Where did the Azerbaijanis come from? Who are you really, mysterious Azerbaijanis? 19th century explorations
IN last days Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev repeats the same words at every corner: “Nagorno-Karabakh is the historical territory of Azerbaijan.” Meanwhile, the Republic of Azerbaijan itself first appeared on the world map only in 1918. At that time, taking advantage of the collapse Russian Empire, the Turkish invasion of Transcaucasia regular army created a Turkic state called Azerbaijan in the east of the region. 56 years later, by the way, in 1974, Turkey will repeat the successful experience of creating a Turkic state, as a result of which Europe will receive another hotbed of tension - Northern Cyprus.
But maybe the state of Azerbaijan existed before 1918, and simply had a different name? History shows: no. The territory, now perceived under the artificial name of the Azerbaijan Republic, never constituted a single administrative unit and at different periods of history, in whole or in part, belonged to or was divided between different states: Media, Caucasian Albania, Iran, Türkiye, Armenia, Russia, USSR…
Or maybe Ilham Aliyev means that a single ethnic monolith of Transcaucasian Turks historically compactly inhabited the territory modern Azerbaijan? Does he mean that the Transcaucasian Turks did not have a state, but they had a homeland? And again the answer will be negative.
The very concept of Motherland is absent in the language of the Transcaucasian Turks. “Mother's yurt” - this is how the Turkic word Anayurdu is translated, this is literally the translation of the word that Transcaucasian Turks use to denote the word Motherland. And their close and distant ancestors had to sew these yurts in the vast expanses from Transbaikalia to Constantinople.
In the process of centuries-long nomadism, the first waves of Turks arrived in the Caucasus in the 13th - 14th centuries, and this process continued until the 18th century inclusive. They managed to exterminate, destroy, and evict many indigenous peoples known from ancient times from the region and gain a foothold on their land. The relict remnants of these peoples: the Kryz, Khinaluk, Udin, Budukh and others, part of the single Lezgin ethnic group, still live in the most high-mountainous regions of Azerbaijan, because it was there that they once found salvation from warlike nomads.
A new wave of annexation occurred after the proclamation of the Azerbaijan Republic in 1918, when this political entity, with the help of the Turkish army, conquered the territories of the indigenous Talysh, Lezgins, Avars, Tsakhurs in the region... All these peoples defended themselves to the best of their ability from the aggression of Azerbaijan: the Talysh even proclaimed their own state , which existed for over a year, but eventually fell under the blows of the Azerbaijani-Turkish army. Azerbaijan then tried to conquer Nagorno-Karabakh, where the first nomadic Turks, later called Azerbaijanis, appeared only in the 17th century, but the Armenians of the region managed to defend themselves from aggression.
In the fall of 1920, units of the Soviet Red Army entered Artsakh. And on July 5, 1921, the ancient Armenian region was included within the borders of Soviet Azerbaijan. For the current reader this may seem incredible, but such were the realities of Bolshevism, the decision to include the Armenian region within the boundaries of Soviet Azerbaijan was made by the party body of a third state: the Caucasian Bureau of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). Imagine if the Socialist Party of France decided to transfer, for example, German Bavaria to, say, the Czech Republic! Absurd, of course, but it is precisely this absurd and voluntaristic decision of a third party party body that to this day is the only document with which Azerbaijan and its President Aliyev “justify” their territorial claims to the primordially Armenian region.
During the years of Soviet power, the territory of Artsakh was under the jurisdiction of Soviet Union, residents of the Armenian autonomy underwent mandatory military service in the ranks of the USSR army, state supervision on the territory of Artsakh was carried out by the NKAO prosecutor appointed by the Prosecutor General of the USSR. Residents of Artsakh were citizens of the USSR (there was a single citizenship in the Soviet Union). The interests of the autonomous region in the highest legislative body of the USSR - the Supreme Council of the USSR - were represented by deputies of the Supreme Council of the USSR elected in Artsakh. They were elected precisely as representatives of a national-state entity in a federal state, which, according to the Constitution, was the USSR. Thus, we have the right to state that the Armenian SSR, located within the Azerbaijan SSR autonomous region was part of the Soviet Union.
On August 30, 1991, the Azerbaijan SSR announced the start of the process of secession from the USSR. On October 18, 1991, Azerbaijan adopted the Constitutional Act “On Independence”. However, Artsakh no longer existed within Azerbaijan. On September 2, 1991, based on international law and the laws of the USSR, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic declared its sovereignty.
The legislative body of Azerbaijan declared the country's independence without taking into account the opinion of the population, that is, without a referendum. International law qualifies such actions as usurpation of power. The usurpation of power in Azerbaijan took place not only in regions densely populated by indigenous peoples (the south and north of the Azerbaijan Republic are inhabited mainly by Talysh, Lezgins, Avars, Tsakhurs), but also throughout the entire territory of the republic.
On the contrary, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic self-determined in full compliance with international law and the laws of the USSR, completing the sovereignization process with a popular referendum on December 10, 1991.
Artsakh was not part of the Azerbaijan Republic in 1918-20: Azerbaijan then failed to conquer the Armenian region.
Artsakh was not part of the Azerbaijani USSR: the Armenian region was part of a federal entity called the Soviet Union.
Artsakh is not and will not be part of the Azerbaijan Republic illegally proclaimed in 1991. Both of these public education spun off from the Soviet Union. The difference is that, unlike Azerbaijan, the NKR declared its statehood in full accordance with the law.
However, Azerbaijan attempted to annex the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic by launching large-scale aggression against it. The results of this aggression are well known: tens of thousands of dead, hundreds of thousands of internally displaced people, broken destinies, lost hopes...
Stating that “Azerbaijan is much stronger than Armenia” and, if the Republic of Artsakh does not agree to join Azerbaijan, the latter “will have to think about other ways to resolve the conflict,” Ilham Aliyev is simply blackmailing the world community. The President of Azerbaijan is not at all confident in the military superiority of the entity he heads over the Armenian states; rather, on the contrary, otherwise he would not fail to commit aggression, as was the case in 1988-94. However, Aliyev is convinced of Europe's sincere desire to see the Caucasus peaceful and prosperous. Aliyev also understands, and all his interviews confirm this, that the Caspian Sea basin is one of the alternative sources of hydrocarbon supplies to Europe. The resumption of hostilities will certainly become an almost insurmountable obstacle to the transportation of energy resources to Europe, which is what Aliyev is trying to blackmail in search of allies for political pressure on the Republic of Artsakh.
Well, I admit, Ilham Aliyev is right: in the event of renewed aggression against the Republic of Artsakh, oil and gas from Azerbaijan will indeed stop flowing anywhere. The Armenian side simply cannot allow the country at war with it to freely increase its economic capabilities. Even the President of Azerbaijan, who is still counting the number of losses in the ranks of Askerni in recent days, has no doubt about the capabilities and high moral combat readiness of the Republic Defense Army. He has no doubts, that’s why he blackmails. But not us, but the world community.
Ilham Aliyev is well aware of the presence of a significant Armenian community in the world, the emergence of which became possible as a result of the Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey. Hence his demagogic cry-question: “Imagine what will happen if Armenians try to self-determinate in all the countries of the world where they live. How many new Armenian states can be formed?” This poorly hidden, and even more stupid provocation can only be answered with mocking irony towards its author: “No more than Turkic.”
However, after today’s meetings in Sochi, the question of the continued existence of one of the Turkic states can be called into very serious doubt.
Levon MELIK-SHAHNAZARYAN
Arriving in Azerbaijan, you will find yourself in a country where the hot sun reigns and you can see magnificent buildings (be they architectural monuments or modern houses). And, without a doubt, you will be captivated by the Azerbaijanis, who are part of the family of Caucasian peoples and are rightfully proud of their history and culture, with their temperament. Without them it is impossible to imagine either the Caucasian flavor or the post-Soviet space itself.
Origin and history of the people
What they don’t tell about Azerbaijanis! Sometimes you can even hear the opinion that these people cannot be considered Caucasian, because they have something in common with the peoples of Asia. However, these are idle fictions. They are the indigenous people of the Caucasus, like those inhabiting this region.
Historians have come to the conclusion that the origin of the people is connected with immigrants from Caucasian Albania - big state, located in the eastern part of the Caucasus in II-I centuries to new era. Then the population of this country began to mix with the Huns, Cimmerians and others.
Persia also had a significant influence on the formation of the ethnic nation of Azerbaijanis. In the first centuries AD, Persia was ruled by the Sassanid dynasty, which expanded its influence into the eastern regions.
We must not forget about the later influence of the Seljuk Turks, who came to these lands in the 11th century. As a result, the local population was first subjected to the influence of Persian culture, and then to the process of Turkization. Thus, the Azerbaijani people have a rich history and it is closely connected with the history of neighboring states.
Turkic tribes constantly migrated throughout the region of Asia Minor, from the early Middle Ages to the 15th-16th centuries. All this could not but affect the local population, who only later start realize your ethnic identity. Some researchers believe that modern Azerbaijanis are the descendants of a specific tribe with Turkic roots.
This hypothesis is shattered by other evidence, including cultural heritage, as well as written sources. Therefore, today we can say that the appearance of Azerbaijanis was influenced by a variety of tribes - Arab, Turkic, Iranian.
And at the same time, they still remain an indigenous ethnic group of Transcaucasia, since their history has precisely Caucasian roots. This is proven by the numerous traditions and diverse customs of the Azerbaijanis, which find their origins both in Iranian and in.
In the 18th century, the powerful Persian Safavid dynasty ended, resulting in the formation of a number of khanates with a semi-independent status. At the head of these small Transcaucasian principalities were representatives of Azerbaijani local dynasties. However, they were never able to form into a single state, since they were still under strong influence m pers.
And later, already in XIX century, Russian-Persian military conflicts began, which led to the fact that they were delimited by their regions of residence. This border ran along the Araks River, as a result of which the northern parts of Azerbaijan fell under the influence of Russia, and the southern parts went to the Persians. And if earlier the Azerbaijani elites had a strong influence on the processes taking place in Persia, then after this this influence disappeared.
Historians admit that their statehood was formed only after the October Revolution and began to be created national republics. Soviet power gave modern borders and a state-legal basis.
When the USSR collapsed, all Soviet republics gained independence, including Azerbaijan. The date of independence is October 18.
Language and religious denomination
The Azerbaijani language is of Turkic origin; its formation was also influenced by Arabic and Persian languages. However, their language also has other phonetic connections - linguists find similarities in it with the Kumyk and even Uzbek languages.
Currently, Azerbaijani is spoken by about 99% of the country's residents. Since the same language is widespread in the north of Iran and Iraq, this brings ethnic groups together and allows for the accumulation of cultural ties.
As for their literary language, it was fully formed only after these territories were annexed to Russia. However, even before the Russian period of history, literary language Azerbaijanis gradually developed in Shirvan and southern regions Azerbaijan.
As for religion, the majority of them are Muslims. Almost 90% of those who profess Islam in Azerbaijan are Shiites, but those who consider themselves to be also live here. This is another manifestation of Persian influence.
The modern faith of Azerbaijanis can be very different, since the country has complete tolerance towards.
Here you can meet both Christians and followers of other religions. A person living in the territory of this country has the right to choose for himself which one to follow, and no one has the right to influence his beliefs.
Enos territorial issues
Since Azerbaijanis are a very diverse ethnic group, representatives of the people are found not only in this region, but also in other countries of the world. Moreover, the division of their lands between Russia and Persia has led to the fact that today there are between 15 and 20 million people living in Iran. This is much more than the population of Azerbaijan itself - about 10 million people live there, according to government statistics.
It was they who had a serious influence on the development of healthy nationalism in modern Iran. After the Second World War, residents of the Republic of Azerbaijan in the USSR and Azerbaijanis in Iran had the opportunity to communicate closely. This inner unity can still be seen today.
Azerbaijanis have close ties in Russia. In 2000, the Dagestani authorities included Azerbaijanis in the Republic of Dagestan, although this ethnic group here is classified as small in number. Basically they live in southern parts republic, namely in and its region they live the most. In the republic they make up no more than 5% (or even less) of the entire Dagestan population.
A serious conflict arose at one time between the Azerbaijanis and the Armenians; it concerned the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, located in the east of the Armenian Highlands. Historically, this territory belonged to, but the Paris Peace Conference in 1920 assigned this region to Azerbaijan.
Since then, the Azerbaijanis have considered Karabakh theirs, which led, after the collapse of the USSR, to a territorial conflict that resulted in full-fledged military action on both sides.
Only in 1994 did Armenia and Azerbaijan conclude a truce, although the tense situation in the region continues today. No matter how much the Azerbaijanis claim that they are the legal owners of Nagorno-Karabakh, they are not going to admit it.
Culture and traditions of the Azerbaijani people
Such a colorful people as the Azerbaijanis cannot but have their own culture - and it has its roots in. The cultural heritage includes not only their folk traditions, but also many crafts - carpet weaving has long been developed here, artistic treatment stone and bone, and gold items created by folk goldsmiths were also widely known.
Speaking about the culture of Azerbaijanis, one cannot help but recall such traditions as holidays and folk ritual performances. First of all, these are wedding customs. In many ways it is similar to those wedding rituals that are practiced by other Caucasian ethnic groups. Not only regular matchmaking is common here, but also preliminary matchmaking, during which the parties enter into an initial agreement on a future alliance.
In many ways, Azerbaijani weddings resemble classical ritual ones. Here the bride's face is covered with a scarf or a thin veil, and the wedding feast is held both in the house of the groom and in the house of the bride.
The Azerbaijanis are always no less bright. You can’t do without national costumes, as well as songs and fiery dances.
Azerbaijani folk music always uses ethnic musical instruments. And modern motifs still resemble in many ways, which is why the songs of Azerbaijanis have a special tonality and are largely stylized after the creativity of the ashugs.
The national flavor can always be traced in. If we consider the folk dance of Azerbaijanis, we cannot fail to note its unique rhythmicity. They can be either overtly rhythmic or smooth.
It is on strict adherence to rhythm that the entire pattern of the dance, its structure, is built. Those dances that have roots in ancient traditions, often bear the names of plants or animals characteristic of Azerbaijan. There are many videos of them energetically performing their songs.
Speaking about the national costumes of Azerbaijanis, it is necessary to mention their correlation with the cultural and geographical location of the region itself. Men wear a caftan-arkhalyg, and under it they put on an undershirt. A man's suit also includes outerwear for cold weather - after all, in the foothills of the Caucasus in winter, only a burka or a fur coat made of tanned lamb skins can save you.
If you look at the photos of Azerbaijanis, you can see that they often wear a Circassian coat with gazyrs.
The women's costume is no less bright and original. These are the top and bottom dresses, as well as the obligatory veil. A mandatory component of women's clothing has always been a belt or sash - such belts could be richly decorated with gold and embroidery, which could say a lot about the status of a woman.
Another custom concerning the appearance of women is the traditional coloring of hair and nails with henna. Henna dyeing is also a legacy of the influence of Persian culture.
Azerbaijanis in Russia today
Currently, Azerbaijanis are settled far beyond the borders of Azerbaijan (it is worth remembering the Iranian representatives of this ethnic group). Today their total number is up to 35 million people. They can meet in a variety of countries, including not only the states of the post-Soviet space, but also Turkey, Afghanistan, and European countries.
As for Azerbaijanis living in Russia, in Moscow alone, according to rough estimates, there are about 60 thousand of them. They also live in Siberia, where the first place in their numbers is occupied by Yugra and the Tyumen region.
To the question of why Azerbaijanis feel at home everywhere, we can answer that these people have always been open, cheerful and very friendly. They expect the same attitude towards themselves.
Composer Uzeir Gadzhibekov, writer Chingiz Abdullayev, film director Rustam Ibragimbekov and many others.
Considering it as a great community of different ethnic groups, you understand that Azerbaijanis are an integral part of the peoples of this beautiful mountainous region. And without Azerbaijan, the history of the entire Caucasus will be incomplete.
It simply forces us to curtsy towards Azerbaijan, so as not to offend the eternal rival countries in the region!
In addition, the origin of Azerbaijanis is not as simple as one might think!
Artificial people
Like Mordovians, Azerbaijanis is a modern term that was used to generically refer to the peoples of the Caucasus who lived in the province of Iran of the same name, "Iranian Azerbaijan" and around Lake Urmia.
It became widely used when the USSR included half of “greater Azerbaijan” into its composition, calling this entity the Azerbaijan SSR.
Such a primitive approach made it possible to classify this complex ethnic group into one unit, but completely ignored the numerous differences.
After all, even the population of Azerbaijan and its Iranian part is quite different.
Initially, the region of Atropatene (Northern Media) was called Azerbaijan, which translates as “land of Aturpata,” which occupied the south of present-day Azerbaijan and part of Iranian Azerbaijan.
Aturpat - "keeper of the fire" Iranian name of Zoroastrian origin, who was the legendary king of these places. Actually, with the arrival of the Indo-Europeans here, the history of Azerbaijan begins.
Components of the Azerbaijani people
Fire-worshipping Zoroastrians became the main population of these lands, assimilating the autochthonous tribes of the Caucasus, close to the ancient Europeans. Until now, Azerbaijan is called the “country of fire,” although it has long been professing Islam, and not the cult of Ahura Mazda.
The fertile lands attracted those who wanted easy money; soon the Scythians, Massagetae and related Parthians would appear here, and then the Turks: Oguzes, Huns, Khazars.
The last ones broke ethnic history region, making the Turkic rather than the Iranian element dominant, as was previously the case.
The Arab conquest and forced Islamization of the country further strengthened Azerbaijan's connection with the world of Islam.
Both the Turks, the Arabs, and later the Mongols will profess Islam, which means the Azerbaijani peoples will constantly fight under the flags of different caliphates, carrying the faith or simply fighting for other people’s interests.
The Iranian population and its cultural paradigm increasingly dissolved and disappeared into Turkic world, this was finally consolidated during the heyday of the Ottoman Empire, where one of the Turkish clans, the Seljuks, directly descends from the descendants of a mixed population of Turks, remnants of the Massagetae and the population of modern Azerbaijan.
Azerbaijanis, as a people, emerged as a result of long historical development, the gradual consolidation of local ancient tribes (Albanians, Udins, Caspians, Talyshs, etc.) with Turkic-speaking tribes that arrived in different periods - Huns, Oguzes, Kipchaks, etc. - and According to the scientific opinion, the replacement of the indigenous languages of the population with the Turkic spoken language here dates back to the 11th-13th centuries.
In turn, the Turkic-speaking tribes were quite diverse in their ethnic components, uniting many other, partly more ancient tribes, which subsequently participated in the ethnogenesis of not only Azerbaijanis, but also a number of other Turkic-speaking peoples.
S. Gadzhieva (famous Dagestan ethnographer)
For a long time, the border zone between Iran and the Ottoman port was also the border zone between the Turkic and Iranian parts of the Azerbaijani people.
But in the 19th century, it became completely blurred.
Geneticists' opinion
Hadji Murat, although not Azerbaijani
Geneticists like to confuse things.
This is what happened with the Azerbaijanis. According to their data, the genetic trace of the Turks is quite weak and belonged to a narrow group of men, probably the elite of the Turks, who recruited harems among local women.
But the majority of Azerbaijanis have haplotypes of the autochthonous peoples of the Caucasus, which emphasizes their significant role in the formation of the people.
The distribution of the R1B group and G, typical of the Middle East, is also significant.
But the share of Iranian R1A is quite modest...
This refutes the opinion about the high share of Persians in the genesis of Azerbaijanis.
Anthropology about Azerbaijanis
Some of anthropological types Azerbaijan
Azerbaijanis are Caucasians of the Mediterranean and Pontic types, with an almost total predominance of dark eyes and hair.
- head shape is long,
- average and above average height,
- Asthenic build and accelerated metabolism predominate.
The elongated head of Azerbaijanis is perhaps the main hallmark, since others Caucasian peoples broadheads. This is associated with the opinion that the Indo-Europeans of Iran were long-headed, but geneticists deny their significant contribution.
The Brockhaus and Efron dictionary calls Azerbaijanis Turks by language and Iranians by race
Linguists' opinion
Here the role of language specialists is not very significant: Azerbaijanis speak a Turkic language, Oghuz group, with a strong influence of languages of the Kipchak group (Iranian).
Most likely, this is a second language that the Azerbaijanis adopted from the Turkic conquerors, but no data has been preserved about their original language.
So who did the Azerbaijanis come from?
Summarizing all the data: Azerbaijanis are a repeatedly mixed people.
Initial substrate from aborigines of the Caucasus received first Indo-Aryan influence from Media to Parthia, and then Turkic influence. The latter had a decisive impact on the language and religion of the people, but had a rather weak effect on the anthropology of the population!
Since the closest morphological analogies of the Caspian population group are noted among the population of Afghanistan and Northern India, the ancestors of the Azerbaijanis should be sought among those ancient peoples who simultaneously gave rise to the Nuristanis and many peoples of Northern India...
But even in the absence of paleoanthropological data, somatological materials indicate that the immediate ancestors of the Azerbaijani people must be sought among the ancient peoples of Western Asia and that in the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijanis, connections in the southeastern direction are decisive.
Contact with peoples who spoke Turkic languages and the associated transition to Turkic speech did not have any noticeable impact on the formation of the anthropological characteristics of the Azerbaijani people
V. Alekseev (Russian anthropologist)
Today's Azerbaijanis are culturally and linguistically close to the Turks, but by origin they are not to a lesser extent close to the most ancient peoples of the Caucasus and the Middle East.
AZERI OR TURKI?
So, without national self-identification there is no national ideology. Before we try to form a national idea, we need to firmly decide on our self-name and ethnicity. In this sense, we have little choice. There are only two real options from which to choose.
1. AZERBAIJANI (AZERBAYCANLI). If we form a national ideology based on the ethnonym “Azerbaijani,” which appeared on Stalin’s initiative only in the 1930s, we will get what we got. That is, we will reach a dead end or form an unviable, artificial national idea of an invented people.
2. TURK (TURK). If we, the Turks of Azerbaijan, return to ourselves our natural self-name turk (Azeri turklеri), which we called ourselves for hundreds of years until the end of the 1930s, then we will cut the “Gordian knot” tied by Stalin and return to the mainstream of normal, natural national existence. As a result, for many difficult questions simple answers will be found, and many problems that seemed insoluble will be solved by themselves.
Conclusion: The national idea of Azerbaijan cannot be formed without returning the state-forming nation to its true and legitimate self-name - turk. The formation of an adequate and worthy national idea of Azerbaijan while maintaining the recently invented name “Azerbaijani” is simply impossible.
Having lost our national identity, we are mired in disputes about who we are - the descendants of the Sumerians, Albanians, Medes or someone else. There is no end to these tiresome and stupid disputes and there will not be until we stand on a natural platform and recognize that under an artificial, faceless name "Azerbaijani" real ethnic groups are hiding - mainly Turks, as well as Kurds, Talysh, Tats, Lezgins, etc. All of them are Azerbaijanis by citizenship, but at the same time they represent different ethnic groups, just as, for example, the Swiss are divided into French-, Italian- and German-Swiss.
So, let's summarize:
1. The formation of an adequate national idea in Azerbaijan is impossible without returning to the people their self-name (ethnonym) turk, which was forcibly taken from them by order of Stalin in the late 1930s. The expression Azеri turku can be used in parallel, similar to how Turks sometimes use the expression Turkiyе turkleri. The expression “Azerbaijani” (Azerbaycanly) should be left as the name of any native of Azerbaijan, regardless of nationality.
2. The Turks of Azerbaijan are an independent nation
with their own state, language and culture, genetically and culturally closely related to related Turkic peoples, especially Oghuz, i.e. Turks, Turkmens, etc.
3. The national idea of Azerbaijan cannot be formed without taking into account the bulk of our ethnic group - the Azerbaijani Turks living in Iran (30-40 million) and historically calling themselves Turk.
4. The national idea of Azerbaijan cannot exist without support from: a) the historical, cultural and political heritage of the state-forming nation - the Turks of Azerbaijan, i.e. "Turkism". b) the idea of Azerbaijani patriotism and cooperation of all nations of Azerbaijan (Turks, Talysh, Kurds, Tats, Udis, Russians, Jews, Lezgins, Avars, etc.) for the benefit of the common Motherland, i.e. "Azerbaijanism".
Farid ALEKPERLI, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Head of Department of the Institute of Manuscripts of ANAS.
Introduction.
Azerbaijanis, Azerbaijani Turks, Iranian Turks - this is all the name of the same modern Turkic people of Azerbaijan and Iran
On the territory now independent states, formerly part of the Soviet Union, are home to 10-13 million Azerbaijanis, who, in addition to Azerbaijan, also live in Russia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. In 1988-1993, as a result of the aggression of the Armenian authorities, about one million Azerbaijanis from the South Transcaucasus were expelled from their native lands.
According to some researchers, Azerbaijanis make up one third of the total population of modern Iran and occupy second place in the country after the Persians in terms of this indicator. Unfortunately, science today does not have accurate data on the number of Azerbaijanis living in northern Iran. Their approximate number is estimated at 30 to 35 million.
The Azerbaijani language is also spoken by the Afshars and Qizilbashs living in some regions of Afghanistan. The language of some people is very close to the modern Azerbaijani language. Turkic groups southern Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey and the Balkans.
According to tentative estimates of researchers, today 40-50 million people speak Azerbaijani in the world.
Azerbaijanis, together with the Anatolian Turks who are genetically closest to them, make up over 60% of the total number of all modern Turkic peoples.
It should be noted that over the past two centuries, hundreds of books and articles have been written on the ethnogenesis of Azerbaijanis, and many different thoughts, assumptions and guesses have been expressed. At the same time, despite the diversity of opinions, they all basically boil down to two main hypotheses.
Supporters of the first hypothesis believe that Azerbaijanis are the descendants of ancient ethnic groups, who in ancient times inhabited the western coast of the Caspian Sea and adjacent territories (here most often called Iranian-speaking Medes and Atropatenes, as well as Caucasian-speaking Albanians), who in the Middle Ages were “Turkified” by alien Turkic tribes. During the Soviet years, this hypothesis of the origin of Azerbaijanis became a tradition in historical and ethnographic literature. This hypothesis was especially zealously defended by Igrar Aliyev, Ziya Buniyatov, Farida Mamedova, A.P. Novoseltsev, S.A. Tokarev, V.P. Alekseev and others, although in almost all cases these authors referred readers to the works of Herodotus and Strabo for argumentation. Having penetrated into a number of general publications (the three-volume “History of Azerbaijan”), the Median-Atropateno-Albanian concept of the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijanis became one of the widespread provisions of Soviet historical science. Archaeological, linguistic, ethnographic sources were practically absent in the works of the above authors. At best, toponyms and ethnonyms indicated in the works of ancient authors were sometimes considered as evidence. This hypothesis was defended most aggressively in Azerbaijan by Igrar Aliyev. Although from time to time he expressed diametrically opposed views and ideas.
For example, in 1956 in the book “Mussell - the most ancient state on the territory of Azerbaijan” he writes: “To consider the Median language as unconditionally Iranian is at least not serious.” (1956, p. 84)
In “History of Azerbaijan” (1995) he already states: “The Median linguistic material currently at our disposal is sufficient to recognize the Iranian language in it.” (1995, 119))
Igrar Aliev (1989): “Most of our sources really consider Atropatena to be part of Media, and in particular such an informed author as Strabo.” (1989, p. 25)
Igrar Aliev (1990): “You can’t always trust Strabo: “His geography contains a lot of contradictory things... The geographer made various kinds of unfair and gullible generalizations.” (1990, p. 26)
Igrar Aliev (1956): “You should not particularly trust the Greeks, who reported that the Mede and the Persian understood each other in conversation.” (1956, p.83)
Igrar Aliyev (1995): “Already the reports of ancient authors definitely indicate that in ancient times the Persians and Medes were called Aryans.” (1995, p. 119)
Igrar Aliyev (1956): “The recognition of Iranians among the Medes is, undoubtedly, the fruit of the tendentious one-sidedness and scientific schematism of the Indo-European migration theory.” (1956, p.76)
Igrar Aliyev (1995): “Despite the lack of related texts in the Median language, we, now relying on significant onomastic material and other data, we can rightfully speak about the Median language and attribute this language to the northwestern group of the Iranian family.” (1995, p.119)
One can cite a dozen more similar contradictory statements by Igrar Aliyev, a man who has been heading the historical sciences of Azerbaijan for about 40 years. (Gumbatov, 1998, pp.6-10)
Proponents of the second hypothesis prove that the ancestors of the Azerbaijanis are the ancient Turks, who have lived in this territory since time immemorial, and all the newcomer Turks naturally mixed with the local Turks, who have lived since ancient times in the territory of the southwestern Caspian region and the South Caucasus. The existence of different or even mutually exclusive hypotheses on a controversial issue in itself, of course, is quite acceptable, but, according to famous scientists G. M. Bongard-Levin and E. A. Grantovsky, as a rule, some of these hypotheses, if not the majority, is not accompanied by historical and linguistic evidence. (1)
However, supporters of the second hypothesis, as well as supporters of the first hypothesis, to prove the autochthony of Azerbaijanis, mainly rely on toponyms and ethnonyms mentioned in the works of ancient and medieval authors.
For example, an ardent supporter of the second hypothesis G. Geybullaev writes: “In ancient, Middle Persian, early medieval Armenian, Georgian and Arab sources, numerous place names are mentioned in connection with historical events on the territory of Albania. Our research has shown that the vast majority of them are ancient Turkic. This serves as a clear argument in favor of our concept of the Turkic-speaking nature of the Albanian ethnos of Albania in the early Middle Ages... The oldest Turkic place names include some place names in Albania mentioned in the work of the Greek geographer Ptolemy (2nd century) - 29 settlements and 5 rivers. Some of them are Turkic: Alam, Gangara, Deglana, Iobula, Kaysi, etc. It should be noted that these toponyms have come to us in a distorted form, and some are written in ancient Greek, some of the sounds of which do not coincide with the Turkic languages.
The toponym Alam can be identified with the medieval toponym Ulam - the name of the place where the Iori flows into the river. Alazan in the former Samukh in northeastern Albania, which is currently called Dar-Doggaz (from Azeri dar "gorge" and doggaz "passage"). The word ulam means “passage” (cf. modern meaning the word doggaz “passage”) is still preserved in Azerbaijani dialects and undoubtedly goes back to the Turkic olom, olam, olum, “ford”, “crossing”. The name of Mount Eskilum (Zangelan district) is also associated with this word - from the Turkic eski “old”, “ancient” and ulum (from olom) “passage”.
Ptolemy indicates the Gangar point at the mouth of the Kura River, which is probably a phonetic form of the toponym Sangar. In ancient times, there were two points in Azerbaijan called Sangar, one at the confluence of the Kura and Araks rivers and the second at the confluence of the Iori and Alazani rivers; It is difficult to say which of the above toponyms refers to ancient Gangar. As for the linguistic explanation of the origin of the toponym Sangar, it goes back to the ancient Turkic sangar “cape”, “corner”. The toponym Iobula is probably the oldest but distorted name of Belokany in northwestern Azerbaijan, in which it is not difficult to distinguish the components Iobula and “kan”. In a 7th century source, this toponym is noted in the form Balakan and Ibalakan, which can be considered a link between Iobula Ptolemy and modern Belokan. This toponym was formed from the ancient Turkic bel “hill” from the connecting phoneme a and kan “forest” or the suffix gan. The toponym Deglan can be associated with the later Su-Dagylan in the Mingachevir region - from Azerbaijani. su “water” and dagylan “collapsed”. The hydronym Kaishi may be a phonetic derivative of Khoisu "blue water"; note that modern name Geokchay means "blue river". (Geybullaev G.A. On the ethnogenesis of Azerbaijanis, vol. 1 - Baku: 1991. - pp. 239-240).
Such “evidence” of the autochthony of the ancient Turks is actually anti-evidence. Unfortunately, 90% of the works of Azerbaijani historians are based on such an etymological analysis of toponyms and ethnonyms.
However, most modern scientists believe that etymological analysis of toponyms cannot help in solving ethnogenetic problems, since toponymy changes with population changes
So, for example, according to L. Klein: “People leave toponymy not where they lived most or originally. What remains from the people is toponymy where its predecessors are completely and quickly swept away, without having time to transfer their toponymy to the newcomers, where many new tracts arise that require a name, and where this newcomer people still live or the continuity is not disrupted later by a radical and rapid change of population." .
Currently, it is generally accepted that the problem of the origin of individual peoples (ethnic groups) should be solved on the basis of an integrated approach, that is, by the joint efforts of historians, linguists, archaeologists and representatives of other related disciplines.
Before moving on to a comprehensive consideration of the problem that interests us, I would like to dwell on some facts that are directly related to our topic.
First of all, this concerns the so-called “Median heritage” in the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijanis.
As you know, one of the authors of the first hypothesis we are considering is the main Soviet specialist in ancient languages, I.M. Dyakonov.
Over the past half century, in all works on the origin of Azerbaijanis there are references to I.M. Dyakonov’s book “History of the Media”. In particular, for most researchers key point in this book there was an indication from I.M. Dyakonov that “there is no doubt that in the complex, multilateral and lengthy process of addition Azerbaijani nation Median ethnic element played a very important, and in certain historical periods, a leading role.”(3)
And suddenly, in 1995, I.M. Dyakonov expressed a completely different view on the ethnogenesis of Azerbaijanis.
In “The Book of Memories” (1995) I.M. Dyakonov writes: “I, on the advice of my brother Misha’s student, Leni Bretanitsky, contracted to write the “History of Media” for Azerbaijan. Everyone then was looking for more knowledgeable and ancient ancestors, and the Azerbaijanis hoped that the Medes were their ancient ancestors. The staff of the Institute of History of Azerbaijan was a good panopticon. WITH social origin and everyone’s partisanship was all right (or so it was thought); some could communicate in Persian, but mostly they were busy eating each other. Most of the institute’s employees had a rather indirect relationship to science... I could not prove to the Azerbaijanis that the Medes were their ancestors, because this is still not the case. But he wrote “The History of Media” - a large, thick, detailed volume.” (4)
It can be assumed that this problem tormented the famous scientist all his life.
It should be noted that the problem of the origin of the Medes is still considered unresolved. Apparently, this is why in 2001 European orientalists decided to get together and finally solve this problem through joint efforts.
Here is what famous Russian orientalists I.N. Medvedskaya write about this. and Dandamaev M.A: “the contradictory evolution of our knowledge about Media was thoroughly reflected at the conference entitled “Continuation of the Empire (?): Assyria, Media and Persia,” held as part of a cooperation program between the universities of Padua, Innsbruck and Munich in 2001. whose reports are published in the volume under review. It is dominated by articles whose authors believe that the Median kingdom essentially did not exist... that Herodotus’s description of the Medes as a huge ethnic group with its capital in Ecbatana is not confirmed by either written or archaeological sources (however, we will add from ourselves, and is not refuted by them).” (5)
It should be noted that in post-Soviet times Most authors of ethnogenetic research, when writing their next book, cannot ignore a very unpleasant factor called “Shnirelman”.
The fact is that this gentleman considers it his duty, in a mentoring tone, to “criticize” all the authors of books on ethnogenesis published in post-Soviet space(“Myths of the Diaspora”, “Khazar Myth”, “Memory Wars. Myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia”, “Patriotic Education”: ethnic conflicts and school textbooks”, etc.).
For example, V. Shnirelman in the article “Myths of the Diaspora” writes that many Turkic-speaking scientists (linguists, historians, archaeologists): “over the past 20–30 years, with increasing fervor, they have tried, contrary to well-established facts, to prove the antiquity of the Turkic languages in the steppe zone Eastern Europe, in the North Caucasus, Transcaucasia and even in a number of regions of Iran.” (6)
About the ancestors of modern Turkic peoples, V. Shnirelman writes the following: “having entered the historical stage as tireless colonialists, the Turks over the past centuries, by the will of fate, found themselves in a situation of diaspora. This determined the features of the development of their ethnogenetic mythology over the last century and, especially, in recent decades.” (6)
If in Soviet era“specially authorized critics” like V. Shnirelman received another assignment from various special services to destroy authors and their works that the authorities do not like, but now these “free literary killers” apparently work for those who pay the most.
In particular, Mr. V. Shnirelman wrote the article “Myths of the Diaspora” with funds from the American John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.
With whose funds did V. Shnirelman write the anti-Azerbaijani book “Memory Wars. Myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia” could not be found out, however, the fact that his works are often published in the newspaper of Russian Armenians “Yerkramas” speaks volumes.
Not long ago (February 7, 2013) this newspaper published new article V. Shnirelman “Answer to my Azerbaijani critics.” This article is no different in tone and content from previous writings by this author (7)
Meanwhile, the publishing house of the ICC “Akademkniga”, which published the book “Memory Wars. Myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia,” claims that it “presents basic research problems of ethnicity in Transcaucasia. It shows how politicized versions of the past become an important aspect of modern nationalist ideologies.”
I would not have devoted so much space to Mr. Shnirelman if he had not once again touched upon the problem of the origin of Azerbaijanis in “Answer to My Azerbaijani Critics.” According to Shnirelman, he would really like to know “why during the 20th century Azerbaijani scientists changed the image of their ancestors five times. This issue is discussed in detail in the book (“Memory Wars. Myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia” - G.G.), but the philosopher (Doctor of Philosophy, Professor Zumrud Kulizade, author of a critical letter to V. Shnirelman-G.G.) believes this problem is unworthy of our attention; she just doesn’t notice it.” (8)
This is how V. Shrinelman describes the activities of Azerbaijani historians in the 20th century: “in accordance with the Soviet doctrine, which showed particular intolerance towards “alien peoples,” the Azerbaijanis urgently needed the status of an indigenous people, and this required proof of autochthony of origin.
In the second half of the 1930s. Azerbaijani historical science received an assignment from the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Azerbaijan SSR M.D. Bagirov to write a history of Azerbaijan that would portray the Azerbaijani people as an autochthonous population and would tear them away from their Turkic roots.
By the spring of 1939, the initial version of the history of Azerbaijan was already ready and in May was discussed at a scientific session of the Department of History and Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences. It conveyed the idea that Azerbaijan had been inhabited continuously since the Stone Age, that in its development the local tribes were in no way behind their neighbors, that they valiantly fought against uninvited invaders and, even despite temporary setbacks, always retained their sovereignty . It is curious that this textbook has not yet given the “proper” importance to Media in the development of Azerbaijani statehood, the Albanian topic was almost completely ignored, and the local population, no matter what eras were discussed, was called exclusively “Azerbaijanis.”
Thus, the authors identified the inhabitants by their habitat and therefore did not feel the need for a special discussion of the problem of the formation of the Azerbaijani people. This work was actually the first systematic presentation of the history of Azerbaijan prepared by Soviet Azerbaijani scientists. The Azerbaijanis included the oldest population of the region, which supposedly had changed little over thousands of years.
Who were the most ancient ancestors of Azerbaijanis?
The authors identified them with “the Medes, Caspians, Albanians and other tribes who lived on the territory of Azerbaijan about 3,000 years ago.”
November 5, 1940 A meeting of the Presidium of the Azerbaijan Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences took place, where the “ancient history of Azerbaijan” was directly identified with the history of Media.
The next attempt to write the history of Azerbaijan was made in 1945-1946, when, as we will see, Azerbaijan lived with dreams of a close reunification with its relatives located in Iran. Practically the same team of authors, supplemented by specialists from the Institute of Party History, who were responsible for sections on recent history, participated in the preparation of the new text of “History of Azerbaijan”. The new text was based on the previous concept, according to which the Azerbaijani people, firstly, were formed from ancient population Eastern Transcaucasia and Northwestern Iran, and secondly, although it experienced some influence from later newcomers (Scythians, etc.), it was insignificant. What was new in this text was the desire to further deepen the history of the Azerbaijanis - this time the creators of Bronze Age cultures on the territory of Azerbaijan were declared their ancestors.
The task was formulated even more clearly by the XVII and XVIII Congresses Communist Party Azerbaijan, held in 1949 and 1951, respectively. They called on Azerbaijani historians to “develop such important problems of the history of the Azerbaijani people as the history of the Medes, the origin of the Azerbaijani people.”
And the following year, speaking at the XVIII Congress of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan, Baghirov portrayed the Turkic nomads as robbers and murderers, who little corresponded to the image of the ancestors of the Azerbaijani people.
This idea was clearly heard during the campaign that took place in Azerbaijan in 1951, directed against the epic “Dede Korkut”. Its participants constantly emphasized that medieval Azerbaijanis were settled inhabitants, carriers high culture, and had nothing in common with wild nomads.
In other words, the origin of Azerbaijanis from the sedentary population of ancient Media was sanctioned by the Azerbaijani authorities; and scientists could only begin to substantiate this idea. The mission of preparing a new concept of the history of Azerbaijan was entrusted to the Institute of History of the Azerbaijan Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Now the main ancestors of the Azerbaijanis were again associated with the Medes, to which were added the Albanians, who supposedly preserved the traditions of ancient Media after its conquest by the Persians. Not a word was said about the language and writing of the Albanians, nor about the role of the Turkic and Iranian languages in the Middle Ages. And the entire population that had ever lived on the territory of Azerbaijan was indiscriminately classified as Azerbaijanis and opposed to the Iranians.
Meanwhile, there was no scientific reason to mix the early history of Albania and Southern Azerbaijan (Atropatena). In ancient times and in the early Middle Ages, people lived there completely different groups populations that are not related to each other culturally, socially, or linguistically.
In 1954, a conference was held at the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, condemning the distortions of history observed during the reign of Bagirov
Historians were given the task of writing the “History of Azerbaijan” anew. This three-volume work appeared in Baku in 1958-1962. His first volume was dedicated to everyone early stages history up to the annexation of Azerbaijan to Russia, and leading specialists from the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the Azerbaijan SSR participated in its writing. There were no archaeological specialists among them, although the volume began with the Paleolithic era. From the very first pages, the authors emphasized that Azerbaijan was one of the first centers of human civilization, that statehood arose there in ancient times, that the Azerbaijani people created a high original culture and for centuries fought against foreign conquerors for independence and freedom. Northern and Southern Azerbaijan were viewed as a single whole, and the annexation of the former to Russia was interpreted as a progressive historical act.
How did the authors imagine the formation of the Azerbaijani language?
They recognized the great role of the Seljuk conquest in the 11th century, which caused a significant influx of Turkic-speaking nomads. At the same time, they saw in the Seljuks a foreign force that doomed the local population to new
hardships and deprivations. Therefore, the authors emphasized the struggle of local peoples for independence and welcomed the collapse of the Seljuk state, which made possible the restoration of Azerbaijani statehood. At the same time, they were aware that the dominance of the Seljuks marked the beginning of the widespread dissemination of the Turkic language, which gradually leveled out the former linguistic differences between the population of Southern and Northern Azerbaijan. The population remained the same, but changed the language, the authors emphasized. Thus, the Azerbaijanis acquired the status of an unconditionally indigenous population, although they had foreign-language ancestors. Consequently, the primordial connection with the lands of Caucasian Albania and Atropatena turned out to be a much more significant factor than language, although the authors recognized that the establishment of a linguistic community led to the formation of the Azerbaijani nation.
The publication reviewed served as the basis for a new school textbook, published in 1960. All its chapters devoted to the history of late XIX century, were written by academician A.S. Sumbatzade. It showed an even more clear tendency to connect early Azerbaijani statehood with the kingdom of Mann and Media Atropatena. They talked about the early Turkic waves of pre-Seljuk times, although it was recognized that the Turkic language finally won in the 11th-12th centuries. The role of the Turkic language in consolidating the country's population was also recognized, but anthropological, cultural and historical continuity, rooted in the deepest local antiquity, was emphasized. This seemed sufficient to the author, and the issue of forming the Azerbaijani people was not specifically considered.
Until the early 1990s. this work retained its significance as the main course in the history of Azerbaijan, and its main provisions were perceived as instructions and a call to action.”(10)
As we see, V. Shnirelman believes that the “fifth” concept (in our book it is considered as the first hypothesis), officially approved and adopted by the authorities back in the 60s of the 20th century, is still dominant outside Azerbaijan.
Many books and articles have been written about the struggle of supporters of both hypotheses of the ethnogenesis of Azerbaijanis in the last 25 years. The first generation of Azerbaijani historians, who began in the 50-70s. deal with the problems of the ancient and medieval history of Azerbaijan (Ziya Buniyatov, Igrar Aliyev, Farida Mamedova, etc.), created a certain concept of the history of the country, according to which the Turkization of Azerbaijan took place in the 11th century and it was from this time that it is necessary to talk about the initial stage of the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijani people . This concept was reflected not only in the book published in the mid-50s. the three-volume “History of Azerbaijan”, but also Soviet school textbooks. At the same time, they were opposed by another group of historians (Mahmud Ismailov, Suleiman Aliyarov, Yusif Yusifov, etc.), who advocated a deeper study of the role of the Turks in the history of Azerbaijan, in every possible way ancientized the fact of the presence of the Turks in Azerbaijan, believing that the Turks were primordially ancient people in the region. The problem was that the first group (the so-called “classics”) had leading positions in the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences and mainly consisted of the so-called. “Russian-speaking” Azerbaijanis educated in Moscow and Leningrad. The second group had a weak position in the academic Institute of History. At the same time, representatives of the second group had strong positions in the Azerbaijan State University and the Azerbaijan State Pedagogical Institute, i.e. were very popular among teachers and students. The historical science of Azerbaijan has become an arena of struggle both within the country and outside. In the first case, the number of publications by representatives of the second group noticeably increased, who began to publish articles about the ancient history of Azerbaijan, according to which, on the one hand, the history of the appearance of the first Turks went back to ancient times. On the other hand, the old concept of the Turkization of the country in the 11th century was declared incorrect and harmful, and its representatives were, at best, declared retrogrades. The struggle between two directions in the historical science of Azerbaijan was especially clearly manifested in the issue of publishing the academic 8-volume “History of Azerbaijan”. Work on it began in the mid-70s and by the early 80s. six volumes (from the third to the eighth) were already ready for publication. However, the problem was that the first and second volumes were not accepted in any way, because there the main struggle between two directions in Azerbaijani historiography unfolded over the problem of the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijani people.
The complexity and severity of the conflict is evidenced by the fact that both groups of historians of Azerbaijan decided to take an unusual step: they simultaneously published a one-volume “History of Azerbaijan”. And here the main ones were the pages devoted to the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijani people, because otherwise there were no differences. As a result, one book claims that the Turks first appeared on the territory of Azerbaijan only in the 4th century, while in another the Turks are declared an autochthonous population living here at least since the 3rd millennium BC! One book claims that the name of the country "Azerbaijan" has ancient Iranian roots and comes from the name of the country "Atropatena". In another, this same thing is explained as a derivative of the name of the ancient Turkic tribe “as”! Surprisingly, in both books we're talking about about the same tribes and peoples (Sakas, Massagetae, Cimmerians, Kutians, Turukki, Albanians, etc.), but in one case they are declared part of the ancient Iranian or local Caucasian group languages, in another the same tribes are declared part of the ancient Turkic world! Bottom line: in the first book they avoided detailed coverage of the problem of the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijani people, limiting themselves to a brief statement that only in the Middle Ages, from the 4th to the 12th centuries, there was a process of formation of the Azerbaijani people on the basis of various Turkic tribes constantly arriving in these centuries, mixing at the same time with local Iranian-speaking and other tribes and peoples. In the second book, on the contrary, this issue was highlighted in a special chapter, where the traditional concept of education of the Azerbaijani people was criticized and it was indicated that the Turks had lived on the territory of Azerbaijan since ancient times.
As the reader can see, the problem of the origin of Azerbaijanis is still very far from being resolved. Unfortunately, none of the hypotheses of the origin of Azerbaijanis has been studied in full to this day, that is, in accordance with the requirements that modern historical science places on such ethnogenetic research.
Unfortunately, there are no reliable facts to support the above hypotheses. There is still no special archaeological research devoted to the origin of the Azerbaijanis. We do not know, for example, how the material culture of the Mannev differed from the culture of the Medes, Lullubeys, and Hurrians. Or, for example, how did the population of Atropatene differ from each other anthropologically from the population of Albania? Or how did the burials of the Hurrians differ from the burials of the Caspians and Gutians? What linguistic features of the language of the Hurrians, Kutians, Caspians, and Mannaeans have been preserved in the Azerbaijani language? Without finding an answer to these and many similar questions in archaeology, linguistics, anthropology, genetics and other related sciences, we will not be able to solve the problem of the origin of Azerbaijanis.
The famous Russian scientist L. Klein writes: “Theoretically”, “in principle”, one can, of course, construct as many hypotheses as desired, deployed in any direction. But this is if there are no facts. Facts are constraining. They limit the range of possible searches.”(12)
I hope that the analysis of archaeological, linguistic, anthropological, written and other materials discussed in this book and their assessment will give me the opportunity to determine the true ancestors of the Azerbaijanis.
Literature:
1. G. M. Bongard-Levin. E. A. Grantovsky. From Scythia to India. Ancient arias: Myths and history M. 1983. p.101-
2. G. M. Bongard-Levin. E. A. Grantovsky. From Scythia to India. Ancient arias: Myths and history M. 1983. p.101-
http://www.biblio.nhat-nam.ru/Sk-Ind.pdf
3. I.M.Dyakonov. History of Media. From ancient times to the end of the 4th century BC. M.L. 1956, p. 6
4. (I.M. Dyakonov Book of Memories. 1995.
5. Medvedskaya I.N., Dandamaev M.A. History of Media in modern Western literature
“Bulletin of Ancient History”, No. 1, 2006. pp. 202-209.
http://liberea.gerodot.ru/a_hist/midia.htm
6. V. Shnirelman, “Myths of the Diaspora.”
7. V.A.Shnirelman. Answer to my Azerbaijani critics. “Yerkramas”,
8. Shnirelman V.A. Memory wars: myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia. - M.: ICC “Akademkniga”, 2003.p.3
9. V.A.Shnirelman. Answer to my Azerbaijani critics. “Yerkramas”,
10. Shnirelman V.A. Memory wars: myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia. - M.: ICC “Akademkniga”, 2003.p.
11. Klein L.S. It's hard to be Klein: Autobiography in monologues and dialogues. - St. Petersburg:
2010. p.245
