have taken care of the settlement of the problem.

The first package documents are separated in the article as their own legal basis. The analysis of the article shows that there is no document in the legal grounds of the issue that could make the legitimate claims of the modern Azerbaijan towards Nagorno-Karabakh.

RECONNAISANCE AND INSTIGATOR – CONSPIRATORIAL ACTIVITIES OF TURKISH SPECIAL SERVICES IN ARMENIA IN 1920-1922 – 2018-2

Summary

Vanik H. Virabyan

Key words – Turkey; Armenia; special services; Georgia; military representative; attaché; council; spy; Transcaucasia; Yerevan; Emergency committee.

After the declaration of cease fire between the Armenian republic and Turkey in November,1920, the representation of the Command of Eastern Front of Turkey’s Grand National Assembly that had political functions was formed in Yerevan.It continued to operate also after the establishment of Soviet system until September 1923 when the consulate was reorganized. Turkish consulate service also existed in Alexandrapol which started to operate after the compulsory withdrawal of Turkish army. Here, too, Turkish consulate was conducting spy- corrosive activity. RSFRS’s Soviet reconnaissance bodies in Transcaucasia were interested in revealing Turkey’s operations. It’s important to state that the representation of Turkish consulate operated especially more indecently during anti-Soviet rebellion in February 1921 headed by ARF. During that period Soviet-Turkish talks were underway where Armenia had great part in issues under discussion: there was also the issue of ASSR’s participation in the conference. The comparison of the facts shows that the creation of chaotic and messy situation in Armenia was beneficial for Turkey and its special services. Thus, Kemal’s Turkey by taking advantage of its representation in Armenia’s territory conducted spy- corrosive activity through his consulate service and spy-agent network swarming around it , that’s why both Soviet Armenian and Russian reconnaissance bodies during 1920-1922 took some countermeasures. Namely, Russia created its agent network in Armenia with which perhaps the Armenian Soviet reconnaissance services coordinated their actions. Turkish consulate representation that acted in Soviet Armenia often violated the rules, its officials assaulted Armenia’s security which made the Armenian government undertake tough measures against Turkish representation. All these factors made Soviet Armenia and Expert’s Committee of Foreign Affairs declare the representative of Turkish government in Yerevan Bahhadin as persona non grata (a person who doesn’t enjoy grace) and on this basis the latter was dismissed from the council’s office. Thus, reconnaissance data obtained by ASSR’s special services states that Turkish-Azerbaijani plottings continued after Armenia’s Sovietization. They elucidate Turkey’s and Azerbaijan’s objectives to undermine the security of Soviet Armenia through spy- corrosive activity.

9-11th CENTURIES CROSS-STONES IN MAKRAVANK – 2018-2

Summary

Gegham M. Asatryan

Key words – Makravank, 9-11th centuries cross-stones, earlykhachkars, simplicity, Kotayk’s artistic style, “Hrazdan type” of cross stones, “Annie style”.

There are numerous cross-stones in different stages of preservation throughout the territory of the complex of Makaravank located in the north-west ofKotayk’sregional center, Hrazdan. Early cross-stones date back to the 9-11th centuries. They, along with the patterns of general cross-stone art development, still have certain peculiarities and thus, since 9-11th centuries have been the basis for the “Hrazdan type” of cross-stones, which dates back to the twelfth century and is older than the other, i.e., “Geghard type” formed in Kotayk. They have playedunique role in establishing it, as well asin the separation from the early cross-stones,that is, the cross-stone of 959 AD, which is a separate set of crossstone school in two neighboring provincesof Kotayk and Aragatsotn.There are also several other early cross-stones as well as the cross-stone of 1039, which, as we found out is a cross-stone of “Annie style”. The latter clearly allows us to conclude that this style had not gone beyond the central parts of Kotayk.

KURDISH CASE IN PERSIA – 2018-2

Summary

Rouben-Prepared by Aram S. Saiyan

The rebellion of Ararat in 1926-1930 isn’t sufficiently studied both in world, Soviet and especially Armenian historical science. One of the main reasons for this is the lack of sources, as well as, the lack of Armenian translation of studies done in foreign languages, especially in Turkish and Kurdish languages.

All this is supplemented by a spacious letter from the prominent figure of the Armenian liberation war, Minister of Defense and Military Forces of the First Republic Rouben (Minas Ter-Minasian).The note entitled “Kurdish Case in Persia” is preserved in the 64th file’s first list of 1048 fund in Armenian National Archive: it’s a detailed report consisting of 34 pages written in the exercise-book and is addressed to ARF’s Bureau. In it Rouben speaks about his special mission carried out in Persia for supporting Ararat’s rebellion. In report the events that took place in spring of 1930, i.e. the process of organizing the Kurdish tribes against the Turks, the military proceedings, as well as, the rebellion’s defeat and the clashes taking place afterwards in some provinces of West Armenia are described in detail.

1348 ARMENIAN REGISTRATION OF THE TOWER OF THE HAMBUSHE VILLAGE (SYRIA) – 2018-2

Summary

Hagop M. Tcholakian

Key words – Hambushie village; Aramo villege, Lattakia’s region; villages with Armenian population; Catholicos Mkhitar Garnertsi; tower; lithography, lithographic fragment; bridge, fountain, stone-cutter rooms.

The article presents the content of Armenian migration in the Middle Ages in northern-western regions of Syria and speaks about the lithographic record drawn up at upper stone door of the tower of Hambushie by the Catholicos of Mkhitar Garnertsi, which complete copy has come to us by Zakaria vartabed of Zumurnia. Now, the village is completely cleared of the Armenians. The tower is completely destroyed and at the same in this area the mentioned lithographic fragment has been found on the wall of one of the houses built in the middle of the 20th century. Other Armenian relic of antiquity such as rocks, bridges, fountains is presented.