2023 Haigazian Armenological Review published

Haigazian University is pleased to announce that the first book of Haigazian Armenological Review for the year 2023, namely book 43/1, has been published.

In its 520 pages, alongside the editorial (included below) entitled “What the Diaspora Armenians Lack: The Role and Influence of the Armenian Scholar,” the book hosts a number of research papers pertaining to arts, folklore, literary criticism, church matters, sociology, linguistics and history, as well as an unpublished document, two briefings and two book reviews.

Launched in 1970, the Haigazian Armenological Review is published by the Armenian Department of Haigazian University. As of 2022, this annual publication is being published semiannually.

Haigazian Armenological Review book 43/1 features the following content:

Lusine Sahakyan, Current Issues of Komitas Studies
Robert Megerdichian, Abraham Megerdichian, Eemin shinadz panerus (The Things I’ve Made)
Antranik Dakessian, A Survey of the Armenian Copper Bath Tass used for Clay
Galya Davidova, Remembering and Reviving Armenian Wedding Ceremonies and Marriage Symbols
Armen Sargsyan, Armenian Popular/Folk Cock-and-bull Stories
Karine Rafaelyan, The Exchanging of Material and Abstract Worlds in Hrachya Saribekyan’s Novels Yergvoryagneri Areve (The Twins’ Sun) and Abushneri Ooghevorutyune (The Idiots’ Journey)
Liza Karimian, Anti-Chalcedonism in Armenia in the Early 6th Century: The Confessional Orientation of the Dvin Council in 506
Samvel Khachatryan, An Examination of the Intersection of Populism and Democracy: The Case of Armenia
Mary Alik Karamanoukian, Diaspora in Armenia: Immigration and Political Integration of Syrian Armenians
Syuzanna Barseghyan, Diaspora Newspapers in the Context of Ethnic Media
Lusine Tanajyan, Some Peculiarities in the Religious Attitude of the Armenian Communities of Los Angeles and Tehran
Herant Katchadourian, Culture and Psychopathology: The Case of the Armenian Village of Anjar
Zaven Messerlian, Consciousness Matters: The Armenian Genocide Within Turkey
Anjela Amirkhanyan, Compound Names of Plants with the Rootword ‘Wolf’
Hagop Cholakian, A General Observation of Plant Names in the Dialect of Kessab
Mohammad MalekMohammadi, Armenian-Arabic Language Contacts and Armenian Words of Arabic Origin
Lalik Khatchatryan, The Transformation of Old Armenian Analytical Constructions into Compound Words with a Pattern Noun+Verb > Verb (Dyachronic Aspect)
Hayk Nazaryan, The Development of the Armenian Air Defence Forces between the May 1994 Armistice and the Military Actions of April 2016 (Part 2)
Seda Galstyan, Pages from the Archive of Anton Kochinyan (1966-74)
Vahram L. Shemmassian, The Saint Paul Capuchin Mission in Musa Dagh, 1919-39
Vazgen Hakhoyan, The Turkish Massacres in the Province of Alexandropol in 1920-21
Karen Mkrtchyan, Raffi’s Historical Articles in Meshag between 1872 and 1878 on the Armenian Community of Iran
Mihran A. Minasian, An Unpublished Report of 1900 on Denek Maden (Kesgin)
Elina Mekhitaryan, The Critical Conditions of the Indigenous Population of Artsakh (An Observation on Refugee and Internally Displaced Groups)
Vahram Hovyan, Interconfessional Cooperation in Kessab during the Years of the Armenian Genocide

***
Editorial

What the Diaspora Armenians Lack: The Role and Influence of the Armenian Scholar

Non-doctrinal thinking, freedom of speech and action are moving forces for the development of any society. The scholar who voices the issues of their society in an objective way and struggles against cautious, conforming, fossilized understandings and mindsets is considered the forerunner of the development of that society.

With outstanding qualities, like critical thinking, courage, rigorous attitude, modesty, independence and broad-mindedness, such scholars commit themselves to the human and national value system and shape social culture through unbiased examinations of diverse issues of life.

In assessing social shortcomings and bygone initiatives of society in an objective and daring manner, the scholar intends to rectify and reduce the shortfalls, balance the disproportions, even to the extent of discomforting society and authorities.

The best evidence of what is said above is the Armenian revival in the 19th century, which had Armenian scholars as its main avant-guard. Emanating from different forums and places, they succeeded in elevating the Armenians from the darkness of the previous centuries.

Indeed, Armenian scholars played a pivotal role in cultivating the 19th century Armenian space. The integration of scholars and capitalists led to the thriving of Armenian culture. Most of the Western Armenian cultivators of this flourishing culture became victims of the Armenian Genocide.

The presence of scholars and a scholarly mindset in the decision-making bodies and leadership of the Diaspora between the 1920s and 1950s was significant. The leadership of the 1950s to the 1980s, which was shaped by the previous generation, maintained the road map of its predecessors to a certain extent. Nonetheless, the gradual decline of the role and place of scholars was also noticeable.

The marginalization of scholars in the decision-making bodies of the late 20th century was obvious. Scholars lost their weight, role and place in those structures, leading to an imbalance that did not yield the expected steps to be taken against the increasingly challenging conditions of the Diaspora. Indeed, the value system had deteriorated, the national vision was lessened and the strategic output was reduced.

For these and other reasons the Armenian Diaspora is fumbling in its undertakings to recreate its identity.

This is why the restoration of the role and place of the independent scholar is a must that should not to be postponed any longer.

In fact, the scholars, grassroots and followers of Armenian Diaspora religious and lay institutions follow a specific guideline of their own. Therefore, these institutions neither separately nor combined can have a pan-Armenian nature, view or space for endeavor. Complementing the leadership of these two institutions with independent scholars may generate a new quality, which may offer a plurality of choices to a society facing numerous concerns. These independent scholars may suggest different approaches to form opinions, thus sanctioning pluralism in national issues and the opportunity to consider various options in taking a stance. This is how democracy, the most important factor for the development of a society, becomes rock-solid.

The problem does not lie in the absence of scholars. Rather, it is the absence of the impact and influence of scholars. It is not an issue of individuals, rather an issue of their high and effective voice. It is not the absence of individual research papers. Rather it is the failure of the acceptance-adoption and implementation of credible calls in shaping views and policies. It is not an issue of quick, superficial internet investigations. It is the issue of acquiring deep and piercing analyses, no matter what their source.

Offering places to scholars, who have a different say in the public sphere, is a basic pathway for generating such a condition. This will encourage the scholarly youth with an ingrained interest to voice their views. Eventually, a healthy atmosphere will come to life in society, which will penetrate to the schools, which should undergo radical educational reform, including critical thinking and free expression as ingredients of the curriculum. This can be the first model of democracy for the scholar of tomorrow, who gets training in free expression and listening to the other from his teens.

In due time these steps consolidate the culture of independent thinking, which revitalizes society for a better future.

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Antranik Dakessian

EDITORIAL BOARD
Silva Papazian, Arshalouyse Topalian, Armen Urneshlian

CONSULTATIVE BODY
Sylvia Agemian, Megerditch H. Bouldoukian, Seta Dadoyan, Arda Ekmekji, Murad Hasratian, Nanor Karageozian, Hranush Kharatian, Susan Pattie, Hratch Tchilingirian, Yervand Yerkanian

HAR REPRESENTATIVE IN ARMENIA
AMAA Yerevan Office