By: Khnkikyan Onik Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography NAS RA

Until now the studies aimed on the elucidation of the relationship between the Urartian and Ervandid periods of the history of the Armenian Highland, due to scanty sources have brought to contradictory views. One of the main obstacles for the study of this relationship should be regarded the insufficient understanding of the periphery of both kingdoms, despite their importance. Taking into account the importance of the task, the present article is an attempt to bring together the results of archaeological investigations conducted in north-eastern Armenia and their supplementation with scanty written data.

Download
pdf (0.83 MB)

By: Verjiné Svazlian Doctor on Philology, Leading Researcher Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, NAS RA

The oral tradition of the Armenians of Istanbul, which is a constituent part of the oral culture of the Armenian people, has developed during centuries with the general principles of the folklore of the Armenian people; however, along with the generalities and the similarities, it has embraced very peculiar and original properties due to the historical-public life of the past and of the present they have lived.
From the representatives of the Armenian community in Istanbul (during my sojourn in Turkey), as well as from former natives of Istanbul living now in Armenia, belonging to the various sex and age groups, I have written down about 1.570 units of large and small materials of oral tradition.
Under the conditions of the present cultural disintegration of the Armenians in the Diaspora, these ethnographic fragments I have written down on my own initiative and saved them from a total loss become, owing to their historical-cognitive value, the material evidences of the traditionalistic level of the contemporary Armenians of Istanbul.

Download
pdf (1.42 MB)

By: Knarik Avakian Institute of History of NAS RA

As a consequence of the protracted and devastating war launched by the terrorist forces in 2011, thousands of Armenian-Syrians have taken shelter among other countries (Lebanon, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, the USA, Canada, Sweden, etc.) also in the Motherland, in the Republics of Armenia and Artsakh (Karabagh).
The present geo-political challenges should further promote the reevaluation of the pan-Diasporan priorities, in order to radically revise and reorganize, in a moral-psychological, ideological-practical sense, the communal life in the Diaspora. That epoch-making mission should resolutely and urgently be assumed both by the Diaspora with all its structures, the Armenian Church (Apostolic, Evangelical, Catholic), the national parties (Social Democrat Party - SDP Hunchakian, Armenian Revolutionary Federation – ARF Dashnaktsutyun, Armenian Democratic Liberal Party - ADLP Ramkavar), the pan-Armenian benevolent organizations, all the Diasporan unions and clubs, the Armenian mass media in Armenian and foreign languages (the press, radio, television, internet), the educational institutions and the Motherland Armenia (RA and AR) with its state, ecclesiastical, public and other levers, to guide and to coordinate all the joint efforts.

Download
pdf (0.57 MB)

By: Danielyan Eduard Institute of History of NAS RA

The historical-geographic environment of the Armenian nation from the earliest times embraced the Armenian Highland and adjacent territories between the Black Sea in the north, the Mediterranean Sea in the south-west and the Caspian Sea in the east. Armenia is a country of mountainous landscape with mountain ranges, plateaus and high peaks. Above all tower the summits of the huge extinct volcanic massif of the Ararat Mountains: Mount Great Ararat-Masis, and Little Ararat (Sis, 3925 m).

The complete system of the Armenian ethno-geographic names characterizes the natural-historic environment and cultural and social-political history of Armenia Haiastan - the cradle and the Homeland of the Armenian Nation. Armenia and the Armenian statehood have been attested in ancient (the 3rd millennium BC-3rd c. AD) and medieval historical sources under the names of Aratta (Ararat), Armanum (Armani, cf. Armi, Arme), Hayasa, Nairi, Ararat (Kingdom of Van-Urartu), Armina, the kingdoms of Great Armenia (320 thousand km2) and Armenia Minor (80 thousand km2), as well as the Armenian State of Cilicia (in 1080-1198 - the Armenian Princedom, in 1198-1375 - the Armenian Kingdom, 40 thousand km2, the capital Sis) in the region of the Cilician Taurus - the natural continuation of the Armenian (Eastern) Taurus.

Great Armenia, Armenia Minor and Kilikia included correspondingly the whole territory of the Armenian Highland, adjacent Armenian (Northern) Mesopotamia, as well as the costal zones of the Black, Caspian and Mediterranean seas. A research on the Ottoman documents and publications revealed that “the government of Sultan Abdul Hamid II fallaciously substituted for the name Armenia such terms as Kurdistan or Anatolia” and Turkish forgers started to use wrongly “Eastern Anatolia” (instead of Western Armenia) in Turkish official documents and pseudo-scientific literature. They falsify even former Ottoman publications and maps in which Armenia is mentioned. Contrary to such a fraud the truth is that the word stem of the term “Anatolia” is the Greek word “east” and “Anatolia” relates only to Asia Minor.

Over the centuries the enemies seized the most part of the Armenian territories. The greatest human and territorial losses took place particularly because of Turkish genocidal policy since the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the Ottoman Empire resulting in the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1923 committed by the Young Turk and Kemalist regimes. In both the Soviet and post-Soviet periods falsifications of the history of Armenia and its place names have also been perpetrated by the artificially introduced unit of “Azerbaijan”. After the Artsakh Liberation War (1991-1994) the defeated aggressive Republic of Azerbaijan has been using these falsifications in the militaristic propaganda against the Republic of Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (the NKR) (Artsakh). The Republic of Armenia (29.743 km2) and the Republic of Artsakh (12.000 km2) together constitute the one-thirteenth part of the Armenian lands in the north-east of the Armenian Highland.

The historical-geographic environment of the Armenian nation from the earliest times embraced the Armenian Highland and adjacent territories between the Black Sea in the north, the Mediterranean Sea in the south-west and the Caspian Sea in the east. Armenia is a country of mountainous landscape with mountain ranges, plateaus and high peaks. Above all tower the summits of the huge extinct volcanic massif of the Ararat Mountains: Mount Great Ararat-Masis, and Little Ararat (Sis, 3925 m).

The complete system of the Armenian ethno-geographic names characterizes the natural-historic environment and cultural and social-political history of Armenia Haiastan - the cradle and the Homeland of the Armenian Nation. Armenia and the Armenian statehood have been attested in ancient (the 3rd millennium BC-3rd c. AD) and medieval historical sources under the names of Aratta (Ararat), Armanum (Armani, cf. Armi, Arme), Hayasa, Nairi, Ararat (Kingdom of Van-Urartu), Armina, the kingdoms of Great Armenia (320 thousand km2) and Armenia Minor (80 thousand km2), as well as the Armenian State of Cilicia (in 1080-1198 - the Armenian Princedom, in 1198-1375 - the Armenian Kingdom, 40 thousand km2, the capital Sis) in the region of the Cilician Taurus - the natural continuation of the Armenian (Eastern) Taurus.

Great Armenia, Armenia Minor and Kilikia included correspondingly the whole territory of the Armenian Highland, adjacent Armenian (Northern) Mesopotamia, as well as the costal zones of the Black, Caspian and Mediterranean seas. A research on the Ottoman documents and publications revealed that “the government of Sultan Abdul Hamid II fallaciously substituted for the name Armenia such terms as Kurdistan or Anatolia” and Turkish forgers started to use wrongly “Eastern Anatolia” (instead of Western Armenia) in Turkish official documents and pseudo-scientific literature. They falsify even former Ottoman publications and maps in which Armenia is mentioned. Contrary to such a fraud the truth is that the word stem of the term “Anatolia” is the Greek word “east” and “Anatolia” relates only to Asia Minor.

Over the centuries the enemies seized the most part of the Armenian territories. The greatest human and territorial losses took place particularly because of Turkish genocidal policy since the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the Ottoman Empire resulting in the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1923 committed by the Young Turk and Kemalist regimes. In both the Soviet and post-Soviet periods falsifications of the history of Armenia and its place names have also been perpetrated by the artificially introduced unit of “Azerbaijan”. After the Artsakh Liberation War (1991-1994) the defeated aggressive Republic of Azerbaijan has been using these falsifications in the militaristic propaganda against the Republic of Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (the NKR) (Artsakh). The Republic of Armenia (29.743 km2) and the Republic of Artsakh (12.000 km2) together constitute the one-thirteenth part of the Armenian lands in the north-east of the Armenian Highland.

Download
pdf (1.04 MB)

By: Galichian Rouben Honorary Doctor

In this article, the author will attempt to present a balanced, unbiased historic and cartographic view to the reader interested in enhancing their knowledge of how and when the historically Armenian–populated region of Karabagh (Artsakh - in Armenian) was described by various world-famous geographers and depicted by famed cartographers. For this reason, maps reproduced in the article (with the exception of the first image and the first map) are selected from the works of non-Armenian geographers and cartographers, whose maps form the basis of the world cartographic heritage. These documents have been sourced from various libraries across the world.

Download
pdf (7.78 MB)

By: Aram Kosyan Doctor in History, Institute of Oriental Studies, NAS RA

During the whole historical period the plain of Erznka (Erzincan in modern maps) which is located along the Euhprates-Tigris contact zone had played an exceptional role in the political, economic and religious life of the Armenian Highland. The present study is an attempt to bring together the geographical, ecological, archaeological and written sources in regard to the plain of Erznka which allows to draw a general outline of the political and cultic-religious realities of the region. During at least from the II mill. BC until the early Middle Ages the plain of Erznka was distinguished first of all as a prominent cultic-religious center located in the north of the Upper Euphrates valley, at the junction between the Transcaucasian world with Central Anatolia, and with Syria-Mesopotamia through the Elâzığ-Malatya.

Download
pdf (0.26 MB)

By: Melkonyan Ashot Institute of History of NAS RA

In the year of the hundredth anniversary of the Armenian Genocide the interest of the world public in this issue has increased significantly. This was due both to the need to highlight a number of dark pages of the age-old history of the World War I, and to study in detail the issue of genocide in the modern world.
In the year of the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, thanks to the joint efforts of the relevant structures of Russia, Armenia and other countries, it was finally possible to inform the world community about the principled approach of one of the great world powers - Russia on the Armenian Genocide, in the name of fraternal, strategic Russian-Armenian centuries-old relations. By virtue of one of the points of this statement, April 24 "as a day of memory of the victims of the genocide" is celebrated at the state level in Russia.

Download
pdf (0.14 MB)

By: Ruben Safrastyan Institute of Oriental Studies, NAS RA

The article will be centered on the last week of May 1915. This week was largely rich in events and needed a detailed study. At the beginning of the week the Entente powers - France, Great Britain and Russia issued a Joint Declaration, sharply condemning the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. In a few days it was followed by the adoption of the “Resolution” and “The Law” of deportation by the Ottoman government. In the meantime, Turkey, led by Germany, began preparations for diplomatic response of Ottoman government to the Declaration.

Download
pdf (0.13 MB)

By: Brant James

James Brant was British Consul first in Trebizond (1836-1840), then in Erzerum (1840-1846) and Damascus (1855 onwards). His "Journey Through a Part of Armenia and Asia Minor, in the Year 1835" (Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London, Vol. 6 (1836), pp. 187-223) and "Notes of a Journey through a part of Kurdistan, in the Summer of 1838" (Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London, Vol. 10 (1840), pp. 341-434) [in the second journey accompanied by A.G. Glascott - British Royal Navy] are the records of lengthy travels through Western Armenia.
The studies of J. Brant are extremely useful source for the geography, climate, demography and related aspects of Western Armenia. They also discuss interethnic relations between Armenian, Turkish and Kurdish populations, the attitude of the Ottoman government and local administration towards eastern multiethnic regions. During his journeys J.Brant meets Ottoman officials, Kurdish tribesmen and Armenians of different social affiliation. The report is a highly important source for the history of this part of the Ottoman empire, i.e. Western Armenia, particularly its Armenian population.
*The present narrative of J.Brant’s journey comprises his second visit to the eastern vilayets of the Ottoman empire (the account of his first journey conducted in 1835 was published in the issue 6/2, 2017).

Download
pdf (0.55 MB)

By: Viscount Bryce

Download
pdf (0.23 MB)

Editor in chief Ruben Safrastyan, Institute of Oriental Studies of NAS RA, Yerevan, 2017, “Printing house of National Polytechnic University of Armenia”, 125 p.

The current issue of the “Contemporary Eurasia” VI (1) (in English) is devoted to the ongoing developments and processes in the Eurasia. The volume includes analyses of the key political developments, economic and security issues in the Middle East, South Caucasus and Central Asia. The volume also contains references on roundtable discussions at the Institute of Oriental Studies of NAS RA held on several occasions.
The publication may be of interest for social scientists, experts and students.

Yerevan, 2018: Gitutyun Publishing House (163 p.).

The Institute of Art of NAS RA by financial support of the State Committee of Science, of MES of RA had held a conference dedicated the 200th anniversary of the birth of Armenian-Russian outstanding seascape painter - Ivan Ayvazovsky (Hovhannes Ayvazyan). During the Conference was presented a distinguished seascape painter's creative heritage.

The collection of articles is addressed to art critics, musicologists, Armenologists and wide circle of readers.

By: Nikolay Hovhannisyan Doctor of Sciences in Hisory, Professor, Corresponding member of the NAS RA
Gevorgyan Gor

Yerevan, “Gitutyun” Publishing House of NAS RA, 2018, 153 p.  (in Arm.).

The collective monograph is devoted to the study of Arab uprisings, also known as the Arab Spring that began in 2011. The emerged nationwide movements were targeted at transforming the various exhausted tribal, social and political institutions that were inherited from the medieval period and establishing modernized political systems for transforming state institutions and forming modernized system of values. The research on Arab revolutions was made using the examples of Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, and Libya. The preference is given to countries where the Arab Spring brought to the change of powers.
The book may be of interest for political analysts, experts, students, specialists of Middle Eastern studies, and a wide range of readers.

By: Kostikyan Kristine
Khecho Movses

Yerevan, 2018, “Gitutyun” publ. house, Institute of Oriental Studies of NAS RA, Persian Documents of the Matenadaran, III, 224 p. (in Arm.).

This volume continues the publication of Persian documents of the Matenadaran collection. It presents 25 Shari’a Notarial documents with Armenian translations and textual comments supplied with Persian originals and photocopies.
The title of this group of Persian documents is associated with the creation of their administrative instance - the Shari’a Notarial offices. Created on the basis of various civil agreements - Shari’a Notarial documents mainly reflect facts and phenomena related to the socio-economic history of that period.

By: Kosyan Aram
Ghazaryan Robert
Khanzadyan Mariam
Martirosyan Satenik

Yerevan, 2018: Gitutyun Publishing House, 180 p. (in Arm.)

The collective monograph is part of the long-termed study aimed on the publication of the Hittite cuneiform texts about the Armenian Highland (II mill. BC), sponsored by the State Committee of Science, RA.
The study includes the texts of two treaties concluded between the Hittite empire and the countries of the Armenian Highland, as well as several other texts related to these treaties.

By: Christine Melkonyan Institute of Oriental Studies of NAS RA

Yerevan, 2018, “Chartaraget”, 168 p.

The research is devoted to the study of the Armenian question and the Armenian diaspora before the collapse of the USSR. In 1921-1991 the Armenian diaspora had the exclusive «monopoly» in pursuing the Armenian cause in international arena although after World War II USSR made it clear to Turkey that the issue of the Armenian territories is not taken off the table and if necessary it can be brought back to agenda. Moreover, Moscow was greatly highlighting the role of the Armenian Church and Diaspora in resolving the issue.
Meanwhile «Cold War» started in 1946 had a negative influence on the process. Turkey gained new allies in face of the USA and the Great Britain who pledged to protect the territorial integrity of Turkey. In these conditions the Armenian cause was deadlocked and in 1950s there was no progress towards its resolution. The struggle of the diaspora Armenians became more productive starting mid-1960s on the eve of the 50th memorial date of the Armenian genocide.
Before 1970s the Armenian cause had been perceived by Armenians around the world as an issue of struggling for returning Armenian lands: later it expressed itself as a movement aimed at international recognition of the genocide and compensation getting the name «Hay Dat» (The Armenian Cause).
In 1960-1970s Armenian national parties, organizations, Hay Dat Committees operating in Diaspora and the Armenian Church conducted a wide range of activities towards the propaganda of the Armenian cause seeking to bring it into the agenda of international relations. In USA, France and other countries this was expressed in cultural penetration and trying to shape the world public opinion in favor of the Armenian cause as well as through direct impact on the public administration system of countries.
Besides, the need to resolve the Armenian cause and to recognize the Armenian genocide gradually led to radical sentiments among some circles of the Armenian diaspora as a result of which in 1970s the phase of armed struggle began in the Diaspora which continued till the 2nd half of 1980s.
At the same time, in 1970-1980s, there was a significant growth of interest among world community towards the Armenian cause; new discussions began in different international organizations, scientific and social conferences. Moreover, in all above-mentioned cases Diaspora organizations - parties, Hay Dat committees, centers for Armenian studies, individual scientists etc. have had a maximum participation on state, social and scientific levels.
The processes aimed at recognition of the Armenian genocide in diaspora during those years made Turkey take some counter-measures which short time later became the basis for the Turkish denial policy and anti-Armenian propaganda. That same policy with some transformations and additions continues at present, too.
Thus, despite some success gained by Diaspora Armenians, there was no radical change in the struggle for the Armenian cause and the recognition of the Armenian genocide. However, as a result of their activities in 1940-1980s the issue of the Armenian genocide, becoming a topic of hot discussions for international organizations, parliaments, governments of different states as well as means of mass media, turned into an issue of international diplomacy starting the process of recognition and condemnation of the Armenian genocide (Uruguay, Cyprus, Council of Europe etc.).

By: Sahakyan Mher

Yerevan, 2018, “Noravank”, 144 + 20 p.

In the monograph has been analyzed the influence of China’s “The One Belt, One Road” initiative on the global political-economic situation. It has been evaluated its initiative from the point of view of China's national security. A number of recommendations has been given, through which Armenia will be able to engage in this initiative as well as.
The study is intended for foreign policy officials, diplomats, experts of international relations, orientalists, sinologists, economists, students and wide range of readers.

By: Sarinyan Robert
Haruthyunyan Vladimir

Yerevan, M. Kotanyan Institute of Economics NAS RA.

vol. I - Yerevan, 2017: Gitutyun publishing house, 464 p.
vol.II - Yerevan, 2018: Gitutyun publishing house, 424 p.

Two volumes of encyclopedia contain bio-bibliographic information about Armenian economists, both from Armenia and other countries, in alphabetic order, from the mid - XIX century until today.

By: Voskanyan Ani

M. Kotanyan Institute of Economics, Yyerevan, 2017: Gitutyun Publishing House 208 p. (in Arm.)

The monograph is devoted to the economic situation of Armenians in the province of Adana, Ottoman empire in the late XIX - early XX century. The author presents the economic activities of Armenians, 1909 massacres, the following deprivation of Armenians and its impact on their economy.
The study is addressed to historians, economists and wide circle of specialists in other fields.

A. Meillet was an outstanding French linguist, the author of numerous of studies in the field of Indo-European linguistics, comparative linguistics, Latin and Greek languages, Slavistics, Iranistics, Armenology. In 1885-1889 he studied at the Paris-Sorbonne University. Among his teachers were M. Bréal, F. de Saussure and O. Carriere. From 1903 until 1936 A. Melliet worked at College de France where he taught comparative grammar of Indo-European languages and General linguistics.

Download
pdf (0.16 MB)

Hakob Manandyan was a prominent Armenian historian, one of the makers of modern Armenian historiography, whose studies are widely referred by Armenian and foreign historians, philologists and philosophers.

Download
pdf (0.09 MB)

Yu. Suvaryan was born in May 15, 1943 in the village of Sghnakh, Askeran region of Nagorno-Karabag. After graduating the primary school of the village Avetaranots he entered the Faculty of Economics, Yerevan state university. Soon after concluding his post-graduate scholarship Yu. Suvaryan defended Candidate of Sciences dissertation in 1970. In 1983 he defended the Doctor of Sciences dissertation.

Download
pdf (0.19 MB)