HU Repository
HU Repository serves as an academic and research repository, offering a rich assortment of Haigazian Armenological Review research outputs along with publications from the Armenian Diaspora Research Center (ADRC) and Haigazian University Press (HU Press). Additionally, it hosts a repository of MA and MBA theses.
With a focus to meet the needs of scholars, students, and researchers within and beyond the Haigazian University community, our repository provides seamless access to a diverse range of scholarly materials. Whether you're delving into historical studies, exploring contemporary research topics, or seeking insights from thesis works, the HU Repository stands as a cornerstone for intellectual inquiry and collaboration.
Communities in Haigazian University
Select a community to browse its collections.
Recent Submissions
Հայկական հարցը Տրապիզոնի կոնֆերանսի ժամանակաշրջանում (Փետրուարի 10/23 - Ապրիլի 9/22 1918)
(1995) Հրանդ Աւետիսեան
Just after the opening of the Conference of Brest-Litovsk, the Ottoman Delegation presented their conditions for peace with the Russian Empire. They were these conditions which later, at the peace talks at Trebizond between the Ottoman and Caucasian delegations, served as the bases for the peace talks.
The Caucasian Seim, which had come into existence after the Russian Revolution, could not agree with the Ottoman demands of first rupture from the Russian entity and then of the declaration of independence of the Caucasian regions so as to have the facility of easily occupying all the Caucasus.
The article presents the non-homogeneity of the Caucasian Delegation of the Seim sent to Trebizond. It was made of the various representatives of the Georgian, Azeri and Armenian peoples, as well as the various political parties and religious and political entities. The racial, religious and political differences put the component parts of the Caucasian Delegation at variance in their stand first among themselves and then with the Ottoman Delegation. Backed by the Turks, the Caucasian Azeris openly expressed their stand with the Ottoman side and endeavoured to impose their will on the Georgian and Armenian delegates to accept the Ottoman demands. The acceptance of the Ottoman demands would surely leave the Caucasians at the mercy of the insatiable appetite and greed of the Ottomans.
They were these divergences of stand that at last led the Caucasian Seim to call home its delegation to the Trebizond Conference, and in front of the Ottoman onslaught into the plain of Ararat and the Turkish demands of the immediate evacuation of the Kars and Alexandropole regions, it felt itself unable to resist and hence made known its rupture from the Russian entity and declared the independence of the Caucasus. Meanwhile the Ottoman advance into the heartland of Eastern Armenia was halted by the Armenian forces at Sardarapat, Bash Aparan and Karakilisse.
Making an abundent use of non-published and archival material found both in Tibilissi and Yerevan state libraries, and the published French, Austrian and Russian documents, the author gives the vivid, detailed and exact story of the Conference of Trebizond.
Աւստրիացի սպայի մը 1895 տարւոյ կոտորածներու վերաբերեալ վկայութիւնը
(1995) Արթիւր Պէյլերեան
Patmeh Tesnenk: Conversations in the Field
(2025) Suzan Pattie
Հոս տրուող գրութիւնը երկրորդ հատուածն է աւելի ընդարձակ գործի մը, որ դոկտորական աւարտաճառն է Տիկ. Սուսան Բեթի-Չիլինկիրեանին: Հատուածը կը ծանրանայ Հայկական Տասընհինգի ջարդերէն, աքսորներէն եւ սուրիական ու միջագետեան անապատներու մէջ թափառայածումներէն մազապուրծ, եւ նախ Կիպրոս ու ապա 1974-էն ետք, Լոնտոն ապաստանած հայու բեկորներու հոգեկան, հոգեբանական եւ իմացական տագնապներուն վրայ, որոնցմէ պիտի յառաջանար որոշ աշխարհահայեացք եւ ներքին մթնոլորտ անոնցմէ՝ այդ հայու բեկորներէն ներս: Գրութիւնը կը բաժնուի հիմնական երկու մասի, որոնցմէ առաջինով կը տրուին հեղինակին ունեցած կարգ մը հանդիպումներն ու զրոյցները թափառ ինկած հայերու եւ հայուհիներու հետ՝ մանաւանդ կիպրահայերու եւ նախկին կիպրահայերու: Գրութեան երկրորդ մասը գիտական մէկ վերլուծումն է այդ զրոյցներուն ետին գտնուող բեկորներուն ներքին աշխարհին եւ անոնցմէ յառաջացած այլազան հարցադրումներուն, որոնց հիմնականները կը մնան հայ ազգային կարգ մը ընկալումներ — հող եւ հայրենիք, կրօն եւ եկեղեցի, ազգ ու ազգութիւն, հայ եւ հայութիւն, հայկական կարգ մը առաքինութիւններ, լեզու եւ ազգապահպանում, ժողովուրդ, անհատ եւ ընտանիք, եւ տակաւին բազմաթիւ բաներ, որոնք կու գան կերտելու ազգ մը ժողովուրդէն կամ հաւաքականութենէն: Յօդուածին երկրորդ մասի աւարտին հարց կու տայ հեղինակը թէ «Ի՞նչ կը նշանակէ կիպրահայ ըլլալ քսաներորդ դարուն [ըլլալ] կիպրահայ մը որ Լոնտո՞ն կը բնակի, անգլիահա՞յ մը, թէ ի՞նչ»։
Հարցումին պատասխանը պիտի գայ խորունկ մէկ ընկալումէն Սուզան Փեթիի գրութեան։
Համիտեան «զուլումի» քաղաքականութեան արտացոլումը արաբական արդի պատմագրութեան մէջ
(1995) Արշալոյս Հ. Թոփալեան
The modern Arab historiography has recently lenghtily dwelt upon the Armenian-Turkish relations in the fourth quarter of the nineteenth century, the period known as "the period of the oppressive policy of Sultan Abdul Hamid II, the Red Sultan.
After his ascension to the Ottoman throne, Abdul Hamid II decided to get rid of the Armenian Question by getting rid of the Armenian people of the Ottoman Empire, thus doing away the reason for European interference with the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire.
Thus started the period of oppression just after the Conference of Berlin which by changing the clause Nᵒ XVI of the Russo-Turkish Treaty of San Stefano to clause Nᵒ LXI of the Treaty of Berlin, let the Sultan loose to deal with his Armenian subjects in the way he preferred, in spite of the promise to introduce the locally required reforms in the six Armenian provinces of Western Armenia. The result was the period of the first great massacres of Armenians in 1894-1896.
The story of the beginning of the annihilation of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire in the days of Sultan Abdul Hamid 11 is deeply dealt with by the Arab historians of modern time. In fact, by making use of the works of the Othman el-Turk, Marwan el-Medawar, Fuad Hasan Hafez, Samir Arbash, Mousa Prince and Saleh Zahr ed-Din, Dr. Topalian has drawn a picture of the Armenian Massacres of the last quarter of the nineteenth century by which to conclude that the Arab historians of the modern times present an impartial and scientific approach to the Armeno-Turkish problem and find the period under discussion a time of oppression, bloodshed, death and annihilation, just because of the fact that in a period of only about two and a half years (1894-1896) some 300.000 Armenians were massacred. It is through an honest and conscious approach that the Arab historians mentioned have been able to present not only the Sultan's policy of anti-Armenians oppression but also to point and prove the truth of the facts which the Ottoman and Turkish historiography tries to falsify and defraud. The modern Arab historians show that the real and only responsibility for the Armenian massacres of 1894-1896 fall on the Sultan himself.
عبادة الأرمن (1915) بين الأسباب والنتائج
(2025) صالح زهر الدين
Making use of Armenian (in Arabic translation), Arab and Western sources, Dr. Zahreddin approaches to the Armenian Question and the massacres perpetrated by both the Young Turks and the Nationalists from the point of view of an Arab historian, putting the question in the context of right and wrong, inspite of the past that, as an Arab, he could very easily hold sides in the question at hand. On the contrary, he limits himself just with the Armenian Question and the Massacres of 1915-1922 and analyzes their causes and results.
To make things clear, the center of the article first draws the plan of the massacres perpetrated. According to him, the Turkish authorities
1. Got rid of the young Armenians by asking them to work on the construction of land roads and railroads. This left the Armenian regions with no force of protection,
2. To disarm the soldiers of the Armenian contingents, thus rendering them unable to oppose;
3. To deport Armenians suspected or those opposing the Turkish policies;
4. To apprehend the intellectuals and leaders of the Armenian community and kill them with the help of the Special Organization erected for this purpose;
5. After disarming the Armenian soldiery, to kill them all;
6. To deport the remaining Armenian women, children and the old people, accompanied with acts of robbing and massacring them at the spot, or drowning them in the rivers and seas. This phase of the plan was called 《Road to Hells》;
7. After deporting the Armenians burning, destroying or appropriating of the Armenian goods and property:
8. According to an official regulation, to appropriate the Armenian land and property as discarded property»; and last but not least
9. To destroy and annihilate all Armenian cultural and material cxpression, as well as antiquities, which could testify of the belongingness of all the Armenian regions, and to change and turkify all place names in the Armenian regions and provinces.
This plan was put into force under the silent look of both the allies of Ottoman Empire and the Entente Powers, and helped later other nations and people (Germans, Italians and Zionists) to repeat massacres unpunished. But things have to be corrected and reparations made. To do so Dr. Zahreddin finds that it is imperative
1. To let the Armenians have the right to return to their fatherland.
2. To accept that Turks have by force appropriated the Armenian lands and property;
3. To oblige the Turks to resign of their occupation of Armenian lands and hand them over to their rightful owners;
4. To pay the Armenians the appropriate indemnity for their losses endured during the deportations and massacres.
Unless the latter are imposed on the Turkish authorities who are the legal heirs to the Ottoman Empire, the Young Turks and their Turanian dreams, the Armenian Question will remain open and find its expression now and then until it finds its rightful solution.
The conclusion is clear for Dr. Zahreddin, and this is why he ends his article declaring that “we are with the Armenians and back the Armenian Question, rightful and sacrosanet; we are with the Armenians in their desire for peace both in Armenia proper and Artzakh; we are with the Armenians in their demand of their fatherland; and we are against the Turkish and Turanian schemes which are anti-Arab and anti-Armenian at the same time. This is the verdict of Truth, and we declare it out loud, because we believe that Truth has to be declared out loud even if our neck is put into the ring of the gallows».