History of Armenia

The book is designed as a catalogue to accompany Rouben Galichian’s exhibition of cartographic texts and images of Armenia to be presented across various countries of the world during the Armenian Genocide Centenary year of 2015. The aim of the exhibition is to make public a selection of cartographic images in which snippets of the history of Armenia could be seen through the eyes of the Ancient, Greco-Roman, Byzantine, Islamic and Western geographers and cartographers.

In ancient and medieval times maps were rare documents; therefore in many cases maps depicting significant moments and events of the history of various nations are not readily available. Sometimes historical and political events took place in such quick succession that it is not possible to prepare maps to record all the events in their real timescale.  Indeed, many events have passed without being shown or recorded on maps at all. Nevertheless, the book intends to present the sequence of events determining the course of the Armenian history as much as possible through maps prepared near the actual time of the occurrence.

In a relatively stable peace at the beginning of the reign, when Byzantium and neighboring Muslim emirates dealt with internal issues, Smbat II Bagratuni (978-990) was engaged in peaceful construction. At that time, the capital of the kingdom of Ani expanded greatly, and it became necessary to build a new, larger wall. Immediately after ascending to the throne, Smbat II began to implement a large-scale project of new defensive walls and adjacent protection systems, which lasted about 10 years. The author of this project was the famous medieval architect Trdat, who was also the author of the project for the restoration of the Church of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople after the earthquake of 989...

This extensive book (2 volumes, 134 pages of sources and modern bibliography, 716 pages of main text, prosopographical lists and index, 4046 references) -based on the research of my PhD thesis- examines in depth the administrative and military organization of the Anatolian / Asiatic regions of the Byzantine Empire (i.e. Eastern border and Central Asia Minor) during the 11th century AD.

Moreover, it describes in detail the political and military developments by region.

Finally, it attempts to trace and evaluate the most important causes that led to the collapse of Byzantine sovereignty in the above geographical areas after the mid. 11th century: internal political instability; overexposure of the new established Byzantine border to vast and inhomogeneous regions (Armenia, northern Mesopotamia, Cilicia, northern Syria); hostility of some of the local populations and their leadership to the local Byzantine authorities and (in general) to the imperial sovereignty and rule; Turkish military pressure across the whole imperial eastern border and the interior; difficulty in dealing with the new enemy for a variety of reasons (agility, multidimension etc.); new administrative and military organization (δουκάτα / doukates, κατεπανάτα / katepanates etc.) that had not yet fully established and properly consolidated, when if faced the deadly external threat; insufficient local leadership and fragmentation of command; personal interests and actions that led to confusion, segregation and dissolution; lack of sufficient military and economic resources; inadequate or bad diplomatic choices from the central and regional administration; decline of the old thematic system and the military organization in the interior of Asia Minor; consequent lack of defense in depth, poor regular and tactical organization, discouragement of imperial local armies and troops.

Extensive prosopographical catalogues of the political and military imperial officers, who served in the above areas during the 11th century AD, are also listed (based on the information provided primary by the known sigillographic evidence and other epigraphic material and -of course- the written sources).

[Centre for Byzantine Research. Byzantine Texts and Studies 43A-B, Thessaloniki 2007, ISBN: 978-960-7856-22-7, text in Greek language]

The development of internal and foreign trade, both in the Mediterranean countries and in Cilician Armenia, reduced the coexistence space between people. Other
forms of commercial, domestic and everyday communication between them became
more versatile, which inevitably increased the demand for new coexistent lifestyles
and rules. These realities became especially evident from the 13th century, when not
only the population but also the ethnic composition of Cilician Armenia was radically changing. These were challenges for the state, so it is no wonder that during
that period the creation of a new code of laws became an agenda for the Armenian
state of Cilicia, which should have been more in line with the changing realities. That
great work was undertaken and carried out by Smbat Sparapet. In addition to the fact
that the population of Cilician Armenia was diverse in terms of ethnic composition,
where people of different cultures, religions, temperaments, with different professions and belonging to different social strata met, it was also diverse from the Armenian point of view. Armenians, who differed from each other in terms of social strata, culture, temperament, legal awareness, and other components, settled here from different parts of the Armenian Highland located thousands of kilometers away from
each other.
The sea, rapid development of international and domestic trade, the growth of
foreign population, cities and urban population – were the factors under which in the
reality of Cilician Armenia were developing different platforms of micro and macro
levels of civilisational dialogues, which began to demand new dimensions of human
social relations, written and unwritten rules, moral and ethical norms.
How did they trade in Cilician Armenia, how did the moral, coexistence, and
ethical boundaries emerge in the big and small trade relations? Were these boundaries documented particularly in legal documents or did they mostly remain in the
field of verbal, everyday agreements?

На сегодняшний день территория трех государств к югу от Главного Кавказского хребта, чья независимость была восстановлена в результате распада СССР, является ареной двух неразрешенных военных конфликтов: армяно-азербайджанского конфликта из-за принадлежности Нагорного Карабаха  и российско-грузинского - из-за двух стратегически важных областей Грузии – Абхазии и Цхинвали (последняя также известна как бывшая Юго-Осетинская Автономная Область). Однако количество конфликтоопасных зон Южного Кавказа не ограничивается Абхазией, Карабахом и Цхинвали. В сфере внимания сил, заинтересованных в дальнейшей дестабилизации региона, находится, в частности, зона армяно-грузинской границы, где наблюдается определенное напряжение, способное при неблагопроятном стечении обстоятельств перейти в конфликтную фазу. Различные политические силы, вольно или невольно ведущие работу, направленную на дестабилизацию в зоне армяно-грузинской границы (в частности, в армянонаселенной грузинской области Джавахети), активно используют в пропагандистских целях события Армяно-Грузинской войны, разразившейся в конце 1918 года и оказавшей негативное влияние на общую обстановку в регионе. Скудость общедоступной информации о данном историческом эпизоде открывает большие возможности для идеологизированной и подчас подстрекательской интерпретации этой малоизвестной войны начала ХХ века.

Настоящий труд призван дать подробное описание событий вышеназванной войны и провести анализ ее последствий как для Армении, так и для Грузии, оставляя за рамками то, как эти последствия обыгрываются в наши дни силами, заинтересоваными в дестабилизации всего региона – прежде всего правящими кругами Российской Федерации, которые, несмотря на свои внутренние разногласия по ряду вопросов, имеют полный консенсус в стремлении сохранить Южный Кавказ в сфере своего политического влияния и не допустить серьезного политико-экономического присутствия Запада на этом стратегически важном стыке Европы и Азии, равно как и достижения реальной независимости и демократии в Азербайджане, Армении и Грузии.

Авторы убеждены, что знание природы и деталей зародившихся в прошлом межэтнических и межгосударственных конфликтов является важнейшим инструментом их успешного и ненасильственного разрешения.

This article aims to give an exhaustive overview of the ancient Aramaic brief inscriptions of Southern Caucasia, from 6th century BCE to 3rd century CE. New interpretations are given to documents still little known but nevertheless very important for the understanding of Caucasian history during the Antiquity.
With an addendum about the short inscription of the silver cup of Saburt'alo (T'bilisi).
Updated on 17 December 2022.

This book traces, through the analysis of the sources, the Mongol domination of Caucasia. The research involves the region that stretches from the Azov Sea in the North, to Georgia and Armenia in the South. The Mongol rule on Caucasia was not the first occasion for the sedentary cultures and the nomads to interact, but it was as a result of this event that the Caucasus experienced a coherent political power that presented the characters of both models; the genesis of this process and its outcomes are the main object of this book.

На основании российских и зарубежных исследований в обзоре освещается современное состояние источниковедческого анализа нумизматических источников и разработанности дескриптивной нумизматики Сефевидского Ирана (описания монетного дела, монетных систем и денежного обращения), необходимых для корректной трактовки экономического и политического прошлого Ирана. В кратком историографическом введении приведен обзор важнейших публикаций нумизматических источников (каталогов собраний и электронных нумизматических баз), а также сжатая характеристика основных обзорных публикаций. В первой части работы на основании современных представлений о фундаментальных понятиях, регулировавших монетную эмиcсию в Сефевидском Иране, описаны права сикка (jus monetae) и хакк аз-зарб (jus monetae cudendae), а также порождаемые ими валютные зоны-общегосударственная зона шахских монет и локальные зоны региональных анонимных выпусков. Описана монетная система сефевидского времени и установлены ее элементы. Проанализированы сферы обращения монет из различных металлов, этимологизированы названия монетных номиналов. Приведены краткие сведения о структуре монетных дворов в Сефевидском Иране, динамике их количества и географическом зонировании. Во второй части описаны важнейшие преобразования и характерные особенности монетного дела в правление каждого сефевидского шаха. Прослежены динамика процесса консолидации монетных зон и изменения монетных стандартов, а также время появления инноваций в текстах монетных надписей (легенд) и в монетном дизайне.

This article investigates the underlying reasons and processes for the resettlement of Azerbaijanis from Armenia in 1948–1953—an undertaking sanctioned by Josef Stalin under the official mantle of strengthening the cotton-growing industry in the Kura-Araz lowland region of Azerbaijan. The decree, which the Soviet leader signed in 1947, also contained a clause on the necessity of vacating places in Armenia for foreign repatriates—a project launched by Moscow in pursuit of territorial claims on Turkey in 1946–1949. This resettlement project reignited the ethno-territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan during Soviet rule; however, in its immediate aftermath, the Soviet authorities were able to keep the situation under control.

The city of Ani (Georgian: Anisi), a significant centre of medieval South Caucasus, was a part of Georgian kingdom in certain periods. Georgian diocesan seat headed by Bishop of Ani functioned there.

The paper deals with a little-known Georgian inscription on the wall of a church named after Grigol the Enlightener. A short comment about the inscription was left by Dimitri Bakradze (Based on D. Bakradze’s archival notes, Valeri Silogava has published the above inscription twice). The recent study is based on photos of this inscription that were taken in 2009 and 2011. New interpretations are given to the text “a grace giver, supporter and protector of Tigran”.

The individual mentioned in the inscription is Tigran Honents, the founder of the church. His merits and the importance of the inscription are stressed by the location of the inscribed stone, placed in a visible position over the central entrance, on the front of the western facade. The epigraphic inscription is important for several reasons: 1) From only three Georgian lapidary inscriptions, found on the facades of the church, this inscription is unique for its historical content, location and style; 2) It is a formerly unknown inscription by Tigran Honents; 3) Since the fact of Tigran Honents’s ktetorship was known only from Armenian inscriptions of the church, this is the first and, so far, only occurrence of this historical account in the Georgian text.

The fact that the church was Chalcedonic and that Tigran was an Armenian Orthodox are well accepted. However, an Armenian scholar, Paruyr Muradyan, raised doubts about these facts and suggested that Tigran was not Orthodox and that he had built the church for Monophysites. In his opinion, the church was transferred to Chalcedonians at a later time.

The inscription in question is direct evidence that Tigran Honents, an ethnic Armenian and native of the Georgian State, was Chalcedonian and that in 1215 he started construction of an Orthodox, Georgian church. Otherwise, it would be difficult to explain why the cross relief with a Georgian inscription was placed in such a pivotal position, or why it was stated in Georgian that “it is the supporter of Tigran”.

Three inscriptions from Georgian epigraphy of Ani are also presented in the paper: an unknown unfinished inscription of a builder / mason (from the church of Grigol the Enlightener), and two explanatory inscriptions supplied to the reliefs (from the “Georgian Church”).

The author touches upon the names of Orthodox churches in Ani, as accepted in the scholarly literature. One of them is known as a “Georgian Church”, and the second one as the “church of Grigol the Enlightener”, or
as Chalcedonic, or Armenian Chalcedonic church. This church is also mentioned as the church of Tigran Honenz, after the name of the donator.

In the author’s opinion, the above approach is non-uniform in the sense that both the “Church of Grigol the Enlightener” and the “Georgian Church” are actually Georgian churches. They were within the jurisdiction of the Ani Bishopric of the Georgian Church. Services and prayers were carried out in these churches in Georgian, the wall paintings were executed according to Georgian tradition, and the church walls
were adorned with Georgian inscriptions.

It is true that mentioning of a church by the name of its donator is a respectful practice, and even artificially introduced name of the church should be taken into consideration if it is already established in the scholarly literature, but at the same time it would be proper to use the following code names to refer to the churches under consideration: the “first and second Georgian churches”, according to the chronological principle, or the “lower and upper Georgian churches”, according to the geographic principle (e.g. the church constructed by Tigran Honents can be called the lower church, since it is erected in a gorge, at a lower level than the city structures).

A.V.LEBEDEV. INDO-ARYAN NAMES IN THE SAGA OF ARGONAUTS, ONOMASTICS OF COLCHIS AND GREEK INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA REGION.
English summary: 728-730.
I. Introduction to the problem. Research plan –731.
      II. Indo-Aryan names in the Argonauts saga: personal names of heroes – 736.
      III. Indo-Aryan names in the toponymy of the legend and its geographical area – 743.
      IV. Indo-Aryan names of three Colchians of the royal blood (Saulacus, Suvarmachius, Nabarnugius), the Scythian leader Saumacus and the owner of the ring from Vani Dedatos – 751.
      V. Indo-Aryan personal names in the inscriptions of the Northern Black Sea region (Olbia and Bosporus) - 766.
      Vi. Ethno-linguistic affiliation of the ancient Colchians – 775.

ИНДОАРИЙСКИЕ ИМЕНА В САГЕ ОБ АРГОНАВТАХ, ОНОМАСТИКЕ
КОЛХИДЫ И НАДПИСЯХ СЕВЕРНОГО ПРИЧЕРНОМОРЬЯ Содержание: I. Введение в проблему. План исследования – 731      II. Индоарийские имена в саге об аргонавтах: личные имена героев – 736  III.  Индоарийские имена в топонимике легенды и ее географического ареала – 743.  IV. Индоарийские имена трех колхов царского рода (Савлак, Сувармахий, Набарнугий), скифского вождя Савмака и владельца перстня из Вани Дедатоса – 751.  V. Индоарийские личные имена в надписях Северного Причерноморья (Ольвия и Боспор) – 766.  VI. Этноязыковая принадлежность древних колхов – 775. Ключевые слова: Аргонавты, Миф о золотом руне, Колхида, греческая мифология, история Грузии, истории Армении, история металлов и металлургии, Восточное Причерноморье в древности, индоарийцы, греческая эпиграфика Северного Причерноморья.

Our study revealed that there were two fortresses named after two Lewons in the Armenian kingdom of Cilicia. The first one was built in 1272 and was named after the king Lewon II. It is mentioned as Lewonklay, Lewonberd, berd Lēōni and Lamberd in primary sources. Its modern name is Maran kalesi.

The second fortress, now called Yilankale, was constructed most likely between June 19, 1320 and January 26, 1329 and was named after the king Lewon IV. The medieval authors called it Tłay Lewonin (with Klay Tłay Lewonin / the Castle of [king] Lewon the Young in mind), apparently also Tʽagaworašen.

In addition to these names, I propose to designate the fortresses by the conditional names Lewonklay I and Lewonklay II respectively, in chronological sequence.

In the period of Achaemenid domination the issue of the center of Satrapic Armenia continues to be a controversial issue even nowadays. Recent studies have shown that during VI-IV BC Armenia was not divided into two Satrapies-the XIII and the XVIII. The XIII satrapy corresponded to Armenia, and the XVIII satrapy was located between the Greater Caucasus and the River Kura). In the article we have demonstrated that the administrative center (capital city) of Satrapic Armenia was the city of Van, which was probably also one of the residences of the Achaemenid "Great kings". As to Armavir being the center of the satrapy, after 331 BC it again became the military-political center of the independent Armenian State. Armavir had as vital economic importance for Satrapic Armenia like that of Susa for Achaemenids.

Exploring Yerevan is an interactive travel guide that has been designed to help visitors make productive and enjoyable use of their time in Yerevan and its surroundings. Ranging from low-key daytrips to festive cultural and social events, the e-guide offers a diversity of programs and an ease of use for all. Videos, introductory virtual tours, picture galleries, 3D and panoramic images, appealing stories about the city, interactive maps, and much more have been used to add to the presentation of the city and its surrounding areas.

1. https://www.avc-agbu.org/type/ebook-learners/exploring-yerevan ;

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AISAGtr0nDo ;

3. https://books.apple.com/us/book/id997141176 ;

4. https://viewer.joomag.com/avc-multimedia-e-book-series-ebook2-exploring-yerevan-a-look-inside-the-city/0447097001427110695?short&

The Great Britain towards the future of Georgia and the South Caucasus
at the turn of 1918 and 1919 – the summary of the article
The subject of this article is an analysis of the British government's attitude towards
the future of Georgia and other South Caucasian republics. It was included in four memoranda
prepared by representatives of the English authorities in late 1918 and early 1919.
The full texts of these documents, original versions of which can be found in the National
Archives, Kew, London, are cited in the second part of this article. These documents
seem to be interesting as they were an attempt to define the British politics towards the
Transcaucasian republics and Daghestan after the end of World War I.
The importance of these documents was emphasized by the fact that, due to the presence
of significant British military forces in the Transcaucasia until October 1919, it
was primarily the government in London that shaped the South Caucasian policy of the
victorious Entente powers in the first year after the end of World War I. In turn, the policy
of the Entente powers had a large impact on the international position and the internal
situation of Georgia and its South Caucasian neighbors after 1918.
Therefore, the presentation and discussion of these documents seems essential for the
analysis of the international position of the South Caucasus after World War I. Moreover,
a comparison of the proposed assumptions of British policy towards the South Caucasus
presented in these documents with their practical implementation may be interesting for
the study of the history of Georgia and the South Caucasus in 1918-1921.

У статті розглянуті питання висвітлення в польських військових часописах подій, відомих як Друга карабаська війна (27 вересня-10 листопада 2020 р.). Відзначено, що цей воєнний конфлікт знайшов відображення у низці статей, опублікованих майже в режимі реального часу. Часом це призводило до публікації неперевіреної й недостовірної інформації. Сюжети проаналізованих нами матеріалів відзначаються певною однобічністю, а самепомітним перекосом у бік аналізу застосування безпілотних літальних апаратів та проблем протидії ним. На другий план відійшов аналіз застосування традиційних засобів збройної боротьби (танків, артилерії тощо). Можна стверджувати, що досліджені нами публікації польської фахової преси можуть бути використані при вивченні історії Другої карабаської війни, але за умови ретельної перевірки викладених у них фактів шляхом зіставлення з іншими джерелами.

В своей монографии французский историк-урбанист Талин Тер-Минасян на примере Еревана рассматривает связь между национальным и территорией. В историографии такая связь нередко эссенциализируется: национальная территория рассматривается как органически связанная с этносом, ее населяющим. Автор, напротив, критически рассматривает пример Еревана как «исключительно удачный опыт территориализации» советской национальной политики идентичности в городском пространстве. Опираясь на архивные материалы, Тер-Минасян рекон­струирует уникальную историю эволюции Еревана от провинциального восточного городка на рубеже XIX и XX веков до республиканской, а затем и национальной столицы.

This paper examines the representation of the rule of the Arsacid Armenian queens P‘aṙanjem and Zarmanduxt, who reigned in the second half of the 4th century C.E. The account of their reign is relatively well preserved in 'The Epic Histories' attributed to Pʿawstos Buzand (5th c. C.E). To get a better understanding of the extent of power that these queens had in society, the representation of their rule is compared to the representation of the reign of male monarchs.

On the basis of the extant sources we may conclude that within the context of Armenian culture a common belief was that a king's authority was symbolically accompanied by the supernatural concepts of p‘aṙk‘ (glory), baxt (fortune), and k‘ajut‘iwn (valour). These concepts represented masculine virtues and would only accompany the rule of a legitimate and, most importantly, a righteous king but never that of a queen. However, the representation of P‘aṙanjem and Zarmanduxt explicitly shows that the institution of queenship in Arsacid Armenia was an integral part of the state mechanism. The queen would assume authority as head of state only when the king’s throne was empty and when the legitimate male heirs were too young to accede to the throne.

A short analysis of the current stage of conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan for Mountainous Karabakh against the background of recent history of the South Caucasus and the role played by Russia in the power politics of the South Caucasus between 1914 and 2020.

The urgency of the article is due to the commencement of authority of the
7th convocation of the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia, which
draws up the completion of the constitutional crisis and the Velvet Revolution.
The subject of the study is the constitutional crisis, which corresponds to the
constitutional legal structure of the Velvet Revolution. The purpose of this article
is to identify the most signifcant constitutional legal features of the constitutional
crisis in Armenia. The method of analysis and synthesis, the formal legal method
of research and the method of interpretation of legal norms were used. On the
basis of legal facts, the article chronologically divides the constitutional crisis
into stages, analyzes the constitutional legal features of the constitutional crisis
in general, and individual features of the stages in particular, highlights the
problem of choosing a constitutional legal mechanism for the dissolution of the
legislative body and calling snap parliamentary elections, on the basis of which
7th convocation of the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia was formed
and began its work. The scientifc novelty of the research is determined by its
purpose, content, uncovered constitutional legal features of the subject of the
article, as well as the formulated proposals and the main conclusion. The author
substantiates that the constitutional crisis is the constitutional legal expression
of the Velvet Revolution in Armenia. The reasons for the allocation of three stages
in the development of a constitutional crisis are given, it is indicated that each
stage has its own unique subject composition of the parties to the confict. The
thesis that the dialectical development of the constitutional crisis contributed to
the strengthening of constitutional values in Armenia is substantiated. It is stated
that the current Constitution of Armenia does not provide for any possibility of
dissolving the legislative body without the consent of the majority of deputies.
Some mechanisms for the prevention and resolution of constitutional conficts
are proposed. It is concluded that the constitutional crisis developed and was
resolved exclusively within the limits of the current Constitution. The results of the
study can be both included in the course of the theory of constitutional conficts,
and used to prevent constitutional conficts and to make reasonable changes
in legislation. The author comes to the main conclusion that the constitutional
crisis developed and was resolved exclusively within the limits of the current
Constitution of the Republic of Armenia.

Five standards of the weight of Ganja ‘abbāsī were fetched out. At the beginning of an independent coinage ‘abbāsī, which were struck in 1764–1781, produced almost of the same weight as Iranian ones (I weight standard, ca. 4.50g). In 1768, following the increasing of the number of shāhī in Iranian ‘abbāsī from 4 to 5, in Ganja again were struck 4-shāhī-‘abbāsī weights 3.69g (II weight standard, used in 1768–1774), that was 4/5 of the Iranian standard. The following two standards also refl ected changes of the quantity of shāhīs in Iranian ‘abbāsī. Ganja ‘abbāsī of III weight standard (3.38g, which is the weight of the four shāhī in ‘abbāsī containing 5.5 shāhī) were minted in 1774–1776. Ganja ‘abbāsī of IV weight standard (3.07g, which is the weight of the four shāhī in ‘abbāsi containing 6 shāhīs) were minted in 1774–1781. During this reasearch, the refi nement of the chronology of changes of the quantity of shāhī in Iranian ‘abbāsī in 1774–1775 was done.

Ganja coins of the last V weight standard (2.46g, i. e. one shāhī less, or –20% of previous standard weight) minted in probably from 1781 and until 1791, after the start of Qarabagh-Georgian occupation of Ganja. It was found that a change in the type of coins was not correspond with a change of the weight standard in 1768–1792. Under the infl uence of introduced in Persia silver coins of heavy denominations, in Ganja in 1792–1800 were struck 5 ‘abbāsī coins of local types and local weight standards – of V standard in 1792–1798 and of IV standard in 1799– 1800. It has been shown, that their prevoius designation as riyāls was incorrect, and they must be called as minaltun or mihazar (or Ganja rouble) in accordance with report dated by 1840.

A short analysis of the current stage of conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan for Mountainous Karabakh against the background of recent history of the South Caucasus and the role played by Russia in the power politics of the South Caucasus between 1914 and 2020.
In Russian.