bell-the-cat
-
Posts
118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Calendar
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Posts posted by bell-the-cat
-
-
Karn, what is the source of your information?
-
The important phrase in the following is "Prior to travelling to Djulfa, they
will need to get the necessary authorisations from the Azerbaijani
authorities." Of course, no such authorisation will ever be given by
Azerbaycan, and no investigation team will ever be sent to examine Julfa.
The European Parliament (also of course) know this - which is why it is an empty
gesture. But it will silence critics for long enough until the whole issue can be
safely forgotten. Am I too cynical?
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT SET TO SEND INVESTIGATION TEAM
TO EXAMINE AZERBAIJAN'S DESECRATION OF DJULFA CEMETERY
-- South Caucasus Delegation Set to Travel to Region at the End of April
STRASBURG (FRANCE) - Speaking at an official conference on Thursday, April
6th, the President of the European Parliament was joined by the leaders of
its political parties in strongly approving the body's decision to send a
delegation in Djulfa, in the Nakhichevan region of Azerbaijan.
The aim of the mission is to investigate the destruction by Azerbaijan of
the Armenian cemetery in Djulfa, a treasure of world architectural heritage
that was effectively destroyed and replaced by an Azerbaijani military
facility.
The EP leaders unanimously decided to entrust this mission to the
Commission on EU-Armenia parliamentary cooperation rather than to an ad-hoc
delegation, as it had initially been planned.
The mission is being sent in accordance with the Parliament's resolution
"on cultural heritage in Azerbaijan," which was adopted in February of 2006
(P6_TA(2006)0069). This measure "demands that Azerbaijan allow missions,
including experts working with ICOMOS, who are dedicated to surveying and
protecting archaeological heritage, in particular Armenian heritage, onto
its territory, and that it also allow a European Parliament delegation to
visit the archaeological site at Djulfa."
The delegation will be composed of ten Members of the European Parliament
(MEP) who are members of the Commission of EU-Armenia parliamentary
cooperation group. They are set to travel to Djulfa as part of their trip
to Armenia from April 17th to 21st. Prior to travelling to Djulfa, they
will need to get the necessary authorisations from the Azerbaijani
authorities.
The delegation will include the following MEPs:
Mme Marie-Anne Isler-Béguin, présidente (Verts, France)
M. Arpad Duka-Zolyomi, vice-président (PPE, Slovaquie)
M. Alessandro Battilocchio (NI, Italie)
M. Johannes Blokand (IND/DEM, Pays-Bas)
Mme Frederika Brepoels (PPE, Belgique)
M. Robert Evans (PSE, R.-U.)
Mme Siiri Oviir (ALDE, Estonie)
Mme Gabriele Stauer (PPE, Allemagne)
M. Hannes Swoboda (PSE, Autriche)
M. Tadeusz Zwiefka (PPE, Pologne)
-
NB: the above text came from a pdf file.
And the removed section. The Greens, who were against the resolution because some of their numbers included ethnic Turks, tried to have the following text inserted, between sections F and G. They did not succeed, since they could offer no evidence that such destruction had taken place.
"whereas the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has already led directly or indirectly to the
destruction by Armenian forces of many invaluable objects of Azerbaijani cultural, religious
and historical heritage in the occupied territories, in Nagorno-Karabakh and on Armenian
territory,"
-
European Parliament resolution on Azerbaijan
The European Parliament,
– having regard to its resolutions of 9 June 2005 and 27 October 2005 on Azerbaijan,
– having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2006 on the European Neighbourhood Policy,
– having regard to its previous resolutions on the South Caucasus and especially its resolution
adopted on 11 March 1999 and its recommendation adopted on 26 February 2004,
– having regard to its previous resolutions on the South Caucasus and especially its resolution
adopted on 11 March 1999 and its recommendation adopted on 26 February 2004,
– having regard to the decision taken by the Council on the 14 June 2004 to include both
Armenia and Azerbaijan in the European Neighbourhood Policy, in particular for the purpose
of fostering goodneighbourly relations, especially through respect for minorities,
– having regard to the obligations of Azerbaijan and Armenia towards the Council of Europe,
especially through the European Cultural Convention, the revised European Convention for
the Protection of Archaeological Heritage, and the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities, that they have ratified and undertaken to respect,
– having regard to the UNESCO 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural
Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and its 1954 Protocol, to which both Armenia and
Azerbaijan are party, as applicable to occupied territories,
– having regard to the 2003 UNESCO Declaration concerning the Intentional Destruction of
Cultural Heritage whereby the international community recognises the importance of the
protection of cultural heritage and reaffirms its commitment to combat its intentional
destruction in any form so that such cultural heritage may be transmitted to the succeeding
generations,
– having regard to the report of ICOMOS and the intermediary report on freedom of worship
and religion made by the UN Committee for Human Rights,
– having regard to Rule 115(5) of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas allegations have been made by Armenia that campaigns to destroy the Armenian
cemetery at Djulfa in the region of Nakhichevan were carried out by Azerbaijani forces in
November 1998 and December 2002; whereas the most recent destruction took place in
December 2005, as evidenced by the recent video footage from the Armenian authorities,
B. whereas there were numerous reactions to these actions from the international community;
whereas Azerbaijan has not provided answers to inquiries from Mr Abdelfattah Amor, the
former special rapporteur of the United Nations, concerning the events in November 1998
and December 2002,
C. whereas serious allegations have been raised about the involvement of the Azerbaijani
authorities in the destruction of these monuments,
D. underlining the exceptional nature of this archaeological site, which still had 6000
'khatchkars' remaining – crosses carved in stone typical of Armenian religious art – and
which testifies to the ethnic and cultural diversity of the region,
E. whereas the destruction or desecration of any monuments or objects of cultural, religious or national heritage infringes the principles of the European Union,
F. whereas that destruction is taking place in the context of the suspended conflict between
Armenia and Azerbaijan on the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh,
G. whereas there might soon be a favourable outcome to the negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh and agreement might be reached on the principles for settling the conflict in spite of the unproductive meeting in Rambouillet between the presidents of Armenia and of Azerbaijan on 10 and 11 February 2006,
H. recalling that the European Neighbourhood Policy aims to establish a privileged partnership with Azerbaijan and Armenia on the basis of common values, including respect for minorities and their cultural heritage,
1. Condemns strongly the destruction of the Djulfa cemetery as well as the destruction of all
sites of historical importance that has taken place on Armenian or Azerbaijani territory, and
condemns any such action that seeks to destroy the cultural heritage of a people;
2. Calls on the Council and the Commission to make clear to Armenia and Azerbaijan that all
efforts must be made to stop the practice of ethnic cleansing which has led to such actions,
and to find ways to facilitate the gradual return of refugees and displaced people;
3. Demands that Azerbaijan and Armenia respect their international commitments - notably in the cultural realm - and especially those deriving from their accession to the Council of
Europe and incorporation into the European Neighbourhood Policy;
4. Stresses that respect for minority rights including historical, religious and cultural heritage is conditional on the genuine and effective development of the European Neighbourhood Policy, which must also lead to the establishment of goodneighbourly relations between all
the countries concerned;
5. Demands that Azerbaijan allow missions dedicated to surveying and protecting the
archaeological heritage on its territory, especially Armenian heritage, such as experts
working with ICOMOS, and also allow a European Parliament delegation to visit the
archaeological site at Djulfa;
6. Calls on Armenia and Azerbaijan to abide by their international commitments, in particular
in the area of culture and of safeguarding cultural heritage, entered into within international
bodies such as UNESCO and the Council of Europe, and calls on them to do their utmost to
protect archaeological, historical and cultural heritage on their territories in order to prevent
the destruction of other endangered sites;
7. Invites the Commission and the Council to incorporate a clause on protecting those
territories’ invaluable archaeological or historical sites into the action plans currently being
discussed in a European Neighbourhood Policy context;
8. Invites the Commission and the Council to make the implementation of the European
Neighbourhood Policy action plans conditional on respect by Azerbaijan's and Armenia's for
universally accepted principles, in particular their obligations as members of the Council of
Europe, regarding human and minority rights, and calls on the Commission and the Council
to incorporate into these action plans specific provisions for the protection of the cultural
heritage of minorities;
9. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the national parliaments and governments of the Member States, the Government and the President of Armenia, the Government and the President of Azerbaijan, as well as the OSCE
Parliamentary Assembly, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the
Director-General of UNESCO, and the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
-
There will probably be a motion condemming the destruction that will be presented to the European Parliament next week.
-
Karmir, кажеться тема про это уже была?
Кстати, тема важная, но статься архинеудачная. Вся эта длинная увертюра с “Спасающийся от турецкого ятагана изможденный крестьянин” расчитанная на эмоции, просто вырубает всю оперативность и информативность статьи уже на подступах ко второму параграфу…
I disagree. It reveals that, in 1915, even the starving and uneducated peasants instinctively knew what was important and priceless and irreplaceable - an instinct that the rich and powerful in today's Armenia seem to have lost.
-
Насколько я понял, в конце мая Нахиджеван посетит докладчик ПАСЕ чтобы на месте ознакомиться с ситуацией.
I will believe that this will happen only when he actually sets foot in Nakhchivan.
-
Pictures speak louder than words. Abrakounis - then and now.
[attachmentid=22091]
-
Репортаж Шотландца Стивена Сима из Нахиджевана, которого власти вынудили покинуть область.
http://www.aga-online.org/downloads/de/eth...an%20report.pdf
C'est moi!
-
A collection of over 40 old postcards and photographs of the town of Kars.
http://www.virtualani.freeserve.co.uk/kars...album/index.htm
If anyone has more then please send them in.
-
-
All are now destroyed, we can be certain. The Azeris now call it Aylis. I got a far as Ordubad this year, but I was stopped by police from proceeding further, and put under observation until I left the town by the next available bus.
-
Here is a much smaller version of the video, for those without broadband.
http://mysite.freeserve.com/virtualani/djugha/16-12-2005.wmv
-
Once again, please excuse me for writing in English.
I passed the Djugha cemetery in July this year, on the Naxcivan to Julfa train.
The Armenian authorities have been pathetic and amateurish in their response. This has been going on for 5 years and nothing has been done - no papers, no proper photographs, no proper pressure put on those who are tasked by international treaties to protect cultural monuments. And complete silence on the fate of the hundreds of other Armenian monuments in Nakhchivan (ALL of which I believe have now been destroyed).
It is almost as if Armenia in some way wants the Azeri's to act in this bestial way in order to whip-up Armenian public resentment against Azerbaijan. As for Unesco - they are completely disinterested - and why should they be otherwise, given Armenia's wimpish response to the destruction, and Armenia's continuing disregard for protecting its own monuments (such as at the Ani quarry).
After visiting Nakhchivan I passed on the news of what I had seen to a representative of ICOMOS, who happened to be in Kars. His response was "So what, Armenians are behaving just as bad". When I asked him to cite some examples to prove this, he couldn't. This individual, named John Hurd, is currently employed by the Global Herritage Fund to destroy the legitimate cultural heritage of Kars and replace it with an invented "Ottoman Herritage" that would not look out of place in a Disneyland-style theme park. He is also engaged in rewriting the history of Ani in order to minimise or remove its Armenian significance. According to him, Ani should not be considered an Armenian site at all! A possible 5 million dollars of Japanese money will be spent at Ani to re-inforce his position. Meanwhile, the boss of the GHF, Jeff Morgan, treats his party-guests to racist jokes about Armenians.
But I'm sure nobody but me gives a ######.
-
Please elaborate. I visited the site this October again and took tons of high qualiy photos.
Other than a new road everything looked the same as it did ten or fifteen years ago.
Just look at Karmir's first two photographs - the second photograph shows the site as it existed during the 1970s and 1980s. The top photograph is after the Lincy restoration (I am assuming this to be the case - there was a website that detailed the "improvements" that the Lincy fund paid for, but it seems to be no longer in existence). 95% of what you see in the first photograph is modern masonry - almost nothing is the original stonework.
The on-site museum is almost empty of any actual artifacts - what there is on display is mostly just colour photocopies, while valuable stone carvings lie outside, scattered, disordered, and overgrown with grass.
-
Also remember (please
) http://www.virtualani.org/aghtamar -
Не знаю ты заметил или нет, сейчас в моде у нас жёлтый туф, в основном добываемый из шахт близ Ани, собственными глазами видел 2 шахты в метрах 50 от руин Ани на нашей стороне и турки правы, отчасти именно мы и разрушаем город. Больше всего меня порозил ответ одного из ченовников мэрии г.Гюмри - на вопрос как же так ?, последовал ответ - да вы что? наши специалисты ездили туда, произвели несколько взрывов идентичный при освоении шахт и убедились что Ани на месте.
Уверен это известно и на высшем республиканском уровне, но бизнес есть бизнес а суки а в Ани суки.
Почему не вызывает это общественного возмущения даже не знаю, может маоло кто об этом знает, да и ещё один породокс все наслышанны о Ани, но мало кто там был.
I do not think that the stone being used to rebuild the Gyumri church is taken from the quarry oppposite Ani. The stone there is a very different colour and texture.
Only Yerevan priests and mafiosi can afford to buy Ani stone.
-
I visited the Zvartnots site for the fist time this summer - and I was dismayed at the destruction that has recently been inflicted on it, under the guise of "improvements", paid for by the Lincy Fund. As an archeological site, it is now almost worthless.
I saw similar, or worse, treatment inflicted on so many other monuments. It seems that there is nobody in Armenia who is willing to stand up against the Church and Mafia oligarths in order to protect Armenia's archaeological heritage.
-
Another thing. According to T.A. Sinclair, the historian Faustus of Byzantium writes that the Armenian Bishop of "Nprkert" (modern Silvan) district crossed into the Aghdzn district and founded many churches including a chapel at Tigranakert. So we have an ancient historian who places Tigranakert somewhere in Aghdzn.
-
Fine, but where in the article does it mention Tigranakert? It is a description of Arzn (Arzan, Aghdzn) – another city and ancient fortress in a neighboring district (Aghdzn gavar). The location of Arzn (Arzan) has never been a mystery, I have even seen some recent photos of Arzn’s ruins. It’s in the vicinity of modern Kurdish village named Zok, in Siirt province of Turkey, east of Arzn river (modern Garzan-su).
Tigranakert, like it was mentioned earlier, is farther west (about 60 km), west of Kaghirt river (in Turkish: Batman-su), in the neighborhood of Silvan, in Diyarbakir province of Turkey.
And thank you for the article and the diagram – very interesting. Except it’s not about Tigranakert.
(Look: even ancient historians knew very well the distinction between “Emporium Arzanenorum” and “Tigranocerta” !)
There are only a fixed number of sites that could be the site of Tigranakert, and the most likely one is Arzen - no other site comes close to filling all the requirements. For example, there is nothing at Silvan that dates from before the late Roman period. The walls at Arzen are clearly from a much earlier period. Many coins of Tigran have been found at Arzen, none at all at Silvan (Classical Martyropolis) or its vicinity.
Tacitus describes Tigranakert, and writes that a wide river, the river Nicephorius, went around one side of the city, and a huge ditch protected the other side. This does not fit Silvan or any site near there - it does fit the site at Arzen. Over 300,000 people are said to have lived in Tigranakert - even allowing for exaggeration that would imply a huge site, and descriptions of the city do mention extensive suburbs. You can see from Taylor's description that the Arzen site does extend well beyond the actual fortified area.
-
Part of Taylor's map of the region, I have circled the position of Tigranakert / Arzen.[attachmentid=19765]
-
A plan of the site.[attachmentid=19764]
-
Tigranakert is not Diyarbakir. Also, Tigranakert is NOT Miafarkeyn (modern Silvan).
There is no mystery to this if you would just look beyond Armenian sources. The site of Tigranakert has been known for almost 150 years. It is a site that today is known as Arzen.
J. G. Taylor
Notes of a Tour in Armenia, Kurdistan, and upper Mesopotamia.
Journal of the Geographical Society, volume 35, 1865.
In October, 1861, I made a short journey from Diarbekr to Saert, by Miafarkeyn, Arzen, and Zok; and from thence, following the course of the Bohtan Su, or Centritis, to Til, where it joins the Tigris, whose course I followed close up to Redhwan, on the Arzen Su. Crossing this latter river, I proceeded to Hesn Keyf, on the Tigris, and then, via Mediat and Mardin, back to Diarbekr.
(I've left out the rest of the text until he reaches Arzen.)
Four hours and a half from this (an old bridge over the Batman Su) I crossed the Iluzu Arzen, or Redhwan Su - it is called by all these names - into the present district of Gharzan. The province in which it is situated was called Arzanene by the Romans, and Artzn (Moses of Chorene), Aghdsnik, Aghdsen, and Khordsen by Armenian writers, and Arzen by the Arabs, since corrupted into its present name of Gharzan by the Kurds and Turks. It was one of the provinces taken by the Parthians from the Armenians, and was ceded A.D. 298 with Intilene, Zabdicene, Moxoene, and Cordouene, by Narses King of Persia to the Romans, under Galerius, in the time of Diocletian.
The ford was near the flourishing village of Giri Hassan, close to the ruins of Arzen, the Oppidum Arzanenorum of Procopius, situated on the left bank of the river. The ruins are very extensive; the remains of the old walls, 20 feet thick at the base, and tapering up to 8 foot, constructed of irregular pieces of rough stone, cemented with mortar, that surround the town are easily traced; and the defences towards the river, consisting of thicker walls and a number of small-domed buildings, are in still better preservation. The area contained within them is about 2700 square yards. On the north-eastern and southern sides the walls are straight and regular, but towards the west it narrows off into an irregular shape that follows the course of the stream. It has four gates, one in each of the three regular walls, and a fourth leading to the river. At the southern side is a mound of ruin connected with the wall, that seems to have been a large fortified bastion. The whole ruin is surrounded by a deep ditch, which was crossed at three of the gates by as many bridges, whose foundations still appear above ground.
When I visited it, the area included within the walls was bearing a fine crop of wheat, but the regular lines of the streets, and some of the sites of the larger buildings, could still be traced. So many medals in gold and silver are found here that the fellahs who till the ground are paid nothing by the owner for their labour, and they give him in addition half of everything they may find. The town was built on what appears a natural platform of some little elevation, which, at its western end, has a steep sharp fall into the plain about a mile from the walls, where it is bounded by a deep bed, through which a small marshy stream flows towards the Tigris, close under the Yezid village of Tellebeea, or Tileeba.
Independently of other associations, Arzen is interesting as being connected with the earliest Christian history, it having been visited, according to Abul Furraj, the Syrian historian, by Mar Addaeus, or Thaddeus, one of the Seventy, the apostle of the Syrian Chaldaeans (and the same who cured Abgarus Uchama of his leprosy), in the thirtieth year of Our Saviour's Ascension, and the fifteenth of Tiberius Caesar, who then built a church here, which was afterwards called by his name.
Higher up the river, and on the same side as Arzen, are the remains of another large city, where I found some of the earliest records of the Moslem conquest, in the shape of tombstones, bearing Cufic inscriptions in the character peculiar to the first century of their era. Many of them are now used by the Armenians of Kani Masee, a small village situated at one end of the ruins, as gravestones. As neither they nor the Moslems knew anything of the characters on them, I thought it best to leave them in their ignorance, as without doubt the latter would soon have desecrated every grave in the place did they know that on each stone the formula of their faith, together with a verse from the Koran, were engraved.
Opposite the ruins, on the right bank of the Arzen Su, which was formerly spanned at this part by a fine stone bridge, whose foundations peer above the stream, is the fine old ruin known now by the names of Kalla Sheikh Baj and Kalla Anushirvan. It is situated on a high hill of conglomerate, the usual rock formation here, having at its summit a circumference of l 1/2 mile. The remains are evidently Parthian, and consist of walls of common limestone, 14 feet thick, which in some places is composed of brickwork of thin broad tiles of the same solidity. A couple of families of decayed Gharzan Begs inhabited some miserable huts among the ruins, and they had cleared several of the old houses, which served them for a stable. These were all of course now under ground, the debris of centuries having accumulated over and covered them. They were built in arches in a very substantial manner, and seemed at one time to have occupied the whole surface, as, in several pits that had been dug in different places, the portions of many other similar buildings were also discernible. On all sides but one the mound in nothing but a steep high cliff, commanding a line uninterrupted view for many miles all round; but towards the west a winding and difficult path conducts the traveller to a large gateway still intact, and the only one in the ruin. A few greybeards of the place, who pretended to some traditional knowledge, informed me that the castle, during the times of ignorance - that is, before Islamism - belonged to the Beni Sassan; and stated that the Gharzan Begs, who live at Zok, 4 miles off, were the descendants of that dynasty in these parts; a fact that was corroborated to me by the Begs themselves on a subsequent visit I paid them. Near this is the mountainous district of Sassoon, inhabited by a warlike, unruly set of Kurds, called Baliki; they are neither Moslems, Christians, nor real Kizzilbash. They swear by a church, and never by a mosque, or the Deity, or any of the prophets.
In a footnote:
The city of Arzen at the time of the Arab conquest was the property of the Armenian lord of Bitlis, and was ceded by him to Iyadh Ebn Ghanem, Omer's general. It subsequently fell, on the decline of the Abbasides, into the hands of the Kurd Merwanides, from whom it passed to a local family. Abul Feda says, "El Melik el Mudhuffer Ghazi, son of El Adel (brother of Saladin), took Arzen of Diarbekr from its lord, Hissam ed Deen, of the ancient family of El Ahdeb, who had possessed it from Melik Shah's time, and gave him Heyni in exchange, A. H. 627," El Mudhuffer was at that time lord of Miafarkeyn.
-
The Surp Amenaprkich church in Gyumri (Alexandropol / Leninakan).If anyone has additional information about this building that they would like to be added to this page, then let me know. I am also looking for some photographs of the interior before the earthquake.Steve
Как турки армянские церкви "восстанавливают":
in Architecture
Posted
The Aghtamar so-called "restoration" is a politically inspired "restoration". It is all to do with propaganda and has nothing at all to do with preserving the structure.
For years, Armenian organisations, especially those in America, were complaining and complaining about the Turks letting Aghtamar "fall into ruins". That was also propaganda - Aghtamar was in no danger of falling into ruin. But the Turks called their bluff, decided to spend a huge sum of money on a "restoration", have done a lot of irrepairable damage to the church, and have got lots of praise from the EU for doing it!
So it is not Turkey that you should blame. It is your fellow Armenians. They set up the circumstances. They, for generation after generation, have failed completely to make any positive action to preserve Armenian monuments in Turkey. All they can do is repeat the same, tired, old propaganda of blaming Turkey for everything.
And do you really think "Armenian experts" could make a better restoration. Have you seen the damage that these so-called "experts" has been doing to Armenian monuments in Armenia?