Part 1.

Ancient and medieval sources about Artsakh (Karabakh)

as a part of Armenia's state territory.

Karabakh during Persian Marzpanate, Arab conquest,

the invasion of Seljuk and Mongol-Tatar hordes,

incursion of Tamerlane.

Nagorno Kharabakh from ancient times.

In different periods of its centuries-old history Kharabakh was named differently: in the Urartian

cuneiform inscriptions it's called Utrekhe-Utrekhini; it is identical to the traditional Armenian

designation Artsakh1.

Ancient Greek authors called this area Orkhistena, which is the equivalent of the Armenian Artsakh.

In early medieval sources (particularly at Movses Khorenatsi) there are also two names of that area,

as the centre of administrative education was removed: Tsavdek-under the name of the center of

Tsavdek principality and Khachen-under the name of castle Khachen (Vardan, an author of XIII

century, writes direct: «Artsakh-(now) Khachen»), which served as a residence for Armenian princes

of the genus Aranshakhiks. In the X-XIII centuries we can see the name Khachen in most cases not

only in numerous monuments of Karabakh's epigraphic, but also in Byzantine and Persian

nomenclature. The castle and the country were called Khachen (from the Armenian word ''Khach''-

cross) just because their inhabitants were Armenians. There are two more names of Artsakh in the

sources - Small Syunik and Small Armenia2.

The name of Karabakh was formed on the basis of Persian geographical nomenclature: unlike the

field area, which was called Bag-i-safid (White garden), the mountainous part of the region became

known as Bag-i-siakh, which turned into Karabakh in Turkic understanding (Black garden)3.

The Greek-Latin sources, starting with the authors of the I century BC - III century CE: Strabo, Pliny

the Elder, Plutarch, Claudius Ptolemy, Appian, Cassius Dio and others unequivocally confirm, that

the border between Armenia and Albania was passing by river Kura.

Strabo: ‘’There are a lot of mountains and plateaus in Armenia itself… and there are many valleys

there… for example Aras plain, through which river Aras flows to the borders of Albania… Over this

plain there is Sakasena which also borders with Albania and river Kir’’4.

____________________ 1. В этом разделе ряд фактов и высказываний античных авторов приводятся по брошюре «Нагорный

Карабах. Историческая справка». Изд-во АН Армянской ССР, Ереван,1988. (In this section a number of facts and statements of ancient authors are from the brochure ''Nagorno Karabakh. Historical reference''. Publishing House of the Armenian SSR, Academy of Sciences, Yerevan, 1988).

1. Там же, стр. 8. (The same place, p. 8).

2. Там же, стр. 8. (The same place, p. 8).

3. С т р а б о н, «География». М., 1994, книга ХI, глава ХIV, парагр. 4, с. 497. (Strabo, ''Geography'', M. 1994,

book XI, chapter XIV, paragraph. 4, p. 497).

«Aras flows through Armenia, and the Kir flows through Iberia and Albania’’1. ‘’ It (Kir) begins in

Armenia and then flows to Albania through a narrow valley: the river powerfully sweeps across the

plains between this valley and Armenia...»2

Pliny the Elder: «This tribe (of Albanians), settled on the Caucasian mountains, reaches, as it is said, to

river Kira which is the border between Armenia and Iberia»3.

Claudius Ptolemy: «Great Armenia is limited with a part of Colchis in the North and with Iberia and

Albania by the above-mentioned line which passes through river Kir»4.

Plutarch: ‘’When winter overtook, the Roman army in this land (in Armenia) and the Romans were

celebrating the feast of Saturnalia, the Albanians, gathering in a number of not less than forty thousand,

crossed river Kirn and attacked them’’5, i. e. moved to the right bank of the Kura.

This is confirmed also by later writers. Thus Stephanus of Byzantium (IV century –the beginning of the

V century) reports about the regions of Armenia: ‘’Obarens – a part of Armenia adjacent to river Kir’’. He

believes that Otena-Utik is an Armenian region, which, as it is known, bordered with Albania on river

Kur6. Another Byzantine source- Menander the Byzantian (the end of the VI century) writes, that ‘’ the

Roman military leaders again invaded Albania, forced the Savirs and Albanians to move on the other

side of river Kira…’’7

The Armenian authors of the Middle Ages also inform about the Kur as a border of Armenia. According

to Faustus of Byzantium (the V century) the Kura was a border of the Massageteans’ king Sanesan’s

possessions. As writes the historian, ‘’the king crossed the border of the Kur and deluged the Armenian

land’’. Among the regions of Armenia, which betrayed the Armenian king of the Arsacid Dynasty, the

historian notes Gardmanadzor, the fortified gavar (province) Artsakh, ''the own possessions of the

Armenian royal house in Atropatene''. He writes about the return of the ''captured'' gavars – Artsakh,

Utik, Sakasena, Gardmanadzor and other contiguous gavars. He indicates: ''He made the border

between his country and Albania River Kur, as it was before…''8

In another book, talking about the activity of Gregory the Illuminator, Faustus of Byzantium writes,

that he (Gregory) ‘’crossed river Kur to the possessions of the barbaric country of the great king and

reached the camp of the Massageteans’ Arsacid king’s army’’9. The same territorial structure confirms

historian Sebeos10.

About the territorial structure of Armenia and about the borders of Albania, “which is between the

great river Kur and Caucasus Mountain”, informs also the Armenian “Geography” of the VII century” –

“Ashkharhatsuyts”11.

The Byzantine court, being well-informed about the situation in the contiguous countries of

Transcaucasus, knew that the Principality of Khachen was situated in Armenia. That’s why the Byzantine

Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos (913-959) addressed his official letters to the

____________________

1. С т р а б о н. Цит. соч., парагр. 5, с. 467. (Strabo. Cit. op, paragraph. 5, p. 467).

2. Там же, глава III, парагр. 2, с. 474. (The same place, chapter III, paragraph. 2, p. 474).

3. П л и н и й. «Естественная история», VI, 39. (Pliny. ‘’Natural History’’, VI, 39).

4. П т о л е м е й. «География», V, ХII. 1. (Ptolemy. ‘’Geography’’, V, XII. 1).

5. П л у т а р х. «Сравнительные жизнеописания». Т. II, М., 1863 (Помпей, ХХХIV). (Plutarch. ‘’Parallel Lives’’.

Vol. II, M, 1863 (Pompeii, XXXIV).

6. В. Л а т ы ш е в. «Известия древних писаний…» Т. I. СПб, 1890, с. 270–271. (Latyshev V. ‘’Proceedings of

ancient scriptures…’’ Vol. I. St. Petersburg, 1890, p. 270-271).

7. Док. № 8. (Doc. № 8).

8. Док. № 7. (Doc. № 7).

9. Там же. (The same place).

10. Док. № 10. (Doc. № 10).

11. Док. № 9. (Doc. № 9).

Khachen and Sevordiam princes “to Armenia”, thus confirming that these territories are Armenian1. The

Persian –Arab geographer of the X century Suhrab (Ibn Saraviun) also reports about Kura as a river of

“Internal Armenia” and about Aras as a river of “External Armenia”2.

In the first half of the VI century BC Artsakh, in the membership of Yervanduni Armenia, was under the

command of Medes, and from 550 to 331 years BC it was under the Achaemenid power.

Since the end of the IV century BC Artsakh, as well as the neighboring regions Utik and Syunik

continued to be a part of Armenian Orontid Kingdom3. The evidence of the fact that this region was

included into the kingdom of Tigran II since 95 years BC is the foundation of city Tigranakert there4.

Strabo also calls Orkhistene (Artsakh) a province of Armenia5; this is also evidenced by the early

medieval Armenian first-sources6.

According to “Ashkharhatsuyts” Artsakh was the tenth province of Armenia and was consisted of

twelve gavars (provinces): Myus Haband, Vaykunik, Berdadzor, Mets Arank, Mets Kuenk, Harchlank,

Mukhank, Piank, Partskank, Qust Pharnes, Koght7. After the partition of Armenia between the Byzantine

Empire and Iran in 387 Artsakh continued to be a part of Armenia until the abolition of the Armenian

kingdom in 428. Then it was joined to the Albanian kingdom by the Persians, located on the left bank of

the Kura, as it is evidenced by the author of “Ashkharhatsuyts”, who also reports, that Albania itself (i.e.

the left-bank) is located in the North part of Kura river, which was a border between Albania and

Armenia from ancient times8.

As it is indicated in the brochure “Nagorno Karabakh. Historical reference”, after the abolition of the

Albanian kingdom (in 469) Artsakh remained as a part of Persian Marzpanate, which was formed in the

territory of the Albanian kingdom and neighboring areas and which was named “Albania” (Aran). A

century later, in the late sixth and early seventh centuries the Albanian Marzpanate in the north was

disintegrated into separate small principalities, which got the names of the tribes living there or the

names of governing Princely families and had lost the name “Albania (which became unnecessary for

them) and the combined name “the Albanians”. In the South Utik and Artsakh formed the separate

Armenian principality of Aranshahiks (the end of the V century), instead of which in the VII century there

____________________ 1. Док. № 11. (Doc. № 11)

2. Док. № 12. (Doc. № 12).

3. М о в с е с Х о р е н а ц и. «История Армении», кн. II, г. 44–45, с. 169–170. (Movses Khorenatsi. ‘’History of

Armenia’’, book II, chapter 44-45, p. 1690170).

4. С е б е о с. «История…» Ереван, 19769, с. 125 (на арм. яз.). (Sebeos. ‘’History’’, Yerevan, 19769, p. 125

(Armenian).

5. С т р а б о н. Цит. соч. ХI, ХIV, 4, с. 497. (Strabo. Cit. op. XI, XIV, 4, p. 497).

6. А г а ф а н г е л. «История Армении»; Мовсес Хоренаци, «История Армении»; Егише, «О Вардане и войне

Армянской»; «Зоранамак» («Воинская грамота»). (Agathangelos, ‘’History of Armenia’’; Movses

Khorenatsi. ‘’History of Armenia’’; Yeghishe, ‘’History of Vardan and the Armenian war’’; ‘’Zoranamak’’

(‘’Military Literacy’’).

7. С. Т. Е р е м я н, « Армения по «Ашхарацуйцу» («Армянской географии VII в.»), Ереван, 1963, с. 105 (на

арм. яз.). (Yeremyan S. T., ‘’Armenia According the Ashkharatsuyts’’ (‘’Geography of Armenia VII century’’_,

Yerevan, 1963, p. 105 (Armenian).

8. С. Т. Е р е м я н, указ. соч., с. 105, ср. А. П. Н о в о с е л ь ц е в, «К вопросу о политической границе

Армении и Кавказской Албании в античный период». — «Кавказ и Византия», вып. 1, Ереван, 1979, с. 10–

18. Автор статьи основывается на данных античных историков Страбона, Плутарха, Птолемея, Диона

Кассия, армянского историка V в. Павстоса Бузанда и др. (Yeremyan S. T, noted op., p. 105, cf. Novoseltsev

A. P., "On the question of political border of Armenia and Caucasian Albania in ancient times''. –

''Caucasus and Byzantium'', релеасе 1, Ыережан, 1979, п. 10-18. The article is based on the datas of

ancient historians Strabo, Plutarch, Ptolemy, Cassius Dio, the Armenian historian of the V century Faustus

of Byzantium, etc.).

were Mihranids of Persian origin. The Mihranids inherited the administrative name of Aluank (Albania),

but, actually moving from the North to South, it has acquired a purely geographical content, reminding

once existed province, without having any relation with “Albania Itself”. The name “Albania” in

application to Utik-Artsakh becomes a synonym of the titles “The Eastern edge of Armenia”, “The North-

East edge”, “The Aluan (i.e. Albanian) edge”, “Armenia Deep”, etc., which we can find in the works of

the ancient Armenian historians1.

The historian of the XI-XII centuries Matthew of Edessa speaking about the “Albanian Country” says:

“which is now called Deep Armenia”2. The authors of the brochure write, that the main content of “The

history of Albania” (or “The history of the Country of Aluank”, as it is traditionally translated) is the

history of the politic and cultural life of those regions.

About Artsakh-Khachen and about the royal dignity of its ruler Hasan Jalal reports also a Persian

speaker anonymous author of the XIII century: ''Its population is Armenian. Abkhaz people call them

padishah tagaver…''3

About Karabakh as a part of Armenia and about the status of its Armenian population in the later

period- the beginning of the XV century, under the rule of the ''son of Tamerlane'' writes the German

traveler Johann Schiltberger, who had visited this country in 1420: ''I've also spent much time in

Armenia. By the order of Tamerlane I went to his son, who owned the two kingdoms of Armenia.

Tamerlane's son, named Shah Rokh, used to spend winter on a long plain, called Karabakh (Karawag),

which had good pastures. It is deluged by river Kur (chur),also called Tigris (tigris), and near the banks of

this river gathers the best silk. Though this plain is in Armenia, it belongs to the Gentiles, to which the

Armenian villages were forced to pay tribute''4.

It should be noted, that in the text published in Azerbaijan the translation of the collocation ''in

Armenia'' of this paragraph was changed to ''in Azerbaijan'', as they usually act with the sources.

About the rulers of one of the Armenian principalities of Artsakh in the XII-XIII centuries - Khachen

there is extant information in a number of epigraphic monuments of that period, which confirms the

country's Armenian affiliation and the political connection of its rulers with Armenia. The possessor of

the fortresses Haterk, Handaberd, Khachenaberd and Avkahatats Hasan, the son of Sakara (Zakar)

Vakhtang, who led the Khachen house since 1142, in 1152 married the daughter of the king of Kyurike,

one of the last representatives of the branch of Lori of the Armenian royal lineage Bagratids5.

One of his sons, the ruler of Lower Khachen Vakhtang, called Tonkik, was married to the daughter of

Sargis the Great, who was one of the best-known military and political figures of Queen Tamar of

Georgia

The author of the ''Armenian Court book'' (Datastanagirq) Gosh, who had close relations with princes

Hasan Jalal and his son Vakhtang, called them ''the principals of other princes'' and equated to the

governor of Cilicia Ruben. Elucidating their role in the political life of the country, an Armenian legist

noted, that ''in the days without power in our (i.e. Armenian) kingdom…in the Khachen edge from the

first times stayed few princes''6.

____________________ 1. А. Ш. М н а ц а к а н я н. О литературе Кавказской Албании. Ереван, 1969, с. 62–64. См. «Нагорный Карабах.

Историческая справка», с. 11. (Mnatsakanyan A. Sh. On the Literature of Caucasian Albania. Yerevan, 1969, p. 62-64. See ‘’Nagorno Karabakh. Historical Reference’’, p. 11). 2. М а т т э о с У р х а е ц и. Хроника Вагаршапет, 1898, с. 230 (на арм. яз.). (Matthew of Edessa. Chronicle Vagarshapet, 1898, p. 230 (Armenian). 3. Док. № 15. (Doc. № 15). 4. Док. № 16. (Doc. № 16). 5. Известия Императорской Академии Наук. СПб, 1909, серия VI, т. III, № 61. И.А.Орбели.

h’Асан Джалал, князь Хаченский. (Proceedings of the Imperial Academy of Sciences. St. Petersburg, 1909, Series VI, V. III, № 61. I. A. Orbeli). Hasan Jalal, the Prince of Khachen. 6. И. А. О р б е л и. Избранные труды. Ереван, 1963, с. 149. (Orbeli I. A. Selected Works. Yerevan, 1963, p. 149).

Vakhtang, the son of Hasan Sakarian (from his marriage to Horishah) had three sons and three

daughters. The eldest son was named Hasan after his grandfather, and Zakara and Ivane - in honor of

Armenian princes, generals of Queen Tamar: Spasalar Zakaria and Atabeg Dolgorukiy1.

A number of epigraphic monuments contain information about the Armenian king of Artsakh-Khachen

Hasan Jalal (1214-1261) and about his descendants. In the inscriptions of 1229 Hasan Jalal acts as the

ruler of Artsakh-Khachen: ''By the grace of God me, Hasan, the son of Vakhtang and Horishah, have built

this holy church…''2

He speaks about himself and his possessions in the inscription on the wall of Gandzasar Monastery: ''I

am the obedient servant of God, Jalal Dawla Hasan, the son of Vakhtang, the grandson of Hasan,

ancient lord and the king of the high and great country of Artsakh and the adjacent area of Khachen''3.

The ruler of Artsakh-Khachen kept close relations with the rulers of Mongolia. As the historian Kirakos

of Gandzak ( XIII century) writes, ''The wise Ishkhan (prince) Jalal, as soon as learned about the attack of

the infidels, gathered all the inhabitants of his country into a fortress called Hohanaberd in Persian. And

when Tatars came to besiege the fortress and saw that it is impossible to occupy it, offered him to

conclude with them a peace contract. And he wisely agreed with their intention. And then he came to

them with gifts. Tatars, giving him honors, returned his possessions and even added some territories,

then ordered him to take part in the wars with them year after year and live in peace under their power.

And Jalal reasonably ruled his country: he collected and kept at his side everything that was necessary

for the needs of messengers, food or something else, and when they appeared, he gave it all to them

and even added something and the Tatars didn't oppress the population of the country, but just visited

him. In other regions they didn't act in this way, therefore the Tatars oppressed the population

everywhere''4.

He was patronized particularly by the son of Golden Horde Batu Khan – Sarti, who adopted

Christianity. About the close relations of the Armenian prince with the son of Batu–Sarti the historian

says: ''Together with the others the great prince (Ishkhan) of Khachen and of the regions of Artsakh

Hasan, who was affectionately called Jalal, a pious, God-fearing and modest man, an Armenian in origin,

also came to him (Sarti). He (Sarti) accepted him and those who were with him kindly and respectfully:

Ishkhan Gregory, commonly called The young man, though at that time he was already an old man,

Ishkhan Desan-a modest young man, Vardapet Marcos and Bishop Gregory.

He led Jalal to his father, gave him high honours and returned his patrimonies –Charaberd, Akane and

Karkar, which were taken away from him earlier by the Turks and Georgians…''5

Later, in 1255, after the death of Batu, Hasan with Sarti went to Mongolia to the great Khan Mangu.

He reports about this himself: ‘‘I, Hasan Jalal Dawla, went to the king of shooters on the East to the

Northern country with my family and members of household for the sake of the church's peace. I and

my wife Mamkan and my son Atabeg given by God went to the North-East, and I went to the edge of the

world to the king, whose name is Mangu Khan…''6 Historian Kirakos of gandzak writes,

____________________

1. И. О р б е л и. Избранные труды. Ереван, 1963, с. 149. ((Orbeli I. A. Selected Works. Yerevan, 1963, p. 149).

2. Там же, с. 150. (The same place).

3. Док. № 14. (Doc. № 14).

4. Док. № 13. (Doc. № 13).

5. Док. № 13. (Doc. № 13).

6. И. О р б е л и. Избранные труды. Ереван, 1963, с. 155. ((Orbeli I. A. Selected Works. Yerevan, 1963, p. 155).

that he ''went to the Mongol ruler to complain about the harassments of the tax collectors and the

Governor Arghun1.

The Turkic tribes begin to appear in the Western Asia for the first time sporadically – as a result of the

invasions of the nomadic peoples of Asia – Seljuk (1048, 1049, 1054, 1065 years), the Tatar – Mongol

hordes (1236-1243 years), the Khan of the Golden Horde Tokhtamysh (1385), Timurlenk (1386, 1394 and

1400 years).

After the hordes of Tamerlane invaded the South Caucasus in 1386-1405, the North Iran and Armenia

appeared under the rule of the Turkmen dynasty of Kara Koyunlu in the first half of the XV century and

under the rule of Ak Koyunlu in the second half of the XV century. But the dynasty of Hasan Jalal wasn't

splited, and its representatives kept the title of Meliks in a number of small principalities of Nagorno-

Karabakh in the XVI-XVIII centuries. The plain (lowland) part of Karabakh, in particular Mugan plain was

taken over by the Turkic newcomers.

Under the reign of the Sefedid dynasty in Persia Karabakh was one of its province (Beylerbeylik). The

lowlands and foothills of Karabakh were under the control of Muslim Khans, and the mountainous part

remained in the hands of Armenian rulers2.

The system of Armenian lords in Nagorno Karabakh was finally formed during the reign of Shah Abbas I

(1587-1629) in Persia. In those years the Persian government encouraged the Armenian Meliks to take

actions against the Ottoman Empire. At the same time the rulers of Persia tried to weaken the Armenian

Meliks separating them from other Armenian possessions by the resettlement of Kurdish tribes in the

area located between Artsakh and Syunik3. (Melik is an Arabic word meaning king, lord. In Persia in the

ancient times the sovereign individuals were called Meliks, and then the hereditary rulers. In the South

Caucasus the Meliks always were hereditary rulers; the importance of the space meant the degree of

importance of Melik. That title always served as a proof of the ancient origin of a surname).

THE METAMORPHOSES OF FALSIFICATION OF THE

QUESTION ABOUT THE HISTORICAL ROOTS AND RIGHTS OF AZERBAIJAN.

When in 1918 just after the foundation of the second Turkish state – the Republic of Azerbaijan by the

Ottoman Empire a territorial dispute arose against the Republic of Armenia, the Musavat government of

Azerbaijan as a corroboration of their territorial claims motivated the religious principle: it countered

‘’the right’’ of the Christian states of Armenia and Georgia on the territory which is inhabited by the

Muslim nations, not only by the Azerbaijanis, who were called ‘’Caucasian Tatars’’ at that time, but also

by the Kurds, Adjarians, Ingiloys, Tatas, Lezgins and other nationalities of Dagestan.

Making claims to the territories inhabited not only by the Shiites, as they are themselves, but also by

the Sunnis, the Azerbaijanis started to implement Pan-Turkic program of territorial expansion with the

Sunni Ottoman Empire, and after its defeat they took in their hands the solution of that problem.

____________________

1. Док. № 13. (Doc. № 13).

2. В. Ш н и р е л ь м а н. Войны памяти. Мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье. М., 2003, с. 199.

(Shnirelmann V. Memory Wars. Myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia. M., 2003, p. 199).

3. Там же, с. 199. (The same place, p. 199).

As the corroboration of claims to the territory of its neighbors – Armenia and Georgia didn’t promise

success, Azerbaijan, like Turkey, perceived very negatively the references of the Armenians and the

Georgians to the ‘’historic rights’’. Considering them ‘’groundless’’ Azerbaijan gave preference to the

religious statistics in their own interpretation. By contrasting the number of the Armenians with all the

‘’Muslims’’, Azerbaijan sought for more and more expansion of the sphere of its pretentions falsifying

the data of census – by exaggerating the number of the Muslim population and by the understatement

of the Armenians. In the sphere of Azerbaijan territorial pretentions there were included not only the

lands inhabited by Muslim nations, but also those lands, which were inhabited by Christians, but were

used by Muslim nomadic pastoralists to move to the mountainous areas of distant-pasture animal

husbandry, such as the pasture of Nagorno Karabakh.

This is how was the picture of the overall ‘’removal of the Muslim population, which is homogeneous

in cultural – economic and social aspect’’, presented by the collaborator of the Ministry of Foreign

Affairs of Azerbaijan A. Schepotyov: ‘’The area, inhabited by the people of Azerbaijan with the closely

related minor inclusions of Kurdish, Persian, Adjara, Ingiloi and mountainous, in particular Lezghin

elements, with exactly the same social, spiritual, religious, cultural levels of lifestyle, is limited

geographically in this way: in the East – the Caspian Sea, in the North – Eastern spurs of Dagestani

mountains towards Derbent, in the Middle Caucasus – the middle part of the Caucasus mountain range,

spurs of the mountain Shirak (Kala-Dara) and ravine of river Kur between the Tiflis and Karayazi steppe,

in the North-West - the Trialet ridge and Atshur ridge and Black Sea''1.

Though these claims were presented as being based on ''natural borders'' and on ''historical

community'', the Turkic – Muslim territorial rights, in fact, were justified by the invasion of Seljuk Turks

in the XI century and by the ejection if the indigenous Christian peoples as a result2.

If Mousavat predecessors claimed the great part of the South Caucasus, then the Azerbaijani

expansionists of the Soviet and post-Soviet periods began to proclaim, that the South Caucasus always,

in all periods of history belonged to the Turks3. According to Azerbaijani leaders the Mousavatist

government blundered by ''regretting the Armenians'' and giving them a piece of land ''around Irevan''.

When Turkey finally moved into the camp of the Western powers and the Turkish leader M. Kemal

didn't have to hide his goals of Pan-Turkic any more, the Azerbaijan, created by Pan-Turkists, needed

such a history of ethnic origin, which would let avoid accusations of political relations with Turkey and

the tend to Pan-Turkism, also to distance themselves from Shiite Iran, to avoid accusations of Pan-

____________________

1. А. Щ е п о т ь е в. О спорных кавказских территориях, на которые имеют права самоопределившиеся

азербайджанские тюрки. — Известия АН АзССР. История, философия и право. 1990, № 2, с. 54–55. Цит. по: В.Шнирельман, Войны памяти. Мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье. Москва, 2003, с. 120.

(Shepotev A. About the disputable Caucasian territories, on which the self-determined Azerbaijani Turks have rights. - Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan SSR. History, philosophy and law. 1990, № 2, p. 54-55. Cit, by: Shnirelmann V. Memory Wars. Myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia. M., 2003, p. 120).

2. Ш н и р е л ь м а н. Цит. соч., с. 119–122. (Shnirelmann. Cit. op., p. 119-122). 3. В. С т у п и ш и н. Геополитические фальсификаторы и национальный вопрос. —«Армянский вестник»,

1999, № 1–2, с. 8. (Stupishin V. Geopolitical forgers and the national question. – "The Armenian herald", 1999, № 1-2, p. 8).

Islamism. What was needed was the status of ''indigenous people'' of the South Caucasus, without any

political connection with the stronghold of Pan-Turkism – Turkey and Persia, which had the same faith1.

The instructions in this regard of the first secretary of the Central Committee of the CP (B) of

Azerbaijan M. J. Baghirov2 were confirmed by the decisions of the XVII and XVIII assembly of the

Communist Party of Azerbaijan in 1949 and 1951 years. Appearing at the XVIII assembly Baghirov argued

that the Turkic nomads as robbers and murderers corresponded a few to the image of the Azerbaijanis.

The leadership of the state, who annexed the historical Armenian territories, constantly feared

aspirations of Karabakh's Armenian population to reunite with Armenia. So it with zeal began to solve

the problem – basing its ''origination'' in the South Caucasus.

As the new coming Turkic tribes and the nation formed on their basis didn't have deep territorial roots,

in Baku they began to ''azerbaijanize'' feverishly all ancient political structures that existed on the

territory of the South Caucasus and the adjacent region. The first it concerned, of course, the historically

Armenian and Iranian territories and, accordingly, the Armenian and Iranian political and cultural

heritage.

In the textbook of 1939 prepared by the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan

SSR, and in its adaptationed version (in 1941) the Azerbaijanis declared themselves native, identifying

with the Medes, the Caspians, the Albanians and with other tribes, who inhabited the territory of

Azerbaijan supposedly about 3000 years ago. It has been argued that ''a few'' Turkic newcomers, as

more backward, assimilated without having a sizeable influence on the ''Azerbaijani'' nation. Therefore

it's necessary to develop the history of Medes as a part of the question about the origin of the

Azerbaijani people3. Since the main ancestors of the Azerbaijanis were declared the Iranian-speaking

Medes, the Azerbaijani State system respectively was identified with the kingdom of the Medes, and the

''first famous ancient Azerbaijani king'' is named the king Medes-Deyoka. The Azeri was declared the

''indigenous'' population of Medes, and the indigenous population itself – subsequent newcomers.

Except the desire to separate Azerbaijan form Turkey, to demarcate themselves from Pan-Turkism,

after the Second World War there was one more stimulus to enroll the Medes in a basic ''ancestors'' of

Azerbaijan: the section of Iran with the isolation of ''Democratic'' Azerbaijan and ''Democratic''

Kurdistan, prepared by Stalin with the participation of Baku.

Starting to develop the version of the Medes, they didn't give much importance to the Albanian

version. But in the new edition of the ''History of Azerbaijan'', prepared by the same group of authors in

1945-1946 years, to the Medes, as the ''principal ancestors'' of the Azerbaijani people were added the

Albanians, who as if preserved the traditions of the ancient Medes after its conquest by the Persians4. Of

____________________

1. В. Ш н и р е л ь м а н. Цит. соч., 132. . (Shnirelmann. Cit. op., 132).

2. М. Д. Б а г и р о в. Об очередных задачах интеллигенции Азербайджана. Баку, Азернешр, 1950 г. (Baghirov M. J. On the periodical tasks of the Azerbaijani intellectuals. Baku, Azerneshr, 1950).

3. Отчетный доклад М.Д.Багирова на XVIII съезде Коммунистической партии большевиков Азербайджана о работе ЦК КП (б) Азербайджана. — «Бакинский рабочий» 26 мая 1951 г. З.И.Ибрагимов, Е.А.Токаржевский.

Развитие советской исторической науки в Азербайджане. Баку, 1964 г. (The Report of M. J. Baghirov at the XVIII Congress of the Communist Party of Bolsheviks of Azerbaijan about the work of the Central Committee of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Azerbaijan. - "Baku Worker’’ May 26, 1951. Z. I. Ibrahimov, E. A. Tokardzevski. The development of Soviet historical science in Azerbaijan. Baku, 1964).

4. З. Б у н и я т о в, 1965, с. 179–188. (Buniyatov Z., 1965, p. 179-188).

course, they kept silence about the language and the writing of the Albanians, as well as about the

language of the Medes, who had nothing in common with the Azerbaijani dialect of the Turkish

language.

Having received from the party and state authorities the next task to write the history of Azerbaijan

again, they prepared and in 1958-1862 published a three-volume ''History of Azerbaijan'' in Baku.

The largest contribution in the falsification of the history of Azerbaijan made Z. Buniatov, closely

related to H. Aliyev himself and to F. Mammadov.

The gap in the time between the disappearance of Aghvank and the emergence of the Turkic ancestors

of Azerbaijan in the in the XI century Z. Buniatov solved easily: he removed the turkization of Aghvank in

time – to the IV-V centuries1, and included the native population of Karabakh into the ancestry of the

Azerbaijanis, presenting them as ''Armenified'' and converted to Monophysitism of the Albanians2.

Commenting the concept of Buniyatov regarding the Armenians of Karabakh, the American researcher

R. Hewsen noted, that ''according to it actually the Azerbaijanis and the Armenians of Karabakh are from

the same ancestors, which corresponded well to the Soviet program of intimacy and fusion of the

nations and practically justified the assimilation of the Armenian minority by the Azerbaijanis''. Hewsen

considered in this also ''potential claims of Azerbaijan to the lands of Armenian SSR''3.

Arbitrarily correcting the dates set in the historical science, the Azerbaijani forgers connected

diverging in the time the end of the existence of the Indo-language Medes with the beginning of the

history of spatially separated from them Caucasian-language Albania near river Kur, and those – with

the Turkic - language Caucasian Tatars emerged in the region in the XI century.

To eliminate the spatial gap between the three components of the ''uninterrupted history of the

Azerbaijani people'', they moved the Southern border of Albania (passing across the Kur till the V

century) on river Aras. At the same time the Azerbaijani fantasist conjurers excluded from the history

the real possibility that the Medes as an ethnic group were assimilated by the cognate Persians. They

don't take into consideration that the indigenous population of the near Kur Albania wasn't disappeared

by the invasion of the Seljuk, but continued to exist in Lezghins and other nations of Dagestan under the

rule of Persian Khans in a pointed conflict with the Persian Khans of Karabakh. They weren't

embarrassed also by the complete absence of the confirmation of the thesis in the sources, that the

Turkic nomads, inhabited in the Mugan steppe, were ethno-political community and didn't consider

themselves a part of the Iran political world, as it takes place so far in the Iranian province of Azerbaijan.

The artificial structure, created for expansion, gives raise a lot of questions, to which the Azerbaijani

historians don't give an answer. Bypassing all the issues of periodization, localization, ethnic staff,

language contradicting this construction, the political formations created by them were lined up in a

row, supposedly reflecting the sequence of development of ''the oldest in the world'' Azerbaijani State

system. This list of ancestors started with the state formation of Mann, founded in the IX BC by

Lulлubeev and Kuti tribes, then followed by Medes, which existed in the VII-VI centuries BC in the

Hellenistic period, and Media Atropatene lying to the South of the Aras. It was argued that the Medes

____________________

1. В. Ш н и р е л ь м а н. Цит. соч., с. 161. (Shnirelmann. Cit. op., 161).

2. R. H e w s e n. Ethno-history and the Armenian influence upon Caucasian Albanians…Philadelphia: Seholars

press, 1982, p. 27; В.Шнирельман, 161. (R. H e w s e n. Ethno-history and the Armenian influence upon

Caucasian Albanians…Philadelphia: Seholars press, 1982, p. 27; V. Shnirelmann, 161).

3. R. H e w s e n. Ethno-history and… p. 27; В.Шнирельман, 161. (R. H e w s e n. Ethno-history and… p. 27; V.

Shnirelmann, 161).

gravitated to the ‘’Northern Azerbaijani lands’’-Albania, which was places in the widest possible range of

Terek river in the North to the lower current of river Kur and river Aras in the South1.

Seeking to prove the ‘’Azerbaijani identity’’ and the national independence of Albania, the Azerbaijani

historians not only distorted, but completely ignored the specific political, cultural, religious and other

ties of Aghvanq2 with Armenia. Henceforth Mann, Medes, Atropatene and Albania were to be

considered not as a consolidated ethnic groups with their languages, but as an ‘’Azerbaijani political

structure’’. These ancient East states were presented as direct predecessors of the Azerbaijani state.

As the purpose of the present Collection of documents is the documentary illumination of the issue of

the origin, nature and development of the territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan, we don’t

enter into a senseless polemics with professional forgers and restrict ourselves only by showing the

frame of primary sources, which unequivocally confirm that the claims of Azerbaijan on Albania is a curt

lie like other facts to which he refers for that purpose.

Azerbaijan can appose nothing but lie to the information of the Greek-Roman primary sources of the

period of existence of Armenian state until the time of partition of its territory in two, as it is now said,

superpowers of East and West – the Byzantine Empire and the Sassanid Persia. As for the more complex

period of Aghvank’s history when it, along with a part of the Armenia’s territory was transformed into a

viceroyalty – province of the Persian king, then we limit our task by presenting documents, which

confirm, that in this period also remained political ties between aborigine Albania and Armenian political

world.

The population of the state formations, represented as components of the oldest in the world’’

Azerbaijani people and of the mythical ‘’Azerbaijani State’’, didn’t speak in a Turkic language of the

Azerbaijanis. The language of Medes was the variety of Indo-European, in Atropatene they used Persian

language, in Aghvank they spoke in Nakh-Dagestanian and Armenian languages. The Azerbaijani

historians are silent about this, but they lie as if in the territory of the future Azerbaijan ‘’there has never

been heard an Armenian speech’’.

Why then in the presence of Azerbaijani people formed for centuries and the ‘’ongoing existence of

Azerbaijan’’ in these territories, the Albanian language of Azerbaijani people disappeared almost

completely without leaving any trace of existence apart from a few fragmentary texts?

Why at the ‘’Azerbaijani identity’’ of the Albanian population only Armenian historians Movses

Kaghankatvatsi, Kirakos of Gandzak and others wrote about Albania, but not the mythical Azerbaijani-

Albanian bearers of the oldest civilization? To whom, if not to the Armenians and to the Armenian-

speaking inhabitants of Aghvank, were addressed the books on history of Aghvank, written by them in

Armenian language?

As it is characteristic to the Turkish-Azerbaijani traditions of appropriation of the history of the

nations, conquered by them, in Baku suddenly began to assert, as if these authors themselves, as well as

many other Armenian scientists and artists weren’t Armenians, but were ‘’Armenized’’ by the

____________________

1. В. Ш н и р е л ь м а н. Цит. соч.; с. 144–145. (Shnirelmann. Cit. op., p. 144-145).

2. Тоже,что Алуан или Албания. (Same as Aluan or Albania).

Azerbaijani-Albanians, and their works were written not in Armenian, but in ‘’Azerbaijani – Albanian’’

language, but were eliminated by the Armenians1.

The fact of creating not only the Armenian, but also the Albanian writing system by Mesrop Mashtots,

at first was ignored, and then they began to claim that the Albanian alphabet was created long before

the Armenian one. In particular they turned into Albanian – Azerbaijani the author of ‘’Armenian Law’’

Mkhitar Gosh borne in Gandzak (now Ganja) and ended his life in the service of the Armenian kingdom

of Cilicia.

Those whom they couldn’t Azerbaijanize in Baku, just distorted. They started to republish at the state

level not only the Armenian, but also the foreign sources, resorting to the explicit acts of low–grade

fraud – the withdrawal from them all the evidences contradicting the Baku’s version of the history of

Karabakh.

The same torment, with a view to Azerbaijanize the Iranian territories, were incurred also the Iranian

statesmen and cultural figures.

By creating flimsy ''concepts'' and arguing, that the Azerbaijanis changed their language for several

times, their authors, in fact, rejected the Turkic identity of the Azerbaijanis. The supporters of Turkish

origin of the Azerbaijani people paid attention to comicality of the concept of the origin of the

Azerbaijani people and state on the basis of three ancient state formations, none of whom spoke in

Turkic. Sharing the expansionist aims of the falsification of history, the supporters of the Turkish

population preferred either to ----------------------- the Turkization, or to transform the Turks themselves in

the indigenous population of South – Eastern Caucasus. Claiming the local character of the Turkic

ancestors, they began to announce, as if the ancestral home of the Turks wasn't in Central Asia, but in

Western. The return to the Pan–Turkic concepts of the origin of the Azerbaijani people no accidentally

occurred in the late 80's – early 90's, when in the fight against the Armenians, and potentially against

Iran, it could be useful again the military and political support of Turkey. Such an interpretation of the

origin of the Azerbaijani people, which disagreed with the idea of ''Great Turan'', didn't satisfy the

adherents of the ''classical'' concept of Pan-Turkism. Rasulzade and other authors of Turkish concept of

the origin of Azerbaijanis were skeptical about the possibility of evidence of ''aboriginal'' formation of

the Turks in Asia Minor and in the South Caucasus. They still insisted on the migration of Turkic nomads

from the Asian ancestral home – Great Turan. The supporters of that concept believed that the invasion

of Seljuk in the XI century marked the beginning of mass Turkization of the local population, that the

alien Turks played the major role in the formation of the Azerbaijani people. The Albanians were

excluded from that process because they were Christians.

This deprived the Azerbaijanis of the chance to base their territorial claims by assertion as if they were

the ''indigenous population'' of the Caucasian Albania. That's why came out a version of early

Turkization of the local population or even the ancient Turkish speaking if not in all, then in a certain

Albanian tribes.

___________________ 1. Азербайджанизации этих трудов предшествовало их изучение на предмет годности к присвоению. Переводы с

древнеармянского языка на русский язык были предусмотрительно засекречены. Автор Комментариев пользовался изданным в Баку переводом «Истории Армении» автора XII в. Киракоса Ганзакеци в спецхране Всесоюзной

исторической библиотеки. (To the Azerbaijanization of these works preceded their study on the subject to the

award date. Translations from Old Armenian language to Russian were hidden foresightly. The author of the

comments used the translation (which was done in Baku) of the "History of Armenia'' of Kirakos of Gandzak (an

author of the XII century) in the special depositories of All Union Historical Library).

The book ''To the problem of the origin of the Azerbaijanis'', published in Baku in 1984 assumed, as

notes the Russian researcher V. Shnirelman, that henceforth the people of Azerbaijan should be

considered not only aboriginal, but also ancient Turkic speaking. The Azerbaijanis, becoming

''aboriginal'' at the same time '' as though returned to the family of Turkic nations''1.

In the late 1980’s –early 90’s with the beginning of a new phase of the movement of Karabakh’s

freedom the party leaders of Azerbaijan, as well as the leaders of NFA began to support openly the ideas

of Pan-Turkizm. The struggle against this political flow was declared the legacy of the Stalin’s cult of

personality2.

After Azerbaijan gained international legal personality, the idea of creating ‘’Great Azerbaijan’’,

depending on foreign policy situation, either got activate, or hushed up. The first president of the

Republic of Azerbaijan Elchibay openly raised this issue. Ilham Aliyev, trying to solve as a priority task the

problem of appropriation of Nagorno-Karabakh, following the example of H. Aliyev, refrained from open

claims on the Iranian province of Azerbaijan.

Referring to the far-fetched ‘’successive link’’ of the Azerbaijani State with the ancient Caucasian

Albania, in Azerbaijan they try to connect the practical interests of territorial expansion in the hope that

it will help to bring forward the ‘’historical arguments’’ in the struggle for Nagorno Karabakh3. Though

the official purpose of the policy of forced annexation of Nagorno –Karabakh was declared the provision

of ‘’territorial integrity’’ of Azerbaijan, Baku is actually seeking to expand the lodgment for territorial

expansion both in Armenia and in Iranian direction. It is being actively conducted the ideological and

military training for realization of the idea of ‘’Great Azerbaijan’’.

___________________

1. В. Ш н и р е л ь м а н. Цит. соч., с. 171. (Shnirelmann V. Cit. op., p. 171).

2. Там же, с. 174–175. (The same place, p. 174-175).

3. Там же, с. 191. (The same place, p. 191).

KARABAKH AFTER THE COLLAPSE OF THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE.

Since November 1917, after the departure of the remnants of Russian troops and the officials,

Karabakh was abandoned in the viewpoint of the power. The National Council, arisen in the city of

Shushi from representatives of several political parties, which led the city with all the works, soon

transformed into a Civil Committee, which went on to lead all affairs concerning the Armenian

population.

From the representatives of Armenian and Turkish committees it was set up a single interethnic

Committee, which solved problems which had interethnic character. The committee consisted of equal

number of representatives of both nations, the chairman was an Armenian, and the substitute was a

Turk. Shushi was ruled in this way till the 16 of July, 1918, and the four Karabakh provinces with

Armenian population – Varanda, Dizak, Khachen, Jraberd remained without governance till that

moment.

Starting from the December 1917, when the Russian frontier guards began to live the bank of the Aras

and return to Russia, the local Muslims destroyed all the border posts, warehouses, the property of the

new railway of Baku – Julfa, seized the weapons and ammunition, and in Jebrail drowned alive in wells a

whole company of Russian soldiers. The remains of Russian soldiers, departing from Shushi to Yevlakh,

at the station Barda were forced to hand over to the Turks all the small – arms and 4 machine guns.

At this time to create a governance structure in Shushi, it took place a congress of Armenian peasants,

which chose a government consisting of 7 members and gave it all the administrative, judicial functions

and placed on it the responsibility for the food supply.

The existing form of governance of the province lasted in Karabakh till the leaving of the Turks and the

arrival of British military mission there in late 1918.

Later, when British troops appeared in Shushi, Major Gibbon, learning about the former governance of

the Armenians, decided not to disturb the structure of the temporary governance.

The meeting of Khmbapets (leaders of self – defense groups) shared Karabakh into 4 districts –

Varanda, Dizak, Khachen and Jraberd. Each of these four districts, creating a temporary national

government, sent a representative to Shushi; thus at the British mission it was formed a center, which

transmitted the directives and instructions of the mission to the local authorities.

THE REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN –

TURKISH CLONE WITH CONGENITAL EXPANSIONISM.

The Azerbaijani state was created by the Turks in the image and likeness of The Ottoman Empire. Its

aggressive, expansionist policy towards the Armenians is a direct consequence and manifestation of the

nature of the state, created by newly arrived conquerors from Asia.

The policy of genocide and ethnic cleansing, which was carried out in the empire towards almost all

enslaved nations, with particular strength and in the most complete and brutal form was conducted

against the Armenians. It is due to the fact, that the Ottoman Empire, once comprised huge areas of

Asia, Africa and Europe, by this time had already lost many of its possessions – Greece, Bulgaria,

Romania and the Balkan countries. The Armenians raised the issue of their release from the Turkish

yoke the last (except for the Kurds).

In these historical conditions in the Ottoman Empire arose encouraged by the Zionists aggressive

Turkish nationalism in the form of Turkism and Pan-Turkism. The first and fundamental purpose of the

political program of Pan-Turkism was the creation of the new Turkish state in the territory of the Iranian

province of Azerbaijan and in the Eastern part of the South Caucasus, which was the subject of Russia,

and where there were settled newly arrived nomadic and semi-nomadic Turkic speaking tribes officially

called in Russia ''Caucasian Tatars''.

To achieve this pan-Turkic goal The Ottoman Empire entered into the World War against Russia with

Germany.

Towards achieving this goal there were the Armenians, who inhabited the Eastern vilayets of The

Ottoman Empire itself (Western Armenia) and the territories of Eastern Armenia belonging to Russia.

The liquidation of that obstacle was the main political motive of the monstrous crime: the full and

universal extermination of the Armenian population of the so-called ''Turkish'' Armenia in 1915-1923.

For the same purpose the Turks transferred the policy of genocide of the Armenians in the confines of

the South Caucasus.

Taking adventure the collapse of the Russian Empire and the treachery of the Bolsheviks, who

concluded the infamous Brest-Litovsk treaty with Germany and its allies, the Turks occupied a part of

the South Caucasus destroying with the ''Caucasian Tatars'' the Armenian population of the occupied

territories.

Breaking the Brest-Litovsk treaty, the Turks moved to Baku to help the Caucasian Turks who had

declared ''independence''. By occupying on the way Nakhijevan and other areas of Northern Armenia

that never belonged to them, they began to turkize them.

One of the objects of the territorial claims of Azerbaijan was Karabakh. The territory of Karabakh was a

part of the Armenian state as one of its areas for centuries, and after the destruction of the Armenian

kingdom that territory was under the rule of the Persian shah for several centuries and was ruled by the

semi-dependent Armenian Meliks.

According to the treaty of Gulistan in 1813, later commuted by the Treaty of Turkmenchay of 1828,

the Karabakh Khanate was given over the Russian rule. The independent republic of Armenia, defending

the territorial integrity of its people, of course, was based on the fact that the Armenians, who

constituted the 95 percent of the population of Nagorno Karabakh, achieve reunification within its

national state on the base of the inalienable right of peoples to free self-determination.

As the Azerbaijani state emerged in 1918, it didn't have initial international-legal title. Which was

represented and still is represented as state territory of Azerbaijan was nothing else than a province of

the Persian first and then the Russian state and neither the Persian Khanate, nor the Russian provinces

weren't built on the principle of nationality. Even in Elizavetpol province, formed in 1866 from former

Persian Khanates – Ganja, Karabakh and Shaki and also two Magals the Turks were only a half of the

population - 55.96 percent, while the Armenians were 35.43 percent. The incorrectness of the

references to the border of the former Russian provinces is confirmed by the fact that Azerbaijan itself

claimed all the provinces of Trans-Caucasus, including Tiflis and Erivan. The last along with Nakhijevan

Khanate was formally annexed to Russia as a part of the ancient Armenia and had state and legal status

of ''Armenian region'' in Russia.

By stating claims to Karabakh, The Republic of Azerbaijan has never been able to subdue Karabakh to

his power even with regular help of the Turkish army.

About the circumstances of the creation of the genocidal Azerbaijani State by the Turks and about its

policy against the Armenians, reports, in particular, the document of the Digest, in which it is set forth

the opinion of B. Baykov1 - the contemporary and participant of these events, the agent of the Russian

National Council in Baku in 1918-1919 years.

''The Azerbaijani government, - he writes, - least of all knew what to do towards the government of

Baku occupied by them and with those areas to which it had spread sovereignty of its ''newly appeared''

republic. Apparently only two tasks were clear to it: the depending of the struggle with the Armenians

and implanting of its nationalism.

«…» To imagine clearly who was the author of the origin of this new state and what kind of goals were

pursued, one must imagine clearly what represented that new republic in the light of history. Both of

these provinces [Baku and Elizavetpol] never constituted a single political body. They also never had a

common name, and particularly the name ''Azerbaijan''.

As the author notes, ''the appropriation by this new state the geographical term referring to the part

of another country and entirely another terrain'', to the right bank of the Aras, was ''one of the main

reasons why Persia didn't want to recognize that new republic for a long time and to have any

diplomatic intercourse with it''2.

As ''it would be impossible to seek historical justification of the growing state, and there were less

reasons to christen in a name that didn't belong to it'', the author indicates what political conditions

made possible the birth of the new state on the territory of Russia, which was ''weakened after the war

and fell apart by Bolsheviks''. He writes: ''The tasks of purely military Germany and Turkey coincided

with the growth of pan-Islamism and pan-Turanism… Turkey, which was in the Germany's orbit of

omnipotence, appeared a huge power as a part of the pre-war Turkey, Caucasus and Trans Caucasus,

Lower Volga region, Transcaspia, Turkestan (with Khiva and Bukhara), Persia, etc. The Turkic nationalists,

in most the political adventurers like Enver Pasha or home breed politicians like Tolchbashev, the

deceased Khan Khoyshi and others, imagined attractive prospects to play in the state people of this or

another scale.

The author notes the ideology of Armenia phobia which manifested at the official level; ''it was

declared definitely a war against the Armenians. They didn't even hide that neither any Armenian

initiative, nor competition in any field of activity will not be tolerated. Some chauvinists, such as Dr.

Khosrov bey Sultanov (Minister of Agriculture and State Property) and others openly said that in

Azerbaijan or it will not be any Armenian, or they will be in the position of the Yurkish rayah (creatures

without rights); the Armenians have nothing to do here, let them go to their place'', -said the gentlemen

from the number of furious nationalists''.

____________________

1. Док. № 229. (Doc. № 229)

2. Док. № 229 (выделено нами. — Ю. Б.). (Doc. № 229 (emphasized by us. – Y, B,).

Practically this state ideology was expressed not only in the ''plunder of the Armenian property, not

even national (charitable institutions, etc.), but private''. Not only the flats were requisitioned by purely

Bolshevik methods, but there were also plundered the commercial and industrial enterprises owned by

the Armenians.

There were resumed ''mass beatings of the Armenians, implemented by the mob, restrained by

nobody… One by one began to disappear without a trace many prominent Armenians… The passage of

the Armenians by the railway line wasn’t safe; the Armenians were removed from trains, pulled out of

the carriages and were shot. Many Armenians were taken out from Baku to other areas of Azerbaijan, or

they were imprisoned or were sent to forced labor in unhealthy areas''1.

____________________

1. Там же (выделено нами. — Ю. Б.). (The same place. - emphasized by us. – Y, B,).

N 226

THE VIEW OF FIELD MARSHAL HINDENBURG

ABOUT THE TURKISH POLICY OF GENOCIDE OF THE ARMENIANS.

The horrible events that took place throughout the Ottoman Empire and to the end of the war were

spread also in the Armenian part of Transcaucasia, were presented by the Turks simply as an internal

affair. <…>

Turkey’s participation in the war exposed the darkest sides of the Turkish government, i.e. the

treatment of the Turks against the Armenians. The Armenian Question… was related to the Pan-Turkic,

as well as the Pan-Islamic ideology. An attempt to solve this issue was accompanied by racial hatred and

religious enmity… Turkey pursued a policy of annihilation of the Armenians.

P. von Hindenburg, Field Marshal. Aus Meinem Leben, Leipzig: Hirzel, 1934. P. 168-169.

N 227

FROM THE REPORT OF THE HEAD OF THE GERMAN MILITARY

MISSION IN THE CAUCASUS, GENERAL KRESS VON FRESSENSTEIN IN THE

FOREIGN MINISTRY OF GERMANY ABOUT THE DIFFUSION OF THE

TURKISH POLICY OF GENOCIDE OF THE ARMENIANS ON NAGORNO-KARABAKH.

Here I give the description of the present situation in Armenia, based on my own observations and on

the conversations with authoritative people. At present Armenia is surrounded by the Turks, except for

Erivan and suburbs, and it is restricted in a small mountainous terrain, which is not suitable for life at all.

The Turks didn’t keep the terms of the Treaty of Batum (made up by them) with regard to the

Armenians. They occupied a number of areas on the other side of the border, the loss of which is very

painful for Armenia, as they took away from it the last fit fertile areas.

At present Turkey wants to launch an attack from Azerbaijan to the Armenian populated Karabakh to

destroy its population under the pretext, that the local Armenians are aggressive against Mussulmans.

Turkish policy is clear. The Turks have an intention to destroy the Armenians. Armenians are persecuted,

wherever it is possible, they provoke them and get reasons for new attacks.

Deutschland und Armenien, 1914-1918. Sammlung diplomatischer Aktenstucke. Nrsg. und eingel. von

Dr. Johannes Lepsius. Potsdam, 1919, N 426.

N 228

FROM THE REPORT OF THE HEAD OF THE GERMAN MISSION IN THE CAUCASUS,

GENERAL VON KRESSENSTEIN IN THE FOREIGN MINISTRY OF

GERMANY ABOUT THE INVASION OF THE TURKS IN KARABAKH.

Tbilisi, August 4, 1918

<…> Recently the Turks tried to invade into the purely Armenian province of Karabakh from the

Azerbaijani side and to disarm its population. If we don’t prevent them from doing that, then one can’t

avoid the fact that the highlanders of Karabakh, capable to defend themselves, would fight against the

Mussulmans.

The Armenian Genocide during the First World War/W. and Sigrid Gust (ed.) in cooperation with Taner

Akcam: Documents from German State Archives. (A-34415. DE/PA-AA/R14104. DuA Dok. 424 (re.gk).

1918-08-15-DF-001.)

N 229

FROM THE MEMOIRS OF THE AGENT OF RUSSIAN NATIONAL

COUNCIL IN BAKU IN 1918-1919 ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES

OF THE CREATION OF THE GENOCIDAL AZERBAIJANI STATE

BY THE TURKS AND ABOUT ITS POLICY TOWARDS THE ARMENIANS.

The government of Azerbaijan knew least of all what to do in regard to the governing of occupied Baku

and those areas, to which it has spread the sovereignty of its newly appeared republic. Apparently only

two problems were clear to it: deepening of the struggle with Armenians and the implanting of its

nationalism.

I'll start with the latter: The National Assembly in April or May 1918, which declared about the

separation of Russia's two provinces – Baku and Yelizavetpol and about the formation of independent

Republic of Azerbaijan with the main city of Baku, was formed by separating from the deputies of the

Transcaucasion Sejm all the Musulmans (they were, it seems, all in all 42), and as in the number of

Musulmans there were also representatives of the region of Batumi, Adjara, Erivan province and other

places, then those people also, who didn't have any relation to the territory of the ''new found'' state,

appeared in the number of its legislators. To imagine clearly who was the author of the idea of that new

state and what kind of goals were pursued, one should clearly understand the meaning of that new

republic in history. These two provinces never formed a united political body. They never had any name

incommon, especially the name ''Azerbaijan''. By exactly this name is known one of the Northern

provinces of modern Persia, which is a part of the Southern borders of the Trans Caucasus, partly

adjoining to the province of Baku, to the whole Yelizavetpol Governorate and to a part of Erivan

Governorate.

The appropriation by this new state the geographical term referring to a part of another state and to

another area altogether was one of the main reasons, why Persia didn't want to recognize this new

republic for a long time and to have any diplomatic relation with it. In reality the territory of the two

governorates (Baku, which beforehand was called Near Caspian, then Shemakhan and Yelizavetpol)

quite arbitrarily named ''The Republic of Azerbaijan'', was once a series of vassal provinces belonging to

Persia and collapsed into a number of Khanates dependent on Persia: Quba, Baku, Lenkoran (Talysh),

Shirvan (Shemakha), Sheki (Nukhi), Karabakh (Shushi) and Ganja (later Yelizavetpol).

All these Khanates gradually, over a number of years and as a result of long wars between Russia and

Persia by peace treaties and tractates (as well as Erivan Khanate) passed into the possession of Russia.

All these semi-independent wild states, which gave a lot of trouble both Russia itself and Georgia,

which was given over to Russia early in the XIX century, repeatedly plundered their neighbors and their

metropolis Persia, and they not only weren't connected to each other by anything, but also feuded and

fought with each other. It is clear, that under these conditions it would be impossible to search historical

justification of the newly originating state, and there were even less reasons to baptize it with a name

which doesn't belong to it.

The birth of that new state over a wide area of weakened after the war and destroyed by Bolsheviks

Russia is explained on one side by the fact, that purely military tasks of Germany and Turkey coincided

with the growth of pan-Islamism and Panturanism, and on the other side with the most convenient for

any separatist achievements of the new ideology first proclaimed by W. Wilson, and then by the

Petrograd Soviet of Deputies, by exactly notorious formula of ''self-determination of nations''.

Turkey, which was in the Germany's orbit of omnipotence, appeared a huge power as a part of the

pre-war Turkey, Caucasus and Trans Caucasus, Lower Volga region, Transcaspia, Turkestan (with Khiva

and Bukhara), Persia, etc. Turkish nationalists in most the political adventurers like Enver Pasha or home

bred politicians like Tolchbashev, the deceased Khan Khoyski and others, imagined attractive prospects

to play in state people of this or another scale.

In the creation of The Republic of Azerbaijan the leaders of ''Musavat'' party had active role (by the

help of the Turks) calling itself ''The Turkic party of Musavat''. It is they who proclaimed this or that

political acts. But the nation was silent.

The Azerbaijani government devised still in the spring of 1918 set as one of its periodical tasks the

nationalization of the organs of government. This problem, as we'll see subsequently was quite

overwhelming for Azerbaijan. Nevertheless, they didn't hide the tendencies to eradicate the Russian

spirit, in spite of all assurances to the contrary.

It was declared definitely a war against the Armenians. They didn't even hide that neither any

Armenian initiative, nor competition in any field of activity will not be tolerated. Some chauvinists, such

as Dr. Khosrov bey Sultanov (Minister of Agriculture and State property) and others openly said that in

Azerbaijan either it will not be any Armenian, or they will be in the position of Turkish rayah (creatures

without rights); the Armenians have nothing to do here, let them go to their place'', said the gentlmen

from the number of furious nationalists''.

From the outset they began the plundering of the Armenian property not even national (charitable

institutions, etc.), but private. The new huge theatre of brothers Mailov was declared a state property

without giving any reward to the owners. The best typography of Chr. A. Verishev in the city is declared

a state property and also without gratuity of the owner. Examples, such as the above mentioned, we

could name a lot. There were plundered the commercial and industrial enterprises owned by the

Armenians, and not only those, which had been actually left without owners and managers from the

Armenians, who fled out of fear of violence expected during the capture of the city, but also the once,

owners of which were present.

I personally had to intervene for the property of one company: a very large company, essentially

Russian, as the majority of the shares belonged to Russian Volga merchants, was represented by

Armenian Managing Director, who had fled from Baku on the night of September 1. Taking all the

appropriate documents for that occasion, I went to B. Kh. Javanshir, Minister of Internal Affairs, as well

as Trade and Industry, and required to take measures for the protection of the multimillion estates

(warehouses, Jetties, ships and so on). B, Kh. Javanshir, learning that the major shareholder is

Commerce Adviser I. F. Skrepinski, refused me in my petition on the ground that Skrepinski is interested

in a lot of Armenian affairs, and is a friend of the Armenians, and therefore ''The Azerbaijani government

can't render him any assistance. I cite this case as a bright example of the attitude that existed among

the leaders of the politics of the newly appeared ''Azerbaijan'' towards the Armenians. The apartments

of the rich men, predominantly of the Armenians, were requisitioned with all the furniture for the

apartments of ministers and other senior government officials. In essence the Tatars who were the

representatives of the authority to the Armenians and to their property, expressed purely Bolshevik

approach. But even more terrible were the methods which the Tatar authorities undertook to destroy

personally the Armenian bourgeoisie and the intellectuals.

The mass beating of the Armenians, implemented by the mob, restrained by nobody, in the first days

of the occupation of Baku (the first days of September, 1918) were officially ceased as a result of a

number of speeches of both local foreign consuls and public figures of other nationalities (Russian,

Jewish) and under the influence of the data received from Tiflis about the public speeches occurred

there (including the speech of the City Council).

One by one began to disappear without a trace many prominent Armenians: longtime city agent D. D.

Harutyunov (Deputy Mayor and a member of the Administrative Board), the doctors T. Zakharin and

aghamirzov (who had only Tatar practice), engineer S. Amirov and many others left their homes and

never came back. And they all were famous people, literally known throughout the city. In particular,

being connected by personal friendship with S. Amirov (fellow in Kadet party) I undertook active

searches: the Minister of Internal Affairs B. KH. Javanshir, whom I visited personally, responded in

complete ignorance and advised to apply to the Minister of Justice, and when the later said the same,

then B. Kh. Javanshir told me, that he has no doubt, that the Turkish military authorities should be

aware of everything. Musral Pasha, to whom I applied with deceased A. Leontovich, listening to us,

asked to believe him, that neither he, nor other Turkish military authorities resolutely have any relation

with that, and advised not to believe the Azerbaijanis, who took the habit of attributing everything that

is not profitable for them, to the Turks. Later we found out that S Amirov is arrested and sits in jail at the

head of the political police God-Eddin-Bey (Turkish officer, who acceded to Azerbaijan and is the right

hand of the above mentioned Javanshir). This time B. Kh. Javanshir, without having any opportunity to

deny his close relationship to the arrest of S. Amirov, by shipping on a friendly tone, said to me and A.

Leontovich: ''And why you, Russians, interfere in Armenian affairs'', and promised to take steps to find

out the reasons for the arrest of Amirov. But a few days later we were informed that Amirov and the

rest Armenians who were kept with him, were shot.

The passage of the Armenians by the railway line wasn't safe; the Armenians were removed from

trains, pulled out of the carriages and were shot. Many Armenians were taken out from Baku to other

areas of Azerbaijan, or they were imprisoned or were sent to forced labor in unhealthy areas.

The Armenians were completely forgotten: they couldn't rely on their national mission. The great part

of the people was sitting at their homes, or those who could tried to go out of Baku.

From the foregoing it is clear that the representatives of other nationalities also couldn't help them

much. The lacking culture nationalism of Azerbaijan, which was celebrating its victory, created a heavy,

poisonous atmosphere.

B. L. Baikov, Memoirs of the revolution in the South Caucasus (1918-1920 years). Publ. In the

collection: ''Archives of the Russian revolution'', volume IX, Berlin 1923 (Published by G. V. Hessen). See

also: ''The Voice of Armenia'', April 6, 2005. (Emphasized by us. – Y. B.).

N 274

THE NEWSPAPER ''THE CAUCASIAN WORD'' ABOUT THE TREACHEROUS

POLICY OF THE BRITISH COMMAND,

WHO ACTED JUST LIKE AZERBAIJAN WANTS TOWARDS

THE ARMENIAN POPULATION OF ARTSAKH.

March 21, 1919.

«…»

With the victory of the Allies Karabakh sighed quietly for a moment. The Allies won, it means, along

with the great allies won and it – the small, but brave ally…

However…

The diplomatic games and intrigues started. And those who were Turkish mercenary agents for ages,

who pondered and created the Baku massacre and the infernal pits, whose hands are stained with the

innocent blood of the passengers taken of the trains, and the peasants, taken from the carts, they, the

well-known members of the huge predatory organization, with the knowledge and consent of the Allied

command, are now trying to achieve what they couldn't achieve by the force of the thief with the help

of the Turkish scimitar and Khoy and Jafarov ''kyasaraha''. Today Sultanov, instead of being imprisoned

in the dock, is appointed the Governor of Karabakh and with the help of the allies tries to take in his

''paternal'' favor that land. And the Allied Command, instead of taking into account the unanimous,

clear, definite and strongly-expressed will of the population to join Armenia or to remain independent

and free from the care of Azerbaijan until the final determination of the question, on the one hand,

weakens and sows discord by negotiations and promises in the leading circles of Karabakh, and on the

other hand, winks at that fact how Azerbaijan, concentrating military forces and ammunition and

breaking the armistice, takes important strategic points… It is necessary to put an end to this tense,

temporizing state and allow the working peasantry to begin its peaceful work. Or to unite with Armenia,

or to establish a solely British control, or to recognize the independence of Karabakh temporarily – here

are the three ways which are acceptable for the population of Karabakh and one of which must

immediately choose the Allied command. The delay would be a crime, and the diplomatic games and

concessions to the desires of Azerbaijan can cause new complications, the responsibility of which falls,

in any case, not on the population of Karabakh.

Ashkhatavor

''Caucasian word'', March 21, 1919. Publ. in the collection: Nagorno-Karabakhin 1918-1923 Yerevan,

1992, doc. 81. (Emphasized by us. -Y. B.).

N 275

RUSSIAN PUBLIC FIRUGE AND PUBLISIST

S. GORODETSKI ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF KARABAKH

FOR THE ARMENIANS.

March 23, 1919.

Every country, every nation has its own cherished stronghold. When the history of a

nation happily formed, it becomes the center of cultural and political life. When the fate

pursues the nation, it becomes the stronghold of the national life, the island of hope,

the key to revival. Exactly the latter role has played for the Armenian people the

mountainous region of Karabakh.

The nature itself has given it a huge importance. There, in the towering heights of

Karabakh, which is the continuation of Kars and Sevan highlands, for nearly two

thousand years the Armenian nation endured the onslaught of nomadic tribes,

preserving their culture, defending their national identity.

Being single ethnographically, economically and in language, Karabakh became the

stronghold of Armenia, its Eastern flank. It was such in the past, so it is now and so it will

be always, as it isn't possible to defend the heart of Armenia, Ararat valley, without

possessing Karabakh. Repeatedly, throughout the history, the waves of invasion broke

against the strongholds of Karabakh, soaking in it only along the river valleys, but they

didn't stay long there too. Repeatedly the Melikdoms of Syunik principality, as Karabakh

was called in ancient times, drove the enemy on their own. The history repeats itself,

and the last time it happened in our eyes.

The nature and history have created a strongly worked type in Karabakh. Scattered

over the world, the people of Karabakh can easily be recognized everywhere. Wide

power, unconditional courage, tend to risk, self-confidence, a kind of stubbornness,

sincere persistence, patriarchal in family life – here are the nice features of Karabakh

people, which is like a concentration of the ancient Armenian prowess, faded from the

cruelties of history and preserved in its pure form in Karabakh. A tall, sturdy nation, who

went to the mountains to save their lives, strengthened in the mountain air and

protected themselves from the infections that occur to the inhabitants of valleys.

The national memory of the Armenians should remember a lot of great names of

Karabakh people. There is no field, in which they haven't shown their enterprise and

talent. Politics, literature, social activity, trade – all served as the arena of their work.

Examples could be cited a lot…

Constrained by its culture and way of life, Karabakh in our days also doesn't blur its

ancient glory. Bringing together their forces, as in the days of Tamerlane, the Meliks

defended the independence of Karabakh. The Shushi episode didn't change the overall

picture of the defeat of Nuri Pasha, and the line of defense essentially remained

untouchable, as in the times of former invasions.

Such is the significance of Karabakh for Armenia. Surely, if it lost Karabakh, the idea of

self-determination would be severely restricted. And conversely, possessing Karabakh,

Armenia will have a rich flow of energetic cultural force, which overflowing on the

ravaged area of Armenia, will fertilize them culturally and thus will complete the

glorious history of Karabakh.

Now every nation is looking for its own. All future of revived nations depends on that if

they find in themselves enough, so to say, yeast of their national culture. In such

conditions all the centers, where for whatever reasons was concentrated cultural life,

get exclusive importance. The same value has Karabakh for Armenia.

''Caucasian Word'', 23.III.1919.