Nakhichevan

[Ghoukas]

Re: Nakhichevan

An atlas for free about NAKHIJEVAN

[Mos]

Re: Nakhichevan

My grandmother's side of the family was from Nakhijevan. Today though it's a really backwards place ruled by a dictator, no development, little economy, and of course Armenian cultural sites mostly destroyed by Azeris.

Syunik is a very important province to us. Not only do we have some very important monasteries and cultural sites there, but also it prevents us from being completed surrounded by Azerbaijan to the South, gives us a passage way to Iran with which we can trade and relieve some of the blockade. Though infrastructure down there is pretty poor, and the volume of trade is rather low compared to the trade that goes through Georgia.

[SevSpitak]

Re: Nakhichevan

Well, back then there was no Nakhichevan to my knowledge. There was probably a city with the name, but it wasn't big enough to be applied to the entire region.

Most of Nakhichevan was incorporated into Syunik.

[lampron]

Re: Nakhichevan

Do you guys notice the use of the letter "x" in the Armenian script in the 1695 map (in the pdf file)? I didn't know we used it. I'm also seeing "h" and dotless "i".

Also, do you see Գուրջիստան (Gurjistan) for Georgia? I didn't know we used that name. Ըստամպօլ also surprised me.

it must be the Moslem influence which increased after the 15th century. Gurjistan is what Turks and Persians call Georgia.

In the 10th-11th centuries it seems that Armenian kingdom used the names of the separate districts rather than "Nakhichevan" for the region that suddenly became 'Nakhichevan ASSR' controlled by Baku in 1924. Names like Yernjak, Ayrarat, Goghtn, Sharur etc

[SevSpitak]

Re: Nakhichevan

Do you guys notice the use of the letter "x" in the Armenian script in the 1695 map (in the pdf file)? I didn't know we used it. I'm also seeing "h" and dotless "i".

Also, do you see Գուրջիստան (Gurjistan) for Georgia? I didn't know we used that name. Ըստամպօլ also surprised me.

[SevSpitak]

Re: Nakhichevan

From what I've seen, the most recurring name for Nakhichevan is Naksivan.

raremaps.com
davidrumsey.com

Those two sites are good databases for antique maps. Most of the time, it's unclear, and Nakhichevan is not even indicated. But in the rare cases that it is, it's either Naksivan or a variant. I haven't checked 19th century maps.

Also, I have no patience to look for it here, you can see what antique Armenian maps looked like here:

http://aiea2008paris.free.fr/papers/Galichian.pdf

Maybe someone can find Nakhichevan there. There's even a T and O map dating from the 13th century. If only the PDF allowed us to zoom in on the maps. Does anyone own the book of Rouben Galichian about the antique maps of Armenia? We might be able to see better examples there.

[ninetoyadome]

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

But king aliyev said "There have never been Armenian's in Nakichevan." Im confused, whos right: historian Movses Khorenatsi, Geographer, historian Strabo or self proclaimed historian king aliyev.

[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

[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.

[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."