Azerbaijan Erases Armenian Heritage: Artsakh’s Historic Dadivank Monastery Given to Udi Community in Propaganda Push

The medieval Dadivank Monastery, a revered Armenian Christian site located in the Karvachar region of Azerbaijan-occupied Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh), has been handed over to the Udi community by Azerbaijani authorities, according to Monument Watch. This move has sparked widespread debate and criticism over the protection and preservation of cultural heritage in post-conflict regions.

Dadivank, a monastic complex dating back to the 9th century, is celebrated for its Armenian Christian heritage. Its walls and ancient khachkars (carved stone crosses) bear inscriptions and symbols that unequivocally link the site to Armenian history. Despite this, Azerbaijan has sought to reframe the narrative surrounding Dadivank, asserting that the site is originally Albanian and linked to the Caucasian Albanian heritage.

The Udi community, a Christian minority in Azerbaijan, has been brought into the spotlight as part of Azerbaijan’s efforts to claim the monastery as part of its own cultural history. Udis historically followed the Armenian Apostolic Church, sharing its liturgical and spiritual practices. However, under Azerbaijani state propaganda, the Udi identity is now being emphasized as distinct and used to legitimize claims over Christian monuments in Artsakh.

Since the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, Azerbaijan has intensified campaigns to rebrand Armenian cultural and spiritual sites as Albanian. According to Monument Watch, these efforts often involve staged visits by Udi community leaders, who conduct rituals and make public statements asserting that Armenian inscriptions and symbols were added during the “Armenian occupation.” Azerbaijani media amplifies these narratives, framing the Udis as reclaiming their heritage.

Critics argue this approach undermines the authenticity of the site and contravenes international cultural heritage laws. The authenticity of Dadivank’s Armenian identity is supported by centuries of historical documentation, foreign scholarly works, and its inclusion within the Armenian Apostolic Church until the late Soviet era.

International conventions on cultural heritage, including the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage and the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in Armed Conflict, emphasize the preservation of cultural sites in their original form. Transforming cultural heritage to align with alternative historical narratives is considered a violation of these agreements.

The appropriation of Dadivank and other Armenian Christian monuments also raises concerns about the preservation of religious freedoms. By distorting the cultural and spiritual identities of these sites, Azerbaijan risks erasing the historical connections of Artsakh’s Armenian Christian population.

The Udi community itself has faced challenges since the dissolution of the Armenian Apostolic Church’s presence in Azerbaijan. Historically, Udis were closely integrated into the Armenian Apostolic Church and identified themselves as “Armenians by nationality, Udi by tribe.” However, political pressures and the Artsakh conflict have placed them in a precarious position.

While Azerbaijani authorities now highlight the Udis as custodians of Christian heritage, this narrative overlooks the community’s complex historical ties to the Armenian Church. Experts have pointed out that portraying the Udi Church as an independent denomination is not only historically inaccurate but also serves as a tool for propaganda.

Scholars, cultural heritage organizations, and international observers have voiced concern about the implications of Azerbaijan’s policies. Transforming cultural properties to fit alternative narratives threatens their historical value, authenticity, and integrity.

The Dadivank case is a microcosm of broader efforts by Azerbaijan to redefine the cultural landscape of Artsakh. International bodies such as UNESCO and ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites) have been urged to address these issues and ensure the protection of cultural heritage sites in the region.