Western Armenia Research Articles

Երվանդ Վերջինի տոհմաբանության շուրջ

Strabo's message about the Armenian king Yervand the Last, as from the "genus of Hydarnes" refers only to King Yervand, and not to the Yervandid dynasty. In the interval of 200 years between Hydarnes and Yervand, Tiribaz was the last ancestry link on the paternal side. Tiribaz is mentioned in Xenophon's "Anabasis" as a hiparchos (regional chief, viceroy) of "Western Armenia" and close relative of Artaxerxes II: "when he was present, no one else put the king on a horse." This witnesses the fact that Tiribaz was a Persian of high birth. To our firm belief, he was also the High Priest of Armenia. The sculpture of rider on Achaemenid silver rhyton from Arin-berd (Erebuni) depicts him. The headdress of the rider is the same as that of a warrior from the priestly class of the bodyguards of the Persian kings, in contrast to the warrior representing the military class. Xenophon, having relationship with Tiribaz not in religious, but in official affairs, could not know that the name Tiribaz conveyed the meaning of priest, because the first component of the name Tiribaz is the name of the God-priest Tir. Artashes I overthrew Yervand the Last (who was considered an illegal ruler) and restored the legal rule of the Yervandid (from the Haykazuns) dynasty, which is mentioned in the sources from the 6-th century BC. Consequently, from the Hydarnes genus (foreign, Persian origin) was not the Yervandid dynasty, but King Yervand the Last represented by his ancestor, the High Priest of Armenia Tiribaz. According to Movses Khorenatsi, Yervand the Last was from the previous dynasty (Arshakids//Yervandids) not on the paternal, but on the maternal side and Artashes I, on the contrary, on the paternal side. Claims to the contrary are unfounded.

«Սասնա ծռեր» հերոսավեպի Մոկաց պատումների գրառման և հրատարակման պատմությունը

Armenian folk heroic epos “SasnaTsrer” was discovered and recorded in course of the 19-20 centuries. It was recorded in the Western Armenia, in particular, according to oral information provided by storytellers living in the basin of Lake Van, as well as provinces located to the south-west and north-east of it: Sasun, Mush, Baghesh, Moks, Shatakh, Van, Hayotsdzor, Khlat, Archesh, Manazkert, Alashkert, Bayazet. They were uneducated, pious countrymen, who were forcefully resettled from their homeland during the Genocide of Armenians and found their shelter in the Western Armenia (Vagharshapat, Ashtarak, Aparan, Talin, Nor Bayazet, Vedi, Artashat, Shirak, Lori), Parskahayk (Khoy, Salmast, Maku), Tiflis, etc. becoming migrant settlers. So, most of the stories of the “SasnaTsrer” heroic novel were recorded in these new settlements.

The Armenian Issue in 1912-1914 and the Extra-Parliamentary Activities of the Armenian Deputies of the Ottoman Parliament

Armenian MPs of the Ottoman Parliament made a contribution to the discussion of the Armenian Question by the Great Powers in 1912-1914. The Armenian MPs, on the one hand, undertook, in the structure of the commission, to develop a plan for reforms in Western Armenia and duly present it to the Great Powers, and on the other hand, undertook such a difficult and dangerous task as the negotiations with the authorities of Young Turks. Young Turks, on the contrary, did everything to obstruct the negotiation process and thereby prevent reforms. Armenian MPs since 1913 stopped meetings with Young Turks so as not to interfere with the negotiation process. Soon, on January 26, 1914 there was signed an agreement between Russia and the Ottoman Empire on the implementation of reforms in Western Armenia. On the initiative of the Armenian MPs, contacts with the European inspectors Hoff and Vestenenk were established. In May of 1914, Talaat Pasha signed an agreement with the European inspectors, according to which real power in Western Armenia passed from inspectors to the hands of the Young Turks. The Young Turks, dissatisfied with even this modest agreement, in June of 1914, demanded from the inspectors to leave the Ottoman Empire.

The Armenian Nationalist-Liberal (Reorganiazed Hunchakian) Party In 1917-1921

The international and political situation that came into existence after World War I dictated to the Armenian political forces to reconsider their programs and practices. The Reorganized Hunchakian Party, which was dedicated to the liberation of Western Armenians and advocated liberal ideas, adopted the name “Nationalist-Liberal”. The Liberals believed that the Armenian state that would unite the Republic of Armenia, Western Armenia and Cilicia, should have a presidential system of government and temporarily accept the patronage of a great power. The party played a significant role in Armenian social and political life in 1917-1921. After the establishment of the Soviet regime in Armenia, the ideological differences between the Liberals and the Soviet government did not disappear, however, the party’s priority became to help Armenia, which continued after the unification of the Liberals and the Ramgavars.

Arshile Gorky’s life in USA. The hard way of search of identity

The life and formation of the great Armenian artist Arshile Gorky in the USA and the search for his own identity is examined in the traditions of the sociological theory of symbolic interactionism, based on the analysis of the rich documentary material left by the artist himself and his contemporaries. The key to understanding the essence of the artist's identity is his statements about himself as a "child of Ararat", an artist who carries in himself the values of the images and colors of the lost homeland (Van, Khorgom). An analysis of the history of the search for identity shows that despite the socio-cultural problems caused by racist policies and the reality of early 20th century American society, Arshile Gorky remained faithful to his purpose and mission: in his paintings he was able to preserve the image of the lost homeland. He used his brush to recreate the image of Western Armenia. He did not change his national identity, and remaining faithful to the inherited principles nurtured himself "mighty as a giant, but tender at heart, like a child". With his art, Arshile Gorky was able to achieve the freedom he strived for.

British Diplomat and Spy Major Noel’s Report on the Extermination of Armenians and Assyrians in Diarbekir Province during the Armenian Genocide

This publication presents the report by Major Edward William Noel, British diplomat and spy, regarding the extermination of Armenians and Assyrians in Diarbekır province during the Armenian Genocide. The document, entitled “Christian Massacres of 1915 in Diarbekir Vilayat,” has been compiled in April, 1919 in the city of Mardin, where the author was on a fact-finding mission, so most of the massacre cases presented there refer to the mentioned locality. Attached to Noel’s report, as an appendix, we present the letter of Arthur Calthorpe, British High Commissioner in Constantinople, to British Foreign Minister Lord George Curzon, dated July 2, 1919, in which he transmits Major Noel’s estimate of populations of Diarbekir vilayet before and after the First World War. Major Noel has been characterized by researchers as “an expert on Kurdistan and the Kurds”, and as “the main British agent in Kurdistan, both in Anatolia and in Iraq, from 1919 to 1922,” so these documents published in Armenian translation, as well as other papers related to his mission in 1919 are very remarkable from the point of view of studying the demography of the southern regions of Western Armenia, the course of the Armenian Genocide, as well as of the history of ArmenianKurdish, Armenian-Turkish, Turkish-Kurdish relationships after the First World War.

Gevorg Halajyan’s Diary “To the Gallows” as a Primary Source on Turkified Armenians during and after the Armenian Genocide

Gevorg Halajyan’s (Taparakan) diary-memoir was published in the USA yet in 1932, but it has not been decently studied and systematized. This extensive work is an invaluable source about the Turkification and assimilation of Armenians in several provinces of Western Armenia in 1924-1928. To stand before the Independence Tribunal of Kemalist Turkey, Halajyan had to travel to Adana, Diyarbakir, Kharberd, Malatya, to be eventually imprisoned in the jail of Sebastia. Halajyan wrote down whatever he eye-witnessed and heard of about the conversion and assimilation of the Armenians in the provinces. Later he escaped from prison to Bulgaria and then to America. This article analyzes the data Halajyan left about Turkified Armenians, as well as discusses the issue of desacralization of churches and chapels during the Armenian Genocide. It also singles out Turkification cases, forms, and mechanisms to compare them with the mechanisms of Islamization in the Ottoman period to reveal not only the similarities but, first of all, the differences, particularly, due to the concept substitution.

The Stages of Implementation of the Policy of Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide of Armenians in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus (11th-20th cc.) (Continuation of the Third Part)

The aim of the article is to present the motives and implementation stages of ethnic cleansing and genocidal policy perpetrated towards the indigenous Armenian population during the 11th-20th centuries in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus – in the territory stretching from the Kur Valley to the Apsheron Peninsula, on the basis of various primary sources (archival documents, statistical materials, periodical press, theme related literature). The work is written by a combined examination of facts, applying the principles of historical investigation and historical-comparative analysis. The level of reliability and validity of the sources through their comprehensive study has been verified. Through the combination of facts the following phases of the history of the main issue are presented: the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide of Armenians in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus were still implemented in the 11th-18th centuries when the region regularly appeared under the invasions and dominion of various conquering nomadic tribes (Turk-Seljuks, Mongol-Tatars, Tamerlane, nomadic Turkmen tribes of Kara-Koyunlu and Ak-Koyunlu, Kizilbash invasions followed by the Turkish-Persian wars, Sunni Lezgins, invasions of Nader Shah and Agha Mohammad Khan). As a result, some part of the Armenian population was deported and left native lands or forcedly accepted the Muslim religion of the conquerers. The next phase of ethnic cleansing and atrocities was the period of the Armenian-Tatar clashes (1905-1906). Later, the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide was implemented at state level already during the Musavat regime of the artificial “Azerbaijan” formation (1918-1920), and finally during the Soviet regime (1920-1990). The article substantiates the fact that the indigenous Armenian population of the region was subjected to ethnic cleansing and genocide in its cradle, just as the Young Turks carried out the extermination of the Western Armenians in 1915-1916 in Western Armenia. Therefore, that policy should be qualified as the continuation and a constituent part of the Armenian Genocide, because the Armenian Genocide with its geographical coverage (from Western Armenia and other Armenian-inhabited territories of the Ottoman Empire to Baku) was a consequence of the implementation of the complete program of Pan-Turkism. There are numerous references to the issue in the historical literature, though the comprehensive study of ethnic cleansing and genocidal policies of Armenians in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus – in the territory stretching from the Kur Valley to the Apsheron Peninsula, has not been the subject of a separate study.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF STAGES AND METHODS OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND TUTSI GENOCIDE IN RWANDA

In genocide studies, for a more comprehensive, objective study of genocide committed against victim groups, the method of comparative analysis is used, which allows to identify both similarities and features between different examples of this crime. In the framework of the article, a comparative analysis of the stages and methods of the Armenian-Tutsi genocides was made. The choice of the Rwandan genocide as a subject of comparison with the Armenian Genocide is due to the fact that, unlike the organizers of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire, who were convicted by Turkish military tribunals, the organizers of the Tutsi genocide in Rwanda were prosecuted by the International Tribunal, created by the UN Security Council in 1994. Revealing the similarities between the stages and methods of committing two identical crimes will provide an opportunity to reveal the precedent of condemning the Rwandan Genocide in the International Tribunal and the possibilities of applying it to the Armenian Genocide case in the future in an international court. As a result of the comparative analysis of the stages of the two genocides, the methods of implementation, in addition to many similarities, significant differences were registered, from which we have separated the following: 1. In order to end the Armenian Genocide, the Turkish authorities chose the period of World War II, when influential world politicians were engaged in hostilities on different fronts of the war and they would not be able to intervene and prevent its implementation, while the Tutsi genocide in Rwanda took place during the civil war that broke out in this country. 2. If the Russian Caucasus Army was an obstacle to the criminal policy of genocide of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire, which during the hostilities on the RussianTurkish front with the support of Armenian volunteer units occupied the provinces of Erzurum, Van, Bitlis in Western Armenia, as well as Trabzon. The complete extermination of the Tutsis in Rwanda was halted by the advance of their military formation, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RWF), which managed to enter the capital, Kigali, to end the Houthi regime's criminal policy against the Tutsis. Unlike the RSF, the Armenian volunteer detachments in the Russian Caucasus Army did not act independently, they were not a military force capable of stopping the genocidal policy of the Ottoman Empire against the Armenian population. 3. The presence of the Russian Caucasus Army in some parts of Western Armenia, which was to some extent a guarantee of security for the genocidal Armenian population, as well as the Russian-Turkish front line, only temporarily stopped the continuation of the criminal policy of the Turkish authorities towards Armenians. During the revolutionary upheavals in Russia in 1917, the Russian Caucasian army was demoralized and disbanded, after which the Turkish authorities were able to continue the policy of the Armenian Genocide not only in the territories of Western Armenia formerly controlled by Russian troops, but also in Eastern Armenia and the Caucasus. The same can be said about Cilicia, when after the departure of the French troops, the Kemalists had the opportunity to continue the policy of genocide against the Armenians of Cilicia.

The Issues of the Number of Western Armenians and Ethnic Composition of the Population of Western Armenia at Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920)

References to the issues of the number of Western Armenians and the ratio of Armenians to other ethnic groups in Western Armenia on the eve of the Armenian Genocide occupy a special place in the context of processes related to drafting a peace agreement with the Ottoman Empire and Armenia’s delineation after WWI. These issues were tackled by diverse Armenian official and non-official organizations struggling for the formation of an integral Armenian state, as well as Turkish authorities manipulating, inter alia, also demographic arguments against the Armenian claim for Western Armenia and the Entente Powers (particularly the United States of America and Great Britain) needing statistical data for deciding the fate of the Ottoman Empire. In the post-war processes the long-distance controversy of the Armenian and Turkish sides over the issues in question can be figuratively characterized as one of the stages – “battles” of the “statistical war” that emerged after 1878, i.e. following the entry of the Armenian Question into the international diplomatic agenda. This article aims to present and analyse the statistics on the number of Western Armenians and the ratio of Armenians in Western Armenia to other ethnic groups on the eve of the Armenian Genocide presented by Armenian and Turkish delegations at Paris Peace Conference, as well as data circulated by the US and British diplomacy. It will try to explain the connection between the delineation of Armenia and the number of Western Armenians, the demographic composition of Western Armenia on the eve of the Armenian Genocide. The calculations of the number of Western Armenians have had a certain effect on deliberations around demarcation of the border between the Republic of Armenia and the Ottoman Empire in the context of post-war world regulation.

“I Feel Removed, Distant, Shattered, in Two Halves”

This article uses close readings of Anna Davtʻyan’s “Diarbekʻir: kʻur” (Դիարբեքիր՝ քուր, “Diyarbakir: Sister”) to challenge solidified positionalities of victim and perpetrator in the context of the Armenian Genocide, and simplified notions of return to “Western Armenia”. “Diarbekʻir: kʻur” is a travelogue written by an Armenian from the Republic of Armenia about the author’s own experience travelling to Diyarbakir. In it, identifications with Diyarbakir as Armenian are nuanced and exist alongside new bonds formed with local Kurds on the bases of gender and friendship, rendering the author a fractured relationship with the city. Moreover, a nuanced picture of subject positions among the Kurds in “Diarbek‘ir: k‘ur” resist totalizing and unitary identifications as “perpetrator”.

Միջազգային հռչակի տեր բյուզանդագետն ու հայագետը

Nicholas Adonts (1871–1942) is one of the outstanding Armenian scholars who received an excellent education in Russia and Europe. During his studies at the University of St. Petersburg and later, when he improved his knowledge in well-known educational centers of Europe – in London, Paris, Vienna, Strasbourg and Munich, Adonts had the support of the great national benefactor Alexander Mantashiants. Eight volumes of Adonts’ works were published by Yerevan State University with the support of the Armenian branch of the Galust Gyulbenkian Foundation. Adonts left no autobiographical memories․ They would have been extremely interesting, since his life was really amazing. Tigran the Great (95–55 BC) was the most beloved historical figure of Adonts. He actually confirms that Tigran manifested himself as a world sovereign and enlightener, and his activities require new elucidation. Adonts presents the great deeds and military successes of the representatives of the princely house of Mamikonians in the Byzantine Empire. The study “The Fame of Bagratids” by Adonts is very interesting; it represents the branches of the Armenian royal house of Bagratids in Georgia, Caucasian Albania and Artsakh. In his extensive article “The Historical Basis and Ideological Value of the Novel David Bek”, the historian takes an exploratory approach while describing the historical events of the novel David Bek by Raffi. Especially rich is the heritage of the scientist in Byzantine studies, which has two branches of scientific and cognitive significance. Firstly, it presents important events of the history of Byzantium, and then the famous figures of this history, who were Armenians by nationality. In 1928 Adonts made a new discovery in Byzantine studies, exploring the “Historical basis of the Byzantine epic Digenis Acritas”. He proved that the epic poem was not Greek, since the homeland and place of activity of the main hero are the Euphrates valley, and his exploits take place in Western Armenia. Adonts was a devoted defendet of the Armenian Cause and dedicated many articles to this issue. Adonts left three monumental monographs as a legacy to science. These are: Armenia in the Era of Justinian (1908), Dionysius of Thrace and Armenian Commentators (1915) and the posthumously published Critical History of Armenia (1946). The scientific heritage of Adonts in the field of Byzantine studies and Armenology is rich with many scientific discoveries, whose value will be preserved forever.

Մեծ Բրիտանիայի հակահայ քաղաքականությունը Ղարաբաղի հարցում (1918–1920 ԹԹ.) և արդի իրավիճակը

The Armenian people were hopeful that after the capitulation of Turkey in the First World War (WWI) and the dislocation of the Allies troops in Transcaucasia, territories of Western Armenia and Transcaucasia would be included within the First Republic of Armenia. However, the Armenian people experienced another disappointment. In 1918–1920, Great Britain, who had gained dominance in Transcaucasia, ignoring the promises given to the Armenians during the war and their particular contribution to the victory of the Allies, adopted anti-Armenian attitude towards the Karabakh conflict. By constant pressure on the Republic of Armenia and Artsakh, the British strived to achieve hegemony of Azerbaijan over Karabakh, nevertheless, the uncompromising stance and unwavering resistance of the Armenians of Artsakh thwarted the anglo-azerbaijani plan. The anti-Armenian attitude of Great Britain was shaped by its strategic plans. Its main purpose in Transcaucasia was to gain control over the economic and military-political life and withdraw Russia from the region and the East in general. With the aim to carry out this important plan, it chose as an ally its recent rival in e WWI – Turkey, and Azerbaijan, which was created with the latter’s help. This selection was influenced by their military-economic potential and anti-Russian attitude. Nowadays (since 1988) when the Armenians of Karabakh struggle for their reunion with Armenia, from which Karabakh was cut off and annexed to Azerbaijan with the help of Soviet Russia on July 5, 1921, the British adopted anti-Armenian attitude towards the Karabakh conflict once again. They supported the aggressive actions of Azerbaijan and its ally Turkey by all means. The United Kingdom’s attitude proceeds from its political and economic interests. The United Kingdom has a large share of Azerbaijan’s most profitable oil mines, as well as the Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan oil pipeline, which was put into operation in 2006 due to its active efforts (30% of the shares in the pipeline are owned by British Petroleum). The anti-Armenian and pro-Azerbaijani policy of Great Britain activated during the Second Karabakh War, which began on September 27, 2020, by Azerbaijan’s aggression against the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (the Republic of Artsakh). British companies expressed their support to Azerbaijan during this war have signed new economic agreements as well as have provided the other side with the maps of mined areas. In October, 2020, during the session in the UN Security Council, the UK suspended resolution of the OSCE Minsk Group member countries with an appeal to stop the war. Hence, the UK supported both war, intervention of the third party countries and terroristic groups in it. Thus, England once again betrayed democracy, justice, right of nations to self-determination, though the United Kingdom publicly presents itself as a protector of these values.

Հայերի էթնիկ զտումների և ցեղասպանական քաղաքականության իրագործման փուլերն Արևելյան Այսրկովկասում (XI-XX դդ․) (Մաս Բ)

The aim of the article is to present the motives and implementation stages of ethnic cleansing and genocidal policy perpetrated towards the indigenous Armenian population during the 11th-20th centuries in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus – in the territory stretching from the Kur Valley to the Apsheron Peninsula, on the basis of various primary sources (archival documents, statistical materials, periodical press, theme related literature). The work is written by a combined examination of facts, applying the principles of historical investigation and historical-comparative analysis. The level of reliability and validity of the sources through their comprehensive study have been verified. Through the combination of facts the following phases of the history of the main issue are presented: the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide of Armenians in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus were still implemented in the 11th-18th centuries when the region regularly appeared under the invasions and dominion of various conquering nomadic tribes (Turk-Seljuks, Mongol-Tatars, Tamerlane, nomadic Turkmen tribes of Kara-Koyunlu and Ak-Koyunlu, Kizilbash invasions followed by the Turkish-Persian wars, Sunni Lezgins, invasions of Nader Shah and Agha Mohammad Khan). As a result, some part of the Armenian population was deported and left native lands or forcedly accepted the Muslim religion of the conquerers. The next phase of ethnic cleansing and atrocities was the period of the Armenian-Tatar clashes (1905-1906). Later, the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide was implemented at state level already during the Musavat regime of the artificial “Azerbaijan” formation (1918-1920), and finally during the Soviet regime (1920-1990). The article substantiates the fact that the indigenous Armenian population of the region was subjected to ethnic cleansing and genocide in its cradle, just as the Young Turks carried out the extermination of the Western Armenians in 1915-1916 in Western Armenia. Therefore, this policy should be described as a continuation and an integral part of the Genocide of Armenians, as the Armenian Genocide with its geographical coverage (from Cilicia to Baku), was a consequence of the implementation of a comprehensive pan-Turkic program. There are numerous references to the issue in the historical literature, though the comprehensive study of ethnic cleansing and genocidal policies of Armenians in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus – in the territory stretching from the Kur Valley to the Apsheron Peninsula, has not been the subject of a separate study.

Mass Killings Implemented by the Kemalists in Pambak Area (Shirak province) according to the Family Memories of Eyewitness-Survivors (1920 - 1921)

In 1920, the operations of Kemalist troops in the Pambak area until the outlined “neutral zone” of the Turkish-Armenian troops were true genocidal action, similar to the genocide implemented by Young Turks in the Western Armenia. Not only had the local residents fell victim to the Turkish sword, but also thousands of exiled from Kars province and refugees from Shirak. The article is largely based on the reproduction of the memories of eyewitnesses and their descendants. Ethnographic research, collection of oral accounts, land clearing works and observations, as well as archival studies have been carried out. The studies demonstrate the process of actions, the forms of organizing the massacres and the pursued goals of the genocidal acts of the Kemalists against the peaceful Armenian population.

The Hay Horoms in the Whirlpool of the Massacres of Christians in the Late 19th – Early 20th Centuries

The Orthodox Armenians or so-called Hay Horoms (Armenian Romans) in the late 19th – early 20th centuries were compactly settled in Western Armenia, namely in the villages of Vank, Dzorak, Shrzu and Musheghka in Akn district, in the villages of Mamsa, Sedrka and Khenderkik in Chemishkatsag district, as well as in the village of Hoghus in Kamakh region. Apart from this, the migrants from Akn and Hoghus resided in the villages of Ortakyöy, Khudi and in other places of Izmit province (historical Bithynia). During the Hamidian massacres in 1895-1896 the Orthodox Armenians did not suffer great loss. However, after these events, the process of Hellenization started to strengthen among the Hay Horoms, so that in the early 20th century they were no longer considered as Orthodox Armenians, but Armenian-speaking Greeks. For this reason they avoided the horrors of the Armenian Genocide except the Hoghus village whose habitants left their homeland to avoid being deported. Later the survived villagers immigrated to Greece. In the summer of 1920 the Hay Horoms of the Izmit province, approximately 10,000 people, were perished and their villages were destroyed. As regards the few Orthodox Armenians of Akn and Chemishkatsag regions, according to the Treaty of Lausanne (1923) they emigrated from Turkey to Greece with the Greek population of Asia Minor.

WWI Armenian Refugees Census Data as A Source for Ottoman Armenian Population Numbers on the Eve of the Armenian Genocide

This paper aims to present and analyze data provided by censuses of the Ottoman Armenians from Van, Erzeroum and Bitlis provinces, who, fleeing the threat of massacre during WWI, found refuge in the territory of the Russian Empire, particularly in the Russian Transcaucasia. By comparing data on the Armenian refugees with information provided by other statistical sources, particularly the Armenian patriarchate and the Ottoman government, it is possible to enrich our knowledge of the numbers of Armenian population in Western Armenia and the Ottoman Empire in general on the eve of WWI and the Armenian Genocide. It is shown that the number of refugees is about 70% higher than the number of the Armenian population for the same areas before WWI mentioned in the official Ottoman statistics and corresponds approximately to the figures of the Armenian patriarchate. If account is taken that some people were already dead by the time the refugee censuses were carried out and also that the populations of some settlements within the administrative units in question were not evacuated at all but massacred, then the actual number of the Armenian population in these areas was even higher.

Towarzystwo Polsko-Ormiańskie we Lwowie (1920-1922)

Polish-Armenian Society in Lwów (1920-1922)
 Using Armenian and Polish sources, the author analyses the activities ofthe Polish-Armenian Society (Towarzystwo Polsko-Ormiańskie) founded in Lwów(Poland) on June 15, 1920. This organization focused on building relations betweenPoland and Armenia. Its leaders, Jan Grzegorzewski, Garabed Keuprulian and AugustTeodorowicz established cooperation with the Armenian National Delegationin Paris, chaired by Boghos Nubar Pasha, and with its branch in Berlin. They alsoundertook the difficult mission of lobbying for the Armenian case in Warsaw. In thefirst phase of its activity, the Society planned to relocate Polish Armenians (officialsand intelligentsia) to the territories of Western Armenia; due to the deteriorating internationalsituation, the idea was abandoned. Subsequently, efforts were focused onhelping Armenian refugees from Turkey in the Caucasus; on this matter, the Societymade an appeal to the Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Count Konstanty Skirmunt.The suspension of the Society’s activity was related to the deterioration of Armenia’ssituation on the international arena. With the abandonment of the Armenianquestion by France and Great Britain, the exchange of letters with activists in Parisalso stopped. The author compares the Society with its counterpart in London – theBritish Armenian Committee, emphasizing the organization of Polish Armenianswas truly exceptional because it was the first one of its kind, and also because itfocused not on the problems of the local diaspora, but on the issue of Armenia’s independence.

Հայերի էթնիկ զտումների և ցեղասպանական քաղաքականության իրագործման փուլերն Արևելյան Այսրկովկասում (XI-XX դդ․) (Մաս 1)

THE STAGES OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY OF ETHNIC CLEANSING AND GENOCIDE OF ARMENIANS IN THE EASTERN CIS-CAUCASUS (11TH-20TH CC.) (PART 1) The aim of the article is to present the motives and implementation stages of ethnic cleansing and genocidal policy perpetrated towards the indigenous Armenian population during the 11th-20th centuries in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus – in the territory stretching from the Kur Valley to the Apsheron Peninsula, on the basis of various primary sources (archival documents, statistical materials, periodical press, theme related literature). The work is written by a combined examination of facts, applying the principles of historical investigation and historical-comparative analysis. The level of reliability and validity of the sources through their comprehensive study have been verified. Through the combination of facts the following phases of the history of the main issue are presented: the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide of Armenians in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus were still implemented in the 11th-18th centuries when the region regularly appeared under the invasions and dominion of various conquering nomadic tribes (Turk-Seljuks, Mongol-Tatars, Tamerlane, nomadic Turkmen tribes of Kara-Koyunlu and Ak-Koyunlu, Kizilbash invasions followed by the Turkish-Persian wars, Sunni Lezgins, invasions of Nader Shah and Agha Mohammad Khan). As a result, some part of the Armenian population was deported and left native lands or forcedly accepted the Muslim religion of the conquerers. The next phase of ethnic cleansing and atrocities was the period of the Armenian-Tatar clashes (1905-1906). Later, the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide was implemented at state level already during the Musavat regime of the artificial “Azerbaijan” formation (1918-1920), and finally during the Soviet regime (1920-1990). The article substantiates the fact that the indigenous Armenian population of the region was subjected to ethnic cleansing and genocide in its cradle, just as the Young Turks carried out the extermination of the Western Armenians in 1915-1916 in Western Armenia. Therefore, this policy should be described as a continuation and an integral part of the Genocide of Armenians, as the Armenian Genocide with its geographical coverage (from Cilicia to Baku), was a consequence of the implementation of a comprehensive pan-Turkic program. There are numerous references to the issue in the historical literature, though the comprehensive study of ethnic cleansing and genocidal policies of Armenians in the Eastern CisCaucasus – in the territory stretching from the Kur Valley to the Apsheron Peninsula, has not been the subject of a separate study.

Հայերի էթնիկ զտումների և ցեղասպանական քաղաքականության իրագործման փուլերն Արևելյան Այսրկովկասում (XI-XX դդ․) (Մաս 1)

THE STAGES OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY OF ETHNIC CLEANSING AND GENOCIDE OF ARMENIANS IN THE EASTERN CIS-CAUCASUS (11TH-20TH CC.) (PART 1) The aim of the article is to present the motives and implementation stages of ethnic cleansing and genocidal policy perpetrated towards the indigenous Armenian population during the 11th-20th centuries in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus – in the territory stretching from the Kur Valley to the Apsheron Peninsula, on the basis of various primary sources (archival documents, statistical materials, periodical press, theme related literature). The work is written by a combined examination of facts, applying the principles of historical investigation and historical-comparative analysis. The level of reliability and validity of the sources through their comprehensive study have been verified. Through the combination of facts the following phases of the history of the main issue are presented: the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide of Armenians in the Eastern Cis-Caucasus were still implemented in the 11th-18th centuries when the region regularly appeared under the invasions and dominion of various conquering nomadic tribes (Turk-Seljuks, Mongol-Tatars, Tamerlane, nomadic Turkmen tribes of Kara-Koyunlu and Ak-Koyunlu, Kizilbash invasions followed by the Turkish-Persian wars, Sunni Lezgins, invasions of Nader Shah and Agha Mohammad Khan). As a result, some part of the Armenian population was deported and left native lands or forcedly accepted the Muslim religion of the conquerers. The next phase of ethnic cleansing and atrocities was the period of the Armenian-Tatar clashes (1905-1906). Later, the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide was implemented at state level already during the Musavat regime of the artificial “Azerbaijan” formation (1918-1920), and finally during the Soviet regime (1920-1990). The article substantiates the fact that the indigenous Armenian population of the region was subjected to ethnic cleansing and genocide in its cradle, just as the Young Turks carried out the extermination of the Western Armenians in 1915-1916 in Western Armenia. Therefore, this policy should be described as a continuation and an integral part of the Genocide of Armenians, as the Armenian Genocide with its geographical coverage (from Cilicia to Baku), was a consequence of the implementation of a comprehensive pan-Turkic program. There are numerous references to the issue in the historical literature, though the comprehensive study of ethnic cleansing and genocidal policies of Armenians in the Eastern CisCaucasus – in the territory stretching from the Kur Valley to the Apsheron Peninsula, has not been the subject of a separate study.