Homeland vs. Home: When a Call to Return to the Homeland Is Not Answered. An Exploration of Homeland, Ideology, and Nationalism

Abstract

When an invitation to repatriate to Armenia was made, why did some diasporic Armenians choose not to go? This thesis aims to answer that question through a case study of the Armenian population of Anjar, Lebanon.,

Based on oral interviews with townspeople, published and unpublished memoirs and contemporary newspaper articles, this thesis argues that a return to a homeland was a complex decision unique to both subaltern groups within a population and to individuals. For the Armenians of Anjar, political ideology, party affiliation, religious denomination, material conditions, familial ties and perceptions or imaginings of homeland all played a part in this complex decision.

In telling this story, this thesis complicates the idea of ‘repatriation’ as it pertains to the Armenian diaspora. Most Armenians, especially those diasporans that chose not to repatriate, call this episode the “Nerkakht’, which literally means ‘inward migration.’ By looking at the multiple factors that shaped individuals’ decisions and the multifaceted ways in which they understood their identities, this project shows that many people in Anjar did not see this movement as “repatriation,” but rather yet another migration, to an imagined homeland that they were not originally from.