Author Archives: Admin

SEMI-INDEPENDENT ARMENIAN AUTHORITIES AND MELIKDOMS IN WESTERN ARMENIA AND MOUNTAINOUS CILICIA (17TH CENTURY TO THE SECOND HALF OF THE 19TH CENTURY) – 2011-3

Summary

Gegham M. Badalyan

Up until the second half of the 19th century, and in separate cases even up until the end of the same century, there existed about two dozen semi-independent Armenian authorities, autonomous provinces or communities on the territory of Western Armenia. The strongest among them were the authorities in Sassun and Zeitun, whose semi-independent status was established on behalf of the Ottoman power through special edicts. The Melikdoms of Shatakh, Moks, Baghlu, the Mirakyan’s of Dersim, and the authorities of Isyan and Savur also enjoyed wide autonomy, while acknowledging the supremacy of their powerful neighboring Muslim country. As a rule, these authorities were governing formations of Armenian or foreign dynasties, who were endowed with the rights of “junior ally.” At the next level were a number of smaller units, whose territory was limited by one or a few settlements – the Melikdoms of the Tarkhanyans, Zirakyans, Liz, and Yonjalu in Van, the Melikdoms of Khnus and Manazkert in Erzerum including also separate communities strewn throughout the territories of Southwestern Armenia, Pontos and Gamirk.

ARMENIA’S CULTURE DURING THE 20 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE – 2011-3

From the Perspective of the Protection of Artistic Heritage

Summary

Ruben S. Anghaladyan (St. Petersburg)

The article is a critical analysis of the difficult fate of Armenian culture during the existence of the 20 years of independence of the Third Armenian Republic. It is accompanied comments and recommendations of a professional nature. The author shows that at the time of the collapse of the USSR, the high quality of Armenian culture that was achieved, compared to the losses it incurred in the 1990s was conditioned largely by the irresponsible attitude of the ruling authorities of the day and by the lack of professionalism by the successive leaders of the Culture Ministry. By disclosing the reasons for the latter’s lack of policy, it is shown how Italy’s experience can be instructive for Armenia, where the state takes fundamental care of the protection of artistic heritage. Meanwhile, the existence of a Culture Ministry in Armenia, from the perspective of social and state interests, in fact provides no benefit, because it has turned into a means for satisfying the personal and collective interests of successive ministers.

The simplistic notions that have taken root in independent Armenia regarding the interchange of culture are subjected to criticism; concrete recommendations are presented to rectify these and to present Armenian culture to the world according to its worth. One of the most serious shortcomings in the country’s cultural policy is accorded a special place in the article and that is the fact of the millions of dollars of worth of cultural treasures that have been accumulated by Diasporan Armenian collectors and which have not been protected and a part of which are now found in museums in the United States, Portugal, Romania, Russia and other countries. To rectify this serious shortcoming, the idea of creating an Armenian Collectors Union is being put forth which could open the way to the establishment of new museums and to make Armenia a touristic center.

A NEW EXAMINATION OF THE OLD MODELS OF ARMENIAN AND TURK RELATIONS IN Z. PIPERYAN’S NOVEL, “LKRTATS” – 2011-3

Summary

Hovhannes K. Yeghoyan

Zaven Piperyan’s creation was a new voice in modern Turkish-Armenian literature. The great writer understood profoundly the meaning of the new era of national literature, and his own accountability before time. For the development and progress of highly valuable literature, Z. Piperyan considered the psychological examination of wide swaths of society as a precondition for social perception, for the universal depth of beauty within the constant influence of the lessons of the national past.

The novel, « Lkrtats » which is one of the best examples of Western Armenian fiction writing, presents Turkish life and post-war misery of the past century. It is a reflection of the new process of Armenian-Turkish relations, in light of the redrawing of tragic historical memory. The Armenian woman, Kyulkun becomes the victim of Ali the butcher’s passions who slaughters her with the call of “old blood” with “equanimity” just as his ancestors and comfortably removes himself toward the city’s Asian section, the hint of which, from a historical perspective, is transparent. The feature of the new era is reflected in the novel; however Z. Piperyan’s literary commitment in TurkishArmenian life is the aspiration to overcome the inculcated fear of national existence and its complexities.

OLD TBILISI AND THE CREATIONS OF GABRIEL SUNDUKYAN – 2011-3

Summary

Aram G. Alexanyan

Soviet literary criticism assessed the historical context and cultural calling of Gabriel Sundukyan as an expression of opposition to market capitalism. This understanding of research during the Soviet era came to rest on extremes and a failure to understand, because it was dictated by the Marxist theory of class struggle.

To explain the historical and cultural context of Sundukyan’s creations with Marxist postulations is not scientific and disregards the principles of historiography. In reality, Sundukyan’s creations are penetrated by a dramatism typical of a transitional era. Values characteristic to the new capital made by traders and money-lenders are in contraposition to Christian morality, the understanding communal justice and to the necessity of the restoration of man’s essence. Thus, Sundukyan’s creation in its historical-cultural calling is multi-layered and extremely original.

A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ETHNIC AND POLITICAL HISTORY OF THIS SO-CALLED AGHVANK (ALBANIA) – 2011-3

Part II: Political-Historical Issues in the Context of Ethnic Belonging

Summary

Babken H. Harutyunyan

The historical geography of all the Eastern part of the kingdom of Great Armenia is discussed in the article, it illustrates that Colthene (Konqhnhv) Claudii mentioned by Ptolemy corresponds to the region of Great Armenia’s Kaspk’(Կասպք) or Caspiene (Kasphnhv).

The information given by Movses Khorenatsi about the governorships of Utik’, Gardmanatsik’ and Tsavdeatsik’ and about the principality of the Gargaratsik’(Gargarians) is elucidated through the source study examination. It is clearly illustrated that the rule of the Gardmanatsik’ was to be found on the left bank of the river Kura, the name Utik’ in Armenian simply means Ovits (Ովիտք), something which due to the development of the language became Utik’ (Ուտիք) and the name Tsavdek’ originated from the name of the Southern Armenia’s region called Tsavdek’ (Ծաղդեք).

It was also examined the issue of how many names of 26 tribes of so-called Albanians mentioned by Strabo were preserved. Comprehensive research has shown that only the name of the Caspians was preserved, and the purely Albanian declared Gargarians (գարգարացիք), Udins (ուդիններ) in those days lived in the Northern Caucasus, outside of the borders of Albania. It is illustrated also that Ouitioi (ուիտիները/վիտիները) were not found in Armenia and have no connection with the region of Utik’. The Greeks knew it very well; if the Uitis were called [Ouitioi, then Utik’ was called [Wthnh. Rich factual material shows that the name of muvkoi has absolutely nothing to do with Mukan (Մուղան), whose old Armenian form Movkan is preserved in Georgian as a loan.

Through the comparative study of the dates by Curtius Rufus and Arrianus it becomes clear that these so-called Albanians did not participate and could not have taken part in the famous Battle of Gaugamela in 331 BC. Their name is simply confused with the Massagets – Mazkuts who had invaded the left bank of the river Kura and who had taken over the Albanian kingdom, whose fellow Mid-Asian tribsmen had participated indeed in the Battle of Gaugamela. The article shows that the Albanian – Massaget confusion also was to be found in the works by Plinius Secundus and Solinus.

It is proved that ’Alarodioi are not Albanians, they belong to the Iranian-speaking Saspeir tribes, which have taken the way to the georgianisation. It is also shown very clearly and objectively that only the Achaemenid Persia’s XIII satrapy was situated in the territory of Armenia, and the XVIII satrapy occupied the territory of the Eastern Georgia and the left bank of the river Kura, and included Matiens, Saspeirs and Alarodis.

The basic conclusion of the article is that the name Albania given by Greek and Roman authors and the name Aghuank’ given by Armenian historiographs has a purely Armenian origin and means “Country of fertile field”. And as the left bank of the river Kura was the continuation of the Armenian fertile | eld, the state formed there was called by the Armenians Alobank’ (Ալոբանք), which through the development of the Armenian language became Aluank (Aghuank’), and in the Greek – Roman world the Armenian “Alobank’” was associated with the Celtic toponym of Albania, and thus was transformed to Albania.

THE BASICS OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ABOUT NATIONAL MENTALITY – 2011-3

Summary

Karlen A. Mirumyan

During the breakthrough stages of the development of society, a necessity arises to reevaluate the old value system, the principles of world views, and to develop new critical directions. These issues are extremely important including also for independent Armenia. However, its solution demands a serious, based on the creation of a methodological doctrine, which would be in the position to relate to the Armenian nation’s past and present; to view Armenians as a complete system. To create such a methodological doctrine it is necessary to choose, cultivate a baseline concept.

In the opinion of the author, the concepts of nation and national entity can play a role. In addition, put forward in the article is the idea that each nation that has a rich spiritual cultural history must create just like its history, the history of the mentality; studying their own methodological thesis, surely accounting for the existence of theses in international sciences. The other primary idea is not that methodological theory has to be “put” onto a concrete historical process, but the opposite. The methodology has to come from the study of a concrete (national) history.

A VALUABLE AND TIMELY COLLECTION – 2011-2

Meline V. Anumyan

“Deportation and Massacres: The Protocols of the Istanbul Military Tribunals on the Investigation of the Armenian Genocide. The Trial of the Unity and Progress Party, 1919-1922.” Compiled by Vahakn N. Dadrian, Taner Akcam, Bilgi University Press, Istanbul, 2008, 732 pages.

ONCE MORE ABOUT RAMIZ MEHTIEV’S “MASTERPIECE” – 2011-2

Summary

Artashes I. Shahnazaryan

The obvious distortion of historical facts and events in the publication “Goris 2010, a Season of the Theatre of the Absurd,” signed by Ramiz Mehtiev, the chief of staff of the president of the Republic of Azerbaijan are revealed in this article. “Scientists” are contributing to the ongoing anti-Armenian hysteria in Azerbaijan by ignoring the content of Armenian lithography and other original sources by “revealing” “dukes” and duchies in Medieval Artsakh, by appropriating the works by Armenian historians and their attempts at subterfuge are refuted by Arabic, Armenian and Georgian original sources.

Illustrated here is the latest incursion against Armenian history and Armenian culture by Azerbaijani “scientists,” which is intricately connected with that country’s consistent policy, since independence, of the massive destruction of Armenian monuments and the distortion of medieval place names and serves as a so-called “scientific basis” for such crimes.

Also elucidated here is their latest attempt to artificially present the time period of the formation of the Azerbaijani people older than it actually is and to connect them with the old and medieval history of the region.

THE TERRITORY OF ANCIENT ARMENIA IN THE 6TH-4TH CENTURIES B.C. ACCORDING TO MOVSES KHORENATSI – 2011-2

Summary

Hovhannes G. Khorikyan

Movses Khorenatsi’s, “History of Armenia” contains information which reflects events and phenomena connected with Armenia in the 6th-4th centuries B.C. The comprehensive investigation of the “History of Armenia” provides the opportunity to make accurate historical-geographical definitions, and clarify its scope. The information provided by Movses Khorenatsi about Hayk and the first Haykides shows that the Armenian Highland, long before the Achaemenides, was mainly inhabited by Armenian tribes. In the article, we conclude that according to Movses Khorenatsi, Armenia till the 6th century B.C. had a large territory and its main territory, according to ancient sources, entered into the structure of the 13th satrapy of Achaemenid Persia. Satrapic Armenia was one of the largest and richest parts of Achaemenid Persia in the 6th-4th centiries B.C.