Talk:History of Armenia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article contains material from the CIA World Factbook which, as a U.S. government publication, is in the public domain.

	Armenia Portal History of Armenia is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to better improve and organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a group devoted to the the study, and improvement of Wikipedia articles on the subject, of History. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

it seems the subsection under the main Armenia article is better than this page --Freshraisin 04:58, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Kur-Araxes Culture 2 "Carenitida" 3 Mt. Ararat and Noah 4 Urartu 5 Liberation movement 6 Hi 7 Fair use rationale for Image:Armenia-soviet-independence.jpg 8 Why no mention of Mannaeans in Armenian History 9 Armenian Christian cross of the 13th century

[edit] Kur-Araxes Culture

Codex,

The "Kur-Araxes" refers not just to the valley (which is the area between the lower sections of the rivers), but to the area between the two rivers, which includes both the valley and modern Armenia (i.e. part of the Armenian Highland). Many of the major monuments of the culture are in modern Armenian (e.g. Metsamor, Mokhrablur, Shengavit), and thus are in the Armenian Highland. The culture perhaps started in that area (between rivers, valley and Armenia) but spread around, to the rest of the Highland and beyond, and north Caucasus. So if you don't mind, I believe the correct compromise would be "Armenian Highland and surrounding areas." This is an article about Armenian History, so it makes sense to link the KA culture with Armenia using the term "Armenian Highland" (plus, as I said, the culture covered the highland as well). Also, the sentence with "river valleys" was abit ambiguous--which rivers? (the Kur and Arax weren't specified as rivers, nor was their link with Armenian history established).

I mainly editted this article for the typos and grammar errors to eliminate the "cleanup" mark. When I editted, the "ca"'s weren't there, so, I never deleted them:)

By the way, is it necessary to put "may have" regarding the transition from KA to Trialeti culture? You previously editted that part (14:36, 31 May 2005 Codex Sinaiticus), and you used the verb "developing" without the "may have." I mean, the rest of the paragraph has a more definite language (it doesn't say "the SS culture may have centered in Transcaucasia). I mean it's already clear from the context that when we talk about history that old, it is never 100% certain. Therefore, I believe adding "may have" to that particular sentence may create an imbalance with the rest of the paragraph.

TigranTheGreat

PS: Codex, perhaps you can help me. How do I make sure that my name and time is added at the end of a comment in the Talk page? Thank you.

Hi Tigran, welcome to wikipedia... I just now saw this discussion, after I added the word "possibly"... Thank you for taking the time to give your thoughts behind the changes...

To put the name and date stamp, you just put ~~~~ and it automatically shows up. Cheers, Codex Sinaiticus 21:53, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome and the tip, Codex:) Just one more thing about the Prehistory section. This article had "cleanup" section due to typos and stuff like that. Now, do you think "is assigned the period of ca. 4000 - 2200 BC" and "and later possibly developed into the Trialeti culture (ca. 2200 - 1500 BC.)" might be modified to ensure parallel tense? I mean we change tense right in the middle of the sentence, and it might sound awkward. I wonder if we could change it to "is assigned the period of ca. 4000 - 2200 BC, and is believed to have subsequently developed into the Trialeti culture (ca. 2200 - 1500 BC.)" This way we have both the parallelism and the non-certainty (via "is believed"). I don't think we want another cleanup notation. Since I don't want to be nitpicky, I will not make the change and leave it up to you decide (you have seniority after all:) ). TigranTheGreat 22:05, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

• Sure, that parallel wording works for me... Feel free to change it yourself, wikipedia isn't really as hierarchical as some would assert! Codex Sinaiticus 22:10, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Carenitida"

Carenitis, not *Carenitida: the latter is a barbarism by someone who didn't read Greek: Carenitida is the accusative case. . . . Bill 17:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mt. Ararat and Noah

I decided to reply to Str1977 about Mt. Ararat here, to make it more accessible to other editors. Here is Str1977's original message on my talk page:

Hallo Tigranes Magnus, I have made the change to plural because AFAIK to equate the Mount Ararat where the Ark "stranded" with the highest peak we nowadays call "the" Mount Ararat is a fairly recent and western phenomenon. AFAIK there are other mountains further south that are traditionally considered the landing place by Kurds and Armenians. Str1977 17:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Str1977. I understand what you mean about the debate that's going on about the location of the ark, and I appreciate your knowledge on the subject (I see you are a historian). The sentence currently in the article (that Mt. Ararat is the traditional landing place) is still accurate because traditionally, that's the mountain that's been associated with the ark. The overwhelming majority of expeditions have been conducted on Mt. Ararat. That's tradition. In fact I am not aware a single expedition before 20th century that went to southern Armenia. If there is, it must be the exception rather than the rule, which means traditionally, it's been the Mt. Ararat linked to the ark. There is a 19th c. painting by Ayvazovski showing Noah descending from Ararat. Most of the Christian videos I have seen still talk about it as the place of the ark. Britannica tells us the same:

Mount Ararat

Ararat, traditionally known as the landing place for Noah's Ark at the end of the flood, is a sacred place to the Armenian people. http://www.britannica.com/ebi/article-9272931

Here is a similar passage from ebibleteacher:

Snow covered Mt. Ararat and Little Ararat are inactive volcanoes located in eastern Turkey. Mt. Ararat rises over 3 miles above sea level. This mountain is the traditional resting place of the Ark. http://www.ebibleteacher.com/batlasweb/sld009.htm

In fact, it seems that the idea of the ark being in the southern mountains of Armenia (modernly referred to as Kurdistan) was seriously considered only recently, after some believed that the expeditions to Mt. Ararat didn't produce any tangible result (although this is debatable too. There seem to be some credible accounts about evidence of the ark found there). However, that debate properly belongs to the article about the Great Flood. This article is about Armenia and not Noah's ark, and so the debate has no place here (which you correctly pointed out by deleting an extensive passage about the expeditions and their "failures"). All that's needed here is a statement that the main mountain of Armenia was traditionally linked to the Flood, which is correct.

I don't think Armenians ever considered the ark to be anywhere other than Mt. Ararat. In fact, from their first days till now, Armenian sources always refer to Ararat as the sacred mountain where the ark landed. This is stated in the Armenia translation of the Bible around 400 AD (one of the oldest translations of the Bible), it was stated so in the works of ancient, medieval, and later Armenian historians. It is depicted on Armenia's official coat of arms.

I don't know if Kruds traditionally thought that the ark landed in the southern mountains, or it's a fairly recent account, but even if they thought that, this is again an article about Armenia, and not the Kurds, and those additional details belong to an article about Noah's ark. In general, it's Mt. Ararat that's been associated with the Flood.

By the way, what foreigners referred to as "mountains Ararat" was in fact Mt. Ararat. The reason is that, as the ebibleteacher passage above (and picture on that page) says, the mountain really has two peaks--Lesser Ararat and Greater Ararat. They form however a single unit, which is why their official name now is Mt. Ararat. Here, take a look at its picture here: http://www.hyeguide.com/images/ararat/ararat2.jpg. Isn't it magnificent :)? When you live in Yerevan, you are blessed waking up to that view every morning.

By the way, the above is stated in the britannica article as well:

Ararat consists of two extinct volcanoes, their summits about 7 miles (11 kilometers) apart. Great Ararat, which rises 16,853 feet (5,137 meters) above sea level, is Turkey's highest peak. Little Ararat rises in a smooth, steep, nearly perfect cone to an altitude of 12,877 feet (3,925 meters).

--TigranTheGreat 09:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

A short reply, Tigranes, more maybe later. Of course "Mount Ararat" is the traditional landing place, as the Bible says so, but to my knowledge this biblical MA is not universally identified with the highest peak of the range. Cheers, Str1977 11:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, Str1977. It is the traditional landing place, which is what the article says. It is also true that it's not universally accepted--some people think it's in Kurdistan. Since this article is about Armenia and not about the Flood or Noah, the debate about the ark's location is inappropriate here--it is a deviation from the main content of the article, and so has little if any relevance. If anyone wants to know what people think about alternative locations of the ark, they can check out the articles on Noah's ark or the Flood. This is also the reason why you deleted an irrelevant paragraph about the details of expeditions to Mt. Ararat, and that "no evidence was found," which means you recognized that such details are unnecessary deviations from the main topic of the article.--TigranTheGreat 14:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Urartu

Scientifically, there has been no direct connexions established between the Indo-European speaking Armenians and the Caucasian speaking Urartans. I strongly discourage nationalistic statements in an encyclopaedia article.--Khodadad 00:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Cite your sources. On what do you base your allegation?

PS: What is the connection between Dravidian Elamites (hey if Urartians are Caucasian) and Indo-European Iranians? :) --Eupator 00:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Much of Armenian language consists of Urartuan words. Many gods in Armenian pantheon (most notably Armenian Hayk=Urartuan Khald) come from Urartu. Every scholar agrees that Urartuans played a role in the ethnogenesis of Armenians (majority believes they mixed, minority believes Urartuans were Armenians). Plus there is a nice cafe in Glendale called Urartu, great sandwitches and drinks--my fave--the Urartuchini. So, there is a connection.--TigranTheGreat 08:58, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Liberation movement

Ottoman, could you please copy here the relevant paragraphs from your sources that you used? I.e.:

^ The Armenian Genocide: History, Politics, Ethics By Richard G. Hovannisian p.129 ^ British Diplomacy and the Armenian Question: From the 1830s to 1914 By Arman J. Kirakossian page 58 ^ Der Minassian, Anahide, "Nationalisme et socialisme dans le Mouvement Revolutionnaire Armenien", in "LA QUESTION ARMENIENNE", Paris, 1983, pp. 73-111.

Thanks.--TigranTheGreat 02:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I have the "History, Politics, Ethics" in the library, I will look for the full paragraph after Christmas. I have been using a program to track my notes and for the British Diplomacy and the Armenian Question: I have the paragraph and this is the exact copy of my note; "The national liberation movement of the balkan peoples and the immediate involvement of the European powers in the Eastern question had a powerull effect on hitherto suppressed natinal movement among the Armenians of the Ottoman Epire - on the development of a national liberaton idealogy and transformathion of their national identty. The armenian population increasingly realized that uts liberation rom the Ottoman Empire would serve to address their problems, and in 1876, the Armenian national addemby in Constantinople debated an appeal to Europen Powers and Russia with a request to implement reforms in Weastern armenia." Hope this will be helpful 4u 4now. You should have access to all these sources, which the presented statements are only introductory statements of the general concepts. You should have more (native) information on the "national movement" of Armenians of Armenia. They build the republic, and it did not happen by itself, right? Happy Christmas, if I will not have chance.--OttomanReference 05:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I understand, OR, but as an editor, it's your responsibility to demonstrate that your edits correspond to sources. We all provide quotes when asked. I will wait for those other quotes.--TigranTheGreat 01:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

—————— "On November 29, the Soviet 11th Army invaded Armenia at Karavansarai (present-day Ijevan) and by November 29, 1920, the Soviet 11th Army marched into Yerevan." November 29 repeats twice. Is that in error or is this two different years? 209.195.110.247 06:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

I hope my rearrangement of the article is okay. I thought that it would be better to divide the article in accordance to historic periods and divide those sections into subsections that concern certain dynasties and periods of occupation. Cheers. -- Davo88 05:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Armenia-soviet-independence.jpg

Image:Armenia-soviet-independence.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why no mention of Mannaeans in Armenian History

Pretty much it's self explanatory, Mannaeans are Armenians, or are some people would like to put it the ancestors of Armenians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.128.67 (talk) 05:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

the Manneans settled at Lake Urmia, which isn't even situated in "Greater Armenia". Thus, there is no reason to discuss them in an article on the history of Armenia. We might mention them as the neighbors of Urartu in the Prehistoric Armenia article, nothing wrong with that. dab (𒁳) 11:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Armenian Christian cross of the 13th century

I photographed the following Armenian Christian cross from the Lori region, at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New-York. If deemed worthy, could someone introduce it in the article in the Middle-Ages paragraph? Also, putting it in the Lori article would be quite nice. Regards. PHG (talk) 18:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Very beautiful picture! I agree that this should be used somewhere. Avarayr (talk) 20:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

there was not a country named Armenia until 1918.Urartu was not an Armenian country.I have prove! Herodotos writes about all the tribes in urartu and there are not armenians in them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.38.118.223 (talk) 19:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)