|
A historian is much like a construction engineer that uses the material s/he has at hand to create a building that says something to those who see it; occasionally s/he has to invent new material and occasionally s/he may find her/himself in a position to neglect some of the materials on hand, not because they don’t look pretty or meaningful, but because they don’t fit into the reconstructed building. From a philosophical point of view, there is a difference between an annalist and a historian in that the annalist records the incidents, whereas the historian refers only to events. An event is not a past incident; it is an incident that has a place in the reconstruction called history. It thus becomes historical. An incident in the past may have had catastrophic impacts on the life stories of people, but unless it is recorded and delivered to the historians of the next generations, unless it is explainable within the limits of normalcy, unless it is repeatable -- if not in shape, at least in essence -- that incident does not become an event. An event is brick in the building called History; an incident is a stone in the middle of nowhere.
The Armenian and Greek presidents are like novice construction workers trying to use uncut, shapeless, fragile and cracked stones to build the histories of their nations anew. Diplomats may have learned to lie to each others’ faces, but when this is done by politicians it becomes funny. The Greek and Armenian presidents claimed during Sarksyan’s official visit to Athens that the two countries had historical ties and friendship and that the two nations have blood-ties. In fact, in the annals of the past you may find good old days between the Greeks and the Armenians, but these good old days are just incidents. The events, on the other hand, are shaped by a deep enmity between the two nations who each claim to be the very first nation to endorse Christianity. Armenians were one of the very first Eastern Churches to be declared infidels by the Greek Orthodox Synods, together with the Assyrian, Abyssinian and other Eastern Orthodox Churches. The recorded history of coexistence of Greeks and Armenians is not one of peaceful coexistence. The Ottoman archives are full of documents of appeals by Greeks and Armenians to the Sublime Porte to solve disputes between the two churches about ownership rights of this and that church, particularly in the Holy Land.
Oh, don’t forget the keystone of this Greco-Armenian history: It was thanks to Armenian support that the Turks beat the Greek armies in the Battle of Manzikert in 1071. True, some of the commanders of the Greek army were also of Armenian-Georgian origin, but these are only incidental facts of the past. What made history is the Battle of Manzikert and northern Armenians were quite helpful in opening the gates of Anatolia, and by extension, of Europe, to the Turks.
Thanks buddies!
Now, stuck in the incidents of the 1915 -- these are still not events; not because they were unimportant, but because they don’t fit to the general reconstruction we call history -- Sarksyan is suggesting that Turkey’s membership to the EU should pass through a recognition of the past. This is not an attempt at “recognition of the past.” It is an attempt at controlling the future. As Israeli President Shimon Peres said several times, who controls the present, writes history and whoever writes history, controls the future.
They say, and this I find more than funny, that the Greek president complained that the defense investment they have been making was the reason for their recent financial crisis. This is not the past; this is history. I hope the Greeks will also start a modernization process similar to that of Turkey soon and will spend some of the money that comes from the sales of the islands to education and the rehabilitation of their financial structure. |
