CC BY
97ARMANU - PRUNUS ARMENIACA: ORIGINATED IN ARMENIA (historical background of the native land of apricot versus modern information challenges)
Eduard L.Danielyan
Along with archaeological and historical geographical proofs, clarifying the origin of the terms arman(n)u1 and (Prunus) Armeniaca
(AppevtotKo) is an important argument for identification of Armanum/
' Doctor of History, Noravank Foundation consultant.
'According to the Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary: “apricot tree: armanu [TREE]
wr. ar-ma-nu “a tree”, Akk. armannu; equals [gesjhashur kur-ra; ir [TREE] wr. ir "type of tree" Akk. armannu՛, apple (tree) armanu [tree] hashur ar-ma-nu SLT 015 prism iii 29 [1]; cf. armannu [APRICOT (TREE)] (N). Written forms: GIS. HASHUR.KUR.RA. Normalized forms: armannu (GIS. HASHUR.KUR.RA) [2], A. Bomhard and J. Kerns made the following entry in “Comparative vocabulary of the Nostratic languages”: “Sumerian hashur ‘apple, apple-tree’... hashur-ar-man-nu, hashur-kur-ra ‘apricot, apricot-tree’ [3, p. 555], cf. “GIS. HASHUR/hashuru and /GIS. HASHUR KUR.RA/armanu have been identified as the apple and/or apricot” [4, p. 205]. I. Gelb [5, pp. 78-82] revived M. Lamberts proposal to identify hashur/hashuru with apricots, at the same time not accepting the translation of the word armannu or armanu as “apricot” by Thompson and von Soden. J. N. Postgate {suggested to consider salluru (a species of Prunus) as apricot} [6, pp. 118-119] and M. A. Powell (not taking into consideration archaeological and cuneiform data wrote that classical sources by their silence speak uniformally for a relatively late date for diffusion of the apricot in the Mediterranean area), denoting the meaning of the word hashurto be apple, as is generally accepted [cf. 7, pp.139-140], disagreed with Gelb’s proposal [8, pp.155-156]. Concerning the term armannu ( armanu, armanu)it is noted: “The vocabulary designation “foreign apple” in Hh. III 35f. does not give sufficient evidence to establish the meaning of armannu, and the identification with “apricot” on the basis of the Syriac name “Armenian apple” (Prunus armeniaci) is based solely on the similarity of the words armannu and armenaya” [9, p. 291]. But the Syriac form of the name of “Armenian apple” might be derived on the basis of the toponimical similarity of the origin of the ancient terms arman(n)u (Sumerian and Akkadian) and (Prunus) Armeniaca/ Appevicuca (Latin and Greek).
79
E.Daniefyan
<21st CENTURY», №2 (6), 2014
Armani with Armenia1 and its corroboration as the native land of apricot. Comprehensive analysis of archaeological data, written historical sources and research works is the backbone of the problem’s solution2.
“De Re Rustica” of Lucius Junius Moderatus Columella3 (4 - c. 70 AD) along with a smaller book (“De Arboribus” attributed to him) on trees, are important sources on Roman and other countries’ agriculture. Columella noted: “Tunc praecox bifera descendit ab arbore ficus Armeniisque, et cereolis prunisque Damasci stipantur calathi...” [22, 403-405]4.
1 The problem of location of Armanum is widely discussed in archaeological and historical studies [10, p. 6; 11, pp. 65-66 ; 12, p. 1; 13, pp. 5-34 et al]. At the same time there are researches substantiating the relation/identity of Arman(um/i) to Armenia [14, pp. 416-418; 15, с. 64-66; 16, с. 106107; 17, с. 30-32; 18, էջ 285-286; 19, pp. 1-21; 20, էջ 32-33 et al]. It has been observed that in the lexicon of the Armenian language a great many names of plants “relate to the local flora, mainly to the mountainous or piedmont landscape of the Armenian Highland, Asia Minor and Northern Mesopotamia, consequently their names had to belong to local languages”. Some of the words, which originated in the Armenian Highland, were borrowed into the neighbouring languages, and it is evidenced by the fact of the presence of “many of these names of plants, medicines even now in the world scientific literature”, traditionally have “the epithet Armenian or are known as plants of the Armenian origin (Plantum armeniacum). In Akkadian texts apricot is called (GIS) HASHUR.KUR.RA “mountain apple” or simply armannu - ‘Armenian”. N. Mkrtchyan noted: this plant the Mesopotamians related to a mountainous region, as might be the Armenian Highland”, considering Armannu possiblly identical to Armenia [21, с. 24-25, сн. 2].
2 Besides the scientific researches of the problem some rather doubtful concepts and even biased, politicized speculations have been put forward, which also have found their reflection in modern information warfare.
3 Columella much indebted to earlier authors, at the same time, it is important to pay attention to the fact that he visited Syria and Cilicia [22, pp. X, 77], during which he could get knowledge about agriculture of Armenia (Great Armenia and Armenia Minor), Cappadocia, Phrygia and Persia.
4 “Then from twice-bearing trees the early fig falls earthwards; panniers are piled high with plums waxen, Damascene and Armenian.” [23, pp. 42-43]; according to another translation, “Armenians (Armeniisque) and wax plums Damsons’ [8, p.155). In English and French translations of Columella’s work instead of the term Armeniisque sometimes is used abricots, e.g.: “. on entasse dans les paniers les abricots, les prunes couleur de cire, celle de Damas...” [24] or “Sorbi quoque et Armeniaci atque Persici non minima est gratia” is translated: “... Service-apples also and apricots and peaches have no small charm” [25, V. X. 19, pp. 98-99]
80
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
E.Danielyan
Plinius Secundus (23 – 79 AD) also mentioned the term Arme-niaca in the following passages: “Ingens postea turba prunorum...., nec non ab externa gente Armeniaca, quae sola et odore commendan-tur” [26, XV, 12, 41]1, “Martio ... ab ea proximae florent Armenia-ca...”[26, XVI, 42, 103]2.
According to Dioscorides (40-90 AD), “та Ss ркротгра, каЛоиргуа Ss Арреусака, 'Ртраюг! Ss Ррекбкта3, гостторттера тюу npoEipqpsymy ёстпу” [27, I. 115, 5, p. 109]4.
Rutilius Taurus Aemilianus Palladius (the later 4th century - first half of the 5th century AD) noted: “. Armenia vel praecoqua prunis.” [29, p. 999]5.
Ch. Daubeny interpreting Columella’s information, wrote: “We find enumerated in the first place, several kinds of plum, viz. the Armeniaca or Apricot, brought from Armenia.” [31, p. 258]. Analyzing the same information, D. J. White noted “Prunus i s most likely the plum, Prunus domes-tica L.. The tree is prunus, ֊i f.; the fruit is prunum, -i, n. .Columella mentions prunus... Armeniisque. among the fruits harvested at the very end of the gardening year”. Then the author commented: “Armeniisque: Armenia, here for Armeniaca (sc. poma), are apricots, Prunus armeniaca L.; the tree is Armeniaca (sc. arboi). Columella, in discussing types of fruit trees to plant in orchard (pomaria), remarks: “sorbiquoque et Armeniaci et Persici non minima est gratia’ [32, pp. 117, 321]. Mentioning Prunus
1 “Afterwards comes a vast crowd of plums. and there is also the Armenian plum, imported from foreign parts, the only plum that recommends itself even by its scent” [26, p. 317].
2 “In March. the next to flower . is Armeniaca .”. It is noted in the footnote: “Probably the apricot” [26, p. 455].
3 Cf praecocia [ 26, XVI, 42, 103; 51. 119].
4 “The smaller which are called Armenian and in Latin praecoqua [ premature - ripe before their time] are better for the stomach than the ripe [above]” [28, p. 169].
5 “. the Armenian, or the early one, on plum stocks.” [30, p. 307].
81
E.Daniefyan
<21st CENTURY», №2 (6), 2014
domestics L. and Prunus armeniaca L. D.White followed the classification developed by Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778) who applied the ancient term “Armeniaca”1. At the same time D. White remarked: “Andre thinks that Pliny is referring to the apricot when he mentions a variety of plums which he calls Armeniaca [32, p. 321; 39, p. 25].
M. A. Powell noted: “The first certain occurrences of apricot are from the 1st century AD. Columella, Pliny, and Dioscorides refer to an “Armenian apple”, “Armenian plum” or merely an “Armenian”. These have... usually been interpreted as referring to the apricot... Pliny speaking of plums, after mentioning various kinds, says, almost as an afterthought “but also (we should not forget) the Armenian from abroad [ab exterme gente Armeniaca], the only one which also commends itself by smell”. Pliny’s mention of its unusual aroma, together with his comment that the almond flowers in January followed by the "Armenian" [Armeniaca; Plin. XVI, 103], in agreement with Columella [XI. 2. 96], who says that such early flowering trees, such as "cherries, tuberes, Armenians [Armeniacae], and almonds" can be grafted in the latter half of December, point toward the apricot. Dioscorides’ statement [Materia Medica I. 115] that "Armenian apples" (mela armeni-aka) were known to the Romans as praikokia, i.e., Latin praecocia, "early ripe", secures the identification. The Latin term "Early-Ripener"
1 The Linnean Collections: LINN 640.12 Prunus armeniaca (Herb Linn) [33]. B.D. Jackson presented it, as “Prunus. 640. Armeniaca. 1 [34, p. 122]. To another usage of the term “Armeniaca” in the Index to the Linnean Herbarium (“Argemone. 670. armeniaca” [34, p. 38] has been given the following interpretation: “Argemone Armeniaca capitulis trivalvibus= Argemone d'Arme-nia” [Apricot colored pricklepoppy] [35]. Linnaeus concerning “Mala Armeniaca majora”, “Mala Armeniaca majora, nucleo dulci”, “Malus Armeniaca minor” [36, p. 474] made references to the book of the Swiss botanist Caspar Bavhin (Bauhin) (1560 - 1624), who based his works [37; 38] on the studies of the ancient Greek [Theophrastus (c. 372 - c. 287 BC), Dioscorides] and Roman [Columella, Plinius Secundus] authors.
82
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
E.Danielyan
ultimately won out and has survived in our word "apricot"...” [8, pp.154-155]1.
According to Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829), “Abricotier commun. Armeniaca vulgaris, - Prunus Armeniaca. L. ...Cet arbre est originaire d’ Armenie.” [44, p. 2]. Likely, M. le Baron De Poederle on the basis of the research of ancient sources considered the origin and the naming of the apricot as a fact definitely connected with Armenia: “Abricotier, en latin, Armeniaca Malus, en flamand, Abricot-boom, en wallon, Abricoty, en anglois the Apricot. Cet arbre tire son nom de l’Ar-menie. d’ou il est originaire et d’ou il fut porte en Europe: les Grecs l’appellerent Chrysomelon; c’est-a-dire Pomme d’or, et les Romains donnerrent a ses fruits le nom de Mala armeniaca, Pommes d’Arme-nie” [45, p. 125; cf. 46, p. 60].
Touching upon the problem of the origin of apricot, Don R. Broth-well wrote: “Although in China, which is thought to be its native land,
1 John Martyn suggested derivation of the word apricot from “the corrupted form” фргкбккю) of praecocia, but at the same time commenting Pliny’s information about praecocia in the passage about apples, pomegranates, pears and peaches, hypothetically questioned: “Whether Pliny meant apricocks in this passage, by the word praecocia., which perhaps might be used only as an epithet to Persica; and then it will signify an early sort of peach. This is certain, that he mentions Armeniaca in the very next chapter, as a sort of plum” [40, p. 63]. But, first, Pliny’s sentence (“nationum habent cognomen Gallica et Asiatica. Post autumnum maturescunt Asiatica, aestate praecocia.” 26, XV, 11. 40) he misread and missing the second mentioning of Asiatica attributed the word praecocia only to Persica. The second, as is seen also from other passages of Plini, praecocia (“early varieties”) (26, XVI. 42, 103; 43. 106) was a generalizing term for some fruit trees. As far as it concerns the derivation of the word apricot, according to J. Claudius Loudon, “the popular English name was originally praecocia, from the Arabic berkoche’, whence the Tuscan bacoche, or albicocco, and the English, abricto, or apricock, eventually corrupted into apricot... ”. According to his opinion, apricot originated in Armenia, being also native of some other lands: “Armeniaca Tourn. The Apricot. Lin. Syst... The genus is named Armeniaca, from the apricot being originally from Armenia...”, “Armeniaca vulgaris Lam. The common Apricot Tree... A native of Armenia, Caucasus, the Himalayas, China, and Japan ...” [41, pp. 681, 682]. In his another book he also noted that PrunusArmeniaca L. Armeniaca vulgaris, Malus Armeniaca “generally supposed to have originated in Armenia” [42, p. 917]. Cf. “Western Asia is the native land of cherry, peach, apricot. The names of some of these fruits indicate their native soil: “. ‘apricot’... its Latin name, malum Armeniacum, reffering it to Armenia” [43, p. 381].
83
E.Daniefyan
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
the apricot was probably cultivated as early as 2200 BC, it seems to have been very slow in spreading. Its progress westwards must have been via Persia and Asia Minor, and we know it was grown by the Assyrians and Babylonians, who called it armanu. The Latin term for it, armeniaca, has always been understood to imply an Armenian origin but it is more likely that it was first grown in the orchards of Mesopotamia, its name having been subsequently adopted into the language of other countries to which it spread. Apart from the Mesopotamia, there is not much evidence of apricot-growing” [47, p. 136].
Don R. Brothwell supposed China to be the native land of apricot, then presented Mesopotamia as the first place where it grew, at the same time doubted the axiomatic fact of the origin of the term arme-niaca from Armenia1.
Babken N. Arakelyan, publishing the results of the Garni excavations, mentioned apricot stone among the 1949-1950 archaeological discoveries: 'Следует особо выделить находку в энеолитическом слое косточки абрикоса (Prunus Armeniaca). Этой находкой оправдывается научное название абрикоса, ибо трудно предположить, что косточка абрикоса могла бы быть завезена в Армению, к подножью Гехамских гор, в энеолитическую эпоху из Средней Азии, которая считается родиной абрикоса” [49, с.25]. Translation: “The presence of
1 Don R. Brothwell mentioned Armenia as a part of a vast region, where some other plants originated (“The bristle oat of western Europe is derived from Avena barbata which is indigenous to the region from Armenia along the Mediterranean to the Iberian Peninsula... ”; “... malum punicum... its original home seems to be the regions of Asia Minor, the Caucasus, Armenia and Persia” (47, p. 100, 134). T. K. Lim considered Armeniaca vulgaris Lam. and Prunus Armeniaca to be the synonyms and mentioned the Armenian name Tziran, but he did not denote Armenia while speaking about the origin and distribution of apricot: “Domestic cultivation in China dates back over 3,000 years ago. It spread to Asia Minor and was introduced to Europe through Greece and Italy by the Romans.” [48, pp. 442-443]. Such a silence about archeological discoveries in Armenia is a result of the neglect of adequate historical sources and scientific literature.
84
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
E.Danielyan
an apricot seed (Prunus Armeniaca) in the Eneolithic stratum is of special interest. This find justifies the scientific name of the apricot, [for] it is difficult to assume that during the Eneolithic era an apricot [stone] could have been introduced into Armenia, in the base of Gegham mountains, from as far distant as Central Asia, the supposed home of the apricot” [50, p. 29]1.
As a result of misinterpretation of scientific data some scholars have attempted to dispute the archaeologically substantiated viewpoint of B. Arakelyan. M. Faust, D. Suranyi, F. Nyuto distorting the above mentioned citation from B. Arakelyan’s book, wrote: “Laufer (1919)2 identified Sogdiana (ancient name for the area around Samarkand) as the place apricot was native. Jeszejian (1977), an Armenian, naturally described Armenia as the native location of apricot. He based his conclusions on the fact that apricot culture had a long history in
1 Without considering archaeological evidence, M. A. Powell wrote: “It is hard to imagine if apricots had been cultivated in the Near East since the 3rd millennium [B.C.]... It is difficult to conceive that the Phoenicians would not have also known apricots if they had been cultivated in Mesopotamia already in the 3rd millennium. In sum, the classical sources by their silence speak uniformly for a relatively late date for diffusion of the apricot in the Mediterranean area” [8, p.155].
2 Berthold Laufer supported De Candolle’s version: “The Greeks also had the peach under the name ’’Persian apple,” and the apricot as ’’Armenian apple;” yet peach and apricot are not originally Persian or Armenian, but Chinese cultivations: Iranians and Armenians in this case merely acted as meditators between the far east and the Mediterranean. The name of the latter (apricot) is bin . Of fruits, the West is chiefly indebted to China for the peach (Amygdalus persica) and the apricot (Prunus armeniaca). It is not impossible that these two gifts were transmitted by the silk-dealers, first to Iran (in the second or first century B.C.), and thence to Armenia, Greece, and Rome (in the first century A.D.). . De Candolle has ably pleaded for China as the home of the peach and apricot. The zone of the wild apricot may well extend from Russian Turkestan to Sungaria, south-eastern Mongolia, and the Himalaya; but the historical fact remains that the Chinese have been the first to cultivate this fruit from ancient times...” [51, pp. 209-210, 408, 539]. Adherents of the Chinese version do not take into consideration the fact of the toponymical origin of the term Armeniaca and the archaeological discoveries.
85
E.Daniefyan
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
Armenia, especially in the area of Yerevan. Apricot seeds from about 3000 B.C. have been discovered at S[h]engavit and at Garni (both near Yerevan), but in the opinion of Arakelyan (1951), a noted archeologist, the fruit form that these seeds have originated was brought into Armenia rather than produced there. De Candolle (1886) [52, pp. 215-218]1, reviewing the available data on wild apricots in Armenia, stated that several qualified travelers, including Karl Koch, who traveled extensively in Armenia, and the Caucasian mountains, did not find wild apricots there. The apricots these travelers found were all cultivated or escapes from cultivation. Based on this information, De Candole concluded that apricot was not native in Armenia. Apricot seeds were found from a later period at the excavation of Karmir Blur (a fort near Yerevan) from the 8th century B.C. (Arzumanjan 1970). Still later, in the first century A.D., large apricot plantations existed around Echmiadzin (near Yerevan) that were cultivated by Armenian monks” [54, pp. 244-246; 55, pp. 119-120]2.
M. Faust, D. Suranyi and F. Nyujto mentioned “3000 B.C.”, which corresponds to the beginning of the Early Bronze Age. But B. Arakelyan dated the archaeological layer in which apricot seed (stone) was found to the Eneolithic era, which corresponds to the 6th - mid 4th millennia BC.
1 N.I.Vavilov critically approaching to De Candolle’s method, noted: “The method of determination of the native land by De Candolle and other authors, according to the locality of the present cultivated plant (Prunus armeniaca L.) in wild state not always may be trusted” [53, с. 95, 234-235].
2 The authors wrote: “The name armeniaca may indicate that apricot came to the western world from Armenia... Koch (1869) indicated that Lucullus and Pompeius may have learned about apricots in the war in which they attacked Armenia from Syria during 69-63 B.C. Thus, it is possible that the apricot arrived in Italy during the first century B.C. directly from Armenia and not through Greece”. Then, “forgetting” their own suggestion about Armenia, they wrote: “Apricot was cultivated throughout Asia and it is difficult to know where it may have come from to Europe” [55, p. 122]. But Pompeius was in Armenia in 66 B.C.
86
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
E.Danielyan
Second, from B. Arakelyan’s text it follows that the discovery of apricot stone justified “the scientific name of the apricot”, i.e. Armenia to be the country which gave its name to the fruit. Third, they misrepresented his opinion, because B. Arakelyan never said: “the fruit form that these seeds have originated was brought into Armenia rather than produced there”, but to the contrary, he noted that “it is difficult to assume that during the Eneolithic era an apricot [stone] could have been introduced into Armenia, in the base of Gegham mountains, from as far distant as Central Asia...”. Besides, there is not a single mention in archaeological literature about evidence for existence of apricot in the Eneolithic Age in Middle Asia (or Central Asia) - as “the supposed home of the apricot”.
As a source of such a “supposition” B. Arakelyan mentioned P. M. Zhukovski’s book [56, с. 325-326]. It is rather strange, that in the third edition of that book (1971), while researching the problem of the origin of apricot, P. M. Zhukovski (1988-1975) had not taken into consideration the fact of discovery of apricot stone in Garni. He generally remarked: “The sort of Armeniaca, as many other Prunoideae, by its origin is eastern Asiatic with the main centre in China” [56, (1971), с. 477]...“Middle Asian genetic center”Armeniaca vulgaris L.: “growing wild in Eastern Tian Shan. A part of primary gencentre of wild apricot, once connected with the main one in China. Apricot culture is very old in Middle Asia. It is the secondary genetic centre of the cultured type”, “Western-Asian genetic centre” Armeniaca vulgaris L. is presented as if “preserved” in Dagestan as “an islet” of growing wild apricot. Prejudiced nature of P. Zhukovski’s approach to the question is seen from his following biased statement: “Название Armeniaca (1752г.) ошибочное (родиной абрикоса считали Армению)” (“The name Armeniaca (1752) is incorrect (Armenia was considered to be
87
E.Daniefyan
<21st CENTURY», №2 (6), 2014
the native land of apricot”)1.
A group of Turkish-Hungarian researchers published an article in which, opposite to classical floristic classification, they falsely invented “Turkish apricot”, which according to their concoction “originated from the eastern part of the country, near the Turkish-Armenian border” [58, p. 415]. Contrary to such a falsified statement, during millennia, up to the Armenian Genocide (1915-1923), the Armenian gardeners cultivated Prunus Armeniaca in the gardens of entire Armenia (Western Armenia and Eastern Armenia)2. The Armenian western natural border historically is western borderline of the Armenian Highland (along western extremities of Armenia Minor to the west of Great Armenia, when there was no trace of “Turkey” in history3). But Turkish forgers went further and, for example, S. Ercisli under the falsified title “Apricot culture in Turkey” wrote: “Turkey
1 As an assertion of such a non-analytical reasoning, the author (without explaining the origin of the name Armeniaca) suggested “a version” that “apricot was transposed by the Arabs from ancient Sogdiana to the Mediterranean region. ... European geographic group of sorts has a mixed - the Chinese and Middle Asian, as well as the Caucasian - origin” [56, (1971), с. 13, 25, 31, 481482). P. Zhukovski ignored as the archaeological discovery in Garni I, as well as the Latin and Greek sources and incorrectly considered apricot to be an unknown fruit in the Mediterranean region until the Arabs introduced it there, i.e. not earlier than the period of the conquests of the Arab caliphate since the mid-7th century. Moreover, he criticized a priori M. le Baron De Poederle’s book, as if the author himself named that fruit Armeniaca. An incorrect, contradictory remark (in brackets) is also present in D. Gledhill’s book [“armeniacus -a -um Armenian (mistakenly for China), the dull orange colour of Prunus armeniaca fruits; armenus -a -um, armeniacus -a -um from Armenia, Armenian” [57, p. 56].
2 Apricot is a beloved fruit tree for Armenians: the national wind instrument duduk is made of it, and the royal gown in ancient Armenia was called “tsirani”; Komitas Vardapet’s song Tsirani Tsar(Apricot Tree) is based on folk music; one of the colors of the Armenian Tricolour flag is apricot color, etc.
3 It is well known that the ancestors of the present-day Turks, Seljuk and Oguz Turkic nomadic hordes (from the trans-Altai and trans-Aral regions) had violently invaded Armenia, the Byzantine Empire and the adjacent lands from the second half of the 60s of the 11th c.. A. Palmer noted: “Originally the Turks were nomadic horsemen from Central Asia. ” [59, p. 2]. From the 14th century appeared “Osmanli” (corrupted into “Ottoman” in the languages of western Europe) dynasty (Ibid.). Their “eponym, ‘Osman, was the son of a certain Ertoghrul who had led into Anatolia (Asia Minor - E.D.) a nameless band of Turkish refugees: an insignificant fragment of the human wreckage... ” [60, p. 151].
88
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
E.Danielyan
and Iran (Iranian Plateau) are centers of origin and diversity of many fruit species... Apricot can be grown in all regions of Turkey, except in the Eastern Black Sea Region and in the high plateaus of the East Anatolian Region” [61, p. 715]1.
In the Republic of Armenia and the NKR (Artsakh) modern researches about the origin and reproduction of apricot brought to a conclusion: “Apricot in Armenia, where vulgar forms of this culture exist until present, was cultivated ever since the ancient times. Seeds of the apricot have been discovered during archaeological excavations of the Garni Temple and Shengavit settlement, having a history of 6000 years. In process of many centuries the reproduction of apricots went by means of its stones, as a result of which a broad spectrum of varieties and forms has been created. Today there are 50 local varieties and large number of forms known in Armenia.... All of them belong to the species of ordinary apricot Armeniaca vulgaris Lam.” [63]2.
1 S. Ercisli, falsifying historical geography, instead of Western Armenia (western part of the Armenian Highland) wrongly noted “the high plateaus of the East Anatolian Region” and distorting the history of the origin of apricot and the original Armenian toponymical terminology of Western Armenia wrote: “Although apricots are grown throughout Turkey, about half the crop is produced in the Central Eastern Anatolia Region. Most important apricot producing centers in Turkey are Malatya, Erzin-can, Aras valley (Igdir-Kagizman), Elazig, Sivas. provinces” [61, p. 715]. But in reality these are Melitene (a centre of Armenia Minor) to the west of Great Armenia, Armenian Erznka, ancient Eriza (Երիզա) in the gavar of Ekegheatc (Եկեղեաց, AKiXioT|vq) of the province of Bardzr Haik (Upper Armenia) of Great Armenia; the ancient Armenian Eraskh-Arax (Երասխ-Արաքս) River; ancient Armenian Horeberd-Kharberd (Հորեբերդ-Խարբերդ) in the valley of the Aratsani (Արածանի) River (the Eastern Euphrates); ancient Armenian Sebastia (Սեբաստիա) in Armenia Minor. The same falsification of the toponymical terminology of Western Armenia and the origin and cultivation of apricot was presented also in another fabricated article by S. Ercisli and co-authors [62, p. 223].
2 It is noted: “The age of ethno-botanic materials goes back to the eighth millennium B.C. According to archeological studies, Armenia has been home for cereals, vegetables, melons, and essential oil plants, as well as for numerous types of fruit trees (wheat, barley, rye, lentil, oat, pea, melon, watermelon, apricot, grape, quince, pomegranate, etc.). Because Armenia still preserves the wild species of the mentioned cultivars and centralizes the largest amounts of these plants, the country is considered to be one of the world’s centers of origin of many cultivated crops [64, p. 82]. R. Chapman touching the problem of apricot, wrote: “It is called this because early scientists of the West, like Turner, believed it came to them from the land of Armenia. In modern times, archaeologists have found apricot pits in Armenia digs that go back to the Bronze Age” [65, p. 38] (more exactly - the Eneolithic Age).
89
E.Daniefyan
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
In the Areni-1 (in Vayotc Dzor gavar 1 of the province of Siunik of Great Armenia) archaeological site of the Eneolithic (Chalcolithic) Age, along with different important discoveries2, many very diverse vegetal remains (desiccated and charred) were found; among them are of what may be the oldest known intentionally dried fruits: apricots, grapes, prunes [70]. On the basis of these discoveries it has been concluded: “Knowledge of the early use and cultivation of fruits such as apricot (Armeniaca vulgaris, peach (Persica vulgaris and nuts such as walnuts (Juglans regia) in particular, is patchy and Areni-1 may shed light on their early use.... Areni-1 is one of the oldest sites in the world with well-preserved organic remains, from dried prunes, grapes and grasses, to textiles, rope, mats and wooden implements dating to c. 4000 BC. Moreover, the site sheds much light on the early exploitation and possible domestication of a variety of fruit trees, including walnut and apricot” [71, pp. 126, 128 ].
A holistic scientific approach to the concept of the native land (Armenia) of apricot on the basis of archaeological data, the Sumerian, Akkadian cuneiform and the Latin and Greek sources proves the Armenian toponymical background of the terms armannu and (Prunus) Armeniaca.
October, 2014 1 2
1 Present Vayotc Dzor marz (region).
2 The earliest known wine-making and wine preservation facility (4000 BC), leather shoe (3500 BC), three human skulls belonging to females between the ages of 9-16 (one contained a piece of well-preserved brain tissue) (5000-4000 BC) and other objects were discovered in the Areni-1 cave [66, p. 12; 67; 68; 69].
90
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
E.Danielyan
References and Literature
1. http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/epsd1/nepsd-frame.html
2. http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/saa09/cbd/akk-x-neoassM-.html
3. Allan R. Bombard, John C Kerns, The Nostratic Macrofamily: A Study in Distant Linguistic Relationship, Berlin, 1994.
4. E R. Ellison, A Study of Diet in Mesopotamia (c. 3000 - 600 BC) and Associated Agricultural Technique and Methods of Food Preparation, Institute of Archaeology, vol. I, Thesis submitted to the University of London in the Faculty of Arts for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 1978.
5. I. J Gelb, Sumerian and Akkadian Words for “String Fruit” in: Zikir Sumim, Leiden, 1982.
6. J. N. Postgate. Notes on fruit in the cuneiform sources. - Bulletin on Sumerian Agriculture. Volume III, Cambridge. U.K., 1987 (BSA).
7. The Assyrian Dictionary, vol. 6, 1956. Fifth printing, 1995.
8. M A. Powell, Classical sources and the problem of the apricot. - BSA.
9. The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, vol. I, part 2, 1968. Fourth Printing, 2004.
10. Ignace J Gelb, Inscriptions from Alishar and Vicinity. - The University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications, vol. XXVII, Chicago, London, 1935. [Present-day Alishar is identified with ancient Amkuwa (V. Minorsky, in: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland (New Series)/ Volume 68 / Issue 02 / April, 1936, p. 355].
11. Michael C Astour, A Reconstruction of the History of Ebla (Part 2) - see: Eblaiti-ca: Essays on the Ebla Archives and Eblaite Language, Volume 4, edited by Cyrus Herzl Gordon, Gary Rendsburg, Nathan H. Winter, Eisenbrauns, 2002.
12. Adelheid Otto, Archeological Perspectives on the Localization of Naram-Sin’s Armanum. - Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Vol. 58, 2006.
13. Alfonso Archi,In Search of Armi. - Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Vol. 63, 2011.
14. H. A. Rigg, Jr, A Note on the Names Armanum and Urartu. - Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 57, No. 4, Dec., 1937.
15. АКифишин, Географические воззрения древних шумеров при патеси Гудеа (2162—2137 гг. до н.э.), - Палестинский сборник, вып. 13 (76). Изд-во АН СССР, 1965.
16. В. Н. Хачатрян, Восточные провинции Хеттской империи, Ереван, 1971.
17. Вяч. В Иванов, Выделение разных хронологических слоев в древнеармянском и проблема первоначальной структуры текста гимна Ва(х)агну. -Պատմա-բանասիրական հանդես, 1983, N 4.
18. Գ Բ Ջահուկյան, Հայոց լեզվի պատմություն, Երևան, 1987։
19. M Kavoukjian, Armenia, Subartu and Sumer, Montreal, 1987.
91
E.Daniefyan
<21st CENTURY», №2 (6), 2014
20. Ա Մովսիպան, Հայաստանը Քրիստոսից առաջ երրորդ հազարամյակում, Երևան, 2005:
21. Н Мкртчян, Субстрат названий растений в армянском языке. - “Древний Восток”, 4, Ереван, 1983.
22. L. Junius Moderatus Columella of Husbandry. In Twelve Books: and his Book concerning Trees. Translated into English, London, 1745.
23. L. Junius Moderatus Columella, On Agriculture, and Trees, with a recension of the text and an English translation by E.S. Forster and E.H. Heffner, in three volumes, III, Re Rustica X-XII, De Arboribus, Cambridge, Massachusets, London, 1955.
24. Columelle de l’ economie rurale, t. III et dernier, Paris, 1846.
25. Columella, On Agriculture, vol., II, Re Rustica V-IX, Cambr., Mass., L., 1954.
26. Pliny, Natural History. With an English translation by H. Rackham, in ten volumes, vol. IV, libri XII-XVI, L., Cambr., Mass., 1960.
27. Pedanii Dioscuridis Anazarbei De Materia Medica. Libri quinque, ed. Max Well-mann, vol. I quo continentur libri I et II, Berolini, 1907.
28. Dioscoiides, De Materia Medica being an Herbal with many other medicinal materials written in Greek in the first century of the common era. A new indexed version in modern English by T. A. Osbaldeston and R.P.A. Wood, Johannesburg, 2000.
29. Scriptores Rei Rusticae Veteres Latini. Tomus Alter..., Lipsiae, 1735.
30. The Fourteen Books of Palladius Rutilius Taurus Aemilianus, On Agriculture. Transl. by T. Owen, London, 1807.
31. Charles Daubeny, Lectures on Roman Husbandry, Oxford, 1857, Lecture VIII.
32. D J. White, Columella res Rrustica 10: A Study and Commentary, University of Florida, 2013.
33. http://linnean-online .org/4699/
34. B.D. Jackson, Index to the Linnean Herbarium, with Indication of the Types of Species Marked by Carl von Linne, London, 1912.
35. http://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47dd-d51b-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99
36. Caroli Linnaei Species Plantarum. Tomus I, Holmiae, 1753.
37. Casparo Bavhino, ФТТОПШАЕ seu enumeration plantarum, Basileae, 1596.
38. C. Bavhini niNAE Theatri Botanici, Basil, 1623.
39. J.Andrh, Les Noms des Plantes dans la Rome Antique. Paris, 1985.
40. Pub. Virgilii Maronis Bucolicorum Eclogae Decem. The Bucolicks of Virgil, with an English translation and notes by John Martyn, London, 1749.
41. J C Loudon, Arboretum et fruticetum Britannicum; or, The trees and shrubs of Britain, vol. II , London, 1838.
42. J C Loudon, An Encyclopedia of Gardening: Comprising the Theory and Practice of Horticulture, Floriculture, Arboriculture and Landscape-Gardening, London, 1835.
92
<21st CENTURY», №2 (16), 2014
E.Danielyan
43. W L. Bevan, The Student's Manual of Modern Geography, London, 1869.
44. M le Chevalier De Lamarck, Encyclopedie Methodiaue. Botanique. Tome premier, Paris, 1783.
45. M le Baron De Poederlh, Manuel de l'Arboriste et du Forestier Belgiques, Sec-onde Edition, Tome Premier. a Bruxelles, 1788.
46. M de Poederlh, Manuel de l'Arboriste et du Forestier Belgiques, Bruxelles, 1772.
47. Don R. Brothwell, Food in Antiquity: A Survey of the Diet of Early Peoples, New York, 1998.
48. T K Lim, Edible Medicinal And Non-Medicinal Plants: Volume 4, Fruits, London, New York, 2012.
49. Гарни, I. Б.Н. Аракелян, Результаты раскопок 1949-1950, Ереван, 1952.
50. B. Arakelyan, II Excavations at Garni 1949-50, Yerevan, 1951 - Russian Translation Series of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Harvard University, vol. III, No 3, Contributions to Archaeology of Armenia by V. P. Alekseev, B. N Arakelyan, A. R. Arutyunyian, S. M Ayvazaian, L. A. Barseghian, A. A. Martirosian and I. A. Ohannesian. Translated by A.Krimgold. Edited by Henry Field, Cambr., Mass., 1968.
51. Berthold Laufer, Sino-Iranica, Chinese Contributions to the History of Civilization in Ancient Iran with Special Reference to the History of Cultivated Plants and Products. - The Blackstone Expedition. Publications of Field Museum of Natural History, Publication 201, Anthropological series, vol. XV, No.3, Chicago, 1919.
52. Alphonse De Candolle, Origine of Cultivated Plants. - The International Scientific Series, vol. XLIX, Second edition, London, 1886.
53. НИ Вавилов, Центры происхождения культурных растений (“Труды по прикладной ботанике и селекции/ Всесоюзный институт прикладной ботаники и новых культур”, Т. 16, вып. 2, 1926). - Избранные произведения в двух томах, I, Л., 1967.
54. M Faust, D. Suranyi and F. Nyujtd, Origins and Dissemination of Apricot. - in: Hotricultural Reviews, vol. 22, New York, 1998.
55. Origins and Dissemination of Prunus Crops: Peach, Cherry, Apricot, Plum and Almond. Edited by J. Janick, - Scripta Hotriculture Number 11, Gent-Oostakker, Belgium, 2011.
56. П.М. Жуковский, Культурные растения и их сородичи, М., 1950; третье изд. 1971.
57. David Gledhill, The Names of Plants, Cambridge, 2008.
58. J. Halasz and A. Pedryc, S. Ercisli, K U Yilmaz, A. Hegediis,“S-genotyping Supports the Genetic Relationship between Turkish and Hungarian Apricot Germ-plasm”. - Journal Amer. Soc. Hort. Society, 2010.
59. A. Palmer, The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire, New York, 1994.
93
E.Daniefyan
<21st CENTURY», №2 (6), 2014
60. A. Toynbee, A Study of History, vol. II, London, New York, Toronto, 1955.
61. S. Ercisli, “Apricot culture in Turkey”. – Scentific Research and Essey, vol. 4 (8), 2009. http://www.academicjoumals.org/article/article1380628156_Ercisli.pdf
62. N M. Demirtas, I Bolat, S. Ercisli, A. Ikinci, H. Olmez, M. Sahin, M. Altindag, B. Celik, The Effects of Different Pruning Treatments on Seasonal Variation of Carbohydrates in ‘Hacihaliloglu’ Apricot Cultivar, - Notulae Botanicae Horti Agro-botanici, Cluj-Napoca, 38 (3) 2010. http://www.notulaebotanicae.ro/index.php/ nbha/article/viewFile/3675/5096
63. E S. Morikian, Apricots of Armenia: Origin and classification of varieties. - ISHS Acta Horticulturae 121: VII Symposium on Apricot Culture and Decline, http:// www.actahort.org/members/showpdf?session=1727
64. S Avetisyan,Agricultme and Food Processing in Armenia, Yerevan, 2010.
65. R. Chapman, California Apricots: The Lost Orchards of the Silicon Valley, Charleston, 2013.
66. Site Preservation and Managment Plan for Areni-1 Cave Enterprise Development and Market Competitiveness. - USAD, ARMENIA, 2013, p. 12 http:// www.edmc.am/sites/default/files/resources/attachments/EDMC_FY13Q4_Site% 20Preservation%20Plan%20for%20Areni-1%20Cave.pdf.
67. http://www.the-boondocks.org/forum/index.php?t=rview&goto=175432&th =29013.
68. http://www.bbc.com/news/10281908.
69. http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/6315).
70. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/science/10shoe.html?_r=0
71. G E Areshian, B. Gasparyan, P. S. Avetisyan, R. Pinhasi, K Wilkinson, A.
Smith, R. Hovsepyan, D. Zardaryan, The Chalcolithic of the Near East and South-Eastern Europe: Discoveries and New Perspectives from the Cave Complex Areni-1, Armenia, - Antiquity, vol. 86, N 331, March, 2012. http://www.academia.edu/1462553/The_Chalcolithic _of_the_Near_East_and_south-eastern_Europe_discoveries_ and_new_perspectives_ from_the_cave_complex_Areni-1_Armenia
94
