Sahagian: No, I Am Not Anatolian!

With the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide approaching, Armenians have done well in preserving the identity of our lost land, at least mentally if not physically, since 1915. Yet, the one group that has failed us in large part is our intellectuals.

Our scholars and academics over the past century have intentionally or unintentionally confused the map of Armenia in the minds of not only non-Armenians but also Armenians, much to the favor of the big bad foe, Turkey. When our intellectuals began using the term “Anatolia” to make it easier for non-Armenians to cope with the geography of Western Armenia, Cilicia, and other Armenian-populated regions, they ironically gave the lead to Turkish linguistic dominance over those lands instead of specifically calling them by their actual names. And over time, the term “Anatolia” obtained scholastic reputation as covering all lands in the Ottoman Empire, even those where Armenians lived long before Turks ever showed up in town.

'It is time to bring the term “Armenian Highlands”—the phrase used for the combination of Western Armenia, Eastern Armenia, Nakhichevan, Javakhk, and Artsakh—back in academic use. '
‘It is time to bring the term “Armenian Highlands”—the phrase used for the combination of Western Armenia, Eastern Armenia, Nakhichevan, Javakhk, and Artsakh—back in academic use. ‘

It is time for us to stop this, especially now, after 100 years. It is time to bring the term “Armenian Highlands”—the phrase used for the combination of Western Armenia, Eastern Armenia, Nakhichevan, Javakhk, and Artsakh—back in academic use. Yes, this term already exists, but unfortunately our intellectuals have been swept away with using “Anatolia” to define even the lands that are simply not part of Anatolia, physically nor culturally. These lands are the Armenian Highlands, which had a culture and history separate from Anatolia.

So by using “Anatolia,” not only did they use the wrong word, they used it on the wrong region. And they gave a Turkish impression to the lands where Armenian history and heritage was born. Indeed, Cilicia, Dikranagerd (Diyarbakir), and other places (beyond the Armenian Highlands) are part of Anatolia. That is because Armenians did roam south over the centuries, as they did north to Nor Nakhichevan in the northern Caucasus. They also went east and west. But all these directions in no way substitute the centrality of our national heritage, which was born and is infused in the Armenian Highlands.

In political struggles, geographic terms are very important. Neglecting the Armenian names of our regions, towns, and cities is surrendering our rightful claims—not for compensation necessarily, but for history’s sake. Just as the Turks wiped out all of the names of Armenian cities and towns, it’s time we wipe out the erroneous name attached to our mountains.

Forget Anatolia. It is the Armenian Highlands. Ardahan. Alashgert. Van. Kars. Ani. Garin. Sasoon. All the way to Dilijan. Datev. Shushi. These are not in Anatolia. These cities where our history began, where our culture formed, and where we began to expand from are not Anatolia. They are all in the Armenian Highlands. Intellectuals, take heed.

And while we’re at this cultural-linguistic struggle of preservation, how about we begin using the Armenian names of the cuisine we love to boast about to foreigners? Admittedly, the origins of these cuisines could be Turkish, or Greek, or Albanian, or Bosnian, but who cares? Use the Armenian name. In a few hundred years, the world will assume them to be Armenian.

It all starts by reclaiming the true identity of our national birthplace by using its original name: the Armenian Highlands—or Hayastani Lernashkharh.

avatar

Apo Sahagian

Apo Sahagian is a Jerusalemite-Armenian musician and writer.
avatar

Latest posts by Apo Sahagian (see all)

40 Comments

  1. The author Apo Sahagian is accurate in the proper description referring to the Armenian Highlands. Historically, Western Armenia was always referenced by its geographic name the “Armenian Highlands”. And, as the author stated correctly “In political struggles, geographic terms are very important.”

    I would also urge the editors and reader of the Armenian Weekly, to refer to Artsakh by its proper name “Artsakh” and abolish the use of NKR, Nagorno Karabakh, RMK, Republic of Mountainous Karabakh, Karabagh, Karabakh Heights, or Lernai-Karabakh, etc. It is simply called Artsakh. The international community is capable of figuring it out.

    • AW should not be criticized for the use of Nagorno Karabagh: it is the correct name as used by the Republic itself.

      NKR also injects ‘Artsakh’ as appropriate. However, NK is used predominantly. There are many legal and practical reasons that the people and leadership of NKR continue using Nagorno Karbagh name at this time.
      When the Fat Lady sings, the name of the Republic can and will be changed to Republic of Artsakh in a day.

      Here are the official sites of the Republic:
      http://www.nkrusa.org/
      http://www.president.nkr.am/
      http://gov.nkr.am/en/

      One of the legal/historical reasons is in the first sentence:
      http://www.president.nkr.am/en/nkr/

      “The Nagorno Karabagh Republic was formed on September 2, 1991 by the former Nagorno Karabagh Autonomous District”.

    • @ Avery

      To “urge” is to persuade. An example of “criticism”is you response. NKR or RMK or Karabakh are not the accurate references to the land known as Artsakh.

    • @Berge Jololian:

      Are you serious ?
      Are you currently a resident of NKR/Artsakh ?
      Did you fight for the Survival and Liberation of NKR like, for example, the President of NKR Bako Sahakyan did ?

      The people of NKR/Artsakh currently use “Nagorno-Karabagh Republic” as the _official_ name of the Republic.
      That’s what they want: they know what’s best for them.
      Not me, not you, not ArmenianWeekly.

      You can use whatever you want.
      You can suggest whatever you want.

      ArmenianWeekly and everybody else should follow the lead of the duly elected Government of Nagorno Karabagh Republic. That is my suggestion, and also coincidentally the official policy of the Republic.

    • Berge has some good ideas, so does Avery, so no need to argue about a point that is good to implement in the future, but currently not of any real urgency. There are probably legal and political reasons why ‘Karabakh’ still needs to be used. That can be changed one day to revert back to its original and ancient Armenian name, but until then I don’t see a big problem if we call it “Karabakh” or Artsakh. Personally in discussions, lately I find myself using ‘Artsakh’ more, it just happened naturally.

  2. Armenians must understand that what happened between Turks and Armenians was not all the Turks fault as Armenians lived among st the Turks for centuries ,should they call parts of California Mexican highlands ,or parts of the usa Indian highlands or Australia koori aboriginal highlands!! we Armenians need to get a reality check had we not taken up arms and gone with the true enamy who we trusted ,the Russians we wouldn’t be here and maybe in a lace called armenian highlands ,sadly we were bluffed by them and one things for sure ,the Turks didn’t let us down the way the Russians did, sadly and they”Turks”were on edge as is with much of the world trying to do away with them.

    • Tukoglu ‘halilyan’ (‘yan’ ?):

      Will you Turks stop posting under Armenian names while pushing Turkish propaganda ?
      What they have told you Turks about Armenians in your so-called schools is entirely true: we are smarter than you nomads; that is why out of spite, jealousy, and envy you Genocidal invadonomads resorted to the only thing you Uyguroglar excel at: mass murder of defenseless civilians.

      Some notes about your notes:

      {“Armenians must understand that what happened between Turks and Armenians was not all the Turks fault..”}
      Sure it is: your Turk ancestors, from Uyguristan, _invaded_ our Armenian Highlands. Uyguroglu Turk. All your fault, and then some.

      {“ as Armenians lived among st the Turks for centuries”}
      Surely you jest: invadonomad Turks forced themselves into our lands, our homes, our people.
      We didn’t live amongst you, Turk: you nomads invaded our homes.
      You Turks squatted in our civilized homes and fouled up our paradise.

      {“ should they call parts of California Mexican highlands ,or parts of the usa Indian highlands or Australia koori aboriginal highlands!!”}
      What does that have to do with the price of eggs in China !!! (three exclamation marks: so there)
      How about the Moon: shall we discuss the Moon also, Turk ?

      {“ we Armenians need to get a reality check..”}
      ‘we Armenians’ ? You are no more Armenian than the Genocidal murderers Talaat, Enver, and Jemal.

      {“ the Turks didn’t let us down the way the Russians did”}
      You shouldn’t be so obvious, Turk.
      We’ll detect you Turks anyway, no matter how clever you think you are. But make it a little more sporting for us, Will Ya ?

      See you later, Turk.
      Visit us @ArmenianWeekly soon and often.
      We love matching wits with invadonomad Uyguroglar.

    • Halil Oghlu, have you ever seen Turkish Highlands beside Armenian Highlands on world map??? If you don’t then look Eastward you will find Turkish “halal” Highlands in Southern part of China where your Uyghur Turks ancestors converted to Islam and occupied entire Armenian Highlands, and wipe entire indigenous Christian population of Western Armenia!

    • If you’re going to post on here pretending to be Armenian, do not use such a cheap disguise. It’s insulting…but mostly it insults you.

  3. Well written Apo. That term Anatolia I never heard used. Ether Historic Armenia or Western Armenia should be used. Armenian Highlands in Western Armenia is also acceptable. It’s good you brought this issue up. Thanks

    • I agree with my friend Steve.
      The term Anatolia is derived from Greek “Anatolikon” and was in use as a geographic designation in the Byzantine Empire long before Turks arrived in the area. That said, the Turks, in their ludicrous official attempts to rewrite history and linguistics in the 1920s and 1930s, declared that they (not Greeks or Armenians) were the native race of the region. They word “Anatolia” was asserted as proof, because it allegedly was related to “ana dolu” (pregnant woman). So much hogwash!!! Armenians should avoid using the term “Anatolia” like the plague.

  4. Bravo, Apo. For millennia, the region bounded by Lakes Urmia, Van, and Sevan was known by its geographic term: Armenian Plateau or Armenian Highland. Only in the 1940s did the region get “cleansed” of its Armenian name. There’s no reason for Armenians to participate in the attempt to equate all of Asiatic Turkey with Anatolia.

    More details in: “Historic Armenia After 100 Years,” which will be published February 2015.

  5. Outstanding article Mr. Sahagian.
    And very necessary.
    Well done, Sir: well done indeed.

    Although the word ‘Anatolia’ has Greek origins, Denialist Turks have cleverly co-opted it in their denialist White Genocide campaign.
    Unfortunately, many Armenians are inadvertently promoting our own White Genocide by using the denialist Turk-contrived word ‘Anatolia’.

    (…there was an article @AW a while back about an Armenian lady who was shooting a film about Genocide. The woman who was playing with the bones of Armenian martyrs in Der Zor: don’t remember her name. But she was waxing poetic about our supposed ‘Anatolian family’: positively revolting).

    Denialist nomad Turks injected the ‘Anatolia’ meme into the public discourse to try to erase any traces of their nomadic roots, and create the fiction that Turks were in Asia Minor all this time, together with all other so-called ‘Anatolian’ peoples.
    One Big happy ‘Anatolian family’.
    No Armenians.
    No Assyrians.
    No Pontic Greeks.
    No Byzantium Greeks.
    Only Anatolians. Right.

    Sorry, folks:

    There is no Anatolian family.
    There is no Anatolian cuisine.
    There is no Anatolian culture.
    There is no Anatolian language.
    There is no Anatolian alphabet.

    There is Turkish language: brought into Asia Minor by nomadic Turkic tribes.
    There is no Turkish alphabet though: they used Arabic script. Then they started using a Latinized script, developed by an Armenian.
    (sorry, an Armenian man, not an ‘Anatolian’).

    The genocidal State is called Türkiye Cumhuriyeti, not Anadolu Cumhuriyeti

    Enough said.

  6. A good article, we need to use Asia Minor as well as Avery did beside the Armenian Highland , the true names of the land from biblical times, no one likes the counterfed, original always is better.

  7. I agree Apo, Armenian Highlands were not originally designated as Anatolia. I am an Armenian Highlander from Asia Minor! The fact that the term has been generalized to include all the territory of the Republic of Turkey reflects the politics of convenience and strange bed-fellows that have allowed Turkey to deny the genocide and avoid justice. We shouldn’t collude in erasing our own historical truth.

  8. I am relieved Apo has not injected the usual references to what posh European pals think of us.

    However, this article is disappointing for two new reasons.

    The article asserts a straw man argument that unidentified Armenian scholars have dis served truth by fudging the boundaries and location of Armenia. Apo is the one who fudges: who are they, where and when did they misstate truth?

    T’oros Roslin would be surprised to know his Vank in Hromklay was not in Armenian lands.
    So would my Marashtze family.

    • When was Marash ever a part of historic Armenian lands? Never was. Same holds true for Ourfa, Ayntab, Everek-Feneseh, et al. Armenians migrated to these lands from Armenia proper over the centuries.

  9. I was with you until the second to last paragraph. How seriously can we take your call to use the true, accurate (Armenian) historical names of the lands, and then in the same breath declare that all foods should use the Armenian word regardless of where it actually originated? Be consistent!

  10. And what should Armenians from Ourfa, Marash, Zeytoun, Kayseri, Ayntab, and other areas outside the geographic area known as the “Armenian Highlands” refer to as their ancestral roots??

  11. Excellent article, thank you Apo Sahagian for clarifying geographic terminology. On Google Ngram I tested the use of the terms Anatolia and Armenian Highlight between 1600 and 2008. It searches references in books. It led to a negligible or zero rating for Armenian Highlands and an up and down scale for Anatolia though rising consistently since about 1888.

  12. Apo Sahagian,

    It’s rather amusing how you intentionally attempt to suggest that our Armenian Genocide scholars have caused confusion in regard to the map of historic Armenia by using the term “Anatolia” to refer to the region occupied by present-day Turkey. And exactly how have they caused us confusion? Prior to your article, we already knew where the location of the Armenian Highlands were; and we already knew where the location of the six Western Armenian provinces were as well. Did you actually think that you were teaching us something new? And if you happen to read any kind of academic source in any country of the world today, you’ll find out that this particular region (the most western part of present-day Turkey to the most eastern part of present-day Turkey) is referred to as either Anatolia or Asia Minor. As for the country which occupies this particular region, it’s called Turkey. And if you do some more reading, you’ll find out that this particular region is located within the region of the Middle East; the only exception is the city of Istanbul, which is situated in Europe. Anyway, what does all of this have to do with causing confusion in regard to the location of historic Armenia? By the way, the name “Anatolia” is not derived from Turkish; it’s derived from Greek, meaning “the East.”

  13. I tend to agree with Yerevanian. What confusion is the author referring to? Anatolia, unlike Armenian Highlands, is currently used as both a political as well as geographic term. And I would bet that non-Armenians would have a better grasp of where Anatolia is situated (eastern Turkey) then the non-descriptive Armenian Highlands appellation. The same vagueness comes to play when some speak of western Armenia and include in it those distant Ottoman Armenian communities as Ourfa, Marash, Aintab and the like. They may be part of the geo-political sphere of Anatolia, but western Armenia? What is the standard here? The map drawn by US President Wilson? The six “Armenian” vilayets of the Ottoman Empire?

  14. An interesting and thoughtful article, partly because it looks to the future. The Georgians might not be too happy about the map though….

  15. Great Article, Thank you!
    The term “Eastern Anatolia” used and implemented by British Prime minister De Israeli. After that we have also “Urartu”.
    All this comes to prove, that Armenian History is “forgotten” by political “Elite” in Europe and that trend was adopted by Soviet’s “scientists” including Armenians in Soviet Armenia!
    In British Museum used to be “Ancient Turkey” now thanks to collective Effort we managed to change, but the still use “Urartu and ancient Anatolia”.
    Can you imagine, how many stupid terminologies we have to fight to change!
    Note to turks, we know our history, how many time you try, you will fail, because you are not the Native like We are, to our lands, we are the Indigenous People of these lands and we have Universal Rights to our History!

  16. It is true as, Yerevanian notes, that Anatolia is often used nowadays as a broad geographic description covering a greater expanse of territory than was historically the case, ie extending to the west of the historical use of the term Anatolia. As contrasted to such usage, broadly speaking the Sahagian position is supported by the content on both the Wikipedia page (supported by maps and graphics) on Anatolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolia) and on the Wikipedia page for Armenian Highlands (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Highlands). I remain inclined to go with Armenian Highlands henceforth when referring to historic Armenia.

  17. Levon // December 16, 2014 at 7:06 am //:
    “When was Marash ever a part of historic Armenian lands? Never was. Same holds true for Ourfa, Ayntab, Everek-Feneseh, et al. Armenians migrated to these lands from Armenia proper over the centuries.”

    @”Levon”
    And who might you be deciding what constitutes Armenia’s Historic Lands? Are you a direct descendant of King Tigran, or did you learn from a book on “Armenian History” where you saw a single dot on the map of the Caucasus someplace labeled “Armenia”?

    Please tell us what ‘Historic Armenia’ was starting with say, 3000 BC.

    And why would you put the six Armenian Vilayets of the Ottoman Empire in quotes? Perhaps they were part of ‘Historic Turkey’ where the benevolent Turks allowed the Armenians to settle in? Please educate us with your knowledge.

  18. EXCELLENT!

    I became aware of the Armenian Plateau/Anatolia usage issue when Richard Hovannisian pointed it out a few years ago at a lecture I attended. I’ve been advocating the same thing ever since and am glad that others are on board.

    Fixing what may seem like molehills such as this one will lead to our having the mountains take care of themselves…

  19. Although I can appreciate the accuracy and reality of the term Armenian Highland, at the same time, I have to say that I also disagree with term “I am not Anatolian”, because it is historically inaccurate. The reason I say this is because people are not defining what Anatolia is in conclusive terms, not to mention what “Historic Armenia” is. For example, what evidence is there that the surrounding territories where Armenians also settled, was ‘someone else’s land’? And if those ‘other people’ existed, who are their modern descendants? The only answer I could come up with is that whomever lived in both Anatolia and the Armenian Highlands before the arrival of foreigners to the region like Turks, Kurds, Arabs and Assyrians, their combined offspring today are the collective Armenians.

    The problem is in the time period. Are we defining what ‘Armenia’ or ‘historic Armenia’ was 2,000 years ago? 3,000? 4,000? If we take into account the ancient period, before our neighboring countries started calling our country and people ‘Armenia’ and ‘Armenians’ (circa 500BC), then the ‘Armenian Highland’ becomes a part of Historic Armenia, but not all of it. The reason is, as a result of the false western “history” pushed by the British and other western “scholars” with their agenda of the 20th century and today, they have tried to turn ancient Asia Minor into a “multi ethnic” area populated by “different peoples” at different times where those people are “extinct” today. (perhaps they were hunted to extinction like the dodo bird?). While it may be true that there were probably linguistic differences, it does not mean they were different sub-races like they are trying to claim, the most important reason of which is their lack of explanation to what ultimately happened to those “different peoples” on a realistic level rather than a mythical “extinction”. (I once had a heated argument here with an Armenian poster who unfortunately took this same position). Of course the clearest answer is that combined, they are all called ‘Armenians’ today, because no other nationality existed and exists today with evidence that they are the descendants of those people in Asia Minor.

    And of course, such a “history” is a godsend for the artificially created Turkey and Azerbaijan, because in this scenario, the Turks and Azeris become just another people in a long line of diverse, different peoples “who invaded Asia Minor and took over like all the rest”. In other words, Armenians would have nothing to complain about with their loss of lands and would have no legitimate claims to those lands.

    The truth of the matter is, considering our ancient ethno-genesis, perhaps all of present day Turkey (and more) was a part of the land of our people, in other words, Armenian lands of settlement. The Armenian Highland merely became our traditional homeland and country more than 2,000 years ago when we started experiencing invasions and incursions from people not related to us and king Tigran’s kingdom was established to unite and consolidate all of our peoples and lands in the face of Roman, Greek and Persian imperialism. Writing, and thus record keeping had developed sufficiently in this period.

    I believe that we today’s Armenians are the descendants of what the western world calls, Phrygians, Hittites, Urartians and Mitanni along with a variety of the subgroups of these like Hatti, Luwian, Hayasa, Armani etc. We can go even further than this and stipulate that one of the ‘first civilizations’ the Sumerians were also in part of Armenian origin. Here probably the Sumerians learned their agricultural techniques from the Ancient Armenians who came from the north, meaning, Armenian civilization and history is even older than thought, but the western Greco-centric teaching has for a variety of reasons chosen to understate Armenian history dramatically.

    So was the Armenian people’s birthplace the Armenian Highland? Yes. Does that mean its surrounding territories were not part of the lands of the Armenians, or ‘Historic Armenia’? No. Are we ‘Anatolian’? Perhaps, depending on your time frame.

    • Hagop,

      Exactly what do the British and other western “scholars” have to do with turning ancient Asia Minor into a “multi-ethnic” area? Is there a reason why you continuously reject the fact that the Greeks, Assyrians, and Kurds happened to also be a part of ancient Asia Minor? The Greeks happened to be in Asia Minor since the 2nd millennium BC. The Assyrians were in Asia Minor, as far back as 2400 BC. As for the Kurds, they’ve been there for over 2500 years. This therefore means that ancient Asia Minor (Anatolia) happened to be multi-ethnic. Having said this, in no way am I trying to imply that these three groups have historic homelands within Western Armenia. On the contrary, their historic homelands are outside of Western Armenia.

      In regard to the extinct Phrygians, Hittites, Mitannis, Hattis, and Luwians, there is no evidence whatsoever which connects them with the Armenian culture. On the other hand, there is a great deal of evidence which shows the Hayasa and Urartu groups to be involved in the Armenian ethnogenesis. As for the Sumerians, they were certainly not of Armenian origin; they were part of ancient Mesopotamia.

      “Probably the Sumerians learned their agricultural techniques from the Ancient Armenians who came from the north, meaning, Armenian civilization and history is even older than thought.” Yes, I agree with that. Although our traditional history traces itself back to around 2700 BC, there is a large amount of archaeological evidence today, which shows the Armenian civilization going back a lot farther than that to around 5000 BC. This would be somewhere around 1500 years before the Sumerians (Ancient Mesopotamia).

    • Back to shoot yourself in the foot again Yerevanian? What is your objective to change history?

      Sorry, but I am not convinced that Assyrians and Kurds were ‘Anatolian’, because in discussing Anatolia, the discussion here is the territories west of the Armenian Highland and in ancient history. However, I am OK with calling present day Turkey Anatolia too for the sake of your discussion, but the traditional homeland of both the Kurds and Assyrians is not ambiguous and can be pointed out with a fair degree of certainty. And that happens to be present day north Iraq, historic “Mesopotamia”. Do parts of their country overlap with historic Armenian lands? Yes, remember for example that the king Tigran ruled over an area at one point called Corduene = Kurd, which happens to be on the southeast of Tigran’s Armenian Kingdom.

      Greeks definitely have a long and ancient presence in Anatolia, but to me it appears they migrated there from Greek lands to the west. As Armenians consolidated and formed their nation, Asia Minor simply became Helenized due to Greek imperialism. But my point above was, before Asia Minor became Helenized, I have found no evidence that all those groups of Asia Minor in pre-history were not Armenians. And if they were not Armenians, then who is their offspring today? That question cannot be answered effectively unless one answers ‘Armenians’.

      You state…
      “In regard to the extinct Phrygians, Hittites, Mitannis, Hattis, and Luwians, there is no evidence whatsoever which connects them with the Armenian culture… As for the Sumerians, they were certainly not of Armenian origin; they were part of ancient Mesopotamia. ”

      And what is your source for all this? Numerous researchers have written on this topic and published books, and they don’t agree with you. Are you more qualified than for example the German professor named Jensen who went to the Ottoman Empire and did his research on the Hittites and concluded that they were Armenians and their language was related? And since then no other researcher has stated a stronger case.

      Here is an introduction you can read, but I suppose, you know a lot more on this subject, since you cast your conclusions in stone all the time.

      http://www.armeniapedia.org/wiki/Hurrians

      In addition, Martiros Kavoukjian wrote a book on Armenians and Sumerians titled “Armenia, Subartu, and Sumer”. Can you do better? Who are you and what makes you qualified to make absolute claims as if there was no other choice or possibility?

    • Actually Hagop, it’s you who is shooting yourself in not one foot, both in both of your feet. Exactly how am I changing history? It’s a known fact that part of the historic homelands of the Kurds and Assyrians happens to be in southeastern Anatolia. And again, those particular parts of their historic homelands which happen to be in present-day Turkey do not overlap with historic Armenia. Since you happen to be unaware of the location of the historic Armenian homeland, I’ve gone out of my way to furnish you with a map:
      http://en:wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Armenia

      When you arrive on that page, make sure to click on that map in the top right corner which shows Western Armenia, Javakhk, Nakhichevan, Artsakh, and the Republic of Armenia. It’s all in yellow. Now focus your eyes on the part of the map which shows eastern Turkey. Everything that’s in white, happens to be outside of Western Armenia. And that white part, under the yellow-marked Western Armenia part, happens to be the parts of the Assyrian and Kurdish historic homelands within present-day southeastern Turkey. There’s no possible way now that you can claim that I’m trying to imply that the Assyrian and Kurdish historic homelands are within Western Armenia.

      “I have found no evidence that all those groups of Asia Minor in pre-history were not Armenians.” Well, what evidence have you found that all those groups of Asia Minor along with so many other groups which you did not include on your list happened to be Armenians? And exactly which researchers have claimed that the Sumerians were Armenian? A person who claims this, is obviously an uneducated, ignorant person who knows very little about Armenian history or Sumerian history. Once again, the Sumerians were not connected to the Armenian culture; they were connected to the culture of ancient Mesopotamia.

      So what if some German professor claims that the Hittites were Armenians. There are also many others who claim that the Hittites were not Armenians. There’s also another thing that I would like to bring up. You had earlier stated that it’s the Western “scholars” who claim that ancient Asia Minor had been multi-ethnic. Well, if that’s the case, then exactly which Eastern “scholars” have supported your ridiculous theory that ancient Asia Minor was inhabited by only Armenians? No scholar out there, whether Western or Eastern, has ever claimed something like that. Even the scholars in Armenia have never claimed anything as ridiculous as that.

  20. Dikranagerd is in the Armenian Highlands as it is even north of Armenian Mesopotamia and north of Կորճայք (Corduene in Latin) which is the very south of Armenian Highlands. Only west of the Euphrates is Asia Minor (the proper name for Anatolia mind you.)

  21. You guys do know that most modern day Turks are indigenous Anatolian’s that have Turkish nationality but their race is Anatolian. DNA proves that most Turkish people in modern day Turkey are Caucasus, Balkan, Laz, etc… with little to no mongoloid in them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*