Turkish Government Ridiculed over Armenian City
A liberal Turkish newspaper is making fun of their government. According to Radical, Turkey’s government has opened a website titled There is No Armenian Ani.
The sarcastic news is actually confronting the Turkish government for launching a website about the historic Armenian city of Ani – now on Turkish territory. The website features information about Ani’s churches and archaeology.
But the word “Armenian” is absent from the entire content of http://www.ani.gov.tr/, except for some bibliography sources.
21 Responses to “Turkish Government Ridiculed over Armenian City”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Barbaros on 27 Nov 2008 at 12:39 am #
The website is correct. There is no Armenian in Ani.
[Sincerely,
Barbaros
Graduate of Ankara University’s Supreme Truth Department]
Raffi Kojian on 27 Nov 2008 at 5:15 am #
I noticed that the first time I went to Ani, and pointed it out to the guy at the gate, told him it was silly. He just shrugged and gave a non-committal nod.
I have a photo of the map upon entry…
Seljuk this
Church
Georgian church
Cathedral
Church
Georgian church
Church
something to that effect. the word Armenian was so obvious in its omission that it was almost (but of course not quite) comical.
Strangely at Akhtamar it did say Armenian – maybe they’re a bit less nervous about Armenians claiming Lake Van? 🙂
barbaros on 27 Nov 2008 at 7:12 pm #
Why would anyone be afraid of Armenian claims. Everyone that knows anything about geo-strategy knows Armenia is not self sustaining and has its eyes on Turkey. I am glad that Raffi visited my beautiful country. And I hope more will come and visit Turkey, because that is the only way Armenians will ever get to see where their ancestors once lived. To make this clear, we are not or never will be ashamed of deporting Armenians. So we will never give you our land, but you are more than welcome to try and take it:)
Hayaser on 27 Nov 2008 at 10:39 pm #
@turGAYaros
the truth is correct, there is NO turKEY, only turGAY
[Sincerely,
Hayaser
Graduate of Armenia’s Supreme Truth Dept.]
SOAD1 on 28 Nov 2008 at 12:12 am #
Barbaros, we will take it. Don’t you ever doubt. Even if it takes 50 yrs. or 300 yrs. Everyone pays for a murder under the sun. And the turks will pay it. In fact they are paying already, Turks are one of the most hated ppl. on the planet. Sooner or later turkey will be divided into pieces. Go eat your heart out barbaros.
Shiva on 28 Nov 2008 at 12:44 am #
It’s not about taking your land, barbaros. See my previous response in the blog posting about Kars.
Blogian, admitting that there was an Armenian civilization on its territory would raise too many questions, and they don’t want that. Remember that this deportation explanation/justification has evolved from such classics as “nothing happened” or “it was a civil war.”
Raffi on 28 Nov 2008 at 2:40 am #
Barbados
1) Don’t pretend to speak for all Turks. Many have apologized for and do not approve of the genocidal campaign against Armenians, including a few who have apologized to me.
2) Turkey is afraid of Armenian claims, there is no other reason they would leave Armenians off of the maps, the websites, and anything else to do with Ani. Talk is cheap, and actions speak louder than words. You can keep crowing about how great the genocide was, but it still poisons your nation to this day.
barbaros on 28 Nov 2008 at 12:34 pm #
Raffi,
I don’t speak for all Turks, but I do speak for the majority and that can be substantiated by Turkey’s policy towards Armenia. If Turks were ashamed and apologetic towards Armenians as you say, there would be no way to continue the current policy towards Armenia.
Turkey isn’t afraid of Armenian claims. Even if the whole world recognizes Armenia’s version of history Turkey will not give Armenians any compensation. Look at Cyprus, we are occupying E.U. lands and the status quo still remains and will continue to remain until Turkey decides the conflict is solved.
I don’t believe the deportations were genocide, but I do believe the economic embargo imposed on Armenia by Turkey is an economic genocide. Out of the three Caucasus countries Armenia is the poorest ( according to the World Bank ) and the only one not benefiting from regional cooperation. It has not been included in major transportation projects and energy pipelines.
Finally, why should Turks include Armenian history in maps in Ani? Do we have good relations? No, so there is no reason to include Armenian history in government websites.
barbaros on 28 Nov 2008 at 12:42 pm #
Shiva,
Armenians like you; who are not after Turkish lands, are the only hope for a real reconciliation between the two peoples.
I HOPE THIS WILL CLEARIFY THAT WE DID NOT TAKE YOUR LANDS:
The territory in which the Armenians lived together for a time never was ruled by them as an independent, sovereign state. This territory was ruled by others from the earliest times from which there is evidence that Armenians lived there. From 521 to 344 B.C. it was a province of Persia. From 334 to 215 B.C. it was part of the Macedonian Empire. From 215 to 190 B.C. it was controlled by the Selephkites. From 190 until 220 A.D. it frequently changed hands between the Roman Empire and the Parthians. From 220 until the start of the fifth century it was a Sassanian province, and from then until the seventh century it belonged to Byzantium. From the seventh to the tenth centuries it was controlled by the Arabs. It returned again to Byzantine rule in the tenth century and, finally, it came under the domination of the Turks starting in the eleventh century.
The Armenians living in this territory who remained under the rule of these various empires, could not continuously maintain any sort of independent or unified Armenian state. At the most, a few Armenian noble families dominated certain districts as feudal vassals of the neighboring imperial suzerains, serving as buffers between the powerful empires that surrounded them. Most of these Armenian “principalities” were, thus, simply set up by local Armenian nobles within their own feudal dominions, or by the neighboring empires, who in this way secured their military services against their enemies. The best example of this was the Baghratid family, long brought forward by Armenian nationalist historians as an example of their historic independent existence, which was in fact put in charge of its territory by the Arab Caliphs. Some of the “Armenian” families which assumed the title of principality at this time were, moreover, really Persian rather than Armenian in origin. That they did not constitute any sort of independent nation is shown in the statement of the Armenian historian Kevork Asian:
“The Armenians lived as local notables. They had no feeling of national unity. There were no political bonds or ties among them. Their only attachments were to the neighboring notables. Thus whatever national feelings they had were local.”
The Armenians broke away from the Byzantine church in 451,150 years after they accepted Christianity, leading to long centuries of Armenian-Byzantine clashes which went on until the Turks settled in Anatolia starting in the late 11th century, with the Byzantines working to wipe out the Armenians and eliminate the Armenian principalities in order to maintain Greek Orthodoxy throughout their dominions. Contemporary Armenian historians report in great detail how the Byzantines deported Armenians as well as using them against enemy forces in the vanguard of the Byzantine armies. As a result of this, when the Seljuk Turks started flooding into Anatolia starting in the late llth century, they did not encounter any Armenian principalities; the only force remaining to resist them was that of Byzantium. The Seljuk ruler Alparslan captured the lands of the Armenian Principality ofAni in 1064, but it had previously been brought to an end by the Byzantine in 1045, nineteen years earlier, with Greeks being brought in to replace the Armenians who had been deported. It is therefore false to claim that the Seljuk Turks destroyed any Armenian principality, let alone a state. This already had been done by the Byzantines, and it was in fact the social and economic ferment that resulted which greatly facilitated the subsequent Turkish settlement. Contemporary Armenian historians interpret this Turkish conquest of Anatolia to have constituted their liberation from the long centuries of Byzantine misrule and oppression. The Armenian historian Asoghik thus reports that “Because of the Armenians’ enmity toward Byzantium, they welcomed the Turkish entry into Anatolia and even helped them.” The Armenian historian Mathias of Edessa likewise relates that the Armenians rejoiced and celebrated publicly when the Turks conquered his city, Edessa (today’s Urfa).
An Armenian principality did arise in Cilicia starting in 1080 but it was the result, not of the Turkish settlement in Anatolia, as has been claimed, but, rather, of the Byzantine destruction of the last Armenian principalities in eastern Anatolia, which caused a flood of Armenians fleeing into Cilicia. This principality maintained good relations with the Turks even as it provided assistance to the Crusaders who passed through its territory on their way to the Holy Land, while accepting the suzerainty, first of Byzantium, and then after it declined, of the Crusader Kingdoms, the Mongols, and, finally, the Catholic Lusignan family which gained control of Cyprus. This sort of relationship with “unbelievers^, however, displeased the Gregorian Armenian Church, with the resulting internal divisions playing a significant role in the Principality’s conquest by the Mamluks of Syria and Egypt in 1375. In the end, the most significant consequence of this last Armenian principality was the establishment of a separate Armenian church from the one centered at Echmiadzin, which added to the internal divisions within Armenian Orthodoxy which remain important to the present day.
Thus, when eastern Anatolia was conquered by Fatih Mehmet II and Yavuz Sultan Selim I, it was taken from the White Sheep Turkomans and from the Safavids of Iran, who had occupied it after the Byzantines had retired; while Yavuz Selim took Cilicia from the Mamluks. MIn no case, therefore, did the Ottoman Turks conquer or occupy an existing Armenian state or principality. In every case, these Armenians had previously been conquered by peoples other than the Turks.
Raffi on 28 Nov 2008 at 8:07 pm #
Barbados, read “You Rejoice My Heart”. I’m telling you, don’t put it off, you need to know a lot more about your history than you seem to.
R on 28 Nov 2008 at 8:09 pm #
“barbarous”,
You must mean the historian Kevork Aslan.
Also Armenia is wealthier and has had a higher growth rate than Georgia for several years:
2007 per capita GDP on a PPP basis:
Armenia – $5,700
Georgia – $4,400
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gg.html
This despite being blockaded by Turkey and Azerbaijan and having extortionate transit fees charged by Georgia.
barbaros on 28 Nov 2008 at 9:14 pm #
Armenia
GDP (purchasing power parity):$17.17 billion (2007 est.)
GDP (official exchange rate):$7.974 billion (2007 est.)
Georgia
GDP (purchasing power parity):$20.6 billion (2007 est.)
GDP (official exchange rate):$10.29 billion (2007 est.)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html
barbaros on 28 Nov 2008 at 9:16 pm #
ok Raffi, if a book with 383 pages is enough to learn Armenian history I’ll definately read it in two days.
R on 29 Nov 2008 at 4:59 am #
Barbarous,
Perhaps you didnt understand that Georgia has at least 50% more people than Armenia (4.5 million vs 3 million) which means that on a per capita basis Armenia is wealthier.
barbaros on 29 Nov 2008 at 12:27 pm #
R so from your prespective Kuwait, Qatar and Luxembourg which are richer on a per capita basis than the U.S. and China have more influence and dominance in the world stage. According to your logic Armenia is also richer than China, because Armenia is ranked 129 and China is ranked 132.
Per capita shows the wealth of the people in a country while GDP shows the country’s actual wealth.
R on 30 Nov 2008 at 1:34 am #
Barbarous,
In your post of 28 Nov 2008 at 12:34 pm you stated that ‘Out of the three Caucasus countries Armenia is the poorest’.
This assertion is wrong and I was responding to it.
Your post at Nov. 29 at 12:27 p.m. above is incoherent.
barbaros on 30 Nov 2008 at 10:27 pm #
R, its really easy to say something is without logic, but harder to prove it.
VirtualAni on 01 Dec 2008 at 4:33 am #
Those “bibliography sources” have just been taken from VirtualAni.org. That’s why they alone mention the word “Armenia”.
Amy on 03 Dec 2008 at 2:46 am #
Radikal made fun of the ministry of tourism website, but its article also appears to be a serious one, as an attempt to include what the website so glaringly omits.
Bravo to Radikal.
Turkey is changing.
Raffi on 06 Dec 2008 at 2:20 am #
Turkish apologies and admissions grow…
http://www.armenialiberty.org/armeniareport/report/en/2008/12/7E1B7968-CD1A-48A9-A7BC-DD323AC9FF18.ASP
Raffi on 29 Dec 2008 at 8:22 am #
I happened to find a photo of the sign I originally mentioned in the comments here online, and thought I’d post a link. You can at least make out the lack of the word “Armenian” on the sign…
http://www.photostock.am/selected_image.php?id=5293&page=1