Talk:Principality of Khachen

New sources are added

• Russian scolar V. Shnirelman: "Khachen is a middle ages Armenian feodalist principality in the territory of modern Karabakh, which played a significant role in the political history of Armenia and all the region at X-XVI centuries" Хачен — средневековое армянское феодальное княжество на территории современного Карабаха, сыгравшее значительную роль в политической истории Армении и всего региона в Х-XVI вв. // В.А. Шнирельман, Албанский миф, 2006, Библиотека «Вeхи»
• Russian scolar Smirnova L. P.:"news on the campaign of atabek Uzbek against the Armenian principality of Khachen in Karabakh in 1214-1215". Особенно важное значение имеют сообщения о фактах и событиях, о которых другие источники умалчивают. К таковым может быть отнесено известие о сражении между атабеком Абу Бакром и хорезмшахом 'Али-шахом, сыном Текеша, в 1205 г. под стенами Абхара, закончившемся поражением и гибелью последнего (л. 190б), - событие, сыгравшее немаловажную роль в истории Азербайджана 73, — а также известие о походе атабека Узбака в 1214—15г. на армянское княжество Хачен в Карабахе, Войско Узбака одержало победу над вассальными местными владетелями, уклонявшимися от выплаты дани в казну атабека. Это событие представляет интерес для истории средневековой Армении. //Аджаиб ад-дунья. (Чудеса мира), ред. Смирнова Л.П. М. Наука. 1993 http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/rus11/Cudesa/framepred.htm
• Soviet scolars G. Litavrin and A. Novosiltsev:"In the [Konstantin's] "On ceremonies", chapter 48, the Armenia word were added to the all of the region's names - Vaspurakan, Kogovit, Taron, Mokk, Andevatsik, Syunik, Vayots-Dzor, Khachen etc., marking, that all of them are parts of Armenian country (Konstantin, p. 151, 311-312, comm. 81-89; Ter-Ghevondian A.H., Armenia i Arabskiy khalifat, p. 239)." Юзбашян полагает, что византийцы не только не рассматривали Армению IX-Х вв. как единое государство, но даже не считали армянские царства и княжества частями единого исторически сложившегося целого (Юзбашян К.Н. Армянские государства. С. 68-69). Этому заключению, однако, противоречит свидетельство гл. 48 "О церемониях", где к названию каждой из областей: Васпуракан, Коговит, Тарон, Мокк, Андэевацик, Сюник, Вайоц-дзор, Хачен и т.д. - добавляется слово "Армения", подчеркивающее, что каждая из них является частью Армянской страны ( Константин . С. 151, 311-312, примеч. 81-89; Тер-Гевондян А.Н. Армения и Арабский халифат. С. 239). // Константин Багрянородный. Об управлении империей. М. Наука, 1991г. 496 с.,Предисловие и Введение- Г. Г.Литаврин и А.П.Новосильцев. http://www.krotov.info/acts/10/porfirog/konst_06.html Andranikpasha 18:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Ter-Ghevondian is not a neutral source, neither is Юзбашян К.Н. Moreover, references brought above from Russian sources do not justify removal of prominent Western scholars on the subject: Dowsett and Minorsky. Atabek 21:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I knew there will be problems:) with the surname of Soviet Armenian scolar Ter-Ghevondian, despite the neutral source marks the words of cezar Konstantin and cites 2 sources at the same time (one from Soviet Armenian scolar Ter-Ghevondian and the first one is a direct citation from the cezar Konstantin, which is surely neutral in this case). Anyways i didnt add this source to the description, and even have nothing against the mediation you asked for! I added this quote just for info as its dedicated to the topic of article! Andranikpasha 21:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

If Ter-Ghevondian is a non-neutral scholar, then who is "cezar Konstantin" cited to be even considered a source? Again, I am waiting for Dowsett and Minorsky quotes to be added back to the article and also a proof where those two called Khachen Armenian principality. Andranik, you can't defuse one group of expert references by another questionable group that you find online. Atabek 21:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Atabek, about Doswett I asked earlier, and related to Minorsky: I never deleted this: ""Caucasica IV", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 15, No. 3. (1953), p. 504: "The territory of present-day Soviet republic of Azarbayjan roughly corresponds to the ancient Caucasian Albania"</ref>, which roughly corresponded to the territory of Soviet Azerbaijan", and more surely will never add it to the article, as I cant see any relation with the article's topic. Why you added this here? Andranikpasha 22:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Andranik, again, this is the reference I was talking about:

• C. J. F. Dowsett. "The Albanian Chronicle of Mxit'ar Goš", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 21, No. 1/3. (1958) on page 475: "In Albania, Xacen, part of the old province of Arcax, had preserved its independence, and we know that it was partly at the request of one of its rulers, Prince Vaxtang, that Mxit'ar composed his lawbook.".

The one I brought above was to address your hogwashing about the word Caucasian, which had nothing to do with the essence of source. Atabek 23:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Albania is just a name for a territory at that time. There was absolutely no difference between those "Albanians" and any other Armenians. An Albanian prince is asking an Armenian monk Mkhitar Gosh, to write a lawbook for Armenians? Btw the entire work can be found online and in English here: [1]-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 04:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Caucasian Albania was an ancient state and a geographic entity known for many centuries before. It's not "just a name of territory at that time". Why is it surprising for Albanian prince to ask Armenian monk to write a lawbook for Albanians (not Armenians)? After all Armenian monk made an alphabet for Georgians for example. And Eupator, please, "rbedrossian.com" is definitely not a neutral source appropriate for citation in this discussion. Thanks. Atabek 05:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Eupator, you say that "there was absolutely no difference between those "Albanians" and any other Armenians", but even contemporary Armenian sources knew the difference. See this Armenian primary source, I already posted it on another talk, this is a quote from Chronicles by Zachariah Kanakertsi, a 17th century Armenian historian:

Некий человек из племени алван, которых ныне зовут удинами, из алванского города Гандзака, отправился в Святую обитель Гандзасара, где находится престол алванского католикоса, и стал учеником католикоса Ованнеса. [2]

Закарий Канакерци. Хроника.

Some man from the tribe of alvans, who are now called udis, from the alvanian town of Gandzak, went to the holy monastery of Gandzasar, where the residence of alvanian catholicos is located, and became a disciple of Catholicos Ovannes.

So Albanians were different as late as the 17th century. Grandmaster 06:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Tags

The removal of CJF Dowsett and Minorsky quotes in this article has still not been justified. Provided the substantial amount of one-sided POV pushing, I think it's necessary to have tags until all sides are willing and interested in neutrality of this article. Please discuss the references per mediation case opened above. Until valid reasons are provided for pushing one-sided POV against important and expert sources, the tags shall remain. Atabek 14:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

"Albanian theory" on Khachen was criticized by Russian scolar V. Shnirelman:

• "In the 1970's Azerbaijani historians moved from simple hush upping to the appropriation of Armenian historical heritage. Middle ages Khachen at a moment became "Albanian", and its Gandzasar monastery were announced "a monument of culture and religion of Caucasian Albania"". В 1970-е гг. азербайджанские историки перешли от замалчивания к присвоению армянского исторического наследия. Средневековое княжество Хачен в одночасье стало «албанским», а принадлежавший ему Гандзасарский монастырь был объявлен «памятником культуры и религии Кавказской Албании».В.А. Шнирельман, Албанский миф, 2006, Библиотека «Вeхи». Is it enough?

Albania was just a region (see for ex. Ibn Fakih -"al -Bouldan", or "Encyclopedicheski slovar", SPb, 1890), where in some centuries existed the Caucasian Albania state. Andranikpasha 18:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that alone justifies the removal of this bad faith tag added by Atabek. I think i'll let it stay for a day though.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 18:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think removal of the tag was justified just because of the above quote. We never referred to Azerbaijani sources, only Western ones, so the opinion of Shnirelman about Azerbaijani scholars is irrelevant, because no one referred to them. The problem here is that the quotes from Western scholarly sources are being removed from the article without any grounds, therefore the tag shall remain until the dispute is resolved. --Grandmaster 08:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

No sources have ever been rmeoved from the article. The biased interpretation of those sources has been removed and will always be removed because it is pov.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 12:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Eupator, Dowsett and Minorsky sources are removed from this article. Please, insert the tag back. You cannot remove the POV tag when there is a dispute on the page. Your explanation above does not suffice. Atabek 23:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Atabek, Dowsett calls Khachen a region of Eastern Armenia ...Khachen region of eastern Armenia... C. J. F. Dowsett, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1. (Feb., 1980), p.138. VartanM 04:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Vartan, first of all, you didn't provide the article title, and secondly, again:

• 1. C. J. F. Dowsett. "A Neglected Passage in the "History of the Caucasian Albanians"", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 19, No. 3. (1957), p.463:

"Among the prisoners captured by Bogha al-Kabir in 854, John Catholicos and Tovma Arcruni mention three Albanian princes: Atrnerseh, lord of Khachen, Sahl, son of Smbat, lord of Shake, Esay Abu Musa, lord of Ktish in Artsakh."

• 2. C. J. F. Dowsett. "The Albanian Chronicle of Mxit'ar Goš", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 21, No. 1/3. (1958) on page 475:

"In Albania, Xacen, part of the old province of Arcax, had preserved its independence, and we know that it was partly at the request of one of its rulers, Prince Vaxtang, that Mxit'ar composed his lawbook."

Until these references, directly related to article topic, are incorporated, the information there will be disputed for neutrality and one-sided POV. My next step in this process will be mediation cabal. Thanks. Atabek 05:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Atabek, Dowsett does not contradict himself. He considers Albania as an Armenian principality and he is using it as a geographic location. Besides, his 1980 paper is much newer. Hewsen also uses the same terminology.

• Source: A Catalogue of Medieval Armenian Manuscripts in the United States Avedis K. Sanjian Review author[s]: C. J. F. Dowsett International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1. (Feb., 1980), pp. 135-138.

Dowsett clearly states:"At all events, the trilingual virtuosity of a scribe functioning in or close to the Khachen region of eastern Armenia is of historical and artistic interest"

This should end the matter. Doswett does not contradict himself, his statement is exactly like that of Hewsen. And Fedayee has already brought that authoritative statement from Hewsen. Caucasian Albania is not used as an ethnic group, but as a geographic location in this context. Khachen is an Armenian principality. VartanM 06:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Vartan, thank you for providing your original source, which is not CJF Dowsett's authoritative article but his review of Armenian author's work on manuscripts. Caucasian Albania was distinct from Armenia, and wasn't a region of Eastern Armenia. Moreover, no such state as Armenia existed 9th century onwards when Khachen principality existed, so to claim that one historic-geographical region was part of another is a plain invention. The works of Dowsett, Minorsky, Smbatyan, Movses Kalankatuaci, etc. already established a strong evidence that Albanians were a group and country distinct from Armenians. As I said earlier, these are not a basis for pushing 2 Dowsett and 1 Minorsky references out of the page. Khachen was originally Albanian principality. Atabek 06:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Atabek, my source is written by Dowsette at much later date then yours. You see when he says Khachen region of Eastern Armenia he means just that. Let me explain. Unlike Caucasian Albania, Armenia never lost its identity, (culture, language, religion etc...) even when it lost its independence. There was no independent Armenia, but Armenia as an entity always existed. And Doewsette doesn't contradict himself, he considers C. Albania as a geographic location and Khachen part of Armenia, moreover If he considered Khachen part of C. Albania don't you think that he would've corrected Sanjian? As a side note, I have to thank you Atabek, you make history exciting. VartanM 08:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

You say that Armenia did not exist as a state, but existed as an "entity". In that case what Khachen had to do with Armenia, a none-existent state at the time? If you mean Armenia as a geographic entity, then geographically that area was not part of Armenia, as it was known to be a part of Arran (Albania), and the region was populated by people, who spoke their own Arranian language according to the Arab geographers. Grandmaster 08:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Grandmaster, Armenia didnt exist as an independent state in that period but an Armenian principality- Khachen (with Armenian population and Armenian rulers) save its independence. Do you know about Principality of Arzrunids or Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia (a state formed during the same centuries with an Armenian population and culture)? PS- Are you sure Armenians in the Khachen spoke Arranian language? First time Im hearing aboutn such a "version" (if to not mark V. Shnirelman's critics on Azerbaijani nationalism and "Albanian" myth). Andranikpasha 10:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

It is known that people of Arran spoke their own language as late as the 10th century, and Khachen was part of Arran. Grandmaster 11:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

That's OR. We have provided many sources which document that Armenia was reinstated as a Kingdom by the Byzantine. Arabs went even further by making Partav as one of thier capitals. Albania as a kingdom or state was completely non-existent by then. And you have not provided any single source which would substantiate your contention. Albania equates what Anatolia is in Turkey, a geographic name which does not contradict with it being currently in Turkey. Why don't we start editing Turkish provinces and replace Turkey with Anatolia or write something like: It is in Turkey according to some and in Anatolia according to others?

And you still not replied to any sources provided. Dowsett calls it a region of Eastern Armenia, Hewsen calls it an Armenian Kingdom in the Armenian Plateau. Even the authors both Atabek and you support claim it being Armenian and not ethnically Albanian, Arran was nothing more than a geographic region.

And why are you using double standards here and not over in Safavid? How is it that it is an Azerbaijani Turkic Empire, when there was no such identity back then, when its entire architecture is recognized as Persian. On the other hand, Khachen, a Armenian dynasty, not only culturally Armenian, everything published and coming from there written only in Armenian. Not only the language but the architecture is also Armenian.It takes guts to push in the Safavid article what here you have a problem with, and here unlike the other article we aren't even talking about official language or the language of the rulers, but the architecture, the published material, the cultural heritage (such as the churchs).

Khachen is present day NK, so what? Can't you try forgetting that? No one in the international community will decide to leave NK alone as an independent state, just because it was a Kingdom in the past. Don't worry, oil interest will always win over historical heritage or peoples right for self determination. VartanM 18:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Andranik, you have confusion in your paragraph above. Dowsett and Minorksy say that Khachen was in Albania or was ruled by Albanian princes. You're saying Armenia didn't exist, but Khachen was Armenian principality. And before mentioning little known Shnirelman again vs. research heavy-weights like Dowsett and Minorsky, please, mind WP:WEIGHT. Thanks. Atabek 18:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL, From an encyclopedia provided ABOVE, Albania was IN Armenia under the Arabs rule. All scholars including Dowsett recognizes Khachen to be an Armenian principality. We have provided Britannica, various and countless numbers of sources, even the scholars you have provided and you are the one asking to mind WP:WEIGHT? VartanM 18:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

VartanM, the article is in dispute, since you're pushing POV and not letting third-party source to be reflected on the page. I am not asking to claim principality of certain origin, I am only asking for NPOV references to be incorporated on the page. Atabek 02:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Atabek, I have provided a source from the same third-party which says otherwise, now either stop the pointless attacks or address them. VartanM 02:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

This redundant cycle is becoming tiresome. Neither Albania or Armenia existed as states. Khachen was a principality, an Armenian one. Simple as that.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 19:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Eupator, how was the principality Armenian if it was in Albania and ruled by Albanian princes, and neither Albania or Armenia existed as states? Atabek 02:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Because the Albanian princes ruling it were Armenian. They just used the "Albanian" title as a matter of fashion. Just like Italian kings bore the title of "King of Armenia." Plus, the population was Armenian.--TigranTheGreat 20:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I am adding tags back to this article, until these two references are addressed and incorporated in the body of the article, there should be no basis for removal of the tags.

• 1. C. J. F. Dowsett. "A Neglected Passage in the "History of the Caucasian Albanians"", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 19, No. 3. (1957), p.463:

"Among the prisoners captured by Bogha al-Kabir in 854, John Catholicos and Tovma Arcruni mention three Albanian princes: Atrnerseh, lord of Khachen, Sahl, son of Smbat, lord of Shake, Esay Abu Musa, lord of Ktish in Artsakh."

• 2. C. J. F. Dowsett. "The Albanian Chronicle of Mxit'ar Goš", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 21, No. 1/3. (1958) on page 475:

"In Albania, Xacen, part of the old province of Arcax, had preserved its independence, and we know that it was partly at the request of one of its rulers, Prince Vaxtang, that Mxit'ar composed his lawbook."

THanks. Atabek (talk) 09:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC) We've been there, there is nothing remaining to debate about. Dowsett considers Khachen to be in Armenia. No addition quoted out of context will be made, Wikipedia shall not suffer because the region is now disputed. Also it is not up to you to determine what should and should not be in the article, you do not own it. --TigranTheGreat (talk) 10:09, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Tigran, I bring you Dowsett quote on Khachen being Albanian, and you tell me in return "Dowsett considers Khachen to be in Armenia", the compromise is to bring both quotes and let reader decide for himself. You can't be just unilaterally removing quotes and tags from the article, when you're not Dowsett but only someone who is interpreting his work and without consensus. Atabek (talk) 05:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I see now. You want to have the original Dowsett quote in the article out of context? We can create the article Armenian Albania, and then link to it from the Dowsett quote. Seems like a fair compromise.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 16:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not out of context, Khachen was an Albanian principality, which is reflected in Dowsett, Minorsky and even Moses Kalankatuaci. There is already an article Caucasian Albania, and no such thing as "Armenian Albania" every exists in any historical record or article reference. Atabek (talk) 00:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

No it isn't. What is referred to as Albania was just another Armenian region populated by Armenians. So anything Albanian=Armenian.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 01:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Albanian (old sense) vs. Armenian

The issue does not seem to be one of sources, so much as interpretation of those sources. Some considerable time prior to the Hasan Jalalyan dynasty the area was part of what geographers at the time (50 AD) called Albania. During the more recent periods it was part of what geographers then called Armenia. As early as 387 AD in the Byzantium-Persia Treaty, Albania (old sense) was considered a subset of Armenia. By the 6th Century the name Albania was no longer used having been replaced by Arran. In the 8th Century Arran (to the east) was separated from Khachen (to the west), . Despite the "in-depth" research into scholarly tomes indulged in by the parties above, the article has not been expanded with regard to the origins of the Khachen state, nor with regard to its eventual demise. Would that activity not be more fruitful? --Bejnar (talk) 20:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. This is what I have been saying the whole time. But users Atabek and Grandmaster are only willing to push their POV original research.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 20:49, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

POV

The page is full of POV and intended omission of two important expert references on the subject, CJF Dowsett and Vladimir Minorsky. Until the proper explanations and more balanced version are concluded, the POV tag shall remain on the page. There is more than sufficient historical references which claim this region as Albanian rather than Armenian principality. Atabek (talk) 00:15, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Tough luck. Albania had lost all ethnic and cultural meaning by the sixth century AD. The region was referred to as Albania strictly in the geographic, and sometimes ecclesiastical, sense afterwards. We call it an Armenian principality because its founders were ethnically Armenian. Anything else smacks of idiotic blather emanating from the direction of Baku.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 01:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

As it was revealed in the above discussion, those sources did not actually say what you're claiming. Returning to this page and adding a pov tag one year later isn't going to change that.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 01:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Marshall, there is no need for a counter productive and inflammatory language. Eupator, the sources are not on the article page, while the quotes brought from CJF Dowsett are on this talk page above, and they have so far not been proven wrong nor incorporated in the article. CJF Dowsett is an expert on Armenian and Albanian history, while neither of references brought on the page are even close to being specific on history of Caucasian Albania as much Dowsett (translator of Moses of Kalankatuyk into English) was. Atabek (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not disputing Dowsett's credentials. That has nothing to do with misrepresenting his work. -- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 03:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Inscription of Hasan-Jalal in Gandzasar.

Kirakos Gandzaketsi about Hasan-Jalal:

… the great prince of the lands of Khachen and Artsakh, Hasan called Jalal, an God-fearing, pious man, of Armenian nationality.

Kirakos Gandzaketsi, “History of Armenia”, c. 44

The same author:

…brave and distinguished men who had caused all the Arabian troops to quake with fear. These men were from Khachen of a prominent family, Christians, orthodox, and of Armenian nationality.
Kirakos Gandzaketsi, “History of Armenia”, c. 12

If you are not contended of these, I can quote you Armenian inscriptions of Khacen as much as you want. Only in the Gandzasar monastery there are 187 inscriptions in Old Armenian language, many of them written by the princes of Khachen themselves. --Vacio (talk) 07:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Flag

Dear User:Paolo Interdonato, I don't think that the reconstructed flag is adequately verified. There is practically no information online about the "American Research Association for Caucasian & Caspian Studies" that is said to have made the flag. Overall, I am very suspicious about these reconstructions of historical flags and their encyclopedic value. I won't delete it, but if you could help find some other information about it, I would appreciate it. Best, Revolution Saga (talk) 20:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)