AND THE QUESTION OF AZERBAIJAN
A HISTORICAL ACCOUNT
(ACCORDING TO MULTI-NATIONAL HISTORIANS)
ARMENIAN POPULAR MOVEMENT
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
117 44 Athens
Armenian Popular Movement
P.O. Box 113/7269