Aryan Roots Save Armenians from Nazi Extermination

[KotkaS]

Aryan Roots Save Armenians from Nazi Extermination
By Grigor Hakobyan


When the Nazis came to power in 1933, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, various cultural minorities were targeted for persecution and harassment. One of these minorities was the Armenian minority of Europe.


The Turkish government of that time took an opportunity to launch a major propaganda campaign against the Armenians living in Germany and the rest of Europe, where they claimed that Armenians were Semite and no different from gypsies. They encouraged the persecution of Armenians by planting falsified information on Armenian history, culture and its origins.

The times were severe for the Armenians of Europe, and particularly of Germany, where a second Genocide seemed to be on the horizon. To counter the anti-Armenian propaganda in Germany, the Armenian community in Potsdam, Germany published an academic book on Armenian studies called Armeniertum-Arivertum, meaning Armenism-Aryanism. Three thousand copies were printed under the leadership of Artashes Abeghyan in cooperation with German Armenologists Yohannes Lepsus and Paul Rohrbakh.

Many German Orientologists like Hans Haynrikh Sheder, Yohannes Fon Lears, Karl Rot, Rev. Gerhard Klinge, and Evar Shteer, took part in this project by submitting their academic findings about the Indo-European origins of Armenians and their Aryan linguistic identity in this book.

The book was republished in 1942-1943 in Shtugart, when the Turkish propaganda reemerged in the German press. Around the same time, Armenologist Hyek Asatrian, in cooperation with Armenian military General Garegin Njdeh, published another book called Armenia-the Cradle of Aryans in Asia.

After those publications, the German Interior Ministry issued a document recognizing Armenians as an Aryan nation. Thanks to the German academics and active participation of Armenian community of Germany, the threat of yet another Armenian genocide, this time in Europe, was eliminated.

Source: Armenism-Aryanism, Armenian reprint by Uri Xachatryan, Aram Aleksanyan and Alina Sonoyan, Yerevan, 2001.

Armenians is aryans...Happy us:D

[ARK]

I wonder, apart from armenians, persians and germans, which other race is aryan?

[KotkaS]

Aryans is not race.It's nazi meaning-ideal human...

[Artsakh]

Aryans is not race.It's nazi meaning-ideal human...


"Aryan" has nothing to do with the Nazis. Aryan has nothing to do with white supremacy or having blue eyes and blonde hair.

Peoples can be of the Aryan race, such are Armenians, Iranians, Greeks, etc... in the same fashion that J-e--ws (actually, only some) and Arabs are a semitic people.

[Artsakh]

I wonder, apart from armenians, persians and germans, which other race is aryan?


Greeks, Italians.....http://www.biblemysteries.com/library/indoeuropean.htm

[ARK]

Aryans is not race.It's nazi meaning-ideal human...

:confused:

[ARK]

Greeks, Italians.....http://www.biblemysteries.com/library/indoeuropean.htm


Thanks Artsakh!

[RSNATION]

"Aryan" has nothing to do with the Nazis. Aryan has nothing to do with white supremacy or having blue eyes and blonde hair.

Peoples can be of the Aryan race, such are Armenians, Iranians, Greeks, etc... in the same fashion that J-e--ws (actually, only some) and Arabs are a semitic people.


Very true. In fact I beleive the original Aryans were located in India. The Nazi's were fond of re-appropriating ancient symbols (such as the swastika which was formerly symbol of the infinity of g*d and can be seen on many of our churches) and the word "aryan". Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I also believe that the word "Iran" is Farsi for "aryan". What Hitler should have emphasized was the "Nordic" race and not the "Aryan" race.

[D3ADSY]

I suggest you find and read quotes of the handful of times Hitler directly commented on Armenians, you will find he was probably indifferent at best.

[Կարմիր Բ]

Yeah only 300.000 armenians died thanks to our ''aryan''(whatever that is) roots. Imagine if we weren't.

[ARK]

Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I also believe that the word "Iran" is Farsi for "aryan". What Hitler should have emphasized was the "Nordic" race and not the "Aryan" race.


In persian we say aryayi referring to aryan.

[oslonor]

"Aryan" has nothing to do with the Nazis. Aryan has nothing to do with white supremacy or having blue eyes and blonde hair.

Peoples can be of the Aryan race, such are Armenians, Iranians, Greeks, etc... in the same fashion that J-e--ws (actually, only some) and Arabs are a semitic people.

Just make a correction: Iranian in common usage refers only to citizens of Iran. "Iranians" is not an ethnic group. Persians, Tajik, Pashtoons etc are ethnic groups who have aryan origin.

[oslonor]

In persian we say aryayi referring to aryan.

RSnation:
Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I also believe that the word "Iran" is Farsi for "aryan". What Hitler should have emphasized was the "Nordic" race and not the "Aryan" race.



Persians, Pashtoons and Tajiks (another name for Persans) are actually Nordic.

See here:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/487760/thread/1155544112/last-1155544112/Persians+and+Afghans

[ARK]

Persians, Pashtoons and Tajiks (another name for Persans) are actually Nordic.

See here:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/487760/thread/1155544112/last-1155544112/Persians+and+Afghans

OMG! :eek: What are you talking about? Persians, pashtoons and tajiks (mixed with Mongols) are Nordic????????! I can’t believe that you are a Persian!:eek:

[oslonor]

By Tajiks I mean ethnic Tajiks. You are refering to Tajik speakers which include mongols and turks too and are called Tajiks. But I am discussing ethnic Tajiks which are actually ethnically the same as Persians but live in Afghanistan. You can check the slideshow and also read the link.

[gunther]

Hitler was a strong leader who made mistakes that led to his downfall.

Take it any way you want.

[Armenian]

I suggest you find and read quotes of the handful of times Hitler directly commented on Armenians, you will find he was probably indifferent at best.

Putting aside what he may or may not have said about Armenians, the fact remains that Armenians were pretty well treated within the Third Reich and the German occupied areas of Europe. Several Nationalist Armenian leaders, such as the great Sparapet Geregin Nzhteh, lead significant Armenians forces within the Wehrmacht. Armenians were promised a free homeland. During the Second World War, Germans did not kill a single Armenian for being Armenian. As a matter of fact, Armenians had full rights within German occupied areas of Europe.

On the other hand, the wonderful Bolkshevik regime was directly responsible for the murders of tens of thousands of Armenians in Armenia just prior the Second World War. Bolsheviks were also responsible for giving Artskah and Nakhijevan to Azeri Turks. And had it not been for Sparapet Garegin Nzhteh, Bolsheviks were getting ready to give Zangezur to the Azeris as well.

In reality, we Armenians had very little concerns about the aftermath of a German victory during the Second World War. And the 'Red' fables about "Turkey getting ready to invade Armenia had the Germans been victorious in Stalingrad in 1943" was nothing but pure Bolshevik propaganda meant to rally Soviet Armenians against the Germans.

I salute our great war heros that fought for Armenia - on 'both' sides of the Eastern Front.

[D3ADSY]

Putting aside what he may or may not have said about Armenians, the fact remains that Armenians were pretty well treated within the Third Reich and the German occupied areas of Europe. Several Nationalist Armenian leaders, such as the great Sparapet Geregin Nzhteh, lead significant Armenians forces within the Wehrmacht. Armenians were promised a free homeland. During the Second World War, Germans did not kill a single Armenian for being Armenian. As a matter of fact, Armenians had full rights within German occupied areas of Europe.

On the other hand, the wonderful Bolkshevik regime was directly responsible for the murders of tens of thousands of Armenians in Armenia just prior the Second World War. Bolsheviks were also responsible for giving Artskah and Nakhijevan to Azeri Turks. And had it not been for Sparapet Garegin Nzhteh, Bolsheviks were getting ready to give Zangezur to the Azeris as well.

In reality, we Armenians had very little concerns about the aftermath of a German victory during the Second World War. And the 'Red' fables about "Turkey getting ready to invade Armenia had the Germans been victorious in Stalingrad in 1943" was nothing but pure Bolshevik propaganda meant to rally Soviet Armenians against the Germans.

I salute our great war heros that fought for Armenia - on 'both' sides of the Eastern Front.
The only thing I wish to say is that we cannot know what would have happened to Armenia had the Germans won, but this is irrelevant now and we can only look at what did happen, and in this regard I do agree with what you are saying.

[hroape]

Well since that time when armenian proved their aryan roots, armenians have also been able to prove that they are also the first of all aryans. We are the oldest and purest aryans existing. And aryan is the white race, which is the ideal race.

[D3ADSY]

Purest? That is pure bullxxxx. Put a group of Armenians together and you will see some who look Middle Eastern and some who look European and everything in between.

[oslonor]

I have a blog on the question of Aryans.

Persians and Hollywood
http://oslonor.blogspot.com

[Aryan_Hye]

Well since that time when armenian proved their aryan roots, armenians have also been able to prove that they are also the first of all aryans. We are the oldest and purest aryans existing. And aryan is the white race, which is the ideal race.

very beutifull world brother.
finaly i see beutifull post in this forum.
maybe i should go to church and light a candel.
or even sacrifice a lamb :D

[Aryan_Hye]

I have a blog on the question of Aryans.

Persians and Hollywood
http://oslonor.blogspot.com
dont believe anything that hollywood says.
believe in our great armenian fuhrer garegin njdeh
read his book (armenians:crade of aryans in asia)
or the book armenian aryanism
or the book of the lord god adolf hitler

but hollywood is controlled by j-ews (the enemies of the aryan race)

[Aryan_Hye]

Purest? That is pure bullxxxx. Put a group of Armenians together and you will see some who look Middle Eastern and some who look European and everything in between.

aryan=indo-european
not european-european.

there are some dark skinned aryans
and bright skinned aryans.
they are different nations from north india to iceland or greenland

only armenians who look extremly like turks or arabs or are not armenians.
they are few 10% or less.

[TomServo]

Մենք քիչ ենք, սակայն մեզ [Aryan] հայ են ասում... :laugh:

[Osttruppen]

Մենք քիչ ենք, սակայն մեզ [Aryan] հայ են ասում... :laugh:

Funny?

[TomServo]

Funny?
Armenisch Reich? :rolleyes:

[Anonymouse]

aryan=indo-european
not european-european.

there are some dark skinned aryans
and bright skinned aryans.
they are different nations from north india to iceland or greenland

only armenians who look extremly like turks or arabs or are not armenians.
they are few 10% or less.


Unfortunately for this mule, his statement about Aryans is correct, Aryans are a language group, not a race.

This misconception about Hitler and the blond Aryan super race is far permeated into peoples heads that sense gets lost somewhere in between. German is a complete language you see, it has words for everything much like Armenian. It has Rasse for race and Volk for people. As a matter of fact, all throughout the NSDAP before and during, they used the word Volk. During the war and all the translations that the Allied powers did, the word Volk was translated to mean race. Who is lying and why?

[TomServo]

Unfortunately for this mule, his statement about Aryans is correct, Aryans are a language group, not a race.

This misconception about Hitler and the blond Aryan super race is far permeated into peoples heads that sense gets lost somewhere in between. German is a complete language you see, it has words for everything much like Armenian. It has Rasse for race and Volk for people. As a matter of fact, all throughout the NSDAP before and during, they used the word Volk. During the war and all the translations that the Allied powers did, the word Volk was translated to mean race. Who is lying and why?
During the years of the Third Reich, this term and its adjective völkisch became heavily politicised, particularly in slogans such as Volk ohne Raum — "(a) people without space" or Völkischer Beobachter ("popular observer"), an NSDAP party newspaper. Also the political slogan Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer ("One people, one country/empire, one leader"). Today, the term völkisch is largely restricted to historical contexts describing that era.

The Nazi-era use of Volk could, depending on context, be interpreted as "race," "Germanic," or "European."

Because Volk is the generic German word for "people", its use does not necessarily denote any particular political views in post-1945 Germany.

[Anonymouse]

The Nazi-era use of Volk could, depending on context, be interpreted as "race," "Germanic," or "European."

That it could was not my point. I am sure any word, in interpretation and translation that is close enough, could be made out to be the other thing, since words by their very nature are fungible. However, when you have consistent Allied propaganda translating it as such when there is clearly another word for it it makes one suspicious.

[Osttruppen]

Armenisch Reich? :rolleyes:

know what it means?

[Wind]

Persians, Pashtoons and Tajiks (another name for Persans) are actually Nordic.

See here:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/487760/thread/1155544112/last-1155544112/Persians+and+Afghans

Interesting, thanks for the link.

[Shahanshah]

Well, Armenians arent Iranic (they are not an Iranian peoples), therefore, they arent Aryan (the real term "Aryan" is not the same as the Nazi "Aryan". The term Aryan has been used to refer to Iranics, but because the Nazis introduced their racist term, scholars now use the term Iranian or Iranic to refer to Aryan peoples).

Armenians are Indo-Europeans, but they arent Aryans, as they are not of the Iranian branch of Indo-Europeans, they are of the Caucasian branch of Indo Europeans.

By the way, do not listen to Oslonor, he is a pan Turk spreading his racist ideology all over the internet (Hm...I'm wondering why he isnt banned and why his posts have not been deleted.)

[Armenian]

Armenians are Indo-Europeans, but they arent Aryans, as they are not of the Iranian branch of Indo-Europeans, they are of the Caucasian branch of Indo Europeans.

Not quite right. The Armenian and Iranian languages are from the same Indo-European sub-root. As a matter of fact the Iranian language has evolved from proto-Armenian, and proto-Iranian tribes originated within the Armenian Highlands. Also, Armenians are only 'partially' Caucasian. Historic Armenia, from 2500BC to 1915AD, comprised most of eastern Anatolia, northern Mesopotamia and the southern Caucasus with the heartland being the region of Van. Only now has Armenia been 'pushed' into the Caucasus.

By the way, do not listen to Oslonor, he is a pan Turk spreading his racist ideology all over the internet (Hm...I'm wondering why he isnt banned and why his posts have not been deleted.)

I don't think there is a single person here that takes the idiot in question seriously.

[Shahanshah]

Not quite right. The Armenian and Iranian languages are from the same Indo-European sub-root. As a matter of fact the Iranian language has evolved from proto-Armenian, and proto-Iranian tribes originated within the Armenian Highlands.

Actually, I dont think there is any linguistic similarity between Iranic languages and Armenian other than the Indo European connection. Atleast I never heard of it.

Armenian was thought of as an Iranian language for a long time, because of the vast amount of Iranian influence on it during the Parthian, Sassanid, etc... era's, but it was later determined that it is its own distinct branch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_language

Also, Armenians are only 'partially' Caucasian. Historic Armenia, from 2500BC to 1915AD, comprised most of eastern Anatolia, northern Mesopotamia and the southern Caucasus with the heartland being the region of Van. Only now has Armenia been 'pushed' into the Caucasus.

True.

[Iranianazeri]

Those who called themselves aryans were the indo-iranians speaking peoples of asia.

The white supremacists took the name and started to call themselves aryan after thousands of years. For them it was race, you had to look nordic. They considered themselves the only "pure" indoeuropeans.

[Armenian]

Actually, I dont think there is any linguistic similarity between Iranic languages and Armenian other than the Indo European connection. Atleast I never heard of it.

Indo European language tree: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/6507/illustration122.jpg

Indo European Homeland: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/6507/illustration130.jpghttp://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/6507/illustration130.jpg

Source: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/6507/chronicle120.html

[Shahanshah]

So your saying that Armenians are an Iranian people?

I know that Armenians and Iranians share a lot of history and culture, and that Armenians and Iranians have generally been close, but I didnt know that Armenians feel that they were part of the Iranic sub group of Indo-Europeans.

[Armenian]

So your saying that Armenians are an Iranian people? I know that Armenians and Iranians share a lot of history and culture, and that Armenians and Iranians have generally been close, but I didnt know that Armenians feel that they were part of the Iranic sub group of Indo-Europeans.

No, I'm saying that ancient Iranians are an Armenian people. This is fact, as far as I'm concerned. Your forefathers originated within the Armenian Highlands, as a result they were proto-Armenians. And your language is of the same subbranch as the Armenian language. Armenian national historiography goes back well over four thousand five hundred years. However, after the fall of the Urartian Armenian empire (approximately mid sixth century BC), Armenia began to be heavily influenced by Persia for several hundred years.

[sev_zeytun]

Just curious, but, which would you guys say is older (if it's even possible to assume or even guess): Armenians, Greeks, Romans, or Persians? Again, just curious.

BTW Armenian: thanks for the tree and stuff. It was useful and cool.:)

[sev_zeytun]

know what it means?

I do.

[Armenian]

Just curious, but, which would you guys say is older (if it's even possible to assume or even guess): Armenians, Greeks, Romans, or Persians? Again, just curious.

I suggest you read some Armenian history. When Armenians were building magnificent cities and contemplating the movement of the stars there were no such things as Romans, Greeks or Iranians. Even the Armenian Araratian empire (Urartu) was centuries older than all the rest.

Here is a thread that might interest you: http://z4.invisionfree.com/Armenian_Diaspora/index.php?showtopic=199

[sev_zeytun]

Thanks. I've studied history in topics such as World History (too broad to really cover anything in detail), European history (not much said about Armenians there), and US History (nothing about Armenians there). So I never got to covering Armenian history as well as I could have. Do you have any books that you could recommend? They could be in Armenian or in English, it doesn't really matter to me.

[ArmSurvival]

Armenian, Urartu is a different culture with a different language than the Armenian culture. We are surely descendents of them, and their culture meshed and evolved into ours, but Urartians are not Armenians. They spoke a different language. Its like saying that the Romans were Etruscans (I could be wrong, but thats my take).

And your language is of the same subbranch as the Armenian language

Thats not true. Armenian is its own subgroup under the Indo-European languages, while Iranian is a separate group, with many subgroups attached to it.

What are your sources? I'm not talking geocities sites, or Armenian sites. Which scholars or institutions can you name me which claim this? (I'm not trying to argue with you, I'm just curious as to what your sources are).

[Selpak]

"Aryan Roots Save Armenians from Nazi Extermination " wtf.

Does anyone know Germany's East policies? Rush to Baku??

[Armenian]

Armenian, Urartu is a different culture with a different language than the Armenian culture.

Yes, according to Turks and their supporters you are totally right.

We are surely descendents of them, and their culture meshed and evolved into ours, but Urartians are not Armenians. They spoke a different language. Its like saying that the Romans were Etruscans (I could be wrong, but thats my take).

Urartians were every bit Armenian, even perhaps more so than the average Armenian today. The official language spoken in Urartu was Caucasian, just like the official language spoken during the classical period was Persian. Armenia's official "language" was also Greek, Assyrian and Russian during different periods. Does that make us ethnically Greek, Assyrian and or Russian? Armenians are also derived from pre-Urartian Hurrians who were also a Caucasian tribe. Thus, language per say is a single factor amongst several fundamental factors that determine ethnicity. Besides which, Armenian language is said to be a mix of Indo European and Caucasian languages, the root being the former.

You seem to know little about your historiography. I suggest you stop absorbing western theories about your nation and begin doing serious research about the period in question. Urartians were Armenians in every sense of the word. I'll choose to listen to dozens of Armenian scholars that make this case and I choose to rely on my own logic and intellect. And its absolutely stupid of you to stay away from Armenian scholars regarding this issue - as you accept non-Armenian scholars. It simply shows your inexperience and self-hate.

Thats not true. Armenian is its own subgroup under the Indo-European languages, while Iranian is a separate group, with many subgroups attached to it.

No, first you need to better understand what you are discussing. Look at what I provided again. The Armenian language is 'currently' a separate branch. But in the distant past it was found in a subgroup. Indo-European languages gradually evolved from a single source, one that was spoken in the Armenian Highlands the birthplace of human civilization.

What are your sources? I'm not talking geocities sites, or Armenian sites. Which scholars or institutions can you name me which claim this? (I'm not trying to argue with you, I'm just curious as to what your sources are).

I posted one famous source. Instead of looking at the name of the website, I suggest you look at the names of the scholars. There are a least dozen Armenian scholars that I can refer you to as well.

Nonetheless, what are your sources? Are they the crap that has been fed to us by Joos, Turks and Americans about Armenians being invaders from the Balkans?

The following website is a good place to start getting familiar with an Armeno-centric approach to our history: http://www.tacentral.com/history.asp#

More on Urartu: http://www.tacentral.com/erebuni/

[Shahanshah]

Armenian, you are incredibly incorrect.

First of all, you are either using outdated information, or you are using theories to push your point across.

The Armenian Iranica connection was disproven in 1875 when Armenian was removed from the Iranic sub category of the Indo Europeans.

Armenians are their own sub-group, as of today, no other Indo European language has been recognized as a direct relative to Armenian.

Furthermore, the Indo-European origin is still unknown, so its amazing how you would pick the one theory that supports your own point of view and try to present it as fact.

For Iranics, the most accepted theory is that they originated in Central Asia.

Indo Europeans are not descendent's of Armenians. You are sounding exactly like the historical revisionist ultra-nationalistic Turks that you criticize.

Your logic is flawed because you are making some very nationalistic assumptions and picking and choosing what you want to represent for evidence (even outdated information).

This may shock you Armenian, but genetic testing has shown Armenians and Caucasian Azeri's to be genetically related, along with Georgians.

[Armenian]

Armenian, you are incredibly incorrect.

Whatever...

First of all, you are either using outdated information, or you are using theories to push your point across.

We all push our theories. However, mine is based on modern archeological, folkloric and linguistic evidences.

The Armenian Iranica connection was disproven in 1875 when Armenian was removed from the Iranic sub category of the Indo Europeans.

You are having a reading comprehension problem, I never claimed Armenian was an Iranic language. Yes, their stupid theories were wrong back then and their new ones are wrong now. If you want to learn about Armenian historiography I suggest you start studying Armenian sources.

Armenians are their own sub-group, as of today, no other Indo European language has been recognized as a direct relative to Armenian.

Early Greek and Iranian is speculated to be have been related to Armenian in the distant past, hence the theorized Greco-Armeno-Aryan tongue originating in Asia Minor.

Furthermore, the Indo-European origin is still unknown, so its amazing how you would pick the one theory that supports your own point of view and try to present it as fact.

Like I said we all have our theories. However, like I said instead of parroting western academia look at the evidence at hand.

For Iranics, the most accepted theory is that they originated in Central Asia.

There are at least half a dozen speculated locations for the proto Indo-European homeland. The most logical of them all, the one with real weight behind it, is Asia Minor - Armenian Highlands. I have even seen quite a few Iranian nationalists claiming that proto-Iranians originated in Caucasia/Asia Minor.

Indo Europeans are not descendent's of Armenians. You are sounding exactly like the historical revisionist ultra-nationalistic Turks that you criticize.
Your logic is flawed because you are making some very nationalistic assumptions and picking and choosing what you want to represent for evidence (even outdated information).

I'll try this again. All Indo Europeans are distant descendants of the Armenian Highlands, not Armenians per say. My evidence is very modern. However, since you are a byproduct of Zionist/Globalist sponsored Western education you have not been exposed to it. For your information, the Turkish "Sun Theory" is based, in part, upon the historical values/evidences of the aboriginal populations of Asia Minor, thus they are indirectly accurate - to a certain degree. Basically, they have taken the rich heritage of the ancient populations of the Armenian Highlands and twisted them into Turkic crap.

This may shock you Armenian, but genetic testing has shown Armenians and Caucasian Azeri's to be genetically related, along with Georgians.

This may shock to you, but I agree. The populations of the region are more-or-less natives of the region in question. Turks for instance, depending on the region where they live, can be related to Greeks, Arabs, Slavs, Mongols or various Caucasians peoples including Armenian. However, it may also come as a shock to you that the so-called "genetic studies" being done today is nothing but "voodoo" science driven by geopolitical agendas. Such types of testing can be easily manipulated to get whatever results the "sponsors" of the test desire. As such, I have seen studies that claim Russians are part Mongols, Greeks are part Africans and Italians are part Semites. I have also seen studies that claim they all are Europeans. There are studies that claim J-e-ws are related to peoples of Asia Minor, while other studies about J-e-ws claim that they are natives of Palestine, while other studies claim they are Europeans. And there are "studies" that prove that you are related to fish and of course monkeys. :laugh:

In short, these studies are agenda driven, thus they often times contradict each other.

So, take that into consideration next time you refer to a topic you don't know much about. And I'll you what, if you want to continue discussing this subject with me, first read all the materials I have compiled in the following thread: http://z4.invisionfree.com/Armenian_Diaspora/index.php?showtopic=199

Read it all and then let's discuss what scientific evidences you have that may back up what you are claiming.

OK, king-of-kings?

[Iranianazeri]

OK, king-of-kings?

Yes, many of the Iranian Shahs called themselves that. This is the most accepted theory:
http://www.sitesled.com/members/racialreality/indo_europeans.html

[Armenian]

This is the most accepted theory:

According to who?

What I told "Kingofkings" applies to you as well. Look at the compilation of various evidences I have gathered within the link I have provided. Read it all, don't just look at the pictures or the titles. Afterwards, if you are still up to it, we'll discuss this topic further.

[ArmSurvival]

Urartians were every bit Armenian, even perhaps more so than the average Armenian today

Thats just speculation. The concept of an 'Armenian' was completely different in those days. You have to remember that modern nationalism is only a couple centuries old, so you can't use today's mentality when judging the past.

The official language spoken in Urartu was Caucasian

Where have you heard that? The Urartian language was related to Hurrian, and was neither Semitic nor Indo-European.

Rick Ney started his life in Armenia in 1992, working in education, humanitarian aid and development, a relationship of that has taken him to it seems every nook of his adopted country. Rick is passionate about Armenia’s deep history and amazing ecology, and can be found roaming Armenia’s least known locales for yet another destination to write about.

This is the author of the site. Nowhere does it say that he is a historian, only that he is "passionate" about it. He has no credentials, and if he does, he hasn't stated them.


Again, I'm not trying to argue for the sake of arguing, but rather, to learn and to correct the incorrect knowledge that I possess. So please, keep the ad hominem comments out of the discussion.

[Armenian]

Thats just speculation. The concept of an 'Armenian' was completely different in those days. You have to remember that modern nationalism is only a couple centuries old, so you can't use today's mentality when judging the past.

Please stop spewing western crap. Armenians have had an Armenian "national" identity for at least several thousand years. Just because the concept of nationalism did not reach the rest of the world until several centuries ago does not concern us Armenians. Again you are foolishly applying a western standard to Armenian issues.

Here is a good article called "Mother Tongue and The Origins of Nationalism" for you to get familiar with: http://www.armenianway.com/aw/Armen_Aivazian/Mother_Tongue/English/index.html

And you might also find the "Code of Honor of the Armenian Military" of the 4/5 century AD interesting as well: http://www.armenianway.com/aw/Armen_Aivazian/Code_of_Honor_Eng/Part12.html

Notice how ancient Armenian texts state that Armenian warriors at the time required "selfless loyalty tо their fatherland, the Armenian "world," country and independent kingdom...

Now, does that not sound like nationalism to you? Or will you still claim that nationalism amongst ancient Armenians did not exist because western "historians" claim otherwise.

Where have you heard that? The Urartian language was related to Hurrian, and was neither Semitic nor Indo-European.

Yes, and Hurrian is now said to be a Caucasian tongue.

This is the author of the site. Nowhere does it say that he is a historian, only that he is "passionate" about it. He has no credentials, and if he does, he hasn't stated them.

Why are you again quoting a westerner regarding Armenia's Karahunj or Metsamor? Why don't you try quoting Armenians? Here, let me help you:

http://www.armenianow.com/archive/2005/eng/?go=pub&id=536&issue_id=64
http://www.iatp.am/resource/science/parsamyan/new/pars-eng.htm
http://www.tacentral.com/history/metsamor.htm

Again, I'm not trying to argue for the sake of arguing, but rather, to learn and to correct the incorrect knowledge that I possess. So please, keep the ad hominem comments out of the discussion.

It all has to do with intellect, pride and intent. If you have a healthy intellect, pride in your ancient heritage and you intend to educating yourself then there are allot of Armenian sources you can familiarize yourself with. Learn Armenian and studying Armenian sources. If you can only read English then you can read the sources found in the links I have provided.

[ArmSurvival]

It all has to do with intellect, pride and intent. If you have a healthy intellect, pride in your ancient heritage and you intend to educating yourself then there are allot of Armenian sources you can familiarize yourself with. Learn Armenian and studying Armenian sources. If you can only read English then you can read the sources found in the links I have provided.

My point is that our culture doesn't have to be the oldest or the most advanced one for us to love it and to defend it. Whether Armenians have been around for 10,000 years or just 3,000, I love our history and culture all the same. I did not claim to know everything, or that what I said is the absolute truth, I will read your sources when I have time and I will get back to you.

[Armenian]

My point is that our culture doesn't have to be the oldest or the most advanced one for us to love it and to defend it. Whether Armenians have been around for 10,000 years or just 3,000, I love our history and culture all the same.

I agree. All peoples love their respective cultures regardless of age or other trivial matters. However, we Armenians do have the oldest continuous national heritage on earth. This in essence makes us who we are. And our Armenian homeland is the cradle of human civilization, the primordial source of the Caucasian race (Europid race) and birthplace of Indo-European tribes.

I did not claim to know everything, or that what I said is the absolute truth, I will read your sources when I have time and I will get back to you.

Just realize that you have been looking at our national historiography and culture, that which you claim to be very proud of, through a western/foreign lens. As a result, you are not intimately familiar with the real essence of what your national heritage is all about.

[Shahanshah]

We all push our theories. However, mine is based on modern archeological, folkloric and linguistic evidences.

I'm not pushing my theory, I'm telling you the accepted theory.

You just undermined yourself by admitting this is all your point of view and not fact.

You are having a reading comprehension problem, I never claimed Armenian was an Iranic language. Yes, their stupid theories were wrong back then and their new ones are wrong now. If you want to learn about Armenian historiography I suggest you start studying Armenian sources.

Show me one scholarly source which supports your point of view? (I know for a fact that you can't)


Early Greek and Iranian is speculated to be have been related to Armenian in the distant past, hence the theorized Greco-Armeno-Aryan tongue originating in Asia Minor.

Oh really? By who? There are theories that Indo-Europeans originated in Central Europe, Central Asia, Iran, Anatolia, the Caucasus, etc...

Who are you to tell us that the ones that say the Caucasus origin is correct are right and everyone else is wrong?

Last I check, you were a nationalist, which severely undermines your stance.


Like I said we all have our theories. However, like I said instead of parroting western academia look at the evidence at hand.

What evidence? An outdated language tree and a theory?:laugh:


There are at least half a dozen speculated locations for the proto Indo-European homeland. The most logical of them all, the one with real weight behind it, is Asia Minor - Armenian Highlands. I have even seen quite a few Iranian nationalists claiming that proto-Iranians originated in Caucasia/Asia Minor.

Why is it that the most logic theory is the one that has the origin at the Armenian highlands?

Also, has it ever occurred to you that maybe Armenians are an people who settled in the Caucasus/Anatolia but did not originate there?

Also, there are Iranian nationalists who claim that Aryans actually originated from Iran and never migrated...

They are exactly as you are, nationalists.



I'll try this again. All Indo Europeans are distant descendants of the Armenian Highlands, not Armenians per say. My evidence is very modern.

What evidence?


However, since you are a byproduct of Zionist/Globalist sponsored Western education you have not been exposed to it.

Wait, the West is so anti-Armenian that they dont want anyone to know that everyone has an Armenian origin?


For your information, the Turkish "Sun Theory" is based, in part, upon the historical values/evidences of the aboriginal populations of Asia Minor, thus they are indirectly accurate - to a certain degree. Basically, they have taken the rich heritage of the ancient populations of the Armenian Highlands and twisted them into Turkic crap.

You are sounding exactly like Turkish revisionists who say that everyone is descendent's of Turks. I cant believe you dont see the connection here.


This may shock to you, but I agree. The populations of the region are more-or-less natives of the region in question. Turks for instance, depending on the region where they live, can be related to Greeks, Arabs, Slavs, Mongols or various Caucasians peoples including Armenian. However, it may also come as a shock to you that the so-called "genetic studies" being done today is nothing but "voodoo" science driven by geopolitical agendas. Such types of testing can be easily manipulated to get whatever results the "sponsors" of the test desire. As such, I have seen studies that claim Russians are part Mongols, Greeks are part Africans and Italians are part Semites. I have also seen studies that claim they all are Europeans. There are studies that claim J-e-ws are related to peoples of Asia Minor, while other studies about J-e-ws claim that they are natives of Palestine, while other studies claim they are Europeans. And there are "studies" that prove that you are related to fish and of course monkeys. :laugh:

In short, these studies are agenda driven, thus they often times contradict each other.

So, take that into consideration next time you refer to a topic you don't know much about. And I'll you what, if you want to continue discussing this subject with me, first read all the materials I have compiled in the following thread: http://z4.invisionfree.com/Armenian_Diaspora/index.php?showtopic=199

Read it all and then let's discuss what scientific evidences you have that may back up what you are claiming.

OK, king-of-kings?

I know more about this subject than you do, trust me. By the way, your outdated, biased, un-scholarly sources will not win you any debate against me buddy.

Lets see, your logic is that everyone is anti-Armenian, therefore they try to suppress the information that everyone has an Armenian origin.

The genetic studies that disprove you are manipulated by people with agenda's.

The modern majority accepted theories are wrong...

lets see, in what way do you not sound like a historical revisionist pan Turk?

You are what you criticize Armenian, I cant believe you dont see this. You are the Armenian version of a nationalist Turk.

[Armenian]

I'm not pushing my theory, I'm telling you the accepted theory.

Smart one, like I said, accepted by who? And don't even try discrediting "Armenian" sources as biased while all you can provide is western derived bullkaka... In the meanwhile, you can start by reading several non-Armenian sources that corroborate Armenian claims, namely that Aryans/Indo Europeans originated within Asia Minor:

Thomas V. Gamkrelidze and V. V. Ivanov: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/6507/chronicle120.html

Russell Gray and Quentin Atkinson: http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/langtree.html

Colin Renfrew (his old thesis): http://www.geocities.com/dienekesp2/indoeuropean/

As far as I'm concerned, the only logical location where the proto Indo-European languages could have first developed is within the region of the south Caucasus and/or Asia Minor. Besides linguistic evidences put forth by Armenian and non-Armenian linguists that places the Indo-European homeland within the Armenian Highlands, several fundamental "cultural" characteristics of Indo-Europeans/Aryans were originated within the Armenia Highlands as well. It is unfortunate that people generally tend to get hung up on one aspect of this study, linguistics, and ignore the other important fields of archeology and anthropology.

It is quite obvious that human civilization and Indo-European culture first originated within Asia Minor/Caucasus - the vicinity of the historic Armenian Highlands.

Oldest theologies and folklores come from the same region in question. The earliest domestication of various animals fundamental to Indo-European culture come from the same region. Cultivations and fermentation of various staple grains and fruits come from the same region. Oldest city states/settlements on earth such as Catal Huyuk, Gobekli Tepe, Agarak, Metsamor, Shengavit, along with various others are found precisely within the same region. The Europid/Caucasian race, that which is associated with Indo-Europeans, first originated within the same region. The oldest Indo-European written records come from the same region. The oldest Indo-European cultural elements such as the war-horse, chariots, metal tools/weapons, the sacred symbol of the Swastika and various Indo-European Gods come from the same region. The oldest Aryan/Indo-European artifacts are also found within the same region.

There is nowhere else on earth that can even remotely compare to the antiquity of Asia Minor and the southern Caucasus and the cultural treasures found therein. Even the famous Sumerians more-or-less believed that life first appeared upon the Armenian Highlands.

If you want sources you may want to start with Martiros Kavoukjian's book in English titled "Armenia, Subartu And Sumer - The Indo-European Homeland And Ancient Mesopotamia." You might also want to consider reading H. Adjarian, E. Khanzadian, N. Adonst, G. Djahukian, Ghapantsian, Abrahamian. Not ot mention non-Armenians sources such as Gelb, Gamkrelide, Ivanov and T. Powell. If interested, you can read Martiros Kavoukjian's English translation: http://www.stvartanbookstore.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=4609

I have written extensively regarding this topic of discussion, had you read the posts within my links you would have come across them. Nonetheless, I'm not going to waste my time anymore with someone who is a self-proclaimed "king of kings" - and as stubborn as one as well. :wave:

[skhara]

I've seen an article online some years back written by an Iranian claiming that ancient Iranian texts point to the S Caucasus as the region from which "the Iranians" moved down from. I'd interested in knowing what those texts say more specifically.

[Sarkis]

Armenians aren't Aryan.

[ArmSurvival]

Armenian, I've read most of the things written in the sources you sent me (I've read some of those sites a good while ago). I have some questions/inquiries about your claim that Urartians were Armenians, but I will start with this: If Urartians were Armenians, how come they called themselves Biainili? In all the places they conquered, there is not (at least I've never heard of) one place out of all their inscriptions, where they call themselves Armenians. This is even more significant when you consider that Herodotus and Xenophon distinguished between Urartians (sometimes called Alarodians) and Armenians. What are your thoughts?

[Armenian]

Armenian, I've read most of the things written in the sources you sent me (I've read some of those sites a good while ago). I have some questions/inquiries about your claim that Urartians were Armenians, but I will start with this: If Urartians were Armenians, how come they called themselves Biainili?

Just like the Uratian name "Erebuni" translates as Erevan in Armenian, just like the term "Urartu" translates as Ararat, the name "Biainili" translates as Vanetsi, in other words - from Van. Thus, the term Biainili itself does not have an ethnic/tribal value, it's a name derived from a region, in this case the region of Van.

What's more, there are many other place name associations between "Armenian" and "Baianili" as well. There are also many historiographical associations; there are many linguistic associations; there are many theological/folkloric associations. For example, according to the early Armenian historian Moses of Khoren, the Urartian king Armamu was none other than our famous patriarch named Aram, after whom the name Armen is supposedly derived from. What's more, the popular Armenian legends of "Ara the Beautiful" and and "Haik the Patriarch" vividly echo the people of Urartu's centuries long struggle against the Semitic Assyrians of the south. And although the Armenian language is "Aryan" at its root, it nevertheless is saturated by Urartian/Hurrian influences.

Besides, if you accept our people's Hurrian origins, and you accept the fact that Urartian and Hurrian may have been linguistically associated, would it be a far-fetched conclusion to assume that modern Armenians share a common ancestry with Hurrians and Urartians? The Armenian nation, as we know it today, is a union of various ancient tribes of the Armenian Highlands. Technically speaking, we are not Armen or Hay, it's not that simple. Its just that for various geopolitical reasons the terms "Hay" and "Armen" have come down to us through the ages.

In all the places they conquered, there is not (at least I've never heard of) one place out of all their inscriptions, where they call themselves Armenians.

Well, Urartu was a "Federation" of local kings that united to become an empire. Like I said earlier, their name is derived from Van. The Armenian nation per say was born out of this empire. Prior to the Urartian Federation however there were various powerful native tribes that lived within the Armenian Highlands. These tribes were not politically united under one banner. With a serious Assyrian threat emanating from the south, Urartian, or the "Araratian" Federation, become that catalyst for proto-Armenian unity.

Thus, the term "Armenia" did not exist at the time like we know it today. Although the tribe that was known as Armen (with all its name variations) were natives of the region in question, and there are many references to them in ancient texts, they, nonetheless, were not alone and they were not the most dominant group. After the Urartian collapse, the tribes of the former empire basically evolved and eventually became known as Armenians by the newly emerged Persian Empire. All the while, the natives in the region in question began collectively referring to themselves as Hay. Why these occurrences happened they way they did no one yet knows.

Nonetheless, there is whole allot we don't yet know about the time in question. The region is so old, so complicated, so much has been destroyed throughout the last several thousand years, what we have left today in terms of cultural legacy and understanding is a mere fraction of the reality that actually existed at the time.

This is even more significant when you consider that Herodotus and Xenophon distinguished between Urartians (sometimes called Alarodians) and Armenians. What are your thoughts?

This again goes back to the different tribes that lived in the region before they were transformed into a single entity we today know as Armenian/Hay. Also, I would not take Herodotus very seriously, his "history" is grossly laced with outlandish Hellenic fantasies regarding other peoples of the time.

In short, we don't know enough about the region in question because of its antiquity. We don't know for sure what the term Armen means, and the same applies to the term Hay as well. At this point in time we can only speculate. However, what we know for sure is that unlike any other nation in the region, we Armenians today carry within our cultural heritage and collective memory various fundamental remnants of several ancient nations, namely - Urartians, Hittites and Hurrians.

We Armenians need to re-look at our national heritage. Intellectually, we are stuck in the here and now. It's not as simple as we being Armen or Hay. Nations go through evolutions due to various socio-political situations. A little modern day example is Karabagh. Due to various socio-political reasons, these Armenians were known as Christian Aghvans, Azeris, Artsakhtsis and/or Karabaghtsis, and their land is officially known today as the Republic of Karabagh (NKR).

Not too long ago in the past, some called Armenians in the region - Christian Turks, and others have called us - Christian Persians. During the Soviet years, what Armenian living in Karabagh, for example, dared call him/herself Armenian? Even today, what Anatolian Armenian dares call him/herself Armenian?

For example, if the Armenian Republic gets destroyed and somehow the NKR survives, will people in the future call Armenians - Karabaghians. Another example, if Armenia and Karabagh gets destroyed and somehow the Hamshentsi Armenians emerge through the rubble and create a nation for themselves, will the world thereafter call the Armenians - Hamshenians?

Just think: Thousands of years from today, after the earth has gone through drastic changes and destruction, people begin to dig up archives from the current era and find terms for the region of the Caucasus like - Karabaghtsi, Hayastantsi, Armenian, Artsakhtsi, Spiurkahay, Hamshentsi, etc... Will the future generations assume that all these people were separate entities, especially if the found archival materials that were written in Russian, Turkish, English and Armenian languages? Have you heard the way Armenian Artsakhtsis and Zangezurtsis speak Armenian? You would be lucky if you understood a single word. Now, just image how murky things were thousands of years ago when there was no record keeping, no central government, no clearly designated borders, no scholastic system, etc...

Although some of what I just outlined above is very outlandish, it should nevertheless show you that history is not as neat and linear as we tend to think. Thus, it's all relative. History must be placed in a proper context and look at objectively. History is not simply reading events, dates and names in a chronological order. Understanding of ones past goes beyond simply reading publications. History is very dynamic and complex. Nations are ever evolving organisms. As a result, they they should not be looked upon through a limited scope. I would even venture to say that understanding one's history requires meditation as well as archival, folkloric and archeological research.

If interested, Martiros Kavukjian's publication will be helpful to you in this topic. And you should visit the following website as well if you have further questions: http://www.hayary.org/index.php?mylang=english

[ArmSurvival]

Ok now that you have explained your view in greater detail, I can tell you that we share essentially the same opinion. I was just irked when you claimed that Urartians were true Armenians, that is all. Geographically, I suppose there is nothing wrong with that statement though.

Just one thing: What do you mean by Herodotus' history being laced with outlandish Hellenic fantasies? I've never read his story in full, just the parts that had to do with Armenians.

[karoaper]

I'd recommend the following from Wikipedia (I don't assume that Wiki is a definitive infosourse, but a well cited Wiki page can be of great use, if only to track down more sources): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urartu.

I also found a link to the following paper from the Journal of American Oriental Society. I don't have a subscription, but it could be a useful source:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-0279%28198510%2F12%29105%3A4%3C597%3AHBIOA%3E2.0.C O%3B2-K&size=LARGE&origin=JSTOR-enlargePage

[Armenian]

I can tell you that we share essentially the same opinion. I was just irked when you claimed that Urartians were true Armenians, that is all. Geographically, I suppose there is nothing wrong with that statement though.

You still have not gotten the essence of my statements regarding Urartu.

The Araratian Federation which was known as "Urartu/Biainili" was comprised of various nations living around lake Van that eventually fused/evolved to become what we today know as Armenians/Hays. The fact remains, there are intimate mythological, linguistic, genetic and folkloric connections between modern Armenian heritage and the ancient culture of Urartu. The language spoken by official Urartu is said to have been late Hurrian, and suspected of being a dying language at the time. However, the population of Urartu is speculated to have spoken early Armenian, one that incorporated heavy Urartian/Hurrian influences into its Indo-European/Aryan structure. As the Hurrian language stopped being used, the language we today know as "Armenian" emerged. Also, the term "Hay" is linguistically connected to the Urartian/Hurrian supreme God called Khaldi.

Thus, the Urartians/Hurrians were in every sense of the word - Hay/Armenian.

Just get the notion of "Armens" somehow marching into Anatolia from the Balkans and taking over the former lands of Urartu out of your head. That story is a myth, no such thing happened. The Indo-European/Aryan language spoken by some proto-Armenian nations was indigenous to the region in question, it did not come from elsewhere.

Just one thing: What do you mean by Herodotus' history being laced with outlandish Hellenic fantasies? I've never read his story in full, just the parts that had to do with Armenians.

Just read his works in detail and you will see what I'm saying. Don't forget, you are talking about a man that lived approximately two thousand five hundred years ago. However, in the absence of other contemporary texts Herodotus is the best we got.

[Կարմիր Բ]

You are sounding exactly like the historical revisionist ultra-nationalistic Turks that you criticize.

That's because he is an ultra-nationalist.

[Կարմիր Բ]

Just curious, but, which would you guys say is older (if it's even possible to assume or even guess): Armenians, Greeks, Romans, or Persians? Again, just curious.


None. Modern Armenians are a mix of people, the language is different than what the ancient Armenians used. If you went back in the Armenian Plateau 2500 years ago you wouldn't be able to communicate with them. The same applies to the Greeks and the Persians. Generally there was no such thing as ethnic consciousness up until the 19th century.

[Կարմիր Բ]

And of course we have nothing to do with the Urartians, except a couple of words such as ''artziv''.

[KarotheGreat]

And of course we have nothing to do with the Urartians, except a couple of words such as ''artziv''.
how can you say this they where our ancestors if we don't have anything to do with them where do we come from, has god drop us there . stop telling people Comunistic propaganda that all men are the same and there is no diffrence between them

[Lucin]

And of course we have nothing to do with the Urartians,.

Who’s ‘we’ Bolshevik!? Maybe you and your Bolshevik brethren, but then Armenians have got nothing to do with Bolsheviks.

[Կարմիր Բ]

how can you say this they where our ancestors if we don't have anything to do with them where do we come from, has god drop us there . stop telling people Comunistic propaganda that all men are the same and there is no diffrence between them

I didn't said that all men are the ''same'' that's what you understood. I said a simple thing: anyone who claims that we are the same people, after all these migrations, to the first armenians who came in the armenian plateau is unable of coherent thought.

And the Urartians have nothing to do with us son. If you tell to any real historian that the Urartians were Armenians he will fall down laughing and you will make us seem idiots.

[Կարմիր Բ]

Who’s ‘we’ Bolshevik!? Maybe you and your Bolshevik brethren, but then Armenians have got nothing to do with Bolsheviks.

We are Armenians. You are the enemy of the people who got booted real good by Armenia in 1922, traitor.

[Կարմիր Բ]

And there's no such nation as ''bolshevik''. lol. Jeez, you ultra-nationalists can be so stupid sometimes.

[KarotheGreat]

We are Armenians. You are the enemy of the people who got booted real good by Armenia in 1922, traitor.

you're calling us a traitor and the enemy you cumounist where was the red army when dashnakh army's wer fighting for Hayastan were was the mighty red army in Artasakh, the only thing they have done is give away our lands.

[Կարմիր Բ]

you're calling us a traitor and the enemy you cumounist where was the red army when dashnakh army's wer fighting for Hayastan were was the mighty red army in Artasakh, the only thing they have done is give away our lands.

You Dashnak traitors were the one's who signed the Treaty of Alexandropol and ceased the majority of our lands to Turkey in order to fight the Red Army. Learn history. The Dashnaks were the most incompetent politicians we ever had. They were unable to organize the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire and to arm them in order to prevent the Genocide except in Van. But soon things shall change, and we Armenians will teach a good lesson to all the traitors who have brought poverty and misery to our country.

[TomServo]

all the traitors who have brought poverty and misery to our country.
:rolleyes: :wave:

[Կարմիր Բ]

Furthermore anyone who claims that Armenia nowdays is independent and not trully dependent on foreign powers simply is unaware of diplomacy. At least during Soviet Union you could have a decent life. 1.ooo.ooo have emmigrated since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Of course Armenia is not ready for Socialism like the one in Soviet Union. We are a too small country to sustain the pressure. But what we can do is to eliminate all these mafiosos who run our country (and their ass kissers), become a Western like democracy, to save whatever is left from our industry, fight corrpution and respect human rights.

Once we do these, we can prepare the country for that once chance to retake the western parts. But these things can't be done by corrupt mafiosos or ultra-nationalistic wackos, but by reasonable and pragmatist people.

[KarotheGreat]

You Dashnak traitors were the one's who signed the Treaty of Alexandropol and ceased the majority of our lands to Turkey in order to fight the Red Army. Learn history. The Dashnaks were the most incompetent politicians we ever had. They were unable to organize the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire and to arm them in order to prevent the Genocide except in Van. But soon things shall change, and we Armenians will teach a good lesson to all the traitors who have brought poverty and misery to our country.

If you would know anything about war you would know that a war on two fronts is almost sure a lost war. And if dashnaks wants to give a way their lands for a treaty they can do that because it's their lands but the comunists can not do that with our lands and the dashnaks did evrey thing they could do to protect their people in those dark years and Socialism will never return to Hayastan we'll have a king before socialism will return
EDIT: The Treaty of Kars (Turkish: Kars Antlaşması, Russian: Карсский договор) was a friendship treaty between the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (which was declared Turkey in 1923) and representatives of Bolshevist Russia, Soviet Armenia, Soviet Azerbaijan and Soviet Georgia (all of which formed part of the Soviet Union after the December 1922 Union Treaty). [1][2] It was a successor treaty to the earlier Treaty of Moscow of March 1921. It was signed in Kars on October 23, 1921 [1] and ratified in Yerevan on September 11, 1922. [2]

Most of the territories ceded to Turkey in the treaty were acquired by Imperial Russia from the Ottoman Empire during the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878. The only exception was the Surmalu region which was annexed by Russia in the Treaty of Turkmanchai after the last Russo-Persian War with Iran.

loke what I've found about your great comunist heroes

[Կարմիր Բ]

What a liar you are. The Dashnaks have already signed the treaty giving our lands before the Bolsheviks.

The Treaty of Alexandropol was a peace treaty between the Democratic Republic of Armenia and TBMM ending the Turkish-Armenian War, before declaration of the Republic of Turkey on December 2 1920. Armenian was forced to renounce the Treaty of Sèvres and cede over 50% of her territory to Turkey. The treaty was to be ratified by the government within a month.

http://www.answers.com/topic/treaty-of-alexandropol

If you would know anything about war you would know that a war on two fronts is almost sure a lost war. And if dashnaks wants to give a way their lands for a treaty they can do that because it's their lands but the comunists can not do that with our lands and the dashnaks did evrey thing they could do to protect their people in those dark years and Socialism will never return to Hayastan we'll have a king before socialism will return

Dashnaks want to give away ''their'' lands? Who the xxxx are you Dashnaks who think that the land belongs to you? These lands belong to Armenia boy, and within the Red Army there were numerous Armenians fighters. The fact of the matter is that you weren't fighting for Armenia, you were fighting for Capitalism and for your money. If you loved Armenia you would have never signed the Treaty of Alexandropol, instead you would let Soviet Union to negotiate the borders. But no, you just had to sign a peace treaty with the Turks, denounce Sevres and fight the Red Army. Because as I said, you aren't Armenians you are Capitalists, you fight for the money, never for the country. Before the Dashnaks left Armenia, they took all the gold from the country and left nothing behind, they said that they would return it when Armenia was ''liberated''. They have never brought the money that they stole.

By the way, after the end of the World War Stalin demanded Kars and Ardahan back from Turkey, which was the main reason why Turkey entered to the NATO.

''In 1945 the USSR demanded Turkey to cede Kars and Ardahan to the Armenian Republic; Turkey refused to comply. In 1946 Joseph Stalin demanded that control over Bosphorus and Dardanelles be handed over to the USSR. Equally disturbing to Turkey was the temporary Soviet occupation of Iranian Azerbaijan (1946).''

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/asmin/turkey194551.html

The Soviets didn't do this out of care for Armenia, by they sure did more for Armenia than anything the ultranationalist traitors have.

[exfo]

Armenians is aryans...Happy us:D

Bravo! Armenians are aryans. Happy you!:laugh:

[Armenian]

Modern Armenians are a mix of people, the language is different than what the ancient Armenians used.

And what is your pointless point?

If you went back in the Armenian Plateau 2500 years ago you wouldn't be able to communicate with them. The same applies to the Greeks and the Persians.

I don't know about Persians or Greeks, but according to Armenian linguists - a modern Armenian could "communicate" with his/her ancient ancestors if he/she was well versed in Grabar. And what's the point again?

Generally there was no such thing as ethnic consciousness up until the 19th century.

False. Sell your Western derived BS elsewhere. The "Armenian consciousness" is at least as old as the Araratian Federation. Go back and read the materials I have posted.

Like this one for example: http://forum.armenianclub.com/showpost.php?p=173846&postcount=52

I can't call you an idiot here due to board rules. However, I can tell you that you are sounding very-very unsmart. :naughty:

And of course we have nothing to do with the Urartians, except a couple of words such as ''artziv''. And the Urartians have nothing to do with us son. If you tell to any real historian that the Urartians were Armenians he will fall down laughing and you will make us seem idiots.

Real historian?!?!?! Like who? Like your Turco-Joo scholars who claim that Thrace dwelling Armenians invaded Anatolia and took over Urartian lands? I actually fell down laughing at how ignorant and self-hating you are, little Bolshevik. You speak like a typical Turk, or a Bolshevik for that matter. Go back and read the materials I posted if you have any reading skills and/or human logic, and you will see how stupid you are sounding.

Do yourself a favor and read what I wrote to another member here regarding Armenians being Urartians: http://forum.armenianclub.com/showpost.php?p=174133&postcount=60

[QUOTE]I said a simple thing: anyone who claims that we are the same people, after all these migrations, to the first armenians who came in the armenian plateau is unable of coherent thought.[QUOTE]

Armenians today are more-or-less the same as Armenians two thousand years ago. However, realizaing this does require some exposure to Armenian studies, common sense and self-pride. In other words, I see why you are not aware of it.

And I'm not even going to entertain the rest of your absurd rants about Dashnaks this and Dashnaks that... You sound like a troubled little child damaged beyond repair by your Bolshevik parents. I can almost see you in your little messy bedroom: with a Starwars light saber, toy soldiers, comic books and Bolshvik paraphernalia made in China.

Things like you actually exist in the Armenian community? How do you actually survive in public?

Amazing...:laugh:

[Կարմիր Բ]

I didn't even read it. Possibly some unscientific rant.

Reasonable people like me will make Armenia great one day.

[KarotheGreat]

What a liar you are. The Dashnaks have already signed the treaty giving our lands before the Bolsheviks.

The Treaty of Alexandropol was a peace treaty between the Democratic Republic of Armenia and TBMM ending the Turkish-Armenian War, before declaration of the Republic of Turkey on December 2 1920. Armenian was forced to renounce the Treaty of Sèvres and cede over 50% of her territory to Turkey. The treaty was to be ratified by the government within a month.

http://www.answers.com/topic/treaty-of-alexandropol



Dashnaks want to give away ''their'' lands? Who the xxxx are you Dashnaks who think that the land belongs to you? These lands belong to Armenia boy, and within the Red Army there were numerous Armenians fighters. The fact of the matter is that you weren't fighting for Armenia, you were fighting for Capitalism and for your money. If you loved Armenia you would have never signed the Treaty of Alexandropol, instead you would let Soviet Union to negotiate the borders. But no, you just had to sign a peace treaty with the Turks, denounce Sevres and fight the Red Army. Because as I said, you aren't Armenians you are Capitalists, you fight for the money, never for the country. Before the Dashnaks left Armenia, they took all the gold from the country and left nothing behind, they said that they would return it when Armenia was ''liberated''. They have never brought the money that they stole.

By the way, after the end of the World War Stalin demanded Kars and Ardahan back from Turkey, which was the main reason why Turkey entered to the NATO.

''In 1945 the USSR demanded Turkey to cede Kars and Ardahan to the Armenian Republic; Turkey refused to comply. In 1946 Joseph Stalin demanded that control over Bosphorus and Dardanelles be handed over to the USSR. Equally disturbing to Turkey was the temporary Soviet occupation of Iranian Azerbaijan (1946).''

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/asmin/turkey194551.html

The Soviets didn't do this out of care for Armenia, by they sure did more for Armenia than anything the ultranationalist traitors have.

At first I'm not a dashnak
Second ok that was not their lands but who is lenin to give away our land for beter friendship with turkey:confused: :confused:
third were was your mighty red army in artasak I'll tell you were they were they were fighting against our men with the azeri dogs :mad:

Karo

[Կարմիր Բ]

I just posted you a reference which proves that Soviet Union demanded Kars and Ardahan and you're still continuing the same song.

The Sevres Armenia was impossible to happen at that time because of the genocide. That was the aim of the genocide. Blaming it to the Soviets is nonsensical.

And let me tell you something, the Tsar didn't sympathise the Armenians. The Russian services at times were competing the Turks in anti-armenianess.

What we must do is to strengthen economically, and thus militarily the country, but this can't occur when thieves rule the country who don't care for Armenia.

[KarotheGreat]

I just posted you a reference which proves that Soviet Union demanded Kars and Ardahan and you're still continuing the same song.

The Sevres Armenia was impossible to happen at that time because of the genocide. That was the aim of the genocide. Blaming it to the Soviets is nonsensical.

And let me tell you something, the Tsar didn't sympathise the Armenians. The Russian services at times were competing the Turks in anti-armenianess.

You are forgeting about the treaty of Kars that was sighend by the Sovjet goverment for better friendship with turkey and they give also Artsakh to the azeris
and the tsar maybe wasn't pro-armenian but he was anti-turkish and could you give the date that the treaty of Sèvres was singend because I think it was after WW1

[Armenian]

I didn't even read it.

Then I suggest you take some reading comprehension courses...

Reasonable people like me will make Armenia great one day.

Delusions of grandeur :laugh:

[skhara]

Armenian roots save Aryans from xxxish extermination.

[TomServo]

Harvey Fierstein is the greatest threat to the Aryans today.

[Sarkis]

Armenians are not Aryan. Hitler saw us as a threat as one of his close officers was stationed in Turkey during the Armenian Genocide and referred to us as "xxxs of the Orient" and during Kristallnacht Armenians were persecuted against in the anti-semetic riots. The Armenian-German Society tried to prove that Armenians were Aryan so that they would not be killed by Hitler.

[arziv]

A great deal of inconsistent and unverified claims are being poured out.

Dashnaks gave land away..., armenians are this and that,... traitors right and left,... bring western style democracy to armenia ( which is tantamount to imposing a western life style sturated with sex, pornography, reggae, jungle sounds, the rotten corruption of the oligarchs, election circuses to keep the masticating bisons "busy", immigration of non whites, multiculturalism, erosion of traditional and religious values, spiritual extinction..., ; these are all trade marks of contemporary western style democracies).

Survival is hard, very hard in the world's jungle without having to contend with members of your own family and race in ill concieved and mindless disputes bordering on sedition and commercializing one's own right to existence.

[Sip]

... bring western style democracy to armenia ( which is tantamount to imposing a western life style sturated with sex, pornography, reggae, jungle sounds, the rotten corruption of the oligarchs, election circuses to keep the masticating bisons "busy", immigration of non whites, multiculturalism, erosion of traditional and religious values, spiritual extinction..., ; these are all trade marks of contemporary western style democracies).


How come you only listed the "bad" things? :confused:

[KarotheGreat]

Armenians are not Aryan. Hitler saw us as a threat as one of his close officers was stationed in Turkey during the Armenian Genocide and referred to us as "xxxs of the Orient" and during Kristallnacht Armenians were persecuted against in the anti-semetic riots. The Armenian-German Society tried to prove that Armenians were Aryan so that they would not be killed by Hitler.
Go and learn history before you write this kind of crap. At first Hitler got the power over Germany in 1933. The Armenian genocide begun in 1915. At that time Hitler was a sargent in the german army. please go and learn your hsitory before you start to talk about things you don't know anything about; Capish

Karo

[Sarkis]

Go and learn history before you write this kind of crap. At first Hitler got the power over Germany in 1933. The Armenian genocide begun in 1915. At that time Hitler was a sargent in the german army. please go and learn your hsitory before you start to talk about things you don't know anything about; Capish

Karo

Wow, your so insightful. I hope you know that Turkey and Germany were Allies during World War I and one of Hitlers officers, Max Scheubner-Richter, was stationed in Turkey during the Armenian Genocide. He was also a contributor to Nazi racial ideology with Alfred Rosenberg. He told Hitler about Armenians and how they were like the xxxs. They had anti-semetic opinions before the Nazi Party came to power. During Kristallnacht, Armenians were persecuted and needed to prove that they were Aryan so the German-Armenian Society was able to do this before the Holocaust and were excused from death and persecution.

[KarotheGreat]

Wow, your so insightful. I hope you know that Turkey and Germany were Allies during World War I and one of Hitlers officers, Max Scheubner-Richter, was stationed in Turkey during the Armenian Genocide. He was also a contributor to Nazi racial ideology with Alfred Rosenberg. He told Hitler about Armenians and how they were like the xxxs. They had anti-semetic opinions before the Nazi Party came to power. During Kristallnacht, Armenians were persecuted and needed to prove that they were Aryan so the German-Armenian Society was able to do this before the Holocaust and were excused from death and persecution.

I know that Germany and Turkey were allies during WI. But at that time germany was a empire, under the the leading of kaiser william. Hitler was a soldier during wI. so tell me how can a soldier have officers :eek::confused::confused::eek: like I told you before ga and studie history . ok

[Sarkis]

Obviously you don't understand what I'm saying. Hitlers officer was stationed in Turkey during World War I. I'm not saying that Hitler had officers during World War but future Nazi leaders knew about the Armenian Genocide and about the Armenians from firsthand account.

[KarotheGreat]

Obviously you don't understand what I'm saying. Hitlers officer was stationed in Turkey during World War I. I'm not saying that Hitler had officers during World War but future Nazi leaders knew about the Armenian Genocide and about the Armenians from firsthand account.

Sorry I thought you ment that Hitler had a officer there. but if Hitler thought we were almost the same like the JE.WS than why was there a Armenian legion and Sro could open the door with his feet when he was meeting with Hitler

[Sarkis]

Again, the Armenians were persecuted during Kristallnacht and the German-Armenian Society needed to prove that Armenians were Aryan so they got enough evidence to convince Hitler they were white enough. Sorry about the confusion.

[Armenian]

Armenians are not Aryan. Hitler saw us as a threat as one of his close officers was stationed in Turkey during the Armenian Genocide and referred to us as "xxxs of the Orient" and during Kristallnacht Armenians were persecuted against in the anti-semetic riots. The Armenian-German Society tried to prove that Armenians were Aryan so that they would not be killed by Hitler.

In fact is we Armenians are more "Aryan" than the Germans.

Hitler did not see Armenians as a threat. You are hallucinating.

Also, when quoting people you need to post your sources.

And, as far as I know, it was the Turks that tried to equate Armenians to J-e-w-s in Nazi Germany.

Again, the Armenians were persecuted during Kristallnacht and the German-Armenian Society needed to prove that Armenians were Aryan so they got enough evidence to convince Hitler they were white enough. Sorry about the confusion.

What's your stupid point?

[Sarkis]

My point is that Armenians aren't Aryan but presented enough evidence to Hitler to convince him they were Aryan. Wheres you proof and sources that Armenians are more Aryan than Germans. Please also quote your sources.

[Armenian]

Wheres you proof and sources that Armenians are more Aryan than Germans.

Do you even know what the term "Aryan" means?

If you think it means Nordic, or European, you are sadly mistaken. Armenians today are perhaps 'the' closest surviving people to the original ancient Aryans - who happened to have originated in and spread worldwide from the Armenian Highlands.

Regarding Hitler: The bottom line is, genetically speaking, Armenians are Caucasian/White. Culturally, Armenians are direct decendants of Aryans. Once the aforementioned scientific facts were revealed, the Third Reich classified Armenians as "Aryan" - for whatever it worth.

[Sarkis]

Explain to me what Aryan means then.

[Armenian]

Explain to me what Aryan means then.

Dude, please... Just look it up...

Hint: The ancient Aryans were powerful "Iranic" tribes that occupied much of Central Asia, the Caucasus and Eastern Europe for many hundreds of years. And they most probably originated within the Armenian Highlands.

[ArmSurvival]

Wow, I know this is a late reply, but I was caught up with school and now with work for the past month or so. Anyways....


The Araratian Federation which was known as "Urartu/Biainili" was comprised of various nations living around lake Van that eventually fused/evolved to become what we today know as Armenians/Hays

I know that Urartu was in essence a federation of tribes/nations centered around Ararat, but the fact that you mentioned that there were "various nations living around Lake Van", already concedes that there was no single, unified Armenian people at that time, meaning that Urartians weren't Armenians, but a combination of the various nations of the area. Like you said,they fused/evolved and became what we now call Armenians. This evolution even happened during the era of Urartu, as many of the late kings of Urartu were in fact Armenians.


The language spoken by official Urartu is said to have been late Hurrian, and suspected of being a dying language at the time. However, the population of Urartu is speculated to have spoken early Armenian, one that incorporated heavy Urartian/Hurrian influences into its Indo-European/Aryan structure.

If that were true, not only would Armenian need to have some Urartian words/roots (which is the case), but the Urartian language would also have to have some Armenian influences, but to my knowledge there is no study which shows this.

Just get the notion of "Armens" somehow marching into Anatolia from the Balkans and taking over the former lands of Urartu out of your head. That story is a myth, no such thing happened. The Indo-European/Aryan language spoken by some proto-Armenian nations was indigenous to the region in question, it did not come from elsewhere

I didn't mention the Armens, but since you did, no one knows for sure, people only have theories, which is why there is no point to argue. Even if a tribe called Armens did migrate to east Anatolia, they were a minority which eventually assimilated into the regional culture(s). Although when groups migrate, historically, they usually adopt the local culture and the locals adopt the language of the conquerers (in order to better adapt to their new conditions). This theory of Armen migration is popular because it would make the connection of Armenian and Greek languages coming from one source in the Balkans, but as I said, they are just theories, I do not commit myself to them....

[melikianAvak]

Wow, I know this is a late reply, but I was caught up with school and now with work for the past month or so. Anyways....




I know that Urartu was in essence a federation of tribes/nations centered around Ararat, but the fact that you mentioned that there were "various nations living around Lake Van", already concedes that there was no single, unified Armenian people at that time, meaning that Urartians weren't Armenians, but a combination of the various nations of the area. Like you said,they fused/evolved and became what we now call Armenians. This evolution even happened during the era of Urartu, as many of the late kings of Urartu were in fact Armenians.




If that were true, not only would Armenian need to have some Urartian words/roots (which is the case), but the Urartian language would also have to have some Armenian influences, but to my knowledge there is no study which shows this.



I didn't mention the Armens, but since you did, no one knows for sure, people only have theories, which is why there is no point to argue. Even if a tribe called Armens did migrate to east Anatolia, they were a minority which eventually assimilated into the regional culture(s). Although when groups migrate, historically, they usually adopt the local culture and the locals adopt the language of the conquerers (in order to better adapt to their new conditions). This theory of Armen migration is popular because it would make the connection of Armenian and Greek languages coming from one source in the Balkans, but as I said, they are just theories, I do not commit myself to them....

Many places in the world had city states or kingdoms, a few examples are Spain, Greece, Britain, and China. The names the Hayk are called is from mouths of odars, we have been called many things. Today the Hayk people and nations (Armenia) has two countries. Hayk and RMK. When we regain Western Armenia and our other lands, they may or may not be one counrty. Lets hope they all become one and that one is called Hayk. After all we do call ourselves Hay.

* On December 10, 1991, Nagorno-Karabagh held an independence referendum in which 82% of all voters participated, and 99% voted for independence.

* On January 6, 1992, the leaders of Nagorno-Karabagh declared independence as the Republic of Mountainous Karabagh (RMK).

Just some thoughts. Armenians, united we stand, devided we fall.
Lets learn from each other.

Respectfuly

Avak:wave:

PS: I think Enker Armenian is correct. I am impressed by his knowledge of history and many other thinks.

[icoN]

What a liar you are. The Dashnaks have already signed the treaty giving our lands before the Bolsheviks.

The Treaty of Alexandropol was a peace treaty between the Democratic Republic of Armenia and TBMM ending the Turkish-Armenian War, before declaration of the Republic of Turkey on December 2 1920. Armenian was forced to renounce the Treaty of Sèvres and cede over 50% of her territory to Turkey. The treaty was to be ratified by the government within a month.

http://www.answers.com/topic/treaty-of-alexandropol


Wait!!! I don't understand so this 50% of land we lost in 1920.... We don't legally have claims to it now present day? Can someone please show me a map of the land we should have right now legally?

[KarotheGreat]

Wait!!! I don't understand so this 50% of land we lost in 1920.... We don't legally have claims to it now present day? Can someone please show me a map of the land we should have right now legally?

His source is wiki so I don't trust it very much. If he can show a other source than I believe it till then. And I have read somewhere that there is a lawyer around who's saying we can use the treaty of Sèvres to get our lands back

[ArmSurvival]

Many places in the world had city states or kingdoms, a few examples are Spain, Greece, Britain, and China. The names the Hayk are called is from mouths of odars, we have been called many things. Today the Hayk people and nations (Armenia) has two countries. Hayk and RMK. When we regain Western Armenia and our other lands, they may or may not be one counrty. Lets hope they all become one and that one is called Hayk. After all we do call ourselves Hay.

* On December 10, 1991, Nagorno-Karabagh held an independence referendum in which 82% of all voters participated, and 99% voted for independence.

* On January 6, 1992, the leaders of Nagorno-Karabagh declared independence as the Republic of Mountainous Karabagh (RMK).

Just some thoughts. Armenians, united we stand, devided we fall.
Lets learn from each other.

Respectfuly

Avak

PS: I think Enker Armenian is correct. I am impressed by his knowledge of history and many other thinks.


No offense, but most of what you said has nothing to do with what I was discussing. You're discussing today's situation (which I was aware of), I'm talking about 7 or 8 centuries before Christ. We're essentially talking about 2 completely different worlds.

Other countries had city-states... well, those city-states, like the ones on the Armenian plateau, were not unified in their early years, and they evolved to become what we now know as Greece, Spain, China, etc. That was my whole point from the get-go.

[Armenian]

No offense, but most of what you said has nothing to do with what I was discussing...

No offense, but most of what you said has nothing to do with what I was discussing either.

No one here was discussing the 'degree' of national 'unity' of ancient Armenians. You are basically nitpicking for no apparent reason. Armenians, as a unified national identity, emerged during the Urartian period. Prior to that period Armenians, per say, were essentially proto-Armenians. And there was no tribe called "Armens" that 'migrated' into the Anatolian highlands, that is pure western derived fantasy. Urartians most probably spoke a version of Hurrian. Hurrian were natives of the region who spoke a Caucasian tongue and Hurrians are one of the two major branches of the Armenian nation, the other being Aryan.

The name "Hai" is linguistically connected to the name "Khaldi" and Khaldi was the supreme God of the Hurrrians - and interestingly enough of the Urartians. The term Ar-men, however, is most probably an Indo-European term and its root word "Ar" is linguistically connected with a supreme Aryan God called "Ar" or Ara.

Thus, no matter how one looks at it, the two names of our nation, the two natures of our language, the two environments of our origins, they are all rooted in two primary locations within the Asia Minor - Anatolia and the Caucasus, Aryans and Caucasians.

[Artsakh]

Wait!!! I don't understand so this 50% of land we lost in 1920.... We don't legally have claims to it now present day? Can someone please show me a map of the land we should have right now legally?

Following the brilliant military victory against the Turks at Sardarabat, the brilliant dashnak politicians let the Turks dictate the terms of Armenia's independence with the Treaty of Batum in June of 1918. Armenians were left with a territory of 4,500 sq. miles of rock and dirt. Armenia was completely surrounded by a Turkish sea. This map roughtly corresponds to the sad state Armenians were in:
http://www.travel-images.com/az-adr-1920.jpg


later on, Armenians were able to recapture lost territories. here's the map:
http://www.24april1915.com/eng/images/Armenia_History_of_Borders.jpg

Do NOT count the treat of sevres territory. We roughly extended our territories to include kars, ardahan, nakhijevan, and zangezure. roughly 70,000 sq km.

the treaty of alexandrople was signed in june of 1920, giving up kars, ardahan, and nakhijevan. the infamous treaty of alexandrople was signed by Alexander Khatisian.

However, this treaty of alexandrople was and IS illegal. Today, armenia has all legal rights to demand back kars and ardahan. Legally, in accordance with today's international law, kars and ardahan are Armenian territory.

that is precisely why when armenia gained its independence from USSR, the first thing turkey did was ask armenia to confirm the treaty. Armenia refused. And armenia refused this under the rule of Levon der petrosyan.

[KarotheGreat]

So treaty of sevres is still leagal and we can use this to demand those lands from the turks. at an international court of law we could get those lands back

[Artsakh]

So treaty of sevres is still leagal and we can use this to demand those lands from the turks. at an international court of law we could get those lands back

Of course the treaty of sevres is still legal. However, if the Turks can counter our claims by bringing up the treaty of Lausanne, then there is no debate whatsoever with regards to Kars and Ardahan. Legally, kars and ardahan are armenian territory in accordance with international law.

in other words, these territories, and that designated to armenians under the treaty of sevres are in our back pockets. However, the problem is, ONLY A STRONG ARMENIA CAN PURSUE THE ISSUE OF THESE LANDS. By strong Armenia, i mean an armenia where the people have descent jobs, there is a population growth, and Armenia is economically on its feet so Armenians from the whole world can go back and built our homeland. Once we establish a country based on the rule of law in our current republic, everything will fall into place, armenia can take the land claims to international courts.

these lands are already in our back pockets. however, its up to us to fix our current republic so that we can do something about our lost lands.

[Կարմիր Բ]

'Legality' has to do on whether you have the power to enforce your demands. Steal a car, you are thief, steal billions, you are a businessman. If Armenia were strong enough, the treaty would be legal.

[Legionary]

read the articles about Armenian heavy cavalry and armenian legions in http://www.armenian-history.com/

[SaroukhSako]

do you know "miayn zenkov ga hayots pergoutioun" did to our people,not just our people to the history even it changed many things when armenians became aware of their problem.and the solution was : baykar.and in the second world war we took every opportunity to save our country ad take it back from every foreign power being turk iranian russian georgian and azeri,to form united independent free armenia. the extent that we even called ourselves aryans was just to retake armenian prisoners of the red army from the hands of germany and we did form new armies with them to attack the turks. I am armenian just plain armenian not aryannindo-eublablabla Armenian and proud of it.

[ArmSurvival]

No one here was discussing the 'degree' of national 'unity' of ancient Armenians. You are basically nitpicking for no apparent reason. Armenians, as a unified national identity, emerged during the Urartian period. Prior to that period Armenians, per say, were essentially proto-Armenians.

That was exactly my point. The 'degree of national unity' wasn't being discussed, but you mentioned earlier in this thread that Urartians are Armenians, maybe even more Armenian than Armenians living today (your words). I don't like nitpicking, but when you make general statements like that about our history, it prompts me to reply. I thought you were trying to twist around history, but your additional comments have shown me that our views are more or less the same. And yes, the Armenian ethnogenesis was happening during the Urartian period, and before that the tribes were essentially proto-Armenians, and their culture was basically passed down to us. Just as there were related tribes inhabiting different parts of the Armenian Highland in ancient times, in modern times Armenians still have their local "tribes" (Marashtsis, Sassountsis, etc), but they are all Armenian. So even at a basic level we see similarities between today's Armenians and the proto-Armenians which inhabited the Armenian Highland in ancient times.

Btw, you still haven't replied about the point I made about the Urartians not adopting any aspects of the Armenian language (since you claimed Urartian language was related to Armenian).

[Marie]

You still have not gotten the essence of my statements regarding Urartu.

The Araratian Federation which was known as "Urartu/Biainili" was comprised of various nations living around lake Van that eventually fused/evolved to become what we today know as Armenians/Hays. The fact remains, there are intimate mythological, linguistic, genetic and folkloric connections between modern Armenian heritage and the ancient culture of Urartu. The language spoken by official Urartu is said to have been late Hurrian, and suspected of being a dying language at the time. However, the population of Urartu is speculated to have spoken early Armenian, one that incorporated heavy Urartian/Hurrian influences into its Indo-European/Aryan structure. As the Hurrian language stopped being used, the language we today know as "Armenian" emerged. Also, the term "Hay" is linguistically connected to the Urartian/Hurrian supreme God called Khaldi.

Thus, the Urartians/Hurrians were in every sense of the word - Hay/Armenian.

Just get the notion of "Armens" somehow marching into Anatolia from the Balkans and taking over the former lands of Urartu out of your head. That story is a myth, no such thing happened. The Indo-European/Aryan language spoken by some proto-Armenian nations was indigenous to the region in question, it did not come from elsewhere.



Just read his works in detail and you will see what I'm saying. Don't forget, you are talking about a man that lived approximately two thousand five hundred years ago. However, in the absence of other contemporary texts Herodotus is the best we got.

its correct the Armenian, with the Iranian, were the first Aryan race who had spread westward (around 5000 years) and brought to western countries their great civilisation and knowledges.. it had been proved by almost every scholar and scientist (from whatever countries) everyone who disagree with that is only getting jealous of this true facts...

[Merv]

Let's address some delusions:

1.) Armenian collusion with the Nazis on racial grounds is disgusting. If they simply wanted to state they were Aryans to survive, that is understandable. Germany was an ally of Turkey in both world wars and being declared "Aryan" by the Nazis is no particular honor.

2.) "Aryan" can refer to three things:

1.) The German racial theory of Germanic/Nordics being "the purest" Aryan, with several other Indo-European peoples

2.) the Indo-European peoples of Iran (and North India)

3.) Indo-European ethnic groups, meaning 1.) north Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis; 2.) Indo-European Iranians, Afghans, and Tajiks; 3.) (extinct) Tocharians of western China; 4.) (extinct) Hittites of Anatolia; 5.) Armenians; 6.) Hellenic peoples (modern descendants are Greeks); 7.) Slavic East Slavs, South Slavs, and West Slavs; 8.) Baltic Lithuanians, Latvians, and extinct groups like Prussians; 9.) Teutonic English, Germans, Scandinavians, and Netherlanders; 10.) Latin French, Italians, Spaniards, Portuguese, Vlachs and Romanians.... 11.) Celtic Scots, Irish, Manx, Welsh, Bretons; and 12.) (extinct) ancient Balkan and Italian languages such as Illyrian, Thracian, and Dacian.

4.) Armenian is NOT an Iranian branch language. It was thought to be for a long time due to a lot of Persian/Parthian vocabulary, but it is actually a distinct Indo-European group.

5.) Armenian culture and language and ethnicity is in no way directly descended from the Urartians. Urartians spoke a Hurro-Urartian language family, unrelated to Semitic or Indo-European. Hurro-Urartian is agglutinative and split-ergative (NOTHING to do with Armenian or any other Indo-European language) and is hypothesized to be related to Northeast Caucasian languages such as Chechen and Ingush. Armenians may be the genetic descendants of Urartians by intermarriage, and they may have been influenced by Urartians culturally, but they were definitely distinct groups.

6.) The notion of Armenians being "the oldest people" or some such is pretty ridiculous. Biologically, all peoples are equally old. However, culturally or civilizationally, some are older than others. I don't think the notion that Armenians are the oldest civilization stands up to test, when we consider other ethnic groups such as the Greeks (Mycenean civilization, 1600 B.C.), Georgians, Chinese (2000 B.C.), Egyptians/Copts (3000 B.C.), not to mention extinct peoples like the Sumerians.

7.) The origins of the Indo-Europeans and their spread is up for debate. The major theories are the Armenian hypothesis, the Anatolian hypothesis, where migration would spread through Iran in one direction (to China, Central Asia, and Indai), and up into Europe via the Balkans andor Caucasus. The other major theory is the Kurgan hypothesis of Gimbutas which states that it began in modern eastern Ukraine on the Black Sea. This is currently the dominant theory of IE expansion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis

[Marie]

Let's address some delusions:

1.) Armenian collusion with the Nazis on racial grounds is disgusting. If they simply wanted to state they were Aryans to survive, that is understandable. Germany was an ally of Turkey in both world wars and being declared "Aryan" by the Nazis is no particular honor.

2.) "Aryan" can refer to three things:

1.) The German racial theory of Germanic/Nordics being "the purest" Aryan, with several other Indo-European peoples

2.) the Indo-European peoples of Iran (and North India)

3.) Indo-European ethnic groups, meaning 1.) north Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis; 2.) Indo-European Iranians, Afghans, and Tajiks; 3.) (extinct) Tocharians of western China; 4.) (extinct) Hittites of Anatolia; 5.) Armenians; 6.) Hellenic peoples (modern descendants are Greeks); 7.) Slavic East Slavs, South Slavs, and West Slavs; 8.) Baltic Lithuanians, Latvians, and extinct groups like Prussians; 9.) Teutonic English, Germans, Scandinavians, and Netherlanders; 10.) Latin French, Italians, Spaniards, Portuguese, Vlachs and Romanians.... 11.) Celtic Scots, Irish, Manx, Welsh, Bretons; and 12.) (extinct) ancient Balkan and Italian languages such as Illyrian, Thracian, and Dacian.

4.) Armenian is NOT an Iranian branch language. It was thought to be for a long time due to a lot of Persian/Parthian vocabulary, but it is actually a distinct Indo-European group.

5.) Armenian culture and language and ethnicity is in no way directly descended from the Urartians. Urartians spoke a Hurro-Urartian language family, unrelated to Semitic or Indo-European. Hurro-Urartian is agglutinative and split-ergative (NOTHING to do with Armenian or any other Indo-European language) and is hypothesized to be related to Northeast Caucasian languages such as Chechen and Ingush. Armenians may be the genetic descendants of Urartians by intermarriage, and they may have been influenced by Urartians culturally, but they were definitely distinct groups.

6.) The notion of Armenians being "the oldest people" or some such is pretty ridiculous. Biologically, all peoples are equally old. However, culturally or civilizationally, some are older than others. I don't think the notion that Armenians are the oldest civilization stands up to test, when we consider other ethnic groups such as the Greeks (Mycenean civilization, 1600 B.C.), Georgians, Chinese (2000 B.C.), Egyptians/Copts (3000 B.C.), not to mention extinct peoples like the Sumerians.

7.) The origins of the Indo-Europeans and their spread is up for debate. The major theories are the Armenian hypothesis, the Anatolian hypothesis, where migration would spread through Iran in one direction (to China, Central Asia, and Indai), and up into Europe via the Balkans andor Caucasus. The other major theory is the Kurgan hypothesis of Gimbutas which states that it began in modern eastern Ukraine on the Black Sea. This is currently the dominant theory of IE expansion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis

stupid low race gay turk see this and shut up:
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/6507/chronicle120.html
http://media.radiosai.org/Journals/Vol_04/01AUG06/CoverStory_Zora.htm
http://z4.invisionfree.com/Armenian_Diaspora/index.php?showtopic=199

do u need more??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Iranians
http://www.iranchamber.com/people/articles/aryan_people_origins.php

[Merv]

stupid low race gay turk see this and shut up:
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/6507/chronicle120.html
http://media.radiosai.org/Journals/Vol_04/01AUG06/CoverStory_Zora.htm
http://z4.invisionfree.com/Armenian_Diaspora/index.php?showtopic=199

do u need more??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Iranians
http://www.iranchamber.com/people/articles/aryan_people_origins.php

Hater. I'm not Turkish. I'm Slavic with a bit of French and German.

Do you just call all people who disagree with you Turks and gays?

[karoaper]

6.) The notion of Armenians being "the oldest people" or some such is pretty ridiculous. Biologically, all peoples are equally old. However, culturally or civilizationally, some are older than others. I don't think the notion that Armenians are the oldest civilization stands up to test, when we consider other ethnic groups such as the Greeks (Mycenean civilization, 1600 B.C.), Georgians, Chinese (2000 B.C.), Egyptians/Copts (3000 B.C.), not to mention extinct peoples like the Sumerians.


Haha, Georgians. You forgot Alabamans and Mississippians.

I wonder what you'd say to an Armenian who pretended to know more about Slavic history and anthropology than a Slav.

[Merv]

Haha, Georgians. You forgot Alabamans and Mississippians.

I wonder what you'd say to an Armenian who pretended to know more about Slavic history and anthropology than a Slav.

No problem. Perhaps I am ignorant of the fact that Georgians are a "new people." Correct me if y