Talk:Armenian eternity sign

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 September 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 January 2013. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Source for swastika origin

See WP:RSN. Dougweller (talk) 13:41, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Coimbra, A Swastika Pictorial Atlas, 2012. Fig. 1 – Several types of swastika / Different periods

this cited in Swastika. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 20:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But nothing is written about Armenia there. Хаченци (talk) 20:57, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sign itself is not Armenian and originated from a swastika in this form. It is used by many people, and in Armenia is used as a Eternity sign. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 21:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Mekhitarian, we need RELIABLE sources that clearly say that this sign is based on or originates from swastika. --Երևանցի ^talk 21:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who decides what is a reliable source, or not reliable? Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 21:58, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RS. Also, self-published sources are not considered reliable. Please find a book or at least an article which verifies the information. --Երևանցի ^talk 22:03, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the author of the famous Fernando Coimbra, and on his page lists resources that are sufficient to WP: RSN. This is evident from Wikipedia pages that link to it. So this question I shall not discuss. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 22:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you need reliable sources. First of all, who is Fernando Coimbra? Can we at least have some kind of info about him? Also, his sources does not say that this sign originates from the swastika, that is simply your interpretation. --Երևանցի ^talk 22:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Coimbra.

Instituto Terra e Memória, ITM, PhD Integrated Researcher.

Research Interests:

Prehistoric Art, Cognitive Archaeology, European Bronze Age, Archaeology, Art History, Prehistoric Archaeology, Funerary Archaeology, Rock Art (Archaeology), Archaeoastronomy, Rock Art, Cognitive archaeology, Rock art conservation, Astronomical Images in Rock Art, História da Arqueologia, Filiform rock art, Iron Age Art, Rock Art Glossary, Cup-marks, Rock Art Sanctuaries, Philosophy, History, Anthropology, Culture, and Iron Age (Archaeology)

Post Doctoral research: Rock Art from Bronze Age and Iron Age in the Portuguese Middle Tagus Bassin (finished in 2010)

PhD in Prehistory and Archaeology, with Extraordinary Prize (University of Salamanca)

Internal Researcher

Quaternary and Prehistory Unit

Centre for Geosciences

FCT . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vahram Mekhitarian (talk • contribs) 23:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Let's say he is reliable. The source still doesn't say that the Armenian eternity sign orinigated form the swastika. There is only one mention of Armenia in that source. That is this engraving from "Gegham" (maybe the Geghama mountains?). And it looks nothing like this eternity sign. --Երևանցի ^talk 23:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that the Unicode source actually says that it "is the direct descendent of the pre-historic Swastika". --Երևանցի ^talk 23:44, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Vahram Mekhitarian Thanks for sending your article about the Armenian Eternity Sign, which I found useful. I took a look at the debates and, as it happens frequently, there's, most of the times, a common problem of generalization - trying to reduce complex things to simple interpretations. Regarding the swastika and variants there are no unique or simple interpretations. I must say that I started to reserach the swastika motif (and its several variants) in 1992, more than 20 years ago, and, in spite of making a PhD thesis about this thematic (awarded in the University of Salamanca, Spain) and have wrtiten several articles (mainly in Portuguese, but two in English and one in Italian), I feel that I have still a lot to learn about swatikas and their variants. According to my files I consider what you call the Armenian Eternity Sign as a variant of the swastika. For example, in Greek pottery form the 8th century BC there are cases of 2 overlapping swastikas what results in a motif of 8 arms (or branches as you wish). Going back in time, there are cases in Neolithic pottery from Hungary with swastikas with the arms in 90 degrees and also with curved arms. It's almost impossible to say which one appeared first. In your article there are cases of the Armenian Eternity Sign with 5, 6 and 7 arms. I know examples from Armenia with 12 arms. This situation happens, for example in Roman funerary stele from the 1st century BC to the 4th century AD in several places of the Roman Empire. It happens also in sevral other examples from different cultures.

I don't have information to say if the name Armenian Eternity Sign is correct. I believe that is a subject for Armenian scholars to discuss. But I know that swastikas of different typology appear in prehistoric rock art in Armenia, around the IV millenium BC. It's important to do more research on these petroglyphs and also to publish the results in English, because most of the publications that I found are in Armenian. Regarding your article, I think that it must be kept on Wikipedia, but it must be developed with further research, including the prehistoric swastikas from Armenia, which can be the "key" to understand all the envolved problematics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eu2001 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What does p 171 of The Mediterranean legacy in early Celtic Christianity say?

I can read "The Armenian symbol of eternity The triskelion (pi. triskelia, from the Cireck trisMes 'three-legged') is a design, usually symbolic, consisting of three curved branches, or three bent legs or arms, radiating from a centre in a counter-clockwise circular fashion (figure 10.17). It is found on ancient Irish bronze artefacts and on" but that's all. Since it's been added as a source, the editor must have it and know what it says after that. Dougweller (talk) 20:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence I cited is on page 186. Why should I know what he says on page 171? Хаченци (talk) 21:07, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The most common pre-Christian symbolism found throughout Armenian cultural tradition, is the round clockwise (occasionally counter-clockwise) whirling sun-like spiral fixed at a centre — the Armenian symbol of eternity.

From the book. Хаченци (talk) 21:17, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's ways to find out what it says after that...! Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 21:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that the editor adding this seems to have used a snippet. If they haven't actually read the context, then they have no way of knowing what the author is saying about this. And of course, this article is not about a 3 armed triskelion. If the Armenian symbol of eternity is the triskelion, the whole basis of this article is false. I'm not making that argument of course. Dougweller (talk) 05:27, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And of course the editor shouldn't be adding material based on a snippet such as this one. Dougweller (talk) 05:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The triskelion has nothing to do with the ASE. The ASE is described in the book, I gave a ctiation. There are no other eternity symbols in Armenia. Хаченци (talk) 11:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't read the book or even the entire page, right? So you don't know what the author is saying in the section starting ""The Armenian symbol of eternity The triskelion (pi. triskelia, from the Cireck trisMes 'three-legged')". Or even why it is descibed later as a spiral - the images I've seen I wouldn't call spirals. Dougweller (talk) 14:13, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What you would or wouldn't call a spiral is irrelevant. Similar images are described as spirals (1 or 2). The Section is not called or starting with "The Armenian symbol of eternity The triskelion... ". It is called "The Armenian symbol of eternity" and it starts with "The triskelion ...". The book is about the similiartites of Armenian and Celtic architectures. The whole paragraph is as below

The triskelion (pl. triskelia, from the Greek triskeles 'three-legged') is a design, usually symbolic, consisting of three curved branches, or three bent legs or arms, radiating from a centre in a counter-clockwise circular fashion. It is found on ancient Irish bronze artefacts and on Ionian shields. In the Celtic tradition the triskelion is a symbol of eternity — past, present and future. Each one of its three arms is linked to the other at the centre perhaps as an illustartion of the Celtic belief in reincarnation. This Celtic imagery is used extensively in the Book of Kells.
Quite a different version of the Celtic triskelion, and perhaps the most common pre-Christian symbolism found throughout Armenian cultural tradition, is the round clockwise (occasionally counter-clockwise) whirling sun-like spiral fixed at a centre — the Armenian symbol of eternity. It is not artistically related to the triskelion, though it may be interpreted to be more akin version of ...

Compare the text with sample pics of Celtic triskelion and Armenian eternity symbol Хаченци (talk) 15:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks, apologies for thinking you haven't read the book - I see people using snippets so often I've become jaded. I was just using shortcuts about the section, sorry. It's ironic that your material was removed by an editor complaining about the removal of text before the AfD is finished. I've restored it - I don't think it's perfect, and I would like more about the history, but it's better than the swastika stuff. What I am not sure about yet is the relationship between the Georgian symbol and this one, since they look identical. Dougweller (talk) 15:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope the user who is currently editing the article, will give corresponding sources, otherwise the content will be deleted and the older version will be restored. It's still far from perfect, but at least there are a lot of sources, showing the sign is widely used in Armenian culture and official symbolics and refered to as "eternity sign" (or "eternity symbol"). I have no doubt that there are some academical works devoted to the symbol, but I am somehow not interested in working on the article. All I want is to prevent its deletion and bring it to more or less normal state, so that other users can improve it. Concerning the Georgian Borjgali sign - there is a list of literature but no concrete reference to the claims of the article. If what is written in Borjgali is true, it would mean that the symbols have somehow different meanings and were used in different ways at least after Christianity. And then, there are some slight differences between the graphical illustrations of (classical) AES and (classical) Borjgali, e.g.

AES has a circle surrounding the main symbol, whearas GB hasn't
the wings of AES touch each other (i.e. each wing finishes on the previous one, or almost reaches it), whereas the wings of GB do not
the AES has even number of wings, whereas GB has seven wings

Of course, there are several examples of AES and GB, which do not obey this rules (there are variations of AES being more close to GB than the standard AES, and vice versa), but, as I said, these are the differences between the classical, most common Armenian Eternity Sign and Georgian Borjgali. Alltogether, I don't think there is a reason to merge the articles, since the symbols are locally known under different names, and the Armenian and Georgian nations - despite being neighbours from immemorial times and having common roots - have their own unique cultures since antiquity. After all, there are several articles about different Christian Crosses, and, despite common origin and the same symbolism, each of them is representing their own church and/or nation, though some of them are almost identical (e.g. this and this, or this and this). Хаченци (talk) 21:27, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Swastika material

What is Fernando Coimbra writing about Armenian eternity sign? Хаченци (talk) 22:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol of national identity

I am somehow confused with the meaning of the phrase - "symbol of national identity". What exactly does it mean, and can the given source be considered enough for the claim? An interesting study is given here, for particular interesting cases it's worth to mention

As we see, there are different types of simbols of national identity, and the claim does not seem to be as bold as it sounds. Хаченци (talk) 14:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You cannon use only one report as a source for such statements.--Δαβίδ (talk) 09:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unicode source

Can anyone tell me, who are the authors of the following "Unicode source"? What are they specialized in, and what the text they write is based on? I mean, well, if the sign is included in Unicode as an Armenian Eternity Sign, it makes it possible (or even necessary) to refer to the symbol under this name. But is a Unicode statement a reliable source for the origin and usage of the symbol itself? I firmly beleive it isn't, unless the authors of the text are specialists of the subject. Хаченци (talk) 01:28, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mekhitarian should probably answer your questions, but from what I understand it is a "comments letter" from the National Institute of Standards of Republic of Armenia (SARM) to Unicode. --Երևանցի ^talk 01:42, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

National institute of standards (of Ministry of economy) is neither specialized in history, nor in archaeology. They undoubtedly can be considered as official source, but for most of the claims in the article an academical source is needed. Хаченци (talk) 01:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with you. It's a government source. However, it is better to have a source like that than no source at all. I'd like to see at least a few reliable, specialized sources that confirm that theory. Mr. Mekhitarian hasn't addressed my question about Fernando Coimbra's source, which doesn't seem to say anything about the connection of the two signs. --Երևանցի ^talk 01:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't better to have any source than no source. It completely fails WP:RS which is our criteria for sources. The authors may be experts in unicode and might be used for that but clearly not for history and archaeology. They even cite us as a source for "

Eternity Sign opens the list of symbols included in ArmSCII". Sorry, but there is no way we can use it for anything else than a statement about a proposal " to involve Armenian Eternity Sign in ISO CD 10646 (3-rd Ed.)." Reliability is not the default and can't be decided here - if anyone wants to argue that this source is reliable for history or archaeology they should raise it at WP:RSN. Dougweller (talk) 05:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Synonyms

Part about synonyms is a full misinformation. The term "kerhach" is armenian synonymous with the word "swastika" has no relation to this sign. "Khach paterazmin" the same, there is no sources confirming the connection. "Vaagnahach" also no sources. Term "arevakhach" is not used by neopagan organizations, but only by one neo-pagan or neo-nazi organization calling themselfs as hayari.org. But is this organization so significant to write about it in article I do not know.--Δαβίδ (talk) 09:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the wrong text. Хаченци (talk) 11:55, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the symbol is widely known (also out of Armenia) under this name and is called Armenian Hetanic symbol. I have no information, that this organization is neo-nazi, they are rather a neo-pagan religious group. The symbol is mentioned in the article about them. Hence, it is necessary to mention that name here. Just google 'arevakhach', there are so many websites using it. Хаченци (talk) 12:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Name

In document of Armenian Standarts body, to identify all forms sign 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, ... lines are called the Armenian Eternity sign under the standard, and all arose out of the swastika. Some cases have also other, more specific names (kerhach, arevahach, the wheel of eternity, Vartan, bordjgali (in Georgia), or others), and some are listed in the "Name". Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 13:08, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And that source fails WP:RS for these claims. I see no one has tried to defend it using our guideline for sources. Dougweller (talk) 13:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The source cannot be used for such claims. I was searching for info about the symbol, and found lots of academical papers mentioning the symbol (many of them are in the article). None of the papers I read was mentioning an Eternity symbol with 4 lines, it has always many lines (usually 6 or 8, sometimes 12 and 20). Some cases have also other, more specific names (kerhach, arevahach, the wheel of eternity, Vartan, bordjgali (in Georgia), or others) - soem cases of what? Swastika? Then this can be written in the article of Swastika. The eternity sign is never mentioned by authoritative sources as kerkhach or arevakhach or bordjgali. Arevakhach is rather a new name, used by the hetanists, and they are mentioned in the article. Kerkhach is just the Armenian name of swastika (according to the Soviet Armenian Encyclopedia, as well as many Armenian dictionaries). About Vahagnakhach - even google has no idea what it is. Хаченци (talk) 13:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Хаченци, can You understand, that the Armenian Standarts body (UNICODE, ISO) to identify all forms sign 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, ... lines, are identify the Armenian Eternity sign under the standard in Armenia? Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 14:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand it, but the article is not about UNICODE symbol, but an Armenian traditional symbol. The Unicode is not a source for Armenian history, culture or archaeology. It can be used as a source only in the section "ArmSCII and UNICODE". If you claim, that Armenian symbol of eternity had 4 lines, then show me one academical source, calling the same symbol with four lines an "eternity symbol", "eternity sign" or "wheel of eternity". And concerning the names - All sources available are mentioning that kerkhach is the swastika, which means that it is NOT the eternity symbol. From the description of Kerkhach in Soviet Armenian Encyclopedia already follows that it is NOT the symbol of etenirty. The following dictionaries are mentioning it as simply the Armenian translation of the word Swastika (1, 2. There is nothing to discuss here. One can mention that Swastika is called in Armenia kerkhach in the Swastika article, but it has no place here since the symbol of eternity has never been mentioned under the name Kerkhach. The other names are also not confirmed by ANY source. If you have information about the names, just bring the source, where the eternity symbol is mentioned under this name. Unicode document can not be considered as such source. Хаченци (talk) 14:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Хаченци, can you understand what this article is about the symbol, which is described in the document and what is cited after the first sentence of Article? This article is not about your perceptions and understanding of the sign. It set out what is presented in the Official document of the Government of Armenia. I do not consider valid attempt somehow to challenge document validity or claim substantiation the contents of this document. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 15:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article can not be about the symbol, which is mentioned in the document, since in that case it obviously does not satisfy Wikipedia:Notability and should be deleted immediately. There are millions of official documents, and thousands of symbols are mentioned there, which does not mean that each of them must have its article on Wikipedia. We don't write articles about each Unicode symbol. And I can't see anything about the Government of Armenia in the overmentioned document. Neither are words like Kerkhach or Vahagnakhach or Arevakhach mentioned there. Moreover, I showed sources, proving that Kerkhach has nothing to do with the symbol, and the words like Arevakhach and Vahagnakhach are missing in famous Armenian dictionaries of IXX-XXI centuries. Hence, it makes absolutely no sense to put that information in the article or even to discuss it. And as I said before (and other users agreed), this document can not be used for claims about the origin, perceptions and understanding. Хаченци (talk) 16:00, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I never added or claimed anything about MY perceptions and understandings of the sign. All my contributions were supported by academical sources. They are much more important for the article, and not a document of Unicode or ISO, whose authors are even not known and the text is based on unknown sources. Хаченци (talk) 16:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Vahram Mekhitarian. What is this discussion about? Weather or not we can put an information, and give a source, which actually refutes it? The source in that text (Soviet Armenian Encyclopedy) clearly states that Kerkhach is the Swastika. It's neither an Armenian symbol, nor it has anything to do with the eternity sign. The same is written in dictionaries I showed. What sould be discussed then here? I am ready to discuss text, which is disputable, but I can't understand why a wrong text (and that's not my opinion, but according to encyclopedias and dictionaries) should be in the article. The text concerning Kerkhach, Arevakhach, Vahagni Khach and Khach Paterazmin is totally misinformative and anti-academical, and can not be on the article. I strongly recommend you not to continue this edit war. Хаченци (talk) 18:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"symbol of the national identity of the Armenian people"

Unless a RELIABLE source is given to back up this claim, it should be removed. --Երևանցի ^talk 18:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article content meaning, cited sources, external links and media content of the Commons category Armenian Eternity Sign about "symbol of the national identity of the Armenian people". Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 23:16, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The bottom line is you need to cite sources to back up this claim. The Star of David is a very good example. Almost everybody knows that that sign is a symbol of the Jewish people and their identity, but sill that claim is cited, because this is an encyclopedia, which requires all information to be verified. Nowhere in the article it says or shows that this is a symbol of the Armenian national identity. If it is, I don't think it's hard to find a source. So go ahead look for reliable sources instead of pushing your POV. --Երևանցի ^talk 18:29, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "Star of David" has been a symbol far before it was used by the Jewish people as a symbol of their identity. Here is an article which explains the symbol as part of the Armenian people far before that of the Jewish people. This isn't controversial, it's historic fact. ^[1] ArmenianSniper (talk) 16:22, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.peopleofar.com/2012/01/14/the-six-pointed-star-of-armenia/

Oshki cathedral

As far as I know, the Oshki cathedral was a Georgian cathedral. It was situated in a region populated by Armenians, who were by religion Georgian orthodoxes (the so called Armenian-calchedonians). It was however built by a Georgian king and it has been a Georgian orthodox monastery. I know that many of the monks and, as I said before, the parishoners, were ethnical Armenians, its architecture is strongly influenced by the Armenian architecture, but when it comes to a cultural point - the Oshki is first of all Georgian cultural monument, and an imortant centre of Georgian culture (especially literature). The ethnic background of its parishoners or monks do not play a big role here. It is, of course, not excluded, that there is some Armenian symbolism there, but I don't think it is natural to call a symbol just next to Georgian inscriptions an Armenian symbol, unless a certain source is doing that. Any objections / suggestions? Хаченци (talk) 22:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, this Georgian cathedral 10th century, and I describe in the first edition and writing. But this 12-Archery symbol from 10th century can be called Borjgali, this is a historical anecdote. Therefore proposed to leave the description in the first edition. So it will be historically true - as an architectural monument of Armenian, and Georgian - as a cathedral. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 04:25, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The statement is correct, the question is why should a photo of a Georgian cathedral with Georgian inscriptions on it be in the article about Armenian eternity symbol. After all, there are so many photos in this short (hopefully only temporarily) article. We should decide which photos to leave and which ones to remove. There are hundreds of pictures with AES, and all of them are significant enough, but we can't put all of them in the article. Хаченци (talk) 04:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but this case, as well as Coptic monastery, has historical value. This is one example of the Armenian-calchedonians (later - Armenian Catholic Church) use this symbol. At this monastery is not only that the Eternity sign, there are a lot of patterns and symbols that coincide with the traditional patterns and symbols of Khachkars. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 06:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What you say is a "historical anecdote". Why would there be an Armenian sign on a Georgian church? And also, please do not add controversial material to this article. There are enough Armenian churches with the sign. The Soviet Armenian Encyclopedia source does NOT say that the sign on it is an Armenian one. --Երևանցի ^talk 03:04, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are some examples of churches changing hands between the Georgian and Armenian church. The fact an Armenian symbol is on a Georgian church or vis-a-vis is not of any surprise. The logic in the question is broken. Additionally, who decides what is "controversial" or not? If there is an article displaying the information which supports an argument one way or another, why is the article not accepted? ArmenianSniper (talk) 16:19, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Armenian eternity sign. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:52, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. Vahram Mekhitarian (talk) 01:05, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Images

The introductory image is a depiction of the Unicode armeternity symbol. I propose to move it down to the ArmSCII and Unicode section.

--Hayordi (talk) 20:24, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.peopleofar.com/2012/01/14/the-six-pointed-star-of-armenia/

[1]