The inquiry revisits the 1877–78 Russo-Ottoman war and the St Stephano and Berlin treaty clauses, asking what violence by Kurds and Circassians placed Armenian security on the international agenda.
Vertovec distinguishes diaspora as a social form, consciousness, and cultural production while tracing how dispersed communities maintain ties across states. Its conceptual discussion names Armenians among the historical cases that shaped the category alongside other diasporic populations.
This article compares the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust as reference points for interpreting later mass violence. It argues that the Armenian case can clarify nationalist forms of destruction that do not fit a single universal model.
This article traces institutional and professional mechanisms used to cast doubt on established scholarship concerning the Armenian Genocide. It links documentary evidence with an ethical examination of how authority, funding, and scholarly credibility can be mobilized in denial campaigns.
Cohen reconsiders diaspora through contrasting histories of coercion, migration, and creative affiliation beyond a homeland. The article explicitly treats Armenians as a victim diaspora while comparing how nationalisms and globalisation reframe diasporic loyalties.
This modern history traces the social and cultural formation of Armenian nationality through imperial division, dispersion, genocide, Soviet experience, and renewed independent statehood.
Dadrian evaluates a wartime Turkish document translated by British officials as evidence concerning Young Turk decision-making before the destruction of Ottoman Armenians.
The article treats Turkish military tribunal proceedings as documentation for the wartime deportation and massacres of Ottoman Armenians, centering the disputed question of whether state authorities intentionally organized the destruction.
Çalışma, Birinci Dünya Savaşı sonrasındaki Doğu Lejyonu'nu Fransız işgal bölgesi ve Güney Cephesi bağlamına yerleştirerek Ermeni Meselesi, İtilaf politikaları ve 1918'deki tanınma söylemini ilişkilendirir.
An 1837 antiquarian essay argues through Biblical chronology that Noah retained the pre-Babel tongue in Armenia and attempts to identify that language as Armenian.
Know published research that belongs here, or have scholarly work of your own? Suggest it and we'll review it for the repository.
Suggest or correct a record