DOCSLIB.ORG

Progress Review of Migration Management in the Republic of Armenia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Progress Review of Migration Management in the Republic of Armenia International Organization for Migration European Union PROGRESS REVIEW OF MIGRATION MANAGEMENT IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA FOLLOW-UP ON THE MIGRATION MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT REPORT International Organization for European Union Migration PROGRESS REVIEW OF MIGRATION MANAGEMENT IN THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA F O L L O W - U P O N T H E M I G R A T I O N M A N A G E M E N T A S S E S S M E N T R E P O R T (Assessment Team: Kristina Galstyan, Franz Prutsch and Pier Rossi-Longhi) The Assessment was conducted within the framework of the “Strengthening Evidence-Based Management of Labour Migration in Armenia” project funded by the European Union and the IOM Development Fund. International Organization for Migration IOM Regional Office for Eastern and International Organization for Migration Headquarters: South-Eastern Europe and Central Asia: Mission in Armenia: 17 Route des Morillons, CH-1211, Geneva 13/3 Nibelungengasse, Vienna 1010, UN House, 14 Petros Adamian Street, 1st 19,Switzerland Austria floor, Yerevan 0010, Armenia Tel.: (+41 22) 717 9111 Tel.: (+43 1) 581 22 22 Tel.: (+374 10) 58 56 92; 58 37 86 Fax: (+41 22) 798 6150 Fax: (+43 1) 581 22 22 30 Fax: (+374 10) 54 33 65 http://www.iom.int http://www.iomvienna.at/ http://www.iom.int/armenia; http://www.iom.am UDC 331.556 (479.25) Prepared for publication by IOM Project Development and Implementation Unit in Armenia While IOM endeavours to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the content of this Review, the views, findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of IOM and its Member States. IOM does not accept any liability for any loss, which may arise from the reliance on information contained in this paper. © Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means of electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher. Publisher: International Organization for Migration International Organization for Migration (IOM) Organisation internationale pour les migration (OIM) Organisation Internacional para las Migraciones (OIM) ISBN 978-9939-51-434-5 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD __________________________________________________________________4 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ________________________________________________________5 B. POLICY __________________________________________________________________ 11 D. ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES ______________________________________________ 30 E. OPERATIONAL MECHANISMS IN MIGRATION MANAGEMENT ______________________ 38 F. METHODOLOGY ___________________________________________________________ 39 ANNEX 1. SCHEDULES OF MEETINGS _____________________________________________ 40 ANNEX 2. MIGRATION-RELATED STATISTICS ______________________________________ 42 ANNEX 3. ACRONYMS USED ___________________________________________________ 51 3 FOREWORD The publication you hold in your hands follows up on recent reforms of migration management in Armenia and is an update on the 2008 Review of Migration Management in Armenia. Like the 2008 Review, it is intended to give the picture of migration management in the country and be a source of information and ideas for promoting policy dialogue on migration and asylum between Armenia and European countries. We would like to express our gratitude to the European Union for their financial support. We greatly acknowledge the hard work of the team conducting the Progress Review: Mr. Pier Rossi- Longhi, Ms. Kristina Galstyan and Mr. Franz Prutsch. The assessment report benefited greatly from the input and guidance of Armenian Government officials, NGO representatives and the international community in in Armenia. The assessment team could not have efficiently carried out its task without the valuable support of the Armenian Government, which provided help and direction in welcoming and guiding the assessment team – particularly the National Assembly, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Territorial Administration and its State Migration Service, the National Security Service and its Border Guards Troops, the Ministry of Labour and Social Issues and its State Employment Service, the Police, the Ministry of Justice, the National Security Council, the Ministry of Diaspora, the Ministry of Economy, and the State Revenues Committee. The progress review was prepared at a most opportune time when EU-Armenia Policy Dialogue on Migration is in progress. We hope that the findings of this report will serve as a point of reference for the reimplementation of the national plan of action for migration within the framework of Armenia’s EU Association, the implementation of the EU-Armenia Mobility Partnership, and the EU- Armenia readmission and visa facilitation processes. We also hope that the recommendations provided will help steer the reforms of migration management in view of the creation of an efficient and comprehensive migration management system in Armenia, aiming at the right balance between facilitation and control of migratory flows. David Knight Ilona Ter-Minasyan Director, Department Immigration and Head of Office Border Management IOM Mission in Armenia IOM Headquarters in Geneva 4 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2007–2008, at the invitation of the Government of the Republic of Armenia, IOM and the Swedish Migration Board conducted a comprehensive review of migration management in Armenia. The 2008 Review of Migration Management in Armenia carefully studied the country's migration policy (both the immigration and emigration policy) and legislation, as well as assessed the administrative structure for managing migration and enforcement, and operational mechanisms. The assessment report was prepared with the aim of steering the reforms in view of the creation of an efficient and comprehensive migration management system, aiming at the right balance between facilitation and control of migratory flows. The review suggested total of 83 concrete recommendations for the reforms of migration management (including 14 for policy, 39 for legislation, 6 for administrative structures and 24 for enforcement). As a follow up to the 2008 Review, by the Decision of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia, an interagency working group1 was established, aimed at discussing the comments and suggestions made in the Review of Migration Management in Armenia – Assessment Mission Report (prepared within the framework of the IOM “Capacity Building in Migration Management Programme Armenia Assessment” project), as well as comments, suggestions and development of new suggestions made by international organizations and experts on reforms to migration management. On the recommendation of the interagency working group that the status of the Migration Agency be elevated to a State Migration Service (SMS), it was given a new function of “coordinating bodies involved in migration activities, developing migration policies and legal acts and securing the implementation of these policies”. Starting from 2009 SMS worked on elaborating the country's migration management strategy, which was adopted in December 2010. In parallel, migration and asylum management remained one of the major components of the Armenia European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) Action Plan. In 2009 within the framework of ENP, the Eastern Partnership (EaP) was initiated by EU with the aim of tightening the relationship between the EU and Eastern partners, including Armenia, by deepening their political cooperation and economic integration. The EaP offers deeper integration into EU structures by encouraging and supporting parnters in political, institutional and economic reforms based on EU standards, as well as by facilitating trade and increasing mobility between the EU and partner states. Thus, at the EaP summit in May 2009, a political commitment was taken regarding the improvement of people-to-people contacts, which visa facilitation and readmission negotiations with Armenia follow; in September 2011 the EC proposed to open negotiations on agreements to facilitate the procedures for issuing short-stay visas as well as on the readmission of irregular migrants between the European Union and Armenia. In July 2010, the EU and Armenia launched negotiations on the future EU-Armenia Association Agreement, which will be the successor agreement to the EU-Armenia Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (signed in 1996 and in force since 1999). The Association Agreement will significantly deepen Armenia’s political association and economic integration with the EU. The EU and Armenia also aim to establish a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), when the relevant conditions are met. 1 Decision # 304-A of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia of 16 April 2009, “On Establishing an Interagency Working Group”. 5 The EU-Armenia Mobility Partnership Declaration was signed in Luxembourg on 27 October 2011. Ten EU Member States (Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania and Sweden) are participating in the Mobility Partnership. The Mobility Partnership is expected to enhance Armenia’s ability to manage migration and inform, integrate and protect migrants and returnees, as well as boost Armenia's capacity to curb irregular migration and human trafficking. The Joint Declaration identifies four areas for increased dialogue and cooperation: (a) mobility, legal migration and integration;
Load more

Recommended publications
  • To the Armenian Information Technology Companies To
    MINISTRY OF ECONOMY OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA GUIDEGUIDE TOTO THETHE ARMENIANARMENIAN INFORMATIONINFORMATION TECHNOLOGYTECHNOLOGY COMPANIESCOMPANIES 2010 GUIDE TO THE ARMENIAN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES © 2004 ‐ 2010 Enterprise Incubator Foundation 2 124 Hovsep Emin Street, Yerevan 0051, Armenia Phone: +374 10 219 797 Fax: +374 10 219 777 E‐mail: [email protected] http://www.eif‐it.com All rights reserved This Guide may be freely copied and distributed as long as the original copyright is displayed and no modifications are made to its content. Copies of the Guide are available for download from http://www.eif‐ it.com. All respective trademarks, brands, and names are the property of their respective owners. Enterprise Incubator Foundation does not guar‐ antee the accuracy of the data and information included in this publica‐ tion. This Guide was supported by the Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Armenia, (http://www.mineconomy.am) and USAID/Armenia Mis‐ sion (http://armenia.usaid.gov/). The publication of this Guide has been made possible by the support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. 3 The concept of this Guide was initiated by Enterprise Incubator Founda‐ tion, a business development and incubation agency supporting tech‐ nology companies in Armenia. The objectives of the Guide stem from and parallel the mission of Enterprise Incubator, which is to foster eco‐ nomic growth in Armenia by assisting IT companies in areas of business development and management, skills development and training, and start‐up formation and entrepreneurship.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe and Central Asia
    EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA 301 INCSR 2006 Volume I 302 Europe and Central Asia Albania I. Summary Albania is used by organized crime groups as a transit country for heroin from Central Asia destined for Western Europe. Seizures of heroin by Albanian, Greek, and Italian authorities declined significantly in 2005, suggesting a possible change in trafficking patterns. Cannabis is also produced in Albania for markets in Europe. The Government of Albania (GoA), largely in response to international pressure and with international assistance, is confronting criminal elements more aggressively but is hampered by a lack of resources and endemic corruption. The new government led by Prime Minister Sali Berisha, in power since September 2005, has stated that fighting corruption, organized crime, and trafficking of persons and drugs is its highest priority. Albania is a party to the 1988 UN Drug Convention. II. Status of Country Although Albania is not a major transit country for drugs coming into the United States, it remains a country of concern to the U.S., as Albania’s ports on the Adriatic and porous land borders, together with poorly financed and under-equipped border and customs controls, make Albania an attractive stop on the smuggling route for traffickers moving shipments into Western Europe. In addition, marijuana is produced domestically for markets in Europe, the largest being Italy and Greece. III. Country Actions Against Drugs in 2005 Policy Initiatives. In 2005, the asset forfeiture law, a key tool in the fight against organized crime, began to be successfully implemented, with the filing of eight asset forfeiture cases and the creation of the Agency for the Administration of Sequestered and Confiscated Assets.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenia by Alexander Iskandaryan
    Armenia by Alexander Iskandaryan Capital: Yerevan Population: 3.0 million GNI/capita, PPP: US$8,140 Source: The data above are drawn from the World Bank’sWorld Development Indicators 2014. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Electoral Process 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.50 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 Civil Society 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Independent Media 5.50 5.50 5.75 5.75 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 5.75 5.75 National Democratic Governance 5.00 5.00 5.25 5.25 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 Local Democratic Governance 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 Judicial Framework and Independence 5.25 5.00 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 Corruption 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.25 5.25 5.25 Democracy Score 5.18 5.14 5.21 5.21 5.39 5.39 5.43 5.39 5.36 5.36 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest.
    [Show full text]
  • The Outcome of the Second Karabakh War: Confrontation Between the Diaspora and the Armenian Government
    APRIL-2021 ANALYSIS THE OUTCOME OF THE SECOND KARABAKH WAR: CONFRONTATION BETWEEN THE DIASPORA AND THE ARMENIAN GOVERNMENT The trilateral agreement signed by the heads of state of Azerbaijan, Russia and Armenia on November 10, 2020 caused a growing discontent both among the citizens of Armenia and among representatives of the diaspora. The Armenian people were divided into several camps: those accusing the West of inaction; those accusing Russia of betrayal; and, finally, those accusing the current government of both betrayal and unpreparedness for military action. It should be noted that diaspora organizations did not openly criticize Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan in their statements at first, blaming Azerbaijan and its ally Turkey for everything. One of the first to speak out against the current administration was the Union of Armenians of Russia (UAR), led by its chairman Ara Abramyan. The situation was further aggravated by the spread of unfounded information about the government misappropriating the funds raised by the Hayastan Foundation during the war. As a result, representatives of the diaspora began to demand the resignation of the present administration. As noted above, one of the first large diaspora organizations to blame the current Armenian government was the Union of Armenians of Russia. Immediately after the signing of said agreement, the UAR held an online meeting of 50 heads of its regional offices, led by its chairman A. Abramyan[1], and on November 11, the organization issued a statement on behalf of the chairman, accusing Prime Minister Pashinyan of “incapacity and inability to run the country effectively.”[2] Russian businessman of Armenian origin Samvel Karapetyan, as well as entrepreneurs Artak Tovmasyan and Ruben Vardanyan, also joined these appeals.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenia Bilateral Relations
    India- Armenia Bilateral Relations Background India recognized the independent Republic of Armenia on December 26, 1991, and India's Ambassador in Moscow was concurrently accredited to Armenia. From September 1992, India's Ambassador in Kiev (Ukraine) was given the concurrent charge of Armenia. India opened its Resident Mission in Yerevan at the level of Charge d' Affaires on 01 March 1999; the first Resident Ambassador Shri Bal Anand assumed charge in Yerevan in October 1999. Armenia, which had opened its Honorary Consulate in April 1994, established its Embassy in New Delhi in October 1999 at the level of Charge d' Affaires, followed by the arrival of the first Resident Ambassador Armen Baibourtian in May 2000. Historical background: Historians have suggested that when Assyrian warrior queen Semiramis invaded India in 2000 BC, some Armenians accompanied her as they probably did Alexander the Great in 326 BC. According to literary evidence, there were Indian settlements in Armenia established by two Indian Princes (Krishna and Ganesh escaping from Kannauj) who along with their families and large retinue had arrived in Armenia as early as 149 BC and were allotted land in Taron region (now in Turkey) by the then rulers of Armenia. Thomas Cana is said to be the first Armenian to have landed on the Malabar Coast in 780 AD. The first guidebook to Indian cities in Armenian was written in the 12th century. By middle ages, the Armenian towns of Artashat, Metsbin and Dvin had become important centers for barter with India which exported precious stones, herbs and stones to Armenia and imported hides and dyes.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Table of Contents 1. Social Economic Background & Current Indicators of Syunik Region...........................2 2. Key Problems & Constraints .............................................................................................23 Objective Problems ...................................................................................................................23 Subjective Problems..................................................................................................................28 3. Assessment of Economic Resources & Potential ..............................................................32 Hydropower Generation............................................................................................................32 Tourism .....................................................................................................................................35 Electronics & Engineering ........................................................................................................44 Agriculture & Food Processing.................................................................................................47 Mineral Resources (other than copper & molybdenum)...........................................................52 Textiles......................................................................................................................................55 Infrastructures............................................................................................................................57
    [Show full text]
  • First Capitals of Armenia and Georgia: Armawir and Armazi (Problems of Early Ethnic Associations)
    First Capitals of Armenia and Georgia: Armawir and Armazi (Problems of Early Ethnic Associations) Armen Petrosyan Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Yerevan The foundation legends of the first capitals of Armenia and Georgia – Armawir and Armazi – have several common features. A specific cult of the moon god is attested in both cities in the triadic temples along with the supreme thunder god and the sun god. The names of Armawir and Armazi may be associated with the Anatolian Arma- ‘moon (god).’ The Armenian ethnonym (exonym) Armen may also be derived from the same stem. The sacred character of cultic localities is extremely enduring. The cults were changed, but the localities kept their sacred character for millennia. At the transition to a new religious system the new cults were often simply imposed on the old ones (e.g., the old temple was renamed after a new deity, or the new temple was built on the site or near the ruins of the old one). The new deities inherited the characteristics of the old ones, or, one may say, the old cults were simply renamed, which could have been accompanied by some changes of the cult practices. Evidently, in the new system more or less comparable images were chosen to replace the old ones: similarity of functions, rituals, names, concurrence of days of cult, etc (Petrosyan 2006: 4 f.; Petrosyan 2007a: 175).1 On the other hand, in the course of religious changes, old gods often descend to the lower level of epic heroes. Thus, the heroes of the Armenian ethnogonic legends and the epic “Daredevils of Sasun” are derived from ancient local gods: e.g., Sanasar, who obtains the 1For numerous examples of preservation of pre-Urartian and Urartian holy places in medieval Armenia, see, e.g., Hmayakyan and Sanamyan 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • THIRD SECTION CASE of BAYATYAN V. ARMENIA
    THIRD SECTION CASE OF BAYATYAN v. ARMENIA (Application no. 23459/03) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 27 October 2009 This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. BAYATYAN v. ARMENIA JUDGMENT 1 In the case of Bayatyan v. Armenia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of: Josep Casadevall, President, Elisabet Fura, Corneliu Bîrsan, Boštjan M. Zupan čič, Alvina Gyulumyan, Egbert Myjer, Ann Power, judges, and Stanley Naismith, Deputy Section Registrar , Having deliberated in private on 6 October 2009, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in an application (no. 23459/03) against the Republic of Armenia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by an Armenian national, Mr Vahan Bayatyan (“the applicant”), on 22 July 2003. 2. The applicant was represented by Mr J. M. Burns, Mr A. Carbonneau and Mr R. Khachatryan, lawyers practising in Georgetown (Canada), Patterson (USA) and Yerevan respectively. The Armenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr G. Kostanyan, Representative of the Republic of Armenia at the European Court of Human Rights. 3. The applicant alleged that his conviction for refusal to serve in the army had unlawfully interfered with his right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. 4. By a decision of 12 December 2006, the Chamber declared the application admissible under Article 9 of the Convention and the remainder inadmissible.
    [Show full text]
  • Eu-Armenia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT EU-ARMENIA PARLIAMENTARY COOPERATION COMMITTEE MINUTES of the TWELFTH MEETING 2-3 November 2011 Yerevan CONTENT 1. Welcome address by Mr Hovik ABRAHAMYAN, Chairman of the National 2 Assembly of the Republic of Armenia 2. Opening remarks by the Co-Chairs of the EU-Armenia PCC 2 3. Adoption of the draft agenda 3 4. Adoption of the minutes of the eleventh meeting of the EU-Armenia PCC held in Brussels on 1-2 December 2010 3 5. The state of play of relations between the EU and Armenia 3 - Political dialogue - Implementation of the ENP Action Plan - Negotiations on the EU-Armenia Association Agreement - Eastern Partnership - Mobility Partnership, Visa Facilitation and Readmission Agreements - DCFTA negotiations Statements by: - The Government of Armenia - The European Union 6. Political developments, reforms agenda in Armenia and EU-Armenia cooperation 5 - Political dialogue and last developments in Armenia - Reforms agenda in Armenia and EU-Armenia - The fight against corruption 7. Regional issues 9 - The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict - Regional cooperation and Armenia’s participation in the multilateral track of the Eastern Partnership - Armenia-Turkey relations 8. Follow-up of the Final Statement and Recommendations adopted at the eleventh meeting of the EU-Armenia PCC held in Brussels on 2-3 December 2010 9 9. Dialogue with representatives of the civil society 14 10. Adoption of the Final Statement and Recommendations 16 11. Any other business 16 12. Date and place of next meeting 16 ANNEX: List of participants ________________ PV\EN.doc 1 PE 495.735 The 12th EU- Armenia PCC under Co-Chairmanship of Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Ed Nations A/HRC/16/47/Add.3
    United Nations A/HRC/16/47/Add.3 General Assembly Distr.: General 17 February 2011 Original: English Human Rights Council Sixteenth session Agenda item 3 Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Addendum Mission to Armenia* ** Summary The Working Group conducted a country mission to Armenia between 6 and 15 September 2010, at the invitation of the Government. During the visit, the Working Group held meetings with various authorities of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the State. It also had the opportunity to meet with detainees, prisoners, representatives of the civil society and the United Nations agencies. The Working Group visited 14 detention facilities, including prisons with convicted and pretrial detainees; police stations and police detention centres; an immigration reception centre; psychiatric hospitals; and facilities for women and juveniles. The facilities visited were located in Yerevan, Aboviyan, Artik, Goris, Sevan and Vanadzor. Three unannounced visits were also made to police stations in Aparan, Goris and Sevan. The Working Group was able to privately interview 153 detainees chosen mostly at random. The report describes the institutional and legislative framework with respect to deprivation of liberty and human rights in Armenia, since its independence in 1991. It refers to important legislative reforms made in recent years that are conducive to creating better standards of human rights for persons who are deprived of their liberty. It also provides a brief outline of the criminal justice system to elaborate on the context in which deprivation of liberty exists.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 Ground Survey
    Chapter 3 Ground Survey Chapter 3 Ground Survey 3.1 Drilling, Laboratory Tests The outline of the lithologic structure in Yerevan can be understood by the geological maps and the collected drilling database, which contains 5,094 logs; however, the data concerning the S wave velocity for the amplification analysis and the soil properties for the liquefaction analysis are not enough. To collect these data, 10 drillings were newly conducted in Yerevan and several tests were conducted using these boreholes. The quantities of the tests are shown in Table 3.1-1. Table 3.1-1 Quantities of Tests Category Quantities Drilling 30m x 10 Groundwater Level Measurement 10 Standard Penetration Test 129 Disturbed Soil Sampling 116 Laboratory Test 116 The drilling points are mainly set to the area where the Quaternary deposits cover because it is effective for the amplification of the earthquake motion by the ground and liquefaction potential. The geologic condition of Yerevan was estimated as follows from the existing information. The rock layer may be shallow in the northern area and the soft soils cover the southern area. Therefore, the selected newly boring points locate in the south of Yerevan city (Figure 3.1-1). The surface soils of each drilling points are shown in Table 3.1-1. The drilling logs are shown in Data Book. The example of drilling log is shown in Figure 3.1-1. 3-1 Final Report Vol. II Main Report 1 Figure 3.1-1 Location of drilling points Table 3.1-2 Surface geology of the drilling points Quaternary layer Symbol Age No.
    [Show full text]
  • Armenian Traditional Black Youths: the Earliest Sources1
    Armenian Traditional Black Youths: the 1 Earliest Sources Armen Petrosyan Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Yerevan, Armenia [email protected] In this article it is argued that the traditional figure of the Armenian folklore “black youth” is derived from the members of the war-band of the thunder god, mythological counterparts of the archaic war-bands of youths. The blackness of the youths is associated with igneous initiatory rituals. The best parallels of the Armenian heroes are found in Greece, India, and especially in Ossetia and other Caucasian traditions, where the Indo-European (particularly Alanian-Ossetian) influence is significant. In several medieval Armenian songs young heroes are referred to as t‘ux manuks ‘black youths,’ t‘ux ktriçs ‘black braves,’ or simply t‘uxs ‘blacks’ (see Mnatsakanyan 1976, which remains the best and comprehensive work on these figures, and Harutyunyan and Kalantaryan 2001, where several articles pertaining to this theme are published). Also, T‘ux manuk is the appellation of numerous ruined pilgrimage sanctuaries. A. Mnatsakanyan, the first investigator of these traditional figures, considered them in connection with the fratries of youths, whose remnants survived until medieval times (Mnatsakanyan 1976: 193 ff.).2 The study of the t‘ux manuks should be based on revelation of their specific characteristics and comparison with similar figures of other traditions. In this respect, the study of the T‘ux manuk sanctuaries and their legends 1This article represents an abridged and updated version of Petrosyan 2001. 2In Armenian folklore the figures of similar names – t‘uxs (‘blacks’) and alek manuks (‘good youths’) – figure as evil spirits (Alishan 1895: 205, 217).
    [Show full text]