About the Journal

The articles cover diverse issues on Armenian and world history, archaeology and ethnography, art, culture, as well as on Armenian diaspora. Hence,  the corresponding sections of History, Archaeology and Ethnography, Art and Culture, Diaspora Studies. The journal also includes  reviews and  materials about  the merited scholars.  There are pages  commemorating and appraising the work of those  who  passed away.

The journal is released twice a year.

Current Issue

Vol. 22 No. 1 (2025)
					View Vol. 22 No. 1 (2025)
Published: 2025-09-19

Articles

  • Articles

    The Reasons for the Emergence of Armenian Statehood in Cilicia

    Areg Vardanyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

     

    The goal of this article is to show that the formation of Armenian statehood in Cilicia was not merely a result of demographic changes that took place in that region during the 10th-11th centuries. Challenging the overwhelming scholarly consensus over the demographic origins of Armenian statehood in Cilicia, the article reconsiders the process of state formation, putting emphasis on the changing social standing and mentality of the late 11th-century Armenian feudal elite and presenting it as the main driving force behind this process in 11th-12th-century Cilicia.

    References

    Ananun Yedesats’i 1982, Zhamanakagrut’yun, ashkh. L. Ter-Petrosyani, Yerevan, HSSH GA hrat, 266 ej. (in Armenian).

    Bakuran 1904, Mi tesut’iwn Kilikioy haykakan ishkhanut’ean vray, Nikosea, tp. Azg. Krt’. Vorbanots’i, 161 ej. (in Armenian).

    Bozoyan 1988, Byuzandiayi arevelyan k’aghak’akanut’yuny yev Kilikyan Hayastany, Yerevan, HSSH GA hrat., 286 ej. (in Armenian).

    Iskanyan 1991, Hay-byuzandakan haraberut’yunnery IV-VII dd., Yerevan, «Gitelik’» hrat., 1991, 638 ej. (in Armenian).

    Leo 1915, Hay Hayrenik’, T’ifliz, tp․ N․ Aghaneani 1915, 244 ej. (in Armenian).

    Khach’atryan 1988, Karno Saldukhyanneri zhamanakagrut’yuny yev tohmabanut’yuny, yst arabakan vimagir aghbyurneri, «Arevelyan aghbyuragitut’yun», 1, Yerevan, 1988, ej 99-133. (in Armenian).

    Hay zhoghovrdi patmut’yun 1976, h. III, Yerevan, HSSH GA․ hrat․, 1023 ej. (in Armenian).

    Hovhannisyan 1957, Drvagner hay azatagrakan mtk’i patmut’yan, h. 1, Yerevan, HSSRR GA hrat․, 525 ej. (in Armenian).

    Manandyan 1978, Yerker, h. B, Yerevan, HSSH GA hrat., 647 ej. (in Armenian).

    Mkhit’ar Ayrivanets’i 1860, Patmut’iwn Hayots’, ashkh. M. Emini, Moskva, Lazarean chemarani tp., ej 69+18. (in Armenian).

    Nerses Shnorhali 1981, Vipasanut’iwn, ashkh. M. Mkrtch’yani, Yerevan, HSSH GAA hrat., 164 ej. (in Armenian).

    Prokopios Kesarats’i 1967, Otar aghbyurnery Hayastani yev hayeri masin, 5, ashkh. H. Bart’ikyani, Yerevan, HSSRR GA hrat., 363 ej. (in Armenian).

    Sebeos 2005, Patmut’iwn, ashkh. G. Abgareani, Matenagik’ Hayots’, ht. D, Ant’ilias, Kilikio kt’gh. tp., ej 453-565. (in Armenian).

    Siruni 1966, Hay yekeghets’in Rrumen hoghi vra. Nikola Yorga, S․ Ejmiatsin, Mayr At’vorr S. Ejmiatsin, 268 ej. (in Armenian).

    Vardanyan 2024, Voghbatesilayin mtatsoghut’yuny yev t’agavorut’yan verakangnman gaghap’ary Hayastanum 5-12 dd. (tesakan ditarkumner), «Patmut’yun yev mshakuyt’», 2, ej 8-19. (in Armenian).

    Ter-Petrosyan 2007, Khach’akirnery yev hayery, h. B, Yerevan, , 672 ej: (in Armenian).

    Urrhayets’i 1991, Zhamanakagrut’yun, ashkh․ M․ Melik’-Adameani, N․ Ter-Mik’ayeleani yev H․ Bart’ikyani, Yerevan, YePH hrat., 540 ej. (in Armenian).

    Adonc 1971, Armeniâ v épohu Ûstiniana, Erevan, izd-vo EGU, 526 s. (in Russian).

    Eremân 1979, Obŝnostʹ sudeb i kulʹturno-političeskoe sodružestvo narodov Zakavkazʹâ v IX-XIII vv., «Kavkaz i Vizantiâ», № 1, s. 5-12. (in Russian).

    Mikaelân 1952, Istoriâ Kilikijskogo armânskogo gosudarstva, Erevan, izd-vo AN ArmSSR, 535 s.. (in Russian).

    Allsen 1987, Mongol Imperialism: The Policies of the Grand Qan Möngke in China, Russia, and the Islamic Lands, 1251-1259, Los Angeles, University of California Press, 287 p.

    Beihammer 2017, Byzantium and the Emergence of Muslim-Turkish Anatolia, ca. 1040–1130, London/New York, Routledge, 458 p.

    Dadoyan 2017, The Armenians in the medieval Islamic world, v. II, London/New York, Routledge, 236 p.

    Dadoyan 1997, The Fatimid Armenians: Cultural and Political Interaction in the Middle East, Leiden/New York/Koln, Brill, 224 p.

    Dedeyan 2003, Les Arméniens entre Grecs, Musulamas et Corisés, v. 1, Lisbonne, 1518 p.

    Der Nersessian 1962, The Kingdom of Cilician Armenia, A History of the Crusades, v. II , ed. K. M. Setton, Philadelphia, University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 630-659.

    Evans 2005, The Age of Justinian: The Circumstances of Power, London, Routledge, 360 p.

    Ghazarian 2000, The Armenian Kingdom in Cilicia During the Crusades: The Integration of Cilician Armenians with the Latins, 1080-1393, London, Routledge, 250 p.

    Haarer 2022, Justinian: Empire and Society in the Sixth Century, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 274 p.

    Iorga 1930, Brève Histoire de la Petite Arménie, Paris, Gamber, 157 p.

    Kaplan 2016, Pourquoi Byzance? Un empire de onze siècles, Paris, Gallimard, 2016, 490 p.

    Mutafian 2012, L’Arménie du Levant (XI-XIV siècles), t. I, Paris, Les belles lettres, 2012, 731 p.

    Niketae Choniatae Historia 1975, ed. Van Dieten, P. 1, Berlin, De Gruyter, 1975, 656 p.

    Ostrogorsky 1968, History of the Byzantine State, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1968, 616 p.

    Selznick Ph. 1949, TVA and the Grass Roots: A Study in the Sociology of Formal Organization, Berkley/Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1949, 274 p.

    Vryonis 1971, Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London, University of California Press, 1971, 532 p.

  • Articles

    Pages from the History of Narekatsiology

    Alexander Safaryan, Vahram Petrosyan, Anushik Martirosyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The life and work of Saint Grigor Narekatsi, the Ecumenical Archimandrite, great poet and thinker, has long been the focus of Armenian scholars and researchers. Indeed, a truly distinctive and multilayered field of Armenian studies and medieval studies has been formed, rich in theological, philosophical, historical, philological, musicological and valuable works. However, Narekatsi studies have been predominantly within the “classical” framework. A comparative study of the works of a saint of the Armenian Apostolic Church, a great representative of Armenian medieval literature and a classic of world literature (F. M. Dostoevsky, Jalal al-Din Rumi and other Sufi authors) began in the second half of the 20th century. The article presents the most acute narekatsiological discussion that unfolded in the last century about the conformity or inconsistency of spiritual and artistic heritage to the ideological framework of the Holy Armenian Apostolic Church and the Universal Christian Church (about possible and impossible relations with the Tondrakid movement, about the relationship between mysticism and humanism). The article also highlights the influence of discourses concerning the “Eastern Renaissance” on the subsequent progression of narekatsiological studies, as well as the refutation of the theories of Sh. Nutsubidze, N. Conrad, V. Chaloyan (as scientific “clichés” of the Soviet era), as well as the unique contribution of Prof. Levon Mkrtchyan (who played a unique role in the translation and promotion of Armenian literature and culture) and Prof. Poghos Khachatryan (a prominent researcher of medieval Armenian manuscripts), who were at the origin of comparative manuscript studies.

    References

    Averintsev S. 1988, Roskosh' uzora i glubina serdtsa: poeziya Grigora Narekatsi – Grigor Narekatsi, Kniga skorbnykh pesnopeniy, Moskva, Glavnaya redaktsiya vostochnoy literatury, 409 s.

    Bakhtin M. 1990, Tvorchestvo Fransua Rable i narodnaya kul'tura srednevekov'ya i Renessansa, Moskva, Khudozh. lit., 543 s.

    Konrad N. 1972, Zapad i Vostok, Moskva, Nauka, 498 s.

    Nutsubidze S. 1967, Rustaveli i Vostochnyy Renessans/ pod red. SH. Khidosheli/, Tbilisi, Literatura da khelovneba, 390 s.

    Safaryan A. 1990, O gumanizme Grigora Narekatsi i poetov sufiyev, Lraber hasarakakan gitutʻyunneri, tʻiv 7, ēǰ 62–68։

    Safaryan A., Sargsyan A. 2013, Obraz Makhmuda Gaznavi v «Masnavi i Maanavi» Mevlyany Dzhelaledina Rumi, Turkmenskaya literatura epokhi Gaznavidov i dukhovnaya kul'tura mira. Tezisy mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii, ss. 428–429.

    Toporov V. 1989, Dva dnevnika/ Andrey Turgenev i Isikava Takuboku/: v kn.: Vostok-Zapad/ Issledovaniya, perevody, publikatsii/, Vypusk chetvertyy, Moskva, GRVL, 304 s.

    Russell J. 1981, Introduction-Grigor Narekatsi, Date Ean Oghbercut’ean (Book of Lamentations), Delmar, New York, 322 p.

    Safaryan A., Meliqyan G. 2000, Apology of Sufism in Divan by Yunus Emre, XXVI International Congress of Assian and North African Studies, Book of Abstracts of ICANAS –2000, Montreal, Canada, p. 60.

    Safaryan A., Melkonyan R. 2008, Investigations of Prominent Turkmen Thinker –Sufi Nejmeddin Kubra in Armenia Nejmeddin Kubra and Spiritual – Cultural World of Orient, Asgabat-Dashoguz, pp. 184–185.

    Safaryan A., Sahakyan L. 2010, On Adaptation of Traditional Images in the Works of Eastern Christian and Islamic Poets, Abstracts of the World Philosophy Day Congress, Tehran, p. 249.

    Abeġyan M. 1968, Erker, h. G, Erevan, «HSSH GA hrat.», 695 ēǰ։

    Allahverdyan S․ 2009a, Ink’nachanach’umy Grigor Narekats’u yev Jalal Eddin Rrumii poyeziayum, «Garun», ej 17-21:

    Allahverdyan S․ 2009b, Mardu yerkvut’yan t’eman Grigor Narekats’u yev Jalal Eddin Rrumii steghtsagortsut’yan mej, Kant’egh, ej 3-8.

    Allahverdyan S․ 2009g, Surbgrayin akunk’neri nert’ap’ants’umy Grigor Narekats’u Matean voghbergut’ean yev Jalal Eddin Rrumii Masnavi manavi steghtsagortsut’yan mej, Merdzavor Arevelk’i Yeritasard arevelagetneri 4-rd mijazgayin gitazhoghov, HH GAA Arevelagitut’yan institut, ej 288-294:

    Allahverdyan S․ 2010, K’ristoneakan mistits’izmi azdets’ut’yunnery Grigor Narekats’u poyeziayum (parskeren), IIH P’ilisop’ayut’yan institut, Hamashkharhayin p’ilisop’ayut’yan orvan nvirvats gitazhoghov, ej 471-481.

    Avetisyan Z․ 1996, Narekats’in nor zhamanakneri hayats’k’ov, Grakan t’ert’, t’. 12-26 hulis, ej 4-5.

    Grigor Narekats’i 1840, Srboy horn meroy Grigor Narekay Vanits’ vanakani matenagrut’iwnk’, Venetik, tp. Srboyn Ghazaru, 428 ej.

    Grigor Narekats’i, Tagher yev gandzer 1981, ashkhatasir., K’yoshkeryan A. Yerevan, «HSSH GA hrat.», 310 [2] ej.

    Dolukhanyan A. 1996, Narekats’u poyemi mijnadaryan meknut’yunnery, Azg, t’․ 16, ej 2.

    Yeghiazaryan V․ 2018, Astghik Ghap’lanyani ashkhatasirut’yamb 2015t’․ hratarakvats «Grigor Narekats’i. Matenagitut’iwn», grk’i masin, Patmabanasirakan handes, №1, ej 273-276.

    Yeghiazaryan V․ 2019, Poghos Khach’atryani 90-amyakin, Patma-banasirakan handes, №․ 1, ej 260-264.

    Yeghiazaryan V․ 2021, Grakhosut’yun Grigor Narekats’u Matenagitut’yan astvatsahacho grk’i masin, Hayagitakan usumnasirut’yunner, ej 84-104.

    Yerg yergots’, handerdz meknut’eamb nakhneats’ 1993, ashkhatasir., T. Mesrop k’ahana Arameani, Yerevan, «Gandzasar» Matenashar, 149 ej.

    Zek’iyean L․ 2015, Grigor Narekats’i, Tiyezerakan vardapet, «Banber» Matenadarani, 22, ej 10-23.

    Khach’atryan P. 1990, Nareki mijnadaryan lutsmunk’y, hrat. YePH, Yerevan, 210 ej.

    Khach’atryan P. 1996, Narekats’in yev hay mijnadary, hrat. Mayr At’vorr S. Ejmiatsin, 396 ej.

    Kozmoyan A․ 1987, Haykakan yev parskakan mijnadaryan sirayin k’narergut’yan tipabanakan arrandznahatkut’yunneri masin, Patma-banasirakan handes, №3, ej 153-160.

    Kozmoyan A․ 1996, Hayots’ yev parsits’ mijnadaryan k’narergut’yan hamematakan peotikan (hayeren yev k’arryan), Lraber hasarakakan gitut’yunneri, N 3, ej 122-134.

    Kozmoyan A. 2001, Mijnadaryan arevelk’i «yeghbayrut’yunneri» tipabanakan khndri shurj, Merdzavor yev Mijin Arevelk’i yerkrner yev zhoghovurdner, h․ 20, ej 290-300.

    Kozmoyan A. 2016, Irani mshakuyt’y․ 1 Yndhanur aknark․ 2․ Parsits’ mijnadaryan grakanut’yun, khmb., Safrastyan R., Hayastani harakits’ yerkrneri patmut’yun, h․ 2, Mijin darer, Yerevan, «Zangak» hrat., ej 107-116.

    Kozmoyan A. 2023, Parsits’ mijnadaryan poyezian hay t’argmanakan arvestum (mi drvagi ditarkum), Arevelyan aghbyuragitut’yun, N 4, ej 141-150.

    Kozmoyan A․ 2024, Iranagitakan hetazotut’yunner, Yerevan, «Gitut’yun» hrat., 461 ej.

    Kozmoyan A. 2004, Parsits’ mijnadaryan poyezian sufizmi gaghap’arneri yev geghagitut’yan hamakargum (Rrumi, Hafez), Parsits’ poyeziayi yntrani, t’argm, S․ Kaputikyan; pars․ toghats’i t’argm․, arrajaban yev tsanot’agr․, A․ Kozmoyan; HH GAA, Yerevan, «Mughni» ej 9-43, ej 109-120.

    Hunanyan H. 1996, Grigor Narekats’in yev hay mijnadary, Arravot, t’․ 155, ogostos 30, ej 6.

    Ghanalanyan A. 1969, Avandapatum, Yerevan, «HSSH GA hrat.», 530 ej. Margartashar /Rrobayat’/ 1989, parskerenits’ toghats’i t’argmanut’yuny, arrajabany yev tsanot’agrut’yuny, A․ Kozmoyani, Yerevan, «Khorhrdayin grogh», 240 ej.

    Mkrtch’yan L. 1967, Narekats’in yev Dostoyevskin, «Hayrenik’i dzayn», 15 hunvari, №3/77/, ej 5-6.

    Mkrtch’yan L․, Poyeziayi hasaky. Hnaguyn shrjan. Mijin darer (V-XII dd․). Hay dasakan k’narergut’yun, h․ 1, Yerevan, «YePH hrat.», 1986, 195 ej.

    Ch’aloyan V. 1964, Haykakan RRenesans, Yerevan, «Haypethrat», 252 ej.

    Ch’aloyan V. 1975, Hayots’ p’ilisop’ayut’yan patmut’yun (Hin yev mijin darer), Yerevan, «GAA hrat.», 524 ej.

    Ch’amch’ean M․ 1785, Patmut’iwn Hayots’, h. B, Venetik, tp. Jiovanni Piats’voyi, 1060 ej.

    Sarinyan S․ 2016, Poghos Khach’atrean. Hay hin grakanut’ean matenagitut’iwn, Yerevan, «Tigran Mets», 614 ej, Patma-banasirakan handes, 3, ej 218-219.

    Safaryan A․, Mkhit’aryan S․1997, Iran-Name, t’․6, ej 20-21.

    Safaryan Al. 1992, I vkayut’yun Narekats’u asttsvatsabanakan rrealizmi, «Yerevani hamalsaran» (Gitainformats’ion handes), t’iv 3 (74), ej 31–34.

    Safaryan Al. 1993, Grigor Narekats’u u sufi banasteghtsneri steghtsagortsut’yunnerum avandakan patkerneri «adaptats’man» masin, Lraber hasarakakan gitut’yunneri, t’iv 2, ej 103–113.

    Safaryan Al. 1993, Mtorumner Grigor Narekats’u yev sufi banasteghtsneri baroyagitakan hayats’k’neri masin, «Iran-name», t’iv 1, hunis, ej 29–30.

    Safaryan Al․ 1996, Nor t’argmanut’yunner Yunus Emrev «Divanits’», Banasirut’yan harts’er (hodvatsneri yev haghordumneri zhoghovatsu` nvirvats prof. G. Nalbandyani 70-amyakin, khmb. G. Melik’yan), «Iran-Name» matenashar, Yerevan, ej 5:

  • Articles

    On the history of the armenian notation

    Diana Hakobyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The article aims at presenting the historical development and scholarly exploration of the Armenian symbolic writing systems. It becomes evident throughout the article that the historiography of symbolic writing has remained notably under-researched.

    The principal conclusion of the study is that the Symbolic Script Codex (“nshanagir imastnots”) has not vanished from the annals of history, yet it has not been subjected to in-depth academic scrutiny and scholarly inquiry. Only a few scholars, namely A. Abrahamyan and H. Acharian, have approached the subject with genuine academic rigor, whereas others have neglected to examine it through a consistent methodological framework.

    The relevance of this article is underscored by its applicability to several unresolved historical and political issues, particularly as documentary evidence in the fight against cultural plunder. In the modern era, distortions and falsifications of Armenian history have intensified. Countering this phenomenon requires not only the publication of academic studies, but also the revelation and reexamination of historical facts and primary sources that have survived from antiquity.

    To ensure the purposefulness of the research, primary historical sources authored by chroniclers and data from previous academic investigations were examined. The study was grounded in rare manuscript codices from the Mesrop Mashtots Institute of Ancient Manuscripts (Matenadaran), with special focus on symbolic scripts recorded by medieval scribes. Based on central archival catalogues, 52 manuscript codices containing symbolic scripts were identified and registered.

    Armenian symbolic writing constitutes one of the essential components of the Armenian nation’s cultural heritage, with origins traceable to the pre-alphabetic era. This writing system, which has undergone transformations and reformulations over time, has fulfilled communicative, ritualistic, ceremonial, and cultural functions. The article examines the historical foundations of symbolic script emergence, their usage across various historical epochs, and their influence on the later development of the Armenian writing system. Special attention is devoted to the application of symbolic writing in religious and ceremonial contexts and its role in the preservation and transmission of national identity. The study reveals that although symbolic writing was ultimately replaced by the alphabet devised by Mesrop Mashtots, it continues to constitute a significant component of the Armenian cultural legacy and remains a subject worthy of renewed scholarly attention and analysis.

    References

    ԳՐԱԿԱՆՈՒԹՅԱՆ ՑԱՆԿ

    1. Է․ Աղայան, Լեզվաբանության ներածություն, Երևան, 2010։

    2. Մխիթար Սեբաստացի, Քերականութիւն գրաբառի լեզուի հայկազեան սեռի, Վենետիկ, 1730։

    3. Միքայել Չամչյանց, Հայոց պատմություն, Ա հտ․, Երևան, 1985։

    4. Գ․ Սրվանձտեանց, Թորոս աղբար, Կ․ Պոլիս, 1879։

    5. М. Эмин, Изселодования, выпуск II, Москва, 1896:

    6. Ագաթանգեղեայ, Պատմութիւն հայոց, Վենետիկ։

    7. Ագաթանգեղեայ, Պատմութիւն հայոց, Երևան, 1983։

    8. Ի․ Յարութիւնեանց, Հայոց գիրը, Թիֆլիս, 1892։

    9. Տ․Պալեան, Նշանագիրք հայոց, Վիեննա, 1898։

    10. ՀՅՏ (Տաշեան), Մատենախօսական քանի մը հրատարակութիւնք, Հանդէս ամսօրեայ, Վիեննա, 1893։

    11. Հ․ Իսահակ, Վ․ Սրապեան, Հնագրական․ հին նշանաձևեր, Հանդէս ամսօրեայ, Վիեննա, 1902, հուլիս։

    12. Ֆրէտէրիք Մուրատ, Պատմութիւն հայերէն լեզուի, Հանդէս ամսօրեայ, Վիեննա, 1903, մայիս։

    13. Ֆրէտէրիք Մուրատ, Նշանագիրք իմաստնոց, Հանդէս ամսօրեայ, Վիեննա, 1903, նոյեմբեր։

    14. Հ․ Աճառյան, Հայոց գրերը, Երևան, 1984։

    15. Ա. Աբրահամյան, Հայ գիր և գրչություն, Երևան, 1973։

    16. Ա. Աբրահամյան, Հայ գրի և գրչության պատմություն, Երևան, 1959։

  • Articles

    On the Issue of Dating the Cathedral Church of Surb Astvatsatsin in Avan

    Avetik Ghazaryan
    View PDF
    Abstract

     

    This study, aimed at dating the Cathedral Church of Surb Astvatsatsin in Avan, is based on a new comparative analysis, re-evaluation and re-substantiation of studies and historical facts on this topic using historical-ecclesiastical comparative, critical, analytical and descriptive methodology. As a result, a scientific analysis is put forward in the context of dating the Church of Surb Astvatsatsin. The results of the study of the problem under discussion are important for conducting multifaceted and interdisciplinary research.

    Medieval literary sources provide valuable information about the complex of the church of Surb Astvatsatsin, that is, the Cathedral Church and the residence of the Catholicos, but do not specify the date of construction. The main issues around which scientific discussions were conducted were the history of the monument, its dating, architectural composition, as well as lapidary inscriptions, which are important for the study of various historical and cultural issues not only in Armenia, but also in the region. Historical facts and medieval literary information are of great importance for the scientific study of the dating of the Surb Astvatsatsin Church, the comparative results of which provide an opportunity for a new scientific discussion on the issue of the discussed object. Thus, a comparative analysis of literary and historical data allows the Cathedral Church of Surb Astvatsatsin in Avan to be dated to the end of the 6th century, taking 591 as the beginning of construction and 597 as the completion. Accordingly, the data we provide also complement the point of view proposed by T. Toramanyan and allow for its re-substantiation.

    References

    Bart’ikyan H. 1962, «Narratio de rebus Armeniae». hunaren t’argmanut’yamb mez hasats mi hay-k’aghkedonakan skzbnaghbyur, «Banber Matenadarani», t’. 6, Yerevan, ej 457-470.

    T’voramanyan T’. 2013, Nyut’er haykakan chartarapetut’yan patmut’yan, Ashkhatut’yunneri zhoghovatsu, Yer․, YePH hrat․, ej 864:

    Kirakos Gandzakets’i 1961, Patmut’yun Hayots’, ashkhatasirut’yamb, K․M․ Ohanjanyani, Yer․, HSSRR GA hratarakch’․, ej 426.

    Hovhannes Draskhanakertts’i 1996, Hayots’ patmut’yun, ashkharhabar t’argm. yev tsanot’agr., G. B. T’umanyani, Yer․, YePH hrat., ej 397.

    Ghazaryan A․ 2018, Avani tachari yerklezu tsatskagir ardzanagrut’yuny. me?k, t’e? yerku ardzanagrut’yun, «Akunk’» gitakan hodvatsneri zhoghovatsu, t’iv 3 (19), Yerevan, YePH hratarakch’․, ej 63-73.

    Ghafadaryan K. 1968, Patmahnagitakan ditoghut’yunner Avani tachari veraberyal (Yerevani himnadrman 2750-amyaki arrt’iv), «Patmabanasirakan handes», t’. 3 (42), Yerevan, HSSH GA «Gitut’yun» hrat., ej 76-90.

    Ghafadaryan K․ 1975, Yerevan․ mijnadaryan hushardzannery yev vimakan ardzanagrut’yunnery, HSSH GA hratarakch’․, Yerevan, ej 252.

    Marut’yan T. 1976, Avani tachary yev haranman hushardzanner, Yerevan, «Hayastan» hrat., 204 ej:

    Marut’yan T․1980, Avani tachari karruts’man zhamanaky, «Lraber hasarakakan gitut’yunneri», t’․ 2, ej 69-76.

    Yovhan Mayragomets’i 2005, Dawt’ay Mets Koghmants’ yepiskoposi vasn patkerats’ yev nkaragrut’eants’, harts’uats i Yovhannay Mayragomets’woy, gitakan bnagiry, N․ Pogharyani, «Matenagirk’ Hayots’», D․ ht․, E․ dar, Ant’ilias-Libanan, ej 355-357.

    Samuel Anets’i 2014, Samueli k’ahanayi Anets’woy Hawak’munk’ i grots’ patmagrats’ yaghags giwti zhamanakats’ minch’ev i nerkays tsayrak’agh arareal, yarrajabanov, hamematut’eamb, yawyeluatsnerov yev tsanot’ut’iwnnerov Arshak Ter–Mik’eleani, Vagharshapat, S․ Ejmiatsni tparan, 1892, ej 302.

    Samuel Anets’i yev sharunakoghner 2014, Zhamanakagrut’yun, Adamits’ minch’ev 1776 t’․, ashkhatasirut’yamb, K․ Mat’evosyani, Yer․, «Nairi», ej 504.

    Sebeos 2005, Patmut’yun, k’nnakan bnagiry, G. V. Abgaryani, arevelahayeren t’argm. yev tsanot’agr., G. K. Khach’atryani yev V. A. Yeghiazaryani, Yer․, «ZANGAK-97» hrat, ej 404.

    Smbatyan SH․ 1972, Mi k’ani chshgrtumner Movses Kaghankatvats’u «Aghvanits’ ashkharhi patmut’yan» bnagri mej, «Patmabanasirakan handes», t’․ 2, 1972, ej 174-192.

    Step’anos Orbelean 1910, Patmut’iwn nahangin Sisakan, Arareal Step’annosi Orbelean ark’episkoposi Siwneats’, T’iflis, yelek’trasharzh tp․ or․ N. Aghaneants’i, ej 610.

    Eremyan A. 1969, K voprosu o datirovke kafedralʹnoj cerkvi v Avane, «Lraber hasarakakan gitut’yunneri», t’. 3, Yerevan, HSSRR GA hrat., ej 47-62.

    Tokarskiy N. 1961, Arkhitektura Armenii IV-XIV vv., Yerevan, «Armgosizdat», 388 str. + tablitsy 100 str․

    Yakobson A. 1950, Ocherk istorii zodchestva Armenii V-XVII vv., pod obshch. red. N. M. Bachinskogo, Gos. izd-vo arkhitektury i gradostroitel'stva, Moskva-Leningrad, 103 s.

    Bartikyan H. 1962, «Narratio de rebus Armeniae»: hunaren targmanutyamb mez hasats mi hay-qaghkedonakan skzbnaghbyur, “Banber Matenadarani”, t. 6. (in Armenian)

    Totamanyan T. 2013, Nyuter hajkakan chartarapetutyan, EPH hrat. (in Armenian)

    Kirakos Gandzaketsi 1961, Patmutyun Hayots, ashkhatasirut. K. M. Ohanjanyani, HSSR GA hrat. (in Armenian)

    Hovhannes Draskhanakertsi 1961, Hayots patmutyun, ashkharhab. targ. ev tsanotagr. G. B. Tumanyani, EPH hrat. (in Armenian)

    Ghazaryan A. 2018, Avani tachari e8klezwu tsatskagir ardzanagreutyuně: mek?, te? Erku ardzanagrutyun, “Akunq”, t. 3(19), EPH hrat. (in Armenian)

    Ghafadaryan K. 1968, Patmahnagitakan ditoghutyunner Avani tachari veraberyal, “Patmabanasirakan hands”, t. 3(42). (in Armenian)

    Ghafadaryan K. 1975, Erevan: mijnadaryan hushardzannerě ev vimakan ardzanagrutyunnerě, HSSH GA hrat. (in Armenian)

    Marutyan T. 1976, Avani tacharě ev haranman huhsardzannerě, Yerevan, “Hayastan” hrat. (in Armenian)

    Marutyan T. 1980, Avani tachari karutsman zhamanakě, “Lraber hasarakakan gitutynneri”, t. 2. (in Armenian)

    Hovhan Mayragometsi 2005, Davta Mets Koghmants episkoposi vasn patkerats ev nkaragrutyants hartsvats i Hwvhanna Mayragometsvo, git. bnagirě N. Pogharyani, “Matenagirq Hayots”, D h., E dar, Antilias-Libanan. (in Armenian)

    Samuel Anetsi 2014, Samueli qahanayi Anetsvo Havaqmunq i grots patmagrats haghags gyuti zhamanakats minchev i nerkays tsayraqagh araryal, harajabaně Arshak Ter-Mikeleani, S. Echmiadzni tpar. (in Armenian)

    Samuel Anetsi ev sharunakoghner 2014, Zhamanakagrutyn, Adamits minchev 1776 t., ashkhatas. K. Matevosyani, “Nairi” hrat. (in Armenian)

    Sebeos 2005, Patmutyun, qnn. bnag. G. Abgaryani, targ. ev tsanotag. G. Khachatryani ev V. Eghiazaryani, “Zangak” hrat. (in Armenian)

    Smbatyan Sh. 1972, Mi qani chshtumner Movses Kaghankatvatsu “Aghvanits ashkharhi patmutyan” bnagri mej, “Patma-banasirakan hands”, t. 2. (in Armenian)

    Stepanos Orbelean 1910, Patmutyun nahangin Sisakan, arareal Stepanosi Orbelean arqepiskoposi Syuneats, Tiflis, tp. N. Aghaneantsi. (in Armenian)

    Jeremmyan A. 1669, K voprosu o datirovke kafedralnoj cerkvi v Avane, “Lraber hasarakakan gitutynneri”, t. 3. (in Russian)

    Tokarskij N. 1961, Arxitektura Armenii IV-XIV vv., “Armgosizdat”. (in Russian)

    Jakobson A. 1950, Ocherk istorii zodchestva Armenii V-XVII vv., Gos. izdat. (in Russian).

  • Articles

    Western-Armenian Periodical Press on Swiss National Movements in the 1840s

    Feliks Movsisyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The Canton movement in Switzerland in the 1840s attracted the attention of the Armenian periodical press of that time. The newspapers ‘’Arshaluys Araratyan’’, ‘’Hayastan’’ and ‘’Europa’’, the ideologues of the Western-Armenian national conservative current, elucidated that movement immediately. The political weekly of the Mkhitaryan Congregation of Vienna considered the Swiss national movement to be ‘’internal confusions’’ created by the influence of the July Revolution of 1830, as well as by the propaganda of the radicals. According to the weekly, the radical Cantons were eager to overthrow the existing authorities and establish a republican order. The Congregation members were supporters of the monarchical order recognized in Europe by the Vienna Congress of 1815, so they called the struggle of the Cantons just “a riot’’. The Catholic congregants also emphasized the religious component in the Canton movement and complained that violence was being used against the church and monasteries were being closed. “The Arshaluys Araratyan’’ doubted that the rebellious mountain Cantons would succeed. The weekly didn’t openly express its position on the struggle of the Cantons and was content to express a vague opinion with the publications of its ideologue European press. “The Hayastan’’, the official newspaper of the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople, also ignored the religious component of the Canton movement, though it preferred to report on it merely as an impartial “historiographer”.

    References

    Galēmk'earean G. 1893, Patmutiwn hay lragrutean, Vienna, Mkhit'arean tparan. [In Armenian]

    “Arshaluys araratyan”, Zmyurnia, 1847, 19 septemberi, № 294; 31 hoktemberi, № 297; 14 noyemberi, № 298; 28 noyemberi, №299; 12 dektemberi, № 300; 1848, 9 hunvari, № 302; 6 petrvari, № 304; 19 marti, № 307. [In Armenian]

    “Europe”, Vienna, Mkhit'arean tparan, 1847, 13 hulisi, № 3; 14 septemberi, № 12; 19 hoktemberi, № 17; 28 dektemberi, № 27; 1848, 25 hunvari, № 4; 1 petrvari, № 5; 8 petrvari, № 6; 22 petrvari, № 8; 11 aprili, № 15; 13 hunisi, № 24; 27 hunisi, № 26; 3 hoktemberi, № 40; 21 noyemberi, № 47; 12 dectemberi, № 50; 1849, 6 marti, № 10; 12 hunisi, № 24. [In Armenian]

    “Hayastan”, Kostandnupolis, 1848, 6 marti, № 89; 27 marti, № 92; 8 mayisi, № 98; 5 hulisi, № 106; 2 hoktemberi, № 119; 9 hoktemberi, № 120; 23 hoktemberi, № 122; 6 noyemberi, № 124; 20 noyemberi, № 126; 27 noyemberi, № 127; 18 dectemberi, № 130; 1849, 8 hunvari, № 133; 22 hunvari, № 135. [In Armenian]

    Debidur A. 1995. Diplomaticheskaja istorija Evropy 1814-1878. Perevod s fr. Tom 1, Rostov-na- Donu, Feniks. [In Russian]

    Zak L.A. 1966. Monarxi protiv narodov. Moskva. Izd. Mezhdunarognye otnoshenija. [In Russian]

    Istorija ХIХ veka 1938. Pod redakcij Lavissa i Rambo. Perevod s fr. Tom 3, Moskva, Gosudarstvennoe social'no-ekonomicheskoe izdanie. [In Russian]

    Revolucii 1848-1849 gg. 1952. Pod redakcij F. V. Potyomkina I A. I. Moloka, Tom 2, Moskva, Izd. Akademii nauk [In Russian]

    Folker P. Istorija Shvejcarii. Perevod s nem. Moskva, Izd. Ves' mir. [In Russian]

  • Articles

    Reactions to the Martyrdom of Christapor Mikaelyan in the Armenian Press and among the Caucasian Armenian Intelligentsia

    Hovik Grigoryan
    View PDF
    Abstract

     

    The public, political, journalistic, and revolutionary activities of Christaphor Mikaelyan, founder and leader of the ARF, have been a subject of serious discussions among both his ideological allies and critics during the 120 years following his martyrdom. Extensive studies dedicated to him have been left by prominent ARF figures such as A. Aharonyan, M. Varandyan, Ye. Frangyan, and others. These works, as a rule, were created many years after K. Mikaelyan’s martyrdom, and their authors had the opportunity to present the image of the ARF leader against the backdrop of the turbulent and tragic events that transpired, and their lessons. Meanwhile, the words of appreciation and regret dedicated to the ARF leader on the occasion of his martyrdom, published in the Armenian press or found in the letters of his individual comrades-in-arms, have largely remained outside the attention of researchers. These evaluations, voiced under the fresh impression of the events, which also contain serious questions about the future of the ARF and the Armenian liberation struggle, allow for a more complete understanding of Christaphor’s image and reveal the real prestige he had not only within the ARF ranks but also among the Caucasian-Armenian intelligentsia. This submitted article is the first attempt to unveil these aspects.

    The obituaries and words of appreciation published in the press, as a rule, were created in the first weeks following the Vitosha disaster and are characterized by their Aesopian language. They bypass the revolutionary characteristics of the ARF leader and the actual circumstances of his martyrdom, primarily revealing and praising his undeniable human virtues: his modest lifestyle, selflessness, ideological devotion, being an “iron man,” a fanatic of thought and idea, a “radiant beacon, a lighthouse showing distant horizons...” for his disciples and friends. Specifically, the words of remembrance and respect by Leo and St. Ter-Avetikyan are drafted in this spirit.

    In contrast to the materials published in the legal and illegal press, and the obituary leaflets issued by the ARF Caucasian structures, the image of the martyred Christaphor is more fully presented in the hitherto unknown letters of the prominent poet Avetik Isahakyan. These letters reveal Christaphor’s role as the founder and leader of the ARF, his significant involvement in the Armenian liberation struggle, and his personal involvement in the poet’s life. The poet, who experienced a great personal shock due to the Vitosha disaster, makes serious and substantiated observations about Christaphor’s role in Armenian history, the irreversibility of his loss for the ARF, and the impossibility of finding an equivalent replacement for him.

    References

    1. Եղիշե Չարենցի անվան Գրականության և արվեստի թանգարանի արխիվ (ԳԱԹ), Ավետիք Իսահակյանի ֆոնդ, վավ. N 233 լրացուցիչ, թթ. 31-34:

    2. Ահարոնեան Ա., Քրիստափոր Միքայէլեան, Պոսթըն, 1926:

    3. Աղետաւոր մահը, // «Դրօշակ», 1905, N 4, էջ 51-53:

    4. Անձնուեր գործողի յիշատակին, //«Մշակ», 12 մարտի 1906, N 55, էջ 1-2:

    5. Գրիգորյան Հ., Ավետիք Իսահակյանը Քրիստափոր Միքայելյանի մասին, Անտիպ նամակներ ՀՀ Գրականության և արվեստի թանգարանի արխիվից, // «Վէմ» համահայկական հանդես, 2012, թիվ 3, էջ 204-210:

    6. Լեո, Անցյալից, Թիֆլիս, 1925:

    7. Լէօ, Լաւ մարդու յիշատակին, // «Մշակ», 10 մարտի 1905, N 42:

    8. Համբարձումյան Հ., Քրիստափոր Միքայելյանի հետքերով, Ցարական ոստիկանության դեպարտամենտի Հատուկ բաժնի 1905 թվականի թղթածրարը, //«Վէմ» համահայկական հանդես, 2009, թիվ 3, հավելված, էջ I-XX:

    9. Վարանդեան Մ., Քրիստաֆոր Միքայէլեան, «Հայրենիք» ամսագիր, Պոսթըն, 1924, NN 3, 5, 8, 12:

    10. Տէր-Աւետիքեան Ստ., Անմոռանալի գործիչի յիշատակին, // «Մշակ», 20 մարտի 1905, N 50:

    11. Տէրտունի, Լռութիւն, // «Ձայն հայրենեաց», 26 ապրիլի 1905, N 337:

    12. Ֆրանգեան Ե., Քրիստափոր ՄիքայԷլեան. նրա կեանքը և աշխարհայեցողութիւնը, Բագու, 1917:

    13. Քրիստափորի եւ Էդվարդի յիշատակին, // «Դրօշակ», 1907, N 3, էջ 42-43:

    14. Քրիստափոր Միքայէլեան, // «Դրօշակ», 1905, N 4, էջ 51-52:

  • Articles

    Reflections on the Situation in Western Armenia in the Pages of “Horizon” on the Eve and at the Beginning of World War I

    Armen Karapetyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    On the eve of the First World War, a rather difficult, complex and tense situation had developed in Western Armenia. Although the agreement on reforms had already been signed, the Young Turk authorities not only had no intention of implementing it, but also incited the incitement of anti-Armenian sentiments among the Kurds, Circassians and other Muslim communities. "Horizon", one of the influential Eastern Armenian periodicals published in Tbilisi, kept everything related to the reforms and the Armenian Question in the spotlight. Its pages constantly contained fresh information and analyses on the situation in Western Armenia. The daily strongly condemned the Armenian-displacing and depopulation-oriented practices of the Turkish authorities. Although European inspectors were already in Armenia, they were forced to leave as soon as the First World War began. The reforms again remained on paper: unfeasible.

    References

    Ludšvejt S., Turciâ v gody pervoj mirovoj vojny 1914-1918gg., Voenno-političeskij očerk, izd.-vo Moskovskogo universiteta, 1966, ej 386.

    Nassibian A․, Writanin and the Armenien Question 1915-1925, London, 1984, New York, St. Markins Press: Croom Helm, ej 386.

    Vrats’ean S․, Hayastani hanrapetut’iwn, Peyrut’ 1958t’․, ej 684.

    Simonyan H․, RR․, Andraniki zhamanaky, girk’ A, «Kasia», hr․, Ye․1996, ej 750.

    Vrramean A․, Haykakan harts’y, VO?v e marzpannerun nets’uky, «Horizon», 1914t’․,t’iv 126, ej 1.

    Vrramean A․, Haykakan harts’y. Hayut’ean dery, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 127, ej 1.

    Vrramean A․, Haykakan harts’y. Pashtoneut’ean mak’razatumy, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 128, ej.

    Hayastani barekargumy yev marzpannery, hnaraworut’iwnner yev patehut’iwnner, t’iv 135, ej 1․

    Arden sksum yen, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 137, ej 1.

    Yntrut’iwnnery․– marzpannery, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 147, ej 1.

    Hrahangner yndhanur k’nnich’neri irawasut’ean yev dzerrnahasut’ean masin, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 150, ej 1, 1914t’․, t’iv 151, ej 1.

    CH’elepyan A․, Zoravar Andranik yev hay heghap’vokhakan sharzhumy, Ye․, «Arevik»

    hr․, 1990t’․.

    Safrastyan RR․, Osmanyan kaysrut’yun․ ts’eghaspanut’yan tsragri tsagumnabanut’yuny (1876–1920t’t’․), Ye․, 2009t’․

    Awstro – serbakan yndharum, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 152.

    Paterazm, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 153.

    Jorazhoghovy, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 155.

    Koch’․ Hasel e p’vordzut’ean zhamy, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 175.

    Hrdehy tsavalvum e, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 177, ej 1.

    Tragizmy, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 178, ej 1.

    Tiran, Drut’iwny Tachkastanum, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 181, ej 5.

    Tachkahayk’, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 167, ej 4.

    Paterazmy ankhusap’eli ky darrnay, 1914t’, t’iv 229, ej 1.

    Germaniayi khaghy T’urk’iayum, 1914, t’iv 230, ej 1.

    Ayzhm arden koroshwi, 1914, t’iv 231, ej 1.

    Yovh․ T’umanean, Verjin tagapy, 1914, t’iv 233, ej 1.

    Paterazmi dashtits’․ Rrus–t’urk’akan sahmany, 1914, t’iv 235, ej 1.

    Ognenk’, inch’ov karogh yenk’, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 237, ej 1.

    Verapahut’ean zhamanaky ch’e, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 240, ej 1.

    Kovkasean banaki shtabits’․ pashtonakan 1914, t’iv 243, ej 1.

    Sep’akan herragirner, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 246, ej 1.

    Nakhazgushats’um, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 247, ej 1.

    Dro, Hay kamaworneri yerkrord gndi hramanatary viraworwats․․․, t’iv 255, ej 1.

    Mer srbazan partk’y, «Horizon», 1914t’,t’iv 288, ej 1.

  • Articles

    The Erzurum Branch of Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa

    Vera Sahakyan
    Abstract

    During the First World War, the Russian-Turkish border, also known as the Caucasian Front or Eastern Front, extended from the Black Sea to the northern regions of Iran. The defense of this front was assigned to the Ottoman Third Army, led by Mahmud Kâmil Pasha. The Ottoman Empire had a strategic interest in the Caucasus region, aiming to maintain influence in the area if Russian power were to be established there. Additionally, they sought to utilize an Independent North Caucasus as a buffer in case of changes in the geopolitical situation.

    To further these goals, between August and October of 1914, regiments supporting the Ottoman army were dislocated along the Russian-Turkish border. These regiments were coordinated by the Istanbul center of the Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa organization. Three headquarters were established in strategic locations: Erzurum, Van, and Trabzon.

    This strategic planning and organization were indicative of the Ottoman Empire's efforts to assert control over the Caucasus region and to prepare for potential conflicts and shifts in power dynamics during the First World War.

    Such strategic planning testifies to the Ottoman Empire’s efforts to establish control over the Caucasian region and to prepare for potential conflicts and shifts in power dynamics during the First World War.

    Within the framework of the article, we aimed to explore recent publications concerning the organization known as Teşkilat-I Mahsusa, which has gained significant traction. We sought to shed light on the activities of the Erzurum branch, focusing on key details from the memoirs of Arif Cemil (Denker) and Ebulhindili Cafer Bey.

    References

    Atnur, I. E, [2016], Yeşil Ordu Müfrezesi Kumandanı Ebulhindili Cafer Bey'in Sivas, Tokat ve Yozgat İsyanları Esnasmdaki Faaliyet ve Gozlemleri, Çayeli'nden Erzrum'a Yrd. Doç. Dr. Cemil Kutlu, Armağan Kitabı, Ed. Selami Kılıç, Erzrum, 2016. ss. 249-264.

    Atnur, İ., E., [2014], Ebulhindili Cafer Bey'in Kaleminden Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa'nın Türkiye'nin Doğusunda Yapılanması ve I. Dünya Savaşı Günlerindeki Faaliyetleri, 691-709, Ebulhindili Cafer Bey'in Kaleminden Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa'nın Türkiye'nin Doğusunda Yapılanması ve I. Dünya Savaşı Günlerindeki Faaliyetleri, 691-709, 100. Yılında Birinci Dünya Savaşı Uluslararası Sempozyumu, 03-05 Kasım, Budapeşte/ Macaristan, ss. 691-708.

    Bilgin, M., [2017], Teşkilât-ı Mahsusa’nın Kafkasya Misyonu ve Operasyonları, İstanbul, 616 էջ։

    Cemil, Â, [1997], Birinci Dünyâ Savaşı’nda Teşkilât-ı Mahsusa, Birinci baskı, İst. 1997, 409 s.

    Dadrian, V. N., [2004], Ermeni Soykırımında Kurumsal Roller, çev. Attila Tuygan, Istanbul, 334 էջ։

    Keleşyılmaz, V., 2000, Kafkas Harekatının Perde Arkası, Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi OTAM, 11.11, İstanbul, ss. 277-304.

    Levent Z., [2019], Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa’dan Kuva-yı Milliye’ye Gayrinizami Harp [1913-1922], Doktora tezi, Ankara, 474 s.

    Levent, Z., [2019], Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa’dan Kuva-yı Mıllıye’ye Gayrınızamı Harp [1913-1922], Doktora tezi, Ankara, 474 էջ։

    Özel, O., [2020], The Role of Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa [Special Organization] in the Armenian Genocide, Christin Pschichholz [ed.]․ The First World War as a Caesura? Demographic Concepts, Population Policy, and Genocide in the Late Ottoman, Russian, and Habsburg Spheres [Gewaltpolitik und Menschenrechte [GM], Band 3, pp. 85-108.

    Safi, P., [2006], The Ottoman Special Organization-Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa: A Historical Assessment with Particular Reference to its Operations Against British Occupied Egypt [1914-1916], a Master’s Thesis.

    Safi, P., [2012], The Ottoman Special Organization -Teşkilât-ı Mahsusa: An Inquiry into its Operational and Administrative Characteristics, Unpublished PhD dissertation, Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara, 346 p.

    Safi, P., [2023], Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı 1826-2023, İlk Defa Yayımlanan MİT Arşiv Belgeleriyle, İstanbul, 528 p.

    Safi, P., [2023], Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı 1826-2023, İlk Defa Yayımlanan MİT Arşiv Belgeleriyle, İst.

    Sanders, L. v. [1927], Five Years in Turkey, Naval Institute, 327 p.

    Stanford Shaw, [2014], Birinci Dünya Savaşında Osmanlı İmparatorluğu Savaşa Giriş, Ankara.

    Stoddart, Ph., [1963], The Ottoman Government, and the Arabs, 1911 to 1918: A Preliminary Study of the Teskildt-i Mahsusa, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 245 p.

    Taner, A․, [2019] When Was the Decision to Annihilate the Armenians Taken?, Journal of Genocide Research, 21:4, 457-480, DOI: 10.1080/14623528.2019.1630893։

    Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa, Philip H. Stodard, Arba Yayınları, Çev: Tansel Demirel, 1993, İstanbul, 204 p.

    Tetik, A. Ata, F., [2023], Hüsameddin Ertürk, Millî Mücadele Senelerinde Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa, Konya, 500 p.

    Tetik, A., [2014], Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa [Umûr-ı Şarkiyye Dairesi] Tarihi, Cilt I, 1914–1916, İstanbul, 500 p.

    Tetik, A., [2021], Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa [Umûr-ı Şarkiyye Dairesi] Tarihi, Cilt III–I: 1918, İstanbul, 463 p.

    Yüksel, Ç., [2020], Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa ve Birinci Dünya Savaşı’ndaki Faaliyetleri, Ankara, 292 p.

    Korsun, N., [1937], Sarykamyshskaya operatsiya na Kavkazskom fronte Mirovoy Voyny v 1914- 1915 Godu, Moskva, 161, [3] s., 5 otd. l. skhem., kart. ; 23kh15 sm.:

    Avagyan, A․, [2011], Hyusiskovkasyan k’aghak’akan vtarandiut’yuny T’urk’iayi artak’in k’aghak’akanut’yan hamatek’stum [1920-1971 t’t’․], Yerevan, 344 ej.

    G.K.V․ [Grigor vardapet Kerkeryan], [1965], «T’eshk’ilat’i mahsuse», «Yusaber», bats’arrik t’iw, nuiruats ap¬rilean Yegherrni yisnameakin, 1915-1965, Gahire, ej 5-35:

    M․ Ali, «I՛nch’pes kazmakerpuyets’aw 1915-i dawadrut’iwny, T’eshk’ilat’y makhsuse, «It’t’ihatakani my yushery irents’ gaghtni kazmakerput’ean masin», «Yarraj», 1933-1934 t’t’․

  • Articles

    Attempts by Turkish Historians to Justify Cemal Pasha's Genocidal Policy

    Meline Anumyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

     

    This article explores a thesis put forth by some Turkish historians suggesting that Cemal Pasha, the Ottoman Empire's Minister of the Navy during the Armenian Genocide, was allegedly more tolerant towards Armenians than other Young Turk leaders. Proponents of this thesis claim he opposed deportations and massacres, advocating for a more lenient policy. The article systematically refutes four main arguments supporting this narrative.

    Cemal Pasha's policies toward Armenians may initially seem different from those of other Armenian Genocide perpetrators, but they were fundamentally the same. Like his counterparts, his ultimate goal was the eradication of Armenians as a nation. He also advocated for their destruction, primarily through assimilation.

                  The justification of key architects of the Armenian Genocide, like Cemal Pasha, is particularly dangerous because it may foster the misleading and unfounded image of a "pro-Armenian Turk" within Armenian society and among Armenians more broadly.

    References

    Akçam T. 2014, Ermenilerin Müslümanlaştırılması, İstanbul, İletişim Yayınları, 243 sayfa.

    Artuç N. 2014, Sevk ve İskân Kanunu ve Cemal Paşa, Yeni Türkiye, N 60, s. 1-14.

    Girayalp K. 2023, Cemal Paşa Ermenileri Korudu, Arapları Modernleştirmek İstedi, Bizim TV, https://bizimtv.com.tr/yazarlar/dr-girayalp-karakus/cemal-pasa-ermenileri-korudu-araplari-modernlestirmek-istedi-1476 (վերջին դիտում՝ 25․12․2025)։

    Kurt Ü. 2021, Bir fail, bir kurtarıcı ve bir muamma: Cemal Paşa, Araplar ve Ermeniler, Toplum ve Bilim, N․ 157, s. 66-100․

    Özşavlı H. 2014, Lübnan Ermenileri (1914-1939), Ankara, 269 sayfa.

  • Articles

    Linguistic and stylistic analysis of the creative revisions of E. Charents' poem "The Danthe Legend"

    Narine Nersisyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    A comparative analysis of a writer's creative revisions offers a new opportunity to uncover his linguistic and stylistic observations, the development of aesthetic principles and the process of refining style. The aim of this article is to present the full spectrum of changes in the young Charents' stylistic thinking, based on the creative history of the poem "The Danthe Legend". The study is based on the printed texts of the poem from 1916, 1922 and 1932 Additionally, the final corrections made by Charents in his handwriting on the 1932 printed text, which were not included in the academic publication, are being published and comprehensively analyzed for the first time.

    References

    Aghababyan S., Hay sovetakan grakanut’yan patmut’yun, Ht. I, Yer., 1986, 576 ej:

    Avetisyan Z., T’umanyani steghtsagortsakan laboratorian, Yer., 1973, 208 ej:

    Avetisyan Yu., Arevmtahay banasteghtsneri steghtsagortsakan mshakumneri lezvaochakan verlutsut’yunner, Yer., 2012, 115 ej:

    Gasparyan D., Voghbergakan Ch’arents’y, Yer., 1990, 382 ej:

    T’amrazyan Hr., Yeghishe Ch’arents’, Yer., 1987, 476 ej:

    Marut’yan A., Ch’arents’i ch’ap’atsoyi lezun yev vochy, Yer., 1979, 200 ej:

    Ch’arents’ Ye., Dant’eakan arraspel, T’iflis, 1916, 31 ej:

    Ch’arents’ Ye., Yerkeri zhoghovatsu, ht. II, Epik’akan poyemner, Moskva, 1922, 286 ej:

    Ch’arents’ Ye., Yerker, Yerevan , 1932, 447 ej:

    Ch’arents’ Ye., Yerkeri zhoghovatsu, HSSRR GA, ht. II, Yer.,1963, 395 ej:

    Gorʹkij M., O literature, M., 1953, 868 st. Grifov B.,

    Psihologiâ pisatelʺâ, M.,1988, 462 st.

    Ink’nagir nyut’er

    Ch’arents’i tun-t’angaran, HF6501․

  • Articles

    The Issue of Nagorno-Karabakh in 1921–1923: Distortions in Azerbaijani Historiography

    Armine Khachatryan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This article examines the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh—the contradictions that arose around this matter in the period from July 5, 1921, when the decision was made to include the territory within Azerbaijan, to July 7, 1923, when the decision was made to grant autonomy and establish the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region [NKAR], as well as the efforts aimed at overcoming these contradictions. The essence of the researched problem lies in the fact that, in the historical and political literature, the situation that emerged after the decision to include Nagorno-Karabakh within Azerbaijan has not been thoroughly studied. In many cases, this issue is approached in a one-sided and biased manner. Meanwhile, the entire course of events related to one of the most acute conflicts of the 20th century—the Nagorno-Karabakh issue—demonstrates that the real consequences of the decisions made and attitudes toward the conflict require further clarification, and one-sided interpretations are unacceptable. At the same time, the reaction of the direct stakeholders—the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh—has not received due attention. There are numerous studies on this issue in both Armenian and Azerbaijani historiographies. However, it should be emphasized that there are significant gaps, particularly in the form of extremely opposing positions on the problem. Our goal is to uncover the actual course of events and, ultimately, examine the issue in terms of how well it reflected the free will of the national majority and to what extent it was acceptable and just.

    References

    Abrahamyan H., 2003, Martnch’vogh Arts’akhy 1917-2000, girk’ A, 1917-1923, Yerevan, ej 338.

    LGHIM marzayin petakan arkhiv, Fond 485, ts’ank 1, glukh 14, t’ert’ 66-68.

    LGHIM marzayin petakan arkhiv, Fond 485, ts’ank 1, glukh 14, t’ert’ 66-68.

    HH PPKA, f. 200, ts’. 1, g. 581, t’. 98:

    Harut’yunyan H., 1996, Lerrnayin Gharabaghy 1918-1921t’t’., Yerevan, 299 ej.

    Khach’atryan K., Suk’iasyan H., Badalyan G., 2015, Khorhrdayin Hayastani yev LGHIM-i taratsk’ayin korustnery 1920-1930-akan t’t’., Yerevan, ej 160.

    P’ashayan H․, 2014, Gharabaghyan himnakhndri k’aghak’akan p’astarknery LGHIM kazmavorman yev Adr․ KHSH kazmits’ durs berman p’astat’gherum[1923-1989t’t’․], «21-rd DAR», t’iv 4 [56], ej 28-50.

    Azerbaydzhanskaya argumentatsiya i yeye oproverzheniye, Yerevan, 1989.

    Aliyev I., 1989, Nagornyy Karabakh: Istoriya. Fakty. Sobytiya, Baku, s. 104.

    Vitkovskaya T., Nazukina M., Dinamika samoopredeleniya etnicheskikh dvizheniy na postsovetskom prostranstve [na primere Azerbaydzhana i Gruzii], Ars Administrandi [Iskusstvo upravleniya]. 2023. T. 15, № 3, 447–470.

    Suleymanova S., Istoriya obrazovaniya Nagorno-Karabakhskoy avtonomnoy oblasti po arkhivnym dokumentam, Sciences of Europe 94, 2022, s. 52-56.

    K istorii obrazovaniya Nagorno-Karabakhskoy avtonomnoy oblasti Azerbaydzhanskoy SSR. Dokumenty i materialy, 1989, s. 270

    Konflikt v Nagornom Karabakhe, sbornik statey, Baku, 1990, s. 272

    Melkonyan A., Khachatryan K., Kryuchkov I., Problemy sovetskogo natsional'no-gosudarstvennogo stroitel'stva/ istoriko-kriticheskiy analiz na primere SuArmenii/, Oriental studies, 2023. Vol.16 is 2.

    Nagornyy Karabakh 1918-1923 gg., 1992, Sbornik dokumentov i materialov, Yerevan, s. 650.

    Nagornyy Karabakh v mezhdunarodnom prave i mirovoy politike. Dokumenty i kommentariy, 2008, tom 1, /sost. Otv. Red. Vstup. St. i komment. d. yu. n., prof. YU. G. Barsegov/, s. 944.

    Narimanov N., 2002, Pis'ma i nekotoryye dokumenty po karabakhskomu voprosu, Baku, 120.

    Niftaliyev I., 2010, Azerbaydzhanskaya SSR v ekspansionistskikh planakh armyan [20-ye gody KHKH veka], Baku, s. 292.

    Ul'yanishchev P., 2008, Avtonomiya kak forma territorial'nogo samoupravleniya Vestnik RUDN, №2, 28-35.

  • Articles

    The Armenian Diaspora։ Formation in the 1920s

    Lusine Moskovyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The article examines the situation following the Armenian Genocide, when a significant portion of the Armenian population was displaced beyond the borders of their homeland. It presents the ideology of “Spiritual Armenia”, developed by the figures of the Dashnaktsutyun party, as a foundational framework for the consolidation of the Armenian Diaspora. The article also clarifies and analyzes the term “diaspora,” evaluating historians’ perspectives on its evolution within the Armenian context.Additionally, the article provides a comprehensive overview of the distribution and demographic characteristics of the Armenian Diaspora during its formative period in the 1920s.

    References

    Abrahamyan A., Hamarrot urvagits hay gaght’avayreri patmut’yan, Ye., 1964:

    Abrahamyan L., Hayastany yev Haykakan sp’yurrk’y. Taranjatum yev handipum, 21-rd dar, 2006, t’iv 1 (11), ej 31-52:

    Barkhudaryan V., Alek’sanyan H., Rrusastani hay gaght’ojakhneri patmut’yun, Ye., Patmut’yan institut, 2015:

    Barseghyan A., TS’eghakron sharzhumy, Ye., 2009:

    Dallak’yan K., Hay sp’yurrk’i patmut’yun (hamarrot aknark), Ye., 2004:

    Yeghiazaryan A., Azgayin hamakets’akan mijavayreri dzevavorumy Haykakan «dasakan» yev «nor» sp’yurrk’um (Libanani yev RRD Haykakan hamaynk’neri orinakov), «Patmut’yun yev mshakuyt’», Ye., 2017, ej 50-66:

    Yeghiazaryan A., Hay gaght’ashkharhi patmut’yan parberats’man p’vordz, «Sp’yurrk’agitut’yun» taregirk’, Ye., YePHhrat., 2013, ej 3-28:

    Yeghiazaryan A., Hayastani arrajin Hanrapetut’yan ghekavarut’yan hastatumy Sp’yurrk’um. «Hogevor Hayastan»-i steghtsumy (hayets’akargayin vorosh ditarkumner), «Hay gaght’akanut’yuny yev Hayrenik’-Sp’yurrk’ kapery 1918-1985t’t’.» mijazgayin gitazhoghovi zekuts’umner, Ye., 2011:

    Yeghiazaryan A., Hay sp’yurrk’i patmut’yan parberats’umy, Hayagitut’yan harts’er, Ye., 2014, t’iv 2, ej 33-51:

    Yeghiazaryan A., Ananyan M. yev aylk’, Hayrenik’-sp’yurrk’haraberut’yunnery 1918 t’vakanits’minch’evmerorery, Ye., YePH hrat., 2017:

    Zohrabyan E., Haykakan hamaynk’nery Rrusastani Dashnut’yunum.zargats’umner, mitumner, «Rrusastani Dashnut’yan haykakan sp’yurrk’y» zekuts’umneri zhoghovatsu, YePH hrat., 2018, ej150-161:

    T’vorosyan T., Vardanyan A., Transformats’vogh sp’yurrk’neri hamematakan verlutsut’yan modelavorman khndirnery, «Haykakan k’aghak’agitakan handes», t’iv 2 (9), 2018, ej 5-32:

    «Irak’ahay hamaynk’y 1915-1990 t’t’.», yst arkhivayin p’astat’ght’eri: Khmb., Virabyan A., Irak’ahay hamaynk’y 1915-1990 t’t’., Ye., 2018:

    Hakobyan H., Sp’yurrk’agitut’yan ardi himnakhndirnery, «Banber Yerevani hamalsarani. Mijazgayin haraberut’yunner, k’aghak’agitut’yun», Ye., t’iv 3 (21), 2016, ej3-15:

    «Hay sp’yurrk’» hanragitaran, Ye., 2003, ej 732:

    «Hayastani koch’nak» shabat’at’ert’, Niw York’, t’iw 3, 20.01.1923:

    «Hayrenik’» amsagir, Boston, 1925, t’iw 2:

    Ghanalanyan T., Sp’yurrk’i nerk’in teghasharzhery 1950-1980-akan t’vakannerin, Ye., 2016:

    Melik’set’yan H., Hayrenik’-sp’yurrk’ arrnch’ut’yunnery yev hayrenadardzut’yuny (1920-1980t’t’.), Ye., YePH hrat., 1985:

    Minasyan E., RRD Haykakan sp’yurrk’i dery HH-RRD haraberut’yunnerum, «Rrusastani Dashnut’yan haykakan sp’yurrk’y» zekuts’umneri zhoghovatsu, YePH hrat., 2018, ej 397-406:

    Nushervanyan N., Hay gaght’akanut’yan teghabashkhumy Hayots’ ts’eghaspanut’yonits’ heto, «Patmut’yun yev mshakuyt’», Ye., 2018, ej 271-282:

    Poghosyan M., Haykakan sp’yurrk’i kazmavorman gortsynt’ats’y, History and Politics Academic Journal, Ye., t’iv 7, 2020, ej 26-40:

    Vardanyan H., Gaght’akanut’yany veraberogh mi k’ani barreri yezrut’ayin arzhek’y hayerenum, Ye., YePH hrat., 2016, ej 124-128:

    Vardanyan H., Sp’yurrk’i tipabanut’yuny yev Hay sp’yurrk’y, «Patmut’yun yev mshakuyt’», Ye., YePH hrat., t’iv 1, 2020, ej 202-208:

    Tagesean A., Bnut’agrakan gitser, Libanani hayochakhin masin (p’vordzagitakan aknark), «Rrusastani Dashnut’yan haykakan sp’yurrk’y» zekuts’umneri zhoghovatsu, YePH hrat., 2018, ej 23-31:

    Dyatlov V., Melkonyan E.,Armyanskaya Diaspora: ocherki sotsiokul'turnoy tipologii, Ye., 2009:

    Cohen R., Global Diasporas: An Introduction. London, Routledge, 2008.

  • Articles

    The Source-Study Value of Garegin Nzhdeh’s Works in the Historical and Military-Geographical Studies of Syunik

    Gor Ghazaryan, Samvel Danielyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    General Garegin Nzhdeh’s works contain multifaceted information about the natural environment of Syunik, which is of great significance for the region’s historical and military-geographical studies. This information includes Syunik’s mountains, rivers, climatic conditions, flora and fauna, as well as its topographical features. In this article, the scientific observations found in Nzhdeh’s works have been systematized and analyzed, comparing them with historical sources and contemporary data. Based on this information, it is possible to reconstruct the natural characteristics of Syunik during 1919-1921, including its military-geographical nature, as well as assess the ecological changes that have occurred in the region over time.

    References

    Adamyan M., 1985, Hayastani t'rchunery, Yerevan, "Sovetakan Grogh" hrat., 232 p. [in Armenian].

    Ananyan V., 1961, Hayastani kendanakan ashkharhy, vol. 1, Yerevan, Haypethrat, 436 p. [in Armenian].

    Ananyan V., 1962, Hayastani kendanakan ashkharhy, vol. 2, Yerevan, Haypethrat, 415 p. [in Armenian].

    Garegin N., 1999, Azat Syunik', Beirut, Hamazgayin Vahe Setean tparan, 176 p. [in Armenian].

    Garegin N., 2002, Erker, vol. 2, Yerevan, HH Arkhivayin gorts' gortsakalut'yun, 504 p. [in Armenian].

    Garegin N., 2006, Hatan'tir, Yerevan, "Amaras", 708 p. [in Armenian].

    Garegin N., 2013, Hishir paterazmy, Yerevan, "Hayrenik'" akumb, 101 p. [in Armenian].

    Garegin N., 2021, Im pataskhany, Yerevan, Hegh. hrat., 200 p. [in Armenian].

    Ghazar'yan G., 2024, Garegin Nzhdehi dery Nikoghayos Marri Anii hnagitakan peghumneri havakats'uny prkelelu gorts'um [1918 t.], Ashkhatutyunner Hayastani patmut'yan t'angarani, N 2[14], pp. 60-68. [in Armenian].

    Hakobyan T., 1966, Syuniki t'agavorut'yuny: Patma-ashkharhagrakan arumov, Yerevan, "Mitk'" hrat., 220 p. [in Armenian].

    Hakobyan T., Melik-Bakhshyan S., Barseghyan H. 1986, Hayastani yev harakits shrjaneri teghanunneri barraran, vol. 1, Yerevan, YPH hrat., 992 p. [in Armenian].

    Hakobyan T., Melik-Bakhshyan S., Barseghyan H. 1988, Hayastani yev harakits shrjaneri teghanunneri barraran, vol. 2, Yerevan, YPH hrat., 992 p. [in Armenian].

    Hakobyan T., Melik-Bakhshyan S., Barseghyan H. 1998, Hayastani yev harakits shrjaneri teghanunneri barraran, vol. 4, Yerevan, YPH hrat., 804 p. [in Armenian].

    Harutyunyan L., Harutyunyan S. 1985, Hayastani dendrofloran, vol. 1, Yerevan, "Lus", 437 p. [in Armenian].

    Haykakan SSH fizikan ashkharhagrutyun [ed., introduction by A. Baghdasaryan] 1971, Yerevan, HSSH GA hrat., 469 p. [in Armenian].

    Khat'isyanyan A., 1968, Hayastani Hanrapetut'yan tsagum n zargats'umy, Beirut, Hamazgayin tparan, 491 p. [in Armenian].

    Lisits'yan S. 1969, Zangezuri hayerë, Yerevan, Haykakan SSH GA hrat., 334 p. [in Armenian].

    Malkhasyan M., 2015, Patmajoghordagrakan usumnasirut'yunner: gitakan haghordagrut'yunneri jhoghovatsu, vol. 1, Yerevan, YPH hrat., 248 p. [in Armenian].

    Nalbandyan A., 2022, Shikahoghi S. Step'anos Nakhavka yekeghets'u peghumneri ardyunk'nery, Ashkhatutyunner Hayastani patmut'yan t'angarani, N 2[10], pp. 8-17. [in Armenian].

    Publius Ovidius Naso 2021, Kerparanapokhutyunner, translation from Latin, introduction and notes by Gohar Muradyan and Aram Topchyan, Yerevan, "Zangak" hrat., 640 p. [in Armenian].

    Sayadyan H., 2020, Hayastani razmakan ashkharhagrutyun, Yerevan, Hegh. hrat., 315 p. [in Armenian].

    Simonyan A., 2017, Zangezuri goyamarty 1917-1921 t't', Yerevan, YPH hrat., 1096 p. [in Armenian].

    Vardanyan Zh., 2005, Tsaragitutyun, Yerevan, HH GA hrat., 370 p. [in Armenian].

    "Syunik" tert 1920, Goris, 26 p'et'var'i, N 7. [in Armenian].

  • Articles

    Observations on the Concept of “History” (19th–20th centuries)(Questions of Theory of History)

    Ararat Hakobyan, Vahagn Hakobyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

         Examining the observations of representatives of European, and partly Russian, historical and philosophical thought on the meaning, understanding, and significance of the concept of "history", we can come to the following conclusions. First and foremost, history is an integral part of humanity's conscious life. Without history, there is no human or human society. History is the memory of humanity. Without memory, there is no history. History is a repository of material and spiritual wealth created by human society, from which we learn, gain experience, and draw lessons for the present and future. The meaning of history should be seen not in the class division and hostility of people towards each other, but in ensuring the freedom and progress of people and nations. As long as the world and humanity exist, history will exist. The educational and instructive role of history is undeniable, both in the achievements and successes left to humanity, and in humanity's aspirations for freedom and development reflected on its pages, as well as in the inevitably accompanying sad pages and sometimes failures. The experience of history shows that new challenges await humanity in the future. This is evidenced and confirmed by European historical and philosophical thought, as well as, to some extent, by modern real life and reality.

        The entire system of values created by humanity accumulates in history. One of the main merits of history is that it contributes to the development of people's intellectual abilities, science in general, and spiritual and cultural progress and development. History is a means of self-knowledge of the human spirit. In addition, history is called upon to understand the present through knowledge of the past and to correctly orient oneself in the future. Due to the cause-and-effect relationship between the past and the present, spiritual and cultural inheritance occurs as information transmitted to generations. Knowledge of history also contributes to strengthening the patriotic aspirations of each nation, enriching socio-political knowledge, and developing scientific and spiritual thought and values in general.

        History is especially valuable and important for Armenia and Armenian society, especially when we consider its rich, suffering, instructive, and edifying path of millennia, directed towards the present and future. Armenian history, like that of many peoples, in addition to socio-economic and political aspects, has also borne the imprint of the ontological over the centuries. And this, apparently, was due, on the one hand, to the geopolitical position and conditions of Great Armenia, and on the other hand, to the peculiarities of the national mentality. But with all this, Armenia and the Armenian people undoubtedly constitute an integral and inalienable part of world history.

     

    References

    Alishan G., Hayapatum (patmich’k’ yev patmut’iwnk’ Hayots’), Venetik, i Vans S. Ghazaru, 1901, (649 ej):

    Adonts’ N., Haykakan harts’, h. A, Yer., «Hayagitak» hrat., 1996, 244 ej: 3.

    Berdyayev N., Patmut’yan imasty, germ. t’argm. D. Mosinyani, Yer., «VMV-print», 2019, 268 ej:

    Blok M., Patmut’yan pashtpanakan, kam patmabani arhesty, t’argm. SH. Margaryan, Yer., «Antares» 2018, 389 ej:

    Lazean G., Hayastan yev Hay Daty, Yer., «Adana» hrat., 1991, 435 ej:

    Leo, Haykakan harts’i vaveragrery, Yer., YePH hrat., 2014, 272 ej:

    Hakobyan A., Miats’yal yev Ankakh Hayastani gaghap’ary Hayots’ patmut’yan holovuyt’um, Yer., «Lusakn», 2020, 212 ej:

    Hovhannisyan R., Hayastani hanrapetut’yun, h. 4, Yer., 2016, 546 ej:

    Mark’s yev Engels, Yntir yerker, h. 1, Yer., «Hayastan» hrat., 1972, 776 ej:

    Mark’s yev Engels, Yntir yerker, h. 3, Yer., «Hayastan» hrat., 1978, 727 ej:

    Nzhdeh G., Yerker, h. 1, Yer., «Luysas» SPY tp., 2002, 504 ej:

    Nits’she Fridrikh, Yerker, hing hatorov, h. 2, germ. t’argm. Hakob Movses, Yer., «Antares», 2018, (612 ej), nuyny, h. 3, Yer., 2018, 680 ej:

    Voskanyan A., Ch’arents’i zhamanaky (patmut’yuny vorpes ink’nahaght’aharum), Yer., «P’rint’info», 2017, 373 ej:

    Plekhanov G., Patmut’yan materialistakan ymbrrnumy, T’iflis, HSKHH pethrat, 1928, 60 ej:

    Sargsyan A., P’ilisop’ayut’yan dasynt’ats’, 2-rd hrat, Yer., «Tntesaget» hrat., 2010, 524 ej:

    Blok M., Apologiya istorii ili remeslo istorika, izd. 2-ye, perevod Lisenko Ye. M., M., izd. «Nauka», 1986, 256 ēǰ:

    Veber M., Izbrannyye proizvedeniya, per. YU. N. Davydova, M., «Progress», 1990, 808 s.

    Gegel' G. , Entsiklopediya filosofskikh nauk, t. I, M., izd. «Mysl'», 1974, 452 s.

    Gegel' G., Sochineniya, t. IX, Leningrad, «Gosizdat», 1932. 319 s.

    Gegel' G., Sochineniya, (filosofiya istorii), t. VIII, perevod A. M. Vodena, M.-L., «Gosizdat», 1935. 470 s. Gegel' G., Lektsii po filosofii istorii, izd. 2-ye, perevod A. M. Vodena, SPb, izd. «Nauka», 2005, 480 s.

    Droyzen I., Istorika. Lektsii ob entsiklopedii i metodologii istorii, SPb, izd. «Vl. Dal'», 2004, 408 s.

    Istoriya Rossii. XX vek (1894-1939), otv. red., A. Zubov, M., 2009, izd. AST, 1023 s.

    Klyuchevskiy V., Kurs Russkoy istorii, t. I, M., 1987, izd. «Mysl'», 430 s.

    Kollingvud R. Dzh., Ideya istorii. Avtobiografiya, per. YU. A. Aseyeva, M., izd. «Nauka», 1980, 486 s.

    Marks i Engel's, Sochineniya, 2-ye izd., M., t. 20, M., «Gosizdat», 1961, t. 20.

    Rikkert G., Granitsy yestestvenno-nauchnogo obrazovaniya ponyatiy, perevod A. Vodena, SPb, izd. Ye. Kuskovoy, 1904, 615 s.

    Rikkert G., Filosofiya istorii, per. s nemetskogo S. Gessena, SPb, izd. D. Ye. Zhukovskogo, 1908, 154 s.

    Rikkert G., Filosofiya istorii, per. s nemetskogo S. Gessena, SPb, izd. D. Ye. Zhukovskogo, 1908, 154 s. Smolenskiy N., Teoriya i metodologiya istorii, M., izd. «Akademiya», 2007, 272 s.:

    Sokolov A., Istoriya istoricheskoy nauki, 2-ye izd., M., izd. «Yurayt», 2018, 270 s.

    Toynbi A., Postizheniye istorii (Sbornik), M., izd. «Progress», 1991, 736 s.

    Shpengler O., Zakat Yevropy, Rostov n/Donu, izd. «Feniks», 1998, 640 s.

    Fikhte I., Naznacheniye cheloveka, SPb, tip. «Montvida»,1906, 133 s.

    Fukuyama F., Konets istorii i posledniy chelovek, M., izd. «Yermak», 2005, 590 s.

    Yaspers K., Smysl i naznacheniya istorii, M., Politizdat, 1991, 527 s.

    https://mediamax.am (viewed: 01.05.24).

  • Articles

    Interdisciplinary approach to the study of the history of the Caucasus region

    Susanna Serobyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    In the past century and at the beginning of the 21st century, new disciplines were formed in historical science, conditioned by the use of new research approaches, principles and methods. The combination of the latest scientific approaches ensures the comprehensiveness of historical studies, creating an opportunity to study the past of societies from different perspectives and predict the future. In the article, the author discusses the necessity of applying an interdisciplinary approach to the study of local history, using the example of the Caucasian region. The author concludes that, at the present stage, a complex, in-depth, objective, and comprehensive study of the history of the Caucasus is impossible without an interdisciplinary understanding of historical events and phenomena. Only through such an approach is it possible to obtain objective scientific results, expand the boundaries of historical cognition, and form a complete and generalized scientific understanding of the Caucasian region’s role in world civilization.

    References

    Step’anyan A., Tartam ants’yalakanut’yunits’ depi patmut’yun, Tek’st, patum, meknut’yun, «VEm», t’iv 1. Ye., 2014:

    Stradling RR., Patmut’yan dasavandman bazmatesankyun motets’umy, Ye., 2008:

    K’ist’ J., Kronakan bazmazanut’yun yev mijmshakut’ayin haghordakts’ut’yun, Ye., 2007:

    Alekseyev M., Ocherki istorii otechestvennogo kavkazovedeniya, M., 2008.

    Berngeim E., Vvedeniye v istoricheskuyu nauku, M., 2011.

    Gadzhiyev K., Geopolitika Kavkaza, M., 2003.

    Potemkina M., Teoriya i metodologiya istorii, M., 2011.

    Pro A., Dvenadtsat' urokov po istorii, M., 2000.

    Teoriya i metodologiya istorii, pod red. A.I.Filyushkina, M., 2018.

    Shnirel'man V., Voyny pamyati. Mify, identichnost' i politika v Zakavkaz'ye, M., 2003.

  • Articles

    The Role of the Yerevan Faience Plant in Urban Lifestyle in the Middle of the XX Century

    Meri Avetisyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The integration of the Yerevan Faience Plant into Yerevan daily life is important for several reasons. Firstly, from the point of view of consumer services, the plant's products ensured the availability of necessary items for different social strata. However, it should be noted that thanks to its work, the plant went beyond the boundary of an entity of exclusively industrial importance and managed to take on other functions that were associated, in particular, with the formation of an urban lifestyle: for example, the plant managed to form a new level of taste and fashion in the society, formed a certain attitude towards utensils, taught people to bring beauty into everyday life.

    To the honor of the plant, it should be noted that the plant managed to solve the tasks assigned to it in the economic and socio-cultural sphere. Now, in connection with the new fashion standards and the variety of goods that the market offers, the plant's products are gradually being squeezed out of everyday life and transferred to museums. Despite this, the society continues to warmly treat the plant's products.

    References

    HAA, f.1451,c.2,t‘.5.

    HAA, f.1451,c.3,t‘.2-3.

    Grakan t‘ert‘ 1955, h.46, Zardê, S.Sekoyan,5.

    Erevan amsagir, 2014, h.29, Erevani hakhchapaku gordzaran. p‘khrun ew ankot‘run, E. Harut‘unyan, 8.

    Yerekoyan Erevan, 1964, h.123, G.Saloyan, 2.

    Khorhrdayin Gharabagh t‘ert‘ 1990, h.67, Gerakat‘arum, G.Grigoryan, 2-5.

    Hayrenik‘i dzayn1977, Haykakan hushanvernerê olimpiada-80-in, 2.

  • Articles

     “Khab u Khaz” in Armenian Industrial Culture

    Hasmik Harutyunyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

     

    A classic manifestation of economic cooperation in the Armenian dairying culture is the phenomenon of milk-lending, when a group of neighboring women of the community in a village or summer mountain pasture agree to process the milk in turn, giving their milk for the day to one of them. In the past, this phenomenon was widespread in various Armenian ethnographic regions; now it exists mainly in Shirak, Javakhk, and is known as khabukhaz. According to the accepted order, each of the participants of the group has a stick, on which the amount of milk is marked with notches.

    Milk-lending requires honest relations; otherwise it could not be held. Women even believed that the deceiver could suffer badly – cows will dry up, the milk will often curdle, spoil, and so on. This folk perception is vividly reflected in proverbs as well as in the medieval fable. Field materials prove that the cooperation of family members of the group is passed down from generation to generation.

    The cooperation can be considered a wonderful idea of an Armenian housewife to take care of the needs of living, an original manifestation of the skill of organizing the industrial culture.  The groups were formed during gatherings and discussions of neighboring women. This cultural phenomenon is additional evidence of the fact that the Armenian woman is also capable of social activities, she had an important role not only in the family, but also in the industrial culture.

    The main purpose of the cooperation was to prepare the annual supply of vital means of peasant’s livelihood, especially butter and cheese, which, without the formation of groups, was almost impossible to realize.

    References

    Acharean H. 1913, Hayerēn gawarakan bararan, Eminyan azgagrakan zh’oghovatsu, h. T’, Lazarean Chemaran Arewelean Lezowats‘,T’iflis, 1143 ēj [in Armenian].

    Aharonyan A. 1982, HRŌ kině, Yerkeri zh’oghovatsu, G, T’ehran, Armēn hrat. marmin, 408 ēj [in Armenian].

    Aghavni 1973, Shirak, Yerewan, Haypethrat, 847 ēj [in Armenian].

    Aghayan E. 1976, Ardi hayereni bats‘atrakan bararan, h. 1, Yerewan, Hayastan, 929 ēj [in Armenian].

    Andrēasean V. 1977, Ch‘armahal gawar, Nor Jugha, tp. Sb. Amenap‘rkich‘ van k‘i, 222 ēj [in Armenian].

    Baypurtts‘ean S. 1896, Sari giwghats‘iner: Nor Dar, T’iflis, 22.05.1896, 88, ēj 3 [in Armenian].

    Bdoyan V. 1963, Hay zh’oghovrdakan khagher, h. 1, Yerewan, HSSR GA hrat., 297 ēj [in Armenian].

    Bdoyan V. 1974, Hay azgagrut‘yun. Hamarot urvagits, Yerewan, Yerewani hamals. hrat., 288 ēj [in Armenian].

    Bdoyan V. 2014, Javakhk‘i hayots‘ azgagrut‘yuně ew zh’oghovrdakan banarvestě, Yerewan, YPH. hrat., 748 ēj [in Armenian].

    Gabikeaan K. 1952, Bargirk‘ sebastahay gawaralezowi, Yerusaghem, hrat. Hamasebastahay verashinats‘ miut‘ean Amerikayi, tp. Srbots‘ Hakobeants‘, 682 ēj [in Armenian].

    Gaspar H. 1892, Giwghatntesut‘yuně hay giwgherum. Kat‘natntesut‘yan masin: Nor Dar, T’iflis, 06.05.1892, 76, ēj 1-2[in Armenian].

    Geworgyan G. 1972, Ashtaraki azgagrakan nyut‘erě, Hnagitut‘yan ew azgagrut‘yan instituti arkhiv [aysuhetew` HAI] Arkh., Geworgyan G. f., g. 1, t‘. 86, Yerewan, dzeragir, [in Armenian].

    Ghanalanyan A. 1960, Aratsani, Yerewan, HSSR GA hrat., 398 ēj [in Armenian].

    Gosh M., Aygekts‘i V. 1896, Arakner: Dpr. Krtser ew mijin tarik‘i hamar: Yerewan, Luys, 79 ēj [in Armenian].

    Hakobyan G. 1974, Nerk‘in Baseni azgagrut‘yuně ew banahyusut‘yuně, Yerewan, Hajastan, 460 ēj [in Armenian].

    Hambardzumean V. 1927, Giwashkharh: Patmakan ew azgagrakan usumnasirutiwn, P‘ariz, tp. “Tarōn”, 280 ēj [in Armenian].

    Karakhanyan G. 2003, Hayots‘ zh’oghovrdakan mshakuyt‘ě. Hanragitaran, h. A, Yerewan, HH GAA “Gitut‘yun”, 322 ēj [in Armenian].

    K‘ōsean H. 1926, Bardzr Hayk‘, h. B, Karnoy giwgherě, Vienna, tp. Mkhit‘arean, 184 ēj [in Armenian].

    Malkhaseants‘ St. 1944, Hayerēn bats‘atrakan bararan, h. 2, Yerewan, Haykakan SSR Petakan Hratarakch‘ut‘yun, 512 ēj [in Armenian].

    Malkhaseants‘ St. 1945, Hayerēn bats‘atrakan bararan, h. 4, Yerewan, Haykakan SSR Petakan Hratarakch‘ut‘yun 647 ēj [in Armenian].

    Patrik A. 1975, Sebastahay gyughashkharhě, HAI Arkh., Patrik A. f., ts‘ 1, g. 1, t‘. 29, Yerewan, mek‘enagir[in Armenian].

    P‘olatean A. 1969, Patmut‘iwn hayots‘ Arabkiri, Niw Yeork‘, Amerikayi Arabkiri miut‘ean hrat., 1020 ēj [in Armenian].

    Sahakyan N. 1985, Sebastiayi nahangi Khurnavul gyughě ew ir avanduyt‘nerě, HAI Arkh., Sahakyan N. f., g. 1, t‘. 125, Yerewan, mek‘enagir[in Armenian].

    Sanasaryan N. 1965, Karno gavari azgagrakan nyut‘erě, HAI Arkh., Sanasaryan N. f., ts‘ 1, g. 1, t‘. 157, Yerewan, dzeragir, [in Armenian].

    Tēr-Grigorean Gr. 1910, Kat‘natntesut‘yuně Shirakum: Giwghatntes, T’iflis, 21.11.1910, ēj 646-649[in Armenian].

    T’orosean H. 1969, Patmut‘iwn hay Tomartsayi, h. B, Pēyrut‘, tp. Sewan, ēj 838-1786 [in Armenian].

    Vants‘ean G. 1896, Hay hamaynk‘i sovorut‘yunner, Murch, N 1, T’iflis, ēj 100-106[in Armenian].

    Zh’amanakakits‘ hayots‘ lezvi bats‘atrakan bararan 1980, h. 4, Yerewan, Haykakan SSH Gitut‘yunneri akademiayi hratarakch‘ut‘yun, 829 ēj [in Armenian].

  • Articles

    “Severe Style” in Suren Pipoyan’s Art (1960s–1980s)

    Lilit Pipoyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

     

    The art of Suren Pipoyan underwent several stages of development. Responding to the challenges of his time and in accordance with his personal aspirations, he created a unique artistic style. During the Khrushchev "Thaw," amidst the liberalization of art, Soviet artists, including Armenian ones, gained the opportunity to familiarize themselves with declassified collections of Western avant-garde art and to visit exhibitions, particularly of Mexican muralists, Picasso, Léger and others.

    During these years, Suren Pipoyan’s artistic style underwent significant changes, acquiring elements of Cubism and Expressionism. Combined with his academic education, this led him to the "Severe Style," which emerged in the 1960s and to which he, with some modifications, remained loyal throughout his creative career.

    In addition to the influences of contemporary Western art, this was also facilitated by the idea of "labor romanticism," which was widespread in the Soviet Union in the 1960s-70s, as well as the personal biography and philosophy of the artist, who endured childhood hardships and World War II. The "Severe Style," free from the polished, falsely optimistic ideas and overly detailed depictions of Socialist Realism, replaced it with a truthful and unembellished new realism.

    Suren Pipoyan created an entire series of multi-figure compositions [12 paintings are analysed here], whose general characteristics include labor romanticism, heroism, monumentality, and a restrained color palette. These works stand out with their geometricized forms, strong masculine figures, and expressive emotional intensity.

    In his paintings, Pipoyan addressed themes of labor, war, genocide, loneliness, struggle, as well as the image of the artist and intellectual.

    References

    Aghasyan A., Hay kerparvesti zargacman ughiner@ XIX-XX darerum.Voskan Yerevants'i hratarakch'ut'yun, Yerevan, 2009.

    Ayvazyan H., Vrdzin ev luys, Sovetakan Hayastan, #132, Yerevan, 1984.

    Duryan L., Guynerov kertvats zhamanak, Yerekoyan Yerevan, Yerevan, 1967, hoktemberi 10.

    Yerevan-2750, Steghtsagortst'yunneri katalog, Yerevan, 1968.

    Yerevani 2750-amyakin nvirvats ts'uts'ahandes, Sovetakan Hayastan, 1968, £12.

    Luvri kamarneri tak, Hayastan hratarakch'ut'yun, ¥erevan, 1974.

    Khaghaghut'yan pashtpanut'yan dirqerum, ts'uts'ahandesi katalog, yerevan, 1965.

    Harut'yunyan V., Suren Pipoyani steghtsagortsut'yunneri anhatakan ts'uts'ahandesi katalog, Hayastani nkarch'i tun, HHK kentkomi hratarakch'ut'yan tparan, Yerevan, 1982.

    Hayastani Sovetakan hanragitaran, Haykakan hanragitaran hratarakch'ut'yun, ht. 6, Yerevan, 1980.

    Ghazaryan M., Khach'ikyan Y., Nkarich'neræ` hobelyanin. Sovetakan Hayastan, 1 marti, 1970.

    Martirosyan J., Petq' e tesnel geghec’ik@, Avangard # 85, Yerevan, 1984.

    Manukyan A., Zhoghovrdic'' vec'ratsæ` zhoghovrdin. Yerekoyan Yerevan.Yerevan, 1986, og.8.

    Mekhakyan A, Mi nkari patmut'yun, Sovetakan hayastan, #118, Yerevan, 1971.

    Ov ov e, hayer, ht.2, Haykakan hanragitaran hratarakch'ut'yun, Yerevan, 2007.

    Pipoyan L., ''Khstashunch' voj@ haykakan kerparvestum, Yerevan, 2024.

    Pipoyan S., Oragir, dzeragir, @ntaniqi sep'akanut'yun.

    ''Pipoyan Suren»» patkeragirq, Zangak hratarakch'ut'yun, Yerevan, 2018.

    Sargsyan L., Qaghaqakani ev geghagitakani mijev.hay geghankarchutyunæ 'Dznhali'' hamateqstum. Khorhrdahay mshakuyt'æ. konc'eptæ, ænkalumner'n u drsevorumneræ, hodvatsneri zhoghovatsu, Yerevan, EPH hratarakchut'yun, 2023.

    http://lib.ysu.am/open_books/418532.pdf hghman taret'iv 23, 2023.

    Step'anyan, Xudozhniki-armjanje v prostranstvje russkoy kul'turiy XX veka, Hay arvesti harts'er, #2, Yerevan, 2009.

    Bobrikov A., Surovij stil': mobilizacija i kul'turnaya revoljucija. Khudozhestvennyj zhurnal, Moskva, 2003, #51/52.

    Burunova V., Proizvedenija khudozhnikov Gruzinskoj, Azerbajdzhanskoj i Armjanskoj SSR.Katalog. Moskva, tipografija Izdatel'stva «Sovetskij khudozhnik», 1954.

    Vtoraja vsesojuznaja vystavka diplomnykh rabot khudozhestvennykh institutov SSSR vypuska 1953 goda, katalog. https://maslovka.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=1444&page=13

    D'akonicyna A, Nikonov P., Dvizhenie k svobode. Zhurnal tet'jakovskaja galereja, # 2, 2019 [63].

    Zhivopis'. Skul'ptura. Grafika. Satira. Plakat. Vsesojuznaja jubilejnaja vystavka, izdatel'stvo Sovetskij khudozhnik, Moskva, 1965.

    Izobrazitel’noe iskusstvo Sovetskoj Armenii. Vsesojuznaja jubilejnaja vystavka “50 let Sovetskoj vlasti». Yerevan, 1974.

    Izobrazitel'noe iskusstvo Sovetskoj Armenii, Vsesojuznajq jubilejnajq vystavka '’50 let Sovetskoj vlasti'', Yerevan, 1974.

    Kamenskij A., Surovyj i prekrasnyj mir, Tvorchestvo,

    Kamenskij A., Pora razobrat'sja! Moskva, gazeta Sovetskij khudizhnik, 1962, #1.

    Kozorezenko P., Orlov I.I., problema istoriografii sovetskoj zhivopisi “surovogo stilja”, mezhdunarodnyj zhurnal eksperimental'nogo obrazovanijq, 2020, #2.

    Manin V., Surovyj stil' i ego modifikacii, v knige Russkaja zhivopis' XX veka, tom 3, Spb, izdatel'stvo Avrora, 2007.

    Sargsjan l., Znachenie impressionizma v armjanskoj zhivopisi XX veka: tradicii i innovacii. 2017, al'bom-katalog vystavki «Armqnskij impessionizm.ot Moskvy do parizha.» Muzej impressionizma, Moskva, 25.03 – 4.06, 2017.

    Florkovskaja A., Abstraktnoe iskusstvo – eto khuliganstvo v mirovom masshtabe. Sovremennoe francuzskoe iskusstvo na vystavkakh v Moskve [1957, 1961]. Iskusstvoznanie, 2016, # 4. http://www.artpanorama.su/?category=article&show=article&id=48 Hghman taret'iv 19.01.2024:

    Erenburg I., Ottepel', Moskva, Sovetskij pisatel', 1956.

    Vern G. Swanson. Soviet Impressionism. Woodbridge, England: Antique Collectors' Club, 2001.

  • Articles

    The Military Coup of September 12, 1980, in Turkey and Political Developments

    Hayk Petrosyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    On September 12, 1980, the military coup that took place showed the unstable situation inside the country. It should also be noted that the elite of the Turkish army, before starting the military coup, had intensive meetings with high-ranking US statesmen for a long time. In the end, after all this was successfully accomplished, the perpetrators of the military coup became the government in the country. Thereby, the "Kurdish movement" was also eliminated, which was also discussed by the military elite. Political parties were not banned, but their public activities were banned; the actual political life was in the hands of the military elite.

     

    References

    Dumanyan A., 1980 T’vakani Rrazmakan Heghashrjumy T’urk’iayum. Patcharrnery, Ynt’ats’k’y, Hetevank’nery, Yerevan, 2016, ej 102-103:

    T’urk’iayi Hanrapetut’yan patmut’yun, Buhakan dasgirk’, Yer., 2018, ej 241:

    Petunts’ A․, T’urk’iayi K’aghak’ats’iakan ishkhanut’yun-banak p’vokhharaberut’yunnery 20-rd dari yerkrord kes 21-rd dari skizb. 2016 t’vakani rrazmakan heghashrjman p’vordzy, Arevelagitut’yan Harts’er, № 13, 2017, ej 142.

    Gasratyan M., Kurdy Turtsii v noveysheye vremya, Yerevan, 1990, str. 306.

    Danilov V., Turtsiya 80-kh : ot voyennogo rezhima do “ogranichennoy demokratii”, Moskva, 1991, ctr. 48.

    Danilov V, Politicheskaya bor'ba v Turtsii: 50-ye - nachalo 80-kh godov KHKH v. (politicheskiye partii i armiya). Moskva, 1985, str. 244-245.

    Yagudin B., Gosudarstvennyy perevorot 12 sentyabrya 1980 goda v Turtsii // Uchonyye zapiski Kazanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta: gumanitarnyye nauki, 2008, t. 150, kn. 1, str․ 207.

    Danilov V., Turtsiya 80-kh : ot voyennogo rezhima do “ogranichennoy demokratii”, str. 58.

    Ganser D. NATO's Secret armies. Operation gladio and terrorism in Western Europe. London: Frank Cass, 2005, p.235․

    Karabelias G., The Evolution of Civil-Military Relation of Post-war Turkey: 1980-95, Middle Eastern Studies, Oct. 1999, p. 134.

    Middle East Contemporary Survey, Vol. 6, 1981-82. New York, 1984, p. 885-886.

    Hale W., Turkish Politics and the Military, London, 1994, p. 247.

    Danilov V., Turtsiya 80-kh : ot voyennogo rezhima do “ogranichennoy demokratii”, str. 74.

    Kremnyuk V., Bor'ba Vashingtona protiv revol yutsii v Irane, Moskva, 1984, str. 157-158.

    Potskhveriya B., Turtsiya, SSHA i NATO v kontse 70-kh – nachale 80-kh godov, Turtsiya. Istoriya, ekonomika, politika, Moskva, 1984, str. 86.

    Çölaşan E., 24 Ocak Bir Dömenin Perde Arkası, İstanbul, 1983, s. 57-73.

    Alatlı E., Müdahale 12 Mart 1971-12 Eylül 1980, s. 398.

    Oran B., Kenan Evren’in Yazılmamış Anıları, Ankara, 1990, s. 33

    Sotnichenko A., Osobennosti modernizatsii v Turtsii, Sankt-Peterburg: Izdatel'stvo Yevropeyskogo universiteta v Sankt-Peterburge, 2009. — 44 s. — (Seriya preprintov; M-11/09; Tsentr issledovaniy modernizatsii). https://eusp.org/sites/default/files/archive/centres/M-center/M_11-09.pdf mutkʻ, 09․12․2023

  • Articles

    The Culture of Civil Participation as a Prerequisite for Democratization and Institutionalization of Civil Society in the Republic of Armenia (1991-2019)

    Arnak Sargsyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    Political participation is one of the main concepts in the study of political science, and at different times a number of theorists have interpreted it with a different theoretical and methodological approach. As a result of modern socio-political transformations, the theoretical analysis of the problem of participation shows that under the conditions of globalization, the forms and principles of people's involvement in political life are gradually changing, and the traditional tools and concepts of the exercise of power are being revised. The full interaction of civil society institutions with other actors of the socio-political system gradually leads to the institutionalization of participation and the provision of operational procedures. That is, each of the institutions, cooperating with other elements of the social system (legal, social, economic, political, etc.), will be able to provide structures of a civilized civil society.

    References

    Թադևոսյան Գ., Չալոյան Ա., Ղազարյան Դ., Քաղաքացիական ներգրավվածության և մասնակցության ինստիտուցիոնալացման հեռա¬նկարները զարգացման ծրագրերի համատեքստում, Հայաստանյան փորձի վերլուծություն, Ե., 2008, 95 էջ:

    «ՀԿ-ների մասին» ՀՀ օրենք, 22.10.1996:

    «ՀԽ մասին» ՀՀ օրենք, 07.03.2018, http://publiccouncil.am/hy/legal-acts/ հասանելի՝ 01.04.18:

    «ՀԿ-ների մասին» ՀՀ օրենք, 16.12.2016:

    «Քաղաքացիական հասարակության կազմակերպությունների զարգացման ինստիտուցիոնալ և օրենսդրական բարեփոխումների հայեցակարգ» ՀՀ կառավարության 2014 թ. սեպտեմբերի 25-ի նիստի № 40 արձանագրային որոշում, հավելված 1:

    Соколов А., Современные институты молодежной политики в Европе: история становления и развития, Вестник международных организаций, 2009, № 1 (23), с. 84-99.

    Adler R., Goggin J., What do we mean by “Civic engagement”? Journal of Transformative Education, 3 (3), 2005, pp. 236-253.

    Dalton R., The Good Citizen. How a Younger Generation Is Reshaping American Politics, CQ Press., Washington D.C., 2008, 256 p.

    Ishkanian A., Reclaiming the emancipatory potential of civil society: a critical examination of civil society and democracy building programs in Armenia since 1991, Armenian review, 51 (1-4), 2009, ISSN 0004-2366, pp. 9-34:

    Owen D., Political Socialization in the Twenty-first Century. Paper presented for presentation at “The Future of Civic Education in the 21st Century” conference cosponsored by the Center for Civic Education, James Madison’s Montpelier, September 21-26, 2008, pp. 1-23.

    The Participatory Approaches Learning Study (PALS) Overview Report (International NGO Training and Research Centre), For the Department of International Development, UK, October 1999, 27 p.

  • Articles

    The Threat of Destruction of Cultural Objects of Unrecognized Countries on the Example of the Republic of Artsakh

    Sona Melkumyan, Gayane Petrosyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    There are more than 20 countries in the world that aren’t internationally recognized. Along with the legal and economic problems, unrecognized states face the threat of cultural independence. In the context of interregional conflicts, global crises, cultural objects of unrecognized states are being destroyed In this article the object of the study is the cultural heritage of Artsakh, which was and is being destroyed by the Azerbaijani forces after the war of 2020. This article considers ways to prevent the destruction of cultural property of unrecognized countries and the role of international organizations, the purpose of whose activities is to preserve and develop cultural and humanitarian interactions.

    References

    Braterskiy M., Skriba A.S., Sapogova A.I., «Bor'ba za priznaniye ili povysheniye statusa: usloviya ustoychivosti i razvitiya nepriznannykh gosudarstv [na primere Yevrazii]», Vestnik mezhdunarodnykh organizatsiy, No 3, 2021.

    Sokolov S., «Klassifikatsiya nepriznannykh i chastichno priznannykh gosudarstv mira», Zhurnal «Poznaniye stran mira: istoriya, kul'tura, dostizheniya», No 2, 2013.

    Barsegov Y., «Nagornyy Karabakh v mezhdunarodnom prave i mirovoy politike», Moskva, 2008.

    Kostyukova A., Kostyukova P., «Mezhdunarodnyye mezhpravitel'stvennyye organizatsii v oblasti zashchity kul'turnykh tsennostey», Zhurnal «Nauchnyye izvestiya», 2016.

    «Konventsiya o zashchite kul'turnykh tsennostey v sluchaye vooruzhennogo konflikta», Gaaga, 14 maya 1954 goda.

    «Konventsiya ob okhrane vsemirnogo kul'turnogo i prirodnogo naslediya», 16 noyabrya 1972 goda.

    Monitoring kul'turnogo naslediya Artsakha. https://monumentwatch.org/en/.

    Rimskiy statut Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda, https://www.un.org/ru/law/icc.

  • Articles

    Security Issues of the South Caucasus in the Context of the Israel–Iran Conflict

    Eduard Zohrabyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    In the context of contemporary geopolitical and geo-economic realignments, the South Caucasus, with its strategic significance and importance, has become a focal point for the interests of regional players and major power centers. The encounter and intersection of these often conflicting interests, along with opposing stances on the formation of the region's new military-political architecture, render the South Caucasus security complex even more sensitive and fragile. The scientific study of these new realities is of paramount relevance, particularly when analyzed through the prism of the multilayered and fluctuating relations between Iran and Israel.

    These two countries, with historical paths spanning millennia, possess distinct political, socio-cultural, and demographic profiles, as well as differing perceptions of the essence of statehood. Their relations have evolved through several historical stages. Iran recognized the State of Israel as early as 1950. Starting in the 1950s, the intelligence services of both countries began to cooperate, and in 1959, they signed a memorandum of understanding regarding cooperation in defense and intelligence. During those years, Israel supported Iran's nuclear programs. After the Islamic Revolution of 1979, their relationship shifted drastically, transforming from the clandestine cooperation of the Pahlavi era into open hostility. This dramatic change was driven by the change of regime in Iran and its new ideological foundations, which were anti-Zionist in nature. In the post-Soviet years, the divergent interests and conflictual interactions of these two key regional actors have posed serious threats not only to the Middle East but also to the countries of the South Caucasus, specifically to the security of the Republic of Armenia.

    References

    Գրականության ցանկ

    Monographs

    Bayburdyan V․, Irani patmut’yun, Yerevan 2002.

    «Hayastani Hanrapetut’yan teghy yev dery Irani Islamakan Hanrapetut’yan taratsashrjanayin k’aghak’akanut’yan volortum» Hayagitut’yan ardi vichaky yev zargats’man herrankarnery, zekuts’umneri zhoghovatsu, Yerevan 2004․

    Iskandaryan G․, Hayastan-Iran haraberut’yunnery Hayastani ankakhut’yan dzerrk’berumits’ heto (1991-2014 t’t’․) Yerevan, 2016 .

    Israyelyan A․, Iran-Adrbejan haraberut’yunnery k’sanamya patmap’ulum (2003-2023), Yerevan, 2023. Melk’vonyan R․, Geghamyan V․, T’urani chanaparhi Haykakan sepy․ « Zangezuri mijants’k’i» himnaharts’y, Yerevan, 2025.

    Khalif-zade M.,Vneshnaya politika Velikobritanii i yadernaya programma Irana., tstr. 70-76, 2(44) 2006.;

    Khalifzade M., Izrail' I Azerbaydzhan: protivodeystviya Iranu, Tsentral'naya Aziya I Kavkaz, Tom 15, Vypusk 3, 2012․

    Ivanov S., Irano izrail'skiy koflikt- odin iz glavnykh ugroz mezhdunarodnoy bezopasnosti, Diplomatitseskaya sluzhba, Moskva, N04, 2024․

    Musabekov R., Korruptsiya v Azerbaydzhane , Tsentral'naya Aziya i Kavkaz, 1(7)․

    Yakimova Y․, Protsess institutsonalizatsii azebayydzhano-izrail'skikh otnosheniy, Nizhniy Novgorod, 2014․

    Ryzhov I., Kharakter vneshnepolititseskoy deyatel'nosti gosudarstva Izrail' v otnoshenii stran tsentral'no Aziatskskogo region (1992-2000 gg.), Nizhnyy Novgorod, 2009.

    Articles

    Iskandaryan G․, Hayastani yev Irani motets’umnery taratsashrjanayin nor martahravernerin, Haravkovkasyan taratsashrjanum uzhayin haraberakts’ut’yan p’vokhakerpumy yev Arts’akhyan 2020 t’, paterazmy, Git․ Hodvatsneri zhoghovatsu, HH GGA, Yerevan 2025.

    Khalafyan N․, Israyel yev Iran bazmashert haraberut’yunner, Analitikon, handes mtatsogh yev voch’ antarber mardkants’ hamar, MARUT, 2017.

    Veranyan K․, Iran-Israyel mijnordavorvats paterazmy, (https;//orbeli.am/hy/author/50).

    Tonoyan A, Adrbejani artak’in k’aghak’akanut’yan himnakan ughghut’yunnery yev arrandznahatkut’yunnery (1991-2023t’t’․), Haravkovkasyan taratsashrjanum uzhayin haraberakts’ut’yan p’vokhakerpumy yev Arts’akhyan 2020 t’. paterazmy, Git․ Hodvatsneri zhoghovatsu, HH GGA, Yerevan 2025:

    Press materials

    «Azg» orat’ert’, t’iv 170, 2009-09-23

    «Azg» orat’ert’, t’iv 121, 2009-07-01:

    «Azg» orat’ert’, t’iv 42, 30-05-2006:

    Uzi Arad. «Bak’vi anvtangut’yuny mez hamar nuynk’an karevor e, vork’an T’el Aviviny», «Azg» orat’ert’, t’iv 42, 12-11-2021:

    Electronic sources

    Changing Geopolitics of the South Caucasus after the Second Karabakh War. Prospect for Regional Cooperation and/or Rivalry - Chr. Michelsen Institute, дата последнего обращения: мая 18, 2025, https://www.cmi.no/publications/8911-changing-geopolitics-of-the-south-caucasus-after-the-second-karabakh-war․

    The Geopolitical Gordian Knot of the South Caucasus | The EU in ..., дата последнего обращения: мая 18, 2025, https://www.clingendael.org/pub/2023/the-eu-in-the-south-caucasus/1-the-geopolitical-gordian-knot-of-the-south-caucasus/․

    South Caucasus, in the shadow of Ukraine - Chr. Michelsen Institute, дата последнего обращения: мая 18, 2025, https://www.cmi.no/news/3185-south-caucasus-in-the-shadow-of-ukraine․

    Shifting Sands: From Alliance to Adversity Tracing Iranian-Israeli Relations before the Islamic Revolution and Envisioning Futur, дата последнего обращения: мая 18, 2025, https://www.ojs.pssr.org.pk/journal/article/download/831/648․

    The long history between Israel and Iran - NPR, дата последнего обращения: мая 18, 2025, https://www.npr.org/2024/04/21/1246236286/the-long-history-between-israel-and-iran․

    Geopolitics and illicit economies in the South Caucasus | Global Initiative, дата последнего обращения: мая 18, 2025, https://globalinitiative.net/analysis/geopolitics-and-illicit-economies-in-the-south-caucasus/․

    Israelis watch closely as Iran protests https://p.dw.com/p/2qKxM (մուտք՝ 19.11.22)․

    Sources of Israel's Policy in the Caucasus Carnegie Endowment for ..., https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2015/02/sources-of-israels-policy-in-the-caucasus?lang=en (մուտք՝ 31․ 08․25)․

    Why Azerbaijan is important for Israel's security - JNS.org, https://www.jns.org/why-azerbaijan-is-important-for-israels-security/(մուտք՝ 31․ 08․25)․

    The Air and Missile War in Nagorno-Karabakh: Lessons for the ..., https://www.csis.org/analysis/air-and-missile-war-nagorno-karabakh-lessons-future-strike-and-defense(մուտք՝ 31․ 08․25)․

    Armenian-Israeli Relations and the Geopolitics of the Middle East, https://is.cuni.cz/studium/dipl_st/index.php?id=&tid=&do=main&doo=detail&did=266975(մուտք՝ 31․ 08․25)․

    U.S. policy in the South Caucasus: Keep Turkey in, Russia down and Iran out, https://armenianweekly.com/2025/08/11/u-s-policy-in-the-south-caucasus-keep-turkey-in-russia-down-and-iran-out/(մուտք՝ 31․ 08․25)․

    T’ehrany «Yerusaghemi hrrch’akagiry» gnahatum e vorpes Merdzavor Arevelk’i sparrnalik’ https://armenpress.am/arm/news/1088323.html (mutk’, 19.11.22)․

    «Israyeli het Adrbejani haraberut’yunnery sarrts’alerr yen hishets’num, aveli khorn yen, k’an yerevum yen» https://azg.am/am/2021052104/ (mutk’, 19.11.22)․

    https://twitter.com/georgedeek/status/1549774617061036034 (mutkʻ, 19.11.22)․

    V Irane zhurnalistok, pisavshikh o smerti Amini, obvinili v gosizmenehttps://www.svoboda.org/a/v-irane-zhurnalistok-pisavshih-o-smerti-mahsy-amini-obvinili-v-gosizmene/32107382.html (mutkʻ, 19.11.22)․

    Konflikt Irana i Izrailya zatronul Kipr i Azerbaydzhan https://www.svoboda.org/a/konflikt-irana-i-izrailya-zatronul-kipr-i-azerbaydzhan/32119209.html (mutkʻ, 19.11.22)․

    Agayev V., Iran: studencheskiye volneniya privlekayut vse bol'she sochuvstvuyushchikh, 13.06.2003 https://p.dw.com/p/3kOy (mutkʻ, 19.11.22)․

  • Articles

    Linguistic and stylistic peculiarities of Armenian translations of J.W.Goethe's poetic works

    Vardush Makichyan , Naira Shchilvyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    The article studies the linguistic and linguistic-stylistic features of translations of J.W.Goethe's poetic works into Armenian. The main attention in the study is paid to the comparative analysis of linguistic features of Armenian translations of "Faust" and some famous poetic works of Goethe - on the material of translations made by P. Mikayelyan, as well as by the great Armenian poets Hovhannes Tumanyan and E. Charents. Despite the significant difference between the linguistic structures of the German and Armenian languages, their rhythmic and melodic structure, these authors managed to reach the top of the translation art. The translations under study make it possible to reveal the linguistic and stylistic features that enabled their authors to not only convey the content of these works as accurately as possible, but also to preserve the poetic spirit and artistic uniqueness of the original.

    References

    Goethe J. W., "Faust", Part I, Yerevan, 1963 (trans. P. Mikaelyan) p. 67.

    Goethe W., Weimar Lyre. Poems. "Soviet Writer" Publishing House, Yerevan, 1985, p. 18.

    Tumanyan H., Selected Works, "The Rose", Volume 1, "Soviet Writer", Yerevan 1985, p. 139.

    Tumanyan H., Selected Works, "Lerats Serar", Volume 1, "Soviet Writer", Yerevan, 1985, p. 143.

    Goethe J. W. Faust. München, Verlag C.H. Beck, 1994, S.47

    Goethe J. W. Ein Lesebuch für unsere Zeit, Berlin und Weimar, AufbauVerlag, 1976, S.5.

    Sigal N. A., YAzyk i stil' molodigo Gete, Uchenyye zapisi Leningradskogo univesiteta, 1958, str. 157.

Book Review

  • Book Review

    History as a Process of Formation and Comprehension of American IdentityReflections on Tigran Yepremian’s university textbook “History of the United States of America”

    Smbat Hovhannisyan, Albert Stepanyan, Karen Gasparyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

     

    The article examines Tigran Yepremian's university textbook "History of the United States of America," analyzing it from both research and pedagogical perspectives. The authors present the fundamental methodological approaches of the textbook, emphasizing its interdisciplinary methodology, the study of American identity paradigms, the examination of crises as catalysts for development, and the analysis of state institutional functions. Besides these institutional issues, the textbook discusses the historical development of the principal elements of American national identity – science and technology, culture and religion, social psychology and civil liberties based on modern humanities. In this view, the problems of American elite groups, various social movements, and outstanding personalities are carefully interpreted in the textbook. The concern with the significant aspects of the history-teaching activity occupies a central position in Yepremian’s textbook. It aims to develop a critical approach for students to the process of American history and its principal lessons to be learned and modeled as the important issues of training in history and humanities. All the said highlight the significance of Yepremian’s textbook for students and the general public.

    References

    Եփրեմյան, Տ. (2024). ԱՄՆ պատմություն․ դասագիրք. Երևան: ԵՊՀ հրատարակչություն.

    Bailyn, B․ (1992) The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution, Cambridge․ MA: Harvard University Press․

    Brzezinski, Zb․ (2012). Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power. New York: Basic Books.

    Certeau, M․ de (1988). The Writing of History /Translated by Tom Conley. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Huntington, S. P. (2004). Who Are We?: The Challenges to America's National Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Kagan, R․ (2012). The World America Made. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Lee, P. (2004). Theorizing Historical Consciousness. in: Seixas, P. (Ed.)․ (2004)․ Theorizing Historical Consciousness․ Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Seixas, P. (2004). Theorizing Historical Consciousness. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Wood. (2011). The Idea of America: Reflections on the Birth of the United States. New York; : Penguin Press.

View All Issues

The articles cover diverse issues on Armenian and world history, archaeology and ethnography, art, culture, as well as on Armenian diaspora. Hence,  the corresponding sections of History, Archaeology and Ethnography, Art and Culture, Diaspora Studies. The journal also includes  reviews and  materials about  the merited scholars.  There are pages  commemorating and appraising the work of those  who  passed away.

The journal is released twice a year.