Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

An Armenian Mediterranean pp 247–267Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Spaces of Difference, Spaces of Belonging: Negotiating Armenianness in Lebanon and France

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Mediterranean Perspectives ((MEPERS))

Abstract

Problematizing diaspora/homeland and diaspora/host-country binaries, this chapter argues that the descendants of once dispersed populations and the institutions they establish in various countries become embedded in the social fabric of local societies, and therefore they can no longer be considered as temporary in “host” countries with an inalienable and essentialized yearning for the homeland. By focusing on the formation of Armenian public and private spaces of difference in Lebanon and France in the twentieth century it is suggested that even polities that promoted and valorized assimilation have yielded spaces for the articulation, expression and production of ethno-confessional differences. In the process of negotiating such enthno-confessional spaces of difference, various Armenian ethnic institutions emerged in these countries, some of which became (permanently) embedded in the legal, political, and social structure of local societies. It is around and beyond the network of these emerging and declining, enduring and short-term, local and translocal ethnic structures and institutions that different Armenian spaces have developed in Lebanon and France (and elsewhere), in relation to which subsequent generations of (originally) displaced Armenians articulated their own forms of cultural and ethnic difference, negotiated various expressions of Armenianness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Transliterations follow the Library of Congress’s Romanization system except when quoting from other texts. In the case of proper names that frequently appear in the Latin script, such as the titles of Armenian newspapers, the more common spelling is preserved.

  2. 2.

    “Morning of Light,” a liturgical song in Armenian church service.

  3. 3.

    Hovel Chenorhokian, “Rise, Diaspora!” RAG Mamoul, August 5, 2015, accessed December 18, 2015, http://ragmamoul.net/en/news-in-english/2015/08/05/rise-diaspora/.

  4. 4.

    Chenorhokian, “Rise, Diaspora!”

  5. 5.

    See for example James Clifford, “Diasporas,” Cultural Anthropology 9, no. 3 (1994): 302–338; Khachig Tölölyan, “Rethinking Diaspora(s): Stateless Power in the Transnational Moment,” Diaspora 5, no. 1 (1994): 3–36; Robin Cohen, Global Diasporas: An Introduction (London and New York: Routledge, 2008). Prior to this, some scholars tended to emphasize the centrality of homeland and the promise of return as a defining characteristic of diaspora. See, for example, William Safran, “Diasporas in Modern Societies: Myths of Homeland and Return.” Diaspora 1, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 83–99; Gabriel Sheffer, “A New Field of Study: Modern Diasporas in International Politics,” in Modern Diasporas in International Politics, ed. Gabriel Sheffer (London & Sydney: Croom Helm, 1986), 1–15.

  6. 6.

    Stuart Hall, “Cultural Identity and Diaspora,” in Identity: Community, Culture and Difference, ed. Jonathan Rutherford (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1990), 222–237; Clifford, “Diasporas”; Paul Gilroy, ‘There Ain’t No Black in Union Jack’: The Cultural Politics of Race and Nation (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1987); Paul Gilroy, The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993); Daniel Boyarin and Jonathan Boyarin, “Diaspora: Generation and the Ground of Jewish Identity,” Critical Inquiry 19, no. 4 (1993): 693–725; Daniel Boyarin, A Traveling Homeland: The Babylonian Talmud as Diaspora (Philadelphia, PA: University of Philadelphia Press, 2015).

  7. 7.

    I discuss the development of the conflicting perceptions of homeland in much detail elsewhere. See Vahe Sahakyan “Between Host-Countries and Homeland: Institutions, Politics and Identities in the Post-Genocide Armenian Diaspora (1920s to 1980s)” (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 2015). See also Anny Bakalian, Armenian-Americans: From Being to Feeling Armenian (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1993); Benjamin Alexander, “The American Armenians’ Cold War: The Divided Response to Soviet Armenia,” in Anti-Communist Minorities in the U.S.: Political Activism of Ethnic Refugees, ed. Ieva Zak (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 67–86; Sarkis Atamian, The Armenian Community: The Historical Development of a Social and Ideological Conflict (New York: Philosophical Library, 1955); Nicola Migliorino, (Re)Constructing Armenia in Lebanon and Syria: Ethno-Cultural Diversity and the State in the Aftermath of a Refugee Crisis (New York: Berghahn Books, 2008); Nikola Schahgaldian, “The Political Integration of an Immigrant Community into a Composite Society: The Armenians in Lebanon, 1920–1974” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1979); Khachig Tölölyan, “Exile Governments in the Armenian Polity,” in Governments-in-Exile in Contemporary World Politics, ed. Yossi Shain (New York: Routledge, 1991), 166–185; Khachig, Tölölyan, “Elites and Institutions in the Armenian Transnation,” Diaspora 9, no. 1 (2000): 107–136.

  8. 8.

    Writing about diasporas in the twentieth century, James Clifford more explicitly suggests that diasporas are defined against indigenous claims by “tribal” people and against “hegemonic nationalism” or “the norms of nation-states.” In juxtaposing diasporas to nativist claims, Clifford wonders whether “relative newcomers,” such as “the fourth generation Indians in Fiji, or Mexicans in southwestern United States since the 16th century,” have historical and/or indigenous rights. “How long does it take to become ‘indigenous’?” he asks, arguing that attempts to draw strict lines between “original” inhabitants and “subsequent immigrants” “risk ahisoricism” (Clifford, “Diasporas,” 307–310).

  9. 9.

    For studies on Jewish immigration and settlement in France and United States, see Esther Benbassa, The Jews of France: A History from Antiquity to the Present (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999); Calvin Goldscheider and Alan S. Zuckerman, The Transformation of the Jews (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1984); Hasia Diner, The Jews of the United States, 1654–2000 (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2004).

  10. 10.

    For the detailed discussion of the Armenian Question see Richard Hovannisian, “The Armenian Question in the Ottoman Empire 1876 to 1914,” in The Armenian People from Ancient to Modern Times, vol. 2, Foreign Dominion to Statehood: the Fifteenth century to the Twentieth Century, ed. Richard Hovannisian (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997), 203–238.

  11. 11.

    Lydie Belmont, La Petite Arménie. Histoire de la communauté arménienne à Marseille (Marseille: Éditions Jeanne Laffitte, 2004); Step‘an Pōghosean, Tṛuts‘ik aknark Marsēyli hay gaghut‘i patmut‘ean vray [Brief Remark on the History of Armenian Colony of Marseille] (Yerevan: Zangak-97 hratarakch‘ut‘iwn, 2005).

  12. 12.

    Sisak Varzhapetean, Hayerě Libanani mēj. Hanragitaran libananahay gaghut‘i [Armenians in Lebanon: Encyclopedia of the Lebanese Armenian Colony], vol. 2. 1920–1980. Patkerazard [Illustrated] (Pēyrut‘: Tp. Sewan, 1981), 200; Sisak Varzhapetean, Hayerě Libanani mēj. Hanragitaran libananahay gaghut‘i [Armenians in Lebanon: Encyclopedia of the Lebanese Armenian Colony], vol. 3, 1920–1980. Patkerazard: Kazmakerput‘iwnner, mshakut‘ayin keank‘ ew shrjanner, [1920–1980. Illustrated: Organizations, Cultural Life and Regions] (Beirut: Tp. Sewan, 1981), 95.

  13. 13.

    Some of the most prominent Armenian periodicals in the interwar France were Haratch [Forward], HOK (The organ of the pro-Soviet Committee for Aid to Armenia), Banvor [Worker], and Mardgotz [Bastion], and literary journals Anahit and Menk‘ [We].

  14. 14.

    In 1916, the British and French entered secretly into what became known as the Sykes-Picot agreement. According to this agreement, in case of an Ottoman defeat in World War I, they would respectively seize control of the Ottoman Arab provinces. As a realization of this agreement following the Mudros armistice, the coastal region from Cilicia to Lebanon fell under the control of the French (see Richard Hovannisian, “Armenia’s Road to Independence,” in The Armenian People from Ancient to Modern Times. vol. II. Foreign Dominion to Statehood: the Fifteenth century to the Twentieth Century, ed. Richard Hovannisian, (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997), 282; Nicola Migliorino, (Re)Constructing Armenia, 46.

  15. 15.

    Rania Maktabi, “The Lebanese Census of 1932 Revisited. Who Are the Lebanese?” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 26, no. 2 (1999): 158; Thibaut Jaulin, “Démographie et politique au Liban sous le Mandat: Les émigrés, les ratios confessionnels et la fabrique du Pacte national,” Histoire & Mesure, 24, no. 1 (2009): 193.

  16. 16.

    “French Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon,” The American Journal of International Law 17, no. 3, Supplement: Official Documents (1923): 178–179.

  17. 17.

    Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.

  18. 18.

    Rania Maktabi, “State Formation and Citizenship in Lebanon. The Politics of Membership and Exclusion in a Sectarian State,” in Citizenship and the State in the Middle East: Approaches and Applications, ed. Nils A. Butenschon, Uri Davis, and Manuel Hassassian (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 2000), 157.

  19. 19.

    The French mandatory authorities were also interested in the political inclusion of the Armenians in Lebanon who could increase the base of their local Christian supporters (see Migliorino, (Re)Constructing Armenia, 53–54; Melker El-Khoury and Thibaut Jaulin, Country Report: Lebanon (Fiesole, Italy: European University Institute, 2012), 6; Maktabi, “The Lebanese Census of 1932,” 227).

  20. 20.

    The history of the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia goes back to the medieval period. According to tradition, the Armenian church had been established in early fourth century in Ējmiatsin (ancient Vagharshapat). Following a shift of political fortunes in Armenia, the seat of the catholicos had been relocated many times. The fall of the last Armenian kingdom on the Armenian highland in the eleventh century prompted an exodus of Armenians from their ancestral lands. After the establishment of an Armenian Kingdom in Cilicia in 1198, the catholicosate moved to Cilicia and in 1293 it was finally established in Sis, the capital of the Kingdom. Despite the fall of the Cilician Armenian kingdom in 1375, the catholicosate remained in Cilicia until 1441. In 1441, a church assembly gathered in Ējmiatsin, which decided to move the catholicosate from Sis back to Ējmiatsin after nearly a millennium. The Assembly elected a new catholicos in Ējmiatsin, but the Catholicosate of Sis continued with limited jurisdiction over churches in Cilicia (for further details see Maghak‘ia Ōrmanean, Azgapatum. Hay ughghap‘aṛ ekeghets‘woy ants‘k‘erě skizbēn minch‘ew mer ōrerě harakits‘ azgayin paraganerov patmuats [National History. The History of the Armenian Orthodox Church from the Beginning to our Days Narrated with Related National Circumstances], vol. 2 (Kostandnupolis: Hratarakutʻiwn V.ew H. Tēr-Nersēsean.1914), col. 2107–21, 2139–41).

  21. 21.

    Prior to the influx of Armenian genocide refugees, the Armenian Catholic congregation had long-established roots in Mount Lebanon. The monastery of Bzommar, established in 1749, had served as the seat of the Catholic Patriarch until it moved to Istanbul after the founding of a Catholic millet in 1830. The seat of the Armenian Catholic Patriarchate was re-established in Lebanon in 1928, several years after the creation of the Republic of Turkey (Ara Sanjian, “Libanan,” in Hay sp‘yuṛk‘: Hanragitaran [Armenia-Diaspora: Encyclopedia], ed. Hovhannes Ayvazyan and Aram Sargsyan (Yerevan: Haykakan Hanragitaran, 2003), 299; Migliorino, (Re)Constructing Armenia, 17–18, 50–52).

  22. 22.

    The Lebanese census of 1932 registered Catholic and “Orthodox” Armenians as separate confessional communities. Protestant Armenians were counted under the general category of Protestants (Maktabi, “The Lebanese Census,” 222, 235; Sanjian, “Libanan,” 291–292).

  23. 23.

    The Armenian Apostolic church in Lebanon continued following the 1863 Constitution, which regulated the internal matters of the Armenian Patriarchate in the Ottoman Empire. This constitution allowed for laymen to be involved in the administrative matters of the Armenian church and community. The Armenian Catholic church did not allow such participation of laymen in the church administration. The Protestant church was also cautious of Armenian political activists.

  24. 24.

    The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnakts‘ut‘iwn) and its supporters promoted a fiercely anti-Soviet agenda. Their opponents found Soviet Armenia as the realization of Armenian dreams and the actualization of an Armenian homeland, even if it comprised only a small part of the imagined homeland.

  25. 25.

    By 1926, the Apostolic Armenian community in Lebanon had established fifteen kindergartens and primary schools for orphans and the children of refugees, whereas Catholic Armenians established eight and Evangelical Armenians founded six such schools (Varzhapetean, Hayerě Libanani mēj, vol. 2, 391).

  26. 26.

    Lebanon is a country with a social-political system that is described by many scholars as a “consociational democracy.” The essence of consociationalism is in sharing power between various confessional or ethno-religious and sectarian communities (see Camille Habib, Consociationalism and the Continuous Crisis in the Lebanese System (Beirut: Majd, 2009), 21–43). The National Pact confirmed the distribution of the three major posts of the Lebanese political system, reserving the seat of the president for the Maronites, the seat of the speaker of parliament for the Shi’ites, and the seat of the prime minister for the Sunnis. This established the 6:5 ratio of Christian:Muslim sectarian representation. This ratio was believed to be roughly proportional to the size of various Christian and Muslim communities in Lebanon (see Fawwaz Traboulsi, A Modern History of Lebanon (London, Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press, 2007), 206).

  27. 27.

    For further details on the Armenian participation in the Lebanese civil war, see Migliorino, (Re)Constructing Armenia, 152–158.

  28. 28.

    This process included a variety of actions taken by the French government against religiosity, which included but were not limited to the secularization of cemeteries and hospitals, suppression of public prayers, removal of religious symbols from courts and other public places, and the establishment of free and compulsory laïc public schools (see Patrick Weil, “Introduction: La loi de 1905 et son application depuis un siècle,” in Politics de la laïcité au XXe siècle, ed. Patrick Weil (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 2007), 13). The law of 1905, in particular, embodying the principle of laïcité, stipulated that the French Republic did not “recognize, pay or subsidize any religion” (Article 2, “Loi du 9 décembre 1905 concernant la séparation des Eglises et de l’Etat,” Legifrance, accessed April 10, 2016,

    http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070169&dateTexte=20080306).

  29. 29.

    Article 18 of the 1905 law stated: “Associations formed to meet expenses, maintenance and public exercise of worship shall be established in accordance with Article 5 and following of Title I of the Act of July 1, 1901…” (ibid.; see also Rémy Schwartz, “Historical and Constitutional Relations Between Churches and the State in France,” in Politics and Religion in France and the United States, ed. Alec G. Hargreaves, John Kelsa, and Sumner B. Twiss (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2007), 15–16).

  30. 30.

    Citizenry defined around a territory, rather than descent. For further discussion of naturalization and citizenship in France see Rogers Brubaker, Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992), 75ff.

  31. 31.

    See Gerd Baumann, “Nation, Ethnicity and Community,” in Diasporas: Concepts, Intersections, Identities, ed. Kim Knott and Sean McLounglin (London, New York: Zed Books, 2010), 45–49; Patrick Weil, How to Be French: Nationality in the Making since 1789, trans. Catherine Porter (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2008), 30–53; Brubaker, Citizenship and Nationalism, 85–106; Mary Dewhurts Lewis, “Immigration,” in The French Republic: History, Values, Debates, ed. Edward Berenson, Vincent Duclert, and Chrstophe Prochasson (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2011), 233.

  32. 32.

    A 1933 report prepared by Georges Mauco, one of the leading experts on immigration and population in the 1930s, sheds an important light on issues of immigration control and the problems France faced vis-à-vis the large influx of immigrants (Georges Mauco, “Immigration in France,” International Labour Review 27, no. 6 (1933): 765–788). The number of immigrants, as reported by Mauco, doubled from 1921 until 1930, increasing from about 1.5 million to about 3 million (7% of the entire population of France) (767). Given the diversity of the countries of origin, the assimilation of immigrants was difficult due to “their even wider difference in customs, culture and language” (776).

  33. 33.

    The Paris Police Bureau officer clarified this point in his interview with the correspondent of Haratch (“Ōrě ōrin: Inch‘ k’ěsē ostik. varch‘ut‘iwně ink‘nut‘ean t‘ught‘eru ew hayeru masin” [Day to day: What Does the Police Department Tell about the ID Cards and the Armenians], Haratch, August 2, 1925, 1).

  34. 34.

    These documents were named after Fridtjof Nansen, the League of Nations’ High Commissioner of the Refugees (1921–1930). These “passports” were initially designed for the Russian expatriates after the Bolshevik revolution who had been subsequently deprived of nationality by the Soviet Union. Nansen Passports served as identity cards for these stateless refugees, and were good for work and travel within the member countries of the League of Nations. During the economic crisis at the beginning of the 1930s, while many immigrant groups were forced out of France, Nansen Passports helped their holders to avoid deportations, as these people had no state to return to (see Martine Hovanessian, Le Lien Communautaire: Trois générations d’Arméniens (Paris: Armand Colin, 1992), 67–68; Anahide Ter-Minassian, Histoire croisees: Diaspora, Arménie, Transcaucasie 1890–1990 (Marseille: Editions Parenthéses, 1997), 69).

  35. 35.

    See Pōghosean, Tṛuts‘ik aknark, 220; Stephan Boghossian, La communauté arménienne de Marseille: Quatre siècles de son histoire (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2009), 251.

  36. 36.

    According to the provisions of the Treaty of Geneva of 1928, recruits with Nansen Passports could wear the uniforms of host-countries. But the military booklets of Nansen refugees in the French army contained the following line written in red ink: “Soldat n’ayant pas la nationalité française” (Cyril Le Tallec, La communauté arménienne de France. 1920–1950 (Paris: l’Harmattan, 2001), 156).

  37. 37.

    Lewon Shant‘ was a former official in the Republic of Armenia and a member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. He moved to Marseille after Armenia fell under Bolshevik control.

  38. 38.

    Lewon Shant‘ believed that families, social environment, and schools constituted the basis of all nations (see Lewon Shant‘, Azgut‘iwně himk‘ mardkayin ěnkerut‘ean [Nationality as the Basis of Human Society] (Beirut: Hamazgayini Vahē Sēt‘ean tp., 1979). This work was initially published in several installments in Hayrenik‘ amsagir in 1922 in Boston).

  39. 39.

    Haratch published a lengthy interview about the College with Lewon Shant‘ on September 23, 1925 (Shaharuni, “Marsilioy dprots‘, ew P. Lewon Shant‘i Haytararut‘iwnnerě” [School in Marseille, and the Announcements of Mr. Lewon Shant‘], Haratch, September 23, 1925, 2). By this time, as the correspondent noted, Lewon Shant‘ had already left Marseille for Egypt. While in Cairo, jointly with some colleagues, he founded the Hamazgayin Cultural Society in 1928. The society aimed at promoting Armenian language and culture in the dispersion, providing Armenian education through schools, vocational classes, and various publications, and preparing future public leaders, teachers, and activists. Two years later, the Hamazgayin society established the Armenian Lyceum [Chemaran] in Beirut. Lewon Shant‘ became the principal and administered the school for the next twenty years. An impossible project to implement in France became possible in the Lebanese context.

  40. 40.

    This school was founded by the Armenian Catholic Mekhtarist order in 1848 in Paris. The school moved to Venice because of the Franco-Prussian war in 1870 but was re-established in Sévres in 1929. It operated as a boarding school until 1980 (Kevork Bardakjian, The Mekhitarist Contributions to Armenian Culture and Scholarship: Notes to Accompany an Exhibit of Armenian Printed Books in the Widener Library Displayed on the 300th Anniversary of Mekhitar of Sebastia, 1676–1749 (Cambridge, Mass.: Middle Eastern Dept., Harvard College Library, 1976), 22; Claire Mouradian and Anouche Kunth, Les Arméniens en France. Du chaos à la reconnaissance (Toulouse: éditions de l’attribut, 2010), 45).

  41. 41.

    The school was founded in Constantinople in 1879 by several prominent Armenian women. It was transformed into an orphanage during World War I, and then moved to Salonica, Greece in 1922, then to Marseille in 1923, and finally to the Le Raincy suburb of Paris in 1928. In 1970 the boarding school was reorganized into a co-educational day school, offering primaire and collège level education (Mouratian and Kunth, Les Arméniens, 46; Claire Mouradian and Anahide Ter-Minassian, “Fransia” [France], in Hay sp‘yuṛk‘: Hanragitaran [Armenia-Diaspora: Encyclopedia], ed. Hovhannes Ayvazyan and Aram Sargsyan (Erevan: Haykakan Hanragitaran, 2003), 638).

  42. 42.

    On the assimilation of the Jews in France see Benbassa, The Jews of France, 98.

  43. 43.

    Missak Manouchian is the most notable among Armenians fighting in the French Resistance. Manouchian was the leader of a small group comprising predominantly Jewish and Polish immigrants. The group was arrested by the Nazis and all twenty-three members were executed in February, 1944 (see Le Tallec, La communauté arménienne, 167).

  44. 44.

    JAF and UCFAF were especially involved in the projects with Soviet Armenia and later with the independent Republic of Armenia, as the detente in the Cold War and the subsequent collapse of the Soviet state made direct relations with Armenia possible.

  45. 45.

    Several other processes also served as catalysts for rethinking the origins, (re)discovering the roots and (re)claiming armenité. These include the genocide recognition campaigns after 1965, the Armenian terrorist attacks in Europe and elsewhere that targeted predominantly Turkish embassies and diplomats between 1975 and 1985, the influx of Middle Eastern Armenians to France, and the earthquake in Soviet Armenia in December 1988 (see Hovanessian, Le Lien Communautaire, 250–252).

  46. 46.

    Hovanessian, Le Lien Communautaire, 255–257.

  47. 47.

    The explosion at the Orly airport on July 15, 1983, orchestrated by some radical members of the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA), alienated most of the ASALA sympathizers among Armenians in France. On January 7, 1984, President François Mitterrand expressed his support to the Armenian community while at the same time condemning the terrorist acts. He did so on a surprise visit to the Armenian community’s celebration of Christmas in Vienne, Isère: “…France,” the President affirmed, “is strong with its diversities… France should be one of the countries, in which you should feel at home… You … are part of our people….” And then he added: “Witnessing certain dramatic [events] which occurred when the Armenian Cause had been, in my view, misguided by violence …, I said to myself: ‘But there is no misunderstanding, there cannot be any misunderstanding between the Armenians and France…France is a country of welcome [host-country], hospitality, and the sons and daughters of those who suffered so much know well that they have all been completely accepted in the French community…Some elements, who generally come from outside, wanted to carry out acts of violence against France, whose responsibility had been only friendly; acts, of which we all have suffered. This is not an acceptable method and surely I will never accept it.’” (“Allocution de Président de la République (texte intégral),” Haratch, November 1, 1984).

  48. 48.

    The immigration of Armenians from the Middle East, Soviet, and post-Soviet Armenia to France created possibilities for negotiating new Armenian spaces, as France was becoming more tolerant towards difference. Since the 1980s, “Armenian” primary and secondary schools have been appearing in Paris, Marseille, and Lyon that offer classes in Armenian language, history, and culture alongside the regular French curriculum. These schools and other Armenian organizations continue negotiating the possibilities of the permissible within the dynamic French social and political contexts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Michigan-Dearborn, Dearborn, MI, USA

    Vahe Sahakyan

Authors
  1. Vahe Sahakyan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Armenian Studies Program, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Kathryn Babayan

  2. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Michael Pifer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sahakyan, V. (2018). Spaces of Difference, Spaces of Belonging: Negotiating Armenianness in Lebanon and France. In: Babayan, K., Pifer, M. (eds) An Armenian Mediterranean. Mediterranean Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72865-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72865-0_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-72864-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-72865-0

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation