An outstanding demographic study of
17-18th century eastern Armenia
Since the Armenian state's defeat in the 2020
Armenian-Azerbaijani 44-Day Karabakh War and since the final ethnic cleansing
of Armenians from Karabakh in September 2023, the common people of Armenia now
confront a new veritable existential challenge. Arrogant sectors of the
Azerbaijani ruling class are shamelessly calling into question the very right
of Armenians to live even within Armenia's current borders. Their immediate
target is Syunik, the geo-strategically critical southernmost province of Armenia.
But the entirety of Armenia is also in their gun sights.
A basis for this Azerbaijani assault is the chauvinist,
anti-democratic and potentially genocidal thesis that Armenians have no right
to a nation-state in the Caucuses, that Syunik and the Yerevan region, the core
of Armenia, are original Azerbaijani lands and that Armenians are colonial-settlers living on expropriated Azerbaijani
homelands. The Armenians it is claimed were planted in the region by 19th
century Tsarism to facilitate imperial control. It is worth remarking that in
loud denunciations of settler-colonialism the Azerbaijani chauvinists dare not
refer to genocidal Israeli settler-colonialism! After all, Azerbaijan is in
close alliance with Israel that provided vital military assistance in its war
against Karabakh’s Armenians!
Book
cover: Armen Ayvazyan’s ‘Demography of
the Eastern Armenians in the 17th - 18th Centuries and the Numerical Strength
of the Armenian Army in the 1720s.
Armen Ayvazyan's monumental ‘Demography of the Eastern Armenians in the
17th - 18th Centuries and the Numerical Strength of the Armenian Army in the
1720s’ (663pp, Yerevan, 2022) is an definitive
rebuttal of fake history peddled by Azerbaijani ideologues and politicians,
including Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev. Its meticulous and systematically
argued conclusions rest on a vast array of primary sources with credible
inferences from the military calculations of potential Armenian troop
mobilizations by 17th century Armenian national leader Israel Ori. The volume
speaks irrefutably of the Armenian presence in eastern Armenia long, long
before any Tsarist conquest.
A
major contribution to demographic history, Ayvazyan’s endeavor deserves to be
emulated for other regions and other eras. Significantly, for an examination of
the course of modern Armenian nation formation, the book also casts a clear
light on the consequences of the defeat of the 1720s Armenian Uprising in
Karabakh. In addition, the close examination of Israel Ori's preparations for
an uprising against Persian domination reveals him as a strategist of
substance, one of whose central concerns was not learnt from by future leaders
of the Armenian national movement.
Armen Ayvazyan
I. Demographic
truths
Not a single claim that Armenians in Armenia and Karabakh
are only descendants of Tsarist planted colonial settlers withstands Ayvazyan's
investigation. Before a remark on his methodology, it is worth noting his
essential conclusions presented in bold and rounded figures. “In the light of
the above examination”,
in the first two decades of the 1700s, that is a century earlier
than the Tsarist conquest of the Caucuses that commenced in 1800, Ayvazyan
writes that:
“...the rounded, approximate, figure for eastern Armenia's
Armenian population was (already-EA) 2.5 million and that of western Armenia
between 2.5 and 3 million. Therefore during those years
one must evaluate the overall figure of Armenians as being between 5 and 5.5
million (p447).’’
More particularly, “it is acceptable to assert '' that the
population of Karabakh during the 1710-1720 years, again “according to the
examination conducted”, totalled at least 500,000
(p300). Meanwhile, for the same period a detailed examination of surviving data
of incomes received from surrounding villages by the Datev Bishopric, indicates
that Syunik’s Armenian population stood at around 630,350 (p148-149).
Taking a longer view the author writes that:
“...in approximate figures, until 1604 (the year of the mass
deportations of Armenians from Armenia by Iranian Shah Abbas – EA) the Ararat
region’s (including the province of Nakhichevan) 1500 villages and hamlets had
a population of about 675,000 with another 100,000 living in four large towns
and 50,000 in 11 smaller village towns. The total population of the area
therefore was 825,000, or rounded out it comes to 800,000 (p234).’
The 1604-1618 Iranian Shah Abbas's deportations were however
a massive blow. Between 400,000 and 600,000 men, women and children were
forcibly driven from their homes with only some 300,000 surviving the
treacherous journey to Iran (p237). Nevertheless, the population of eastern
Armenia was to rapidly recover and reach 2 million within a century, albeit
with different regional distributions now weighted away from the Ararat region
to the safer regions of Syunik and Karabakh (p263).
Such were the demographic realities that underpinned and
enabled the tremendously powerful 1720s Armenian Uprising by Karabakh’s
semi-autonomous political-military principalities against Persian and then
Ottoman domination. The significant Armenian presence in eastern Armenia is
especially underscored by the rebel leadership's ability to enroll up to 43,000
Armenian troops in their campaign, a figure possible only on the basis of a
substantial population. Moreover, the audacious moves, especially by the Uprising's
first leader David Beg could not have been taken without a broad and rooted
Armenian presence that together with the then existing semi-autonomous military
and political Armenian power harbored the potential to accelerate sturdy nation
formation.
II. Methodology
Many will try hard to fault Ayvazyan’s conclusions and his
methodology. But attempted refutation would be a futile challenge even to the
most stalwart and skilled falsifier however much his data and statistics are
qualified.
Armen Ayvazyan's study opens with a presentation of data
gathered in 1699 by Israel Ori about the number of potential Armenian troops
that could be raised in eastern Armenia for the hoped for rising against
Persian domination. Arguing a ratio of 1 soldier for every 10 people as a
traditionally accepted figure, Ori's numbers, detailed for each eastern
Armenian province, translate into a total eastern Armenian population of
1,920,000. Ori based his calculations on statistics from Church taxpaying
records, from local Church officials as well as other informants (p45-47).
Statue of Israel Ori, in Jermuk, Armenia, from Wikipedia
Ayvazyan does not take Ori's figures for granted and is
aware that many have dismissed them as outlandish and grossly exaggerated. But
Ayvazyan’s persuasive retort comes in the form of assiduous sets of cross
checks, cross-references and comparisons of findings and data from the most
diverse sources – Church tithe records, European travelers’ memoirs, Church
leaders' letters and documents, Ottoman, Russian and Persian references and
much more. Ayvazyan proffers detailed demographic information on each individual
eastern Armenian province that he puts under an investigative microscope – all
this with cogent effect.
One example underlining the reliability of drawing on
Israeli Ori's military mobilization calculations for Syunik, is Ayvazyan's
thorough examination of a surviving late 17th century log of incomes received
by the massive Syunik province Datev Bishopric, calculated on named villages
and population estimates for each village in turn calculated according to the
number of households and on average persons per household paying their dues.
Ayvazyan concludes with a population figure of around 600,000 which is notably
close to calculations based on Ori’s troop figures for regions that comprise
the province of Syunik (p129-152). In another instance affirming the historical
Armenian presence in Iranian occupied eastern Armenia Ayvazyan taking into account all qualifying factors meticulously
examines records of head taxes paid by Armenian communities.
Contrary to chauvinist Azerbaijani claims, Armenian common
people were not planted by the Tsarist empire but were settled there centuries
upon centuries before. It requires affirming nevertheless that Armenians would
have equal, albeit naturally not exclusive, rights to build their homelands in
these regions even had they not already been settled there for tens of
centuries.
Great population movements of common people have regularly
been deployed by imperial powers to weaken opponents or to secure strategic
advantage. Added to what are essentially forced relocations are migrations
caused by flights from war zones, from natural catastrophes, from epidemics and
famines. But always, the common people having had their lives upended by great
powers or other causes begin to rebuild them wherever they are able, setting
roots and creating new homelands. Claims of one people to a particular
territory never abrogates those of other peoples’.
Azerbaijani fantasists should note that historically ceaseless population
movements by the common people for whatever reason, render exclusive claims to
a specific territory empty.
III. The
1720 Uprising defeated – consequences
A great deal of Ayvazyan's argument is knitted around the
1720s Karabakh Armenian Uprising when semi-autonomous principalities challenged
the power of both Persian and Ottoman empires with a vision of greater freedom
and greater autonomy in alliance with Georgia, and in balance between
neighboring imperial powers. As he charts Armenian population numbers before
and following the uprising Ayvazyan compels thought on the terrible price of
the Uprising's defeat. Despite notable military triumphs the Armenians of
Karabakh led first by David Beg and then by Mkhitar Sparapet
were eventually overwhelmed. In the wake of the 1720s defeat Armenian
principalities underwent rapid decline and were finally dissolved following the
Russian occupation in 1805. Critical to this decline was a sustained
demographic collapse.
Tomb of
Mkhitar Sparapet, from Wikipedia
Whilst eastern Armenia's Armenian population had within a
century recovered from the catastrophe of the Shah Abbas deportations, the
story was entirely different following the failure of David Beg's and Mkhitar Sparapet’s project. From 1710 to 1797 Karabakh's population
fell by 2/3rds (p74-75) and it was never to fully
recover.
“...from the 1720s until 1797 Karabakh recorded a tenfold
decline of the Armenian population, from 100,000 families to 11,000 (that is
from approximately 500,000 people to near 55,000) (p305, 315).”
A similar picture obtained in eastern Armenia generally.
Commenting on the experience of the town of Meghri in
Syunik whose population, in 1767, in part because of its successful 1720s
resistance was the same as at the opening of the century Ayvazyan notes that
this was:
“...in contrast to many, many (eastern Armenian) provinces
and communities that since 1722 had suffered decisive demographic
falls...(p154).
Ayvazyan justly comments that demographically and otherwise
for eastern Armenians:
“...the 18th century from the 1720s became a harsh
historical epoch, perhaps the harshest (p335).”
With the diminished power of Armenian principalities, the
forces of population decline operated relentlessly and unrestrained -
Islamization, forced emigration, ethnic cleansing, war, famine, disease and
poverty. The process was accelerated by distorted, Diaspora-based Armenian
capitalist development, capitalist development not in core Armenian lands but
in Baku, Tbilisi and beyond. It sucked tens of thousands of Armenians from
their homelands in eastern Armenia. Karabakh never recovered its Armenian demographic
density even as Azerbaijanis also registered population declines in the area.
The Soviet era for a brief period consolidated Armenian positions, but the
Third Republic failed miserably in securing the future of Karabakh's Armenian
population that experienced tragedy in September 2023.
Had the 1720s Uprising triumphed, the subsequent
consolidation of Armenian life in an economically and strategically promising
region could have secured a safe haven for Armenian national development. With
a strong autonomous eastern Armenia sections of
Armenian merchant and trading capital instead of migrating across the globe
through Iran, Russia and the Ottoman empires would also have profited from
investments at home and thereby generated a core for modern Armenian national
development. Such prospects for nation-formation suffered a terrible blow after
the Uprising's defeat, with devastating historic consequences.
IV. The
strategic wisdom of Israel Ori
Israel Ori (1659-1711) was a leader of the early 17th - 18th
century Armenian National Liberation Movement (ANLM). In 1699 he had prepared
elaborate proposals for mobilizing and organizing a large Armenian army based
in eastern Armenia. He hoped that such a force would, with additional critical
support from European great powers, lead a war against the Persian and Ottoman
occupation of Armenia. The detailed record of Ori's demographic-military
calculations throws important light on the poverty of subsequent ANLM elite
strategic thinking and their failure to learn anything from Ori's principles,
approach and program.
Statue of Israel Ori, in Jermuk, Armenia, from Wikipedia
Like all national liberation movements Ori too naturally
sought external support from powerful states, an absolutely necessary step for
small nations in struggle against immensely superior occupying forces. But
critically, and here the 19th and 20th century Armenian elites learnt nothing,
for Ori the core of a rational national strategy, the condition and premise for
seeking foreign assistance, was the preparation of a viable, independent and
effective national military force. Independent Armenian power was the first
premise of Ori's approach.
The posture of 19th and 20th century Armenian elites was
totally different. They acted with passive, almost absolute submissive reliance
on foreign – primarily European imperial power, on France, Britain, Russia, the
USA and eventually upon the extreme national chauvinist Young Turks – to secure
Armenian interests and emancipation. This elite never attended to the
indispensable business of creating independent foundations for Armenian power
that would give Armenians agency and the means to act in the event of
inevitable great power treacheries. The elite's passive reliance on foreign
agencies came to a tragic head 1908 when the ARF entered into alliance with the
Young Turks and disbanded the ANLM’s independent military wing leaving the
Armenian people defenseless against the 1915 genocide!
Ori's life and thoughts deserve greater attention.
********
Ending this review on what now follows may sound entirely
inappropriate. But it needs to be said, reflecting as it does the sad state of
current Armenian thought about the future of the state, the nation and the
common people. It is hoped that this book is widely read and discussed. It is
tragic however that its print-run was a mere 250 copies! How will the young,
the students, the common people be able to access vital documents if print runs
are so small! Let us hope demand for this volume generates a second edition or
that it is also published in digital format. It needs to receive a wide
audience.
|
|
Eddie
Arnavoudian holds degrees in history and
politics from Manchester, England, and is ANN/Groong's
commentator-in-residence on Armenian literature. His works on literary and
political issues have also appeared in Harach in
Paris, Nairi in Beirut and Open Letter in Los
Angeles. |
