From
The Armenian Weekly On-Line
http://www.armenianweekly.com
The Armenian Weekly; Volume 73, No. 39; Sept. 29, 2007
'Armenian Dissidence'
Research Sets Preconceptions of Ancient Armenian Liberty on Fire
By Andy Turpin
BELMONT, Mass. (A.W.)-On Sept. 20, Dr. Seta Dadoyan, visiting professor at
the St. Nersess Seminary in New York, spoke at NAASR on "Armenian
Dissidence: Highlights of an Unwritten History."
Dadoyan opened her talk by quoting Charles Darwin, who described his seminal
work, The Origin of the Species, saying, "The whole thing is just one long
argument for a thesis. My entire work is an argument."
"In Armenian, there's only one word for dissidence, and it's not quite
dissidence," Dadoyan said. "Dissidence is the opposition of something
established... Women's rights, anti-slavery, labor movements-these
progressives were all defending human rights in their dissidence. Da Vinci,
Martin Luther, Picasso, Nietzsche-these were all nonconformists," she
explained.
"In the humanities, by which I mean the social sciences, we use the terms
'philosophical dissonance,' we don't say 'dissidence.'" Speaking of
Armenians, she said, "Critical thought has not become part of our culture.
This is very sad but true. We still haven't accepted critical views of our
culture."
Dadoyan cited the Copernican revolution of heliocentric science as proof of
effective dissident behavior by intellectuals. "Not that the universe had
changed, but man had a truer image of it," she said. "This is dissidence."
Calling for further delving into less studied epochs of Armenian history,
Dadoyan clarified, "By dissidence, I mean a sense of course and action that
are liberal in essence. I'm looking for a truer image of Armenians than I've
been given... The existing models, in my opinion, have ceased to conform to
contemporary scholarship of writing history. There's this lagging," she
added.
According to Dadoyan, "These models do not provide explanations for odd
phenomenon. We should look at these factors as integral and review our
accounts. Many cases did not find their way into the mainstream narratives
because Armenian histories served political parties-and they still do."
Speaking about the gaps and suppression of adequate information in old
Armenian sources, Dadoyan said, "If I want a piece of specific information,
I don't know really where to look. It's not in the Armenian historical
record."
She stated vehemently, "The Armenian scholar must really know everything.
You must know the cultures of the region. You will never know anything
Armenian if you don't know other cultures. We're much more cosmopolitan than
we think."
Dadoyan critiqued the nationalism that permeates Armenian history writing,
saying, "No nation is pure in essence. There is a lag and the idea is a pure
abstraction.
In contrast to zealots that cry generational assimilation and the collapse
of Armenian Christianity, Dadoyan suggested instead that "We are returning
to ancient times."
Dadoyan explained early Armenian-Christian thought that "Christ was born as
a man, but he was so good, he was adopted by God." She stated, "Armenian
'Lutheran' tendencies are as old as Armenian Christianity itself. But they've
been left out of the story."
Countering the synchronized claim that Armenia's populous accepted
Christianity in 301 A.D. full stop, Dadoyan explained, "It took 10 centuries
to be accepted by the people. It did not take place all at once and whoever
practiced their own interpretation of the faith was anathematized and made
heretics [by the Church]."
"The inferiority of women was rejected. So was slavery," she went on. "Do
you see the roots of Armenian feminism in dissidence?"
Dadoyan spoke to the high period of Armenian dissident groups, saying, "The
entire 10th century is a mystery, and it's an incredibly interesting period.
At this time the Armenian dissidence really became powerful."
She cited a 10th-century Armenian tribal lord who chronicled, after raiding
a dissident stronghold, "I destroyed their entire literature. I went to
every corner and made sure nothing survived." She then noted, "But the
Byzantine sources mention them."
Dadoyan culminated by discussing the damage caused by 19th and 20th-century
nationalist histories, stating, "I believe nationalism abstracted and
weakened the more radical ideas of the Enlightenment. As we come to the 20th
century, I'm afraid the genocide covered the century. There's no
self-reference. These are nothing but nationalists. They are not
dissidents."
She said of today's nationalist paradigm of Armenian history, "These are
modern words. We cannot implement them into the old stories. It was a
different world."
Dadoyan suggested, "Let's change the hypothesis and use other sources. This
thing is methodological. There are better paradigms. The older formulas are
out."
Asked by an audience member about how far she believed she could take her
research, at the St. Nersess seminary in particular, Dadoyan quipped, "I don't
know, how much can I ruin?"
