As is the case with any state-controlled historical narrativizations, the history is often de-contextualized and re-contextualized, de-coded and re-coded so as to serve the interests of a particular class. What I have tried to do in this article is to subvert that process and, in effect, to deconstruct that which has been constructed as “Armenian History”.

This article works its way from ancient movements such as Pavlikians, Tondrakiyts, Messalians and Borborits, on to more recent anarchist fradments of Armenian history such as Shaamirian, Nalbandian, Jheon, Atabekian and especially the Anarchist origins of early Dashnaks (ARF). [This article could be of particular interest to anyone interested in Armenian history as well as to academics researching on Anarchist history in the region of Caucasus]

“Who controls the past controls the future, and who controls the present controls the past“. — George Orwell

Throughout all of its history spanning over many centuries the Armenian people have led an uninterrupted struggle for both freedom (against their conqueror: Persia, Arabian caliphate, Byzantium, Seljuk and Ottoman Turks etc) as well as for social justice (against local exploiters).

The geopolitical location did not leave any prospects of developing statehood on the territory of Armenia. For this reason Armenian people found themselves in a constant struggle against conquerors, often with their own efforts since they did not have regular armies.

Life wasn’t any less difficult under the exploitation of their own kings, feudals and clergymen.

Thus, in IV-V centuries feudals (nakharar) and the patriarchal throne concentrated in their hands vast territories of land (fertile fields and river valleys, water sources and land resources). Large monasteries also became owners of vast lands. The economic and civic conditions were becoming increasingly unbearable for the peasantry. The peasantry was gradually falling into feudal dependency: the tariffs were rising while the majority of peasants were tied to the land and were not allowed to leave.

In such socio-economic conditions brews a movement of workers against the feudals of nobility and clergy. Peasant uprisings, sometimes adopting the form of heretical movements, were directed against the feudal order and its upholder – the Christian church. At the times of its humble origins in the I-IV centuries Christianity in Armenia was the embodiment of social values and cultural codes that today approximate to those of anarcho-communism: compassion, nonviolence, sharing, mutual aid, cooperative mode of production, direct democracy and communal ownership. Until the pan-national adoption of Christianity, the first Christians were persecuted and therefore formed their own isolated communes (such as Geghard) in the mountains where they could not be found. Today we are very proud of the fact that Armenians were the first nation to adopt Christianity as a state religion in 301AD, yet rarely do we question the effects of the state religion ever since those ancient times till now. And so in V-XI centuries we see the uprisings of Borborit and Messalian, Pavlikian and Tondrakiyts movements. Though different in form and ideology, all of them carried a similar anti-feudal character. Especially popular were the movements of Pavlikians and Tondrakits.

The Pavlikian movement (VII-IX centuries, named after one of its leaders), like other peasant movements was of a religiously-heretical character. Pavlikians rejected feudal land-ownership, social inequality, the church and its rituals, and the notion of “afterlife”. In essence they protested against the feudal exploitation, and believed that all people should be equal in life as they are equal at birth and death (a principle that must have been unheard of and absurd at the time). Their ranks were rapidly growing with workers and laborers from towns and villages – the oppressed strata of the society. Among mentioned participants we also find some clergymen and small landowners. Apart from Armenians the Pavlikian movement included Greeks, Arabs and Syrians; that is to say, the Pavlikian movement was not restricted by national boundaries and was in many ways a truly Internationalist in its character. The Pavlikians had their own preachers who would travel from one region to another, thus disseminating their ideas. They created their own communities and fought against regular armies. Nevertheless, the military machinery managed to crush this movement, though the Pavlikian ideology could not be eradicated. In the X-th century Pavlikians moved to Frakia (Thraki), where they continued their activities. Their ideas were then spread across Balkans and later European countries where they found a more fertile ground.

In X-XI centuries a new wave of peasant uprisings ignites across Armenia. According to a historian-contemporary, Ohaness Draskhanakertsi, the peasants of Ararat region were fighting with arms against major feudals and manors, thus destroying their castles and property. Another peasant uprising started also in Syunik. After the construction of the Tatev monastery (906AD) the surrounding villages and communities became the property of monks. In protest to this, the peasants led a continuous struggle against the clergymen, which sometimes took forms of an open insurrection. The most bloody of these was the battle in Tsurabert. Here the peasants attacked the monastery and took back its lands and properties. Soon, however, this uprising was crushed. Nevertheless, the Tsurabert population rose again. This struggle continued for many years until in 990 AD the king of Syunik, Vasak, leveled Tsurabert to the ground and silenced whatever population remained.

In X-XI centuries another movement known as Tondrakiyts (after the name of Tondrak village) gained a popular support. The founder of the movement was Smbat Zarekhavantsi – reportedly a well educated and wise man. Tondrakiyts people rejected the notions of soul’s immortality, afterlife as well as the institution of the church, and were supporters of an egalitarian self-determination, which also incorporated the notion of social equality between men and women. To realize their ideals Tondrakiyts people formed their own communes in late-9^th – early 10^th century, and took part in the uprisings in Ararat and Syunik regions. The Tondrakiyts movement had many similarities with the Pavlikian movement and in essence was its continuation. However, while the Pavlikian movement was placing its emphasis on the social and national liberation (from Arab and Byzantian occupation), the Tondrakiyts movement had a sharper agenda pertaining to social justice and class struggle.

The history teaches us that the Armenian working people never succumbed neither to the external conquerors, nor to the internal exploiters. It shows that the Armenian people have always and continuously aspired to the ideals of freedom and equality and never bowed to political, ethnical or gender hierarchies and inequalities. These ideas are as old as the world, but to this day they remain progressive and applicable.

Intellectuals, artists, thinkers and activists have played a substantial role in the struggle of the Armenian people. In the second half of the 18^th century the Second Armenian Enlightenment started emerging and evolving, which adopted anti-feudal, democratic, revolutionary and deeply patriotic ideology. One of the vivid figures of this movement was Shaamir Shaamirian. In his famous book “The Trap of Ambition” he wrote that individuals are born free and equal, and that no other individual has the right to use violence and exercise authority over him.

“Even among animals there isn’t one central figure that would dominate and control the rest: therefore, it is an insult to our intelligence to be obedient to one person who retains same appearance and qualities as us, though becomes our almighty ruler”.

In a decisive rejection of monarchical order, Shaamirian believed that it is necessary to create “jhoghovarutyun” (the rule by the people): the country must be ruled by a parliament – “The House of Armenians” – where all classes of society would be represented. The elections should be equal and general; a person must be guaranteed with maximum individual freedom and the elitist privileges must be abolished. All posts, including the judges, must be elected – an idea that paralleled that of Bakunin. The church must be separated from the State.

Another prominent thinker and activist later in 19^th century was Mikael Nalbandian (1829–1866) – a poet, a writer and a publisher. In his time this revolutionary openly declared: