Nakhichevan

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Nakhichevan

I agree here with bell.

I remembered a book I had read when I was in my early teens by Raffi.
It was called Der Totiki Tbrots. Not even sure where you would obtain such books.

To get the real feel of the atmosphere in those schools you would have to obtain the book and read it.
I remember reading, the schools were very harsh and cruel environment.
The teachers would only be described by today standards as ignorant peasants and worse.
Luckily I have found an indirect reference to these type of schools which were run by priests.

http://forum.hyeclub.com/archive/index.php/t-9159.html

...... "See that girl reading over there," said Ashot pointing to the girl sitting on the tree stump, "she reminds me of a scene from one of Raffi's (Hakop
Melik-Hakopian, 1835-1888, born in Persia) writings. ...

There is a pasage further down that backs up almost exactly what I had said earlier.

In 1810, the Armenian community in Astrakhan, Russia, opened its first school, the Aghababian School. Earlier, in 1780, the Armenian community in Calcutta, India, had opened a school, and in 1821 they opened the Armenian college, Mardasiragan Jemaran (depending on the curriculum, the jemaran is a high school or a junior college), which trained numerous teachers and men of letters for forty years. In the early 1800s, the Murad-Rafaelian School was opened in Venice by the Mkhitarists. In Moscow, the Lazarian College was established in 1815. Initially, an elementary school for poor children, in 1820 it became a gymnasium, where along with basic subjects, Arabic, Armenian, French, German, Latin, Persian, Russian and Turkish were also taught. It was renamed the Lazarian Institute for Oriental Languages in 1827, and in the 1830s received the title of Second-Level Educational Institution. Later, the school was known as the Moscow Institute for Eastern Studies, and during the Soviet era it was known as the Institute for the History of Asian Peoples. Mikael Nalbandian, who graduated from the University of St. Petersburg, earning the title of professor, was one of the teachers that taught at Lazarian College. Some of the school's well-known graduates were Rafael Patkanian (Kamar Katiba), Vahan Terian, Leo Tolstoy and Ivan Turgenev.

In the Russian Empire, freedom was given in 1836 to its ethnic communities to open their own schools. Etchmiadzin was given permission to open one school associated with each active church, and one school for each of the six regions subject to Etchmiadzin. Prior to 1836, though, Armenian schools had opened in Astrakhan, Nor Nakhichevan (near Rostov-On-Don), and in Kizliar and Mozdok in southern Russia north of the Caucausus Mountains.

This crucial period in the history of the Armenians-the 1800s-marked the revival of education and the establishment of schools and learning centers for all the people, not just the select few. This period of enlightenment was met with zeal, idealism and a sense of renewal. Before 1800, nearly all education for the Armenians was controlled by the church in order to train clerics and to preserve the literature of Classical Armenian. Armenians in the Caucasus had very few if any schools before the Russian annexations. With the existence of the Aghababian, Gogoian and Lazarian schools in Astrakhan, Nor Nakhichevan and Moscow, respectively, the Zharangavorats Seminary in Etchmiadzin (opened 1813), and the Nersisian Jemaran in Tiflis, Armenian learning in the Caucasus or Eastern Armenia began to take shape and branch out to the churches and homes where usually one devoted teacher would teach. By the end of 1836, there were twenty-one Armenian church schools.

[lampron]

Re: Nakhichevan

To get the real feel of the atmosphere in those schools you would have to obtain the book and read it.
I remember reading, the schools were very harsh and cruel environment.
The teachers would only be described by today standards as ignorant peasants and worse.

are you comparing ,say, 19th century Armenian schools (A) with Ottoman ones (O), or Greek ones (G) or British ones (B) or Indian ones (I) and classifying them in their order of backwardness?

If you take each one of those and compare them with the present yes, I can guarantee you that British schools schools in the 19th century were also harsh and cruel compared to present ones (read books by Charles Di-ckens). Religion was central to most schools around the world.

What have you proven? What has this got to do in establishing the correct nameform/pronunciation of Nakhichevan/Nakhijevan?

[lampron]

Re: Nakhichevan

As if I (or anyone) cared what is, or is not, in your trash-can, Mr Worm.

right! precisely because you don't care you have been reading and giving silly replies to nearly all of my posts! (and remember name-calling doesn't help, it just shows your frustration!)

[lampron]

Re: Nakhichevan

Orders from Moscow to Armenian politicians whose sustenance comes from obeying Russian interests, is my bet.

that's entirely possible. Russia is much closer to Azerbaijan today and Russia is keen to show it is even handed in its handling of the conflict. Armenian diplomacy must take this into account

[lampron]

Re: Nakhichevan

Who are "The national council of Armenians in Nakhijevan"? There are no Armenians in Nachchivan. So it is a meaningless politicised organisation, just like similar Azerbaijani Nagorno Karabakh equivalents.

.

first off, why do you insist on the 'Azeri' spelling of Nakhichevan/Nakhijevan? You seem to like disrespecting the original Armenian name

meaningless to whom? to the international media who frequently make reference to 'Azeri' refugees from Nagorno Karabakh but never to Armenians from Nakhichevan ?

[jgk3]

Re: Nakhichevan

first off, why do you insist on the 'Azeri' spelling of Nakhichevan/Nakhijevan? You seem to like disrespecting the original Armenian name

meaningless to whom? to the international media who frequently make reference to 'Azeri' refugees from Nagorno Karabakh but never to Armenians from Nakhichevan ?

In my opinion (based on what I know about phonology), the e in Nakhichevan is quite a special little piece of machinery in the development of this name across time among different groups. Only in the Armenian version does it appear as an e however, in the other names, it is across the board, an i. The "i" in the Armenian one, which is the only case of a vowel appearing before the ch/sh/s element, is an outlier in the sampling and likely occured on its own, in Armenian later on, independantly of the genetic history for the other variants of the name.

Bell showed that the earliest attested form is Naxuana, and Hellektor agreed that the Soviet Encyclopedia says this too.

So how does Naxuan (lets drop that final a) become Nakhitchevan, or Naxchivan? Are there things being lost here... or are things being added?

I believe the ch element was not originally there. It comes from an original, palatal zh sound, like in the name Serzh, which hardened to ch overtime in some varieties of the name, like Naxchivan (the Azeri name) and Nakhitchevan, whereas in others, this palatal fricative might've sounded more like an s... resulting in other varieties of the name, such as Naksivan, or as a sh, like in Nakshivan and what Hellector brought up as the Arab name for it, Nashwi.

This zh sound (as well as its palatal s and sh-like counterparts) occured through a phonological process called Palatalization, the phonetic assimilation of the place of articulation for a consonant, by direct influence from an adjacent front vowel, such as "e" or "i". If the earliest attested name is Naxuan/Naxvan from 150AD, such a vowel might've formed between the x and the u/v overtime in the minds of speakers, perhaps because in their dialect, a consonant cluser of x (a kh sound) and v (since the diphthong ua naturally produces a w-like sound, which if devoiced by influence of the voiceless kh starts to sound like a v) felt uncomfortable and wanted some vowel space between them to transition between the two syllables was warranted. Producing "Naxivan", which is actually one of the attested versions of the name. But along with the creation of this "i", some of the airflow that was producing the x sound, now was being localized to the place of articulation for an "i". What this probably did was the following...

Children learning the language of their parents, who probably didn't have all the sounds in their language neatly categorized, don't perfectly override the uniqueness of many sounds in their diagnosis of what letter they can be, for example in English, how the the letter t in the american pronounciation of the words: 'butter', butler, butts, table... all actually sound quite different to a baby, who would never be dumb enough to say, "they're all the same sound". But we are that dumb, as fully grown adults, accustomed to diagnosing all the sounds occurring in our language to individual phonemes (mental categories for sounds, or... in terms that give the idea in lay terms: letters).

Now, what was happening for children hearing Naxivan was Na-x-'some palatalization of the airflow from x'-i-van. This 'some palatalization of the airflow from x' either had to be identified as part of the x, or attributed its own letter, and what the kids who chose to do the latter was attribute to it something like zh or some other close palatal fricative sound. That is how they got from Naxivan to Naxzhivan. By devoicing the zh, you get sh, as in Naxshivan (Naxschivan), which is one of the attested names. But fortition of the zh, you get dj, or its devoiced variety, ch. Eastern Armenian will say Nakhidjevan, while western will say Nakhitchevan. That is the difference there.

As you can see, you can get Nakhchivan from Naxuan. But Nakhitchevan is a wee bit more tricky to get form Naxuan. I want to remind you that in the Armenian form, the i in the position it is in Nakhchivan, or Naxivan, or any of the other variants, has become an e. It is not the i in Armenian Nakhichevan that is equivalent to the i in Nakhchivan or Naxivan. The i in the Armenian version was likely developped last, perhaps to break appart the kh and the ch consonant cluster, though I don't imagine this cluster to be too bothersome to Armenian speakers. I can't think of the words right now that would have this cluster in Armenian, but I'm certain they exist, it's just my vocabulary can't draw them right now for this post.

That leads to a final possibility... Armenians upon hearing Nakhchivan, imagined that there must've been an i originally between the kh and the ch, which would produce the Nakh + ichevan, first settlement... And assumed that the i was lost. So they put it back.

[londontsi]

Re: Nakhichevan

are you comparing ,say, 19th century Armenian schools (A) with Ottoman ones (O), or Greek ones (G) or British ones (B) or Indian ones (I) and classifying them in their order of backwardness?

If you take each one of those and compare them with the present yes, I can guarantee you that British schools schools in the 19th century were also harsh and cruel compared to present ones (read books by Charles Di-ckens). Religion was central to most schools around the world.

I was not comparing with anything.

I was looking at it in absolute terms.

From my recollection two types of punishment came to mind.

One was the falakha which is beating under the soles.
The other was holding a heavy bible above their heads for "hours" as punishment.
This is to 7-12 year olds.

Some similarity with modern day torture.
The other criteria you might look is what type of people these "institutions" produced.

What have you proven? What has this got to do in establishing the correct nameform/pronunciation of Nakhichevan/Nakhijevan?

I am not trying to prove anything.
The debate was rather stuck in a ditch and straggling in first gear so tied to push it out of the ditch !!

[arakeretzig]

Re: Nakhichevan

I haven't found an answer to this question so those who might know a valid explanation are welcome to clear this so that we are done with this ambiguity.

I may have found what you're looking for. in this blog http://blogian.hayastan.com/category/nakhichevan/, it's mentioned.

"Save for the disputed proposal that Nakhichevan comes from the Persian phrase Naqsh-e-Jahan (image of the world), every other explanation of the name of the region has to do with Armenians (see Wikipedia for the several versions), let alone that the word itself has two Armenian parts to it: Nakh (before or first) and ichevan (landing, sanctuary) – referring to Noah’s coming out of the Ark from (another holy Armenian symbol) Mount Ararat – next to Nakhichevan now on Turkish territory."

[jgk3]

Re: Nakhichevan

These are all etymological readings of the word, seen from different languages... Language A might identify "Nakh" corresponding to one word in their lexicon, while Language B identifies that same "Nakh" as pertaining to a totally different word.

This is what happens when one relies solely on etymological readings of a name, seen from the perspective of a given language. What we really need is history of the earliest attestation of these names. Btw, Armenian is not even attested before the 5th century AD, so an etymological reading of Nakhitchevan being "Nakh" + "ichevan" is only valid for use from the 5th century AD onwards. We neither know if "Nakh" or "ichevan" in those forms were words in the Armenian lexicon, nor if "Nakhitchevan" was even called as such, by any persons living before the 5th century BC. Worse still is that the name "Nakhitchevan" needs to be attested as early as possible in the written records of the Armenian language to give it any logical reason to consider it the original name of the region despite all the other versions which don't point to the etymologies Armenians use as "evidence" for being the true form.

[lampron]

Re: Nakhichevan

Nakhichevan



According to Movses Khorenatsi, the territory of Nakhichevan region had been part of the Ancient Armenian Kingdom as early as from the 6th century B.C. In his description of the deeds of the Armenian King Tigran Yervandyan the historian notes that the king “settled his wife and many maidens of his family together with the youths and numerous captured people in the eastern side of the great mountain which reached the borders of Goghtn, i.e., in Tambat, Oskiokh, Dajguin and other settlements. These people were also given three small towns, Khram, Jhukhu, Khoshakunik, as well as the valley on the opposite bank of the river from Ajhanakan to the fortress of Nakhichevan” (cf. “History of Armenia by Moses Khorenatsi”, 1858). The boundary stone with the Aramian inscription of the Armenian King Artashes I (189-160 B.C.) found on the foothill of Ishkhanasar, as well as other inscriptions found in the region around the Lake Sevan attributed to the same king confirm that in the 2nd century B.C. the District of Syunik constituted part of the Ancient Armenia (cf.: A.G. Perikhanyan, “Aramian Inscription from Zangezur”, Historical-Philological Magazine, 1965, No 4; A. Ya. Borisov “Inscriptions of Artaxia (Artashes), King of Armenia, 1946, No 2).

According to Strabon, Syunik was inhabited by the Armenian ethnos. (Strabon, “Geography in 17 Books”, 1964, Vol. XI, XIV). It is stated in “The History” by Pavstos Byuzand that Nakhichevan was part of Armenia. Pavstos Byuzand mentioned that some of the people captured by Tigran II (71-70 B.C.) in Palestine were settled there. In the 4th century Nakhichevan, including other Armenian towns, was plundered by Shapuh II Sasanid, and thousands of Armenians and xxxs were forcedly withdrawn from there (cf.: “History of Armenia” by Pavstos Byuzand, 1953).
During the 6th and 7th centuries Nakhichevan suffered from the Persian-Byzantine wars, and in the 7th century it was enslaved by the Arabs. In 705 the Armenian noblemen and princes were invited to Nakhichevan by Mahmed, the Arab vice-regent and burnt alive (“History of Caliphs” by Vardapet Ghevond (VIII century), 1862).

http://www.karabagh.am/eng/7Naxichevan.htm