[QUOTE=jgk3;297942]Unfortunately regarding the Caucasian Albanians, I can't find the sources that I want to share, but I've read about how names of their towns, outside of areas where Armenians formed what could comfortably be defined as a "native majority" in those days, would be colonized by Armenians and their names changed. Since Armenia was in power at the time, it would begin to claim some of those places as native to Armenians through giving them Armenian names, and the Caucasian Albanians lacking a sovereign voice, with their church for all effective purposes controlled by the Armenian one, could do nothing in response. This very "Turkish" tactic is common throughout the globe, and to think Armenians were immune to it during their hay day, just because we were genocided relatively recently and lost our sovereignty for centuries, is ridiculous. I will look for examples of what I'm talking about regarding Caucasian Albians from some good sources.[QUOTE=jgk3;297942]
That's not proof. And if you've read it somewhere I would surely like to know the source of their reasoning.
Now, look at the bold part. You are using the reasoning "if they could do it, then they probably it. That kind of reasoning is flawed, yet you keep presenting it as fact.
Originally posted by jgk3
View Post
Furthermore, you claimed in a previous post that the Church had likely ordered the changes, yet your source simply states taht at some point in time Armenians started to refer to Ararat as Noah's landing site. There is nothing related to the source of the change, yet you want to confidently state that it was the result of the Church's power.
Again, your reasoning is "it probably was so, the church could do it, therefore the church did do it. Flawed
Leave a comment: