Armenia and the information war

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Armenia and the information war

NB: Samvel Karabetian of Askeran is better known by his war nickname, as 'Ako'


The 4 mosques mentioned are main NON Armenian, that is Persian style, evidently Foreign monuments one can see.
The 'Gyumbazes' that you mention are not foreign made, they are evidently armenian style, and armenian "stamped", and the PDF document you mention just proves that..
Once I used to pass twice a day, next 2 of those 'Gyumbazes' of Vanotza mentioned, between the village of Gornitzor (Goris District RA), and Dzaghkapert (Kashatagh Distr, NKR), for months... never having time to have a close look. I never felt a stranger presence, or discomfort, as I feel in front of Shushi Mosques.
Shushi mosques are evidently NON Armenian with their minarets, etc...

Contrary to those, the mosoleums where ordered or paid for by nomads, but made by Armenian villagers of the regions.
They are so similar to the armenian chapels, and monasteries all around the same hills.
I had to stop by, to notice the arabic inscriptions, that do look like artificial or strange, as much they do not coincide with the general armenian style of the monument.
Same goes with the Karavanadoun of Varanta.
Samvel did not show the signatures of the actual builders in the stones.... But I have seen Armenian inscriptions (name of builders, just like in any Armenian church). Look at the arches !! They are typical Armenian Arches... The case of the Karvanadoun is limpid.
So goes for the "mosque" of Abdal/Vazkenashen...
In Artzakh, the look of the arches is very characteristic and easy to identify, when labeling something of Armenian or Muslim architecture...(Persian, Kurd, Turk or Tatar...). And this goes with civilian buildings too. Tatar/Azeri civilian buildings can not be confused with Armenian ones in Shushi, or in the villages all over NKR.
For me, those monuments are part of Armenian heritage, even if they testify of bad times, when we were forced to live or tolerate foreign Yoke...

Similarly, some Armenian churches of the Diaspora, specially in small communities, where they did not have the resources or the capacity to build according traditions, or adapted other nations buildings, or used non Armenian handcraft, manpower, can not be considered as Armenian monuments, Armenian heritage... even they belong to Armenian communities, and whorshiping goes on according tradition...

Conclusion: Those monuments built in the XIV cent, by Armenian villagers, builders, for nomad chiefs of those periods, of islamic faith, have no link to actual tatars/ azeris since those people came to NKR only after Shah Abass forced ethnic purification... And at that time, no one heard of a specific 'nation' North of the Arax river. For me, if someone has a right on those, that's Armenians, as a symbol of occupation.
Just like the french can claim the heritage of Atlantic wall , as symbol of Nazi occupation, if you wish...

Actually, the concept of the kumbet-type mausoleum is alien to traditional Armenian architecture - there is no tradition of the use of split level tombs (prayer hall on ground level, tomb chamber below ground) in Armenian architectural forms. The last split-level Armenian tombs date from before the Arab conquests and they are pre-Christian forms of tombs that continued into the Early Christian period.

To say that the whole design of kumbets were just taken directly from the drums and domes of Armenian churches is actually a bit silly - it's akin to saying that NASA took the designs for their space rockets directly from Ottoman minarets! Monumental kumbets exist in Iran that predate anything found in Turkey or the Caucasus region, and it is from that tradition that the smaller kumbet/turbe form must ultimately derive from.

Form follows function, and the form is limited by and defined by the physical properties of the building materials to hand and the skills and traditions of those constructing the structures. So it is not surprising that these Islamic monuments in Artsakh share a sense of similarity with neigbouring Christian monuments. I think that defining and studying these monuments requires more care than what a heavy-handed "Islamic monuments of Armenian architecture" label gives them. There was a lot of cross-fertilisation of architectural ideas in the Caucasus region - nobody "owned" them - and you can see the same features appearing on churches and kumbets and mosques. Just like those single-nave mosques look like churches, in Van region you can find churches that superficially look like mosques, and the mosque in the Erzurum fortress looks similar to a church. The drum and dome of the Vanotsa mausoleum has almost certainly been copied from an Armenian church, but, in contrast, the Thumas Village kumbet seems to me to have no features that are derived from traditional Armenian architectural forms.

I don't know on what basis Karapetian states so confidently that the Khachen-Dorbatli kumbet was designed by the Armenian Shahik. The exact duplication of the designs of the animal relief carvings between the tomb and Shahik's bell-tower suggests to me that the relief designs on both were copied directly from a third source, perhaps a manuscript. But anyway, the architecture of a building does not automatically take the ethnicity of its architects or masons! That would misuse the term "architectural style". However, to say that these monuments are part of Armenia's (and of Armenian) heritage is completely correct.

[TomServo]

Re: Armenia and the information war

its one of these

http://www.raa-am.com/AGN/AGN_vardzq_3_poqr.pdf

http://www.raa-am.com/Arcaxi%20mahme...hyur_small.pdf

Ahh, thanks. It's the second one.

bell, I think the title is meant to reflect Karapetian's central argument: that the region's Islamic monuments were "constructed in accordance with the principles and logic of Armenian architecture."

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Armenia and the information war

Could one of you supply a link to this PDF?

its one of these

http://www.raa-am.com/AGN/AGN_vardzq_3_poqr.pdf

http://www.raa-am.com/Arcaxi%20mahmed%20hush/Arcakhi%20mahmed%20broshyur_small.pdf

[TomServo]

Re: Armenia and the information war

Could one of you supply a link to this PDF?

[Vrej1915]

Re: Armenia and the information war

A good piece of misinformation, azeri style refurbished via russian media:
- Bartolone never condemned the "beating of the tatars", he condemned the violence as a such, and asked for an investigation
- The ceremony was a comemoration of Sumgait Pogroms, not a conference on the conflict...

-------
FRENCH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY'S CHAIR CONDEMNS VIOLENCE AGAINST AZERBAIJANIS

Vestnik Kavkaza, Russia
March 6 2013

The French National Assembly's president Claude Bartolone condemned
the violence against two Azerbaijani nationals, who were reportedly
beaten by Armenians.

In response to a letter from the Azerbaijani ambassador to France
concerning the incident, the president of the National Assembly said
that he condemned this act of violence and was waiting for the results
of the investigation to voice his position on the issue, Azerbaijani
Ambassador to France Elchin Amirbayov told Trend today.

In his letter to the ambassador, the president of the National Assembly
expressed the hope that the actions would be taken to prevent similar
incidents in the future.

Two Azerbaijani nationals, Mirvari Fataliyeva and Vusal Huseynov,
were reportedly beaten by representatives of the Armenian community
at the French National Assembly during an event devoted to the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

[Vrej1915]

Re: Armenia and the information war

NB: Samvel Karabetian of Askeran is better known by his war nickname, as 'Ako'

That's Karapetian.

Also, we shouldn't mix up Argam Ayvaziyan with that nut-case pseudo-historian Armen Ayvaziyan.

There are many more Muslim monuments in Nagorno Karabakh than just 4 mosques, and they seem to all be in relatively good condition - see the RAA pdf publication that SHOULD have been titled "The Islamic Monuments of the Architecture of Artsakh" but which was rendered into appearing to be a propaganda work thanks to its actual title.

And nobody sends me anywhere.

The 4 mosques mentioned are main NON Armenian, that is Persian style, evidently Foreign monuments one can see.
The 'Gyumbazes' that you mention are not foreign made, they are evidently armenian style, and armenian "stamped", and the PDF document you mention just proves that..
Once I used to pass twice a day, next 2 of those 'Gyumbazes' of Vanotza mentioned, between the village of Gornitzor (Goris District RA), and Dzaghkapert (Kashatagh Distr, NKR), for months... never having time to have a close look. I never felt a stranger presence, or discomfort, as I feel in front of Shushi Mosques.
Shushi mosques are evidently NON Armenian with their minarets, etc...

Contrary to those, the mosoleums where ordered or paid for by nomads, but made by Armenian villagers of the regions.
They are so similar to the armenian chapels, and monasteries all around the same hills.
I had to stop by, to notice the arabic inscriptions, that do look like artificial or strange, as much they do not coincide with the general armenian style of the monument.
Same goes with the Karavanadoun of Varanta.
Samvel did not show the signatures of the actual builders in the stones.... But I have seen Armenian inscriptions (name of builders, just like in any Armenian church). Look at the arches !! They are typical Armenian Arches... The case of the Karvanadoun is limpid.
So goes for the "mosque" of Abdal/Vazkenashen...
In Artzakh, the look of the arches is very characteristic and easy to identify, when labeling something of Armenian or Muslim architecture...(Persian, Kurd, Turk or Tatar...). And this goes with civilian buildings too. Tatar/Azeri civilian buildings can not be confused with Armenian ones in Shushi, or in the villages all over NKR.
For me, those monuments are part of Armenian heritage, even if they testify of bad times, when we were forced to live or tolerate foreign Yoke...

Similarly, some Armenian churches of the Diaspora, specially in small communities, where they did not have the resources or the capacity to build according traditions, or adapted other nations buildings, or used non Armenian handcraft, manpower, can not be considered as Armenian monuments, Armenian heritage... even they belong to Armenian communities, and whorshiping goes on according tradition...

Conclusion: Those monuments built in the XIV cent, by Armenian villagers, builders, for nomad chiefs of those periods, of islamic faith, have no link to actual tatars/ azeris since those people came to NKR only after Shah Abass forced ethnic purification... And at that time, no one heard of a specific 'nation' North of the Arax river. For me, if someone has a right on those, that's Armenians, as a symbol of occupation.
Just like the french can claim the heritage of Atlantic wall , as symbol of Nazi occupation, if you wish...

[TomServo]

Re: Armenia and the information war

I think the Gomidas Institute or Zoryan Institute should translate this scholar's work into English. But it should be done professionally. There is a book called The Invention of History by Ruben Galichian that also focuses on Azerbaijani hysteriagraphy but it was either poorly translated or poorly edited. Some of the sentences are almost as difficult to understand as Artashes' posts.

VICTOR SHNIRELMAN: WHY TO ATTRIBUTE THE DOMINANT VIEWS IN AZERBAIJAN TO THE "WORLD SCIENCE"?

16:55 06/03/2013 Â" REGION

Chief scientific researcher in the Institute of Ethnology and
Anthropology in the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Historical
Sciences Victor Shnirelman responded to the publications of Azerbaijani
authors, who had earlier criticized his book The Wars of Memory: Myths,
Identity and Politics in the South Caucasus (Moscow, 2003). Ð~XÐ~P
REGNUM publishes the article by Victor Shnirelman with his consent.

In February 2009 the administration of the National Academy of
Sciences of Azerbaijan (NASA) together with the directors of a
number of academic institutions convened a session devoted to my
book Wars of Memory. It is hard not to notice that NASA needed
about six years to get familiarized with the book and to hold its
discussion. At the same time the task of giving it a "worthy rebuff"
was assigned to philosopher Zumrud Kulizade: apparently no historians
knowledgeable in the subject under discussion were left in Azerbaijan;
or maybe they were not qualified enough for such a responsible task
(or rather it is more simple than that - the historians understand
quite well what my book is talking about). For that reason they chose
an elderly woman with life wisdom who (unlike of course my naïve self)
knows well about the "politicization of the historical science" and
"the manipulation of public opinion by historiographers". Apparently
the choice of the academic authorities was influenced by the fact
that having possessed such sacral knowledge, this chosen candidate
had refrained from discussing this question both in Soviet times,
when it could have had serious consequences, and in post-Soviet times,
when it became possible.

It is noteworthy that in her extensive critical essay the philosopher
carefully bypasses the question of politicization of the historical
science in Azerbaijan. Apparently Azerbaijan is the only state that
serves as a unique example of devotion to authentic science and the
lack of "manipulation of the public opinion"; apparently this is the
only state in which there is no "reanimation of memory concerning
historical offenses and wars", which allows the philosopher to
furiously attack the "foreigner" who dared to doubt this. The
dear critic does not dispute my statement on that the ideology of
ethno-political conflicts can't but appeal to the past. However, her
"philosophical erudition" does not allow her to conclude that it is
exactly for this reason that the analysis of this kind of conflicts
cannot ignore the images of the past created by local intellectuals.

Moreover, she does her best to present the attempt of a scientific
analysis of the conflict as its "inflation". Aren't the ethno-political
conflicts normally so protracted because of the fact that the local
intellectuals refuse point blank to make a deep and comprehensive
analysis of these conflicts? Instead of making an effort to figure
out the problem of the "social memory", the philosopher, quite in line
with the Soviet style, distorts my words and ideas in the most absurd
manner and ascribes to me those which I have never shared. Indeed,
it turns out to be much easier to refute these ideas since the
philosopher refuses to actually polemicize the main ideas that make
up the core of my book; here is where the Soviet training comes to
help - to speak without saying anything essential.

Like many other critics the Azerbaijani philosopher accuses me of
an "incorrect interpretation of the history of Azerbaijan". But in
my books devoted to the "historical memory" there isn't and there
couldn't be any claim of writing the history of the Caucasian nations
and their culture. The question under discussion is the images of the
past constructed by various intellectuals in this or that historical
period as well as the link between these images and the ethno-political
context, including the Soviet national politics.

However, the philosopher, who mentions the names of such renowned
authorities as Halbwachs and Werth did not understand this: apparently
she knows the works of these authors only by name. It looks like she
hasn't bothered to read my book either; after all, even the titles
of separate chapters of my book are not correctly quoted in her review.

Where and when did I insist that the history of the Caucasus is that
of endless wars and genocides? Where did I write about "the nations
of the given region being psychologically encoded for mutual hatred"
or about the perpetuity of ethnic wars on the Caucasus? Where did I
claim that the "Azerbaijani Turks must be subjected to genocide"? How
exactly is my "negative attitude towards Islam" manifested? And where
do I "present to the reader the past and the present of Azerbaijan
and the Azerbaijanis as a historical nuisance" (unfortunately the
philosopher stays ignorant of the contemporary research on ethnicity;
she is hopelessly confused in the understanding of primordial and
constructivist approaches)? All these are but baseless assertions of
the philosopher who has done everything to avoid discussing the most
important and key problems that are raised in my book. In particular
I would like to ask her why during the 20th century the Azerbaijani
scholars changed the image of their ancestors for five times. This
question is discussed in detail in the book, but the philosopher
considers this issue unworthy of her attention; she simply does not
notice it.

Instead, she devotes the bulk of her review to groundlessly accusing
me in "unprofessionalism" and in "falsifications". It remains quite
unclear what the massive quotes from medieval authors, which she
quotes without commenting, have to do with my book (by the way it
looks like the philosopher is not aware of such science as Source
Studies and the problem of the critique of written sources remains
a grave mystery for her). After all they do not throw any light
whatsoever upon the questions which I dedicated my book to. I would
also like to know who among the multiple medieval authors quoted by
the philosopher called himself an "Azerbaijani". And why, speaking
of "historical compositions... published in Russian and Azerbaijani
languages in the 30s and in the subsequent years of the 20th century"
the author refers solely to the works written at the beginning of
the 20s? It looks as if this kind of "imprecision" is typical to the
philosopher's knowledge of history in general. That is why in her
understanding the Oghuzes lived either at the turn of our era or "many
thousand years ago". She is apparently not concerned with the problem
of strict chronology that lies at the basis of the historical science.

Doesn't this disorient the same audience which my dear critic is so
concerned about?

Read the rest here: http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2...06/shnirelman/

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Armenia and the information war

http://www.raa-am.com/

that's Samvel Karabedian's organisation.
NB: Do not confond with famous Askeran commander with same name.

That's Karapetian.

Also, we shouldn't mix up Argam Ayvaziyan with that nut-case pseudo-historian Armen Ayvaziyan.

There are many more Muslim monuments in Nagorno Karabakh than just 4 mosques, and they seem to all be in relatively good condition - see the RAA pdf publication that SHOULD have been titled "The Islamic Monuments of the Architecture of Artsakh" but which was rendered into appearing to be a propaganda work thanks to its actual title.

And nobody sends me anywhere.

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Armenia and the information war

One day to construct from scratch a defense against an enemy! Given that the enemy's strategy and weapons in this offensive is ALWAYS the same, and that they ALL just fire blanks, it shouldn't be that difficult to put together an off-the shelf response, or that difficult to realise the advantages in having such a response prepared long in advance.

I just hope that those in the trenches in Artsakh are better prepared.

In my opinion, and probably of many other people, the defense budget goes into the pockets of azeri govt officials. Every now and then they buy new equipment to show that they are spending money but majority goes into their pockets. They've been claiming they can take over Artsakh in a week and even get to Yerevan but for some reason they have decided not to. They keep threatening resumption of war since the ceasefire. Now their deputy prime minister, ali hanasov, claims they have not attacked because they are going to fight the Russians in Artsakh, not the Armenians.

“President Ilham Aliyev has always promised a military solution to the [Nagorno-Karabakh] conflict and he still has the issue on the agenda. The option of a military solution is always on the table, but the most important thing is how this kind of operation will be carried out. We need to become much stronger so that if we become involved in combat in Nagorno-Karabakh we can stand up to Russian troops, because that is who we will have to face. Did Armenia occupy our territories? Do you think Armenia's power is sufficient for that?” asked Hasanov....

Recalling his home city, which is also in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan, Hasanov said the occupation was accomplished with the military support of Russia. “I saw Russian soldiers get out of tanks and celebrate their victory with champagne.”

http://www.eurasianet.org/node/66630

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Armenia and the information war

That is a lot of great information to get me started with, I appreciate it guys
I'll get started with this, and I should be able to take it from here
though even more material will be nice

One day to construct from scratch a defense against an enemy! Given that the enemy's strategy and weapons in this offensive are ALWAYS the same, and that they ALL just fire blanks, it shouldn't be that difficult to put together an off-the-shelf response, or that difficult to realise the advantages in having such a response prepared long in advance.

I just hope that those in the trenches in Artsakh are better prepared.