“I Haven’t Read It, but the Historian Should Be Objective,” the Deputy Director of the Institute of History Says About Edik Minasyan’s Textbook

www.aravot.am inquired of Karen Khachatryan, the deputy director of the Institute of History, National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, a PhD in history and an associate professor, what he thought of the subjective interpretation of the 2008 presidential election and particularly the events of March 1 in the university textbook of the Armenian history written by Edik Minasyan, the dean of the Faculty of History, Yerevan State University. Mr. Khachatryan said that he hadn’t read the book: “I should check it out; I don’t recall what was written there.” When we said that the press and social networks were “stuffed” with the news about that Karen Khachatryan added: “The fact of the matter is that I don’t know, because I was in Karabakh, in the military bases, in the past two days, along with our institute’s workers.”

In response to our question whether the historian had the right to interpret historical events or any event and phenomenon from his own political or any other viewpoint, the deputy director of the Institute of History said: “The historian should be objective, but every historian is an individual and can have his subjective approach…. I cannot speak on everyone’s behalf. I think the historian must present the objective history; there are no two ways about it.”

Let us remind that Edik Minasyan wrote in his book: “…Serzh Sargsyan who had won the election called on the other candidates to cooperate on February 26… the massive protests of the radical opposition continued. The unauthorized rallies organized by the opposition completely destabilized the situation around the country within 10 days. The calls of different NGOs, artists and scientists, the Armenian Catholicos for tolerance and their statements were met with the disdain of L. Ter-Petrossian’s supporters who had adopted an intolerant work style in the existing atmosphere of mistrust… but ignoring all advice, the oppositionists ‘skillfully’ used the existing situation. …In order to stir up the sentiment of the masses, Levon Ter-Petrossian and his supporters made manifold statements about ‘punishing the powers that be’… L. Ter-Petrossian’s supporters continue to challenge the results of the election by unlawful means. A group of oppositionists rioted in downtown Yerevan on March 1, harming citizens and damaging the state property, as well as directly threatening citizens’ security.”

Gohar HAKOBYAN