«Սպասելով Մհերի վերադարձին» - Լևոն ԽԵՉՈՅԱՆ

Levon Khechoyan's article "Awaiting the Return of Mher," which represents the writer's address to the Congress of Armenian Writers, is devoted to the problem of the 1922 reform of Armenian orthography and the necessity of restoring it to its traditional form.

Introduction and Statement of the Problem
The author opens his address with reflections on the enduring relevance of the question of Armenian orthography more than eighty years after its reform. Referring to the biblical wisdom of Ecclesiastes on the eternal cycle and return, Khechoyan formulates the key metaphor of the entire text: authentic culture is like a river that must return to its source, without dissolving without a trace into the sea and without overflowing it with itself.

Historical Background
The author reminds us that Armenian writing, created 1600 years ago, ensured the continuity of the people's spiritual tradition. However, the 1922 decree of the People's Commissariat for Education on the transition to new orthography, in Khechoyan's view, continued the destructive work begun by the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire, and led to a rupture in the spiritual unity of the nation.

Key Argument: Reform as an Instrument of Cultural Rupture
Khechoyan insists that under the pretext of combating illiteracy, the Bolshevik reform in fact destroyed the connection of the Armenian people with their centuries-old cultural heritage and pre-literate civilization. He provides evidence of resistance to the reform from major Armenian and foreign scholars and writers:

Shirvanzade, Tumanyan, Isahakyan, Adontz, Acharyan, and other figures of Armenian culture;
the French armenologists Antoine Meillet and Frédéric Feydit, who warned of the dangers of the changes;
a parallel with Ivan Bunin's position, who rejected a similar reform of Russian orthography.

Particular emphasis is placed on Hrachia Acharyan's statement about the impermissibility of destroying a thousand-year-old written heritage for the sake of momentary aims.

The Contemporary Dimension of the Problem
The author points out that the Armenian people have remained the only nation in the world using two variants of orthography, which aggravates the disunity between the homeland and the diaspora (Spyurk). Comparisons are drawn with the policies of Atatürk and contemporary Azerbaijan, which consciously changed their writing systems in order to form cultural-political unity — in contrast to which the Armenian people, united by blood kinship, are deprived even of a unified written language.

Conclusion
Khechoyan calls upon the Congress of the Writers' Union to appeal to the parliament with a demand to correct the historical error of 1922. He emphasizes that the restoration of traditional orthography has not only spiritual but also practical significance — in conditions of a hostile environment, the Armenian people have no right to renounce the resource of the diaspora, which proved its solidarity during the years of the Artsakh War. The key conclusion of the article is that without unified orthography, the genuine realization of the principle "One people, one homeland, one culture" is impossible: a divided writing system deprives the nation of access to its own cultural heritage and symbolically keeps the epic hero Mher trapped in the cave, from which, according to legend, he is destined to one day emerge.