Why Armenia is not popular in the same way that Greece is?

[Nadezhda89]

Why Armenia is not popular in the same way that Greece is?
I mean Armenia was founded in 2492 BC but it is not respected the way Greece is and it is not popular as Greece. Even their alphabets are similar. But why things are this way?

[kabeiros]

The best thread ever :picard1:

[Nadezhda89]

The best thread ever :picard1:

:icon_smile:

[Partizan]

Moving it to Armenian forum.

[bella1407]

Why Armenia is not popular in the same way that Greece is?
I mean Armenia was founded in 2492 BC but it is not respected the way Greece is and it is not popular as Greece. Even their alphabets are similar. But why things are this way?
:picard1:
Armenia alphabet:
http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/235/8/6/armenian_alphabet_by_sternradio7-d47mqkf.jpg
Greek alphabet:
http://static4.depositphotos.com/1001003/348/i/950/depositphotos_3481463-3D-Silver-Greek-Alphabet.jpg

They are totally different.

[Nadezhda89]

:picard1:
Armenia alphabet:
http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/235/8/6/armenian_alphabet_by_sternradio7-d47mqkf.jpg
Greek alphabet:
http://static4.depositphotos.com/1001003/348/i/950/depositphotos_3481463-3D-Silver-Greek-Alphabet.jpg

They are totally different.
Are you sure?
"The Armenian Alphabet was invented in 405 AD by Mesrop Mashtots.
It is said that some letters of the Armenian alphabet were based on the Greek ones. However, more than a visual similarity, the Armenian and Greek alphabets are rather very close in the letter/sound order. Actually a Greek colleague allegedly helped Mashtots with creating the Armenian alphabet."

[Pontios]

I guess maybe because they have not went on to build great empires, multiple times, and invent so many things the Greeks have. After all, half of the world's governments today, Democracy, was invented by Greeks. That alone already makes Greeks pretty popular :lol:

They are a very ancient nation though, one of the first Christians actually, and have a rich history being in the center of Greeks and Persians often. Their history should be taught and known much more.

They are also often thought to be very close to Greeks.

[Linet]

No matter what, Armenia :old: and Greece :fpoem: are different countries, with different history :book2: , traditions :fdancing: and achievements :cupgold0:... the fact that Armenia is an ancient nation is respectable but we are still talking for two different countries.

[Nadezhda89]

No matter what, Armenia :old: and Greece :fpoem: are different countries, with different history :book2: , traditions :fdancing: and achievements :cupgold0:... the fact that Armenia is an ancient nation is respectable but we are still talking for two different countries.
Yeah, but I think it should be respected way more. It is not enough. :)
I mean look at Egypt, Greece, Italy...

[Twistedmind]

Even their alphabets are similar.
With tiny difference of 1400 years between two. :picard1: Anyway, Latin Script, Armenian, Georgian, Glagolitic, Cyrillic, all were based on Greek, and follow similar letter order.

On topic, Greeks left much to European Culture, Armenians are rich in history and tradition, but not really comparable to Greeks when it comes to European identity.

[bella1407]

I guess maybe because they have not went on to build great empires, multiple times, and invent so many things the Greeks have. After all, half of the world's governments today, Democracy, was invented by Greeks. That alone already makes Greeks pretty popular :lol:

They are a very ancient nation though, one of the first Christians actually, and have a rich history being in the center of Greeks and Persians often. Their history should be taught and known much more.

They are also often thought to be very close to Greeks.

actually Armenia is the First Christian nation:)

[Twistedmind]

Osroene and San Marino become Christians earlier.

[Linet]

actually Armenia is the First Christian nation:)

You mean as official religion :icon_ask:?

[bella1407]

You mean as official religion :icon_ask:?

yes.
In the early 4th century, the Kingdom of Armenia became the first nation to adopt Christianity as a state religion."(Wiki)

[Twistedmind]

yes.
In the early 4th century, the Kingdom of Armenia became the first nation to adopt Christianity as a state religion."(Wiki)
Well, like I said frist country which accepted Christianity was kingdom of Osroene in III century (somewhere before 212).

[Gospodine]

Popular in what way? Amongst Cultural Preservationists and European Nationalists?

Probably because it's not European? And no amount of forcing them into Europe with Eurovision and the Orthodox brotherhood will make them so.

[Willem]

Because many think they are some kind of Turks/Arabs.

[Lathander]

They lack few things.Or theirs are not as good as greek ones..

1)Big marble temples
2)Beautiful marble statues
3)Philosophers and scientists (I am sure they have their own schoolars but not effective as Aristo to say)
4)Mythology of course.I like hellen mythology.

[Sikeliot]

Because Armenia did not contribute to the foundation of Western civilization.

Anyway, Armenia and Greece are similar due to religion and Ottoman influences, just like Serbia or any other Balkan country. In ancient times there was no Greek influence there I don't think.

[Trun]

Anyway, Armenia and Greece are similar due to religion and Ottoman influences, just like Serbia or any other Balkan country. In ancient times there was no Greek influence there I don't think.

Armenia and Greece have different religion. Armenians are Apostolic, Greeks are Orthodox.

Also, Greeks and Armenians are the foundations of Byzantine Empire. They even speak similar languages.

[Sikeliot]

They even speak similar languages.

They may have started out that way, but from what I have been told, they have diverged very much.

[Linet]

We speak similar languages :eusa_eh:
.....when that happened and nobody informed me :icon_ask:?

[Trun]

They may have started out that way, but from what I have been told, they have diverged very much.

It is because Armenian has been influenced by Persian.

[Sikeliot]

Armenian doesn't sound like Greek at all that's for sure. I would think going by its sound that it was more related to Persian, Kurdish, etc

[Gospodine]

Graeco-Armeno-Aryan branched off from IE around 3500BC.

It's been a long time since Greek and Armenian were similar. And yes, Armenian is thoroughly Persian-influenced (it was originally though to be a member of the Iranian language family).

And Greek picked up a heavy pre-IE substrate when it moved into the Balkans.

[Sikeliot]

Didn't Greek and Armenian start out somewhere in the Ukraine/Russia area and then spread outward?

[Gospodine]

Didn't Greek and Armenian start out somewhere in the Ukraine/Russia area and then spread outward?

Late PIE movements and migrations have never been finalized. They could have been in the Southern Caucasus, Black Sea region or possibly even in Central Asia.

Generally the Indo-Europeanists that support a late-stage Graeco-Armeno-Aryan branch also support the idea that the PIE urheimat was in the Armenian highlands; the Armenian Hypothesis.

The other thing that differentiates Armenian is that it's not entirely Indo-European.

It has a substrate of likely Proto-Caucasian influence: Hurro-Urartian. Indeed the Urartian Kingdom was centered around Mount Ararat and Lake Van.

[gregorius]

Lol armenian doesnt sound like greek or Persian. it is an own branch in the IE language group like the alboz. How much is russian related to dutch ? the same as armenian is to greek or to persian.

Armenian alphabet and the Greek are not the same. The only thing similar is that armenian alphabet has also 36 characters.
The only other thing common is that armenians and greeks both dont like turks in general.

Armenia is not popular etc. Because it is located at a shitty place, no sea shore, no tourism.
Barbarian mongol turks on the left, Backstabbers Georgians above, and silly turkified persians at the left who think armenia is historical azeri land.

[Scholarios]

Much Respect to Armenians, but Philhellenism grew out of Europeans' constantly changing view of themselves and their civilization. Armenian history and culture, though rich and influential in it's own way, didn't have the far-reaching influence of Greek culture, specifically the language and the Greek influence on Western Christianity.

[Scholarios]

We speak similar languages :eusa_eh:
.....when that happened and nobody informed me :icon_ask:?


Generally, Armenian is usually considered the closest living language to Modern Greek ( unless you consider Pontiaka, Tsakonika, or Griko to be separate languages from Greek)

Edit: but I'm actually unaware on what linguistic basis this hypothesis rests.

[Anulik]

We have our own mythology as well but one downside to our history is upon becoming a christian nation everything prior to Christianity was destroyed ex. Buildings etc... For this reason a lot of ancient structures could have provided insight and evidence to not only our history and origins and cultures but also world heritage.

[Linet]

Generally, Armenian is usually considered the closest living language to Modern Greek ( unless you consider Pontiaka, Tsakonika, or Griko to be separate languages from Greek)

Edit: but I'm actually unaware on what linguistic basis this hypothesis rests.

Of course i consider them to be Greek dialects :nod:

Even if its the closest thing, its still not similar :icon_ask:...The lack of other more similar to Greek language still doesnt make Armenian related to Greek :icon_no:...



We have our own mythology as well but one downside to our history is upon becoming a christian nation everything prior to Christianity was destroyed ex. Buildings etc... For this reason a lot of ancient structures could have provided insight and evidence to not only our history and origins and cultures but also world heritage.

i agree, chistianity at its early years was a plague :sick: for the countries that had some history :old . For cristianity to be implanted to them, their history :book2: should be destroyed :comp26:...on the other hand for other less advanced countries :desert:, christianity :fpope: was a blessing :rose:

[Dengizik]

Greek people are smart and friendly. Armenians just some whinys.

[gregorius]

says a Turk.

[cro magnon]

Because its a shithole of reptilian race.

[Dengizik]

says a Turk.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/543184_10152402950960483_1818033462_n.jpg

[gregorius]

you can ask yourself why there isnt a single nation that likes turks. Because you are dumb people which only quality is making kebab

[Just90]

Because of the Greek Islands , like ; Santorini , Mykonos , Paros , Milos
That's paradise :love:
That's like the Caribbean of Europe lol

[legolasbozo]

Lol armenian doesnt sound like greek or Persian. it is an own branch in the IE language group like the alboz. How much is russian related to dutch ? the same as armenian is to greek or to persian.

Armenian alphabet and the Greek are not the same. The only thing similar is that armenian alphabet has also 36 characters.
The only other thing common is that armenians and greeks both dont like turks in general.

Armenia is not popular etc. Because it is located at a shitty place, no sea shore, no tourism.
Barbarian mongol turks on the left, Backstabbers Georgians above, and silly turkified persians at the left who think armenia is historical azeri land.


you can ask yourself why there isnt a single nation that likes turks. Because you are dumb people which only quality is making kebab

what's wrong with you man? why are you insulting us permanently? in this forum everybody hate each other, the hatred toward us just because our past, maybe they got some points. but you are saying turks barbaric, georgians backstabbers the others thief, look at yourself, you are not get along with even your neighbours. The hatred between Turks and Greeks in this forum is not exemplify whole. You can find too many peoples in Turkey and Greece has a sympathy for each others. Past is past.

[Yalquzaq]

Gregor, I would bet hundred bucks that you are one of those diaspora Armenians who don't even have a relation to the Caucasus. Otherwise, I don't think you would doubt our "Turkness" because Armenians see us as Turks, and thats how they refer to us aswell. Georgians call us Tatar, Persians call us Turk.

And for the sake of it, if anyone is Persian, it is you Armenians. You are for instance pretty similiar to your Kurdish brothers. Neverthless that the "Persian theories" is usually attested to Azeri Turks that lives in Iran, and not those of Caucasus, not that they hold any slighest truth about our brethern to south of Araz river anyway.

And yes present-day Armenia was a Oghuz land since Oghuz tribes migrated westward, this only changed when Russians changed the demographics of the region in 1800s.

And a fun fact for you, to "your" above actually there is Azerbaijani Turks of Borchali, not Georgians. :laugh:

[gregorius]

cool story didnt read

[Yalquzaq]

So I should not waste my time with a teenager diaspora troll anyway.

[gregorius]

nope you should not

[Anulik]

Of course i consider them to be Greek dialects :nod:

Even if its the closest thing, its still not similar :icon_ask:...The lack of other more similar to Greek language still doesnt make Armenian related to Greek :icon_no:...




i agree, chistianity at its early years was a plague :sick: for the countries that had some history :old . For cristianity to be implanted to them, their history :book2: should be destroyed :comp26:...on the other hand for other less advanced countries :desert:, christianity :fpope: was a blessing :rose:

Christianity isn't a plaque. It has formed our identity as paganism dwindled throughout the world.

[Anulik]

Gregor, I would bet hundred bucks that you are one of those diaspora Armenians who don't even have a relation to the Caucasus. Otherwise, I don't think you would doubt our "Turkness" because Armenians see us as Turks, and thats how they refer to us aswell. Georgians call us Tatar, Persians call us Turk.

And for the sake of it, if anyone is Persian, it is you Armenians. You are for instance pretty similiar to your Kurdish brothers. Neverthless that the "Persian theories" is usually attested to Azeri Turks that lives in Iran, and not those of Caucasus, not that they hold any slighest truth about our brethern to south of Araz river anyway.

And yes present-day Armenia was a Oghuz land since Oghuz tribes migrated westward, this only changed when Russians changed the demographics of the region in 1800s.

And a fun fact for you, to "your" above actually there is Azerbaijani Turks of Borchali, not Georgians. :laugh:

Keep rewriting your bs and pretty soon you'll start believing it... wait that's what your country is founded on.

[Yalquzaq]

So another diaspora Armenian. None of you are from Caucasus, and your brothers in Caucasus were relocated to Caucasus from elsewhere by Russians and you talk about "talking BS"?

[Anulik]

So much passion. You'd think its true! My ancestral land is Armenian highland and the Caucasus is there a problem? I don't need to argue about that. Keep coming back for some more? Can't get enough of us huh?

[gregorius]

its really funny that you actually believe what your sultan says. you must be really smart to believe that

[Yalquzaq]

How can it be your "ancestral land" when none of your ancestors lived there? The Armenian diaspora in the west are those who ended up there from the Ottoman lands, and this did not include the Caucasus. The Armenians in Caucasus like said for the most part were relocated from other territorities to Azerbaijani lands by Russians in 1800s.

[Partizan]

Gregor, I would bet hundred bucks that you are one of those diaspora Armenians who don't even have a relation to the Caucasus. Otherwise, I don't think you would doubt our "Turkness" because Armenians see us as Turks, and thats how they refer to us aswell. Georgians call us Tatar, Persians call us Turk.

And for the sake of it, if anyone is Persian, it is you Armenians. You are for instance pretty similiar to your Kurdish brothers. Neverthless that the "Persian theories" is usually attested to Azeri Turks that lives in Iran, and not those of Caucasus, not that they hold any slighest truth about our brethern to south of Araz river anyway.

And yes present-day Armenia was a Oghuz land since Oghuz tribes migrated westward, this only changed when Russians changed the demographics of the region in 1800s.

And a fun fact for you, to "your" above actually there is Azerbaijani Turks of Borchali, not Georgians. :laugh:

Thanks for history lesson to those Hays.

Genetic chart about Turks, Turkmens, Azerbaijani Turks and Persians:

http://i49.tinypic.com/64j79y.jpg

Turks and Azerbaijani Turks seem like half or quarter blooded Turkmens. So, "Azeris are Persian and Kurdish lololol" theories of Armenians, Kurds and Persians collapse.

Besides, about Armenians:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-V-NWT_L5gLs/TkTaSpKQLiI/AAAAAAAAD6o/bNZ-AKjduac/s1600/ADMIXTURE%2BArmenian_D_12.png

http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/2927/westcentraleurasialabel.png

Armenians seem closer to Yemenis more than any other West Asian ethnicity :tongue

Let's see what Strabo writes on this occasion:


(I, 2, 34): “...Syrians, Arabs and Armenians live in the close neighbourhood, this is why they are similar both in appearance and way of life”

[gregorius]

im not going to post any proves dude, look at the old maps and search byyourself.

i know that you did that already and everytime you saw that it proves that armenia an karabach is armenian historical land and not western azerbeijan:picard1:

you also asked yourself why the rest of the world also thinks that.

[Azalea]

The only thing that's actually funny is that both of you just wrote a few responses to Yalquzaq telling him how wrong and false he is without having tried to prove him wrong in any way. Good job. Just continue, don't bother taking your head out of your asses.

[Loki]

Armenians are an ancient Indo-European population in the area and respect to them for that.

But they cannot compare to Greece at all. Western civilization started with the Greeks, and Greek philosophers have shaped our modern world in almost every way imaginable.

[Sikeliot]

Armenia was likely influential in terms of Christianity in the Middle East. Armenia just didn't influence the west to the same extent as Greece.

[Anulik]

Armenia was likely influential in terms of Christianity in the Middle East. Armenia just didn't influence the west to the same extent as Greece.

Many Armenians contributed greatly in Byzantine Empire but of course it needn't be specified of the ethnicity in the empire for the most part. Thank you for your kind contributions to this thread.

[Anulik]

The only thing that's actually funny is that both of you just wrote a few responses to Yalquzaq telling him how wrong and false he is without having tried to prove him wrong in any way. Good job. Just continue, don't bother taking your head out of your asses.

Whats really pathetically funny is how you write a small response contributing nothing but a fake calm coolness and then an insult? Most likely your head is stuck somewhere. Prove what wrong? Lmao his little nationalistic wet dreams with no evidence provided? To convince who? You and your deranged lemmings? The whole world knows but of course go ahead and keep repeating it to convince yourselves further in your pathetic circle you poor souls. Make an idol out of it and worship it if you must...pathetic..,

[MegaArgus1]

Armenia was likely influential in terms of Christianity in the Middle East. Armenia just didn't influence the west to the same extent as Greece.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Armenian_Byzantine_emperors

the west exaggerated with the greek influence and now the present greeks want to cash it

[Linet]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Armenian_Byzantine_emperors

the west exaggerated with the greek influence and now the present greeks want to cash it

Megaargus hurts? :lol: ....the i have nothing, i contributed nothing, came to judge us :chin: ...jealousy isnt a good thing :icon_wink:

Did any Greek here say anything bad about Armenians? :eyes...we all respect them...Nobody said all emperors were of pure Greek decent. if you have nothing of value to say about the conversation, just leave...


And this is for you...This guy from Macedonia dynasty who fought against Samouel (your Monkeydonian hero)...ops your ancestor was Bulgar :blink:

Basil II "the Bulgar-Slayer" (Macedonian dynasty)
(Βασίλειος Β΄ ο Βουλγαροκτόνος) 10 January 976 –15 December 1025
Eldest son of Romanos II, Basil was born in 958.
The first decade of his reign was marked by the rivalry with the powerful Basil Lekapenos, an unsuccessful war against Bulgaria an rebellions by generals in Asia Minor. Basil solidified his position through a marriage alliance with Vladimir I of Kiev, and after suppressing the revolts embarked on his conquest of Bulgaria. Bulgaria was finally subdued in 1018 after over 20 years of war, interrupted only by sporadic warfare in Syria against the Fatimids. Basil also expanded Byzantine control over most of Armenia. His reign is widely considered as the apogee of medieval Byzantium.

[Linet]

@Anulik : Now christianity is part of our past and our heritage. But in order to become that, it destroyed great part of our ancient history. Valuable scripts were burned and stautues have been broken....i may be Christian, i would fight for my religion, but i will never forgive that...

[Arsen_]

And yes present-day Armenia was a Oghuz land since Oghuz tribes migrated westward, this only changed when Russians changed the demographics of the region in 1800s.


You think that Europeans do not know details of history in Caucasus and you can spread here your ugly bullshit?

Oghuz tribes managed to have some demographics in Armenia only thanks to "Great surgun" in 1604-1608 when shah Abbas forcibly depopulated those areas and forced migration of Armenians from the Caucasus to the central areas of Iran. Before 1604 all those lands were inhabitted by Christian Armenian population.

Having a desire to move even the center of Armenian spiritual life of Armenia to Iran Shah Abbas even was planning to transfer the residence of the Catholicos of All Armenians, and for that it was supposed to destroy the Echmiadzin (near Yerevan) - the seat of the head of the Armenian Apostolic Church and from its stones to build a new residence in Iran. Even in 1614 to Isfahan it was taken 50 stones extracted from the building of the Echmiadzin Church and sacred objects and relics, such as the right hand of St. Gregory the Illuminator, Baptist of Armenians. But Abbas' plans thanks God did not happen , by the resistance of the Armenian clergy and the wealthy merchants. When Armenian bishops, priests and peasants learned that the relics of saints from monastery of St. Gayane and Hripsime near Yerevan were planned to be sent to Iran, there was a riot.

So only after relocation of great number of Christian Armenian population from their Homeland some semi-wild nomad tribes began to have some demographics there.

[gregorius]

...

[MegaArgus1]

Megaargus hurts? :lol: ....the i have nothing, i contributed nothing, came to judge us :chin: ...jealousy isnt a good thing :icon_wink:

Did any Greek here say anything bad about Armenians? :eyes...we all respect them...Nobody said all emperors were of pure Greek decent. if you have nothing of value to say about the conversation, just leave...


And this is for you...This guy from Macedonia dynasty who fought against Samouel (your Monkeydonian hero)...ops your ancestor was Bulgar :blink:

Basil II "the Bulgar-Slayer" (Macedonian dynasty)
(Βασίλειος Β΄ ο Βουλγαροκτόνος) 10 January 976 –15 December 1025
Eldest son of Romanos II, Basil was born in 958.
The first decade of his reign was marked by the rivalry with the powerful Basil Lekapenos, an unsuccessful war against Bulgaria an rebellions by generals in Asia Minor. Basil solidified his position through a marriage alliance with Vladimir I of Kiev, and after suppressing the revolts embarked on his conquest of Bulgaria. Bulgaria was finally subdued in 1018 after over 20 years of war, interrupted only by sporadic warfare in Syria against the Fatimids. Basil also expanded Byzantine control over most of Armenia. His reign is widely considered as the apogee of medieval Byzantium.


http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1282211&postcount=1

"so once again the greek claim you are slavs you are not macedonians since the ancient macedonians 2500 years ago were not slavs is not just funny but it comes from sick minds"

http://forum.slavorum.com/index.php/topic,1396.msg64652/topicseen.html#msg64652

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t847963-26/#post10887438

[gregorius]

Thanks for history lesson to those Hays.

Genetic chart about Turks, Turkmens, Azerbaijani Turks and Persians:

http://i49.tinypic.com/64j79y.jpg

Turks and Azerbaijani Turks seem like half or quarter blooded Turkmens. So, "Azeris are Persian and Kurdish lololol" theories of Armenians, Kurds and Persians collapse.

Besides, about Armenians:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-V-NWT_L5gLs/TkTaSpKQLiI/AAAAAAAAD6o/bNZ-AKjduac/s1600/ADMIXTURE%2BArmenian_D_12.png

http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/2927/westcentraleurasialabel.png

Armenians seem closer to Yemenis more than any other West Asian ethnicity :tongue

Let's see what Strabo writes on this occasion:


Seems that you just proofed what i was stating that azeri's and turks greatly overlap with persians that is what we were talking about.

Hmmm so you say that armenians live closer to arabs like syrians than turks do ?:D i think it hold more for turks with his arguments :) anyway we had our discussion yesterday ;) and you know better now

[Yalquzaq]

You are free to check the 1897 population census of Erivan Governorate.

http://demoscope.ru/weekly/ssp/emp_lan_97_uezd.php?reg=566

4 out of 7 Uyezds, including Yerevan itself had Tatar aka Azerbaijani Turkic majority.

Before being annexed by Russian Empire, present-day Armenia was composed of İrevan Khanate, a local Azerbaijani Khanate which became independent following Nader Shah Afshar's death but however accepted Qajar suzeranity (an Azerbaijani tribe which ruled Iran from 1796 to 1925) during the Russian-Qajar wars, and perhaps the Qajar tribe origin of the Khanate itself could have a role in it.

Here is the list of Khans of the Khanate.

Khalil Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1752-1755)
Hasanali Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1755-1762)
Huseynali Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1762-1783)
Qulamali Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1783-1784)
Mahammad Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1784-1805)
Mehdiqulu Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1805-1806)
Ahmad Khan Muqaddam (Otuziki-Afshar) (1806-1807)
Huseynqulu Khan Qovanlu-Qajar (1807-1827)

Here is the distribution of Azerbaijani Turks in present-day Armenia during the 1890s...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Azerbaijanis_in_Armenia_1886-1890.PNG

[gregorius]

You are free to check the 1897 population census of Erivan Governorate.

http://demoscope.ru/weekly/ssp/emp_lan_97_uezd.php?reg=566

4 out of 7 Uyezds, including Yerevan itself had Tatar aka Azerbaijani Turkic majority.

Before being annexed by Russian Empire, present-day Armenia was composed of İrevan Khanate, a local Azerbaijani Khanate which was independent but however accepted Qajar suzeranity (an Azerbaijani tribe which ruled Iran from 1796 to 1925) during the Russian-Qajar wars, and perhaps the Qajar tribe origin of the Khanate itself could have a role in it.

Here is the list of Khans of the Khanate.

Khalil Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1752-1755)
Hasanali Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1755-1762)
Huseynali Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1762-1783)
Qulamali Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1783-1784)
Mahammad Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1784-1805)
Mehdiqulu Khan Ziyadlu-Qajar (1805-1806)
Ahmad Khan Muqaddam (Otuziki-Afshar) (1806-1807)
Huseynqulu Khan Qovanlu-Qajar (1807-1827)

Lol again you use the arguments being the majority for 100 years means its your historical land. we also where majority in tiblisi. we are majority in glendale ?

anyway everyone knows the armenians back then were deported to iran back than

As a result of the continued wars in the region and Shah Abbas I's deportation of much of the Armenian population from the Ararat plain and the surrounding region in 1605, Armenians formed about less than 20% (about 15,000) of the population at the time of the Russian annexation of the Erevan Khanate in 1828, while the remaining 80% was made up of Muslims (Persian, Azeri, Kurdish),[1][6] forming a total population of 102,000.[7] read source

[MegaArgus1]

Megaargus hurts? :lol: ....the i have nothing, i contributed nothing, came to judge us :chin: ...jealousy isnt a good thing :icon_wink:

Did any Greek here say anything bad about Armenians? :eyes...we all respect them...Nobody said all emperors were of pure Greek decent. if you have nothing of value to say about the conversation, just leave...

.

this i a more realistic picture of you..do not pretend to be swinish!!!!

i choose a typical greek woman look try by yourself you must look similar :thumb001:

http://www.avenue1online.com/images/sophiam1.jpg

[Yalquzaq]

Present-day Armenia became one of the traditional grounds of Oghuz tribes since their westward migration like said, countless toponyms and historical evidence of our presence there is enough to prove whos land it was.

Even with such a deportation as you claim, which is btw 200 years before the Russian annexation of the region, does not take away the fact that present-day Armenia actually was a firm Turkic land for centuries. The Armenian population that was relocated from Iran to former territorities of Irevan Khanate was still not enough for an Armenian majority, alot of Armenians were also brought from Ottoman territorities, not solely Iran. And if one would say that those from Iran had their ancestry in these lands, the ones from Ottoman territorities was totally unrelated to the area.

[gregorius]

well show me some unbiased proves which arent azeri than ?
everyone knows its armenian land its really funny that you believe it, ask your friend partizan ;) even he could not back the things up in our discussion yesterday ;)
anyway i dont blame you though

We were living there before you guys came from the central asian steppes. How can you even deny it ?
anywya ask yourself why its called armenian highland and not azeri highland, why we got churches from 480 AC. Just very simple facts

http://www.biblicaltourguide.com/ancientturkeymap17b.jpg
http://www.old-print.com/mas_assets/full/old-antique-victorian-print-B3311901215.jpg

[Yalquzaq]

Some of Azerbaijani Turkic toponyms in Armenia:

Related to the names of people: allahverdiyev
(Göyçe village name), abbaslar
(Korus), Ağabek (Erivan, Sürmeli), allahverdibey
(İrevan, village name), babakişi
(Novobeyazıt, village name), kasımcan
(Sürmeli, village name), davutlu (İrevan,
village name), ebdulmusa (Garni, village
name), ebdurrahman (İrevan, village name),
eliveli (İrevan, village name), elimemmed
(İrevan, village name), yakublu (Eçmiadzin,
village name), kamal (İrevan, village name),
kerem memmedli kendi (İrevan, village
name), köroğlu (Novobeyazıt, village name),
mahmudlu (Zengezur, village name), hemze
(Zebil, village name), çelebi (Amasya, village
name)


Related to the names of fruit and
vegetable: armudlu (Vedibasar, village name),
zoğallı (Basargeçer, village name), iydeli
(Eçmiadzin, village name), yoncalı (Revan,
village name), kavunlu (Aralık, village name),
güllüce (Kırkbulak, village name), suvanverdi
(İrevan, village name), heyvalı (İrevan, village
name)

Related to the names of animals:
ayıyatağı (Talin), atlıdere (Şirakel, village
name), ahudağ (Novobayazıt, mountain name),
aşağı katırlı (Sürmeli, village name), aşağı
keçili (Masis, village name), koyunlu (İrevan,
village name), danagirmez (Kırkbulak, village
name), dovşanlı (Zebil, yayla), donuzdamı
(Dereleyaz, kışlak), donuzyatak (Krasnoselo, kışlak), endelib (İrevan, village name), ilandağ (İrevan, village name), ilanlı (İrevan, village
name), inekbulak (Revan, village name),
inekdağ (İrevan, dağ), itlice (Şirakel, village
name), kedi karabulak (Merze, village name),
kiçik ördek (Dereçiçek, village name), göyerçin
(Talin, Çemberek, village name), maraldağ
(Novobeyazıt, village name), öküzlü (Sürmeli,
village name), ördekli (Novobeyazıt, village
name), porsuklu (Obaran, village name),
serçeler (Zengibasar, village name), tovuzkala
(Şemşedil, village name), dovşankışlak (İrevan,
village name), tülkütepesi (Bazarçayı, village
name), tülküviran (Kabri, village name),
deveçuhuru (Revan, village name).


Related to the names of colors: ağyaylak
(İrevan, Maku), ağkend (İrevan, Dereleyaz),
ağkörpü (Yelizavetpol, Zengezur), ağbulag
(İrevan, Sürmeli), ağdağ (İrevan, Şerur), ağdamlar
(İrevan, village name), ağdaş (İrevan,
Novobayazıd), ağdere (İrevan, Dereleyaz),
ağcagala (İrevan, village name), ağcagışlak
(İrevan, village name), karakala (İrevan, village
name), karakışlak (İrevan, village name),
kırmızılı (Talin, village name), yaşıllar (Revan,
village name).

Related to the names of tribes and
nations: avşar (Vedibasar), ağaçeri (Selçuklu
tayfalarından biri, Revan, village name),
azaklar (İrevan, village name), alpout ‘Eski
Türk kavimlerinden birisinin adı” (İrevan,
village name), aşağı begdili (Talin, village
name), aşağı kanlıca (İrevan, village name),
aşağı türkmen (Eçmiadzin, village name),
bayan “Uygurlarda ve Kırgızlarda bu isim
kullanılmaktadır” (Erivan, village name),
bayatlar (Pembek, Kışlak adı), bayburt (Erivan,
village name), baydar (Amasya, village name),
baltaderesi (Dilican, village name), batar
“baydar” (Zengezur, village name), başabaran
(Erivan, mahal adı), karakoyunlu (İrevan,
village name), karaman (Göyçe, village name),
karahanlı (Zerzemin, kışlak adı), gerger
(Dereleyaz, village name), kıpçak (İrevan,
village name), erebkir (İrevan, village name), erebkirli (Sürmeli, village name), erebli (İrevan, village name), zengiler (İrevan, village
name), sungurlu (İrevan, village name), tatarlı
(İrevan, village name), türk karakilsesi
(Ahuryan, village name), hezerler (Kırkbulak,
village name), çandar (Garni, village name),
çepni (Zengezur, village name), çağatay
(Zengibasar, village name), çandarlar (Revan,
village name), şakabad aslı sakabad (İrevan,
village name).


Historical names: kanlı (Qoca Qanlı in the Book of Dede Qorqud) (Basargeçer, village name), manas (Tumanyan,
village name), talas (İrevan, village name),
oğuztaş (Kırkbulak, village name), oğuzbatır
(Kırkbulak, village name)

And many more...

[gregorius]

whahah you call that facts ? we also have names from everything ;) Dont go in discussion, you will lose. Cant you remeber we had this discussion earlier and anotherguy (who dont like armenians) himself stated that what you were saying was nonsense

anyway we can better discusse if the safavids where really an azeri dynasity or an iranian? because maybe the leader was of azeri origin.(obama is also from african origin).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh#Antiquity_and_Early_Middle_Ages


According to some historians,[33][34] including Richard Frye, the Safavids were of Azeri (Turkish) origin:[23]
The Turkish speakers of Azerbaijan are mainly descended from the earlier Iranian speakers, several pockets of whom still exist in the region. A massive migration of Oghuz Turks in the 11th and 12th centuries not only Turkified Azerbaijan but also Anatolia. Azeri Turks were the founders of Safavid dynasty.
Other historians, such as Vladimir Minorsky[35] and Roger Savory, refute this idea:[36]
From the evidence available at the present time, it is certain that the Safavid family was of indigineous Iranian stock, and not of Turkish ancestry as it is sometimes claimed. It is probable that the family originated in Persian Kurdistan, and later moved to Azerbaijan, where they adopted the Azari form of Turkish spoken there, and eventually settled in the small town of Ardabil sometimes during the eleventh century.

[Yalquzaq]

Yes they are facts, unlike your children arguments (you don't even have any arguments actually).

[gregorius]

Yes they are facts, unlike your children arguments (you don't even have any arguments actually).

:picard1: :picard1: oke man goodbye, i post facts with prooves and a very logical explenation for it.

and then you come with phrases with how the armenians streetnames are called in azeri language. :thumb001:
we also have names for other places and tribes where we ever lived ;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apricot known as Prunus armeniaca,
named after our region because we are the natvies and not you.

[gregorius]

Present-day Armenia became one of the traditional grounds of Oghuz tribes since their westward migration like said, countless toponyms and historical evidence of our presence there is enough to prove whos land it was.

Even with such a deportation as you claim, which is btw 200 years before the Russian annexation of the region, does not take away the fact that present-day Armenia actually was a firm Turkic land for centuries. The Armenian population that was relocated from Iran to former territorities of Irevan Khanate was still not enough for an Armenian majority, alot of Armenians were also brought from Ottoman territorities, not solely Iran. And if one would say that those from Iran had their ancestry in these lands, the ones from Ottoman territorities was totally unrelated to the area.

Lol and again being a majority doesnt mean its your land. Why do i have to keep saying that to you like 8 times. The armenians of anatolia were armenians from western armenia. When we got our eastern armenia back its logical that armenians from western armenian(ottoman empire than) go back to armenian ground.

http://www.armeniapedia.org/images/thumb/6/6b/Armeniam.jpg/300px-Armeniam.jpg
you see? it happened everywhere when the turks were killing the anatolian greeks the anatolian greeks went to the land what is now called greece and vice versa. Ofcourse where else would they go? Not to their homes in anatolia because these were destroyed/took over by the turks. They went were their fellow greek people had a own state


Give me your historical evidence that the armenian highland/ south caucasus is historical oghuz turkic land ? when the oghuz tribes came we were already living there for 2000 years. Its very strange how you actually can think that the oghuz are still the natives. We have so many churches dating back before there where turks there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etchmiadzin_Cathedral
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khor_Virap
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yererouk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pemzashen_Church
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Hripsime_Church
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_St._John,_Mastara
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsiranavor_Church_of_Ashtarak
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surb_Astvatsatsin_Church_of_Karbi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odzun_Church
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsakhats_Kar_Monastery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kotavank
and many more

and also give me sources for you historical names of armenia? I know its published by azeris.


http://t.qkme.me/3sjbdv.jpg

[Yalquzaq]

Maybe you didn't quite understood my argument. I'm saying (and which is true) that Russians illegally changed the demographics. The argument the user "Arsen" presented was that Armenians were supposedly deported to Iran in early 1600s, however the large-scale relocation of Armenians to western Azerbaijani lands did not only involve those from Iran, but also Ottoman territorities who had zero relation to these lands.

[gregorius]

an armenian is an armenian what a bullshit you are talking, read my explenation about the greeks and you will understand. if an armenian from western armenia wants to go to eastern armenia he can. it is al called the armenian highland. Anyway most armenians of western armenia didnt go to armenia, and unfortunetaly they got massacred.

anyway if you state that the western armenians are not locals in east armenia fine, but the eastern armenians are so it would not make a change.

well if its illegal why did the persians deported the armenians from armenia in the first place ? so actually the russians just took the things back in yerevan which they were before

http://i48.tinypic.com/2itiex4.png
http://i45.tinypic.com/14joxmx.png

http://i46.tinypic.com/npj7mt.png
http://i47.tinypic.com/2ntwsch.png
Source encyclopedia of asia and oceania Written bij Barbara West

The indigenous people of the most of your country before the invasion of the oghuz tribes 900 years ago were the Caucasian Albanians who where christians and where part of the Armenian Apostolic Church.


The Albanian Apostolic Church or the Church of Caucasian Albania was an ancient independent[1] autocephalous[2] church. It later fell under the religious jurisdiction of the Armenian Apostolic Church[3] that existed from the 5th century to 1830 and was centered in Caucasian Albania, a region mostly located in present day Azerbaijan.[4] It was one of the earliest national Christian churches.
Written by Robert Hewster

[gregorius]

And im still waiting on your proves about that the oghuz are natives, despite they came 900 years ago

If you cant back the things up you say than dont say it.

[Partizan]

Seems that you just proofed what i was stating that azeri's and turks greatly overlap with persians that is what we were talking about.

Actually, it proves both of them are from same blood(Seljuk Empire) since they cluster between Persians and Turkmens. Unlike Armenian and Persian chauvinists claim Azeris are just "Turkified Persians". If they would be Persians, they wouldn't cluster near to Turkish people and Turkmens.


Hmmm so you say that armenians live closer to arabs like syrians than turks do ?:D

It was in past, genius. I quoted from Strabo's Geography, which proves Armenians(or rather, Hays) are not native to S. Caucasus. Genetics prove it too


i think it hold more for turks with his arguments :) anyway we had our discussion yesterday ;) and you know better now

Discussion? Where you showed Iranist sources like Encyclopedica Iranica and also showed Armenian sources? Sure, so unbiased.

[Partizan]

Give me your historical evidence that the armenian highland/ south caucasus is historical oghuz turkic land ? when the oghuz tribes came we were already living there for 2000 years. Its very strange how you actually can think that the oghuz are still the natives. We have so many churches dating back before there where turks there.

Well, not Oghuzes but another Turkic tribe(Kipchaks or Bun-Turks) were settled in South Caucasus back to 2000+ years.

http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/personal/jg/pdf/jg2007c.pdf


Within the “Conversion of Kartli”, the people called bun-turkni, i.e. “Bun-Turks”, play a
prominent role indeed. In the most comprehensive version of the text, that of the Šaṭberd
codex of the late Xth c., they are mentioned as inhabitants of East Georgia right at the
beginning, in connection with an enigmatical account of a king named Alexander:
MK.S 320,2–6
5
:
odes aleksandre mepeman natesavni igi lotis šviltani carikcina da šeqadna igini ̣ ḳedarsa
mas kueqanasa, ixilna natesavni sas ̇ ṭiḳni bun-turkni, msxdomareni mdinaresa zeda
mṭḳuarsa mixuevit, otx kalakad, da dabnebi mati: sarḳine-kalaki, ḳasṗi, urbnisi da oʒraqe.

“After Alexander the King (had) conquered the descendants of the children of Lot and
dispelled them into the land Ḳedar (?), he saw the fierce tribes (of) the Bun-Turks who
resided along the river Kur, in four cities, and their villages (were) Sarḳine-City, Ḳasṗi,
Urbnisi and Oʒraqe.”
6
From Leonṭi Mroveli’s adaptation of the passage it is clear that the king in question is
Alexander the Great, but neither the “children of Lot” nor the “land Ḳedar” are explained here:
KC. L.Mr. 17,6–8
7
:
aman aleksandre daiṗqrna q ̇ ovelni ̇ ḳideni kueqanisani. ese gamovida ̇ dasavlit, da ševida
samqrit, šemovida črdilot, gardamovlna ḳavḳasni da movida kartlad...
“That Alexander conquered all the edges of the land. He started from the west, and went
south, entered northwards, transgressed the Caucasus (mountains) and came to Kartli...”
It is but a vague idea that the “land Ḳedar”, ḳedarsa mas kueqanasa, ̇ might be replaced by the
“edges of the land”, ḳideni kueqanisani, ̇ in this text
8
, and that the “children of Lot” have their
counterpart in the “northward” direction, črdilot, of Alexander’s progression. As both the
“descendants of Lot” and a land (or, rather, tribe) named “Kedar” are Biblical topoi
9
, it may
well be the text of the “Conversion” that has undergone changes here, rather than Leonṭi’s
which must have had a model quite distant from the Šaṭberd version of the legend.
Different from the “Conversion”, Leonṭi Mroveli continues not with “Bun-Turks” but with
“Kartvelians” in the present context, and in a very unfavourable manner indeed:
KC. L.Mr. 17,8–11:
... da ṗovna qovelni ̇ kartvelni uboroṭes qovelta natesavta s ̇ ǯulita. rametu col-kmrobisa da
siʒvisatws ara učnda natesaoba, qovelsa suliersa ̇ čamdes, m ̣ ḳudarsa šesčamdes, vitar-ca ̣
mqecni da ṗiruṭquni, romelta kcevisa c ̇ armotkma uqm ars ... ̣
“... and he found all (the) Georgians worse than all tribes by (their) faith. For they did not
care of (sanguinal) relations in marriage and matrimony, used to eat everything living and
(even) dead, just like beasts and wild animals, and it is impossible to describe (their)
customs.”

In Leonṭi Mroveli’s treatise, it is not the kartvelni, i.e. Georgians alone, however, who are
ascribed these raw manners. Immediately afterwards, the author agrees with the “Conversion”
again in introducing the “Bun-Turks”, too. But different from the latter text, the term itself is
combined here with another designation of a Turkic tribe, viz. qiv̇ čaq-,̇ i.e., Qypchaqs:
KC. L.Mr. 17,11–13:
da ixilna ra ese natesavni sasṭiḳni carmartni, romelta-igi ̣ čuen bunturkad da qiv̇ čaqad ̇
ucodt, msxdomareni mdinaresa mas m ̣ ṭḳurisasa mixvevit, dauḳwrda ese aleksandres,
rametu ara romelni natesavni ikmodes mas.
“And when he saw these fierce pagan tribes, whom we call Bun-Turks and Qypchaqs,
who resided along the river Kur, Alexander was astonished, for no (other) tribes would do
the (same).”
Who, then, are the “Bun-Turks” who are reported here to have lived together with Kartvelians
and Qypchaqs in East Georgia by the time of Alexander? As a matter of fact, several
explanations have been proposed for their name, which seems not to be attested as such
outside of Old Georgian sources. The first proposal was made by Marie-Félicité Brosset
10
who regarded bun-turk- as a compound denoting “Turks primitifs”. This assumption is in
accordance with the use of the word bun- in Old Georgian, esp. of its derivative bunebawhich is the general term for “basis” or “nature”. It is further supported by two later revisions
of St. Nino’s legend
11
which allude to buneba- explicitly in the given context, in a sort of
lucus a non lucendo argumentation:
NA. 46,15–18:
ixilna natesavni igi sasṭiḳni carmarttani, romelta ̣ čuen ac̣ bun-turkad da qiv̇ čaqad ̇ ucodt, ̣
msxdomareni mdinaresa zeda mṭḳurisasa mixuevit, da kalakni matni ʒlierni da cixeni
priad magarni, da cxondebodes igini qovlad ̇ ucxod ḳacta bunebisagan, vitarca mqecni da
ṗiruṭquni, romelta kcevisa c ̇ armotkumay uqmar ars. ̣
“And he saw the fierce tribes of the pagans, whom we now call Bun-Turks and Qypchaqs,
residing along the river Kur, and their strong cities and very firm strongholds, and they
lived (in a way) totally deviant from the nature of men, and their customs were
impossible to describe.”
NB. 79,26–80,3:
da ixilna natesavni sasṭiḳni carmartni, romelta ̣ čuen ačat-bun-turkad ucest, rametu ̣
ixilvebodes igini qovlad ̇ ucxod ḳacta bunebisagan, vitarca iqvnes mqecni rayme ̇
saʒulvelni.
“And he saw the fierce pagan tribes, whom we call Ačat-Bun-Turks,
12
for they looked
totally deviant from the nature of men, because they were somewhat ugly beasts.”
Brosset’s proposal was but slightly altered by Nikolai Marr who suggested a translation
“коренной турокъ”, i.e., “original” or “old-established Turk”, assuming “корень, основаніе”
(“root, basis”) to be the underlying meaning of bun-.
13
At the same time, Marr rejected the
interpretation published by Ekvtime Taqaišvili in the first edition of the “Conversion”, ̇
according to whom the word might denote Turks as “spear-bearers” (“будет означать турка-
копьеносца”)
14
. As Marr correctly observed, bun- nowhere means “spear-bearer” nor even
“spear” alone; in the combination bun- horolisa- appearing, e.g., in the Šaṭberd codex within
the Treatise on David and Goliath by Hippolytus (243,26; 244,33) as a quotation from II Kings (II Sam.) 21,19, it is horol- which denotes the weapon, bun- designating the “shaft”
(“ратовище”) as its “basis” or “handle” (“основаніе, рукоятка”)
15
. Marr was also right in
underlining the coincidence with Armenian which has bown gełardan in I Kings (I Sam.) 17,7
as a perfect equivalent of bun- horolisa-. And there is hardly any room for doubt that both
Armenian bown and Georgian bun- lastly reflect Middle Persian bun with its meanings “base,
foundation, bottom” as proposed by Heinrich Hübschmann
16
, Ilia Abulaʒe
17
, and Mzia
Androniḳašvili
18
. Thus the assumption that the term “Bun-Turks” means something like
“primeval” or “original” Turkic inhabitants of Kartli seems to be well founded
19
.
However, a different view suggests itself if we consider the information provided in
“Mokcevay Kartlisay” and “Kartlis Cxovreba” in a broader context. As a matter of fact,
Leonṭi’s text strongly reminds of a certain type of medieval legends on Alexander the Great
that have come down to us in other languages, viz. Greek, Armenian, and Syriac. As a close
parallel we may quote the prose version of the “Christian Legend”, which is preserved in the
latter language as an appendix to the Alexander Romance proper
20
. Here, both Alexander’s
travels into the Caucasus and the wild appearance of the people living there are described in a
very similar way:
CL. 260,15–264,2 / 148,35–151,7:
“And Alexander looked towards the west ... then they went down to the source of the
Euphrates ... and they came to the confines of the north, and entered Armenia and
Âdarbaijân and Inner Armenia ... and he went and encamped by the gate of the great
mountain. ... Alexander said, “This mountain is higher and more terrible than all the
mountains which I have seen. ... Who are the nations within this mountain upon which we
are looking? ... What is their appearance, and their clothings, and their languages?” ...
“They wear dressed skins; and they eat the raw flesh of everything which dies of theirs;
and they drink the blood of men and animals. ...”
And of course, Alexander’s question as to the nations he is looking at is answered as well:
CL. 263,2–5 / 150,20–24:
“Alexander said, “Who are the nations within this mountain upon which we are
looking? ...” The natives of the land said, “They are the Huns.” He said to them, “Who
are their kings?” The old men said: “Gôg and Mâgôg and Nâwâl the kings of the sons of
Japhet ...”


n "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" and The Life of the Kings, we have the description of the invasion of Georgia by Alexander the Great who saw there horrible barbarians, established on the Kura river (Mtkvari - in Georgian) and along its northern tributaries (flowing down from the mountains of the Great Caucasian Ridge), people who were called by Georgians "Bun-Turks and Kipchaks".[96] Alexander was astonished because no other people acted in such a disgusting way as they did. But they had strong towns and were fearless warriors. In Georgian annals the characterization of these barbarians is picturesquely expressed, though by the words of the chronicier: "the description of their way of life is inexpressible".[97]

It seems that the Bun-Turks, whose name is usually explained as original, fundamental, real Turks or as "Hun-Turks" and whom Alexander supposedly met in Central Transcaucasia, must have represented the population of northern provenance, broken through the south of the Caucasian mountains. This fact is in a certain degree confirmed by the information in The Life of the Kings, namely that Bun-Turks, surrounded by Alexander's forces in the stronghold of Sarkine, slipped through the hole in the rock and took shelter in the Caucasian mountains: "He (Alexander - G.K.) caused much hardship for the Sarkinelians, because he attacked them for eleven months. Secretly they began to hew out the rock and to drill through the cliff, which was soft and easily cut. The Sarkinelians escaped through the hole by night and fled to the Caucasus; they left the city empty. Alexander conquered all K'art'li" (I, 18).[98]

Arseni Beri, the Georgian author of the twelfth century, indicated the area where the Bun-Turks were resettled after Alexander having banished them from K'art'li, as a place situated outside of Ovseti (that means the country of Ossetians or "Alans").[99] By the words of Arseni Beri this place is a vaste country, rich in water, and where afterwards the great breed of Qipchaks lived. It is quite certain that Arseni Beri had the steppes of South Russia in mind.

As only in this part of The Life of the Kings, describing Alexanders campaign towards the Caucasus, the Bun-Turks are mentioned, though the text in connection 196 with earlier and later northern invaders speaks mainly of Khazars,[100] this fact must be considered as an additional proof of the borrowing of above part from "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay" or from a third source, common for both these chronicles, unknown to us.

As Khazars are mentioned in The Life of the Kings describing events of pre-Alexander time, it becomes obvious that this ethnonym was used in the conventionl sense and implied nomadic tribes settled in the Northern Caucasia. By the information of The Life of the Kings, for example, long before king Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem, Khazars invaded the Northern Caucasia: "At that time the Khazars grew strong and began to attack the peoples of Lek and Kavkas... and they requested help against the Xazars. All the peoples descended from T'argamos united, crossed the Caucasus mountain, ravaged all the territory of Xazaret'i, built cities at the entrance to Xazaret'i, and returned. After that the Xazars appointed a king; all the Xazars submitted to this king, their sovereign. They advanced and came out at the Pass of the Sea, which is now called Daruband. The descendants of T'argamos were unable to resist them, because the multitude of the Xazars was numberless. They plundered the land of the descendants of T'argamos, destroyed all the cities of Ararat and of Masis and of the north..." (I, 11-12).[101]

The information about the building of cities at the entrance to Khazaria seems to be the reflection of the permanent desire of the Transcaucasian population to fortify the entrances also at the northern edges of passes leading through the Caucasus. By the information of Georgian annals, Georgian kings used the Dariali Pass (Persian "Dar-i-alan", Gate of Alans) for their campaigns to the north of the Caucasus. The Life of King Vaxtang Gorgasali points out that: "Vaxtang set out and stopped in T'ianet'i. There all the kings of the Caucasus joined him, 50,000 cavalry. He advanced in the name of God and crossed the pass of Darialan. On his entry into Ossetia Vaxtang was 16 years old. Then the kings of Ossetia assembled their troops and were joined by a force from Xazaret'i. They met him on the river which flows from the Darialan and descends into the valley of Ossetia" (I, 151).[102]

In connection with David the Restorer The Life of David, the King of Kings informs us about the control of all passes leading through the Caucasus by David for the massing of northerners for his army: "They [King David and his chancellor Giorgi - G.K.] entered Ossetia, and were met by the kings of Ossetia and all their princes. Like servants they presented themselves before him; and hostages were given by both sides, Ossetes and Kipchaks. In this way he easily united the two nations, and made friendship and peace between them as (between) brothers. He took control of the fortresses of Darial and those of all the passes of Ossetia and of the Caucasus mountain. He created a safe passage for the Kipchaks, and brought through a very great multitude" (I, 336).[103] 197

The Life of the Kings mentions two routes of the invasion of Transcaucasia from the north and indicates simultaneously the approximate time of the creation of the above part of the text by calling the invaders - "Xazars": "The Xazars knew two roads, namely the Pass of the Sea, Daruband, and the Pass of the Aragvi, which is the Darial" (I, 14).[105]

The Life of the Kings ascribes the opposition to the Khazar invaders of the Persian military leader (erist'avi) Ardam: "He came to K'art'li, destroyed all the cities and castles of K'art'li, and killed as many Xazars as he found in K'art'li" (I, 13).[104] This is asserted for the epoch earlier than Alexander's fight with Bun-Turks and must therefore be considered as a later addition to the text comparable with "Mok'c'evay K'art'lisay".

Also Movses Xorenac'i, the author of The History of the Armenians, called also the northern tribes, according to the realities of his time, "Khazars" and "Basiliks", who, passing the Daruband Pass ("Chor gate", Derbend), invaded the right bank of the River Kura: "...the hosts of the northern peoples united, I mean the Khazars and Basilik', and passing through the Chor gate under the leadership of their king, a certain Vnasep Surhap, they crossed to this side of the River Kura". Valarsh, the king of Armenians at first won and "pushed them back through the Chor pass". But the enemy was once again united and Valarsh in the subsequent battle was killed. His son, Khosrov, "gathered the Armenian army and passed across the great mountain to exact vengeance for his father's death. Routing those powerful nations with sword and lance, he took hostage one out of every hundred of all their active men, and as a token of his own authority he set up a stele with an inscription in Greek so that it would be clear that he owed allegiance to the Romans" (II, 65).[106]

This information must be connected with the data given in The History of the Armenians (§ 19) by Agathangelos, an author supposedly of the late fifth century A.D., about the population of northern origin who penetrated Transcaucasia from Dariali as well as from Derbend Gate (stronghold of the Chor), but following the invitation by the Armenian king: "...Khosrov king of Armenia began to raise forces and assemble an army. He gathered the armies of the Albanians and the Georgians, opened the gates of the Alans and the stronghold of the Chor; he brought through the army of the Huns in order to attack Persian territory and invade Asorestan as far as the gates of Ctesiphon".

The scale and importance of such possible northern invasions become obvious by the following words: 198 "He ravaged the whole country, ruining the populous cities and properous towns. He left all the inhabited land devasted and plundered. He attempted to eradicate, destroy completely, extirpate, and overthrow the Persian kingdom and aimed at abolishing its civilization".[107]

The same story is as well reflected in The Life of the Kings: "Kosaro was king in Armenia. This Kosaro, king of the Armenians, began to wage war on K'asre, king of the Persians. Asp'agur, king of the Georgians, helped him. Asp'agur opened the passes of the Caucasus and brought down the Ossetes, Leks, and Xazars; he joined forces with Kosaro, king of Armenia, in order to wage war on the Persians. In the very first attack on Persia K'asre, king of the Persians, drew up his line; but they put him to flight and destroyed his army. From then on no king of Persia was able to resist them, and they increased their attacks on Persia and their ravages in Persia... the Armenians, Georgians, and nations of the North had put the king of Persia to flight, and they had increased their attacks on Persia and their ravages of Persia, and the king of Persia was no longer able to resist" (I, 59-60).[108]

The policy of Armenians, as well as Georgians, towards northerners was ambivalent: if, on the one hand, it was necessary to defend the Caucasian passes from them, on the other hand it was a big temptation to use their forces against their own southern enemies. The Armenian king Trdat, according to Movses Xorenac'i, "with all the Armenians descended into the plain of Gargar and met northern /people/ in battle... in pursuit, chased them as far as the land of the Huns... Trdat took hostages from them according to ancestral custom and returned. Thus he brought together all the north, raised many troops, and bringing them together marched to Persia to attack Shapuh, son of Artashir" (II, 85).[109]

The last part of The Conversion of K'art'li by Nino informs us as well that: "In his time [Varaz-Bak'ar's, the king of Iberia - G.K.] the king of the Persians sent an erist'avi with a large army against the Armenians and Georgians in order to impose tribute. Then the Armenians dispatched an envoy to Varaz-Bak'ar, suggesting that they join forces, add troops from the Greeks, open the passes of the Caucasians, bring down Ossetes and Leks, and oppose the Persians. His nobles also urged opposition to the Persians" (I, 136).[110]

The idea of the joint Armeno-Iberian opposition to the Persians, so often appearing in old Armenian and Georgian chronicles, is easily understandable on the background of the fact that both these Transcaucasian countries constituted, in many quantifiable respects, a single social organism.[111]

But generally the interests of Georgian, Armenian and Persian monarchs were united in the defence of the Derbend Gate from the penetration of the northerners. The Life of the Kings mentions, that king Mirian who afterwards became the first Christian king of Georgia, was the most devoted follower of this policy: 199 "He began to wage war on the Xazars, and fought continuously. Sometimes the Leks defected from Mirian; and whenever they brought down the Xazars to help them, Mirian would encounter them in Heret'i or Movakan, and there they fought a battle. On other occasions the Durjuks and Didos joined forces and brought down the Xazars.Then they fought battles, and never did the Xazars win. Mirian was always victorious. Such was the frequent result of battle with the Xazars. He made most of his expeditions to Daruband. For the Xazars would come and besiege Daruband in order to capture it and open the broad pass, from where they began to invade Persia. But when the Xazars came to Daruband, then Mirian would march to aid Daruband. Sometimes without fighting the Xazars withdrew before Mirian, and sometimes he routed them in battle" (I, 66).[112]

The essence of king Mirian's struggle is peculiarly clear expressed in the words ascribed to him by the same chronicle: "...all my days I have been occupied in fighting the Xazars, often with my own blood have I saved Persia from the Xazars..." (I, 67).[113]

The Life of King Vaxtang Gorgasali shows the importance of the Derbend Gate for the operations of the northern tribes in Iberia: "When Vaxt'ang [the proper form is Vaxtang - G.K.] was ten years old, innumerable Ossete troops came down and ravaged K'art'li, from the source of the Mtkuari [the Kura river - G.K.] as far as Xunan. They devastated the plains, but left untouched the fortified cities, except for Kasp [the proper form is Kaspi - G.K.]... and went through the pass of Daruband because its inhabitants gave them passage. Then they returned victorious to Ossetia" (I, 145-146).[114]

Movses informs us too, that Shah "Shapuh son of Ormizd, established greater friendship toward our (Armenian - G.K.) King Tiran, even supporting and assisting him: he saved him from an attack of the northern nations who, having united, penetrated the pass of Chor and encamped on the borders of Albania for four years" (III, 12).[115]

As to an information by Movses about much earlier times when Arshak, the son of Valarshak, ruled over Armenia, "there was a great tumult in the zone of the great Caucasus Mountain in the country of the Bulgars. Many of them split off and came to our land and settled for a long time below of Kol (South-West Georgian province - Kola, the modern Turkish Göle, west of Kars - G.K.) in the fertile regions rich in wheat" (II, 9).[116]

It seems that the Bun-Turks of the Georgian annals and the Bulgars of the Armenian annal were one and the same tribe of northern origin. Their identification with each other becomes more plausible if we take into account the story about the "barbarous foreign race" in the text of Movses Xorenac'i preceding the passage dedicated to the Bulgars and whose characterization resembles some traits of the Bun-Turks and the territory of their inhabitation - Central Transcaucasia. By this information, Valarshak, father of aforementioned Arshak, 200 "summoned there (below of Kol, cf. II, 9 - G.K.) the barbarous foreign race that inhabited the northern plain and the foothills of the great Caucasus Mountain and the vales or long and deep valleys that descend from the mountain on the south to the great plain. He ordered them to cast off their banditry and of assassinations and to become subject to royal commands and taxes..." (II, 6).[117] It is obvious that Movses meant the same Bulgars in this connection. In the above paragraph[118] Movses Xorenac'i considers the upper Basiani (the territory between the upper flows of the Araxes and the Kura) as a colony of Vlendur Bulgar Vund who dwelt in the area which was called after his name Vanand (the district around Kars).

As we have seen, Movses refers several times to the barbarous races north of the Caucasus. It seems to be clear that in another aforementioned fragment of Movses' text concerning the fact of the entrusting the government of the northern mountains by the Armenian king to the ruler of Iberians, Mithridates,[119] we have an indication of one of the functions of the Iberian state, namely to defend the passes through these northern mountains (i.e. the Caucasus) from the penetration of northern barbaric tribes.

For the advanced societies of the Near East the fear of the invasion of northern tribes, "sinful tribes of Gog and Magog", from the Central Eurasia, at the time of the gradual increase of their activity, mainly that of the Hunns, became more and more dangerous. The Huns, as to Ammianus Marcellinus, "burn with an infinite thrist for gold".[120] By the characterization of the emperor of Byzans, Constantine II Porphyrogenetus, "all the tribes of the North have as it were implanted in them by nature, a ravening greed for money, never satiated, and so they demand everything and hanker after everything and have desires that know no limit or circumscription". Already in the third century B.C. a Chinese chronicle records that "the Barbarians of the West and of the North are ravenous wolves who cannot be satiated".

In his book, A History of the Georgian People, published 68 years ago and which as a epigraph has the phrase from the Decline of the West of Oswald Spengler, namely that "poetry and historical study are akin", W. E. D. Allen underlines the big difference between the areas north and south of the Caucasian mountains.[121] We can sum up that Georgia and Caucasia in general, localized to the contact zone of the two Worlds, distinguished by D. Sinor as Central Eurasia (the 201 same as Inner Asia) and as its periphery, were situated in the area exposed to the influences of A. Toynbee's second type of stimulus created by human environment - the stimulus of continuous external prressure. Such a position of the Caucasus was already noticed by Pliny, namely that the Caucasian Gate divides the world in two parts (see above). As to his information, the Caucasian Gate, together with the fortress of Kumania (to be identified with the Georgian fortress of Kumli), closed the entrance for the innumerable tribes living north from the Caucasus.[122]


http://kavtaradze.wetpaint.com/page/Georgian+Chronicles+and+the+raison+d'%C3%AAtre+of+ the+Iberian+Kingdom

[gregorius]

Actually, it proves both of them are from same blood(Seljuk Empire) since they cluster between Persians and Turkmens. Unlike Armenian and Persian chauvinists claim Azeris are just "Turkified Persians". If they would be Persians, they wouldn't cluster near to Turkish people and Turkmens.



It was in past, genius. I quoted from Strabo's Geography, which proves Armenians(or rather, Hays) are not native to S. Caucasus. Genetics prove it too



Discussion? Where you showed Iranist sources like Encyclopedica Iranica and also showed Armenian sources? Sure, so unbiased.

Lol i showed dutch and english schollars

[Partizan]

Lol i showed dutch and english schollars

IIRC they had Armenian and Persian colleagues.

[gregorius]

IIRC they had Armenian and Persian colleagues.

i also said to you. if you dont want to believe that its fine ;) i can agree with you that they are a bit biased. but i also showed you dutch and english scholars. Also read that encylopedia from above non armenian.

But then you accidentaly changed the subject in armenian fidayee music that you liked that so.

[gregorius]

Well, not Oghuzes but another Turkic tribe(Kipchaks or Bun-Turks) were settled in South Caucasus back to 2000+ years.

http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/personal/jg/pdf/jg2007c.pdf





http://kavtaradze.wetpaint.com/page/Georgian+Chronicles+and+the+raison+d'%C3%AAtre+of+ the+Iberian+Kingdom


both the southern (Oghuz) and
the northern (Qypchaq) idioms of Turkic stock are generally believed to have entered the area
in relatively recent times only. Nevertheless there are clear indications of contacts between
Caucasian and Turkic peoples in antiquity, witnessed to by historical sources from the area
itself. The present paper deals with one of these traditions, viz. that of the “Bun-Turks”
mentioned in Old Georgian historiography.
Even though there is good reason to believe that Old Georgian literacy emerged quite at the
same time as that of Old Armenian,


2000 years ago doesnt make them the natives. since we settled there earlier.

Azeris are not kipchak turks so it doesnt hold for them. in that case we could say that the armenians are indo europeans like hittites who where there 2000 BC.

also when strabo lived. armenia was at its greatest kingdom under tigranes the great, Armenia was very large and had a big part of syria to. So it isnt very rare they lived together.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Maps_of_the_Armenian_Empire_of_Tigranes.gif

[Partizan]

i also said to you. if you dont want to believe that its fine ;) i can agree with you that they are a bit biased. but i also showed you dutch and english scholars. Also read that encylopedia from above non armenian.

You showed a Encyclopedia Iranica, which is Perso-centrist. Of course Persian scholars(I remember one Persian scholar) would side with Armenians since they are also against Azerbaijan.


But then you accidentaly changed the subject in armenian fidayee music that you liked that so.

Since I know you were going to keep on posting biased/Armenian-Persian centrist articles, I did not see a point for going on.

[gregorius]

You showed a Encyclopedia Iranica, which is Perso-centrist. Of course Persian scholars(I remember one Persian scholar) would side with Armenians since they are also against Azerbaijan.



Since I know you were going to keep on posting biased/Armenian-Persian centrist articles, I did not see a point for going on.
Yea sure yo do :cool: you lost the discussion which is not very strange. anyone who can read can win this kind of discussions. We dont say that you guys should Leave baku or something, we say you should stop the nonsense and thinking we are not the natives.

I can show you those things again ;) like the encyclopedia from above, who is clearly non armenian. Anyway tell me why you think armenians are not the natives but the azeris are? show me something logical

I showed you papers from Robert H hewsen cofounder of the social studies of caucasia

[Partizan]

i can show you those things again ;) like the encyclopedia from above, who is clearly non armenian. Anyway tell me why you think armenians are not the natives but the azeris are? show me something logical

Since you posted Armenian/Persian sources in chatbox discussion and consider yourself as you "won" the debate, I will show from an Azeri website(but with quotations from Armenian and Russian scholars):


It was a serious mistake to use such names as Armenia/Arman and Hayastan as synonyms in historiography till 1920 because these are 2 different geographical areas and each received its name in different historical periods. Moreover, the two names did not belong to one and the same ethnos.Armenia and Arman are both ethnotoponyms, but the latter belonged to an ancient Turkic tribe of Central and Minor Asia whereas Hayastan is a name of a state (present Armenia) and belongs to an Indo-European ethnos hay (erroneously named Armenians). To understand which of originally Turkic ethnotoponyms with a component Armand/Erman were spread from Asia Minor to Altai it is necessary to look through some of them (19):

Ermen-daghi (Mountain Ermen) (Kazakhstan - Abdirahmanov, 1975, 90)

Ermentau (city) (Kazakhstan - HPS, 1987,126)

Eriman (Kazakhstan, Agadir area - OKJSA, 232)

Erman gishlaghi (Ermen kishlak) (=Hazarak, Uzbekistan, Saryosiye area - Nafasov 1988, 222)

Ermen-deli (steppe) (Turkmenistan, Yilanly area - Ataniyazov 1980, 327)

Ermenigum (toponym in Turkmenistan - Ataniyazov 1988, 138)

Arman-gala /=Armand fortress/ (a fortress near Ashgabad - Ataniyazov, 1980, 43)

Arman (toponym in the same place, mentioned in 1818; МIТТ, II, 413)

Arman (toponym in Bashkiria, Baymak area)

As you could see in the examples above, the name Ermen is used in Kazakh, Uzbek, Turkmen, Bashkir ethnotoponymy. The FACT that they are nothing but ethnotoponyms is proved by a circumstance: some of the Turkic tribal divisions were also called Arman/Erman/Ermen. It's evident that hays who adopted the self-name of a Turkic tribe Arman in Asia Minor never reached Central Asia in antiquity.

Kazakh ethnotoponimy experts connected the Arman/Erman oronym (name of a mountain) with Mongolian (G.Konkoshpaev), Mongolian-Turkic(A.Abdrahmanov) origin pleading "hybridization" (20). But this name could not be correctly etymologized as the fact of its relation to an ethnonym of tribe generated far away from Central Asia had not been considered. In fact, the occurrence of such toponyms as Erimen/Ermen/Arman in Central Asia is connected with apperance of Ermen tribe which part moved from Anatolia and Azerbaijan to the eastern lands (within mitan/muiten tribal union). We should note that tribal division of mitan/muiten is called "mitan-ermen" in antique sources.

It is necessary to consider the average form of the Ermen ethnonym which variations as Arman/Erman were spread on such a big territory. This average form is Ermi. One of the Greek sources calls the Turkic Bulgarian tribe Ermi who adopted christianity “Ermi-aris”. Further the part of the Bulgarian tribe which settled among Chuvash and Bashkir was called "ermi/iermi/urmi" (21). Later we will speak more about the Turkic ethnos Аrmеwhich lived in Arman area of Anatolia.

Speaking about toponym and ethnos Aran we noted that it consists of two components: АR/ER ("man//person//warrior") and a suffix "~АN". This suffix expressing plurality has a collective meaning. There was another component (suffix) in ancient Turkic languages which had similar meaning - “~pi / ~bi” [sometimes transited into "~mi"]. This component was also participant in formation of ethnonyms (tribal manes suv-bi, kam-bi, lulu-bi,azer-bi ["AZERBAIJAN"], kas-pi, uru-mi, eli-pi, etc.). As well as Aran, the name Arman/Erman also consists of the component "AR/ER" as structureаr+me+an (ARMAN), or эr+me+an (ERMAN). Alongside with form Аrme-Erme used by various Turkic peoples nowadays, the variation with a suffix "~an" -Erman/Arman was even more widely spread. The component "me-an" c transition in "man", further was used in formation of such ethnonyms as"kara-man", "Turk-men", "ku-man" and others (22). Pay attention: there are Bashkirian tribal divisions "dur-man", "bush-man", "torok-man"(="Turk-men"), "ite-men" (23). Stephanus of Byzantium who wrote about Turkic tribe tirmen specified they were of Saqian (Scythian) origin, and their name in Saqian language meant "the ones expelled". Really, both in all ancient Turkic languages and in modern Azerbaijani language the verb “itir~” (with "i" added) forms noun “(i)tirmen” (by adding component 'men/man') which is translated as "expelled", "driven out". In this connection the origin of Bashkirian tribal division "itemen" is very interesting.

So, there were several internal tribal divisions like Arman, Ermi, Ermen, Karaman, Tirmen and others among such Turkic tribes as Saqa/Saga, Bulgar, Azer/Azar/Hazar, Turkman which INITIALLY lived in lands around Caspian sea. As we have already shown, there is a Turkic basis which ethimologizes all these ethnonyms. It is possible to see following toponymy with a Turkic component Arman in the lands of ancient Azerbaijan:

ﾷ Arman (a mountain to south of Kirkuk on the bank of Tigris river; ХV-ХII centuries BC)

ﾷ Arman (a town of Kassi period near Diala river; pronounced as Alman also)

ﾷ Аrmuna (a village close to lake Urmia, VII century BC)

ﾷ Аrmangu (a toponym near Kyzyl-Uzen river, VIII century)

ﾷ Армаит (a fortress near Zivije district, VII century BC)

Leaving for a while the toponymy of Northern and Southern Azerbaijan, we will look through geographic names the lands located to the west of Azerbaijan. First of all we will consider the names connected with ethnotoponym Arman/Armi which originated from ethnonym Erman; the name of Semitic people - Aramaics will also be considered. This is necessary since many scientists speaking about the name of people Ermeni/Armenians(which today denotes hays) usually refer to abovementioned ethnotoponimy (25).

Geographic names Armi and Arman were first mentioned III thousand years BC and is used so far. This toponym can be met in the records concerning Acadian king Narram-Suen I (2236-2200) and to his grandfather Sargon:

1) SAG.GİSH.RA Ar-ma-nimki u Eb-laki

2) Ar-ma-namki u Eb-laki

Though the arrangement of one of these areas (Ebla) is known, but Arman area is not localised in the source. Therefore there are some researchers identify area Arman with Арме of the newfound sources. On our opinion, these are different toponyms though they are located in one region. So, Italian archeologists discovered ancient archives of Ebla in northwest Syria, to south of Haleb. Texts of unknown Semitic language (close to Sumer-Acadian) are imprinted on the clay tablets and as well as several toponyms of non-Semitic/Elamic/Hurri/Indo-European or any other dialect of that period. One of them is - repeatedly Аrme which one can repeatedly come across (26):

dra-sa-ap ar-mi ki “Rasap, the god of city of Arme”; 3 Ar-miki al-KU Gi-za-anki “three men from Аrmi, located in Gizan”; Eb-laki wa Ar-miki “Ebla andАrmi”; 4 GİŞşilig 1 ninda ku-li en-en Ar-miki “Meal for Armi governor's four friends”.

This toponym of Tigris and Euphrates interfluve cannot be connected with the Aramaic because, first, they appeared here 1000 later, and second, the name was applied in relation to Subars and Hurris (27). Considering the facr that the country named "Аrme" in Eblaic texts was in the center of Mitanni and Mitanian tribes were called Arman/Erman in those places where Subareans lived. Let's look through the sources concerning these tribes because as we said above, Arman toponym is mentioned in this territory. It is also well known that 1000 before name Аrmе emerged, Hirrian thibes lived close to Subars earlier than those of Urartu (28). This obviously promoted consolidation of different tribes at certain stage of historical development. Probably Hurrians flew together with some of mitanian tribes of Subar ethnos, because the state created by Hurrians was most often called Mitanni. In the letter sent by Mitanian king Turmatta to Egyptian pharaon III Amenhotep (1455-1424 BC) his country was called Hurrohe in the part written in language and Mitanni in the part written in Acadian (29).

After the downfall of Mitanni, all its tribes who lived in separate feudal substates were enthralled by invaders. Some part of them moved deep into Asia Minor, the other settled near lake Urmia and in Central Asia. That is why Mitan tribal divisions are mentioned in the specified geographic regions. Speaking about Uzbek tribal division of Moitan in Kumush, Chogan Valihanov mentions Ming, Karakalpak, Barkut, Katagan/Kutagan andMitan among them.(30). L.Tolstova who wrote about Mitan-Horezmian relations refered to a legend about arrival of the Karakalpak-Moiten people's forefather to Caucasus. She also specified many ethnotoponimy connected with Mitan tribe. In her work the problem such toponyms as Mada-Mitanmentioned in X-XII centuries is touched upon; the author opposes their Iranian origin (31).

Mitanian tribes are minutely described Herodotus's and Strabo's works, they give information covering at least 5 centuries at least (V century BC - I century BC). Herodotus writes that the Big and Small Zab revers flow from the country of Matiens, which he locates in the central part of Anatolia and close to Urmia. That is what “father of a history” writes:

“The Hellenes name Cappodocaeans 'Syrians'. These syrians were subject to lidians before Persian conquest ... . River Halis flowing from Armenian plateau was the border between Midian and Lidian empires; it flows from Cilicia then through Matiens' lands on the right and Phrygian on the left. Passing Phrygia, the river turns to the north and then forms border between Syrian Cappodocaeans the right bank and Pathlagonians on left bank” (I, 72). “Moving to Babylon, Kir reached river Ginda. It flows from Matien mountains, through the lands of Dardans, and flows into another river - Tigris”(I, 189). “They say Araks (in this case Kyzyl-Uzen, - the author) is deeper than Ister, the others, on the contrary, consider this river shallow …; it takes source in Matien mountains whence flows and Gind (Diala) river as well, which Kir divided into 360 channels” (I, 202). “Matiens, Sapyrs and Alarodaeans were laid under tribute of 200 talents. It was eighteenth district” (III, 94). “After Phrygians come Cappodocaeans which we call 'Syrians'. Their neighbours are Cilicians, …. whose lands border with those of Armenii's (they are rich for cattle as well), and latter border with -Matiens who live in this country. Then the lands of Cassis follow, and here on the bank of Hoaspe river the city of Sus is located; where great king stays with all his treasures” (V, 49).

Strabo who did not agree with Herodotus's identification of Araz/Araks (the river in Azerbaijan) with Kyzyl-Uzen (XI, 14, 13) writes about ethnotoponimy connected with names Mada, Matien, Arme/Arman:

“According to Ksanthus, in the times of Artaxersus there was such a strong drought that the rivers were dried up, sas well as lakes and wells …. and he had to to see stones in the form of a two-folding bowl in many places far from the sea - in Armenia, Matiena and Lower Phrygia …. Therefore he expressed his opinion, that these plains were the sea long time ago” (I, 3, 4). “Area of Media - Matien … ” (II, 1, 14). “On the other side of Girkania live Debriks, and Cadusians border with Midians and Matians at bottom Parahoathr mountain” (XI. 8.8). “This country (Atropatene - the author) is located to east from Armenia and Matiene, and west from Great Media […]; on the south - it borders the areas close to the basin of Girkan (Caspian) sea and to Mantiene” (XI, 13, 2). “They also say that Armenia which was a small country before, was expanded after Artaxsi and Zareader's wars”(XI, 14, 5). “There are big lakes in Armenia. One of them is called Маntiene which means "blue". As they say, this is the biggest salty lake after Meotid and reaches Atropatia” (XI, 14, 8).

From all said about the Mitan/Moitan/Matien tribal divisions it is possible to draw a conclusion that in the middle of II millenium they promoted caucasian-speaking Hurri tribes to create a state Mitanni in the south-west of the lands between Tigris and Euphrate. The ethnic majority of this state Subar(Mitan)-Hurri tribes were settled from northwest of Syria before various settlements along bank of Tigris river in the east. Mitan-Ermantribes as well as Saqa-Kimmerian (Saga-Gamer), were the internal divisions of one Turkic ethnos; they are marked in all primary sources BC in close neighbourhood with each other. After the downfall of Mitanni some of them moved to Anatolia, Azerbaijan and Central Asia. At Herodotus's time (V century BC) these tribes lived in central and eastern Anatolia, around lake Urmia. At Strabo's time Matien area located east from Armenia and west from Atropatene was within Median borders. In the next centuries matien ethnonym could be come across among Bashkir, Kazakh, Uzbek, Karakalpak etc.

Ermen/Erman ethnonym which belonged to one of Subar-Mitan tribal divisions was reverberate not only in Ancient Azerbaijan and Anatolia, but Central Asia as well. Representatives of Turkic tribes Ermen were moving both from Southern Azerbaijan to the east, and from Northern Azerbaijan to Northern Caucasus. Therefore, so far toponimy with 'Arman' component in Ossetia and Arman-Gala (“Fortress Arman”) in Samur river outfall are known. Also note that in trilingual king Darius's Bisutun inscription names Arminiyya and Urartu are used as synonyms. The name of an Arminian (notArmenian//Hay!) who rose mutiny in Babylon Uraka is mentioned in the inscription; the same name had a Turkic khan, the king of the Nogay people, who lived in Kumyk area (32). At last, the fact that Arman/Armen/Erman is a tribal division known among contemporary Turkic peoples perfectly shows what kind of people it was in antiquity and what ethnic group it belonged to. Some historians and philologists who consider the heroine of Nizami Ganjevi's “Hosrov ans Shirin” poem to be "Shirin of Armenian people" (just because she is from Erman area). We should recommend them to read the part of the poem where Shirin names herself 'a Turkic girl'. The reason of distortion of the name Arman (compare Alban [Aghvan] and Aran) is that some scientists who do not know the particulars of historical ethnology put an equal-sign between ethnonym Hay andаrman/ermen, and so such horonyms as Armenia and Hayastan synonyms which brings confusion into the history of Azerbaijanis. Thus, initial carriers of the name Arman/Erman were Turkis (that is why the ethnonym was ethimologised on a Turkic lingual basis). Such facts as prevalence of Armanethntoponym from Anatolia in the west to Baikal in the east; from lake Urmia in the south up to Azov sea in the north since centuries ago. In primary sources this ethnotoponym is met in Mitanni. A SINGLE EXCEPTION as horonym Armenia (a state created by Hays ['Armenians'] in annexed lands of Western Azerbaijan - Chuhur Sa'ad, Zangezur etc. in the beginning of XIX century with help of Russia) is a "merit" of historians, not History, because 3 thousand years long this ethnotoponym is common for Turkic peoples.

After downfall of Mitanni there was an area Arman beside several feudal formations in northern part of Entire Rios. In II - beginning I of one thousand BC an afflux of the Aramaic to Interfluve begins. Since this moment northern part of Syria was fixed in sources as KURAreme, matArame,KURAramu. The ethnonym Aramaia ahlamaia was met here as well (34). Semitic origin of these names is indisputed but though they were spread to Kashar mountains, not Diyarbakir. So, the ethnonym we are interested about was located northwards of Diyarbakir, or to the west from Subar state (35). And this was an area populated not by Aramaics (despite seeming similarity of words Arman/Arme-Aramu), but Turkis - Subar, Mitan-Arme and caucasian-speaking Hurris who were the former inhabitants of Mitanni state. And the area ARMAN, the place where they lived was called Arme in Urartu sources and Arime - in Assyrian (36). In the course of aggressive campaigns of Urartu and Assyria this area gradually was conquered by the latter. But the Subar state located eastwards of Assyria retained independence till 673 BC. This year Assyrians conquered this state and divided its territoty into 2 dependent areas, attaching Arman to the western part. Both areas consisted of territory on perimeter of Mush-Bitlis-Lake Hazar(Caspian Sea) with population consisting of Urmeans, Subar, Mitan Armi (also Turkic tribe), northwards, near lake Bingiol lived Kashkais. Among these Turkic tribes Caucasian-speaking Hurris lived as well.

Some parts of Subar, Armi-Mitanian, Urmean tribes who moved northwards had joined their ethnic relatives Saka-Kimmers (Saga-Gamer) in headwaters of Euphrates (VII century BC). That was historical Аrminiya (note thus far these were the grounds conquered by Urartu). Soldiers of this country joined army of Media against Assyrians in 615 BC. After the victory Median king Kiaksar had imparted historical Arminiya the special status of Median Empire's province. The governor of these lands was appointed Parur of Saks/Sags (37). So Ermenian/Armanian area which had no connection with Hays (Present 'Armenians') became a component of Media with the population consisting of Turkis: Subar, Mitan, Armi-Mitans, Urmu/Urmeans, Kashkais, Saka-Kimmers (Saga-Gamer); and caucasian-speaking Hurri and Urartus. But the penetration of Hay tribes from northwest Syria at the dawn of Christianity and their transformation into the major population of this area has occured later.

At diferent periods of history this area was conquered by Ahemenis, Selevkis, Parphyan Arshakis, Byzantium, Sasanis, Arabs, Seljuks as well. It was a part of the Ottoman Empire till second decade of XX century. At present time it belongs to Republic of Turkey. All emperors appointing satraps (governors, vassals) to this area, frequently charged to them to govern adjoining territories as well. This caused that concept Arman//Arminiyareceived administrative-political value besides ethnic. So, Iranian historian Said Nafisi wrote that “arabs have named all conquered territories of Caucasus Arminiya”. Thus, looking through the history of Erman/Arman area we have stopped at the dawn of our era. Let's return to the question "hayisation" / "armenisation" of this area to sum up:

а). The area Arman in the headwaters of Euphrates was populated by Subar-Mitan, Hurri-Mitan sinse III till I millennium BC; later belonged to Urartu (X-VIII centuries BC): in VII century up to BC Saka-Kimmerian (Saga-Gamer) tribes settled here. The Turkic population was dominant (Saka-Kimmerian [Saga-Gamer], Subar, Armi-Mitan), Hurris made a prepotent element as well. In the end of VII century the area was joined to Median Empire, and since middle of VI century conwuered by Ahemenis. Before the reign of Selevki Dynasty the satraps appointed to this area were from Urartu, Median, Sak/Sag and Persian by origin.

b). In the course of Alexander the Great Asia Minor campaigns Ahemenis dynasty was replaced by snother one, the Selevki dynasty. Only after defeat of Аntiochus III (223-187 BC) by Rome the area Arman/Erman was divided into 2 Roman provinces. Though during at Тigran II reign the area was subject to Tigranokert, the capital, further it was dependent first on Rome then Parthyans.

c). Before Seljuks, this country (Arman/Erman) was conquered by Arshakis, Sasanis, Byzantium, Arabian Caliphate at different periods of time. The administrative-political value of this country was not equal at each period, it increased or diminished depending on whether united with adjoining areas or not. At Herodotus's time so called "Great Armenia" was extent no more than 310 kms. Even neighbouring area Matien was twice as large (Herodotus, V, 52).

As we see the horonym Ermen (Arman[~iya]) was formed from Turkic ethnonym Arman/Erman. The borders of this area frequently varied. Probably,Ermen Turkis, as well as Alban Turkic tribes were the first to adopt christianity, as the word "arman/erman/ermen" carried the meaning of "Christian" as well. So, in Shak area of Northern Azerbaijan there is a village Kish with such toponymy as Ermen Yeri (land of Ermens), Ermen cemetery though these territories have never been populated by Hays. These names mean "Christian". Note that Ermi, the tribal division of western Bulgarian Turkis were also christians (39).

The self-name of present 'Armenians' is "hay", whereas Georgians call them "somekhi", Kurds - "file", Chechens and Ingushs - "ermalo", Azerbaijanians and other Turkis - "ermeni". However, as it was already said, the ethnonym "Erman/Arman" initially did not refer to them but the people of absolutely another culture and language. After Hays appeared in area Arman and adopted christianity they started settling in neighbouring territories, thus getting ecoethnonym "Armeni/Ermeni", which is natural, because their neighbours saying "Ermeni" meant "population of area Arman" (inhabitant ofArman). By the same Hays created their alphabet and have appropriated centuries-old history of Ermen Turkis writing it as "Armenians' gistory". Therefore, speaking about the origin of Erman/Armen/Armen ethnonym it is necessary to differentiate between Turkic tribe who carried this name andpseudo-Ermens (present Hays/Armenians). N.Emin, The commentator of Hay chronicler M.Horenatsi wrote that “...Armenians named themselves Hay(not "Armens" - the author), or descendants of Aram, and their country - hayots ashkhar, hayots yerkir, hayastan, hayastan ashkhar (but not"Armenia")” (40). Such people as Arim (Homer's Arimoi), Arme and Еrmens are mentioned on the territory of Anatolia. But they are Subar-Mitan tribal divisions of Turkic ethnos and their history does not belong to Hays (present Armenians).

Coming from the Balkans to Syria, and therefrom to Arman, naturally Hays strongly differed from local population (Ermens), both anthropologically and by language. Numerous figures are displayed on the pedestal of Darija the king's statue in Sousse; these figures depict this or that people, with name of each. One figure concerning people Armini is a display not of Armenoid (to which Hays belong), but Sag/Saq type (41). Let's see what Strabo writes on this occasion (I, 2, 34): “...Syrians, Arabs and Armenians live in the close neighbourhood, this is why they are similar both in appearance and way of life”, but not language. Therefore Armenoid Hays are not are not the autohtonic population of Arman area, or to be more exact - localErimen//Armen were not Hays. And according to glottogeny their language is more kindred to Indo-European languages; the degree of Hay/'Armenian'language similarity with these languages can be displayed in this scheme:

HAY (nowadays 'Armenian') <-> GREEK <-> BALTO-SLAVIC <-> INDO-IRANIAN

This scheme put forward by A.Manandian, gives an occasion to assume, that proto-Hays lived in some area between Illirians and Macedonians of the Balkan lands. This scientist had noted that due to the appearance of "Armenians" (Hays are meant) in Asia Minor in XIII-XII centuries BC and then their penetrations to area Arman in VI century BC, their name was written in Bisutun inscription. I.M.Djakonov carried this date since VI century BC to XII-X centuries BC as he considered Mushk tribes mentioned in Assyrian texts to be of Armenian origin (43). Certainly, this point would be acceptable if any source of that time had mentioned the ethnonym Hay. But non of the sourses of that period has such information. Obviously, being a colony in Phrygia Hays came to northwest Syria (VII century BC) after disintegration of Phrygian kingdom; and after the downfall of Assyria and Urartu could penetrate to Arme, the territory of ancient Turkic tribe Subar (between VI and III centuries BC) . The results of assimilation of Hays with Hurri-Urartians (who lived between lake Van and Аrmе area) strongly affected their language (44).

The picture of Hays' migration according to the Balkans - Phrygia - Northern Syria - Аrmе - Arminiya (historical 'Armenia') route can theoretically be traced from the data of ancient sources. However, it is a difficult thing “to collect pieces”. There is no "pretext", in Hay linguistics which could lead to common interpretation of events that took place in those times. Therefore it is impossible to assert that Hays together with Phrygeans appeared in Asia Minor in XII century BC. The appearance of Phrygeans from Europe to Asia according to Greek historians took place after the war in Turova (Troy). Greek tribes began to settle in the West Anatolia only after VIII century BC (45).

One more evidence to prove that the country Ermen/Arman was initially inhabited byTurkis is presence of many ancient Turkic elements in Hay ('Armenian') language. We will look through them later but note that these lingual elements were borrowed before the date of "intrusion" of the Seljuk Turkis to Asia Minor. This fact was specified by German scientist M.Mordman as well in his book “О взаимодействии языков в процессе глотогенеза” ["On interrelation of languages in the process of glottogeny"] (М., 1870). "Armenian language has in itself Turkic elements of such an archaic layer which could not be attributed to Seljuks, Ottomans etc.".

In those ancient times when Hays appeared in country Arman, their language was enriched with Turkic elements, though kept its Indo-Europeanfeatures. Later, during the Arabian conquests they settled closer to Turkic lands (Northern and Southern Azerbaijan) which promoted the infuence of Azeri-Turkic language on theirs. Thus Hay language had partially lost its former structure. Though grabar (old Armeian language) still remained the language of priests, the spoken language was ashcharabar (modern Armenian language), used in our days. While as grabar syntax and grammar corresponded to the structure of French or Slavic languages, ashcharabar has grammar, word order, grammatical agreement of Azerbaijani-Turkic language (many lexical elements as well). So, modern-used Hay language differs greatly from its initial form. Such competent scholars as Acharian, Abovian, Boduenne de Courtenee and others wrote on this subject.



But despite all these changes, Hay language is not considered to be alienated from Indo-European family. For degree of similarity it is closer to Greek,Slavic and Indoiranian languages. This linguistic criterion is another evidence to the fact that Hays ('Armenians') are allochthons (not local) in Armanand generally in Asia Minor. According to anthropological analysis it is schollars come to analogical conclusion.

Grante Kapantsian in this occasion wrote that the population of country Arman primarily consisted from Hurris and Subars. Hays have seized Urartu in culturally and politically in VI-III centuries up BC and were later assimilated by local tribes; this process came to end in III century. Continuing his idea, this author proves "Armanisation" of Hays:

“Despite the that fact that toponym Armina is originated from Iranian name "armen", due to the completion of "Hayisation" of Subar and Urartu tribes we should see a new ethnic quality with a dominant Hay language and with name formed according to the Greek Armen-oi, Armen-ia” (46).

We can agree with academician Kapantsian (the expert of Hay language and a history) on the stipulation that the date of Hays' "Armenisation" falls at the period not BC but III century AD, that is, Hays adopted new ethnonym (Armen) during cristianization. So, after cristianization Hays Hays were called by the neighbouring peoples "Armen/Ermen/Erman" due to the name of the country they lived in. Probably, as Saka-Kimmers (Saga-Gamer)gradually departed from area Arman towards Azerbaijan where other Turkic tribes lived, Hays started settling here more actively. And the tendency of identification of toponym Arman with names of Ararat/Urartu was caused by incorrect interpretation of Semitic R-R-T letters combination in the bible:

“And he was killed praying to his god Nisrok by two sons - Adramelek and Sharezar; and they ran to the Ararat country” (II Kings, 19, 37; Isaiah, 37, 38). By the moment of recording of these biblical chapters a century passed since downfall of Subar kingdom, and Urartu did not exist as well. This is why biblical form 'R-R-T' (Urartu/Ararat) is a literary denotation. So, Ararat (Urartu), Ashkenaz(Saga//Saka tribes) and Minniean (Mannah)empires are last mentioned in Bible referring to 593 year (Eremeah, 51, 27). That is why by the moment of description of King Sinaherribi murder by his sons the specified grounds were components of Media. A pair of centuries later (III-II centuries BC) while translating the bible into Greek (in connection with popular adoption of this language by the diaspora Jews) they substituted R-R-T form by Arminia. Further the "forefather" of Hay history, Moses Horenatsi (probably using 2 different variants - Semitic and Greek) called the two patricide sons "...who run toArmenia" Adramelek and Sannasar in the other place and Adramel and Argamozan in another. This chronicler writes that they became the progenitors of Hay kins:

“He was killed by his two sons Adramelek and Sannasar who frightened ran to Armenia. One of them, Sannasar was settled by our courageous ancestor Skayordi in the southeast of our land, close to Assyrian borders. Having multiplied, his descendants filled up the mountain, called Sym. [….] Argamozan... settled in the southeast. The historians say that he but nobody is the ancestor of Arzruni and Genuni kins. This is the reason why we had to mention Sinaherim (Sinaheribi). The same historian says, that Angegh's kin descends from Paskam, one of Hayk's grandsons” (I.XXIII).

As we could see, in this source the settlement of some of Hay kins around Van in connected with runaway Assyrian princes. Besides this, many dynasties such as Arshaks, Mamikoneans, Bagratuni and others who reigned in Armenia are Turkis, Turkmens (a part of Parthians), Aramaics, Jews etc. Search for Hays' "ancient and great" history chronologically begins from V century. Though V century Hay ('Armenian') historian Horenatsi wrote "We have never been a big ethnos..." under the government of another peoples (48). In XI century Hovanes Drashanakertsi wrote that before Parura Skayordi the country Hayk (Armenia) was governed by strangers. But neither Parur nor many of his followers were not Hay ('Armenian') by origin [see note 37].

Russian scolar V.Nikonov explains the reason why Hays ('Armenians') connect their origin with name Arman/Erman as follows: the name/toponym that lost its primary meaning wakens associations with mythical primogenitor. “And so appeared the myth about Hayk and his son Armenak, the two primogenitors of this people whose names lie in hay and armen/arman ethnonyms” (50).

There are many legends about Hays' origin, to one of them we will refer in Strabo's works:

"They say a resident of Armenia town in Thessaly (Greece) came with Jason to Armenia country and took part in Alexander's the Great campaign. Cyrcillus of Pharsally and Midius of Laris confirm the connection of the country name with this man” (51).

Even if Jason's colleague's name was Armen indeed, this concision cannot substantiate the toponym origin in any way. But nevertheless this story specifies indirect kinship between Hays and Greeks. Having described a pair of such legends Strabo points out:

“…This is the ancient legend. Another, more contemporary story since rule of Persians and all those following them should be expounded as follows. First Armenia was reigned by Persians and Macedonians, later by those who conquered Syria and Midia (Media); the latest governor was Orontus (Horand), descendant of Gidarn, one of the 7 Persians. Later Artaxus and Zariader, Antiochus’s the Great military leaders had divided Armenia into two parts. They governed the country on behalf of the king. After the king had been defeated the came over to the side of Romans and announced to be kings received independence. The Artaxus’s descendant Tigran was Armenia’s king in full sense of this word…” (XI, 14, 15).

Then Strabo writes that Tigran annexed neighboring people’s territories and thus expanded the geographic notion of ‘Armenia’. He was captured by the Parthians (Arsags’ country) who enthroned him in Armenia, assisted him in expanding Armenian territories, later drove him out of conquered eastern lands for perfidy. And a little bit later Lucullus, the Roman commander drove him out from Syria and Cilicia (Strabo, XI, 14, 15). His descendant, Artavazd was killed by Anthony for treachery in war with Parthia. “After that the country was governed by some kings subject to Caesar and Romans; the situation is the same in our days” (Strabo, XI, 14, 15).

How did Tigran become ‘Armenian king in full sense of this word’, as Strabo wrote? The Soviet scientists answered this question:

“These kings’ regency fully depended on political situation in Parthia. Prince Tigran hold captive in Parthians convinced Mitridat II he would yield 70 provinces of Atropatene in case of his enthronement in Armenia. Thus Tigran became Armenian king in 95 BC” (52).

Later Parthians drove him out of conquered territories and he went to Arme-Subar lands where he founded Tigranokert, Hays’ capital city. Great Armenia’s independence lasted 20 years whereupon Tigran was disreputably defeated by Romans in 66 BC (Note that “Great Armenia” which Armenians dream about today was mostly a geographic notion as well as “Small Armenia”. This may be compared to “Kurdistan” area in Turkey. As an administrative and political unit this country had existed 20 years and consisted of conquered territories). Artavazd II, Tigran’s son was a Roman vassal (55-34 BC). Strabo (see above) described the way he governed the country. Centuries later, Kornelius Tasit wrote:

“…Besides this, Armenians are inconstant and changeable,… invited other empires’ armies to their country. For domicile, near resemblance, at last for mixed marriages they are closer to Parthians, and having not perceived freedom Armenians try to submit them”(Analles, XIII, 34).

Ancient Hay historians mentioned the Arsag/Arshak kin very often. At the same time they tried to present their peoples’ history against the background of this dynasty. Surely, Parthians conwuered both Armenian and Azerbaijan (Albania and Atropatene), Saak (Anak-bey’s son) Parthian monk was even the first to profess christianity in these countries. But Arsags/Arshaks were the descendants of Saka/Saqa Turkic tribe and Hays were always Hays although Moses Horenatsi having read the Armenian translation of bible “amended” it into Armenian/Hay origin of the dynasty (53). Obviously, Procopus who knew about such tricks pointed out: “Let nobody think that Arsags/Arshaks dynasty are of Armenian origin” (“De Aedificiis”, III, 1, 4).

As we see, the toponymy Alban/Alvan (Aghvan), Aran, Ermen/Arman/Erman situated on the territory lying between Derbend in the north and Euphrates in south were formed on the basis of identical Turkic ethnonyms. The process of expanding of most disputable Ermen/Arman/Erman on great territory and the stages of its formation were considered as well. Now we can give the account of Hays’ “armenization” after their appearance in Asia Minor. As for the name “Hayastan” it was used in I-IV centuries in Anatolia and V-XIX in Caucasus as Hays’ inhabited localities; there were 1, 2, 3, … 100 ‘Hayastans’ till 1920 when Soviet Armenian Republic was created in Western Azerbaijani lands (54). Long before this, the lands of modern Armenia (‘Hayastan’) were basically inhabited by Turkic tribes Azer/Azar, Ermen (not Hays!), Saqa-Kimmers (Saga-Gamer), Bulgar, Subar-Sabir and others who initially were Tengrians (Tengrianity – Turkic monotheism) and turned into Christianity before adoption of Islam (55).

Here are the sources from both Turk and non-Turk ones:


NOTES

19. In “Altai-Buchi” epos the name of hero’s sister is Ermen-Chechen. The second component of the name means “smart”, “mellifluous” (Nikiforov, 1915, pp. 14). Usage of ethnonyms as personal names (e.g. Azer, Cherkez) is usual for Turkic peoples.

20. A.Abdirahmanov who objected Mongolian origin of the name Ermen advanced the version of Turkic-Mongolian hybridism of the name: ‘Erme-n’. He submitted popular etymology reflected in legend: “A Kalmag warrior climbed on Ermen mountain after he had defeated his Kazakh enemy” (“Birakkalmak atı tau işinde erimen kaşıp ketip, eşkit üstay almantı. Sodan Erimen atalıpdı-mıs” (A.Abdirahmanov, 1975, pp. 90)).

The name of Urartu king Rusa’s father was Erimen. “Rusa Ermenaki” in this language meant “Rusa, the son of Ermen” which is confirmed by I.Dyakonov and S.Arutounian; they disagreed with B.Meshaninov who interpreted this phrase as “Rusa the Armenian”. Note that the ethnotoponymArman/Ermen was spread from Asia Minor to Altai by Turkis which disproves its Urartian origin. Moreover, this element is met as a king’s name only once. As for Urartian language itself there is no such lexical element.

21. Initial form (Ermik) is met in a toponymy in Vedi (Western Azerbaijan, present Armenia) and exists in Bashkirs’ and western Bulgars’ tribal divisions names.

22. The morpheme “~man” is an auxiliary particle to form adjectives (such as ‘gojaman’, ‘azman’) and ethnonymy of Turkmen model. This suffix having received the ethno-formant status was further transformed into pronoun ‘I’. Kazakh form Turkpen does not differ from Turkmen form which it is derived from.

It’s known that Saqa-Kimmers (Saga-Gamer) tribal divisions reached south Russian steppes. Later Hazar, Bulgar, Suvar/Subar/Savir, Kuman tribal divisions came here and were creating their states during 2 thousand years as well. The Danube Bulgar tribe who moved to present Bulgaria from Azov Sea littoral created their kingdom. A town Ermenli was renamed into Dragash-Voivoda in 1934. Both Danube Bulgar and Saqa-Kimmer (Saga-Gamer) had tribal division Armini.

After Kimmerian king Skirul died the warriors of this division who lived near Olvia hastened to help the inhabitants of this town. Such phrase as “Armen archers” can be met in chronicles found here (Vinogradov, 1989, pp. 253).

At the dawn of our era Herusk, an Ost-Goth tribal division lived in the same area. Their king’s name was Armini. Erman-Arix killed by Huns in 357 AD was an Ost-Goth king as well. Both Turkic and German tribes lived in north littoral of Black Sea, and as we see, they both had identical names. In Ermen-S’ul chronicles found in Stadberg (Saxony) a ‘German’ tribe who came from Persia (Azerbaijan was a Persian province then) and they worshipped Ermen (Bogush, pp. 248). Generally, the contacts between Saqa-Kimmers and Germans occurred long before those of Germans and Hunns. These tribes lived in close neighborhood in Crimea which was the reason of their interaction. So it is not surprising that there are so many German-Turkic parallels (the morpheme “~man” is not an exception).

23. Kuzeev, 1974.

24. АНОСК, с. 174

25. Kapantsian (1947), Melikishvili (1954), Dyakonov (1985), Sarkisyan (1989) and others.

26. “Древняя Эбла”, с.223; 284-285; 336. Some ‘scientists’ (I mean Armenian scientists), who identify Akkadian form “Arman u Ebla” with phrase “Ebla and Arme”, so trying to equate the toponymy Arman (relatively new) to Arme which is much more ancient (around 5000 years). So they called the area “Armenians’ (Hays’) ancient native land”. I.Dyakinov correctly noted on this occasion:

“Armanum, the name of a town in neighborhood of Ebla and toponym or ethnonym ar-miki caused great interest in some pseudo scientific circles. They hoped to find Armenians’ ancestors. However, the hope to find Armenians in Eblaic texts had to wither as well as the myth of Biblical towns”(Dyakonov, 1985, pp. 336).

He also wrote that Hays never called themselves “Armenians” noting toponym Armanum is connected with ethnonym Armi which means “stranger”, “alien”. We agree with I.Dyakonov’s words about Armenians’ self-name but not with his concept of connection between the names of area Armanumand ethnonym Armi. Unlike Turkic languages rich for vowel sounds (with steady position only) Semitic languages are poor for vowels and their replacement causes changes of meaning. Moreover, the endings in the names mentioned are doubtable which is noted by Paul Garelli in his article “Some Notes on Eblaic Archives Toponimy” (“Древняя Эбла”, pp. 285).

27. In such phrases as “Dumur of Armi”, “Uttian king Tamur-Lim”, “Abarsila, the country of Armun’s residence” the words “Dumur/Tamur” (compare to Turkic “damir” – “steel”), toponym [A]barsil, (compare to “Barselia” – “Land of Lions”) can hardly be etymologized on Semitic basis.

28. If the toponym Armani in Bogazgoy region is connected with ethnonym Armi its history is even more ancient (Эртем, рр. 16).

29. Eastern Hurri kingdom capital founded in the headstream of Habur and Balich rivers (the latter hydronym is of Turkic origin) was called Vasshukanni (XVI-XIII BC). The Semitic name of the country was Hanigalbat, Egyptian – Naharain (“Land of two rivers”) [Меликишвили, 1956, pp. 93-95]. But some of the eastern Hurri tribes reached middle stream of Tigris (present area of Kirkuk on the left bank of the river). That is why whereas they can be traced from Palestine to south-west borders of South Azerbaijan.

Certainly, in order to stand against Assyria living so separately from each other they had to rely on Subars. It must have been the consequence of close contact that such Turkic names as Dashuk, Kaltuk, Siluk, Dada, İkita, Umbin-Api, Puta, Arijen etc. appeared in Hurri milieu.

30. Ch.Valihanov, 1986, pp. 256

31. “However, a number of the abovementioned facts, particularly the legends of Zarevshan Mitans showing their existence in Urmia region (South Azerbaijan) which was initially called Ma[n]tiane, let us assume another interpretation” (Тоlstova, 1971, pp. 246-253).

32. ИНСК, с. 278

33. Nizami Gandjevi, “Hosrov and Shirin” (Baku-1981, с.238, 245, 265):

“Män o qaragözlü türkäm ki, bu damda adım sänin ağ känizin olubdur” (s.238);

“Qämzä ilä könül ovlayan türk olsam da, öpüşlä könül oxlamağı da bacarıram” (s.245);

“Män o türk deyiläm ki, äräbcä bilmäyim, işvä-naz etmäyi dä bacarmayım” (s.265).

34. АВИИУ, №18, №28 (Assyro-Babylonian Sources on History of Urartu)

35. To get more information about Turkic Subar kingdom see “Azär Xalqı”, Baku, 2000, pp. 113-129.

36. If the country Arme of Eblaic archives is identical with this name (Armam/Armen), the history of this horonym is even more ancient.

An opinion was assumed that the horonym Armenia emerged in Urartian language in the same form as it is now. This is theoretically possible but in fact we met quite another form Arme. There is no “Armenia” form in Urartu texts.

37. Let’s see what the first Hay (Armenian) chronicler Moses Horenatsi wrote in this occasion. In the translation by N.Emin (an Armenian linguist) made in 1858 we read: “Our first king crowned by Varbak was Parur Skayordi” (I, XXII).

All researchers say that “Parur Skayordi” means “Parur, son of Saq”, as ‘ordi’ is Armenian equivalent of “son”. This means he was not Hay (Armenian) but Saq/Sag who ruled in Armenia as his ancestors did. Horenatsi called the Median king Varbak (Arbak) as he confused different sources’ information.

The point is that Erman (Subar-Mitan, Hurri-Mitan, Saqa-Kimmer and others) tribal divisions who joined Media in the war against Assyria were regarded by the Median king as allies and it must have been him who appointed a governor (vassal?) Arbak, the representative of 612 Saqan tribes.

38. al-Nafisi, 1990, pp. 26

By the way, “Armenia” was expanded in administrative and geographic sense in 1828. In march 1828 according to Nicholas I decree Yerevan and Nahichevan provinces were united and called “Armenian province”. True, this province existed only 12 years until Georgian-Imeret and Caspian provinces though the fact of its existence is still an “irrefutable proof” for Armenian territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

39. It’s interesting that Caucasian peoples call Hays (Armenians) as follows: the Chechen and Ingush – ermalo, the Dargins – ermalan[ti], the Abhaz – armeli, the Karachais and Balkars – ermenli/yermenli, Adygei, Nogai and Kumyks – ermeli/yermali.

40. Horenatsi, pp. 244, 248-249

41. DAFİ, №4, 1974, с. 124-125, pictures on pp. 249-250

42. Strabo, I, 2, 34

43. Dyakonov, 1983, с. 168-169;

Besides this, adding Mushks to Hay tribes some researches write about appearance of Armenians in Anatolia in XII BC! Still they should know that ethnonym Mushk in Assyrian, Urartu and Jewish texts (ИДМ, т-I, с. 46) is related to Phrygians. Of course, this does not exclude Hays’ contacts with these tribes which is proven by existence of such names among them as Phrig and Musheg.

Actually the period of XII-X BC is so complicated that it can hardly be described in details. The point is that there were Kassi state in the lower stream, Mitanni state in the upstream of the Tigris and Euphrates and Hittite kingdom in Anatolia. Besides these, a large number of small kingdoms were located in this region. Only in late X century BC Assyria strengthened and Urartu state came to existence. At the same time an afflux of Aramaic tribes to Syria began. If Hays (present ‘Armenians’) had actually appeared here during the period since X till VII BC they would have certainly been (considering their manners!) recorded by Assyrian, Acadian, Urartian and other kings and chroniclers. Moreover, we should not forget that Arman/Erman area was within the territories possessed by Turkis.

44. Kapantsian, 1974; Dyakonov, 1983; Melukushvili, 1954.

45. Without entering into controversy with the ‘scholars’ who relate Phrygians’ appearance to VIII BC we will note that they created a kingdom (VIII BC) in the upstream of Halis river (present Kyzyl-Irmaq). A century later they were included into state of Lydia. Obviously, in this period Hays moved to north-west Syria from Gordion (present Haymana), the Phrygian capital, as Herodotus described them as an alien ethos.

46. Kapantsian, 1947, pp. 209.

47. The same event is described in the “David of Sasun” as follows:

Sinekerim’s sons Sanosar and Bagdasar having secretly run away in the night come to Tevadoros, Armenian king. He gives each of them 300 families to live with in Sasun.

48. “Although we are not a great people and small in number, not mighty and often stay under others’ rule, still we have done a lot of feats mentionable…” (Horenatsi, pp.31).

49. Dyakonov, 1983, pp. 162.

50. Nikonov, 1970, pp. 19.

51. Strabo, pp. 449.

52. ИДМ, v-II, 1983, pp. 406-407.

53. Horenatsi, pp. 136-137.

54. According to Abul-Faraj, during Ibn Vatab’s rule in Syria and Arminiyya (1037 AD), ‘The Seljuks assaulted Arminiyya and killed its population consisting of Kurds and Arabs’ (Abul-Faraj, pp. 295). It would be interesting to know what kind of “Armenian country” can it be if its population consists of Kurds and Arabs? It is now obvious that before XI century AD Hays (Armenians) moved to Ani and Agri.

55. Today Hays (Armenians) claim these Christian architectural models (churches, chapels, monasteries etc) as theirs.

If you find it too long to read, I can summarize...

1.Hay=/=Armenian and you Hays have no real connection with historical Armenia. So, claiming it as your own and pretending to be natives is just funny.
2.Real Armenians(ancient ones) were probably related to Turkic people, based on toponyms and historical evidences.

Well, despite the website&author is Azerbaijani Turk, he cites and quotes quite reliable sources like Strabo, Bible and even some Armenian scholars. I bolded some important parts, if you find it too long to read.

[Partizan]

A Turk can't legitimately claim to be native to anywhere outside of Central Asia.

A Turk being native to the Caucasus is a total contradiction in terms.

Of course, if only you base on Eurocentrist history theories which declare Scythians as IE just because of one sentence found in Iran(which is Hittite and not even Scythian), which ignores Kimmerian-Turkic relationship, which also ignores the Kipchaks' existence in South Caucasus even in Alexander the Great's era and so on....

[Partizan]

2000 years ago doesnt make them the natives. since we settled there earlier.

They makes us natives, actually. Most of European nations settled to their current places in last 20-30 centuries also.


Azeris are not kipchak turks so it doesnt hold for them. in that case we could say that the armenians are indo europeans like hittites who where there 2000 BC.

Azeris have Kipchak blood as well, especially in Northern parts.


also when strabo lived. armenia was at its greatest kingdom under tigranes the great, Armenia was very large and had a big part of syria to. So it isnt very rare they lived together.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Maps_of_the_Armenian_Empire_of_Tigranes.gif

Well, it writes "Armenians" but most likely Strabo talks about "Hay"s, the article in last post gives enough information.

[gregorius]

Anyway talking about stabo his georgaphy

Of the remaining sides the northern is protected by the Caucasian mountains, for these overhang the plains, and are called, particularly those near the sea, Ceraunian mountains; The southern side is formed by Armenia, which extends along it. A large portion of it consists of plains, and a large portion also of mountains, as Cambysene, where the Armenians approach close both to the Iberians and the Albanians.

http://rbedrosian.com/Classic/strabo11b.htm


here are some quotes from strabo himself.

your sources are all of azeri turks, such things are armenians are turkic and that kind of bullshit is nowere stated, only by azeri turks.

how can you be so stupid to say that armenians from today are not the armenians from 1000 years ago. Hay is just a synonym for ourself, we call ourself hay just like hungarians call themselves magyars.

I know that all of the prooves i stated which are very obvious all can be say are falls, if someone prooves that the armenians of today are not the armenians of the ancient times.

so some azeris are trying to proove that, what a bullshit is that do you believe that anyone believes that ? give me a text which is not from azeri's but from other people who say that the armenians of today are not the armenians of earlier, and that the ancient armenians are turkic.

So not like the text above where they say such thing and then read of the bottom of the paper that they have sources but dont show them.\


and again i dindnt showed you armenians sources but english and american. read that encyclopedia?. so azeris are also kipchaks? in that same source you gave me it was stated that armenians where there earlier than the kipchaks. why are you only posting things which are only in your favor? the same source tells completely other things

[Partizan]

Ancient Armenians were Turks? Come on man fuck off

Turk propaganda has always been ridiculous but you're taking it to a whole new level

It is actually historical facts. The word of Armen/Ermen/Ermeni/Arman etc. does not mean anything in Armenian language and they identity themselves as Hays but many places in Central Asia have place names like that and ancient Turkic word "Er"(Soldier or Man)+-man suffix(which is widely used in tribe names like Turkmen, Cuman etc.) could explain etymology of the word.

[gregorius]

It is actually historical facts. The word of Armen/Ermen/Ermeni/Arman etc. does not mean anything in Armenian language and they identity themselves as Hays but many places in Central Asia have place names like that and ancient Turkic word "Er"(Soldier or Man)+-man suffix(which is widely used in tribe names like Turkmen, Cuman etc.) could explain etymology of the word.

lol in armenian language we call ourselves Hayastan. Armenia is what outstanders call us its a ethononym not a toponym. WE call ourselves HAy becouse sone of noach Hayk is to believed in the bible to be the resetlers.

the assyrians gave us the name of armenians. because our king by then his name was armenak(aram)

[Partizan]

Anyway talking about stabo his georgaphy

Of the remaining sides the northern is protected by the Caucasian mountains, for these overhang the plains, and are called, particularly those near the sea, Ceraunian mountains; The southern side is formed by Armenia, which extends along it. A large portion of it consists of plains, and a large portion also of mountains, as Cambysene, where the Armenians approach close both to the Iberians and the Albanians.

http://rbedrosian.com/Classic/strabo11b.htm


here are some quotes from strabo himself.

About Arab-Semitic-Hay relation, again from Strabo:


GEOGRAPHY, i6. 4. 27

entirely at loss to know, in the first place, in regard
to the Sidonians, whether one should call them a
certain people who dwelt on the Persian Gulf, from
whom the Sidonians in our part of the world ^ were
colonists, just as they speak of Tyrians there,
islanders, as also of Arabians, from whom they say
those in our part of the world were colonists, or
whether one should call them the Sidonians them-
selves; but, secondly, the inquiry about the Erem-
bians is more doubtful, whether one should suspect
that the Troglodytes are meant, as do those who
force the etymology of " Erembi " from eran
emhainein^ that is, go into the earth, or the Arabians.
Now our 2 Zeno alters the text thus : " and to
Sidonians and Arabians " ; but Poseidonius more
plausibly writes, with only a slight alteration of the
text, " and Sidonians and Arambians," on the ground
that the poet so called the present Arabians, just as
they were named by all others in his time. Posei-
donius says that the Arabians consist of three tribes,
that they are situated in succession, one after another,
and that this indicates that they are homogeneous
with one another, and that for this reason they were
called by similar names — one tribe " Armenians,"
another " Aramaeans," and another " Arambians.'*
And just as one may suppose that the Arabians were
divided into three tribes, according to the differences
in the latitudes, which ever vary more and more, so
also one may suppose that they used several names

http://archive.org/stream/geographyofstrab07strauoft/geographyofstrab07strauoft_djvu.txt


your sources are all of azeri turks, such things are armenians are turkic and that kind of bullshit is nowere stated, only by azeri turks.

how can you be so stupid to say that armenians from today are not the armenians from 1000 years ago. Hay is just a synonym for ourself, we call ourself hay just like hungarians call themselves magyars.

I know that all of the prooves i stated which are very obvious all can be say are falls, if someone prooves that the armenians of today are not the armenians of the ancient times.

so some azeris are trying to proove that, what a bullshit is that do you believe that anyone believes that ? give me a text which is not from azeri's but from other people who say that the armenians of today are not the armenians of earlier, and that the ancient armenians are turkic.

So not like the text above where they say such thing and then read of the bottom of the paper that they have sources but dont show them.

A google search would help about sources. For example Kapantsian's claims about Hay people:

http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/library/ane/digest/2000/v2000.n271


Or else there is Azzi/Hayasha, ESE of the Kashkans, with its Hurrian
[substrate?] toponynms: Armenian Hay(-k)/father(s) + Hurrian esh/ash=
land? "Fatherland"? Formerly called Azzi by the Hurrian "natives" - i.e.
just "(our) land" / i.e. another spelling of the word for land?
[ Who first suggested this? not the Hurrian "esh" part! At that time
they thought it meant "heaven"! This is my own dumb idea.]
Diakonoff (1961, p 594): "G.A.Kapantsian has developed a theory
according to which the Armenians, or Hay-kh, are descended from the
inhabitants of Hayasa, mentioned in Hittite texts as situated in the
region south of Erzincan. But the onomastic and toponymic material
from Hayasa has, on the evidence of G.A. Kapantsian himself, no
connection with the Indo-Europ. Armenian language." (See Zimansky #1391=
G. Kapancjan in 1947: in Russian, "Hayasha, cradle of Armenia:
ethnogenesis of the Armenians and their initial history." )

[gregorius]

It is actually historical facts. The word of Armen/Ermen/Ermeni/Arman etc. does not mean anything in Armenian language and they identity themselves as Hays but many places in Central Asia have place names like that and ancient Turkic word "Er"(Soldier or Man)+-man suffix(which is widely used in tribe names like Turkmen, Cuman etc.) could explain etymology of the word.

maybe in that mongol language of yours, but there rest of the wourld doesnt call us Armen but an armenian, the georgians call us again differentely, we call ourselves Hay.

anyway you dont call us ermen but an ermeniler, just you call the romanians rumeniler, are romanians also turkic ? and ancient turkish lands ?

arameans are assyrian people, there where some kings and queens who married eachother ? call us arabs if you want call us yemenites or turkish. The facts is that we are the natives there and not you.

You are not even trying to say that the armenians are not the natives, You are now trying to proove that the armenians of today are not the armenians of earlier, and that the armenians of earlier are turkish.

I can claim also that the turks of now are not the turks of earlier because they were mostly mongol people? You are people mixed with greeks,arabs,armenians,persians
GTFO of anatalia then ?
The word armenians is giving way before the turks where in anatolia? How can you say that armenia is a turkish name ?

[Partizan]

and again i dindnt showed you armenians sources but english and american. read that encyclopedia?.

Well, I remember you posted Persian and Armenian scholars' works before.


so azeris are also kipchaks?

Both two are Turkic anyway, firstly. Your comparison between Armenian and Hittite was irrelevant, since Armenian and Hittite belongs in different branches of IE. But both Kipchak and Oghuz belong in same branch of Altaic language family.


in that same source you gave me it was stated that armenians where there earlier than the kipchaks. why are you only posting things which are only in your favor? the same source tells completely other things

Armenians, not Hays.


That makes perfect sense

Just like Albanians must be from Caucasian Albania!!!! !!!!11!11!!111!!1 1 1 1 !! !11!!!

:bored:


lol in armenian language we call ourselves Hayastan. Armenia is what outstanders call us its a ethononym not a toponym. WE call ourselves HAy becouse sone of noach Hayk is to believed in the bible to be the resetlers.

the assyrians gave us the name of armenians. because our king by then his name was armenak(aram)

Believe it or not, Armen, Arman etc. words could be explained with Turkic grammar and it is for sure modern Armenians are from "Hay"s who came from North-West, settled in South(Syria) and later migrated to Southern Caucasus.

[Partizan]

maybe in that mongol language of yours, but there rest of the wourld doesnt call us Armen but an armenian, the georgians call us again differentely, we call ourselves Hay.

All come from the same noun root.


anyway you dont call us ermen but an ermeniler, just you call the romanians rumeniler, are romanians also turkic ? and ancient turkish lands ?

Ermeni=Armenian
Ermeniler=Armenians.

We call Romanians as Romenler and as singular Romen but it is for sure because of their connection to Roman Empire.

Can you show me toponyms about Romanians in Turkic countries? As I showed, there are a lot of place names with Armen, Ermen, Arman etc. in Turkic countries.

[SKYNET]

a battlefield between turks and a some people :D

[gregorius]

your turkish names are as follows

Ermentau =Ereymentau
Ermen-daghi (Mountain Ermen) such thing doesnt exist on the internet
and the rest i could not find anything. Another thing Armenia name is givin us 440 BC or earlier.

The oldest records of a Turkic language, the Old Turkic Orkhon inscriptions of the 7th century Göktürk

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Turkic_language

ANd if it was true what you said, it wouldnt make a change, your people are giving us a name in your language which every nation does,
English Armenian
Dutch Armeen
the greeks :Ἀρμενία (armenia) which is a way older language than turkic, so claim wathever you want

about the encyclopedia, one was but i posted another from a english scholar and articles from several dutch and english persons
http://i47.tinypic.com/2ntwsch.png
http://i46.tinypic.com/npj7mt.png
http://i45.tinypic.com/14joxmx.png
http://i48.tinypic.com/2itiex4.png

[Yalquzaq]

Azerbaijan is the biggest fail in history

They are Persians with 1/8th Chink blood, living on stolen Armenian, Persian and Caucasian land, and got their asses handed to them by a much weaker country in Artsakh

You have a weird bias towards Armenians and a dislike against us for a British I must say. This is not the first time I see you making such comments.

How could we be Persians when pre-Turkic peoples and tribes in these lands were not Persians to begin with? You yourself talk about Caucasian Albanians, who are an extinct nation, but they, and not Persians were the nation who populated present-day Azerbaijan before Oghuz Turks. We are direct descendents of the Seljuq Empire and 24 Oghuz tribes, this is the only fact and reality. BTW, Partizan posted a chart, you should look at it.

The first war, despite everything, is only history. Russians, with one of the largest armies in the world, lost the first war in Chechnya against bunch of rebels armed with rifles only, but the second war had a entire different story. Azerbaijan is now a entirely different country, despite all the negatives, is far superior to Armenia with incomparable potential.

[Partizan]

your turkish names are as follows

Ermentau =Ereymentau
Ermen-daghi (Mountain Ermen) such thing doesnt exist on the internet
and the rest i could not find anything. Another thing Armenia name is givin us 440 BC or earlier.

Ermentau:

http://www.satelliteviews.net/cgi-bin/w.cgi?c=kz&UF=-2346307&UN=448398&DG=ADM2

Arman(in Bashkortostan):

http://mapcarta.com/28468072

Perhaps you couldn't find because of dialect differences .


The oldest records of a Turkic language, the Old Turkic Orkhon inscriptions of the 7th century Göktürk

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Turkic_language

:rolleyes: Official history. Those are ones which could be found. FYI, Turkic language family seems to be older. See here (http://www.hunmagyar.org/turan/index.html).


ANd if it was true what you said, it wouldnt make a change, your people are giving us a name in your language which every nation does,
English Armenian
Dutch Armeen
the greeks :Ἀρμενία (armenia) which is a way older language than turkic, so claim wathever you want

Which could be explained in their grammars? Which have toponyms in their lands with name of Armen/Ermen/Arman etc.?

[gregorius]

ereymentao doesnt look like ermen, and letnik arman is situated in russia with letnik a russian word.

could you say where it stated how old the turkic language is? anyway what are you trying to proove ? Armenians are turkish ? the armenians of today are not the Armenians of earier? or that Armenia is a turkish word ?

because armenians where living there earlier than the turks, which are mixed indo european people, If the armenians of today are not the armenians of earlier, as you claim which is ridicoulous, i can say with more certain that the turks of today are not the turks of earlier but mixed with armenians,greeks arabs,persians. SO that means you should leave the country.

its cited everywhere that the assyrians and Greeks called us armenians. which are both much older than turkish. And when they called us armenians the turks where in central asia. Anyway those placesnames are not giving 2500 years ago, so there is no relation.

unless you state that the armenians are turkish people which sound laughable in my ears dont you agree ? or do you reall think that:picard2:

[orangepulp]

Lol and again being a majority doesnt mean its your land. Why do i have to keep saying that to you like 8 times. The armenians of anatolia were armenians from western armenia. When we got our eastern armenia back its logical that armenians from western armenian(ottoman empire than) go back to armenian ground.

Actually it does. Majority group is the dominating ruling group so therefore it is our land because we conquered it. This is a universal rule, the strong survive and the weak parish. In USA who is the ruling class, who really owns America, do you think it is the indigenous people?? Well to be fair it is also your land but for the love of God Armenians are for the most only native to the ass of Anatolia and not the mainland anyway.

you see? it happened everywhere when the turks were killing the anatolian greeks the anatolian greeks went to the land what is now called greece and vice versa. Ofcourse where else would they go? Not to their homes in anatolia because these were destroyed/took over by the turks. They went were their fellow greek people had a own state

That's very one sides story you are presenting there. Armenians were killing and raping Turks too. Armenians and Russians attempted to rape my ancestors and the villagers. They destroyed my grandmothers village and my great great grandfather had to rebuilt it.

Btw, what makes you think Greeks are native to Anatolia? Romans were invaders like the Turk but the only difference is they were invaders for a longer period of time.

[Yalquzaq]

Gregor, I don't know why you constantly refer to words which I did not say. I didn't say that Oghuz Turks were native to Transcaucasia, I.E originated in Transcaucasia, however we have been present in these lands for a millenium, this is a enough time to make these lands our "native" lands. Armenians are neither native to Transcaucasia btw, and your language confirms this. What I said from the start was that Russians illegally changed the demographics of the region, and which is a fact.

[gregorius]

we where there 2 milleniums earlier which means with your words we are more native. the russians deported us back into armenians if you call it illegal it means that the persians did that too a couple of centerys ago. so the russians turned it back whiich it was before. Anyway you are talking about caucasus albania and not about armenian lands, because you were not living there for a millenium

im not saying azerbeijdna is armenian land, but you guys are saying armenia is azeri land and rubbish stuff.

about orangepulp


Actually it does. Majority group is the dominating ruling group so therefore it is our land because we conquered it. This is a universal rule, the strong survive and the weak parish. In USA who is the ruling class, do you think it is the indigenous people?? Well to be fair it is also your land but for the love of God Armenians are for the most only native to the ass of Anatolia and not the mainland anyway.

majority is not the dominating rule. We were majority in tiblisi is tiblisi ours? we are majority of glendale is glendale ours ? rotterdam hjas a majority of muslims is rotterdam muslim ground ? no ofcourse not.

THe greeks are more native because they are the earliest civilization still around in the world, the hittites are assimilated in other anatolians groups. so they cannot make any statements

if you think that side is the ass so be it, doesnt matter for me.
Also i referred in my ealer post vice versa which means both side so read better. Im sorry for your grandparrents, i know bad things are happend on both sides. which is logic because no man wil be sitting around while they are getting killed

[Partizan]

ereymentao doesnt look like ermen, and letnik arman is situated in Bashkortostan with letnik a russian word.

Fixed. I do not know what does Letnik mean though but Letnik seems like a title, since there are many places starting with "Letnik".


could you say where it stated how old the turkic language is?


Dogma #2: Sumerians an "isolate" ethno-linguistic group
This claim states that the Sumerians were not related to any known ethno-linguistic group. However, there is evidence to the contrary: the Sumerians were not an isolated ethno-linguistic group, they were part of a larger non-Semitic and non-Indo-European ethno-linguistic group including the Subareans, Hurrians, Hatti, Kassites, and Elamites, which inhabited the ancient Near East before the appearance of the Semitic and Indo-European peoples in that region. In fact, the evidence indicates the existence of non-Indo-European peoples not only in the Near East, but also in Europe, Iran, Central and South Asia prior to the Indo-Europeans. Even if not all of these non-Indo-European peoples were originally related to the Sumerians, given the substantial linguistic, archeological, and anthropological evidence of the dominant ethno-linguistic, cultural, economic, and political influence exerted by the Sumerian civilization over 1500 years in Western and Central Eurasia, it is highly probable that most of these ancient non-Semitic and non-Indo-European peoples evolved into related ethno-linguistic groups through cultural and ethno-linguistic convergence and hybridization with Sumerian or Sumerian-related peoples. The significant cultural and ethno-linguistic influence exerted over large areas of Eurasia by the Sumerians and related Turanian peoples played a key role in the development of the Semitic, Indo-European, and Ural-Altaic ethno-linguistic groups, as indicated by comparative linguistic analysis which shows that a significant number of words of Sumerian origin are present in those Eurasian language groups (Götz, 1994).

The fundamental problem with the Sumerian question is the fact that the creators of mankind's earliest known civilization were neither Semitic, nor Indo-European, and this is an inconvenient reality for certain leading interest groups whose ideological bias has been interfering with scientific research about the origins of the various Eurasian ethno-linguistic groups since the 19th century.

Dogma #3: Single-source origin of Indo-Europeans
This is the so-called "family tree" theory which claims that the Indo-European languages and peoples originate from a single common ancestral language, people and homeland, based on Grimm's linguistic theory of sound change. So far all attempts at locating the presumed ancestral Indo-European homeland and to reconstruct the hypothetical ancestral Indo-European language have failed. The evidence suggests that there were no single Indo-European common ancestral language, people and homeland, but that the Indo-European languages and peoples evolved from a complex process of cultural and ethno-linguistic convergence and hybridization among various proto-Indo-European and non-Indo-European peoples, including Turanians. The failure of Indo-European linguistics is due to the fact that many words which are assumed to be of Indo-European origin are in fact of Sumerian origin, but Indo-European linguists simply continue to ignore this because of the erroneous belief that Sumerian was an "isolate" language (Götz, 1994).

Dogma #4: Scythians an "Iranian" people
The claim that the Scythians were "Iranian", and therefore Indo-European, is based on the highly questionable interpretation of a few names and words transmitted by Greek sources. The evidence indicates that there were non-Indo-European peoples in Iran and Turan long before the appearance of Indo-Europeans in those regions. Some of these pre-Indo-European peoples may have later become "Indo-Europeanized" to some extent. The Scythians, Cimmerians, Sarmatians, Medes, and Parthians were therefore not originally Indo-European, they were Turanians. Indo-European linguistics has a tendency to claim as "Indo-European" many ancient peoples who were in fact originally non-Indo-European, but may have later become "Indo-Europeanized" as a result of ethno-linguistic convergence and hybridization.


Dogma #5: Uralic and Altaic groups "not related"
Indo-European linguists reject the possibility of a connection between the Uralic and Altaic ethno-linguistic groups. This is an unfounded assumption as the evidence indicates that the Uralic and Altaic groups were formed through ethno-linguistic convergence and hybridization with Turanian peoples such as the Sumerians and Scythians. The Uralic and Altaic groups therefore share common Turanian ethno-linguistic roots.

Dogma #6: Existence of Turanian ethno-linguistic group dismissed
Based on the unsubstantiated claims that the Sumerians were an "isolate" ethno-linguistic group and that the Uralic and Altaic groups are "not related", Indo-European linguists deny the existence of an ancient Turanian ethno-linguistic group which included the Sumerians and the Scythians despite evidence to the contrary, evidence which they simply ignore or dismiss without valid justification.

Dogma #7: The theory of the "Finno-Ugrian" origin of Hungarians
The so-called "Finno-Ugrian" theory of the origin of the Hungarian people and language is closely modelled on the Indo-European "family tree" linguistic theory. As such, not only is the "Finno-Ugrian" theory fundamentally flawed, it was also developed during the 19th century when Hungary was under the foreign rule of the Austrian Habsburgs. As a result, this pseudo-scientific theory was part of the anti-Hungarian cultural policy specifically designed to weaken the national self-consciousness of the Hungarian people by distorting and falsifying their origins and history. This was the case under the Habsburg regime's policy of Germanization just as it was the case under the Soviet Communist regime's policy of Russification. It was therefore in the interest of these regimes to
"let the conquered Hungarians believe that they have an ancestry more primitive than that of the Indo-European peoples. In Habsburg times Hungarian children were taught that most of their civilization came from the Germans: today they are taught that their 'barbaric' ancestors were civilized by the educated Slavs." (Bobula, 1982)
According to the latest genetic research (Semino, 2000), the main Hungarian ancestral population has inhabited its current Carpathian homeland for at least 40 000 years, and is of Central Eurasian origin. The genetic markers most characteristic of the Hungarian population are also present in Eastern Europe and Central and South-Western Asia, and correspond to the known distribution and movements of the ancient Scythian and Hun peoples based on the historical and archeological evidence, thus substantiating the Hungarian-Scythian, Scythian-Hun and Hun-Magyar ethno-linguistic connections.

The genetic evidence also indicates that the genetic markers most characteristic of the Finno-Ugrians of Northern Europe, the Volga-Ural region, and Siberia are completely absent in the Hungarian population. Based on the latest linguistic, archeological, anthropological, and genetic research, Hungarians are therefore not of Finno-Ugrian origin, but the Finno-Ugrian ethno-linguistic group was formed under the dominant cultural influence of the Turanian peoples with whom the Finno-Ugrians came in contact, thus explaining the Hungarian-Uralic linguistic correlation.

It seems, Turkic language existed earlier than Göktürks due to Sumerian-Scythian connections.


anyway what are you trying to proove ? Armenians are turkish ? the armenians of today are not the Armenians of earier? or that Armenia is a turkish word ?

1.Modern Armenians are not grandsons of Armenians of antiquity
2.Real Armenians(ancient ones) were related to Turkic people.


because armenians where living there earlier than the turks, which are mixed indo european people, If the armenians of today are not the armenians of earlier, as you claim which is ridicoulous, i can say with more certain that the turks of today are not the turks of earlier but mixed with armenians,greeks arabs,persians. SO that means you should leave the country.

Find me such a genetic test about Ancient Armenians and modern Armenians than I will believe:

http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/07_03/ancient.shtml


The researchers found that interbreeding between Europeans and Asians occurred much earlier than previously thought. They also found DNA sequences similar to those in present-day Turks, supporting the idea that some of the Turkish people originated in Mongolia.


Skeletons from the most recent graves also contained DNA sequences similar to those in people from present-day Turkey. This supports other studies indicating that Turkish tribes originated at least in part in Mongolia at the end of the Xiongnu period.


its cited everywhere that the assyrians and Greeks called us armenians. which are both much older than turkish. And when they called us armenians the turks where in central asia. Anyway those placesnames are not giving 2500 years ago, so there is no relation.

So how those placenames appeared in Central Asia? :rolleyes:


unless you state that the armenians are turkish people which sound laughable in my ears dont you agree ? or do you reall think that:picard2:

I don't say today's Armenians but ancient ones.

[orangepulp]

majority is not the dominating rule. We were majority in tiblisi is tiblisi ours? we are majority of glendale is glendale ours ? rotterdam hjas a majority of muslims is rotterdam muslim ground ? no ofcourse not.


You are not majority in Tiblis, Georgians are:



Tbilisi is a multicultural city. The city is home to more than 100 different ethnic groups. Around 89% of the population is ethnically Georgian, with significant populations of other ethnic groups such as Armenians, Russians, and Azeris. Along with the above mentioned groups, Tbilisi is also home to various other ethnic groups including Ossetians, Abkhazians, Ukrainians, Greeks, Germans, Jews, Estonians, Kurds, Assyrians, and others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tbilisi

In none of the places you mentions are those ethnicities a majority, you are over exaggerating.

THe greeks are more native because they are the earliest civilization still around in the world, the hittites are assimilated in other anatolians groups.
For that matter Middle Eastern people are more native because they are earlier than the Greeks!! You don't even know what the native population was like in Asia Minor, maybe even then people weren't pure because Anatolia was a migration route. Today's Turks are not that different in situation than of the Romans of the past. Just as those people went through Romanification they went through Turkification process. People assimilate with the ruling class. So I think its actually stupid for anybody to boast around as being ''native''. What the hell is native Anatolian?



if you think that side is the ass so be it, doesnt matter for me.
Also i referred in my ealer post vice versa which means both side so read better. Im sorry for your grandparrents, i know bad things are happend on both sides. which is logic because no man wil be sitting around while they are getting killed

This is quite obvious and I tend to leave such incidents where they belong, to the past unless of course people are just sharing a one side story. In a civil war everyone experiences casualties.

[Yalquzaq]

anyway we can better discusse if the safavids where really an azeri dynasity or an iranian? because maybe the leader was of azeri origin.(obama is also from african origin).


What has Safavids to do with anything?

"Iranian" is only a recent term for a nationality, Safavids cannot be an Iranian dynasty as such a term or idenity was non-existent in those times, however you could ask this question with regards to their ethnicity, and there is no doubt that they were Turkomans, from Azerbaijan and spoke Azerbaijani Turkish as their native language. Shah Ismail himself was the grandson of Uzun Hasan, the leader of Turkoman Aq-Qoyunlus. Shah Ismail was also a poet in Azerbaijani language. Azerbaijani Turkish was the sole language of the court and military, and it was also used at state level.

This is a decree of Shah Ismail in Azerbaijani Turkish. This means that Azerbaijan was a official language of the Empire.

http://www.apa.az/photosession/Shah%20Ismayil%20Xetainin%20fermani%20270912.jpg

Əbülmüzəffər sözümüz

Əmiri-əzəm əkrəm Musa Dorğut oğlu inayət və şəfqətimiz ümidvar olandan sonra şöylə bilsün kim, iftixarül-əazim vəl-əyan Əhməd ağa Qaramanlu ol tərəfə göndərdük və ol yerin ixtiyarligini kəndunə şəfəqqət etdük. Gərək kim, müşarileyh sözümdən və məsləhətimdən çıxmasun və mütabiət və yardım ona qılsun kim, inşaallah-təala hər nə kim, etmək muradi və istəgi olsa, hasildür. Gündən-günə hər iş vaqe bolsa. Əhməd ağa ittifaqi ilə dərgahi-müəllamizə bildirsünlər kim, hər növ buyruğumuz olsa, əməl etsün, könlümüzə xoş dutub mərhəmətimizə əmrdar olsun.

Təhrirən 7 rəbiüləvvəl, sənə 917
Xətm

Also, you don't know a jackschit about how Safavid state came to be. Shah Ismail created his state with the help of Turkoman tribes from Azerbaijan and Anatolia, who were known as "Qizilbash". Safavid state was a Turkoman Qizilbash state, and this is not even needed to be argued.

The Safavid capital, where Shah Ismail crowned himself as the Shah, was Tabriz in Azerbaijan, which was the Turkoman centre of that time, and which also served as the capital city of Aq-Qoyunlu and Qara-Qoyunlu states before Safavids.

Following the lose of Eastern Anatolia to Ottomans, the Ottomans became just door away from Tabriz, they had also sacked Tabriz following the Chaldiran Battle. For this reason (Ottomans would sack Tabriz four times later), the capital was relocated away from Tabriz first to Qazvin, and later to Isfahan, purely for security reasons. But this had also an effect for the Turkic characteristics of the empire, since it was relocated away from Turkic Azerbaijan to Persian Isfahan, but neverthless Safavid Empire remained to be a Turkic Empire albeit with increasing Persian influence and less Turkic characteristics, Shah Abbas's policy against Qizilbash tribes also had a big role in this.

Btw, The last Safavid Shah, Sultan Husayn was even nicknamed "Yakhsidir", Azerbaijani word for "Very Well". Safavids never really lost their Turkic characteristics completly.

[gregorius]

Why dont you find me a genetic test which proves the opposite ? You are claiming we are not the armenians of earlier times? with the same reasoning i can say you are not a turk. It could be so that the armenians over the time are geneticly chanched a little bit, but so are alot of others ethnicities, but we have always keep our religion/culture/language/alphabet so that is enough to call ourselves armenians.

I never ever have read such thing that the ancient armenians are turkish. Show me?
those dogmas of youre is stating that there isnt such that as indo european languages but languagees who are mixed with other semitic and turanic languages. that site is written by turanian people without any sources.

i cant find any history of the placenames, can you ? i know that those kazach place are not 2500 years old seems unlikely. ereymentau dont look like armenian. There is a difference between Armen and Ermen, The whole world calls us Armenian and you do it with a ''er''.

[gregorius]

You are not majority in Tiblis, Georgians are:




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tbilisi

In none of the places you mentions are those ethnicities a majority, you are over exaggerating.

For that matter Middle Eastern people are more native because they are earlier than the Greeks!! You don't even know what the native population was like in Asia Minor, maybe even then people weren't pure because Anatolia was a migration route. Today's Turks are not that different in situation than of the Romans of the past. Just as those people went through Romanification they went through Turkification process. People assimilate with the ruling class. So I think its actually stupid for anybody to boast around as being ''native''. What the hell is native Anatolian?




This is quite obvious and I tend to leave such incidents where they belong, to the past unless of course people are just sharing a one side story. In a civil war everyone experiences casualties.

i said we were not we are look at 1800 untiull 1897
middle eastern ? like what ? assyrians ? the where not in anatolia but in mesopotamia babylonian where in babylonia ? arabs where in saudi? which middle eastern of today are more native than the greeks ?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/IE1500BP.png ancient anatolians where hittites an IE group not semitic

[gregorius]

What has Safavids to do with anything?

"Iranian" is only a recent term for a nationality, Safavids cannot be an Iranian dynasty as such a term or idenity was non-existent in those times, however you could ask this question with regards to their ethnicity, and there is no doubt that they were Turkomans, from Azerbaijan and spoke Azerbaijani Turkish as their native language. Shah Ismail himself was the grandson of Uzun Hasan, the leader of Turkoman Aq-Qoyunlus. Shah Ismail was also a poet in Azerbaijani language. Azerbaijani Turkish was the sole language of the court and military, and it was also used at state level.

This is a decree of Shah Ismail in Azerbaijani Turkish. This means that Azerbaijan was a official language of the Empire.

http://www.apa.az/photosession/Shah%20Ismayil%20Xetainin%20fermani%20270912.jpg

Əbülmüzəffər sözümüz

Əmiri-əzəm əkrəm Musa Dorğut oğlu inayət və şəfqətimiz ümidvar olandan sonra şöylə bilsün kim, iftixarül-əazim vəl-əyan Əhməd ağa Qaramanlu ol tərəfə göndərdük və ol yerin ixtiyarligini kəndunə şəfəqqət etdük. Gərək kim, müşarileyh sözümdən və məsləhətimdən çıxmasun və mütabiət və yardım ona qılsun kim, inşaallah-təala hər nə kim, etmək muradi və istəgi olsa, hasildür. Gündən-günə hər iş vaqe bolsa. Əhməd ağa ittifaqi ilə dərgahi-müəllamizə bildirsünlər kim, hər növ buyruğumuz olsa, əməl etsün, könlümüzə xoş dutub mərhəmətimizə əmrdar olsun.

Təhrirən 7 rəbiüləvvəl, sənə 917
Xətm

Also, you don't know a jackschit about how Safavid state came to be. Shah Ismail created his state with the help of Turkoman tribes from Azerbaijan and Anatolia, who were known as "Qizilbash". Safavid state was a Turkoman Qizilbash state, and this is not even needed to be argued.

The Safavid capital, where Shah Ismail crowned himself as the Shah, was Tabriz in Azerbaijan, which was the Turkoman centre of that time, which also served as the capital city of Aq-Qoyunlu and Qara-Qoyunlu states before Safavids.

Following the lose of Eastern Anatolia to Ottomans, the Ottomans became just door away from Tabriz, they also sacked Tabriz four times. For this reason, the capital was relocated away from Tabriz first to Qazvin, and later to Isfahan. But this had also an effect for the Turkic characteristics of the empire, since it was relocated away from Turkic Azerbaijan to Persian Isfahan, but neverthless Safavid Empire remained to be a Turkic Empire albeit with increasing Persian influence and less Turkic characteristics, Shah Abbas's policy against Qizilbash tribes also had a big role in this. The last Safavid Shah, Sultan Husayn was nicknamed "Yakhsidir", Azeri word for "Very Well" BTW.


Imust admitt i dont have any knowledge about this savafids are azeri origin or not, anyway if you want to discuss about that we can open a thread about the origings of the safavids.

I know that the savafids (Azeri if you like to call it) deported the armenians from yerevan when they came into power and the majority became muslim(kurd,persian,Azeri) Than when the russian came into power the deported they deported the armenians back) Also alot of armenians from eastern armenia cam back to yerevan which is logic.

[Partizan]

Why dont you find me a genetic test which proves the opposite ?

You asked about Turkic people and I found about my nation. So?


You are claiming we are not the armenians of earlier times? with the same reasoning i can say you are not a turk. It could be so that the armenians over the time are geneticly chanched a little bit, but so are alot of others ethnicities, but we have always keep our religion/culture/language/alphabet so that is enough to call ourselves armenians.

Well, as I said you are "Hay"s, others mistake for you as descendants of ancient Armenians.


I never ever have read such thing that the ancient armenians are turkish. Show me?

It was not in the last link I sent(hunmagyar), genius.


those dogmas of youre is stating that there isnt such that as indo european languages but languagees who are mixed with other semitic and turanic languages. that site is written by turanian people without any sources.

Actually, in other pages of the site, they have sources:

http://www.hunmagyar.org/tor/controve.htm


NOTES

(1) Endrey Antal, A Magyarság eredete, Magyar Intézet, Melbourne, 1982, p. 14.

(2) Endrey, op. cit., p. 10.

(3) Endrey, op. cit., p. 26.

(4) Endrey, op. cit., p. 32.

(5) Biró József, A Szabirok Östörténete, Buenos Aires, 1986, p.12.

Götz László, Keleten Kél a Nap, Püski, Budapest, 1994, pp. 234, 291.

(6) Érdy Miklós, A Sumír, Ural-Altaji, Magyar rokonság kutatásának története, Gilgamesh, New York, 1974, p. 36.

Götz, op. cit., p. 700.

(7) Blaskovics József, A Magyarok története, II. Nagy Szittya Történelmi Világkongresszus, Cleveland, 1988, p. 13.

(8) Endrey, op. cit., p. 41.

(9) Endrey, op. cit., p. 41.

(10) Nagy Sándor, A Magyar nép kialakulásának története, Hidfö, San Francisco, 1987, p. 154.

(11) Götz, op. cit., pp. 56, 246.

(12) Endrey, op. cit., p. 44; Götz, op. cit., pp. 212-213.

(13) Baráth Tibor, The Early Hungarians, Barath Publications, Montreal, 1983, p. 2.

Nagy Sándor, The Forgotten Cradle of the Hungarian Culture, Patria, Toronto, 1973, p. 168.

Érdy, op. cit., p. 118.

Bobula Ida, Origin of the Hungarian Nation, Danubian Press, Astor, Fla., 1982, p. 7.

Endrey Antal, The Origin of Hungarians, Hawthorn Press, Melbourne, 1975, p. 30.

(14) Bobula, op. cit., p. 10.

(15) Baráth Tibor, Tajékoztató az újabb magyar östörténeti kutatásokról, Montreal, 1973, p. 27.

(16) Götz, op. cit., p. 268.

(17) Götz, op. cit., pp. 379, 398.

(18) Götz, op. cit., pp. 398-399.

(19) Götz, op. cit., p. 407.

(20) Götz, op. cit., pp. 311-312, 385.

(21) Götz, op. cit., pp. 222-223, 370-372.

(22) Götz, op. cit., pp. 406, 452.

(23) Endrey Antal, A Magyarság eredete, Magyar Intézet, Melbourne, 1982, p. 50.

Götz, op. cit., p. 398.

(24) Götz, op. cit., p. 450.

(25) Endrey, op. cit., p. 60.

(26) Götz, op. cit., p. 545.

(27) Érdy, op. cit., pp. 28, 60, 78.

Kramer, S. N., The Sumerians, University of Chicago Press, 1963, p. 306.

(28) Érdy, op. cit., p. 28.

(29) Érdy, op. cit., p. 118.

(30) Érdy, op. cit., p. 170.

(31) Götz, op. cit., p. 379.

(32) Götz, op. cit., pp. 375-379.

(33) Érdy, op. cit., pp. 64-68.

(34) Endrey, op. cit., pp. 78, 84.

(35) Endrey, op. cit., p. 92.

(36) Badiny, F. J., ed., The Sumerian Wonder, School of Oriental Studies, University of Salvador, Buenos Aires, 1974, pp. 114- 115.

(37) Oláh Béla, Édes magyar nyelvünk szumér eredete, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1980, p. 12.

(38) Götz, op. cit., p. 19.

(39) Götz, op. cit., p. 158.

(40) Paliga, S., "Thracian terms for 'township' and 'fortress', and related place-names", in: World Archeology, Vol. 19, No. 1, 1986, pp. 26-29.

(41) Haraszti, E., The Ethnic History of Transylvania, Danubian Press, Astor, Fla., 1971, p. 8.

Baráth Tibor, The Early Hungarians, Barath Publications, Montreal, 1983, p. 127.

(42) Childe, G. V., The Danube in Prehistory, Oxford University Press, London, 1929, p. 205.

(43) Ligeti Lajos, ed., A Magyarság östörténete, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1986, p. 105.

Hóman Bálint, Magyar történet, Maecenas, Budapest, 1990, Vol. 1, pp. 115-117.

(44) Ligeti, op. cit., p. 126.

(45) Padányi Viktor, Dentumagyaria, Editorial Transsylvania, Buenos Aires, 1963, pp. 323-324, 360-361.

(46) Padányi, op. cit., pp. 372-374.

(47) Vágó Pál, A Vérszerzödés ereje, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1976, p. 31.

(48) Pesti József, Két rádió-beszéde, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1980, p. 6.

Vágó, op. cit., p. 31.

(49) Padányi, op. cit., pp. 385-388.

(50) Badiny, F. J., Az Istenes Honfoglalók, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1986, p. 13.

Pesti József, Mit akartok az östörténettel?, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1982, p. 55.

(51) Götz, op. cit., p. 257.

(52) Childe, op. cit., pp. 109, 205.

Baráth, op. cit., pp. 131, 210.

(53) Nagy Sándor, A Magyar nép kialakulásának története, Hidfö, San Francisco, 1987, p. 98.

(54) Dienes István, A Honfoglaló Magyarok, Corvina, Budapest, 1978, pp. 68-72.

(55) Vágó, op. cit., p. 43.

(56) Padányi Viktor, Vérbulcsu, 1955, pp. 25-26.

(57) Vágó, op. cit., p. 40.

(58) Vágó, op. cit., pp. 56-57.

(59) Vágó, op. cit., p. 39.

(60) Vágó, op. cit., p. 66.

(61) Vágó, op. cit., p. 83.

(62) Országh József, Magyar Hit vagy szellemi nyomor, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1977, p. 22.

(63) Országh, op. cit., p. 12.

(64) Dienes, op. cit., p. 1.

(65) Badiny, op. cit., p. 24.

(66) Badiny, op. cit., p. 8.

(67) Badiny, op. cit., p. 8.

(68) Padányi Viktor, Dentumagyaria, Editorial Transsylvania, Buenos Aires, 1963, p. 54.

Badiny, op. cit., p. 11.

Nagy, op. cit., p. 230.

(69) (70) Götz, op. cit., pp. 216-217.

(71) Nagy, op. cit., p. 235.

(72) Országh, op. cit., p. 9.(Back)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aczél József, Szittya-Görög eredetünk (Budapest, 1926), Szatmári, Garfield, NJ, 1975.

Badiny, F. J., Káldeától Istergamig, I (1971) - II (1981), Buenos Aires.

Badiny, F. J., The Sumerian Wonder, School for Oriental Studies, University of Salvador, Buenos Aires, 1974.

Badiny, F. J., Mah-Gar a Magyar, Buenos Aires, 1976.

Badiny, F. J., Az Istergami oroszlánok titka, Buenos Aires, 1979.

Badiny, F. J., A magyar nemzet történetének kis tükre, Buenos Aires, 1984.

Badiny, F. J., Az Istenes honfoglalók, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1986.

Bakos Ibolya, Öseink nyomdokain Közép Ázsiában, Bern, 1983.

Baráth Tibor, Tájékoztató az újabb magyar östörténeti kutatásokról, Montreal, 1973.

Baráth Tibor, The Early Hungarians, Montreal, 1983.

Baráth Tibor, A magyar népek östörténete, Montreal, 1988.

Baráth Tibor, Östörténetünk orientalista szemléletben, Montreal, 1988.

Baráthosi Balogh Benedek, Elpusztult hunos véreink, Magyar Kultúra Kiadása, Buenos Aires, 1976.

Baráthosi Balogh Benedek, Szumírok, Szittyák, Östuránok, Hidfö, San Francisco.

Bartha Antal, Magyar östörténeti tanulmányok, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1977.

Biró József, A Szabirok östörténete, Buenos Aires, 1986.

Biró József, Szabir-Magyar történet ösi gyökerei, Buenos Aires, 1986.

Blaskovics József, A Magyarok története, II. Nagy Szittya Történelmi Világkongresszus, Cleveland, 1988.

Bobula Ida, Kétezer magyar név sumir eredete, Montreal, 1970.

Bobula Ida, A sumir-magyar rokonság kérdése, Buenos Aires, 1982.

Bobula Ida, Origin of the Hungarian Nation, Danubian Press, Astor, Fla., 1982.

Bóna István, Az Avarok Kincsei, Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, Budapest, 1986.

Bóna István, A hunok és nagykirályaik, Corvina, Budapest, 1993.

Childe G. V., The Danube in Prehistory, Oxford U. P., London, 1929.

Csobánczi Elemér, Östuránok, Sydney, 1963.

Csomor Lajos, Magyarország szent koronája, Vay Ádám Múzeum Baráti Köre, Vaja, 1988.

Dienes István, A honfoglaló magyarok, Corvina, Budapest, 1978.

Dúcz László, A közöttünk élö Turulmadár, Antológia Kiadó, Lakitelek, 1993.

Dümmerth Dezsö, Az Árpádok nyomában, Panoráma, Budapest, 1977.

Endrey Antal, The Origin of Hungarians, Hawthorn Press, Melbourne, 1975.

Endrey Antal, A Magyarság eredete, Magyar Intézet, Melbourne, 1982.

Endrey Antal, Magyar történelem, Boldogasszony Kiadó, Hódmezövásárhely, 1992.

Érdy Miklós, A Sumír, Ural-Altaji, Magyar rokonság kutatásának története, Gilgamesh, New York, 1974.

Érdy Miklós, Belsö-ázsiai utam az Ujgurok hazájába, New York, 1983.

Érdy Miklós, Az Ordos-pusztai Magyarok: valóság vagy legenda?, Árpád Könyvkiadó Vállalat, Cleveland, 1990.

Erdélyi István, Ázsiai lovas nomádok, Gondolat, Budapest, 1982.

Fehér M. J., Nagy G., Szkítak és Magyarok, Magyar Kultúra Kiadása, Buenos Aires, 1976.

Fehérné Walter Anna, Az ékírástól a rovásírásig, Magyar Öskutatás, Buenos Aires, 1975.

Fekete Zsigmond, Hol volt hol nem volt Pribina országa, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1978.

Fettich Nándor, A Zöldhalompusztai szkíta lelet, Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, Budapest, 1928.

Fischer Károly Antal, A magyar östörténetírás hanyatlása, Budapest, 1904.

Forrai Sándor, Az Ösi Magyar Rovásírás, Antológia Kiadó, Lakitelek, 1994.

Foyta István, Honnan származtunk, Buenos Aires, 1961.

Galgóczy János, A sumír kérdés, Gilgamesh, New York, 1968.

Gosztony Kálmán, Összehasonlitó szumér nyelvtan, Duna Könyvkiadó Vállalat, Fahrwangen, 1977.

Götz László, Keleten kél a nap, Püski, Budapest, 1994.

Györffy György, ed., Honfoglalás és régészet, Balassi Kiadó, Budapest, 1994.

Haraszti Endre, The Ethnic History of Transylvania, Danubian Press, Astor, Fla., 1971.

Harsányi Fedor, Elödeink, Magyar Öskutatás, Buenos Aires, 1975.

Hóman B., Szekfü Gy., Magyar történet, Maecenas Könyvkiadó, Budapest, 1990.

Katona Sándor, Östelepes népünk - kettös népnevünk, Somogyi Zoltán Kiadása, 1993.

Kiszely István, Honnan jöttünk?, Hatodik Síp Alapítvány, 1992.

Kolozsvári G. Endre, Aranykincsek hulltak a Hargitára, Népszava, Budapest, 1990.

Kolozsvári G. Endre, A Magyarok Istenének elrablása, Titokfejtö, Budapest, 1993.

Köhalmi Katalin, A steppék nomádja, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1972.

Köpeczi Béla, ed., Erdély rövid története, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1989.

Kramer S. N., The Sumerians, University of Chicago Press, 1963.

Kristó Gyula, Az augsburgi csata, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1985.

László Gyula, A nagyszentmiklósi kincs, Corvina, Budapest, 1977.

László Gyula, Östörténetünk, Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest, 1980.

László Gyula, 50 rajz a honfoglalókról, Móra, Budapest, 1982.

Ligeti Lajos, ed., A magyarság östörténete, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1986.

MaCartney C.A., The Magyars in the Ninth Century, Cambridge U. P., London, 1930.

Magyar Adorján, Elméletem ösmüveltségünkröl, Duna Könyvkiadó Vállalat, Fahrwangen, 1978.

Magyar Adorján, A magyar nyelv, Budapest, 1992.

Makkay János, A tiszaszölösi kincs, Gondolat, Budapest, 1985.

Nagy Sándor, A magyar nép kialakulásának története, Hidfö, San Francisco, 1987.

Nemeskürty István, Hunok és Magyarok, Szabad Tér Kiadó, Budapest, 1993.

Németh Gyula, ed., Attila és Hunjai, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1986.

Novotny Elemér, Sumer=Magyar, Duna Könyvkiadó Vállalat, Fahrwangen, 1977.

Novotny Elemér, Sumir nyelv - magyar nyelv, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1978.

Oláh Béla, Édes magyar nyelvünk szumír eredete, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1980.

Oláh Imre, A Nimrud hagyomány, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1985.

Orbán Árpád, Nimrud király népe - a Magyarok östörténete, Csíkszereda, 1942.

Orbán Árpád, Déli magyar öshaza, Szatmári, Garfield, NJ, 1976.

Országh József, Magyar hit vagy szellemi nyomor, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1977.

Padányi Viktor, Vérbulcsu, 1955.

Padányi Viktor, Dentumagyaria, Editorial Transsylvania, Buenos Aires, 1963.

Paliga S., "Thracian terms for 'township' and 'fortress', and related place-names", in World Archeology, Vol. 19, No. 1, 1986.

Páll János, A magyar vallás, A Kanadai Magyar Egyház Kiadása, 1992.

Pesti József, Két rádió-beszéde, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1980.

Pesti József, Mit akartok az östörténettel ?, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1982.

Püspöki Nagy Péter, A tények erejével, Püski, New York, 1985.

Radics Géza, Eredetünk és öshazánk, 1993.

Sára Peter, A Magyar Nyelv Eredetéröl Másképpen, Arculat Bt., Budapest, 1994.

Simon Zoltán, Dicsöség a sasnak és az égnek, Vancouver, 1978.

Somogyi Ede, Szumirok és Magyarok, Gilgamesh, New York, 1968.

Szelényi Imre, Szumér-magyar rokonság, Hidfö, München, 1961.

Szilvay Gyula, A magyar és testvér népek östörténete, Hidfö, San Francisco, 1984.

Szöcs István, Antiszumir álláspontok kritikája, Szatmári, Garfield, NJ, 1984.

Szülejmenov Olzsasz, Sumér és Ázsia, Szatmári, Garfield, NJ, 1977.

Thúry József, A Magyarok eredete, öshazája és vándorlása, Hidfö, San Francisco, 1988.

Tolsztov Sz. P., Az ösi Chorezm, Szatmári, Garfield, NJ, 1986.

Tóth-Kurucz Mária, Aranyfonal, Cleveland, 1990.

Tökei Ferenc, ed., Nomád társadalmak és államalakulatok, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1983.

Trugly Sándor, Griffek és Oroszlánok Népe, Kalligram Könyvkiadó, Pozsony, 1994.

Varga Géza, Székely rovásjelek Hun tárgyakon, Írástörténeti Kutató Intézet, Budapest, 1996.

Varga Zsigmond, Az ösmagyar mitológia szumír és ural-altáji öröksége, Hidfö, San Francisco, 1956.

Vágó Pál, A Vérszerzödés ereje, Ösi Gyökér, Buenos Aires, 1976.

Zajti Ferenc, Magyar évezredek, Budapest, 1939.

Zakar András, A sumer hitvilág és a biblia, Szatmári, Garfield, NJ, 1972.

Zakar András, A sumér nyelvröl, Duna Könyvkiadó Vállalat, Fahrwangen, 1975.

Zakar András, Elhallgatott fejezetek a magyar történelemböl, Duna Könyvkiadó Vállalat, Fahrwangen, 1976.

Zakar András, A sumér és akkád ékjelekröl, Szatmári, Garfield, NJ, 1976.

Zakar András, Fordulópontok történelmünkböl, Szatmári, Garfield, NJ, 1987.

Zürichi Magyar Történelmi Egyesület, Az 1. (Benidormi) Magyar Östörténeti Találkozó Elöadásai és Iratai, Zürich, 1991.

Zürichi Magyar Történelmi Egyesület, Magyarok östörténete, Zürich, 1992.

Zürichi Magyar Történelmi Egyesület, Az Elsö (Szegedi) Iskola Elöadásai és Iratai, Zürich, 1993.

Zürichi Magyar Történelmi Egyesület, A 2. (Zürichi) Magyar Östörténeti Találkozó Elöadásai és Iratai, Zürich, 1993.


i cant find any history of the placenames, can you ? i know that those kazach place are not 2500 years old seems unlikely. ereymentau dont look like armenian. There is a difference between Armen and Ermen, The whole world calls us Armenian and you do it with a ''er''.

Well, do you know any other place except Central Asia with such place names? I don't.

[gregorius]

You asked about Turkic people and I found about my nation. So?



Well, as I said you are "Hay"s, others mistake for you as descendants of ancient Armenians.



It was not in the last link I sent(hunmagyar), genius.



Actually, in other pages of the site, they have sources:

http://www.hunmagyar.org/tor/controve.htm





Well, do you know any other place except Central Asia with such place names? I don't.


wel french,italian people have names like Arman.

I havent seen any statements that armenians are turkish, Only in the hunmagyar website which says indo euro doesnt exisct it is derived from the turanian and other languages. it means that most likely every nation on this planet is turkish.

As i said before i cant give you genetic proofes of us and the armenians of 2000 years ago, we might be slightly changed geneticale beacuse we where under the ottoman,persian,russian and byzantium empires. But as i stated we kept our languages/religion/culture/alphabet which is more than enough to say that we are armenians .

Hay is armenian, again we call us Hay the others armenian. hungarians called themselves Magyar the rest of the world hungary, same with greece,albanian,croatia.

Everywhere is stated that we got our names from the assyrians and the greeks took over. Why are you keep saying that beacuse others call us armenians and your say that turkich placenames like erementay and letnik ermen are the prooves why we are turkish people?

and even if we where laughable enough turkish ? than still we settled there long before you guys and so more native.

[Yalquzaq]

Imust admitt i dont have any knowledge about this savafids are azeri origin or not, anyway if you want to discuss about that we can open a thread about the origings of the safavids.

I know that the savafids (Azeri if you like to call it) deported the armenians from yerevan when they came into power and the majority became muslim(kurd,persian,Azeri) Than when the russian came into power the deported they deported the armenians back) Also alot of armenians from eastern armenia cam back to yerevan which is logic.

Seriously, did you read anything I wrote? Then you would not ask further questions about Safavids.

Yerevan was a Tatar (Azerbaijani) city when Russians occupied the city, not just a "Muslim" city of mixed ethnicities, the other "Muslim" ethnicites were only few.

As I have already told about this, Russians also relocated alot of Armenians from Ottoman territorities to western Azerbaijani lands, not only Iran. BTW, Yerevan was still a majority Tatar (Azerbaijani) city as late as 1897, decades after the relocation of Armenians.

[Partizan]

wel french,italian people have names like Arman.

True, Armin as well. But I especially mean place names.


I havent seen any statements that armenians are turkish, Only in the hunmagyar website which says indo euro doesnt exisct it is derived from the turanian and other languages. it means that most likely every nation on this planet is turkish.

Turkish=/=Turanian But based on Etruscan-Sumerian-Scythian-Turkic-Magyar connection, it can be said that Ural-Altai aka Turanian people have the greatest impact in World.

[gregorius]

Seriously, did you read anything I wrote? Then you would not ask further questions about Safavids.

Yerevan was a majority Tatar (Azerbaijani) city when Russians occupied the city, not just a "Muslim" city of mixed ethnicities, the other "Muslim" ethnicites were only few.

As I have already told about this, Russians also relocated alot of Armenians from Ottoman territorities to western Azerbaijani lands, not only Iran, so even that argument does not change the illegal actions by Russians. BTW, Yerevan was still a majority Tatar (Azerbaijani) city as late as 1897, decades after the relocation of Armenians.

seriously? Lol are you reading what i said ? before the safavids where there yerevan had a majority Armenian,. Then the safavids came and the armenians where deported. Doesnt matter if they where mostly azeri or persians or whatever. is very presumable that the azeris where the majority back than. Then the safavids lost the control and they deported the armenians back from iran/savafids land or whatever back to armenia. And yes alot of armenians from ottoman empire went to eastern Armenia. WHy do you still reffer it as western azerbaijan ? you knew that we where deported so you where the majority there ? you even stated by yourself that the oghuz tribes came 1 millenium ago and not in yerevan but in other places in the caucaus.

Why it is legal to deport armenians from they homeland to iran but when the russians deport them back it is illegal?

[gregorius]

True, Armin as well. But I especially mean place names.



Turkish=/=Turanian But based on Etruscan-Sumerian-Scythian-Turkic-Magyar connection, it can be said that Ural-Altai aka Turanian people have the greatest impact in World.
oke than we are done discussing with our discussion with your last sentence, go tell those jokes to other people.

lets say armenians are turkish, we are still natives of the ground where we live on now

[Baldur]

Popular in which way?

[Yalquzaq]

Maybe then you can try to prove it. You guys don't say anything else than "Safavids deported Armenians", but this doesn't means that Armenians had a majority in these lands. What I tell you is, the Armenians that were relocated from Iran would not be enough for an Armenian majority. As I told you, the city had Tatar (Azerbaijan) majority in 1897 when Russian Empire conducted a census there. The 1897 census btw was the only census done in the history of Russian Empire.

[American_Hispanist]

define popular.

[gregorius]

Maybe then you can try to prove it. You guys don't say anything else than "Safavids deported Armenians", but this doesn't means that Armenians had a majority in these lands. What I tell you is, the Armenians that were relocated from Iran would not be enough for an Armenian majority. As I told you, the city had Tatar (Azerbaijan) majority in 1897 when Russian Empire conducted a census there. The 1897 census btw was the only census done in the history of Russian Empire.

WTF are you again using the majority thing again?
when do you understand that being a majority doesnt mean it is your land
before the safavids we where te majority it is stated everywhere, if you go some pages back you will see it that i stated it with a source.

I gave you that encyclopedia thing where it was al good states when you guys came.

[Nadezhda89]

Message to the moderators - Please close this thread. :picard1:

[eeroli]

A few Armenians i have met are OK peoples. They love their country and their culture.

[Anglojew]

Why Armenia is not popular in the same way that Greece is?
I mean Armenia was founded in 2492 BC but it is not respected the way Greece is and it is not popular as Greece. Even their alphabets are similar. But why things are this way?

Armenia did not influence European civiliasation like Greece did. There are no well known ancient Armenian philosophers. They didn't have an empire nor did Armenian become the Lingua Franca of he ancient world. Half of the Roman Empire was not Armenian. Armenia did not invent the Olympic Games. The New Testament was not originally written in Armenia.

[Artavazt]

The New Testament was not originally written in Armenia.

Interresting evidence :rolleyes:

[Chuck Norris]

Well, here is my take on it. First and foremost, the development and appreciation of "culture" is contingent on who your neighbors are. Certainly, Armenia, as a state, and Armenians, as a people, have had an influence on their neighbors at various points in time, but unfortunately their influence has always been downplayed due to political reason. Relative to their neighbors Armenians given their population and geopolitical circumstance have contributed greatly to the development of the region. However, today you don't see your average Georgian, Iranian, Azeri, or Turk running around proclaiming the contributions of Armenia on their society. Just google Balyan family and look at how many buildings they constructed. These buildings are "national treasures" in Turkey, but if you ask an average Turk they would deny it even though it is recorded in the annuals of their own history books. Same for Georgians and the rest.... you ask them how is it possible that their alphabet or churches resemble the Armenian alphabet or churches and they claim it was created by some mythical figure?

For a comparison, I would say relatively, Greece is to "Western Europe" as Armenia is to the "near east", but the only difference while the neighbors of Greeks appreciate Greek culture and built upon it Armenia's neighbors destroyed what we had given them or downplayed it.

However, I don't see this going both ways and that is why today Armenian history is well studied in established universities while Ottoman, Georgian, and Azeri history is not. Furthermore, the connection between Cilicia, Byzantine Armenia, and etc...with the western world has just recently been revisited by academics (mostly Cilicia and Byzantium).

As for antiquity, well Armenia and Urartu is one and same. Academics generally consider Urartu as the remnants of the Hurrian civilization. The Hurrians and the Hittites had built a unique alliance against various rivals....where am I going with this...the influence in antiquity is also there in the region via both the Hurrians and Hittites. In general, "Armenian" is the name given to Armenians by third parties. To give a comparison, Armenians were a national and homogenized people since the middle 6th century BC (it could be much older, but if we take the Old Persian Behistun inscription as a proxy for a recorded date of 515 BC) then Armenians as a people stretch farther in back in history.

At this time, there was no such thing as "Turkish", "Georgian", "Chinese", "Indian", and etc. There were Greeks, but Greeks at time identified more so with their "city-state" versus this idea of "homogenized Greek people" like today. However, Armenians are the only people today that have been called "Armenian" since 550BC. You you put the date of their historical "mythical creation" of Heyk Nahapet (i.e. where he is fighting Bel and the Babylonians) and your realize how old Armenians really are.

Now, with that being said...where am I going with this...well I just would like to highlight a double standard. Everyone attempts to project themselves in the past (Europeans via the Romans and Greeks, Georgians with the Iberians, and etc.), however, I only find that the Armenians do project themselves with the utmost honestly and this type of double standard extends to our contributions. You can go to Ani and clearly see the transfer of culture from Armenia to European. However, today, Ani is in ruins and the Turkish government fails to maintain it. They conduct half ass renovations and fail to properly secure the building foundations. Same situation in Georgia, of the 32 or so Churches in Georgia only 2 or so maintained. The rest are left to rot because when they go down Georgians can claim that they invented more things on their as the architectural motifs die with the buildings.

If I were to claim Armenians invented something that contributed to the development of Turkey, Azerbaijan, or Georgia as a nation...how many Turks and Georgians would admit and embrace it? None. It is the truth and it is sad reality of the region and this is precisely why that area will never develop because you have only a few innovators and a lot of copiers. That is truth. You can't even convince these countries of simple historical truths how can you honestly convince them complicated reasoning and historical chain of events? And that is why today Greeks are the innovators of Western Civilization, while Armenians as some claim "didn't contribute to anything". It is just absurd as the OP claimed that how come "Armenians are not seen in the same image as Greeks"...well look at where Greece is and look at where Armenia is.
For a comparison, I would say relatively, Greece is to "Western Europe" as Armenia is to the "near east", but the only difference while the neighbors of Greeks appreciate Greek culture and built upon it Armenia's neighbors destroyed what we had given them or downplayed it.

However, I don't see this going both ways and that is why today Armenian history is well studied in established universities while Ottoman, Georgian, and Azeri history is not. Furthermore, the connection between Cilicia, Byzantine Armenia, and etc...with the western world has just recently been revisited by academics (mostly Cilicia and Byzantium).

As for antiquity, well Armenians/Urartu are one and same and academics generally consider Urartu as the remnants of the Hurrian civilization. The Hurrians and the Hittites had built a unique alliance against various rivals....where am I going with this...the influence in antiquity is also there in the region via both the Hurrians and Hittites. In general, "Armenian" is the world given to Armenians by third parties. To give a comparison, Armenians were national group and homogenized since the middle 6th century BC (it could be much older, but if we take the Old Persian Behistun inscription as a proxy for a recorded date of 515 BC) then Armenians as a people stretch farther in back in history. At this time, there was no such thing as "Turkish", "Georgian", "Chinese", "Indian", and etc. There were Greeks, but Greeks at time identified more so with their "city-state" versus this idea of "homogenized Greek people" like today. However, Armenians are the only people today that have been called "Armenian" since 550BC. Meaning, then that by logic you put the date of their historical "mythical creation" of Hike Nahapet (i.e. where he is fighting Bel and the Babylonians) and your realize how old Armenians really are.

Now, with that being said...where am I going with this...well I just would like to highlight a double standard. Everyone attempts to project themselves in the past (Europeans via the Romans and Greeks, Georgians with the "Ancient Iberian Kingdom", and etc.), however, I only find that the Armenians do see with the utmost honestly and this type of double standard extends to our contributions.

If I were to claim Armenians invented XYZ and this contributed to the development of Turks or Georgians as a people...how many Turks, Azeris, or Georgians would admit it? None.

I hope this answers your question.

[Loki]

How about ... Armenia's ethnic cleansing of Azerbaijanis which is still ongoing ...

[Chuck Norris]

How about ... Armenia's ethnic cleansing of Azerbaijanis which is still ongoing ...

Ethnic cleanings? Armenians don't do that. Ask Turks and Azeris as well as Georgians. They like to clean a lot. Churches, gravestones, and everything that ends with "ian or yan" including people. Not only the physical, but also the metaphysical. Also, the taxonomy of the region. Ask them, they not only know about "ethnic cleansing", but also about "genocide", "pogroms", "historical revision", "changing names", and claiming they invented everything almost 500 years before the earliest known Armenian example. They know more than Armenians about this kind of topics.

[Loki]

Ethnic cleanings? Armenians don't do that. Ask Turks and Azeris as well as Georgians. They like to clean a lot. Churches, gravestones, and everything that ends with "ian or yan" including people. Not only the physical, but also the metaphysical. Also, the taxonomy of the region. Ask them, they not only know about "ethnic cleansing", but also about "genocide", "pogroms", "historical revision", "changing names", and claiming they invented everything almost 500 years before the earliest known Armenian example. They know more than Armenians about this kind of topics.

Armenians don't do that? Consensus is that is exactly what they are doing against Azerbaijanis ..

yLI99q6Qbyo

It seems Azerbaijanis got a pretty raw deal, and Armenia is hell-bent on claiming Nagorno-Karabakh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh) too ... and prepared to go to war over it. They make no secret about it.

Despite the ceasefire, fatalities due to armed conflicts between Armenian and Azerbaijani soldiers continued.[66] On January 25, 2005 PACE adopted Resolution 1416, which condemns the use of ethnic cleansing against the Azerbaijani population, and supporting the occupation of Azerbaijani territory.[67][68] On 15–17 May 2007 the 34th session of the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Organization of Islamic Conference adopted resolution № 7/34-P, considering the occupation of Azerbaijani territory as the aggression of Armenia against Azerbaijan and recognizing the actions against Azerbaijani civilians as a crime against humanity, and condemns the destruction of archaeological, cultural and religious monuments in the occupied territories.[69]

At the 11th session of the summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference held on March 13–14, 2008 in Dakar, resolution № 10/11-P (IS) was adopted. According to the resolution, OIC member states condemned the occupation of Azerbaijani lands by Armenian forces and Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan, alleged ethnic cleansing against the Azeri population, and charged Armenia with the "destruction of cultural monuments in the occupied Azerbaijani territories."[70] On March 14 of the same year the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution № 62/243 which "demands the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of all Armenian forces from all occupied territories of the Republic of Azerbaijan".[71] As of August 2008, the United States, France, and Russia (the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group) are mediating efforts to negotiate a full settlement of the conflict, proposing a "a referendum or a plebiscite, at a time to be determined later," to determine the final status of the area, return for some territories under Karabakh's control, and security guarantees.[72] Ilham Aliyev and Serzh Sarkisian traveled to Moscow for talks with Dmitry Medvedev on 2 November 2008. The talks ended in the three Presidents signing a declaration confirming their commitment to continue talks.[73] The two presidents have met again since then, most recently in Saint Petersburg.[74]

[Chuck Norris]

Armenians don't do that? Consensus is that is exactly what they are doing against Azerbaijanis ..

yLI99q6Qbyo

It seems Azerbaijanis got a pretty raw deal, and Armenia is hell-bent on claiming Nagorno-Karabakh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh) too ... and prepared to go to war over it. They make no secret about it.

Despite the ceasefire, fatalities due to armed conflicts between Armenian and Azerbaijani soldiers continued.[66] On January 25, 2005 PACE adopted Resolution 1416, which condemns the use of ethnic cleansing against the Azerbaijani population, and supporting the occupation of Azerbaijani territory.[67][68] On 15–17 May 2007 the 34th session of the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Organization of Islamic Conference adopted resolution № 7/34-P, considering the occupation of Azerbaijani territory as the aggression of Armenia against Azerbaijan and recognizing the actions against Azerbaijani civilians as a crime against humanity, and condemns the destruction of archaeological, cultural and religious monuments in the occupied territories.[69]

At the 11th session of the summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference held on March 13–14, 2008 in Dakar, resolution № 10/11-P (IS) was adopted. According to the resolution, OIC member states condemned the occupation of Azerbaijani lands by Armenian forces and Armenian aggression against Azerbaijan, alleged ethnic cleansing against the Azeri population, and charged Armenia with the "destruction of cultural monuments in the occupied Azerbaijani territories."[70] On March 14 of the same year the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution № 62/243 which "demands the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of all Armenian forces from all occupied territories of the Republic of Azerbaijan".[71] As of August 2008, the United States, France, and Russia (the co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group) are mediating efforts to negotiate a full settlement of the conflict, proposing a "a referendum or a plebiscite, at a time to be determined later," to determine the final status of the area, return for some territories under Karabakh's control, and security guarantees.[72] Ilham Aliyev and Serzh Sarkisian traveled to Moscow for talks with Dmitry Medvedev on 2 November 2008. The talks ended in the three Presidents signing a declaration confirming their commitment to continue talks.[73] The two presidents have met again since then, most recently in Saint Petersburg.[74]

Seriously?

First, Armenians were targeted before any "Azeri Genocide". They were brutal murdered via pogroms on Soviet television. For almost century there was state run policy to destroy traces of both Armenian presence and Armenian people.

Second, it was precisely the demographic changes due to corrupt Soviet policy spearheaded by Stalin that lead to the intensification of this issue in the later 20th century. Both Arsakh ("Karabagh") as well as Nakhichevan had Armenian majorities. Today Nakhichevan is cleansed of anything Armenian.

Any logical person can see then that between the historical antecedents of the Armenian genocide, the pogroms, and the corrupt Soviet policy the remaining Armenians in Artsakh had no choice but to succeed from Azerbaijan. There is no logical conclusion besides this choice.

Are you honestly claiming that you as an Armenian could live under a government that promotes Ramil Safarov as a hero? If you do then you do agree with him being a hero for killing a fellow human being in bed with an axe when the victim was sleeping then you seriously have some moral dilemmas you need to hash out before claiming anything about Armenians.

Azerbaijan is a corrupt government run by a dictator that is stealing money and blaming Armenians for both his dishonesty and the ineptness of his government. This is the kind of psychological sociopaths Armenians have to deal with. There exists no way you can honestly sit down and negotiation a resolution when the individuals you are negotiating reward cold blooded murder in order to steal more money. The entire government is corrupt. How can you honestly claim now that somehow Armenians are "ethnic cleaners" and Azeris are not? Seriously? You have issues my friend.

In closing, I would like you to honestly think about my reply to you. Really consider these points that from the Armenian perspective you have a destruction, theft, and cold blooded murder of your people who for 500 years have been subjugated and served loyally their "Ottoman brothers and sister" only to be rewarded by death. Most of the populations that were murdered were "Ottoman Christians". They were afraid to go against the empire as they lived in terror for 500 years. Flash forward, 100 years, how would any intelligent person trust a government backed by genocide deniers, trust a government that rewards murderers, and, most important, that has a history of conducting pogroms on minorities? If you really think Armenians had "choice" then you sir are either stupid or dishonest.

[Onur]

The current Armenian state in Caucasus is a result of centuries old policy of Moscow. They always wanted to create a state between the Turks in Caucasus (Azerbaijani) and the Turks in Anatolia, a vassal state under Russian sovereignty but a hostile one to the both side, so it can act as a barrier between the Turks and prevent Turkey (Ottoman empire back then) to reach Khazar sea. This was something unbearable for the Moscow as it would hurt Russian policies in the region.

Moscow already invited Armenians to the territories of current Armenian state since 19th century. They encouraged Anatolian Armenians to settle in there. They also fully supported Armenians during WW-1, supplied them arms to start uprising in eastern Anatolia. Whether Armenians manages to expand their state into Anatolia or not. Both results would be useful for Russia anyway.

Watch this video. Putin speaks in Armenia;

X-1FK57LSik

[Yalquzaq]

Watch this video. Putin speaks in Armenia;

X-1FK57LSik

People should really watch this video. The plans of Russian Empire regarding relocation of Armenians to Azerbaijani lands is no secret anyway, the documents are all in archives, however these words belong to the president of Russia.

[xajapa]

yLI99q6Qbyo
This appears to be a real piece of propaganda. According to this video the blame lies with Russia and Iran.

[Wulfhere]

Why Armenia is not popular in the same way that Greece is?
I mean Armenia was founded in 2492 BC but it is not respected the way Greece is and it is not popular as Greece. Even their alphabets are similar. But why things are this way?

Greece is the fount of Western civilisation.

Armenia isn't.

[Scholarios]

People should really watch this video. The plans of Russian Empire regarding relocation of Armenians to Azerbaijani lands is no secret anyway, the documents are all in archives, however these words belong to the president of Russia.

So I guess just get rid of the last Armenians so Turkey can have a little more breathing space.

http://blog.hetq.am/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/future-of-Turkey.jpg

[Anulik]

Exactly. Sad but true. Just imagine if we were to go extinct long ago like Hittites, Babylonians, and other such groups the inhabitants on our lands would not cover up history but actually make claims that they're direct descendants of the people who left behind these buildings and culture. The problem is we are still here today, small and not as strong, but here. You get more respect when you're extinct.

[Anulik]

Exactly. Sad but true. Just imagine if we were to go extinct long ago like Hittites, Babylonians, and other such groups the inhabitants on our lands would not cover up history but actually make claims that they're direct descendants of the people who left behind these buildings and culture. The problem is we are still here today, small and not as strong, but here. You get more respect when you're extinct.


Seriously?

First, Armenians were targeted before any "Azeri Genocide". They were brutal murdered via pogroms on Soviet television. For almost century there was state run policy to destroy traces of both Armenian presence and Armenian people.

Second, it was precisely the demographic changes due to corrupt Soviet policy spearheaded by Stalin that lead to the intensification of this issue in the later 20th century. Both Arsakh ("Karabagh") as well as Nakhichevan had Armenian majorities. Today Nakhichevan is cleansed of anything Armenian.

Any logical person can see then that between the historical antecedents of the Armenian genocide, the pogroms, and the corrupt Soviet policy the remaining Armenians in Artsakh had no choice but to succeed from Azerbaijan. There is no logical conclusion besides this choice.

Are you honestly claiming that you as an Armenian could live under a government that promotes Ramil Safarov as a hero? If you do then you do agree with him being a hero for killing a fellow human being in bed with an axe when the victim was sleeping then you seriously have some moral dilemmas you need to hash out before claiming anything about Armenians.

Azerbaijan is a corrupt government run by a dictator that is stealing money and blaming Armenians for both his dishonesty and the ineptness of his government. This is the kind of psychological sociopaths Armenians have to deal with. There exists no way you can honestly sit down and negotiation a resolution when the individuals you are negotiating reward cold blooded murder in order to steal more money. The entire government is corrupt. How can you honestly claim now that somehow Armenians are "ethnic cleaners" and Azeris are not? Seriously? You have issues my friend.

In closing, I would like you to honestly think about my reply to you. Really consider these points that from the Armenian perspective you have a destruction, theft, and cold blooded murder of your people who for 500 years have been subjugated and served loyally their "Ottoman brothers and sister" only to be rewarded by death. Most of the populations that were murdered were "Ottoman Christians". They were afraid to go against the empire as they lived in terror for 500 years. Flash forward, 100 years, how would any intelligent person trust a government backed by genocide deniers, trust a government that rewards murderers, and, most important, that has a history of conducting pogroms on minorities? If you really think Armenians had "choice" then you sir are either stupid or dishonest.

[Onur]

Exactly. Sad but true. Just imagine if we were to go extinct long ago like Hittites, Babylonians
You owe to your existence to the Turkish rule in these lands. You have been ruled by us for like 800 years and we allowed you to live inside your own community, your own religious institutes and your own schools. We allowed you to participate into the governance of our state. Even the last foreign minister of the Ottoman empire was an ethnic Armenian during WW-1 years.

If we would do what other people usually did in medieval era, then we could have easily wipe your existence on earth as early as 11th century and Armenians would belong to history books today like Hittites, Lydians etc. No one would even remember Armenians today after 900 years.

[Anulik]

Rubbish as usual. I owe my existence to God. Before your existence there were many others in that region, so don't hold your head in a bubble. Except wiping out someone's existence doesn't come that easily does it.... >Armenian Genocide. Yet you still continue to in many sneaky ways justify your existence over another's. The problem is were still here, hence the rubbish and propaganda from people like you. My post still stands true.


You owe to your existence to the Turkish rule in these lands. You have been ruled by us for like 800 years and we allowed you to live inside your own community, your own religious institutes and your own schools. We allowed you to participate into the governance of our state. Even the last foreign minister of the Ottoman empire was an ethnic Armenian during WW-1 years.

If we would do what other people usually did in medieval era, then we could have easily wipe your existence on earth as early as 11th century and Armenians would belong to history books today like Hittites, Lydians etc. No one would even remember Armenians today after 900 years.

[Hess]

Greece is the fount of Western civilisation.

Armenia isn't.

That would be my response as well.

Armenia is nowhere near as important as Greece in the Cultural and Intellectual development of Europe, and I don't see how any person with even the slightest knowledge of history can argue otherwise.


In terms of its contributions, it would be much more reasonable to compare Armenia to Bulgaria or Moldova.

[Chuck Norris]

You owe to your existence to the Turkish rule in these lands. You have been ruled by us for like 800 years and we allowed you to live inside your own community, your own religious institutes and your own schools. We allowed you to participate into the governance of our state. Even the last foreign minister of the Ottoman empire was an ethnic Armenian during WW-1 years.

If we would do what other people usually did in medieval era, then we could have easily wipe your existence on earth as early as 11th century and Armenians would belong to history books today like Hittites, Lydians etc. No one would even remember Armenians today after 900 years.

Turks owe their existence to the cunt of Greeks, Assyrians, Arabs, and Armenians. Without the cunt of the many nationalities Turks would not exists as the later bastard population that they are today. Unless you look like Chengiz Khan or some Mongolian horse riding nomad you sir are anything but "Ogoz" in blood. And the various things you attribute as "Turkish culture" like your food and etc. are only a "hodge podge" of culture you inherited from child brides or raped women from the Balken, Iranian highlands, and the Southern Caucasus. Any halfwit can see this.

Anything else you write is a bunch of rubbish. You make it sound like the Ottoman Empire was some carnival cruise. The Christians were taxed death. There were no rights for Christians. You have a delusional idea of the Ottoman Empire. If it was so nice you would still have Christians there. Why are there no Assyrians or Greeks?Look unless you have slanted eyes you are some bastard Turk. Get over it.

[Xenomorph]

Kind of a weird question. These are countries, not pop stars.

[Nadezhda89]

Kind of a weird question. These are countries, not pop stars.
:icon_lol:

[Chuck Norris]

That would be my response as well.

Armenia is nowhere near as important as Greece in the Cultural and Intellectual development of Europe, and I don't see how any person with even the slightest knowledge of history can argue otherwise.


In terms of its contributions, it would be much more reasonable to compare Armenia to Bulgaria or Moldova.

I don't think so ... I don't agree with this statement. I don't want to go into a long written out response as it is a waste of time seeing as to how this forum has turned into Kebobestan.

Look you are comparing Apples and Oranges. You also are attempting to take Greek contribution and pin it as a "european backbone" whereby the only element of European culture that stems from Greece is only a transfer wealth and knowledge from the downfall of the Byzantine Empire that was exported to Europe and the Byzantine Empire consisted of many ethnic groups that contributed to the Empire. Of these groups, Greeks and Armenians stand out. The empire was built on the backs of Armenian traders, merchants, and soldiers. Once the easter half fell the Byzantine went into decline.

Furthermore, Armenians have built a multitude of cities and kingdoms only to be brought down by the clash of civilizations that is only apparent in the west only recently (i.e. Islam versus Christianity) and as far as traders, they were probably one of the first to monopolize the silk road. As they were in India much sooner than the Europeans. Thus, providing European traders inroads to the riches of the East.

Again, this is dragging out...just look at the architecture of Europe. Most of the origins of the grand churches and etc...stem from Cilicia. Cilicia transfered a magnitude of architectural motifs and fortifications that contributed greatly to the design of later European churches and etc....

I could write endlessly...I just don't as, again, this forum has become Kebobestan. Good luck and don't write rubbish next time. You are comparing apples to oranges. Armenians were in sea of muslims trying to exist as Christians...this is a reality that can not be overlooked when comparing lets say Greeks to Armenians. Greeks are Greeks. Armenians are Armenians. End of story.

[Loki]

In closing, I would like you to honestly think about my reply to you.


Did you even read my post and watch the video?

[Chuck Norris]

Did you even read my post and watch the video?

Propaganda my friend. Good luck. :thumb001:

[Arsen_]

any person with even the slightest knowledge of history...


Knowledge of history depends on those who teach it. A couple of examples.

Georgia got a lot from Armenia (alphabet, architecture, religion etc) but Georgian historians sooner will drown themselves in shit than admit it. The same in Turkey. Just a simple example to understand ugly behavior of Turkish denialists: an Armenian man who was head of Turkish Language Association and greatly contributed to development of Turkish Language and for that was called in 1934 Dilacar (literally meaning Turkish language opener) and in 1979 (!!!) Turks try to conceal his Armenian descent and even do not mention his first name "Agop", which would suggest an Armenian descent, and instead mentioned "A. Dilacar". What do you expect form Turks regarding Armenian contribution of old times?

The same is your "knowledge" of history. If I say for example that Armenian architecture influence European you will deny it cos you know nothing about it. If I say that miniatures of old Armenian manuscripts influence European art you will also deny it cos in your "history" you were not taught it. If I say that first ever protestant-like Christianity came to Western Europe (France) via Balkans from Armenia you will also deny it.

But regardless you like it or dislike, Armenians were are and will always be creative people.

[legolasbozo]

Knowledge of history depends on those who teach it. A couple of examples.

Georgia got a lot from Armenia (alphabet, architecture, religion etc) but Georgian historians sooner will drown themselves in shit than admit it. The same in Turkey. Just a simple example to understand ugly behavior of Turkish denialists: an Armenian man who was head of Turkish Language Association and greatly contributed to development of Turkish Language and for that was called in 1934 Dilacar (literally meaning Turkish language opener) and in 1979 (!!!) Turks try to conceal his Armenian descent and even do not mention his first name "Agop", which would suggest an Armenian descent, and instead mentioned "A. Dilacar". What do you expect form Turks regarding Armenian contribution of old times?

The same is your "knowledge" of history. If I say for example that Armenian architecture influence European you will deny it cos you know nothing about it. If I say that miniatures of old Armenian manuscripts influence European art you will also deny it cos in your "history" you were not taught it. If I say that first ever protestant-like Christianity came to Western Europe (France) via Balkans from Armenia you will also deny it.

But regardless you like it or dislike, Armenians were are and will always be creative people.

do you know artin penik?
Do you know alen markaryan?
Turks never has a problem with armenians, but russian puppets orthodox armenians caused all that mess. Why catholic and protestan armenians stayed in Turkey? But why orthodox armenians deportated?

[Hoca]

How about ... Armenia's ethnic cleansing of Azerbaijanis which is still ongoing ...

Armenia is the ONLY MONO-ETHNIC country in the world. Just guess how that happened?

While their neighbors are all multi-ethnic countries.

Armenia should look into his own history first if he wants to be taken serious by its neighbors.Europeans can't help them. Armenia is being isolated from all sides because it attacked almost all neigbhors and carried out multi massacres and genocides in its short history.

[Loki]

I don't think so ... I don't agree with this statement. I don't want to go into a long written out response as it is a waste of time seeing as to how this forum has turned into Kebobestan.


You registered this month and have a total postcount of seven. Thanks for your feedback.

[Queen B]

Do you seriously make such a question?

[Hayalet]

Just a simple example to understand ugly behavior of Turkish denialists: an Armenian man who was head of Turkish Language Association and greatly contributed to development of Turkish Language and for that was called in 1934 Dilacar (literally meaning Turkish language opener) and in 1979 (!!!) Turks try to conceal his Armenian descent and even do not mention his first name "Agop", which would suggest an Armenian descent, and instead mentioned "A. Dilacar".
Was that the first time in history a first name was shortened to the capital letter?

[Yalquzaq]

Propaganda my friend. Good luck. :thumb001:

Putin's remarks is also propaganda?

[Loki]

By the way good luck to the good people in Azerbaijan, they just want peace. I befriended some Armenians in London and my jaw dropped at what they discussed over the dinner table ... wanting to massacre Turks and Azerbaijainis. It's like a national indoctrination for them since day one.

[Hoca]

By the way good luck to the good people in Azerbaijan, they just want peace. I befriended some Armenians in London and my jaw dropped at what they discussed over the dinner table ... wanting to massacre Turks and Azerbaijainis. It's like a national indoctrination for them since day one.

Same here, it is amazing what they say, just imagine what they are capable of doing if you give them some guns and equipment.

Don't worry about Azerbaijan though. They are building up their army and nowadays Turkey is much more flexible with helping out Azerbaijan.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Long live United Armenia.

http://www.armeniapedia.org/images/thumb/4/4d/Tigranesthega.gif/590px-Tigranesthega.gif

[poiuytrewq0987]

By the way good luck to the good people in Azerbaijan, they just want peace. I befriended some Armenians in London and my jaw dropped at what they discussed over the dinner table ... wanting to massacre Turks and Azerbaijainis. It's like a national indoctrination for them since day one.

How is it indoctrination when it is historical fact that the turkos invaded Armenia and sacked Armenian Constantinople Ani and then went on to destroy every single remnant of Armenian resistance against Turko-Mongolic occupation. To add salt to wound, they massacred more than 3 million Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians just as they were breaking free from Turkish yoke. I guess they should have said thanks and gave turkos roses for the destruction of Armenian civilization, the occupation and the genocides?

[Hoca]

Thraex, the funny thing is the girl in your avatar. She is Tatar. LOL.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Thraex, the funny thing is the girl in your avatar. She is Tatar. LOL.

No, she is Volga Bulgarian. Tatar = Volga Bulgarian. Get over it and GTFO your pan-turko obsession.

P.S. Nice derail because you knew everything that I said is 100% true. Turks are the worst scum on the earth. I am tired of people who think Turks can do no wrong, and that people benefited from Turko-Mongolic occupation. You are the worst thing that's ever happened to Asia Minor and the Balkans.

[Hoca]

Since when are Tatar people Volga bulgar? She is Turkic Tatar ancestry and you obsess about her, haahaha, the irony. Everybody knows Tatar history so I don't have to explain you. The reason why I didn't respond to your delusions is because it is not worth it. If everybody takes your mindset, then peoples of America, Australia, Africa all have to relocate before colonization.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Since when are Tatar people Volga bulgar? She is Turkic Tatar ancestry and you obsess about her, haahaha, the irony. Everybody knows Tatar history so I don't have to explain you. The reason why I didn't respond to your delusions is because it is not worth it. If everybody takes your mindset, then peoples of America, Australia, Africa all have to relocate before colonization.

We don't need to hear regurgitated turko pan-turkism pseudo history 100 times on here. Volga Tatars are Volga Bulgarians, period, all unbiased history points to that. Ethnic consciousness of many Volga Tatars profess a Volga Bulgarian ethnic consciousness, not turko-mongol of asstolia.

[Loki]

Long live United Armenia.

http://www.armeniapedia.org/images/thumb/4/4d/Tigranesthega.gif/590px-Tigranesthega.gif

That's just one of many old maps. The region is ancient. We don't know who the earliest inhabitants were.

[Hoca]

That's just one of many old maps. The region is ancient. We don't know who the earliest inhabitants were.

The hittite were older than them and they were not Armenians. Hittite capital was in Angora, today it is called Ankara.

[Onur]

... wanting to massacre Turks and Azerbaijainis. It's like a national indoctrination for them since day one.
This is how the Armenian state and diaspora organizations indoctrinates Armenian youth for decades. They are getting raised by learning to massacre Turks and invade Azerbaijan, eastern Anatolia to create their mythical Armenian kingdom.



The hittite were older than them and they were not Armenians. Hittite capital was in Angora, today it is called Ankara.
In fact, Hittites wrote that the city of Angora was already existed when they first gone there and had the same name. It was the city of Hattians before 2000 BC, the people who spoke non-IE language.

Anatolia has 12.000 year old attested history of dozens of people and their states. Greeks, Armenians, Romans are just the ones who ruled Anatolia before the Turks. They have no particular importance other than that. There was Lydians, Hittites, Hattians, Trojans, Persians and many others before them.

[Hess]

Look you are comparing Apples and Oranges. You also are attempting to take Greek contribution and pin it as a "european backbone" whereby the only element of European culture that stems from Greece is only a transfer wealth and knowledge from the downfall of the Byzantine Empire that was exported to Europe and the Byzantine Empire consisted of many ethnic groups that contributed to the Empire. Of these groups, Greeks and Armenians stand out. The empire was built on the backs of Armenian traders, merchants, and soldiers. Once the easter half fell the Byzantine went into decline.

The bulk of the Greek Contributions to which I was referring came far before the Byzantine Empire.

The ancient Greek philosophers laid the foundation for western thinking and the ideas of socrates play an immense role even today, seeing as how influential he was in the formation of Catholic Doctrine.


Furthermore, Armenians have built a multitude of cities and kingdoms only to be brought down by the clash of civilizations that is only apparent in the west only recently (i.e. Islam versus Christianity) and as far as traders, they were probably one of the first to monopolize the silk road. As they were in India much sooner than the Europeans. Thus, providing European traders inroads to the riches of the East.

I never denied that Armenians made important contributions; my contention is that Greece made far more important contributions.



I could write endlessly...I just don't as, again, this forum has become Kebobestan. Good luck and don't write rubbish next time. You are comparing apples to oranges. Armenians were in sea of muslims trying to exist as Christians...this is a reality that can not be overlooked when comparing lets say Greeks to Armenians. Greeks are Greeks. Armenians are Armenians. End of story.

The OP was the one who first compared Armenians to Greeks, not me. I find it to be a stupid comparison myself, but I was simply responding to the OP's question.



Knowledge of history depends on those who teach it. A couple of examples.

Georgia got a lot from Armenia (alphabet, architecture, religion etc) but Georgian historians sooner will drown themselves in shit than admit it. The same in Turkey. Just a simple example to understand ugly behavior of Turkish denialists: an Armenian man who was head of Turkish Language Association and greatly contributed to development of Turkish Language and for that was called in 1934 Dilacar (literally meaning Turkish language opener) and in 1979 (!!!) Turks try to conceal his Armenian descent and even do not mention his first name "Agop", which would suggest an Armenian descent, and instead mentioned "A. Dilacar". What do you expect form Turks regarding Armenian contribution of old times?

The same is your "knowledge" of history. If I say for example that Armenian architecture influence European you will deny it cos you know nothing about it. If I say that miniatures of old Armenian manuscripts influence European art you will also deny it cos in your "history" you were not taught it. If I say that first ever protestant-like Christianity came to Western Europe (France) via Balkans from Armenia you will also deny it.

But regardless you like it or dislike, Armenians were are and will always be creative people.


You're attacking a straw-man. I never denied that Armenians are creative people, or that they made important contributions to Europe.

There's a difference between making less contributions than Greece and making no contributions at all; I was arguing the former point.

[Chuck Norris]

This is how the Armenian state and diaspora organizations indoctrinates Armenian youth for decades. They are getting raised by learning to massacre Turks and invade Azerbaijan, eastern Anatolia to create their mythical Armenian kingdom.



In fact, Hittites wrote that the city of Angora was already existed when they first gone there and had the same name. It was the city of Hattians before 2000 BC, the people who spoke non-IE language.

Anatolia has 12.000 year old attested history of dozens of people and their states. Greeks, Armenians, Romans are just the ones who ruled Anatolia before the Turks. They have no particular importance other than that. There was Lydians, Hittites, Hattians, Trojans, Persians and many others before them.

First, the only myth in the entire world is the idea of a "Antolian Turk". Get over mate. Turks are nomadic asians, you come from the cunt of the same people you claim "you conquered". That is what I don't understand about Turks...they look in the mirror and don't look like Chengiz Khan, but yet claim they "conquered others". One must ask them if they realize that the people they claim "they conquered" are themselves.

The unconquered populations are still in Greece, Armenia, and etc...

And regarding your last point. That is the most idiotic thing to say. You can make the argument for most of the populations in the world. You argument is idiotic, but then again what do accept from a Turk? Morally bankrupt individuals.

[Chuck Norris]

The bulk of the Greek Contributions to which I was referring came far before the Byzantine Empire.

The ancient Greek philosophers laid the foundation for western thinking and the ideas of socrates play an immense role even today, seeing as how influential he was in the formation of Catholic Doctrine.



I never denied that Armenians made important contributions; my contention is that Greece made far more important contributions.




The OP was the one who first compared Armenians to Greeks, not me. I find it to be a stupid comparison myself, but I was simply responding to the OP's question.





You're attacking a straw-man. I never denied that Armenians are creative people, or that they made important contributions to Europe.

There's a difference between making less contributions than Greece and making no contributions at all; I was arguing the former point.

Well, not to drag it out...my point is that Europeans (Specifically, what we think of as Western Europe) have had a significant contribution in culture from the Byzantines versus say Ancient Greeks. The latter I would argue has had only a marginal effect.

Regarding Armenians, my point is that you can't really make a comparison to any population in the world as Armenians are unique. They have a unique history, identity, and culture.

[Hoca]

I can't believe people on anthropology forum don't know the difference between Mongol (genghis khan) and Turkic people xD

[Chuck Norris]

That's just one of many old maps. The region is ancient. We don't know who the earliest inhabitants were.

Loki, if you like Turks so much why don't inveite them to your country as residents. Maybe in a couple years they will show the same "hospitality" as they have shown us.

You know I believe Turkey does belong in the EU as it seems to me that people in Europe are Turkophiles.

[Chuck Norris]

The hittite were older than them and they were not Armenians. Hittite capital was in Angora, today it is called Ankara.

If anyone can lay claim to Hitties and Hatians it is Armenians, but that is another story. Your argument is idiotic. It absolutely makes no sense...

Every Turk has a problem with accept the Armenian Genocide as it implies that (1) Muslims can commit Genocide, (2) most stole from their Armenian neighbors, and (3) have a problem returning the wealth they stole from their own "Ottoman Citizens". Forget the Republic of Armenia...if you can't as a state embrace Justice and Rule of Law then how can you "project yourself as a Neo-Ottoman State"? You can't. You don't even have the soft power as nobody trusts a Turk at the seat of power due to their policy of prejudice against Christians and non-Muslims. It is a reality.

[Hess]

Well, not to drag it out...my point is that Europeans (Specifically, what we think of as Western Europe) have had a significant contribution in culture from the Byzantines versus say Ancient Greeks. The latter I would argue has had only a marginal effect.

Regarding Armenians, my point is that you can't really make a comparison to any population in the world as Armenians are unique. They have a unique history, identity, and culture.

The ancient Greek thinkers only had a "marginal effect" on Western Europe?

Catholics would be awfully surprised to hear that, seeing as how Scholasticism (and thus Catholicism) did nothing more than build on the works of Socrates.

[Loki]

Loki, if you like Turks so much why don't inveite them to your country as residents. Maybe in a couple years they will show the same hospitality as they have shown us.

You know I believe Turkey does belong in the EU as it seems to me that people in Europe are Turkophiles.

My ancestors loved Turks because they helped them against the Spanish

And yes I know Turkey is an interesting country with options

[Hoca]

.. says the guy who lives on native American bones. I didn't even read your whole comment. When your ass arrived in America, we were in Anatolia for thousand years.

[Chuck Norris]

I can't believe people on anthropology forum don't know the difference between Mongol (genghis khan) and Turkic people xD

Ogoz Tribe, what is the difference? I forget Turks think that The Ogoz Tribe are Aryan supermen. It is most probable that Turks look like people from Kazakhastan, Turkemestan, and etc...somewhere in Central Asia.

You really do believe that real Turks don't have slanted eyes and asian features in general? Come on...cut the bullshit.

[Chuck Norris]

My ancestors loved Turks because they helped them against the Spanish

And yes I know Turkey is an interesting country with options

That is funny. :rolleyes:

I will make sure that in 50 or years I ask you the same question. History will repeat itself.

[DJVT]

My ancestors loved Turks because they helped them against the Spanish

And yes I know Turkey is an interesting country with options

If you are reffering to you ancestors as ''Dutch'' than I would recommend you to visit Amsterdam than you'll see what our people think of Turks :thumb001:

[Hoca]

If you are reffering to you ancestors as ''Dutch'' than I would recommend you to visit Amsterdam than you'll see what our people think of Turks :thumb001:

A lot of Dutch visit Turkey, so it shouldn't be that bad, hahaha. They don't visit Greece or Armenia, do they?

If you visit Greece today, you probably will be attacked because you look Germanic. And in Armenia.. god knows.

[DJVT]

A lot of Dutch visit Turkey, so it shouldn't be that bad, hahaha.

You would be suprised
http://www.geenstijl.nl

Alot of people from Holland and I asume from other parts of western Europe visit Turkey only because its cheap and the weather is fine. Not because they want to feel the culture because we feel that very well here

[Tyfani]

I cannot answer the question but maybe cause Greece is a country that is beautiful for holidays thanks to the thousands of coasts? I mean there is a lot more advertise as concern the modern-Greece

[Chuck Norris]

And in Armenia.. god knows.

The only people that should feel unsafe in Armenia are denialist. Even then we don't go around arresting individuals for "insulting Armenians" (Article 301...Turks have a article 301 that invokes "Insulting Turkishness" ...Loki should read this one). We don't go around killing old women:


LONDON—Amnesty International called on the Turkish authorities to carry out a prompt, thorough and impartial investigation into the series of attacks on elderly Armenian women in Istanbul.
In the last two months, four attacks, one of them fatal, took place in Samatya, an area historically inhabited by Armenians in central Istanbul. All four women are Turkish citizens of Armenian origin.
The Turkish authorities have an obligation to investigate any alleged racist and/or religious bias behind the perpetration of these crimes. A failure to do so may amount to a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights, ratified by Turkey, and the prohibition of discrimination set forth by it.
Hate crimes constitute a serious form of discrimination. State authorities have not only to refrain from discriminating themselves but also exercise due diligence to prevent and combat discrimination from private parties.
It is regrettable that Turkish legislation does not foresee any legislative and policy measures ensuring that hate motives are systematically and thoroughly investigated and duly taken into account in the prosecution and sentencing.
Police insist that they are investigating the cases thoroughly. However, Amnesty International is concerned at public statements made by the authorities discounting the possibility of a racist motivation to the attacks.
Amnesty International believes that the authorities must carry out a thorough investigation into these attacks without discarding the possibility of hate motivation from the outset and take steps to prevent further attacks.
The incidents
In late November 2012, an 87 year-old woman was physically attacked in the street. She was severely beaten and as a result of the attack lost the sight in one eye.
A group of three men allegedly attempted to abduct another elderly woman while on her way to the church on the occasion of the orthodox Christmas on 6 January. The attackers reportedly fled after the intervention by other church goers.
On December 28, an 85 year-old woman was found stabbed to death in her home. Her jewellery was stolen.
On January 22, an 80 year-old woman was attacked and beaten as she was returning to her home.

Just this month 3 elderly women were murdered at gunpoint and that is how you treat your own citizens. Like I communicated ... your country is morally bankrupt. Good thing I am not in Turkey as I would be sent to jail as the internet is monitored as well. The only citizens in Turkey are Muslim Turks. Secular democracy is a lie.

[Chuck Norris]

I cannot answer the question but maybe cause Greece is a country that is beautiful for holidays thanks to the thousands of coasts? I mean there is a lot more advertise as concern the modern-Greece

Greece has a rich history. It has influenced world civilization more so than Armenia. I don't think it is tourism...maybe it is. It is really a nice country in that respect as well, but I don't think it is fair to compare Greece to Armenia in the sphere of comparison that was articulated before. This zero sum idea of comparison...look if you are trying to compare Armenia and Georgia that is fair, but Armenia and Greece...it is hard to make a comparison. As tourist I would prefer Greece because it has so much more offer if I was tourist besides rich history and culture, but Armenia attracts tourist as well that are looking for connection to Armenia. You know? The comparisons before are idiotic.

[Loki]

That is funny. :rolleyes:

I will make sure that in 50 or years I ask you the same question. History will repeat itself.

obvious questions get obvious answers

[Anulik]

What about that pregnant Armenian girl that was killed and rapped? They thirst for Armenian blood. I'm so disgusted by it.

[poiuytrewq0987]

That's just one of many old maps. The region is ancient. We don't know who the earliest inhabitants were.

So you are using Turkish logic that they claim everyone lives in Greece but Greeks? Armenians obviously lived in the area of Greater Armenia shown on the map. Turks came to the region way later. I don't think it can be denied at all that their influence on Asia Minor has been wholly negative. Asia Minor before the Turkish invasion was a much nicer and civilized place. The Armenian metropolis, Ani, was only equalled by Constantinople in wealth and cultural richness. Today there are only ruins of Ani; the same there are only ruins of Constantinople, and Istanbul, no, is not Constantinople.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Why Armenia is not popular in the same way that Greece is?

The only reason Armenia is not compared with equal prestige is because the Armenian civilization was totally obliterated by Turks. Their demographic further reduced by Young Turks massacres and the ensuing genocides of various Christian ethnic groups. Armenia would have been looked up to as an example to follow by Asia Minor, Levantine, Arabic civilizations if the Turko-Mongolic hordes didn't so totally destroy them and reduced them to a peasant rabble similar to what they did to Balkan peoples.

[Annihilus]

I don't get this Turko-Mongol thing. Didn't the Turks fight the Mongols in Anatolia (and got their asses kicked big time)?

[RussiaPrussia]

because armenian behave like jews. They only support their own people. They have also this kind of race is my religion thing.

[wvwvw]

The only reason Armenia is not compared with equal prestige is because the Armenian civilization was totally obliterated by Turks.

You nailed it. That's probably the only reason.

[Pontios]

because armenian behave like jews. They only support their own people. They have also this kind of race is my religion thing.

Who do you want them to support? :lol: Nobody did anything for them except kill them and many countries don't even accept their genocide, why should they do anything for anyone? I don't understand. :confused:

[Queen B]

A lot of Dutch visit Turkey, so it shouldn't be that bad, hahaha. They don't visit Greece or Armenia, do they?

If you visit Greece today, you probably will be attacked because you look Germanic. And in Armenia.. god knows.

We have lots and lots of Dutch, actually.
And we had also lots of Germans, no problem :D

[xajapa]

because armenian behave like jews. They only support their own people. They have also this kind of race is my religion thing.

I see nothing wrong with people being proud of their heritage, especially if they need it to keep their identity in a rather hostile world. As for your statement their race is their religion, what is wrong with somebody having religion and actually adhering to it? As Christians, Armenia is isolated. Their religion is their identity, so what?

[DJVT]

A lot of Dutch visit Turkey, so it shouldn't be that bad, hahaha. They don't visit Greece or Armenia, do they?

If you visit Greece today, you probably will be attacked because you look Germanic. And in Armenia.. god knows.

As a matter of fact, Ive travelled to Greece,Armenia,Georgia and Krasnodar, and I cant say nothing else than good words.
You dont have to behave like they are animals in Greece or Armenia because they arent. I know how Turks are because my city is infected by them.
That last sentence that is exactly typical what I dont like about your kin. That sanctimonious behaviour very very disgusting.

Only low class people in Holland go to Turkey because it is cheap, we call them Toki's.

[legolasbozo]

A lot of Dutch visit Turkey, so it shouldn't be that bad, hahaha. They don't visit Greece or Armenia, do they?

If you visit Greece today, you probably will be attacked because you look Germanic. And in Armenia.. god knows.


if tourist would visit Greece, probably they also visit Turkey or vice versa. To defend your arguments, or defend your people don't attack to others.

[Musso]

I think Greece has always been more well known than Armenia, for historic reasons. That being said, we both still have a rich history and culture, and do have a history together.

[Aquafina]

They are equally great. Armenians need more exposure.

[Musso]

They are equally great. Armenians need more exposure.

We need better PR I think.

[teodor11]

Armo people very very popular i think.

God created a woman! they love black man.

http://belgoturk.tv/anasayfa/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Kim-Kardashian-%C3%A7%C4%B1plak-poz-1.jpg

[Trun]

This whore (who isn't even Armenian) brings only shame to Armenian women worldwide. But some Turks seem to be very enthusiastic about her, probably they are attracted to whores...

[Sky earth]

Kim Kardashian gave Armenia and the Armenians a very bad reputation world wide. I know many people who say directly Kim Kardashian when they hear Armenia.

[gregorius]

teodor the turk is trying to bring a butthurt war here between turks and me probably by bumping several threads with crap.
Teodor go and be butthurt somewhere else

[Hayalet]

Never mind.

[Hoca]

She is supposedly 1/2 or 1/4 Armenian or something. Funny, reading from the comments here they even blame the Turk for unleashing the Armenian whore on the world.

Turks are known by Doctor Oz(TV figure), Muhtar Kent (Coca cola CEO) and Cenk Ugyhur (internet show host).

We are doing good. What about Armenians? The only celeb I know is Kardashians. I mean if they had other celebs it would compensate it but the only famous is that bimbo. Quite embarrassing since there are much more Armenians than Turks in US if we look at it demographically.

[gregorius]

She is supposedly 1/2 or 1/4 Armenian or something. Funny, reading from the comments here they even blame the Turk for unleashing the Armenian whore on the world.

Turks are known by Doctor Oz(TV figure), Muhtar Kent (Coca cola CEO) and Cenk Ugyhur (internet show host).

We are doing good. What about Armenians? The only celeb I know is Kardashians. I mean if they had other celebs it would compensate it but the only famous is that bimbo. Quite embarrassing since there are much more Armenians than Turks in US if we look at it demographically.

See cenk ugyhurs presenator in the show, she is armenian and an integral part of the succes.

anyway:

Ana kasparian
Dr dead
Angela sarafian
Atom egoyan
Cher
James P. Bagian (astronaut)
Kirk Kerkorian

also several congressmen, and many more.

[Trun]

The only celeb I know is Kardashians. I mean if they had other celebs it would compensate it but the only famous is that bimbo. Quite embarrassing since there are much more Armenians than Turks in US if we look at it demographically.

http://2a56b976980e0793ddee-5cc5435fcbc367bb03f9a415e7067a97.r91.cf2.rackcdn.c om/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/System-of-a-Down.jpg
http://viasport.bg/images/stories/All/chess/Silvio_Danailov/Gary-Kasparov1.jpg

[Also]

It becomes a problem when people start to judge a whole ethnicity based on a few "celebrities".

I think Pontios made the right point.


I guess maybe because they have not went on to build great empires, multiple times, and invent so many things the Greeks have. After all, half of the world's governments today, Democracy, was invented by Greeks. That alone already makes Greeks pretty popular :lol:

They are a very ancient nation though, one of the first Christians actually, and have a rich history being in the center of Greeks and Persians often. Their history should be taught and known much more.

They are also often thought to be very close to Greeks.

There are also many known greek philosophers and mathematicians and popular greek literature and mithology, but none of this is the case of Armenia.

[bimo]

Armo people very very popular i think.

God created a woman! they love black man.

http://belgoturk.tv/anasayfa/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Kim-Kardashian-%C3%A%C4%B1plak-poz-1.jpg

what a stupid post , so i can post some turkish whore and say ALL turkish women are sluts

you sound like you have inferiority complex

[Loki]

Armo people very very popular i think.

God created a woman! they love black man.

http://belgoturk.tv/anasayfa/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Kim-Kardashian-%C3%A7%C4%B1plak-poz-1.jpg

I think Kim is very hot.

[Trun]

I think Kim is very whore.

Fixed.

[Loki]

http://viasport.bg/images/stories/All/chess/Silvio_Danailov/Gary-Kasparov1.jpg

Kasparov is half Jewish.

[bimo]

whore or not she is hot

[Trun]

Kasparov is half Jewish.

I think he identifies as Armenian though.

[Also]

Why is Kim K. a whore?

[Hoca]

http://2a56b976980e0793ddee-5cc5435fcbc367bb03f9a415e7067a97.r91.cf2.rackcdn.c om/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/System-of-a-Down.jpg
http://viasport.bg/images/stories/All/chess/Silvio_Danailov/Gary-Kasparov1.jpg

Ok, forgot about System of Dawn. But besides that are there other famous Armenians?

Kasparov is not Armenian. Even his name gives it away. He is Jewish/Russian born in Armenia.

[gregorius]

Ok, forgot about System of Dawn. But besides that are there other famous Armenians?

Kasparov is not Armenian. Even his name gives it away. He is Jewish/Russian born in Armenia.

Kasparov is half armenian half Jewish. Kaspar is a very common name among Armenians.

Kasparov was born Garik Kimovich Weinstein (Russian: Гарик Вайнштейн) in Baku, Soviet Union (now Azerbaijan). His father, Kim Moiseyevich Weinstein, was Russian Jewish, and his mother, Klara Shagenovna, was Armenian.[7][8][9][10] Kasparov has described himself as a "self-appointed Christian", although "very indifferent".[11]

anyway

Ana kasparian (host Who is basicly the whole succes behind the tvshow of Cenk)
Dr dead
Angela sarafian (actrice)
Atom egoyan (regissuer
Cher (Singer)
James P. Bagian (astronaut)
Kirk Kerkorian (CEO Tracinda)
Charles Poochigian, Republican politician
Paul Krekorian California State Assemblyman
Edward Djerejian
Peter Koutoujian Massachusetts State Assemblyman
Anna Eshoo Democratic Congresswoman
Alex Yemenidjian, former CEO and Chairman of MGM Studios
Carla Garapedian filmmaker/ ancor BBC world
Alex Manoogian, founder of Masco Corporation
Alex Seropian, founder of Bungie Studios (Halo 2 launcher)
David Shakarian- Founder of GNC
Mark Hoplamazian, CEO and President of Global Hyatt
Kevork Hovnanian, founder of Hovnanian Enterprises

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Armenian_Americans

and here the politicians

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Armenian_American_politicians

[dralos]

its not todays greeks but ancient greeks very big difference plz respect it

[Armenian Bishop]

Kasparov is half armenian half Jewish. Kaspar is a very common name among Armenians.

Kasparov was born Garik Kimovich Weinstein (Russian: Гарик Вайнштейн) in Baku, Soviet Union (now Azerbaijan). His father, Kim Moiseyevich Weinstein, was Russian Jewish, and his mother, Klara Shagenovna, was Armenian.[7][8][9][10] Kasparov has described himself as a "self-appointed Christian", although "very indifferent".[11]

That's correct: Gary Kasparov is an Armenian Jew. While Kasparov is paternally of Russian Jewish descent, he is maternally of Armenian descent. He declined to use his father's name; instead, he adopted his maternal name, Kasparov, derived from Kasparian.

Kasparov is considered to be one of the finest chess players of all times. Though deeply involved in Russian Politics, his political career has been greatly overshadowed by his dominant role as a chess powerhouse.