The article analyzes the key features of the Armenian historiography of the late Soviet and post-Soviet periods. With rare exceptions, it was formed within the framework of predominantly Armenian approaches, which are characterized by “zealotry” in the Toynbean sense and primordialism in its various manifestations. Armenian studies, as one of the very specific areas of Orientalism, originated in Western Europe, from where it then spread to Russia and Armenia. While it was developing in line with the European scientific tradition, it was distinguished by its academicism, critical, but generally friendly attitude to sources and research material. However, with the transition of Armenian studies to the sphere of interests of Armenian intellectuals — primarily historians and literary critics — it, on the one hand, was enriched by their deeper knowledge of the Armenian language, history, literature and culture, and on the other, acquired a pronounced “zealotish” character. This trend originates in the activities of the Mekhitarians, a Catholic monastic congregation based on the island of St. Lazarus in Venice. “Zealotry” is traditionally associated with primordialism, which is represented in all its classical forms in Armenian studies, but also has a number of unique features. These include a special attitude to historical geography, the desire to unnecessarily antiquate the already ancient history, as well as reliance on mythology, linking the Armenian ethnic group with the “sacred land” and the divine principle. An important feature is also the close alignment of the Armenian ethnicity with Christianity and the Armenian Apostolic Church, while at the same time not paying enough attention to the institutions of state power and civic values. Finally, for more than a century, the Armenian Genocide of 1915 has remained a central element of the primordialist discourse of Armenian ethnic identity.
Yervand Margaryan (Wed,) studied this question.