ETHNOGENESİS OF SMALL PEOPLES OR THE SEARCH FOR ETERNAL HİSTORY (PROBLEMS OF SOURCE STUDY)

Abstract

The genesis of nations tends to grow and expand. Separated from an ethnic group, small groups are doomed to isolation, vulnerability and backwardness from integration and development. The character of "history" is similar to a human being, and when he goes beyond his natural development, he feels like a person with a "nonvalue complex".

To determine the ethnogenesis of peoples, one can reconstruct the general picture of historical genesis by summarizing traditional historical knowledge, information provided by modern archaeological excavations, materials provided by linguistics, ethnogenetics, the theory of proto-languages and modern scientific knowledge. The general outlines of the great genesis and the landscape of ethnos are known in the historical reconstruction of the last 6-7 thousand years. Using this model, it is impossible to recreate the ethnogenesis of isolated peoples.

From this point of view, attempts to synonymize such concepts as “Armenian”, “Armenia”, “Armeni”, “haik”, “Urartu” and so on are nothing more than manipulation of isolated small peoples in the “historical darkness”. The famous Russian researcher Alexander Anninsky, in his 1899 book “Ancient Armenian Historians as Historical Sources”, published in Odessa, analyzes several medieval Armenian books, exposes their systematic falsification and considers it wrong to use them as historical sources. One might think that this put an end to the deception of Armenian historians. However, this did not happen, and falsifications and references to exposed sources continue and continue to this day.