Category Archives: MEMORY

Summary

Ani V. Ghazaryan
Candidate of Sciences in Philology

The phenomena and events in a dream present themselves to the writer with unexpected solutions, and since the reality of impressions is a kind of merging point, they are subjected to the requirement of artistic abstraction. That is when the striving to achieve the perfect takes place; the unstoppable and unexpected flight of imagination, and the aesthetic ideal-image of the writer is formed, which is beyond the reality.

From this point of view, the goals of Raffi and Isahakyan completely coincide: through dreams they reveal the inner life, feelings, emotions and sensations, secret desires, fears and anxieties of the characters they create. Clearly realizing that a dream is also an expression of a person’s subconscious desires and fears, they, along with representing real life, try to predict the future events and happenings through the characters’ dreams.

Structurally, Vardan’s and Karo’s dreams are made up of a premise, because the conditions and maturing processes that contribute to the appearance of the vision, the dream itself and its description are described in advance. The dreams of the protagonists have a local significance, because they are aimed at the interpretation of the future of the country, which fully contributes to the disclosure of their mental world. They were witnesses of the life-changing periods for Armenia, and Raffi and Isahakyan consciously made them their ideological heroes.

REFERENCES

20. Avetis’yan Z., E. dari hay patmagrutyan tipabanutyuně, Yer., 2013. (in Armenian)
21. Bazmavep, 1848, tiv 6. (in Armenian)
22. Devrik’yan V., Hayots’ mijnadari azatagrakan legendě (mas yerkrord, azatagrakan legend tesilnere), Vem, 2011-1. (in Armenian)
23. Tamamyan N., Tesilě vorpes grakan-gegharvestakan mtatsoghutyan drsevorum, Echmiatcin, 2005, ZH.-ZHA.
24. Ter-Davtyan Q., XI-XV dareri hay varqagrutyune, Yer., 1980. (in Armenian)
25. Isahakyan A., Barev varpet, Yer., 2008. (in Armenian)
26. Isahakyan A., Avetik’ Isahakyani gitakan kensagrutyuně, hat. 1, Yer., 2000(in Armenian).
27. Isahakyan Av., Yerkeri liakatar zhoghovatcu, hat. 7, Yer., 2016. (in Armenian)
28. Isahakyan Av., Yerkeri liakatar zhoghovatcu, hat. 12, Yer., 2021. (in Armenian)
29. Hayots’ grakanutyan patmutyun, hat. 3, Yer., 2015. (in Armenian)
30. Movses Khorenatsi’, Hayots’ patmut’yun, Ashkharhabare, targmanutyune, neratsut’yune yev tsanotagrut’yunnere akademikos St. Malkhasyantci, Yer., 1968. (in Armenian)
31. Hovhannisyan A., Drvagner hay azatagrakan mtqi patmutian, Girk’ a’ragin, Yer., 1957. (in Armenian)
32. Madoyan A., Nerses Metci tesile mijnadaryan hay poeziayum, Patmabanasirakan handese, 1969, N 4. (in Armenian)
33. Raffi, Yerkeri zhoxovatsu, hat. 9, Yer., 1962.(in Armenian)
34. Sarinyan S., Raffi. Gaghaparneri yev kerparneri hamakarge, Yer., 2010.(in Armenian)
35. Sarinyan S., Hay vepi patmutyun, Yer., 2005. (in Armenian)
36. Syurmelyan L.-Z., Ardzaki tekhnika. Chap yev khentutyun, Yer., 2008.(in Armenian)
37. Qristonya Hayastan hanragitaran, Yer, 2002. (in Armenian)
38. Freid Z., Tolkovanie snovideniee, M., 2011.(in Russian)

Linguistic manipulation in action

Seda K. Gasparyan, Gaiane H. Muradian

War discourse is a specific type of communication maintained and structured through language, serving as a medium of mass interaction. The discourse is purposefully created to construct internal support against an external enemy and encourage direct action against a certain state, country, nation, or ethnic group. Social actors worldwide employ the language of war to shape ideologies that legitimize violence and justify certain political, economic, territorial, or social interests. Any call for war masterfully uses the power of words to achieve the consent of society and the citizens to get involved in war.

To the 100th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne on July 24, 1923

Armen Ts. Marukyan

In the process of signing the Lausanne Treaty, the mandatory conditions and procedures for amending international treaties were not observed. Since neither the subjects nor the parties of the two treaties are identical, there is no reason to argue that the Treaty of Sèvres has been legally superseded by the Treaty of Lausanne. Based on this, it can be stated that the rights of the state parties to the Treaty of Sevres that are not parties to the Treaty of Lausanne, from a legal point of view, could not undergo any changes, in particular, the Treaty of Lausanne did not introduce any changes into the provisions of the Treaty of Sèvres regarding the rights and interests of Armenia.

Anna E. Hakobyan, Gayane E. Grigoryan

Political discourse analysis (PDA) is an inter-and multidisciplinary research that focuses on the linguistic and discursive dimensions of political text and talk and on the political nature of the discursive practice. It indicates unity of communicative intentions which are always intentional and the public speaker has three primary goals when delivering his message: to inform, trigger and arouse an emotional response and to persuade his audience.

Haykaz J. Hovhannisyan

The conflict between the commander of the Russian army in the Caucasus,
Gen. Ivan Paskevich, and the head of the Armenian diocese in Georgia, Nerses
Ashtaraketsi, has repeatedly analyzed in the Russian and Armenian historiography.

Summary

To the 150th anniversary of the birth of Nikol Aghbalyan

Lusine A. Avetisyan

The philological and linguistic heritage of the literary critic, teacher, public figure, ideologist Nikol Aghbalyan has almost gone unnoticed by researchers. However, the serious observations and the fundamental results achieved through the peculiar research methodology conducted by this great Armenologist are of utmost importance not only to linguistics and Armenology but can be very useful for new discoveries in the fields of philosophy of language, philosophy and psychology of the nation, for cultural studies and many other scientific branches.

This introductory article presents Nikol Aghbalyan in several essays: as a linguist, as one of the pioneers of comparative linguistics and a dissenting and zealous Armenologist.

The article reflects upon at the prehistory of Aghbalyan’s linguistic studies, shows his attitude to Indo-European studies, and the completely new theory proposed by him, in his own assessment – some of his conclusions, one of which is that the Armenians did not become Armenians as a result of assimilation, but the Armenian language is the same Urartian, only heavily modified. And the Urartian is also an Indo-European language (emphasis by L. A.).

In his articles, he thoroughly studied the phonetics of the Armenian language, dialect stress and due to that the historical phonetic changes, that resulted in the dialect variants with which the language was supplemented during the formation of the nation from different Armenian tribes acquiring words with different meaning, but of the same origin, such as the words “grain” and “bread”.

Particular attention was paid to simple and compound sounds, the examples entirely showed that there are old and relatively new sounds in the language, and that the latter appeared as a result of the synthesis of two simple sounds, which, due to the reduction of a vowel between them, turned out to be next to each other.

A large and important part of Agbalyan’s scientific works are his etymological articles, which not only supplement the research and hypotheses of other linguists, but also often object to them and substantiate their own remarks with new conclusions.

Summary

(On the occasion of 125th birth anniversary)

David V. Gasparyan
Inhumane treatment of the First Secretary of the Central Committee of Communist (Bolshevik) Party of Armenia Amatuni with Yeghishe Charents led to the death of the latter. During the work of A. Khanjian as the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the C(B)PA there was a question of sending the poet to Paris for treatment by the decision of the Zakkraikom. But the murder of Khanjian on July 9, 1936 turned everything upside down. It was believed that Charents was under the patronage of Khanjian, who was declared an enemy of the nation and was persecuted.

On November 16, 1936 the NKVD authorities decided to investigate the case of Charents, charged under the articles 67 and 68 of the Criminal Code of the Armenian SSR. He is accused of being one of the leaders of the anti-revolutionary, nationalist group of writers “November”. Charents categorically denies all charges, defends himself and gives explanations. From the same political positions, Charents was harshly criticized at the general meeting of Armenian writers on April 17-21, 1937.

Despite all this, in the last years of his life, the free creative element of Charents produced some great poetry, as well as works that show the real picture of
brutal political violence. In 1935-1937, Charents created more than in previous years. His creative life lasted 25 years – 1912-1937. The discovered pages of the works of those years are collected in three large volumes: “Unpublished and unfinished works” (1983), “Newly-appeared pages” (1996), “The Book of Remnants” (2017), to which new books can be added, because the unpublished pages of the poet’s oeuvre have not yet been fully studied. Each part of this heritage is a historical document of its time.

Hence, authorities come and go, but the spirit-creators, regardless of the official attitude towards them, come and stay. There was Pilate, who crucified Jesus Christ, and there was Amatuni, who sentenced Yeghishe Charents to death. The mythical power of the people’s faith resurrected Christ, and the genius of Charents, after 17 years (1937-1954) of prohibition, unveiled the unpublished legacy of the poet and made him a national heritage.

In the collections of the National Museum of Armenian Ethnography and Liberation Struggle

Arevik B. Melikyan
The article presents the personal belongings of the participants of the 1918 May heroic battles, preserved in the collections of the National Museum of Armenian Ethnography and Liberation Struggle.

Most of them are weapons and household items donated to the museum by the heirs of participants.

The aim of the article is to cover and popularize the personal relics of highranking commanders and self-defence fighters.

The article touches upon the personal belongings of one of the founders of the Republic of Armenia – Aram Manukyan, which were donated to the museum on June 24,1998 by his daughter Seda Manukyan.

The article also presents the history of personal belongings and documents of the command staff of the 1918 May heroic battles, for instance, the personal items confiscated during the trial of Movses Silikyan, as well as property, awards, nominal weapons and manuscripts of the general commander of the Armenian artillery of the May 1918 heroic battles – Colonel Christopher Araratyan.

The article also presents the description of personal belongings of the commander of the 1st battalion of the 5th regiment, Staff-Captain Vardan Jaghinyan, the commander of the battalion fighting at the bridge guard-station of Margara village – Yervand Mamajanyan, Navasard Veziryan – the favorite and reliable comrade-in-arms of (Zoravar) Andranik and Garegin Nzhdeh, Yervand Kyureghyan – a haiduc of Vaspurakan, signalman of the 5th infantry regiment Hmayak Khachatryan, machine-gunner Hakob Margaryan, militiaman Ruben Sargsyan, as well as participants of Bash-Aparan battle Mamikon Ter-Sargsyan, commander of the artillery battalion Samson Mnatsakanyan, artilleryman Gabriel Aharonyan, machine-gunner of the 6th regiment Karapet Vardanyan, militiaman Ruben Frangulyan, participant of the Battle of Karakilisa Hovhannes Baloyan and other participants.

Soseh B․ Poghosian (New Jugha, Iran)
Poet Stepanos Dashtetsi from New Jugha lived and worked in the second quarter of
the 17th – the first quarter of the 18th cc. During the forced deportation carried out by Shah
Abbas, his parents have been resettled from Dasht village of the Goght canton to
New Jugha, where he was born. The pseudonym Dashtetsi has been taken from here.

Dashtetsi received education at Amenaprkich Monastery of New Jugha, he was a student
of Stepanos Jughayetsi and was specialized in philosophy and theology. After
receiving the primary education in Isfahan, he studied at the high school of Vatican in Rome.

He mastered Old Armenian, Persian, Turkish, Georgian languages, as well as Latin
and Hindi.

In the beginning, Dashtetsi was a priest but later, due to some circumstances, he became a
merchant. He visited many countries: he was in Persia, India, Turkey, Greece, Italy and a
number of European countries. During his travels, he saw and learned a lot, and in this
connection he became circumspect, experienced, patient and wise.

The theological and polemical works of the author are most popular. Meanwhile, his
image as a literary and public figure would be incomplete without studying his poetry.

In the article we have examined Dashtetsi’s poems, which have been divided into
three groups: a) satirical and condemnatory; b) instructive and philosophical; c) love.

In the poems of the first group, he, ridiculing and condemning, points to the common
delusions among the inhabitants of New Jugha: hypocrisy, greed, worship of everything
foreign, ignorance and envy. In the poems of the second group, he tries to enlighten the
society through moral teachings. His poems on these two main topics are written mostly in
the eastern form of Tajnis in the New Jugha dialect.

Love songs stand out among the poems of Dashtetsi. They continue the traditions of
the medieval poetry with their depiction of the external appearance of the object of love and
suffering caused by the devotion of a lover.

17 poems of Stepanos Dashtetsi that have reached us with their content, form and
language are of great value both for the Armenian literary criticism and for the
dialectology, as well as for the study of the history of Armenian culture.

Modern culture of the khachkars of Artsakh based on the works of sculptor Robert Askaryan

Summary

Anush Safaryan
Khachkar is one of the unique symbols of Armenian identity. Khachkars were erected throughout the territory of historical Armenia, including Artsakh and Utik, as well as in Armenian colonies around the world. The figurative relief of the khachkars of Artsakh, which is represented by a combination of plant-geometric composition and human scenes and images, is one of the unique manifestations of the khachkar culture in general. The article is devoted to the modern culture of the khachkars of Artsakh on the example of the works of the artist and sculptor R. Askaryan, in whose works traditional images are clearly presented, but in a peculiar manner and interpretation. This primarily concerns the iconography of angels, which is devoted a separate paragraph in the article.

Based on a thorough analysis, we can conclude that the master in his works widely used the themes and images of classical khachkars, tombstones and carpets of Artsakh. However, if the structure of the composition of classical khachkars, tombstones and carpets is more complete and suggests that organizing the composition: the central image, the scene, “Ornament” or tree – have clear canons for the placement of constituent elements (for example, land animals should be located at the bottom, and birds and stars at the top), then the characters of the master’s works, individual motifs are freely placed throughout the structure of the composition. The master, according to certain logic, fills the space free of intertwined patterns. It is not always possible to find a mutual connection between these characters, which makes Askaryan’s works especially dramatic.

As an artist, R. Askaryan undoubtedly left his mark on the modern art of the khachkars of Artsakh, his “handwriting” is recognizable in all his works, at the same time being a distinctive stamp among other traditional and modern khachkars.