Author Archives: Admin

KARS AS A NOVEL SPACE – 2012-2

According to Yeghishe Charents’ “Land of Nayiri” and Orhan Pamuk’s “Snow”

Summary

Vahram S. Danielyan
The article deals with two particular novels: Yegishe Charents’ “Land of Nayiri” and Orhan Pamuk’s “Snow.” The events of these two novels are set in the same city, Kars and the article is an attempt to describe the literary space from the perspectives of geographical, historical, political platforms; how these two different authors reconstruct and rediscover the city and its life from the perspective of different historical times, political worldviews and novelizing styles. This is also a new attempt to draw parallels between the literature of the two nations: Armenian and Turkish and to find a bonding point on the base of common literary space.

ARMENIAN-HUNGARIAN DIALECT IN THE 17-18TH CENTURIES – 2012-2

Lexical and grammatical review

Summary

Norayr B. Poghosyan
The article is devoted to the linguistic relationship between Armenian and Hungarian. Armenians have settled in Hungary since the X-XI centuries. In the late Middle Ages (17-18 centuries) Armenians gained economic and judicial autocracy in Hungary; many archival documents were later published. Grigor Govrikyan, for example, published many archival documents of Transylvanian Armenians. Leaning upon these documents, the author of this article illustrates that Hungarian-Armenians utilized many European words in their language. Among them, Hungarian ones constitute a great number, e.g. guba (wine store), lants (chain), nemish (nobleman), chibgay (lace), valos (reponse), etc.

Other European loan words as well as the characteristic features of the dialect of Armenian- Hungarians are also discussed in the article.

TANER AKCAM’S “A SHAMEFUL ACT…” – 2012-2

A Pragmalinguistic Study

Summary

Seda K. Gasparyan, Gohar R. Harutyunyan
The paper aims at studying Taner Akcam’s considerations of the Armenian Genocide and brings out his point of view concerning the responsibility of the Turkish Government and the Turks in general for the shameful, unforgettable and unpardonable crime their predecessors committed against the peaceful Armenian population in Western Armenia. His firm belief is that it is only by carrying the burden of responsibility that Turkey will be able to get over the syndrome of denial, “look into the eyes of the obvious truth” and cease to violate the undeniable historical reality in the perception and understanding of the coming younger generations of Turkey.

The application of the pragmalinguistic approach to the study of the book helps to reveal the meanings and shades of meanings implied in the text.

AVAG PETROSYAN, STROKES OF A PORTRAIT – 2012-2

On the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the birth of a prominent opera singer

Summery

Anna G. Asatryan
One of the central figures in 20th century Armenian music, tenor Avag Petrosyan (tenore di forza) was one of the most distinguished representatives of the Soviet-Armenian vocal school. He was a unique and profoundly national artist, a singer and dramatic artist harmonically combined, whose created characters were distinguished by the unification of his amazing vocal and stage presence.

A. Petrosyan became known for the heroic roles he played in Armenian operas:
Saro in A. Tigranyan’s “Anush,” Santur in A. Tigranyan’s “Davit Bek,” Ashugh and Sheikh in A. Spendyaryan’s “Almast,” Karo in A. Babayev’s “Artsvaberd,” Tirit in T. Chukhajyan’s “Arshak III,” Vahan in H. Stepanyan’s “Heroine,” Sos in V. Tigranyan’s “Sos and Varditer,” Seyran in L. Kojayeinatyan’s “Namus.” His roles as Saro and Santur (“Anush,” “Davit Bek”) became the masterpieces in his artistic repertoire.

A. Petrosyan was also a celebrated chamber singer, he was the delicate interpreter of Armenian, Russian and Western European classical songs, and was an unrivalled performer of Armenian traditional and folk songs.

A. Petrosyan presented Armenian musical culture to the cities of the Soviet Union, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kiev, Tashkend, Tbilisi, Baku and also to the United States, Canada, India and France. Everywhere he went he spread Armenian song and received nationwide acclaim that very few artists have been able to garner.

THE FIVE PUBLICATIONS OF HAKOB MEGHAPART – 2012-2

A Comparative Analysis of Print and Manuscript Samples

Summery

Vardan G. Devrikyan
Vardan Deverikyan’s article, “The Five Publications of Hakob Meghabart,” examines the first printed Armenian publications by Hakob Meghapart in Venice, 1512-13, according to the sequence of their printing.

By examining all of his books individually, the article illustrates how the first Armenian printer carried on the Armenian manuscript tradition from the previous era and with which guiding principles, prior to printing. Meghapart’s publications are examined thematically and contextually. The article highlights Meghapart’s publications, which were conditioned by the following motives:

a. To disseminate a number of manuscript collections notable in contemporary Armenian environment through printing that had begun in Europe, which related to different religious and ritual issues, natural phenomenon and through an annual calendar, make forecasts for any particular day of the year.
b. Through the printing of books containing necessary information, communicate different agricultural activities and accurately determine church celebrations, also including information about daily life.

Hagop Meghapart’s works printed in Venice were first and foremost for Armenians dispersed throughout the world, Armenian merchants of the day and different travelers. With this objective, necessary information, including forecasting and superstitions, were communicated prior to travel; church celebrations were concisely noted and presented, so that those Armenians, far away from the homeland could celebrate those days accordingly.

One of the main objectives for Meghapart was to create ties for those Armenians living abroad with the Motherland, which is clearly illustrated particularly in his last publication, “Songbook.” Similar collections in the 16-17th centuries had wide usage in the Armenian Diaspora, thereby Hakob printed “Songbook” where all the cherished songs of the day are compiled; among those songs found in his book, those pertaining to wanderers form the greatest portion.

THE LOCATION OF ACHEMENID PERSIA’S SAKA COUNTRY – 2012-2

Summary

Hovhannes G. Khorikyan
The study of the location of the country of Sakā and the Sacae in general in specialized literature has given rise to much disagreement. However, a comprehensive study of old sources shows that the country of Sakā of Achaemenid Persia corresponds to the country of the Sacae mentioned in the XV Satrapy. By initially being included in the territorial settlement of Sakā-haumavargā, the territorial settlement of Sakā was later included also in Sakā-tigraxaudā, found in the country of Sakā. Therefore, on the Behistun inscription, the country of Sakā and the Sacae in Herodotus’ XV Satrapy, in general, represent the haumavargā and tigraxaudā Sacae, who were found adjacent to each other, and reflected in the geographical concept, «the Scythians who are beyond Sogdians.»

THE ATTITUDE OF TURKISH SOCIETY – 2012-2

Towards the Problem of Recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Turkey

Summary

Anush R.Hovhannisyan
In the last ten years, steps aimed at reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia has considerably increased. But it is obvious that real reconciliation between the two nations and between the two societies is impossible without the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

“Denialism” is the term commonly used to characterize the positions of both the Turkish state and society towards the Armenian Genocide. Although the arguments of Turkish state denialism were widely discussed scholarly, the motivations for public denial are still less investigated. Why has Turkish society chosen simply to forget, to ignore or deny the crimes committed by their ancestors or as Taner Akcam said “wish to forget history?”

Some scholars explain it by the lack of historical consciousness in Turkey. According to them, the public sphere has been totally dominated by the imposed official state narrative and to be critical of the official text, publicly oppose and contradict it means to question the very existence of the state and Turkish identity. Society was unable to question this narrative, so ignorance, amnesia and fear became part of their survival strategy. In our article, we argue that in such collectively committed crimes as genocide and its denial there must be a kind of “solidarity” between the state and society: society must be hostile towards the target group to allow the genocide and it’s denial to occur. Whatever the motivations for this are, society cannot move forward without confronting and acknowledging the crimes of the past.

In the last years “the desire to not remember the past” or the “Armenian Genocide taboo” is losing ground; part of Turkish society wants to know what really happened in 1915 and is demanding open discussion of the Armenian Genocide. This group of historians, journalists, intellectuals and common people still comprise only a small part of Turkish society and cannot considerably influence state policy. But the process of the further democratization of Turkey could change the attitude of society towards this issue that is that the genocide will stop being viewed as rational and acceptable policy.

Lusine Hambardzumian – Muller, “Michael Arlen and his World of Novels” – 2012-2

Summary

Ruzan G. Asatryan
Lusine Hambardzumian’s book, edited by Suren Danielian, is a unique opportunity for Armenian readers to discover the real Michael Arlen, an Armenian whom we have known through the perceptions of other writers (who often blamed him for having changed his name). Thanks to this successful and valuable monograph it has become possible for us to reveal some basic parallels between the two world famous writers whom the Armenians will always be immensely proud of.

ARTASHES HARUTYUNYAN’S LITERARY-HISTORICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL PERCEPTIONS – 2012-2

In Memory of the Martyred Writer and Intellectual

Summary

Anahit G. Nahapetyan
Poet, writer, literary critic Artashes Harutyunyan (1873-1915) was one of the benefactors of Western Armenian literature. He developed the literary-cultural program “Tomorrow’s Literature,” which had a contained message in the perception of national literature and corresponded to European historical-comparative and psychological perceptions.

While he was alive, the writer was able to publish three modest collections of poetry. However, while modest, almost 460 of those poems have been published in the pages of about 60 Armenian and French publications; compiling these works was undertaken by the author of this article. Artashes Harutyunyan’s views, the new percepts of his writings, old and newly discovered facts about him are disclosed in the article. His well known personality is revealed on the depths of Western Armenian literary culture from the critique of psychological literary interpretation, which is an innovative phenomenon and until today insufficiently elucidated.

THE PRESERVATION OF THE ITTIHAT TRADITION IN THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY – 2012-1

A Comparative Analysis of the Young Turk Trials of 1919-1921 and 1926

Summary

Meline V. Anumyan
The article compares the Young Turk trials of the 1919-1921 Military Tribunal of the Ottoman Empire and the 1926 Independence trials in the Turkish Republic and highlights the preservation of the Ittihat tradition in the Republic of Turkey.

The 1919-1921 Ittihat trials took place thanks to international pressure and as a result of the coming to power, once again, of the Freedeom and Agreement Party who was in opposition to the Unity and Progress Party (Ittihatin). The Young Turk trials that took place in 1926, in the case of the assassination attempt in Izmir and Ankara or the “Group of Black Bandits,” wasn’t so much due pressure as certain attempts at intervention on the part of a number of states. The deportation and extermination of the Armenians, the creation of the “Special Organization”which played an important role in the realization of the Armenian Genocide, dragging the country without valid reasons into the world war, allowing for economic abuses, working within the black market and threatening the country’s security all served as a basis for the 1919-1921 Ittihat trials. In addition to these accusations the trials of 1926 spoke to the objective of taking over power by those Young Turks who had dragged the country into war and then sped off abroad, their activities in foreign countries and their later attempts to reestablish their party in Turkey. Among the accusations in 1926, the accusation of deporting and slaughtering Christians, in particular, Armenians was outrightly absent. Moreover, during the entire course of the trial, there was not a single mention about the extermination of the Christians by the Young Turks during the First World War.

The criminal case against the Unity and Progress party of 1919-1921 was not one of retribution by the powerless Ittilaf government; that was the 1926 trials of Izmir and Ankara by the Kemalist government, comprised of the same Ittihat party. The 1926 trial of the Young Turks, by putting an end to the Ittihatist “deep state” in Turkey, placed the foundation for the development of another Kemalist deep state – to settle scores with the Armenian retaliation against several escaped leaders of the Ittihat, however leaving the Ittihat idealogy and practice intact in political life.