Armenian Genocide Museum Marks 110th Anniversary with International Conference
YEREVAN—The Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute in Yerevan commemorated the 110th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide with a groundbreaking three-day international conference. Titled “A Century of Armenian Genocide Studies: Scholars Reflect on Legacy, Explore New Horizons,” the conference took place from May 29 to 31.
More than fifty scholars from Armenia, Turkey, Poland, Israel, Sweden, Lebanon, Canada, Germany, Brazil, Australia, and the United States participated in this rare and intellectually rich gathering. Representing a wide range of disciplines—including history, political science, law, anthropology, literature, and digital humanities—the participants brought diverse perspectives to the evolving landscape of genocide studies. The conference provided a vital platform not only to reflect on the development of Armenian Genocide scholarship over the past century but also to engage with unresolved historical, ethical, and methodological questions. By fostering dialogue across national, disciplinary, and generational lines, the event helped shape a forward-looking research agenda, reaffirming the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in advancing the field.
The conference opened with a series of welcoming remarks emphasizing the moral and scholarly imperative of sustained research on the Armenian Genocide—particularly in the face of ongoing denial, geopolitical challenges, and the global urgency of prevention.
“This conference aimed to critically assess Armenian Genocide studies as an academic discipline,” said Dr. Edita Gzoyan, Director of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute. “We sought to revisit and honor the foundational work of early scholars who built the groundwork for this field, while also evaluating the progress made to date, identifying unanswered questions, overlooked areas, and envisioning a more inclusive and interdisciplinary future. One of our key goals was to outline future trajectories for the field, including deeper integration with digital humanities, comparative genocide research, and interdisciplinary studies. The Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute remains committed to fostering rigorous scholarship, preserving memory, and serving as a global hub for academic collaboration and innovation in genocide studies.”
The first day of the conference opened with Panel One, which focused on the development of Armenian Genocide historiography and the establishment of institutional frameworks. Prominent scholars including Raymond Kévorkian, Bedross Der Matossian, Armen Marukyan, and Stephan Astourian offered critical reflections on the trajectory of genocide studies, tracing its emergence in both Western academia and Armenia, the vital contributions of Armenian institutions, and the persistent thematic and methodological gaps in the field. These discussions reaffirmed the need for continual reevaluation of archival practices, scholarly priorities, and models of public engagement. Anna Ohanjanyan presented the newly established research group at AGMI dedicated to the study of Late Ottoman society, transformations, and historical violence, outlining its interdisciplinary mission and future directions.
Panel Two centered on early documentation efforts. Mihran Minassian and Boris Adjemian have both examined the foundational role played by Aram Andonian and institutions like the Nubar Library in Paris. Speakers also emphasized how Armenian newspapers (Mariam Hovsepyan) and individual memoirists helped shape the initial narratives of the genocide, spotlighting lesser-known survivor-documenters such as Garabed Kapigian (Regina Galustyan) and the underutilized archives of Gevorg Mesrop (Narine Margaryan).
Panel Three delved into the intricate relationship between memory, archives, and oral history. Shushan Khachatryan, Arman Khachatryan, and Manuk Avedikyan examined the evolution of oral history in the context of the Armenian Genocide. The Panel featured also comparative insights from Holocaust studies, such as Sharon Kangisser Cohen’s work on testimony, and innovative research on archival memory from the perpetrator’s perspective, as presented by Hazal Halavut. The panel underscored oral history’s significance as both a source and a methodological tool, highlighting its unique ability to weave together narrative, trauma, and historical truth. Armen Marsoobian and Catherine Masud explored the use of visual storytelling as a powerful medium for genocide education and public engagement.
Panel Four concluded the first day with a focus on witnessing and humanitarianism. Presentations brought attention to previously underexamined figures such as Leopold Gaszczyk (Dominica Macios), Marzped (Gohar Khanumyan) and Heinrich Militonian (Hayk Martirosyan), as well as community-led initiatives by Armenians in Artsakh aimed at supporting genocide survivors (Lusine Hovsepyan). These contributions highlighted the indispensable role of rescuers, aid workers, and intellectuals in alleviating suffering and preserving human dignity amidst catastrophe.
Day two of the conference opened with Panel Five, which showcased innovative and cross-disciplinary approaches to Armenian Genocide studies. From the ethical and regulatory implications of generative AI in genocide representation (Narek Poghosyan), to ecological frameworks (Samuel Dolbee), localized microhistories (Suren Manukyan) and casual frameworks (Henry Theriault), the panel revealed how new methodologies are reshaping scholarly understanding of both the causes and consequences of genocide.
Among the standout presentations was “The Madagascar Plan: Armenian Case” by Edita Gzoyan and Aram Mirzoyan, which examined the little-known Armenian resettlement proposals of the 1920s. Their research demonstrated how ideologies of demographic engineering circulated globally in the early 20th century, drawing provocative parallels with later resettlement schemes such as the Nazi “Madagascar Plan.”
Panel Six turned to the enduring legacy of genocide in shaping trauma, memory, and identity within post-genocide Armenian communities. Topics ranged from comparative studies of memory transmission in Brazil (Júlia de Moraes Cabral Tordeur), to re-readings of April 24 commemorations (Harutyun Marutyan), and in-depth analyses of intergenerational trauma in diasporic settings (Mariam Hergnyan). Collectively, the presentations illuminated the psychological, linguistic, and cultural dimensions of inherited trauma.
Additional contributions explored symbolic and psychological modes of survivor expression. Tehmine Martoyan analyzed the “language” of genocide survivors through the lens of victimology, while Gevorg Vardanyan and Narine Hakobyan examined the memorialization of the Hamidian massacres among Armenian Americans—linking early episodes of violence to broader narratives of identity formation and the ongoing imperative of genocide recognition and prevention.
Panel Seven, dedicated to the intersection of gender and genocide, addressed the complex dynamics of sexual violence, displacement, and resistance. Elyse Semerdjian drew powerful parallels between Armenian and Indigenous experiences of gendered violence, while Mariana Boujikian examined the enduring effects of gender-based trauma in the Armenian diaspora of Brazil. Roy Knocke highlighted the often-overlooked humanitarian contributions of women in the late Ottoman Empire, and Inesa Stepanyan provided a compelling comparative analysis of women’s resistance during the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust—emphasizing both common patterns and the specific forms of agency that emerged in different historical contexts.
The final day of the conference opened with Panel Eight, which focused on the ideological and political roots of genocide. Hamit Bozarslan explored the continuities between Hamidian authoritarianism and contemporary Turkish nationalism, shedding light on the persistent structures of repression and exclusion. Other presentations offered critical demographic and legal insights—Arpine Bablumyan presented demographic shifts of Western Armenians before the genocide, Robert Tatoyan analyzed varying death toll estimates through meticulous demographic research, while Mehmet Polatel examined post-war restitution efforts and their limitations. Hilmar Kaiser provided a detailed case study of the Trabzon deportations from the perspective of the Ottoman state, highlighting the bureaucratic and political logic behind genocidal policies.
Panel Nine broadened the discussion through comparative genocide studies, drawing connections among the Armenian, Assyrian, and Jewish genocides. Vincent Duclert, David Gaunt, and Melanie O’Brien engaged with complex legal, theoretical, and ethical questions, including Raphael Lemkin’s concept of genocide and the evolving pursuit of justice. Keith David Watenpaugh introduced the concept of “social death” to analyze the long-term effects of genocide on Armenian children, revealing the deep ruptures in identity, kinship, and belonging caused by systemic violence.
The conference concluded with Panel Ten, which returned to the themes of survival and reconstruction. Presenters highlighted the resilience of Armenian survivors and the reconstitution of communal life in new contexts. Discussions focused on the resistance of survivors (Mikael Nichanian), urban transformation of Yerevan (Susanna Harutyunyan), the establishment of new neighborhoods (Lusine Amirjanian), and the preservation of Turkish-language oral traditions by Western Armenians (Verjine Svazlian)—an often-overlooked yet vital dimension of cultural continuity. Viki Tchaparian’s paper focused on the Arabic sources on the Armenian Genocide, another aspect that needs to be explored more. These presentations affirmed not only the profound loss experienced during and after the genocide but also the enduring capacity for renewal, adaptation, and cultural preservation.
“This has been one of the most intellectually stimulating and professionally rewarding conferences I have attended throughout my academic career,” said Bedross Der Matossian (University of Nebraska–Lincoln), who participated in the conference. “The breadth of topics covered, along with the depth and sophistication of the arguments presented by scholars from around the world, clearly marks a new and exciting phase in the study of the Armenian Genocide.”
He went on to commend the host institution and its scholars: “I am particularly impressed by the extraordinary research being conducted by the scholars at the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute. Their rigorous, interdisciplinary approaches—not only rooted in archival scholarship but also incorporating fields such as memory studies, cultural anthropology, and gender studies—demonstrate the Institute’s growing importance as a global hub for Armenian Genocide Studies. The dedication, innovation, and collaborative spirit on display here have set a new standard for future scholarly work in this field.”
The conference concluded with reflections from both organizers and participants, underscoring the importance of honoring the scholarly legacy built over the past century while embracing innovative, comparative, and intersectional approaches for the future. A recurring theme in the discussions was the critical role of Digital Humanities in broadening the academic scope of Armenian Genocide Studies, enabling new methods of analysis, visualization, and engagement. Visits to the Armenian Genocide Memorial and the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin further anchored the conference’s intellectual dialogues in spaces of profound national and spiritual significance, reinforcing the inseparable link between memory and scholarship.
At a time when genocide denial and historical revisionism continue to pose challenges, the conference affirmed that Armenian Genocide Studies must remain a vibrant and evolving interdisciplinary field—one that not only commemorates the past but also contributes meaningfully to global conversations on justice, human rights, and the prevention of mass atrocities.
The Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute Foundation is dedicated to preserving the memory and legacy of the Armenian Genocide by honoring 1,5 million Armenians who have perished during the horrible events at the beginning of the 20th century. The Museum-Institute teaches universal lessons to combat hatred, discrimination, prejudice, and apathy. It fulfils its missions through the permanent, temporary and on-line exhibitions, vigorous research in different topics related to the Armenian Genocide, enrichment, preservation, digitalization and interpretation of its collections, through educational programs and other initiatives that raise the awareness of the Armenian Genocide, promote the value of human rights and foster recognition and prevention of genocides.
