Government

[Haykakan]

Re: Government

Where is a mod when you need one..This sounds like a Urartu history forum now.

[hagopn]

Re: Government

Well, maybe you can find someone who agrees that there is such a thing as "genetic behavioral memory" in the choice of governance of modern human societies (as opposed to, say, the "fear of the dark" genetic behavioral memory that arose from prehistoric human communities).

The global primal or the local more idiosyncratic, which takes precedence? I don't pretend to have an answer, but I have seen discussion on the topic, yes, among political historians and geneticists.

[hagopn]

Re: Government

As to the relevance to today's situation, Derenik Demirjian was my inspiration on this as well as Grigor Artsruni, who were both obsessed, rightly so, with the reasons for Armenian political disunity and its roots. I am mostly repeating and embellishing their thoughts on the matter.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Government

Another wrench throwing bout via ridicule. This fellow's job seems to be to stop discussions he doesn't agree with.

Well, maybe you can find some expert who agrees with you that there is such a thing as "genetic behavioral memory" in the choice of governance of modern human societies (as opposed to, say, the "fear of the dark" genetic behavioral memory that arose from prehistoric human communities).

[hagopn]

Re: Government

Yes, partly sorry. But going off-topic is common every where here. And it was as a response to hagopn who went wildly off-topic by starting to suggesting circumstances in 800bc urartu or 4thc Armenia or 12thC Cilicia had some relevance to governance issues inside today's Armenia. And who claimed that chosen methods of government are dependant on "genetic behavioral memory" and that there is some sort of particular "genetic behavioral memory" that Armenians have (even before there even were Armenians) and that other don't have.

This above is truly a fanatical stance. This fellow's job seems to be to stop discussions he doesn't agree with.

The above is speculation (my proposals, which I derived chiefly from Markale's analyses on the Celts) on the possible reasons for adhering to a non-centralized political model, a traditional tribal and autonomous model despite changes in geopolitics. There is nothing I have stated that has not been discussed in academia, but apparently the "open minded" Scot here, the Judge of Armenians, the Ayatollah of Truth, has chosen to yet again barge in like a rabid bull.

All possible factors are mentioned without necessarily a bias or fanatical stance for any. We already know the orthodox theories of "nationalism", but Markale's proposed Celtic model is closer to the ARmenian tradition than the Roman.

[hagopn]

Re: Government

Distinction between the Urartuan vernacular and cuneiform, or as he termed it, "the regional possible diplomatic" language of Hurrian (hence the neo-Hurrian clasification) was first proposed by Martiros Gavoukjian in 1976. I first heard of it in 1991 from a historian named Azat Vehuni who introduced me to Gavoukjian's work.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Government

Hey this is getting off topic -please discuss this in another thread

Yes, partly sorry. But going off-topic is common every where here. And it was as a response to hagopn who went wildly off-topic by starting to suggesting circumstances in 800bc urartu or 4thc Armenia or 12thC Cilicia had some relevance to governance issues inside today's Armenia. And who claimed that chosen methods of government are dependant on "genetic behavioral memory" and that there is some sort of particular "genetic behavioral memory" that Armenians have (even before there even were Armenians) and that other don't have.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Government

Dear Mr. Ax Grinder, I have respect for Lang, but cannot accept "guesses" with no evidence as the basis for theories.

Urartuan as expressed in cuneiform is undertermined on whether or not it was the same language as the vernacular.

I can't believe that some offhand stuff I wrote decades ago on a pre-worldwideweb aol forum as a response to some Turkish propaganda actually got adopted by Armenian extremists as an excuse for their inability to connect written Urartian to spoken Armenian. If you can find any reference to this "theory" prior to the late 1980s or very early 1990s, I'd be surprised and, with apologies, withdraw my claim to have coined it. I think I coined it because there were Turks around claiming the Urartians were Turks.

The absence of something cannot be used as the basis for claiming the existence of something else. There is no written "vernacular Urartian" - so nobody has evidence it even existed. And you were the one claiming the Urartians are Armenian - so why are you now suggesting that the rulers of Urartu were not Armenian and that their temple and palace and cultic and other monumental cuneiform inscriptions were written in their own non-Armenian language?

That anti-Armenian nutter I mentioned in another post (who turned anti-Armenian in the mid 1980s after his California antiques shop innocently called "Turkish Bazar" was targeted by extremist Armenians because of its name), and who later went insane and got carted off to a lunatic assylum for a few years, was one of the chief posters there, copypasting Turkish genocide-denying propaganda. This all might be obscure and trivial history, but at least it is real history.

[hagopn]

Re: Government

Haykanan, it is actually another wrench thrown by a fanatic into the topic.

Let's get back to the topic, then. Let's assume that there was a gradual cultural gradation from Urartuan to Armenian in the general population. Is that also of any relevance when discussing the political habits of the folk that have lived there for generations? Apparently the transition, if there was one (which there probably was not) from Urartuan to Armenian was peaceful and comprehensively retained much of its former cultural character. So goes with its population's political character and governing methods.

Also, does the above scenario - which is acknowledged to be the case, more likely indicate continuity or a "radical ethnic cataclysm?" "Radical ethnic cataclism" would have to have happened in order for a total decline and ascendency between two cultures in what really amounts to around 2 ro 3 decades, barely a generation. That just does not happen.

Therefore, the topic stands. Political traditions in Armenia were as I describe for many millennia, regardless of the linguistic and ethnic arguments brought about to invalidate the link between Armenians and their, even if argued to be linguistically distinct (which is never the case in linguistics, by the way), cultural and genetic continuity - something that surprisingly there is a consensus on, the "Anatolian genetic continuity". Even the most die-hard opponents of Urartuan/Armenian continuity, ssuch as James Russell in his prime, agreed ot the "genetic and cultural continuity" idea.

[Haykakan]

Re: Government

Hey this is getting off topic -please discuss this in another thread