Vol. 3 No. 18 (2019): 2019-3

In XIII-XV centuries dozens of universities were founded in the European countries
which essentially changed the portrait of the European culture. During that period some
universities were also founded in Armenia, which continued their existence for about 150 years
in original ways and different names (as they were genetically connected to each other, the
expression “medieval Armenian university” is used following to A. Matevosyan) continuing
the traditions of medieval Armenian higher schools. The medieval Armenian university
fulfilled several functions like the European universities did, such as: a) if European
universities played an important role in the unification of European nations, in the formation of
a new social stratum and pan-European culture, in inserting educational and teaching system
operating in a united criteria, in the Armenian reality the medieval Armenian university did the
work of uniting the mental forces of Armenians, preparing literate people and creating the pan-
Armenian educational environment. b) Both European and Armenian universities became the
heart of science organization, the centre of creating and spreading scientific research and
humanistic ideas. c) If European universities played an important role in the formation of both
pan-European and the national identities, the Armenian university played a great role in saving
the pillars of Armenian identity – religion, dogma, language and culture. Though the Armenian
Church had rich experience in dogmatic struggle in this phase, as distinct from former centu-
ries, the religious-dogmatic struggle continued on an institutional level and had an underlined
intellectual direction. Armenian literate people were able to give an adequate answer to the
Latin Unitarians. First of all, they founded universities. Secondly, they made use of scholastic
philosophy and methodology while writing their dogmatic and theological works, i. e. they
struggled against the Unitarians with their own weapon.

It is about martyrdom of Persian magician Makhosh-Hiztbuzit in the VI century
in Dvin city, during the reign of Khosrow I Anushirvan Sasanian, king of Iran (531-579).The
martyrology was created by Nerses Razhik who witnessed the tortures and martyrdom of
Hiztbuzit and decided to write about it. We think that martyrology was written in Assyrian and
was edited by Bishop Petros of Syunik, who participated in the Second Council of Dvin (553-
555). Much likely martyrology was translated into Armenian by Bishop Petros's initiative. We
think that the work was created between the time of the martyrdom of Hiztbuzit and during the
death of Bishop Petros. In VI-VIII centuries, martyrology was widespread among the Assyrian
Nestorians, Monophysite Armenians and Chalcedonian Greeks and Georgians. In this
Hagiographic work many evangelical scenes, even direct repetitions (the episode of
crucifixion, etc.) are used. Hagiographical characteristics of Early Middle Ages have been
preserved. New trends have been manifested in the miracles and visions. The episode of
miracle reflected the ideological position of the Armenian Church, the establishment and the
spread of the cult of the cross. Besides, ideological position has been also an anti-pagan
propaganda in visions. We can see also some motives from new Armenian national epos
(“Daredevils of Sassoun”) that helped martyrology to gain popularity in the environment of
illiterate believers. The aforementioned comes to prove that oral traditions were influenced by
hagiographic ones which gave a new ideological power to them.

The use of ancient maps as a historical source is applicable for resolving both humani-
tarian and environmental issues. In the present study, an attempt was made to analyze Frédéric
DuBois de Montperreux’s “Map of Lake Sevan Basin in Armenia, Drawn by Russian
Engineers in 1832” and compare the results with his book “Travel” and other materials.
Hopefully, the findings will provide the researchers with an opportunity to discuss the current
environmental issues of Lake Sevan from another perspective.

At the beginning of the Turkish-Persian war of 1603-1612, the consequences of military
operations and, in particular, planned actions by Persian authorities affected negatively the
demographic processes in Armenia. The policy of mass deportation of the Armenian
population, organized by Persian Shah Abbas I (1587-1629) in 1603-1605, had the most
extensive consequences, the main stage of which took place in 1604. The issue of the territorial
coverage of the mass deportation was investigated in this article. On the basis of a number of
Armenian, Persian, Turkish, and European sources, it was confirmed that the policy was
carried out against the Armenian population not only of Eastern, but also Western Armenia. At
first, Armenians were resettled from various regions of Chukhur-Saad (Ararat) Eyalet and
Gyanja (Gandzak) Sanjak to the territory between Yerevan and the River Araks. Thereafter,
before the upcoming campaign of the main forces of the Ottoman army, Shah Abbas ordered to
conduct the strategy of scorched-earth policy in the territory of Western Armenia, in particular
to destroy the whole agricultural infrastructure in order to prevent its use by the attacking
Ottoman troops. Within the context of the mentioned strategy, Shah Abbas ordered to resettle
the population from Kars Eyalet, eastern and northern regions of Van Eyalet, central and
eastern regions of Erzurum Eyalet to the territory of Chukhur-Saad Eyalet. After on, they,
along with the previously relocated population, were deported to Persia. Thus, this policy
adversely affected the demographic situation of the above mentioned territories.

The essay aims to shed light on the biography of Constant of Julfa, offering an expla-
nation for his career as an author of trade manuals. The traditional view of Constant’s life has
been limited to the colophons of Armenian manuscripts, which depicted him as a schoolmaster
between 1685 and 1699. Relying on the documents preserved in New Julfa’s All Savior’s Mo-
nastery and Venetian State Archives, the paper shows that Constant was involved in comme-
rcial operations in Smyrna in the 1660s. What should be concluded from Constant’s comme-
rcial career is that he wrote his trade manuals on the basis of first-hand information and
experience in the 1680s.

The article looks into the controversial statements connected with the formation and role
of the “millet system” in the Ottoman Empire, put forward in works by Turkish, Western and
Armenian researchers. It also aims to throw light upon the choice of appropriate terminology.
All attempts to present the “millet system” as manifestation of exceptional national and
religious tolerance in contemporary Turkish and pro-Turkish historiography and public writing
are disproved. It is also stressed out that the relatively confessional “autonomy” to a certain
extent reveals the impotence of the subjects of the Empire against arbitrary rule.

The Balu region was historically a part of the Forth Armenia (Sofena) of Greater Armenia
and since 1880s was part of sanjak Argan Maden, Diarbekir province. The Balu region
included about 50 villages inhabited by Armenians, more than 20 of which were inhabited only
by Armenians. The article provides statistical data on the number of Armenians in the region at
the above mentioned time. In particular, according to the data of the British geographer,
traveler H. Lynch, the total population of the region was 60 730 souls, the number of
Armenians was 15 150, Muslims – 45 580. In the article published in the “Araks” magazine
there is census data, according to which the number of Armenians was 23 000. The data of the
Russian military, vice-consul in Van A.M. Kolyubakin, and other researchers are also given.
The article also contains a table in which the number of Armenians in the settlements of the
region is presented according to the data of P. Natanyan and G. Srvandzyants. In general, more
than 20 000 Armenians lived in the Balu region in 1878- 1895.

From the 1880s until World War II, Armenians moved to California mostly from the
eastern United States, Western Armenia and partly from Eastern Armenia. After World War I
they moved to California from numerous countries as exiles. Armenians originally lived in the
San Joaquin Valley of Central California, especially in Fresno, Tulare, Stanislaus, and other
counties. However, in the 1920s significant population movements occurred in California
because of economic depression. The local Armenians moved to the northern and southern
parts of the state – San Francisco, Los Angeles, and elsewhere in large numbers.

At the beginning of the 20 th century, the main issue of the Armenian national-political life
was the liberation of Western Armenians from the Ottoman Empire. The efforts of the Arme-
nian national parties were aimed at solving this problem. In the current international political
conditions, the further course of the liberation struggle, the paths of activity of national parties,
the role that various layers of the Armenian people played in this struggle, and many issues
related to this issue were widely discussed in the party press. These issues were also raised in
the magazine “Young Armenia” of the Hunchakyan Party of America.

The article focuses on the pro-Armenian activities of the German-Armenian Society
during Brest-Litovsk, Trabzon and Batumi peace talks in 1917-1918, mainly based on German
sources. Particularly, the article touches upon the calls made by the German-Armenian Society
to support the creation of Armenian autonomy in Western Armenia, the organization of the
return of exiled Armenians and the question of Germany’s consensus on the extermination of
Armenians.

The present article, written on the occasion of the 150 th anniversary of one of the greatest
figures of Armenian literature Yervant Odian, presents the life of the satirist and most of his
literary works. In the article, Odian is portrayed as a person, artist, and esthetician. Many of
Odian's works are written on documentary grounds and in this regard are historical documents
and have historical value. In his works, Odian equally taunts party and non-party figures,
national leaders, false revolutionaries, and merchants. Focusing people's attention on the
failures and tragedies of the past Odiana raises the motives for returning to life. In those bloody
years of loss, Odian's literature made his people, who were in the clutches of death, laugh. His
literature was a word of truth and a deliberate mockery intended to awaken the hopeless souls,
to rouse from sleep the dedicated ones and to drive the Armenian man to self-recognition.

By separating and circulating the materials on Hovhannes Tumanyan, published in
“Abaka” weekly of Paris (1921-1925), the author of the article shows that in spite of their
journalistic and concise nature, there are numerous valuable testimonies and memories, as well
as evaluative, instructive, useful observations on his works. Today they may have mostly a
literary and historical significance, but are interesting for Tumanyan studies in general

The present paper focuses on the two small-volume autobiographic books, written by the
Ottoman Turkish writer, historian and military officer Ahmet Refik Altinay. The book “Two
Committees: Two Massacres” represents a comparative analysis of the activity of Young Turks committee and Armenian Revolutionary Dashnakcutyun committee. The author highly criticizes the policy of the Young Turks and even considers that they, especially Taleat and Enver
pashas, were guilty for the collapse of the empire. At the same time, Altınay blames the
Armenians for trusting the Russians and ‘betraying’ the Turks. Pretending to represent the
main reasons and consequences of the policy of the Ottoman authorities towards Armenians in
1915-1918, the author also refers to the mass deportations of Armenians and the problem of
Armenian properties abandoned after the Genocide. The second book “On the Caucasus Roads: Memories and Emotions” sheds light on the situation in Erzrum, Kars, Gyumri and other cities according to the author, who was there in April-May, 1918. In this book the author in a very
emotional manner represents military actions of Turkish troops in these regions and tries to
blame Armenians for “killing the Turkish civilians”.

After World War II, Meline Manushyan, the widow of Misak Manushyan, left France,
settled in Yerevan and started to work at the Institute of Literature of the ASSR Academy of
Sciences. In the early 1960s, she left for Paris for several months to visit her sister. In 1964,
while in Paris, she did not have any particular desire to return to Armenia, and many people
knew about it. That is why the outstanding Armenian historian A. G. Hovhannisyan wrote to
her with a request to return to her homeland, to Soviet Armenia, although she did not pay any
attention to his proposal.