PAN-TURKISM AND THE QUESTION OF AZERBAIJAN "AGHVANK" OR CAUCASIAN ALBANIA A HISTORICAL ACCOUNT (ACCORDING TO MULTI-NATIONAL HISTORIANS) ARMENIAN POPULAR MOVEMENT 1992 |
In 1918, May 27, The Turkish Mousavatists
for the first time in history, motivated by Pan-Turkist expansionist goals,
committed a great historic forgery and named that Transcaucasian landpiece as
Azerbaijan. After the establishнment of the Soviet regime, under the cover of
"revolution" they continued the same endeavours, keeping the name
Azerbaijan, by the clear intention of mingling with the inнterior affairs of
the real Azerbaijan and annexing it by force at the right occasion. The Soviet
authorities did not object to this awful forgery, since in those days it was
thought that this new step taken by the Azeri rulers might serve to spread
waves of the Revolution into the Islamic world.
DEDICATION
To the everlasting
memory of all the massacred Armenian martyrs, who became the victims of bloody
Pan-Turkist schemes before our own eyes and the entire human race.
PREFACE
The deep suffering and horrible oppression
to which the Armenians of Artsakh (Mountainous Garabagh) were and are still
subjected, is slowly revealing itself today to the concerned world.
The Armenian people of Artsakh have been
continuing their struggle for over four years, on all grounds, to regain their
just rights, reuniting with mother Armenia.
The question of liberating Artsakh from
the claws of Azerнbaijan, is an inseparable pan of the general Armenian cause
of land claiming and struggle, and creates the necessity for exaнmining the
reasons behind it, and clarifying realities that lie underneath the nibble of
history, over a wide range and scope.
This study is not an integral historical
research but a coordiнnated representation of established facts given by
foreign hisнtorians, through which the reasons for the complexity of Artнsakh
and the Armenian question in general are revealed.
The facts given here by multi-national
historians, on the basis of historical perceptions, reveal the vanity and
bankruptнcy of the Pan-Turkist theory.
In this respect therefore, the objective
here has been to emнphasize even more the reasons and motives that have given
rise to the so - called State of Azerbaijan, basically depending upon the
multi- national historians' works.
It is important to mention that we have
referred several times to the Iranian historian Dr. Enayat Ollah Reza's
valuable work "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981. Considering that
he has spent 20 whole years of his life in the former Soviet Unнion including
Azerbaijan, having studied there, also taught and lectured in universities, he
is well informed of Azerbaijan's creation story not only from the theoretical
point of view, but also its factual side.
Thus presenting the historical facts, we
leave to the reader the judgment and conclusion.
ARMENIAN POPULAR MOVEMENT
"In May 1918, The Mousavat
Party which pursued the Pan-Turkist policy, declared independence in a part of
the Caucasus, calling it The Independent State of Azerbaijan' while that region
was never Azerbaijan before".
Dr. Enayat Ollah Reza (Iranian
historian)
"If there is the need to
select a name that embraces the whole of the State of Azerbaijan, in that case
it is possible to call it Aran (Aghvank)".
Prof. Vassily V. Bartold
(Soviet Orientalist)
HOW "AGHVANK" WAS
CALLED AZERBAIJAN
In 1911, the Mousavat party was
established in Baku, whose full name was "Islamic and Democratic Mousavat
Party". The founders were Rasoulzade, Sherifzade, Kazemza-d and others,
who were protected by the Young Turks that took power at the time.
According to the Soviet Great
Encyclopedia, "the menнtioned party's plan was to unite all Islamic
countries under the leadership of Turkey". (1)
"In 1917, a joint conference took
place between the Isнlamic and Democratic Mousavat Party, and the Turkish Fedнeralist
Party. In this conference both parties united and seнlected a new name calling
themselves Turkish Mousavat Federalist Democratic Party". (2)
"This party from that moment on,
expressed its approval of autonomy and independence. In the party's first
conferнence Rasoulzad6, Koujinski, Ousoubegof, Aghaief and othнers were elected
in the Central Committee. The Party's ofнficial paper was the "Istiklal"
(Independence). (3)
According to the same Soviet Encyclopedia,
"after the Great October Revolution of 1917 when Russia refused to
participate in the First World War, Turkey spread its inнfluence in the
Caucasus. The Mousavat leaders first showed sympathy to the Bolsheviks of the
Caucasus, but later they were opposed to them. In May 27,1918, The Mousavats
declared the formation of their government in Tbilisi and declared independence
in the name of the State of Azerbaiнjan".(4)
In July of the same year, The Mousavats
moved their headquarters to Gyanja (Kantzag, Girovabad).
On September 15, 1918, The Ottoman army,
under the leadership of Nouri Pasha, occupied Baku. It was after this occupation that
the Turkish backed Mousavatist governнment transferred its center to Baku.
In 1954, the so - known "Small
Encyclopedia" pubнlished in Moscow, had written the following about the
Mousavatist government and Turkey: "The Mousavatists followed the Turks
and were a Pan-Turkist government". (5)
The Persian historian Enayat Ollah Reza
states: "In the Caucasus, the naming of Aran (Aghvank) and Shirvan as
Azerbaijan took place according to the policy and wishes of Turkey. Many times the
Turks invaded the Iranian Azerbaiнjan (Aderbadagan) and in spite of the vast
massacres comнmitted, they always encountered the firm confrontation of the
Azerbaijani population there. So, failing to earn the Azerbaijani people on
their side by direct means, they adopted indirect ways. They first tried to
turn the Caucasus (present area of Soviet Azerbaijan) and Azerbaijan (The Iraнnian
Aderbadagan) into one entity and then join these two to their country".
(6)
Another Iranian writer, Mihrtad Azeri,
details the Pan-Turkists' goals in the following way: "The selection of
the name Azerbaijan for this region of the Caucasus, had ulteriнor motives
since the very beginning. The Pan-Turkists who had the Mousavat Party leaders
under their influence, wanted in mis way to achieve their old dream, the
establishment of a Turkish speaking empire and binding the Iranian Azerbaiнjan
to it The purpose of naming this new state as Azerbaiнjan was only to pretend
that Azerbaijan is the name of one regional entity which, as a result of
Iranian-Russian wars and oppositions, was divided into two. And now that the
northern region is liberated from Russian domination, its southern counterpart
must also be liberated from the Iranian domination". (7)
Several other documents support the above
political enнdeavors. The same Iranian writer continues: "In the First World War, the
Ottoman forces occupied Aderbadagan's (Iraнnian) main part until the city of
Miane, Kurdistan, Kermanshah (now Bakhtaran), also Boroujerd, Hamadan... The
Ottoman government, which was led by the Ittihad Ve Te-rakki' Party, that is
through Talaat and Enver, was pursuing to expand the Ottoman Empire by annexing
the (Iranian) Aderbadagan". (8)
In those same years of the First World
War, The German Embassy secretary, Iranian by origin, Mou'arekh al - Daw-le
Sepeher, who due to the close relationships of German and Ottoman Empires, was
well informed about all the events, in his work "Iran During the Great
War" states the following: "When Neder Mayer (German) met the Ottoman
government representative Raouf Beg in Baghdad, he well understood that the
Turks were dreaming of dominating the Iranian Aderbadagan. The Germans
evaluated England as their main enemy, while the Ottomans, although hating the
Russians, had no antypathy towards England. Thus, the Germans attempted to
create an Islamic unity just to presнsure India in this way, while the Ottomans
longed for the unity of Turks having in mind the Middle East and the Cenнtral
East". (9)
On October 30, 1918, British armies, led
by General Thompson, occupied Baku. The Turkish army, being defeatнed, had to
retreat. But the British colonialists acknowledged the so-called State of
Azerbaijan.
It was under the presence and support of
the British forнces that, this region continued to remain under the occupaнtion
of Mousavatist Pan-Turkists despite Artsakh's (Mounнtainous Garabagh) heroic
people's continuous and mytho-logic battles.
"The
Mousavatist government ruled Aghvank and Shirvan under the name of State of
Azerbaijan, around two years. This situation continued until April
28,1920". (10)
"In the same year, Red Army troops
captured Baku". (11)
According to the Iranian historian Enayat
Ollah Reza, "in the same year Soviet domination was declared over Baku and
the surroundings. But the new government (Soviet Azerbaijan) as well continued
to keep the same name Azerнbaijan, a name that the Pan-Turkists had given to
Aran and Shirvan. In this way, a Caucasian region, first by the Mousavatists
and later by the Soviet Union, was accepted and founded as Azerbaijan".
(12)
The Iranian historian concludes:
"There isn't the slightнest doubt about the fact that the Turkish speaking
Caucaнsian regions never bore the name Azerbaijan. In the past, historians and
writers didn't avoid expressing this truth, but later and for political reasons
the truth was veiled from the world, so that today only a very few of the new
and the old generation know about this fact". (13)
However, the famous Soviet historian,
Academic Vassily V. Bartold has spoken about the above fact without reserнvation.
"The name Caucasian Azerbaijan was used only afнter the Revolution (1917
October Revolution), first by Mousavatists and later, the Soviet Union."
(14)
Prof. Bartold further elaborates about
naming this Cauнcasian region as Azerbaijan in the following way: "If
there is the need to select a name that embraces the whole of the State of
Azerbaijan, in that case it is possible to call it ARAN (AGHVANK)". (15)
As to why this mistake in naming was made.
Prof. Bar-told expresses a similar point of view to that of the Iranian
historian: namely that its motive was PAN-TURKISM. "The name Azerbaijan
was chosen for this state only through the intention and thought that by
founding the State of Azerbaijan, Iranian Azerbaijan would also join the
state... Therefore, the name 'Azerbaijan' was selected". (16)
In the weekly magazine "Hayreniki
Tzayn" (Voice of the Fatherland) published in Yerevan (Feb. 14,1990),
the offiнcial paper of the Committee for Cultural Relations with the Diaspora, Albeit
Mousheghian, under the title of "What Is Hidden Beyond The Open
Boundary?", says: "Azerbaijan as a name for the area north of the
Arax river, is strictly the invention of Mousavatists, who in agreement with
Ottoнman Turkey and the personal advice of General Noun Pasha who conquered
Baku on September 15, 1918, decided to anнnounce the newly created state of
Caucasian Turks as Azerнbaijan having the intention of snatching from Iran the
southern part of Arax, the original Azerbaijan or the histoнric state of
Aderbadagan, with the help of Turkey".
Thus, within the same days of naming this
Caucasian region as Azerbaijan, large waves of protests occurred in Iran and
especially in historic Azerbaijan itself. The most prominent circle of
protesters was Azerbaijan's Democratic Group (not to be confused with the
Azerbaijani Democratic Grouping - Ferghe" - established in 1944, to which
we will refer later). In this Group important Iranian democratic figнures
participated, as well as Sheikh Mohammed Khiabani, Ismail Amir Khizi, Ahmed
Kesrawi Tabrizi and many othнers. The issue got so complex that, the movement
led by Ismail Amir Khizi and Sheikh Mohammed Khiabani comнpulsively offered to
change the name of historic Azerbaijan (Iranian).
In this respect Enayat Ollah Reza
testifies the following: "The people of Azerbaijan, all women, men and
children from Tabriz down to the remotest villages, who in the past fought
several wars against the Ottoman Empire's armies to protect their homes and
property, that refused to surrender to foreign occupation, couldn't reconcile
with the idea that in the name of their original country, another region or
piece of land be called. During those days, that one of the Caucasian regions
was named Azerbaijan, the good-remembered Sheikh Mohammed Khiabani and his
friends offered to change Azerbaijan's name as a sign of protest". (17)
Also within the same context, Ahmed
Kesrawi, the Azerbaijani (Iranian) famous historian, in his book "Azerbaijan's
18 Year History", tens of years ago mentioned the following:
"During those same first days, Sheikh Haji Ismail Agha Amir Khizi, being
an old freedom fighter and a collaborator of Khiabani (Sheikh Mohammed
Khiabani) of the time, offered the following: "Since Azerbaijan, on the
way to constitution (The Iranian constitutional revolution in 1906), made big
efforts and won freedom for Iran, so let us call it Azadestan" (that is, State
of Freedom) (18).
The author continues: "During that
epoch, the name Azerbaijan was facing a difficulty, in that, after the fall of
the Russian Empire, the Turkish speaking Caucasian peoнple of Baku and the
surrounding had created a small state and called it the State of Azerbaijan.
That region was menнtioned in books as Aran". (19)
Still in 1928, A. Kesrawi in his book "Unknown
Kings", in spite of his sympathetic approach towards the 1917 October
Revolution and the establishment of Soviet regime in the Caucasus, couldn't
conceal his surprise seeing this Caucasian landpiece called as Azerbaijan. He
wrote: "It is surprising that Aran is now being called Azerbaijan.
Considering the fact that Azerbaijan or 'Azerbaigan' was found next to Aran,
and is larger and more famous, since very old days in history those two regions
have been separнate and Aran has never been called Azerbaijan. Until today we
couldn't know why our Aranian brothers, who had creatнed freedom and
sovereignty for their country, wanted to seнlect this name for it? Why have
they put aside their historic old name and are trying to steal from
'Azerbaigan', and what do they gain from this surprising act? Our comment here
is not
for the fact that we are 'Azerbaiganis' and have feelings of solidarity towards
our homeland, since there is no loss for Azerbaijan out of this act, but it is
rather for our Araniнan brothers who have turned their backs on their exact oriнgin,
national and free life, their history and country's past, which in itself is a
great loss. There is no other example in history to such a surprising
deed". (20)
The Iranian contemporary historian Enayat
Ollah, conнcentrating on the expression, "What do they gain from this
surprising act", writes: "As it becomes clear, the good-remembered
old Kesrawi, while writing the book "Unknown Kings", was
unaware of that ulterior motive, through which Aran was called
Azerbaijan". (21)
Referring to this Pan-Turkist plan, Enayat
Ollah further continues: "However, when he (Kesrawi) wrote "Azerbaijan's
18 Year History" and "Iran's Constitutional History" books,
like the Soviet historian Bartold's views, reached similar conclusions".
(22)
Enayat Ollah thus refers to Prof.
Bartold's famous anнnouncement: "The name Azerbaijan was selected for the
State of Azerbaijan with an intention by which it was thought that through the
establishment of the State of Azerbaijan, the Iranian Azerbaijan would also
join the above..." (23)
Enayat Ollah Reza, referring to a series
of writings pubнlished in the Soviet Azerbaijan in which they talk about
"Northern and Southern Azerbaijans"(24), reveals the emperialistic
intentions behind them.
In
another place he writes: "If we examine all the printed documents and
books issued from the Ministries of External Affairs of both Tzarist Russia and
Iran until 1918, it is exнplicit that Aran and Shirvan regions were never
called Azerнbaijan but were always named as Aran, Shirvan and someнtimes The
Caucasus". (25)
Tzarist Russia's Encyclopedia,
the printing of which started in 1890 in St. Petersbourg and later continued in
Leipzig (Germany), wrote about Aghvank (Caucasian Albaнnia) the following:
"Albania was the historic name of a reнgion found in the eastern and
southern parts of the Caucaнsus, between the Black and Caspian Seas, north of
Armenia and whose boundary was the river Giros (Gour).... The inнhabitants of
this region are today's southern people of Shir-van and Daghstan". (26)
Other sources also mention the
same region. "The reнgion Albania is found east of the Caspian Sea, its
northern parts are bounded by the Caucasian mountains, the south by Small
Marastan (Mad Adrbad) and the south-west by Armeнnia Country". (27)
The Tzarist Russia's
Encyclopedia, mentioned earlier, diнvides the entire Caucasus and Transcaucasus
regions into twelve states in the following list:
"Stavropol, Terek, Kouban,
Black Sea region, Kutayisi, Tbilisi, Yerevan, Baku, Elizavedbol
(Gyanja-Kantzag-Girovabad). Daghstan, Gars, Zakatala". (28)
Dr. Enayat Ollah, referring to
the Encyclopedia's above paragraph, writes: "There isn't even one place
where Azerbaijan is mentioned. At the same time, there isn't any word about
Azeris as natives of this region. But in all the volнumes of the Encyclopedia,
Turkish speaking inhabitants of the Caucasus are referred to as Tatars".
(29)
The historian concludes:
"If a region named Azerbaijan north of the Arax river ever existed,
undoubtedly its name would occur in the volumes of the Encyclopedia. However,
there isn't the slightest mention of a region named Azerbaiнjan north of the
Arax river"... (30)
Referring to the same source,
the Iranian historian conнtinues: "In the same Encyclopedia's first volume
and under the name Azerbaijan, we read:
"Azerbaijan or Aderbeijan
(The Azar - hoor - landpiece, Otorbatagan in Bahlavi, Aderbadagan in Armenian)
is the technically well developed north-west region of Iran. Azerнbaijan is
bounded by Iranian Kurdistan from the south (Ar-dial state) and Ajam Iraq
(Mad-Marastan), from the west by Turkish Armenia and Turkish Kurdistan, from
the north by Russian Armenia and southern Caucasus, which is bounded by the
Arax river, and from the east the state of Gilan and Caspian Sea
regions..." (31)
The Iranian historian resolves
in the following way: "In the Encyclopedia, published during the days of
Tzarist Rusнsian Empire, nothing is mentioned about Iranian Azerbaijan or
Russian Azerbaijan types of names, as we often witness in the case of naming
Turkish Armenia or Russian Armeнnia. There, only one Azerbaijan is recalled,
which is the Iraнnian Azerbaijan". (32)
Dr. Enayat Ollah concludes:
"Caucasian Albania, during the last centuries was known as Aran and
Shirvan. Azerbaiнjan as a name for Caucasian Albania, became the motive for a
number of diversions and confusions, in historic research works of this
region". (33)
"...Reports presented by
famous scientists and visitors state that Aran was a separate region from
Azerbaijan, and that in the past, Aran was never called Azerbaijan". (34)
Historian Bartlod, as well,
referred to the geographical position of Aran and its border with Azerbaijan
and stated:
"The Arax river, which now
divides Iranian Azerbaijan from the Caucasus, was in the old days a clear
ethnic boundary between Albania and Iranian Marastan". (35)
Pre-Christian historian and geographer
Strabonis, has stated the following about "Aghvank" and Aderbadagan:
"Albania is a region spread south of the Caucasian mounнtains until the
Giros (Gour) river and from the Caspian Sea until the Alan river, bounded by
Mad Aderbaten from the south". (36)
Famous historian and geographer Pliniaeus
(1st century A.D.), in his book "History of Nature", composed
of 37 volumes, mentions the following about Aghvank: "The Albans live in
the surroundings of the Giros river... and the Alazan river separates them from
the Iberians (the Georgians)". (37)
The Arabs have also testified about "Aghvank"
being a totally separate region from Azerbaijan.
About the geographical situation of
Albania - Aghvank, the author of the familiar book "al - Bouldan" (Countries),
Ibn el - Fakih in the 3rd Islamic century, dividing Armenia into four regions,
has stated as follows: "Aran is Armenia's first region where 4000 villages
are located". (38)
Yakout el - Hamawi, who lived in the 7th
Islamic centuнry, in his book "Mou'jam al - Bouldan" (Encyclopedia
of Countries) has stressed:
"Between Azerbaijan and Aran there is
a river, which is called Aras (Arax). Its northern and western parts are called
Aran, and the southern pan is named Azerbaijan". (39)
Abu el - Fida (died in the Islamic year
732) in his book "Takweem al - Bouldan" (Evaluation of
Countries) clarifies: "Aran is a familiar region next to Azerbaijan".
He continнues: "Armenia, Aran, and Azerbaijan are three large and sepнarate
regions, which are demonstrated by experts in one map". (40)
As the above presented facts prove,
throughout the cenнturies and to these days, multi-national historians,
geographers and visitors testify that in the northern region of Arax river
there has never been a place by the name of Azerbaiнjan. In 1918, May 27, The
Turkish Mousavatists for the fust time in history, motivated by Pan-Turkist
expansionist goals, committed a great historic forgery and named that Transcaucasian
landpiece as Azerbaijan. After the establishнment of the Soviet regime, under
the cover of "revolution" they continued the same endeavours, keeping
the name Azerbaijan, by the clear intention of mingling with the inнterior
affairs of the real Azerbaijan and annexing it by force at the right occasion.
The Soviet authorities did not object to this awful forgery, since in those
days it was thought that this new step taken by the Azeri rulers might serve to
spread waves of the Revolution into the Islamic world.
This conviction was explicitly tried to
turn to reality afнter the Second World War. Using the golden opportunity of
the presence of Soviet troops in the northern parts of Iran, the Democratic
Party acting in Iranian Azerbaijan and familнiar by the name Democratic
Party of Azerbaijan - Ferghe -which was in reality ruled from Baku by Soviet
Azerbaijan Communist Party first secretary Mir Jaafar Baghirov, secнretly and
under the approval of Soviet leadership, had planned the annexation of Iranian
Azerbaijan to the Soviet Azerbaijan, while the leadership of the Communist
Party (by the name of Toude) of Iran was completely unaware of this plan.
In the book "The Past Is the Torch
of the Future" issued by Iranian leftist groups, there is a clear
reference to the above fact. There we read: "While the Iranian Toud6 Party
continued to operate all over the Azerbaijan (Iran) lands, the Azerbaijani
Democratic Ferghe, without informing the leadнership of Iranian Toude and even
without their knowledge or consent, Said Jaafar Pishevari (Ferghe's first
secretary) and Soviet Azerbaijan's president Mir Jaafar Baghirov met in Baku,
with the consent, and moral and material support of the Soviet leadership,
after which a government was formed in Iranian Azerbaijan". (41)
It is true that this government formed in
the autumn of 1945, lasted merely one year, when the Soviet troops retreated
from Iranian lands. It is also true that, later, the leader of Ferghe,
Pishevari, became the victim of an arнranged a truck and car accident, ordered
by Soviet Azerbaijan's ruler Baghirov. Baghirov himself was shot to death for
having ordered the elimination of 25 thousand men during the Stalin period. But
it is also true that this policy, encouraged from outside, continued to survive
within the majority of Baku rulers as political notion and policy.
In this respect, Enayat Ollah Reza
himself, who took refuge in Soviet Azerbaijan in 1946, with the leaders of
Ferghe, in his mentioned work quotes several of Ferghe' leaders' telegrams
directed to the Soviet Azerbaijani leaders, where several times we read:
"The people of Southern Azerнbaijan, which is an inseparable part of
Northern Azerbaiнjan..." and concludes: "From the contents of these
teleнgrams, it is easily possible to understand the secret of this nomination
(Soviet Azerbaijan), as well as the nominators' aim; the annexation of Iranian
Azerbaijan and the endeavor of joining it to the Soviet Union". (42)
AGHVANK AND ITS TURKIFICATION
Like Aderbadagan, the Aghvans existed,
with their private language, culture and history, centuries ago before the enнtrance
of Turkish tribes.
The famous historian Marquart writes:
"The name Albaнnia is mentioned in ancient Greek and Armenian writings. In
Arab literature it is mentioned as Aran, and in Georgian as Rani". (43)
According to historian Bartold,
"Aran, which in Arabic literature is often mentioned as al-Aran, is a name
by which the Arabs have called Albania. In Armenian it is called Al-vank".
(44)
The Iranian historian Enayat Ollah also
states the same: "Albania's name in Armenian historians' and geographers'
writings is mentioned as Aghvan (Aghvank), Alvan (Alvank)". (45)
In engravings, at the time of King Shabouh
I (241 - 270 A.D.) of the Iranian Sassanid Dynasty, along with the names
Aderbadagan, Armenia and Belashkan, Albania's name is also mentioned. (46)
According to Enayat Ollah: "Historic
researches prove that Caucasian Albania's language was not only different from
that of Aderbadagan, but also from that of Armenian and Georgian
languages". (47)
He continues: "The entrance of
Christianity to Caucasian Albania goes back to the beginning of the 3rd
century. This in itself became a reason for Armenia and Albania to draw nearer.
Armenian clergymen tried to create letters and literaнture for the Caucasian
Albanian people". (48)
Bartold states the same, and mentions that
the creation of Albanian alphabet was realized in the 5th century A.D.
"In the 5th century A.D., and through
Armenian clergyнmen, an alphabet for Albanians was created, because Albanians
had sounds or pronunciations which didn't exist in Armenian. After the
appearance of the alphabet, the holy books were translated from Armenian into
Albanian". (49)
According to Bartold, "the Albanian
alphabet was very close to the Armenian alphabet, but they were not the same.
In Albanian there were sounds which didn't exist in Armenian". (50)
According to the Iranian writer M. Azeri,
"the people of Albania (Aghvank) before accepting Christianity in the 5th
century, had neither letters nor literature. For the first time Armenian
clergymen created letters close to their alphabet for the people of Albania.
After the creation of this alphaнbet, which had a few more letters than the
Armenian alphaнbet, the Bibles were translated into Albanian. However, this
language didn't have a long life. With the domination of the Arabs, Arabic
letters replaced the Albanian". (51)
Other historians have mentioned the same
as well. Some facts state that the Albanian alphabet consisted of 52 letters.
(52)
Enayat Ollah writes: "The Armenian
literature has stated that 'Gargar', 'Oudi', 'Ijookh' and some other tribes
have been relatives of the legendary Aran tribe".
He continues: "Sassanid period
Armenian historian and geographer Movses Khorenatsi has written that Aran was
the name of an intelligent man from Albania's commander 'Sisak' tribe. He (M.
Khorenatsi) writes that Oudi, Gardman and Gargar tribes were the ancesters of
the Arans". (53) ..."Movses Khorenatsi believed that the Gargars'
language in the 5th century became the basis for the appearance of Albanian
literature". (54)
According to Bartold, the spreading of
Christianity in Aghvank goes back to the times of Iranian Sassanid King Yezgerd
(Hazgerd) I (399-420). (55)
Other historians state the same, and
mention that Christianity in Aghvank has started spreading in the 4th centuнry".
(56)
At any rate, multi-national historians
state that centuries before the arrival of the Turkish element, both
Aderbadagan and Aghvank peoples had separate letters and literature, and in
spite of the people of Aderbadagan who believed in "Zradashd" religion,
the Aghvans through Armenian clergyнmen had accepted Christianity.
Additionally, the unique alнphabet of the Aghvan language has been created by
Armeniнans. Historians also confirm that the history of Aghvank was also
written down by Armenian historians.
According to Enayat Ollah, "based on
facts and docuнments, Caucasian Albania's history, as well, was not writнten by
local historians and writers. This country's history was written down by
Armenian historians and authors". (57)
In a book published in 1962, in. Baku,
there is a quotaнtion from Movses Khorenatsi, where he says:
"In the days of Vagharshag's kingdom,
Dertad I and his brother Logaz have ruled the Aghvank". (58)
According to historians, Aghvank became
part of the Sassanid Empire in 441.'The Sassanid King Hazgerd III, who was
fighting against the northern invading tribes such as the Huns, the Kidars and
others, started the construction of the Derbend Highwall.
Enayat Ollah adds: "The Armenians
call this Highwall as "Jour".... This city turned into one of the
basic centers of Caucasian Albania"."... In the days of the Sassanid
King Khosrov Anoushirvan, the construction of Derbend Highwall was completed.
However, after a short period of time, in the days of Khosrov II Abrouez, Turks
and Khazars starнted fierce attacks with large massacres against Albania".
Enayat Ollah, referring to Armenian
historians, continнues: "10th century historian Movses Gaghangadvatsi, who
has written Caucasian Albania's history under the name "History of the
Aghvans", describes the Turkish attack upon Derbend in the following
way:
"... The Armenian king became a
witness to all that happened to the armies and resistors of the city of
Jour.... To establish these great walls and towers, Persian kings had collected
workers and means from several places. This Highwall was between the Caucasus
and the Eastern Great Sea (Caspian Sea)... . He (The Armenian king) became a
witness to the horrible danger that was displayed by plain and womenly faced,
mean and fraud people. Their long hair was pouring all over their hands. They
attacked like wild wolves. There wasn't the slightest shame nor regard on their
faces. They attacked the city's inhabitants in streets and squares cutting them
into pieces. These ruthless men wouldn't even pity the beauties. They killed
both men and women, didn't pity even the handicapped or the old who were unable
to fight and struggle. Also didn't pity the baнbies and children. Their hearts
didn't soften, even when they watched breast - feeding babies. These innocent
babies, falнlen upon their mothers' perforated corpses, were sucking blood
instead of milk from their breasts. When they entered a house, they burned and
destroyed everything like fire in cane bushes. After entering a house and
coming out of it, they would pave the way for wild animals and kites".
(59)
"The Arab invasions into Albania and
the Caucasus started in the 7th century. Armenian historian Bishop 'Sepios'
described the Arab invasion into Armenia and Albaнnia as horrible and cursed.
He wrote: "The sons of Ismail (The Arabs) surrounded the city of Garin,
entered it and plundered gold, silver and people's wealth. They looted the
wealth of Armenians and Albanians, and destroyed the churches as well".
(60)
In the days of the Califs, the Albanian
racial situation was very much confused. Along with the Aghvans there lived
Abruezes, Arabs, Armenians, Jews, Khazars, Tats and other races. This situation
continued until the immigration of the Turkish element into Aghvank. Since long
times, the existence of various tribes in Aghvank became the cause of
linguistic diversity and dialects. 1st century geographer Strabonis states:
"The Caucasian Albanian tribes spoke in 26 different dialects". (61)
Historic researches show that Aghvank,
relative to its neighbours, had a mediocre state financially. The absence of
both gold or silver coins, while within the same periods there were mints in
the surrounding countries, confirm Albania's backwardly (belated) financial
state, where merchanнdise or money exchange was absent Soviet numismatist
Pakhomov, as a result of his reнsearches, states: "No mint was found in
Caucasian Albania belonging to the 3rd century B.C.". (62)
According to the latter, "the oldest
mint that was found in the area of Caucasian Albania belonged to Alexander the
Great of Macedonia (336 - 323 B.C.)". (63)
This by itself states or proves, that up
to the above date Albanians were strangers to the art of coin making. The
economical backwardly state naturally had its reflection on the development of
Albania's cultural life.
Enayat Ollah writes on the subject:
"... It is easy to unнderstand that the people of Caucasian Albania,
relative to their neighbours, Armenians, Georgians and Iranians, lived in a
poorer economic state. Undoubtedly, this bad financial state in itself hindered
Albania's cultural progress". (64)
The letter and literature of Albanians yet
not in the final shape, was passing through stages of development when the Arab
invasion started. Like elsewhere subject to the Califate, Arabic letters and
literature replaced the local.
According to Enayat Ollah,
"culturally well developednations such as the Iranian and Armenians were
able to preнserve their language, literature and culture as much as possiнble.
But others, who hadn't accomplished this high level, dissolved within the
ruling races' culture. For this reason, no trace was left of the letter and
literature of Caucasian Alнbania's people, who dissolved first in Arabic and
later in Turkish". (65)
In spite of this fact, Albania's racial
and tribal identity did not disappear even during the Islamic domination
period. According to Bartold, "the tribal and racial differences between
Azerbaijan and Caucasian Albania didn't vanish even during the Islamic period.
Azerbaijan's people's Iranian dialect was different from Albania's people's
language, which was a branch of the Yafs language. Azerbaijan's peoнple's
religion was also different from that of Albania's. Azerbaijanis were believers
of the Fire (Zradashd), whereas The Albanians, as other neighbouring countries
to Iran, followed Christianity". (66)
Historic documents prove that the people
of Aderbadagan is composed of Iranian tribes, "something which we do not
witness in the case of Armenia, Iberia (Georgia) and Caucaнsian Albania".
(67)
This reality has lasted despite the
invasions of Iranian Sassanids. Soviet historian Vladimir K. Loukonin, in his
work "Iranian Sasanid Civilization", based on historic and
archeologic inscriptions, testifies the following: "Zradashd spirituals
along with royal armies were directed towards...Armenia, Iberia (Georgia)...
Belashkan and Albaнnia's Derbend, to spread their religious beliefs upon these
regions by force. (68)
Islamic 4th century scientist and
traveller Abu Abdallah Beshari Moughadasi, in his book "Ahsan al -
Takasim fi Maarifat al - Akalim" (The Best Divisions in Learning Reнgions),
hinting that the distinct language of Aderbadagan's
people, inspite of being affected by other
languages, still keeps its identity, writes: "In Armenia they speak Armeniнan,
in Aran Aranian, but their (Aderbadagan) Persian resemнbles a strange series of
words, similar to Khorasan (Iranian language) dialects". (69)
Historians consider year 545 (A.D.) the
beginning of Turkish history. That year the war ignited between the Chinese and
the Turks. (70)
In the year 552, Turkish refugees attacked
inhabitants north of China and defeated them a year later. Furthermore, the
Turks conquerred China's north - eastern valleys until the borders of Korea. In
the year 554, defeating the Tatar and Kidan tribes, they settled all over the
northern borderly regions of China. (71)
Thereafter, the Turks moved towards the
western valleys, in other words, the north-eastern region of Iran, the
surrounding valleys of Lake Aral and Seyhan river. (72)
The oldest recording left from the Turks
is the 8th centuнry ORKHON. This writing belongs to the tribe, that calls
itself Turk'. In the 6th century, the Turks occupied norнthern China, and thus
all the valleys between northern Iran and the borders of Byzantium were
conquered. (73)
Between 561 - 571, the Turks occupied the
northern parts of the Caspian Sea and aimed towards the shores of the Black
Sea.
In 558, the Avars, who were inhabitants of
Northern Caucasus, were defeated by Turks. Thereafter, the latters reached the
banks of Volga river.
Continuing their invasion from the north,
the Turks arнrived until the fortresses of Derbend. But facing their strong
resistance, they retreated hopelessly. (74)
In the days of Iranian Sassanid
King Khosrov Anoushirvan, the Turks did not appear around the Caucasian
regions.
In 584, the Turks were busy with internal
wars. In 588, the Byzantians drove them away from the Bosphorus. (75)
The Turkish tribal internal wars continued
until 593.
During the reign of Hormoz IV, the
successor of Sassanid Khosrov Anoushirvan, the Turks, who had attacked Iran
from the east, were heavily beaten and retreated (76). After that, the weakened
remnants of Turkish tribes, during a few wars which lasted till the year 690,
were strongly defeated by the Chinese forces. (77)
After reorganizing, in the twenties of the
7th century, the Turks were now directed towards Europe's south - eastern
valleys.
In 626, Turks, Khazars and Byzantians
started joint invaнsions against Iran.
The Byzantians through Asia Minor, Armenia
and Aderbadagan, whereas the Turks and Khazars from the north, atнtacked
Caucasian Albania and Georgia. Thereafter, the forces of the Byzantian King
Heracles, joining their Turk and Khazar allies, surrounded Tbilissi and
organized horrible massaнcres. (78)
The references mentioned above show that,
in contrary to Turkish numerous invasions, except Middle Asia's few regions,
also Soghd and Tokharisdan, they didn't succeed in capturing the lands subject
to the Iranian Sassanid Dynasty, as well
as the Caucasus. Until the end of the Sassanids, Turks couldn't step over
Aderbadagan and nearby regions.
They (the Turks) could only for a short
period of time, joining the Byzantians and Khazars, attack over Caucasian
Albania, Armenia and Georgia's certain regions, loot, desнtroy, and then return
because of internal difficulties''. (79)
Within this period, not only the Sassanid
Dynasty, but also the Turkish domination broke up and fell. As a result, the
Khazars, by the middle of the 7th century, drove the
Turks away from their country and
reestablished their unique independence. (80)
"In this way, the Arab invasion and
domination period was facilitated". (81)
In exploring the history of Turks,
historians have very often utilized the historic works of other peoples.
Enayat Ollah writes in this respect
"It's a pity that not a single writing exists, left from the Turks upon
which one could make an assessment, or judgement". (82)
Cahun writes: "Until the 10th and
llth centuries, the Turks had neither a philosophical teaching nor left a trace
in literature and arts". (83)
Referring to the Armenian historian Manuel
Zulalian, Enayat Ollah writes: "According to Master Zulalian's writings,
the Turkish history, up to date, has been represented through Chinese, Persian,
Armenian and Byzantian based sources. Not a single writing in Turkish exists.
This is a reality which the Turkish
historians themнselves obligedly confess". (84)
"In studying Islamic period's
sources, it is easily clariнfied that still centuries after the appearance of
Islam, the Turks did not live in Asia Minor, Aderbadagan and the Cauнcasus.
During Islamic 3rd century and afterwards, when the Califate of Beni Abbas was
opposed to the Persians, Califs fortified the Turks, but instead, they
gradually started servнing the Turks. The Turkish infiltration into the
mentioned areas was taking place slowly and gradually". (85)
Indeed, even the existence of the Turks
within the Caliнfate, cannot be considered as settlement of the Turkish element
within these regions.
This is a truth, which is not only
confirmed by multiнnational historians, but the Turkish historians themselves
confess as well.
Turkish fanatic historian Togan, confesses
in this direction. He says: "Such, it is clear that a raw of Turkish prinнces,
serving in Aderbadagan and Anatolia, were holding the commanding positions of
army forces, but our information about the Turks having settled there, is very
little". (86)
He continues: "Only and only during
the time of Turk-Seljouk domination did the Turks, and for the first time,
settle within these regions". (87)
While studying Turkish history, Enayat
Ollah, very ofнten bases himself upon Armenian historians' researches.
He writes: "Soviet historian, Master
Zulalian, considers the llth century, as the beginning of Turkish migration
towards Iran, and believes: "Nothing can be said about the Turkification
of eastern regions of Caucasus, before the HA century". (88) ,
"By the end of the Iranian Sassanid
Dynasty, Turkish tribes fell in the hands of Chinese imperial armies. Howeнver,
spreading through Eastern and Western China, they inнtermixed with the northern
and central Asia's local tribes. New tribes appeared as a result of this
intermixing, and these were no more the previous Turks. Although these tribes
were the result of such intermingling between immigrant Turks and local tribes,
in history they are all known as Turks". (89)
"Still later, the same tribes
intermingled with others, creating still new tribes, that were also known as
Turks, but in reality it is not possible to call them Turks". (90)
According to Enayat Ollah, "in
reality, those tribes that were directed towards Iran, Asia Minor and the
Caucasus, were from the "Ghz" or "Oghouz" tribes".
(91)
The Oghouz group, comprised of around
fifty thousand people, headed towards Aderbadagan (Iranian), in the 5th Isнlamic
century. This was the first group, of Turkish origin, that settled in this
area. (92) "Nevertheless, the latter, (Aderbadagan's Turkish tribes), did
not take a break and frequently
attacked Armenia and other places, where they
devastated and plundered". (93)
"The second group of Ghzs headed
toward Aderbadagan in the Islamic year 429... According to their habit and
instinct, they did not give up looting and plundering. So they undertook the
looting of Armenia's and Aderbadagan's peoples. In the same year 429, they
invaded 'Maragha' (Iranian city) and killed a large number of Kurds, setting
fire to the city's mosque. Another group of them (Ghz), that was settled in
Ourmia, attacked Kurdistan and Armenia, commitнting massacres and
plunders". (94)
In those same years, the Ghzs defeated Ray
(a historic city in the proximity of Teheran). However, when Seljouk
Doughroul's brother Ibrahim Inan headed towards Ray, The Ghz departed in horror
from the region and went to Aderbadagan. A year later they arrived in Western
Armenia, Diar-bakir and Asia Minor. (95)
Also, a fourth group of the Ghz tribe
invaded Aderbadaнgan before the Islamic year 435, not only over Aderbadagan but
Armenia and all of Asia Minor as well. They commitнted massacres and pillage
and advanced until Mousoul (Ninwa - Ninve), where they acted the same way. (96)
The advancement of Ghzs occurred in two
directions. They headed towards the Caucasus through the Bosphorus. In the days
of Seljouk Alp Asian, the Caucasus, Armenia's northern and central parts, also
certain areas in Asia Minor, were occupied. (97)
Quoting the Armenian historian Zulalian,
Enayat Ollah writes: "In 1048 A.D. (Islamic year 440), the commander of
Seljouks, Doughroul Bey, occupied Iran, and engaged in his great invasion into
different countries, including Armenia. In the same year, other Seljouk
commanders like Ibrahim Inan and Gatlamesh attacked the Caucasus and Armenia
through the Bosphorus and thereafter directed towards Erzeroum". (98)
He continues: "The Turkish occupation
of northern and central parts of Armenia, was first achieved in the days of Alp
Asian (1063-1073 A.D.). Ani was captured in 1064 A.D. by the latter and turned
into ruins". (99)
Among certain native peoples, the
following opinions about the setting of the Turkish dialect, persist:
"Having the country's authority and commandmentship in their hands, the
Turkish tribes headed with greater force towards their desired areas. They
first chose the villages and areas with abundant water and vast pastures as
their homes. Conнsidering that small number of people lived in villages as
compared to cities, also that the villagers didn't have enough cultural habit
to preserve their language - as in many areas they spoke local dialects - so,
locals dissolved at a faster rate within the victorious invaders, gradually losнing
their language and dialect The conquerors' intermingling and marriages with the
defeated also enhanced in acнcelerating this process.
"The author's point of view is that,
the Turkish lanнguage overweighed the local languages first in the villages,
and then headed towards the cities and commercial centers. Of course, one
should exclude those villages which were difficult to reach, and the Turks
ignored those directions, either due to road difficulties or unsuitable
conditions of land use and water. These regions are those where up to date we
witness traces of native peoples' local dialects". (100)
Enayat Ollah confirms the following:
"Considering the fact that both money and power were in the possession of
Turks due to their increased numbers in the cities, merнchants and businessmen
were forced to learn the Turkish language". (101)
" The Ottomans many times invaded
Aderbadagan and headed towards Tavriz. But when the Afghans by the end of
Sefevid Dynasty, occupied Isfahan, the Ottoman Turks as well invaded
Aderbadagan and western Iranian cities, keepнing them under siege for
continuous years". (102)
According to Kesrawi, "all these wars
and invasions came to harm the Azeri (Aderbadagan's local people's) language
". (103)
"The same was the case of Caucasian
Albania (Aran and Shirvan). Especially after the end of the Russian-Persian war
and separation of the Caucasus from Persia, the people of Aran and Shirvan were
hopeless from Persia's protection, and so they turned their expectations
towards the Ottoman Turks. In this course the Turkish language spread even more
in the Caucasus. This was the reason that during the First World War, the
people of Aran and Shirvan turned to Ottoman Turkey." (104)
Even from the first day of the creation of
a so - called "Azerbaijan" republic in the Transcaucasus, the
distinction policy toward different ethnic groups or nations and their forcible
Turkification continued. That non-stop racial course also continued under
Soviet rule, taking on different coнlours. The most obvious fact of this
reality, is the case of the Armenians of Nakhitchevan where they formed 50% of
the inhabitants, whereas today the Armenian element has disappeared from the
region. The case of Armenians in Garabagh's plains, is not different They were
subjected to the same fate. Today, furthermore, the Armenians of Mountaiнnous
Garabagh are struggling for existence, to avoid the same fate. Other peoples of
the region like the Kurds, the Talish, the Tats, the Khazars, etc., had not had
a different fate.
Here we stress the case of the Kurds and
the Talish.
In January 23,1990, Soviet Armenia's
Kurdish intellecнtuals' conference has examined the lamentable situation of the
Kurdish people in areas subject to Soviet Azerbaijan. The statements of this
conference have been reported by the TASS News agency, where it is said:
"According to the staнtistics of 1926, 64,200 Kurds lived in
Transcaucasus. Of these 41,200 were in Azerbaijan, 8,000 were in Georgia and
15,000 in Armenia. 44 years later, in Azerbaijan lived only 5,500 Kurds, 20,700
in Georgia and 37,000 in Armenia. However, the statistics of 1979 showed that
the number of Kurds in Armenia has reached to 51,000, in Georgia 37,700,
whereas in Azerbaijan there are no Kurds".
As to the Talish, they are the native
people of historic Aderbadagan's north - eastern regions. Having spread along
both banks of the Arax river, they live both in Iran and the Soviet Union, they
are neither Turkish speakers nor Turнkish in origin, but Iranian.
Enayat Ollah writes in this respect:
"To the south -western shore of the Caspian Sea (Soviet Astara and Lenkoнran),
live the Talish. This people's language is a branch of the Iranian language.
However, the Talish language as well as the Tats' language (also an Iranian
language), are comнpleting their desintigration stages. These races do not have
schools that teach in their mother tongue or the Iranian lanнguage. (105)
In the "Yeregoyan Yerevan" daily
newspaper (4 January 1990), in an article by Vartan Krikorian titled "Voluntary
Amalgamation or Hypocrisy and Deceit", we learn that acнcording to the
statistics of 1926, there lived 77,323 Talish and 3,301 Talish-speakers in
Azerbaijan. According to the Statistics Committee's 1931 data, that number rose
to 89398. By the year 1970, however, statistical data showed that the Talish in
Azerbaijan have disappeared, while in 1972 they counted 80,000 in the Iranian
regions of Gilan and Ardebil. Again, in the statistics of 1926 mentioned above,
there lived in Azerbaijan 28,443 Tats, 103,330 Lezgins, etc... According to
unofficial data, the number of Kurds in Soviet Azerbaijan at present, is over
200,000, whereas the Talish are 200,000 to 300,000 or even half a million,
about whom not a single word is mentioned, but it is only spoken of 7 million
Azeris (now Turkish speakers).
About the spreading of the Turkish language,
Enayat Olнlah writes the following: "A number of readers could assume that
the spreading of Turkish language within these regions has proceeded by a
natural process, like other lanнguages and cultures, in various geographic
areas". (106)
To this question he answers in the
following way and by the Aryans example.
"As an answer to this question, the
following must be said The Aryans compared to the local people, had a higher
culture and civilization. Native peoples' intermixing within the Aryans has
taken place through the voluntary acception of their culture... While the
Turks, because they were relaнtively backward than the peoples of the defeated
countries, were unable to dissolve the local defeated peoples' culture within
theirs. As we witnessed in Asia Minor, the Caucaнsus, Aderbadagan and other
regions of Iran, the culture of the defeated nations was not only strong but
also dissolved that of the victorious, who had a nomadic culture within itнself.
The subjugation of the victorious culture to the defeatнed nations, had another
reason as well, such was that the Turkish tribes were not all of the same
element. As an exнample, it is worthy mentioning the Mongols', Turks' and
Tatars' cultural differences, such as the Ghz, it is not possiнble to call them
Turks in the full sense of the word". (107)
"It is also necessary to add that, in
contrary to the fact that the attackers imposed their language upon the
defeated, they couldn't secure their linguistic unification with the deнfeated.
So, even though the Turkish language outruled in Asia Minor, Aderbadagan and
the Caucasus, the language it self could not become the base of such a
unification, beнcause the civilization and culture of the peoples of Asia Miнnor,
Aderbadagan and the Caucasus, were not similar and coherent". (108)
The author here refers to the Pan-Turkist,
expansionist ambitions in the following way: "Both in Turkey and the
Caucasus and on behalf of Turkish governments, there have been some in the
past, who, taking advantage of linguistic similarities, have tried to create
subsoils for the unification of the region's Turkish speakers. They have even
someнtimes undertaken wars, and yet haven't ceased from preachнing and
provoking deeds. Nevertheless, lifestyle and cultural differences themselves turned
into a barrier against such deнsires or ambitions". (109)
Of course, the pages of history and also
the documents under our disposal, are expressive enough with examples of
Pan-Turkist ambitions and expansionism, but we have tried to give the simple truth
just by taking references from multi-national scientists and historians,
keeping this research within its scientific frame.
In the next chapter, we refer to the
Pan-Turkist historiнans' opinions, the grounds for their political ambitions
and multi-national historian's answers.
ARE THE TURANS TURKS?
With a certain amount of wealth in
historic documentaнtion to our days, Armenian history has verified more than
once the nature and depth of unscientific and inhumanistic course adopted by
politically oriented Pan-Turkist historiнans.
Here we want to present a few of the most
salient examнples launched out with Pan-Turkist schemes, asserting first, to
what extent this fanatically loaded orientation is rejected by multi-national
historians, and then by what extent, away from scientific study it has and
still continues its unfounded persistence.
Turkish historians have tried a lot to
assert that the Tu-rans were Turks. In reality, they have utilized the
similarities between the two words Tur and Turk. On the other hand, a number of
researchers, examining the Pan-Turkist ideas, and dismantling them, have
qualified Pan-Turkism as Pan-Turanism. All these have served as ground for vast
hisнtoric perversions by Pan-Turkist historians. It is time that we glance
through some of the bright examples of Pan-Turkist historians' efforts.
Pan-Turkist historian Zia Geokalp wrote as
follows: "Neither Turkey nor Turkistan is the fatherland of Turks, but it
is the great and eternal Turan country". (110)
Another Pan-Turkist historian, Ali Kemal,
qualifies the Armenian kingdom of Ourartu as "Turkish" and
"Turanian". (111)
Ann Engin, also, labels Hittites and the
people of Ouнrartu as Turks. (112)
Z. Togan has written as follows: "The
Humans, as well as the Sumerians and the Elamites were the primates of
Turks". (113)
At the Second Congress (conference) of
Turkish History, in which Turkish historians participated, the majority of the
speakers declared that "the Turks were the first torch - bearнers of
civilization in history". (114)
Gunaltay Semsettin, another Pan-Turkist
theorist and historian declares: "The Turks have moved to their present
country, five thousand (5000) years B.C., from Central Asia". (115)
The book published in Ankara in 1964, by
Kirzioglu M. Fahrettin, carries the following title: "From Whatever
Angle We Look the Kurds are Turks". In this book the author insists:
"This question that Kurds are Turks from all points of view, is an
explicit and unrefutable reality, like we say two times two makes four
(2x2=4)". (116)
Referring to Kirzioglu, Enayat Ollah
writes: "He releasнes the following permit to all Turkologists of the
world:
"We spoke about the existence of the
Turks, before the appearance of Islam in the Anatolian Peninsula, Azerbaijan
and Georgia. Among which we demonstrated that the Kurds are Turks. Hereafter,
all the Turkish specialists of the world will be directed by this path while
studying and examining the history of Turks". (117)
Finally, Gunaltay Semsettin in examining
the Turkish tribes, brings forth an admiration before the whole world of
history. He writes:
"Those tribes which have come into
appearance on the horizon and dawn of the Near East, that is the Sumerians,
Subarians, Humans, Elamites, Qutians, Kassites, Mitanni-ans, and Hittites, were
from this tribe (i.e. Turks). But the Akkadians, Assyrians, Arameans, Jews and
Semites, probaнbly were from this tribe". (118)
The Iranian historian Enayat Ollah,
commenting on the above thoughts, writes: "As the readers notice,
according to Gunaltay, The Sumerians, Subarians, Humans, Elamites,
Qutians, Kassites, Mitannians and Hittites
were uncondiнtionally and firmly, Turks. But the question didn't end here.
Still, probably, the Akkadians, Assyrians, Arameans, Jews and Semites could
also be of Turkish origin". (119)
Enayat Ollah carries on: "If we are a
little careful to the writings of Turkish historians, it becomes clear, that in
the entire Western, Central and Northern Asia not a sample of non - Turkish
type exists, but within this continent (Asia) all peoples have Turkish
origin". (120)
Thereafter he says: "In February
1944, a book by the name "The Turks of the Entire World" was
published, writнten by Hussein Namegh Eurgune, where if the reader only looks
at the list, he could understand the authors' purpose and tendency". He
goes on: "The book's chapters would follow this series: Siberia Turks,
Central Asia Turks, Aral Turks (Volga riverbank region), Crimea riverbank
Turks, Azerbaijani Turks, Western Turks, etc...". (121)
The Iranian historian continues:
"Soviet scientist Master Minorsky has a very beautiful expression about
Pan-Turkist historians' undertakings, the citation of which is just in place.
"Wherever a scientific dispute exists, concerning the culture of ancient
eastern tribes... the Turks immediately lay their hands on". (122)
The Iranian historian, shocked by
Pan-Turkist distorнtions, continues: "Pan-Turkist historians were still
not satнisfied by this, and spread their enchroachments up to the Achaemenians,
and named the creators of culture and civiliнzation in the city of Shosh as
Turks". He makes the followнing citation: "Semsettin Gunaltay, in his
book "The Ancient East", explicitly wrote: "The creators
of culture in Shosh and Mehnju-Daru, were of the Turkish tribes". (123)
"Gunaltay declared, that as though
the Eastern Turks' most ancient tribes had appeared in Central Asia (5000) five
thousand years before Christ". (124)
Enayat Ollah concludes: "These lines
were an insignifiнcant portion of the Pan-Turkist historians' writings. Until
today, perhaps, there hasn't been such a degree of forgery and distortion in
the field of history". (125)
Elsewhere, the Iranian historian writes
about the Arнmenians: "Pan-Turkist historians have not only named Central
Asia, but the worlds' major part, including Ourartu as Turan. Ali Kemal, one of
these historians, denies the existence of Armenia and the Armenian people,
writing thus: "Until the 6th century B.C. there wasn't even one Armenian
in the Anatolian Peninsula. In this country, the 'Ourartu' Turanian government
was created by The Turks". (126)
The Iranian historian writes: "Alas,
no writing at all exists, left by the Turks, upon which it is possible to make
a judgement". (127)
He continues: "Cahun has written
about the Turkish culнture, that until the 10th and 11th centuries, they had
neither philosophical studies nor an interesting trace of art and literнature".(128)
Referring to the Armenian historian
Zulalian, Enayat Ollah writes: "According to Zulalian, up to date, the
Turkнish history has been presented based on Chinese, Persian, Armenian and
Byzantian sources. Whereas nothing exists in this respect from the Turks
themselves. This is a truth that even Turkish historians forcibly
confess". (129)
The Iranian historian having witnessed
these inexplicaнble perversions (distortions) by the Pan-Turkist historians,
writes in amazement: "Pan-Turkist historians have called the Medes,
Parthians and Kurds, also Turks". (130)
It is not a secret, that, Kirzioglu,
disregarding the fact, that the Sakas belong to the Indo - European and Aryan
groupings, has written: "All subjects to the Ourartian (auнthorities)
kingdom, had Sakaian origin and hence were Turks". (131)
Soviet historian Oransky, states about the
Parthians: "The Parthians were Iranians and their language was totally of
middle age Iranian series, and could be considered as one phase of development
in the Persian language". (132)
Enayat Ollah writes: "This question
is clear to all the world's scientists. However, Pan-Turkist historians have
named the Arsakid Parthians as Turks". (133)
Concerning the Pan-Turkist historians'
delusions about Central Asia, it is possible to look at multi-national
historians' following statements.
Soviet famous historian and Turkish
specialist Bartold asserts: "The Bakhtarians, Sakaians, Kharazmians,
Parthians and Soghdians were Central Asia's ancient natives. They were all
Aryans". (134)
Historian Jemilev states the following:
"All those noнmadic fighters, who lived north of the Soghd region, were
named by the Arabs as Turks. Thus, a lot of Central Asian tribes were
mistakenly named as Turks, while the mentioned tribes were never Turks".
(135)
Ibn Howghal, who lived during the 4th
Islamic century (10th century A.D.) in his well known book "Sourat
al-Ard" (The Earth's Picture), does not call the Farab, Soghd,
Samarghand, Kharasm and Jihoun rivers' pastures as Turkнish regions, nor refers
to their inhabitants as Turks. But there we read: "However, the slaves of
those nverbank reнgions were Turks". (136)
According to Enayat Ollah, "all the
world's historians, except a group of Pan-Turkist historians, are in agreement
or have agreed that the native inhabitants and tribes of Cenнtral Asia were not
Turks". (137)
He goes on: "Only a glance through
Central Asia's mountains, valleys, rivers, cities and inhabitable regions'
list, clarifies that the tribes living in these regions were not Turks nor
spoke Turkish". (138)
Finally, the author writes: "In the
regions of Central Asia that were subject to the Achaemenian Dynasty, even the
slightest glimpse of Turks doesn't exist. Therefore, the unfounded persistences
of Turk and Ottoman historians, that in most ancient times Central Asia had
been Turkish, is void of any type of proof and basis". (139)
Early in this century, the famous Persian
writer, Ahmed Kesrawi, says the following about the history of Aderbadagan:
"Since the beginning of history, of which 3000 years have passed, the
Mitanians have settled in Azerbaijan (Iraniнan) and in southern regions next to
it. And if an individual is well informed in history, he knows that it's a
ridiculous point of view that as though the Turks had inhabited Azerнbaijan
since the beginning". (140)
However, what concerns Turan and Turanism,
it is here that the Pan-Turkist historians register their overwhelming defeat
in the theories that form the spine of their philosoнphy. Here it becomes clear
that the Tur and Turan of Aryan origin, have nothing to do with Turks except a
word simiнlarity.
Historian Bartold, referring to this
point, writes: "The name Turan has been cited in the Avesda (the Bible of
Zradashdian belief). Thus it is evident that the Turans were a branch of the
Aryans, with a lesser cultural development. There has been animosity between
the Iranian and Turanian groupings. In the 6th century A.D., the Turks entered
Central Asia. Name similarities became the cause for some, to consider the Turs
and Turks as one, while between the two names there is no connection
whatsoever". (141)
I.M. Diakonov considers the Tur tribes as
one of the Saнkas branches, and the Turan as "Eastern Iran".а In other words, he names Turan the Sakas'
Central Asian country. (142)
Other historians also acknowledge the Turs
as a branch coming from the Sakas. Soviet scientist Abaev, speaking of this
matter, writes: "According to the Avesda, Fariane has belonged to (he Tur
tribe, .or even more accurate, to the Sakas. This name and other connected
names occurrence in the Sakas, is clear and explicit". (143)
German historian Joseph Marquart states
that the Turans were nomadic and wandering tribes of Iranian origin. From the
civilization point of view, and compared to Persian citiнzens and farmers, they
were less developed or mediocre. They continuously attacked Iranians and
plundered and lootнed. This is the reason why the Iranians called these wild noнmadic
tribes as Turs. (144)
From linguistic point of view, the
following is clear about the word Tur. According to the Sanskrit language, Tur
means СbraveТ and 'hero'. To these days, this word in Kurdish and
the Gilans, living south of the Caspian Sea, means 'crazy', 'savage' and
'disobedient'.
Iranian intellectual Pour Davoud says:
"Since the Turans were the Persians' or Iranians' enemies, so later on
this was meant to be as 'crazy' and 'savage'". (145)
Enayat Ollah writes: "The
Pan-Turkists, taking advanнtage of the similarities between the names Tur and
Turk, extended hands toward Turan for looting. By this deed, they abused some
of the mistakes made by a few Muslim writers and historians". (146)
He ends his statement by a citation from
the Armenian historian Manuel Zulalian: "Wherever and whenever Euroнpean
researchers were found clumsy in identifying a tribe, or failed to call them
both Semetic or Indo-European, which of course doesn't embrace the Turanian
tribes, the Turkish hisнtorians, without paying the slightest attention to
tribal and geographic meanings, skillfully and craftily extended hands for
encroachment and plunder towards that direction. Turan never had the Turk
meaning". (147)
PAN-TURKISM OR PAN-ISLAMISM ?
To realise Pan-Turkist intentions, fanatic
Turkish leaders and political circles, have several times descended the arena
under religious masks, while in reality their desires and inнtentions have been
strictly fanatic and racist. The dismanнtling of this today also has an
important bearing for Middle and Far Eastern countries, where Turkey,
encouraged by a number of international incitements (rousings) tries to carнess
old dreams.
In this field, we witness the absolute
awareness of a lot of Arab and Persian intellectuals, which is the principal
pledge for facing the Pan-Turkist schemes of abusing and misleading the unaware
masses.
The Persian book "Azerbaijan and
Aran" (Aghvank), published in Teheran 1981, by Dr. Enayat Ollah Reza,
is one of the works tackling this subject The study is so vivнid (explicit), in
this respect, that it doesn't need commentнing. Here we cite a portion of it
with intermissions.
"Since the beginning of the twentieth
century, Pan-Turkist ideas got their encouragement in Ottoman Turkey. A group
of Turks tried to make Pan-Islamism serve Pan-Turkism, and subject all lands of
Far Eastern countries to Turkish domination". (148)
"The Young Turk group was the
preacher and propagator of these ideas. This group, which longed for the
unification of all the world's Turkish speakers, in 1907 established the 'Mhad
V6 Terakki' (Unity and Progress) Party". (149)
"The 1911 statements of the Central
Committee of the Party 'Ittihad Ve TerakkiТ... In the below mentioned
statement, if we remove the word Islam, and exchange it by the word Turk, the
whole question is clarified at once.
The Empire (Ottoman) must be transformed
into an Islaнmic empire and not a single nation must be allowed to establish
its own national organization... . The spreading of the Turkish language is the
best means of enforcement of Islamic domination and dissolving other
nations".
The author continues: "Naturally two
questions arise:
1. Why would the spreading of the Turkish
language be the best means of enforcement of Islamic domination?
2.а
The other nations, in which nation or tribe would they be dissolved?
In the case of the first question, if the
aim is the expanнsion of Islamic domination, then where is the need for Turkish
language, while the majority of Islamic people in the region speak Arabic?
This is the reason why the author believes
that, if we exchange the word Islam by Turk, the sentence receives the
following form: The spreading of the Turkish language is the best means of
enforcement of Turkish domination.
Concerning the second question, dissolving
has always meant the disappearance of one or more nations into one naнtion... .
The spreading of Turkish language makes it simple and clear that the intention
is the dissolving of other naнtions into the Turkish nation".
The author concludes: "As it is
obvious, the Pan-Islamism ideology has served as a means for Pan-Turkism in the
Ottoman Empire. By the weakening of the Empire, however, Pan-Islamism was
gradually separated from Pan-Turkism". (150)
Enayat Ollah goes on: "The Young
Turks and their Kemalist leftovers, who were the followers of Moustafa Kemal,
known as Ataturk - the father of Turks - since they didn't find Islam suitable
for the realization of their own purposes, adopted the unification path of the
Turks all over the world. In that direction, parallel to political endeavors
(longings), also undertook 'scientific and exploration' activiнties... .
A few historic distortions and
transformations have ocнcurred in this respect, which are:
1. That supposedly, the Turks of Asia and
Europe haнven't migrated from elsewhere, but have been the native inhabitants
of these regions.
2.а
To prove the above false opinion, they didn't have any other choice, except
to pretend that the region's ancient tribes were their ancestors.
3.а
Also for this reason, they found that the linguistic and ethnographic
nature of ancient eastern tribes, especially the Far Eastern ones must be
refuted and, so - called 'revised'..." (151)
Enayat Ollah, eventually referring to the
declarations of a few Pan-Turkist historians, concludes his study, in this
respect, by the following quotations:
"It is our purpose to gather the 100
million Turks in one united nation" (Zia Geokalp, Istanbul, 1952)".
(152)
"Ataturk is not only the father of
the Turks in Turkey, but the whole world Turks as well". (Ann Engin,
Istanbul, 1953). (153)
Iranian historian scholar Ismail Rahin, in
his book "The Genocide of Armenians", reflecting on Iranian
famous writнer Seid Mohammad Ali Jamalzade - who is the founder of a new school
in modern Iranian literature - cites the horrible memories he had witnessed of
Armenian massacres while he was passing through Turkey in 1915. Jamalzade
refers to reнalities along which he states, that religion was simply a means
for Pan-Turkist plans. He wrote: "In Istanbul, the Turkish police arrested
me and after a long interrogation they would ask me: "If you are Iranian,
why don't you speak Turkish.......?" And in the police jail, Ottoman interнrogators,
slapping me in the face, were trying to force me rogators, slapping me in
the face, were trying to force me to speak Turkish". (154)
We also cite here from a few of the
contemporary Arab historians, that completely assert the above opinion.
Egyption lawyer - historian Fouad Hassan
Hafez, in his study titled "The History of the Armenian People from the
Beginning until Today", says:
"The policy of these new tyrants
(governors) of the Otнtoman Empire was distrust to all non-Turkish people, who
lived in that country. Due to their racism, and also the idea of Turkish unity,
they tried to turkify this Empire and conнfine its authority only among Turks,
whose one of the most important manifestations was their 'Ittihad Ve Terakki'
Party Conference set up in Thessaloniki in 1910, where it was decided to forbid
all non-Turkish parties, by which they first had in mind the Arabs and
Armenians". (155)
Lebanese historian Saleh Zahreddin, in his
work "Armenians: A Nation and Cause", writes:
"It must be said that the Ottoman
Sultanate was inclined to intermix the Arab element and its Turkification,
starting from the days of the enslaver Sultan Abdul Hamid, increasнing the
severity during the times of Ittihad Ve Terakki rule in 1908, and after the
Iskandaroun robbery period, 1939". (156)
In his book "Armenians Through
History", the Syrian author, Marwan al - Moudawwar, writes: "The
Young Turks started spreading the Turanian policy and making inнvitations for
it. This invitation was making appeals to deнstroy the connections of the
Ottoman Empire, whose amount of collapse and decay they were aware of, and
weave a new empire, whose threads would be of Turkish nations, and which
extended over the Caucasian mountains until the borders of Turkistan. It is
noteworthy that this new empire, which would be based on racial foundations,
had no place for foreign nations, be they Arabs or Armenians". (157)
We wonder if it would be necessary to
present additional proofs from Greek, Bulgarian, Cypriot, Kurd, Georgian,
Armenian and other historians, after the above so vivid statements of
multi-national historians, whose peoples have already been and still are the
victims of bloodthirsty Pan-Turkism, whose chain's latest ring we witness today
in Mountainous Artsakh, after Western Armenia.
CONCLUSION
1. The Transcaucasian landpiece which
today is called Azerbaijan, bases on historic and historiographical facts, as
well as geographical maps, until the fall of the Russian Tzarist Empire, has
been called Aghvank or Caucasian Albania, Aran in Persian and Arabic, and Rani
in Georgian. In 1918, May 27, the Pan-Turkist Mousavatist Party, which was
governed by Turkey's Ittihad Ve Terakki Pan-Turkist party, named this region
Azerbaijan. This false nomination took place deliberately and its aim was, to
lay foot inside the original historic Azerbaijan - Iranian Azerbaijan, with
dreams of forming a Pan-Turkist empire. By the late years of the First and
Second World Wars, events came to prove the above historic realities.
2. The Azeri people and Azerbaijan, with
25 centuries of history, have always been in the southern region of the Arax
river. The Azeri language, being a branch of the Bah-lavi language, had no
connection whatsoever, with the sevнeral Turkish dialects. Naming any Turkish
dialect as Azeri language, also naming any landpiece falling to the north of
the Arax river as Azerbaijan and its inhabitants as Azeris, is a great historic
perversion, that has been performed with ulнterior political and expantionist
motives.
3.а
The Turkish - speaking peoples, contrary to the groundless persistence
of the Pan-Turkist historians, have never been the natives of Iranian
Azerbaijan, Asia Minor, or Transcaucasus Multi-national historians state this
fact, and prove their being immigrants considering the llth century A.D. barely
the beginning of their habitation in the above mentioned regions.
4. The Tur and Turan tribal groups have
had Aryan origins, and have no connection whatsoever with the Turks. All
Turkish specialists and orientalists, except a number of Pan-Turkist
historians, confirm this fact The similarity, however, between the Tur and Turk
words, have served as means for the Pan-Turkist "historians", so that
they, withнout the slightest feeling of responsibility towards historic, tribal
and geographic data, intentionally name the Tur and Turan as Turk and in this
way try to confuse even the interнnational historiographic circles.
5. Since the end of the 19th century and
the beginning of the 20th century, the Pan-Turkists have tried to use
Pan-Islamism as a means to realize their expansionst dreams. However, by the
weakening of the Ottoman Empire, the Pan-Islamist ideology was put aside as
well, thus Pan-Turkism and the purposes it chased were discovered, without any
pretext or veils.
Today, however, spurred by political
calculations, a number of Pan-Turkist circles or societies, both inside and
outside Turkey, occasionally enter the arena, covered under Pan-Islamic
umbrella. Their tendencies and aims remain the same, racistic Pan-Turkism, a
theory full of hatred and refuнsal toward other nations.
***
REFERENCES
1.а
"Bolshaia Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia", 3rd edition, volume 17,
"Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia" Publishers , Mosнcow, 1974, pp. 128-129
(in Russian).
2. Ibid, pp. 128-129.
3. Ibid, pp. 128-129.
4. Ibid, pp. 128-129.
5.а
"Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar", volume 2, "Bolshaia
Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia" Publishers, Moscow, 1954, p. 445 (in Russian).
6.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
214-215 (in Persian).
7. Ibid, page 215.
8.аа
"Bolshaia Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia", volumeаа I, "Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia"
Publishers , Moscow, 1970, p. 254 (in Russian).
9.а
Mou'arekh al - Dawl6 Sepeher, "Iran During the Great War",
Tehran, 1957, page 60 (in Persian).
10.а
Enayat Ollah Reza "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
215 (in Persian).
11.аа
"Bolshaia Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia", volumeаа I, "Sovetskaia Entsiklopediia"
Publishers , Moscow, 1970, p. 254 (in Russian).
12.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehнran, 1981, pp.
215-216 (in Persian).
13. Ibid, page 216.
14.аа
Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia", volume II, part 1,
"Vostochnoi Literatury" Publishers, Moscow, 1963, p. 775 (in
Russian).
15. Ibid, page 703.
16. Ibid, page 703.
17.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
218 (in Persian).
18. Ahmed Kesrawi, "Azerbaijan's 18
Year History - Remнnants of the Iranian Constitutional History", vol. 2,
9th edition, Amir Kabir Publishers, Tehran, 1978, page 873 (in Persian).
19. Ibid, page 873.
20. Ahmed Kesrawi, "Unknown
Kings", 2nd edition, Amir Kabir Publishers, Tehran, 1956, page 265 (in
Persian).
21.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
219 (in Persian).
22. Ibid, page 220.
23.аа
Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia", volume II, part 1,
"Vostochnoi Literatury" Publishers, Moscow, 1963, p. 703 (in
Russian).
24.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, pp.
224-226 (in Persian).
25. Ibid, page 51.
26."Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar",
under reduction of Profesнsor IJE. Andreevsky, volume I, St. Petersburg, 1890.
p. 359 (in Russian).
27. Strabonis, "Geographica",
vol. I-III, Berol, 1884-1892, XI, 4,1 (in Latin).
28."Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar",
volume XIII, Brokgauz (Leipzig), Efron (St. Petersburg), 1894, p. 819 (in Rusнsian).
29.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
53 (in Persian).
30. Ibid, page 53.
31."Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar",
under reduction of Profesнsor I.E. Andreevsky, volume I, St. Petersburg, 1890.
pp. 212-213 (in Russian).
32. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran 1981, page 57 (in Persian).
33. Ibid, page 113.
34. Ibid, pp. 44-45.
35.аа
Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia", volume II, part 1,
"Vostochnoi Literatury" Publishers, Moscow, 1963, p. 775 (in
Russian).
36.а
Strabonis, "Geographica", vol. I-III, Berol, 1884-1892 (in
Latin).
37. Pliniaeus, "Secundi Naturalis
Historia", vol. 1-2, Berol 1866-1882 (in Latin).
38. Ibn Fakih, "al - Bouldan",
Tehran, 1970, page 139 (Arabic origin, Persian translation).
39. Yakout al - Hamawi, "Encyclopedia
of Countries", vol. I, Leipzig, 1866, page 183 (in Arabic).
40.а
Abu el - Fida, "Takwim el - Bouldan", (publishing place and
date not mentioned), page 386 (in Arabic).
41.а
Group authorship, "The Past Is the Torch of the Fuнture", Jami
Publishing, Tehran (publishing date not mentioned), page 247 (in Persian).
42.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
224 (in Persian).
43. Marquart J., "Eransahr nach
Geographic des Ps Moses Xorenac'i", Berlin, 1901, p. 132 (in German).
44. Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia",
volume III, "Nauka" Pubнlishers, Moscow, 1965, p. 334 (in Russian).
45.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
21 (in Persian).
46.а
Sprengling, "Third Century Iran" (Sapor and Kartir), Chicago,
1953, p. 73 (in English).
47.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
131 (in Persian).
48. Ibid, page 131.
49.аа
Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia", volume II, part 1,
"Vostochnoi Literatury" Publishers , Moscow, 1963, p. 672 (in
Russian).
50. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page 133 (in Persian).
51. Mihrtad Azeri, "Azerbaijan and
the New Melodies of Colonialists", Tehran, 1983, page 25 (in Persian).
52. "Bolshaia Sovetskaia
Entsiklopediia", 3rd edition, vol. 1, "Sovetskaia
Entsiklopediia" Publishers, Moscow, 1970, p. 250 (in Russian).
53. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page 120 (in Persian). The author has used Movses
Khorenatzi's "History of Armenians", Russian translation, Moscow,
1893, page 58.
54. Ibid, page 193.
55.а
Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia", volume II, part 1,
"Vostochnoi Literatury" Publishers, Moscow, 1963, p. 673 (in
Russian).
56. "Bolshaia Sovetskaia
Entsiklopediia", 3rd edition, vol. 1, "Sovetskaia
Entsiklopediia" Publishers , Moscow, 1970, p. 250 (in Russian).
57. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page 133 (in Persian).
58.а
"Voprosy Istorii Kaykazskoi Albanii", reductor Igrar Aliev,
Azerbaijan S.S.R. Academy of Sciences' Publishers, Baku, 1962, p. 22 (in
Russian).
59. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page 126 (in Persian). The author has used Movses
Gaghangadvatzi's "History of The Aghvank", Rusнsian translation, St.
Petersburg, 1861, page 105.
60.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
128 (in Persian). The author has used Biнshop Sepios's "History",
Russian translation, Yerevan, 1936, pp. 74, 127.
61.а
'Isledovaniia po Istorii Kultury Narodov Vostoka", Sbornik v tchest
Akademika I. A. Orbeli, U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences' Publishers,
Moscow-Leningrad, 1960. p. 18 (in Russian).
62.а
"Voprosy Istorii Kavkazskoi Albanii", reductor Igrar Aliev,
Azerbaijan S.S.R. Academy of Sciences' Publishers, Baku, 1962, pp. 106-107 (in
Russian).
63. Ibid, page 107.
64.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, pp.
130-131 (in Persian).
65. Ibid, pp. 132-133.
66.аа
Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia", volume II, part 1,
"Vostochnoi Literatury" Publishers , Moscow, 1963, p. 663 (in
Russian).
67.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, page
153 (in Persian).
68.а
Vladimir Grigorevich Loukonin, "The Civilization of Sasanid
Iran", Tehran, 1971, page 131 (in Persian), translated to Russian by Dr.
Enayat Ollah Reza.
69. Abu Abdallah Beshari Moughadasi,
"Ahsan al - Taka-sim Fi Maarifat al - Akalim", Laden, 1906, pp. 259,
375 (in Arabic).
70. Cordier H., "Histoire Generale de
Chine", vol. 1, Paris, 1920, p. 356 (in French).
71. Bichurin (Iakinf) N. la,
"Sobranie Svedenii O Narodakh Obytavshikh v Srednei Azii v Drevnie
Vremena", vol. 2, Moscow-Leningrad, 1952, p. 75 (in Russian).
72.а
Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 180
(in Persian).
73. Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia",
volume V. "Nauka" Pubнlishers, Moscow, 1968, p. 3 (in Russian).
74. Tabari, "The History of Kings and
Apostles", Tehran, 1973, p. 648 (in Persian) , translated from Arabic by
Abou el - Gassem Bayande.
75. Jemilev L. N.,
"Drevnie Tiurki", "Nauka" Publishers, Moscow, 1967, p. 145
(in Russian).
76.а Tabari, "The History of Kings and
Apostles", Tehran, 1973, pp. 726-727 (in Persian), translated from Arabic
by Abou el - Gassem Bayande.
77. Jemilev L. N.,
"Drevnie Tiurki", "Nauka" Publishers, Moscow, 1967, p. 145
(in Russian).
78.а Movses Gaghangadvatsi, "The History of
Aghvans", from the Russian translation, St. Petersburg, 1861, p. 107.
79. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 185 (in Persian).
80.а Jemilev L.N., "Drevnie Tiurki",
Publishers "Nauka" Publishers, Moscow, 1967, p. 238 (in Russian).
81.а Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and
Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 184 (in Persian).
82. Ibid, p. 184.
83. Cahun L.,
"Introduction a l'Histoire de I'Asie", Paris, 1896, p. 87 (in
French).
84. Enayat Ollah Reza,
"Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 186 (in Persian). The author
has used Manuel Zulalian's "Questions of Armenia's Old and Middle Age History
in the Light of Contemporary Turkish Historiography" book's Russian
translation, Yerevan, 1970, pp. 51-52 (Zulalian M. K., "Voprosy Drevnei i
Srednevekovoi Istorii Armenii v Osveshchenii Sovremen-noi Turetskoi
Istoriografii", Yerevan, 1970, p. 51-52).
85. Enayat Ollah Reza,
Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, pp. 186-187 (in Persian).
86. Togan Zeki Velidi,
"Umumi Turk Tarihine Guis,", vol. 1, Ankara. 1946, p. 168 (in
Turkish).
87. Ibid, pp. 186-187.
88.а Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and
Aran", Tehran, 1981, pp. 187-188 (in Persian). The author has used Manuel
Zulalian's "Questions of Armenia's Old and Middle Age History in the Light
of Contemporary Turkish Historiography" book's Russian translation. Yerevan, 1970,
p. 57 (Zulalian M. K., "Voprosy Drevнnei i Srednevekovoi Istorii Armenii v
Osveshchenii Sovremennoi Turetskoi Istoriografii", Yerevan, 1970, p. 57).
89.а Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and
Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 188 (in Persian).
90. Ibid, p. 189.
91. Ibid, p. 189.
92.а Ahmed Kesrawi, "Kesrawi's Study",
Tehran, 1977, p. 328 (in Persian).
93. Ibid, p. 195.
94. Ahmed Kesrawi,
"Unknown Kings", 2nd edition, Amir Kabir Publishers, Tehran, 1956,
pp. 191-192 (in Persian).
95. Ibid, p. 195.
96. Ibid, p. 199.
97.а Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and
Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 199 (in Persian).
98.а Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and
Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 200 (in Persian), The author has used Manuel
Zulalian's " Questions of Armenia's Old and Middle Age History in the
Light of Contemporary Turkish Historiography" book's Russian translation,
Yerevan, 1970, p. 102 (Zulalian M. K., "Voprosy Drevnei i Srednevekovoi
Istorii Armenii v Osveshchenii Sovreнmennoi Turetskoi Istoriografii",
Yerevan,а 1970, p.102).
99. Ibid, p. 103.
100.а Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan and
Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 201 (in Persian).
101. Ibid, p. 204.
102. Ahmed Kesrawi,
"Kesrawi's Study", Tehran, 1977, p. 335 (in Persian).
103. Ibid, p. 235.
104. Enayat Ollah Reza,
"Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 207 (in Persian).
105. Ibid, p. 134.
106. Ibid, p. 207.
107. Ibid, p. 208.
108. Ibid, p. 209.
109. Ibid, p. 209.
110. "Encyclopedic de
I'lslam", 1'article "Turan", par Minorsky, Livraison N., pp.
224,930 (in French).
111. Ali Kemal,
"Erzincan", Istanbul, 1939, p. 12 (in Turнkish).
112.а Engin Ann, "Eti Tarihi", Istanbul,
1958, p. 92 (in Turkish).
113.а Togan Zeki Velidi, "Umumi Turk Tarihine
Giris.", Ankara, 1946, pp. 73-74 (in Turkish).
114. Ikinci Turk Tarih
Kongresi, Istanbul, 1943, p. XXXII (in Turkish).
115. Enayat Ollah Reza,
"Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 62 (in Persian).
116.а Kirzioglu M. Fahrettin, "Her Bakimdan
Ttirk Olan KOrtler", Ankara, 1964, p. 5 (in Turkish).
117. Ibid, p. 5.
118. Gunaltay Jemsettin,
"Turk Tarihnin Ilk Devirlerinden Yakin зark Elam ve Mezopotamya",
Ankara, 1937, pp. 116-117 (in Turkish).
119. Enayat Ollah Reza,
"Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 100 (in Persian).
120. Ibid, p. 100.
121. Ibid, p. 111.
122. "Encyclopedie de
I'lslam", 1'article "Turan", par Minorsky, Livraison N., p. 924
(in French).аа Akopov G.B., "Voprosi
Etnogeneza Narodov Blizhnogo Vostoka", Izvestia AN Arm. S.S.R., 1956, No.
7, p. 37 (in Russian).
123. Gunaltay Semsettin,
"Turk Tarihnin Ilk Devirlerinden Yakin Sark Elam ve Mezopotamya",
Ankara, 1937, pp. 121, 128 (in Turkish).
124. Ibid, p. 128.
125. Enayat Ollah Reza,
"Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 102 (in Persian).
126. Ali Kemal,
"Erzincan", Istanbul, 1939, s. 12 (in Turнkish).
127. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 186 (in Persian).
128. Cahun L.,
"Introduction a 1'Histoire de 1'Asie", Paris, 1896, p. 6 (in French).
129. Enayat Ollah Reza,
"Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 186 (in Persian). The author
has used Manuel Zulalian's " Questions of Armenia's Old and Middle Age
History in the Light of'Contemporary Turkish Historiography" book's
Russian translation, Yerevan, 1970, pp. 51-52 (Zulalian M. K., "Voprosy
Drevnei i Srednevekovoi
Istorii Armenii v Osveshchenii Sovre-mennoi Turetskoi Istoriografii",
Yerevan, 1970, pp. 51-52).
130. Enayat Ollah Reza,
"Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 101 (in Persian).
131.а Kirzioglu M. Fahrettin, "Kars
Tarihi", vol. 1, Istanнbul, 1953, pp. 84,93 (in Turkish).
132. Oransky I., "Vvedenie
v Iranskuyu Filologiyu", Mosнcow, 1960, p. 192 (in Russian).
133. Enayat Ollah Reza,
"Azerbaijan and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 106 (in Persian).
134.а Bartold V.V., "Sochineniia", volume
II, part 1, "Vostochnoi Literatury" Publishers, Moscow, 1963, p. 109
(in Russian).
135. Jemilev L. N.,
"Drevnie Tiurki", "Nauka" Publishers, Moscow, 1967, p. 31
(in Russian).
136. Ibn Howghal, "Sourat al -
Ard", Tehran, 1966, p. 195 (in Persian), translated from Arabic by Dr.
Jaafar Shoar.
137. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 63 (in Persian).
138. Ibid, p. 78.
139. Ibid, p. 74.
140. Ahmed Kesrawi, "Kesrawi's
Study", Tehran, 1977, p. 321 (in Persian).
141. Bartold V.V.,
"Sochineniia", volume II, "Vostochnoi Literatury"
Publishers, part 1, Moscow, 1963, p. 661 (in Russian).
142. "Istoriya Iranskoyo Gosudarstva
i Kultury", editors B. G.а Gafurov,
E. A. Grantovsky, M.S. Ivanov, Mosнcow, 1971, p. 144 (in Russian).
143. Ibid, p. 240.
144. Marquart Josef, "Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte von Eran", vol. 2, Leipzig, 1905 (in German).
145.а
Pour Davoud, "Yesna", Tehran University Publicaнtion, vol. I,
3rd edition, 1977, p. 53 (in Persian).
146. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 82 (in Persian).
147. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 98-99 (in Persian). The author has used Manнuel
Zulalian's" Questions of Armenia's Old and Middle Age History in the Light
of Contemporary Turkish Historiography" book's Russian translation,
Yerevan, 1970, pp. 20-21 (Zulalian M. K., "Voprosy Drevnei i Srednevekovoi
Istorii Armenii v Osveshchenii Sovre-mennoi Turetskoi Istoriografii",
Yerevan, 1970, pp.20-21).
148. Enayat Ollah Reza, "Azerbaijan
and Aran", Tehran, 1981, p. 59 (in Persian).
149. Ibid, p. 211.
150. Ibid, pp. 59, 60,61.
152. Ibid, p. 112.
153. Ibid, p. 112.
154.а
Ismail Rahin, "Armenian's Genocide", 2nd edition, Tehran,
1972, p. 212 (in Persian).
155. Fouad Hassan Hafez," The History
of The Armenian People From the Beginnig Till Today", Cairo, 1986, p. 301
(in Arabic).
156.а
Saleh Zahreddin, "Armenians: A Nation and Cause", Beirut,
1988, p. 135 (in Arabic).
157. Marwan al - Moudawwar,
"Armenians Through Histoнry", Beirut, 1982, p. 403 (in Arabic).
Armenian Popular Movement
26, Mel. Vassiliou
Neos Kosmos
117 44 Athens
Greece
Armenian Popular Movement
P.O. Box 113/7269
Beirut- Lebanon