What territories covered the historical Azerbaijani lands. Azerbaijan
By the end of the XVIII - beginning of the XIX century. The internal and external political situation of Azerbaijan was extremely difficult. First of all, this manifested itself in the political and economic backwardness caused by the dominance of subsistence farming, the feudal fragmentation of the country and civil strife. Also, one cannot ignore the fact that the invasions of foreign invaders represented by Iran constantly prevented the creation of a centralized state in Azerbaijan, the emergence of capitalist relations. Azerbaijan, like other countries of the Transcaucasus, could not successfully develop the economy and at the same time prevent encroachments from external enemies by internal forces alone.
As historical practice shows, the best way to centralize the state can only be the establishment of restrained control by a more powerful state, but in this situation a twofold situation arises: the line between control and enslavement is thin. In the case of Azerbaijan, the following picture of events emerged: the attempts of individual khans to unite Azerbaijan under their rule were doomed to failure, then the country could only expect the forceful subjugation of disparate territories by Iran or Turkey. Another option was the search for a military-political patron, with his own economic interests, which would also allow the development of an independent economic system in Azerbaijan itself.
Tsarist Russia became such a patron for him, expressing the interests of noble landowners and merchants, striving to conquer new economic zones, expand sales markets and obtain sources of raw materials. Transcaucasia, including Azerbaijan, given its strategic and economic importance, became the most attractive object of the foreign policy of tsarist Russia. The conquest of this region would decide the balance of power in the traditional Russian-Turkish rivalry in favor of Russia.
Regardless of the subjective aspirations of tsarism, the annexation of Transcaucasia to Russia objectively should have led to progressive consequences. By the beginning of the XIX century. capitalist relations developed in Russia, industry and trade grew. Petersburg, Moscow and many other cities became major economic and cultural centers.
Russia acted in the East as an advanced country. F. Engels wrote that "Russia really plays a progressive role in relation to the East", that "the dominance of Russia plays a civilizing role for the Black and Caspian Seas and Central Asia, for the Bashkirs and Tatars...".
In the specific historical situation of that time, the further strengthening of the Russian orientation of Azerbaijan, which played an important role in joining it to Russia, was of great importance. The most far-sighted feudal rulers of Azerbaijan at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries. sought to strengthen economic and political ties with Russia, they wanted to become its subjects. Since they wanted good relations with a strong power, this would help the development of trade. In 1800, the Talysh Khanate was taken under the protection of Russia. In 1801, the ambassadors of the Talysh, Baku and Quba khanates arrived at the court of Emperor Alexander I (1801-1825), who negotiated the conditions for joining Russia.
The Western European powers, especially England and France, who also had plans for expansion in the Transcaucasus, closely followed Russia's actions in the Transcaucasus and sought to thwart its plans.
Of great importance for all the peoples of the Caucasus was the accession of Eastern Georgia to Russia in 1801. September 12, 1801. The tsar's manifesto was published on the accession of the Kartli-Kakheti kingdom to Russia. The Georgian province was formed, headed by the commander-in-chief of the troops and the civil ruler. This province also included part of the territory of Azerbaijan - the Gazakh, Borchali and Shamshadil sultanates, which were in vassal dependence on the Kartli-Kakheti kingdom and, together with the latter, were annexed to Russia. Consequently, with the accession of Georgia to Russia, the beginning of the conquest of Azerbaijani lands by Russia was laid.
At the same time, the Kazakh and Shamshadil sultanates, mostly populated by Azerbaijanis, became part of the Russian state. The accession of Azerbaijan to Russia began. The rescript of Alexander 1 of September 12, 1801 said: "Containing relations with neighboring owners and peoples, try to increase the number of adherents to Russia, especially to attract the khans of Erivan, Ganja, Sheki, Shirvan, Baku and others, over whom the power of Baba Khan is still has not established itself, and which therefore, in the present circumstances, for their security, will, of course, be more inclined towards Russia.
The tsarist government, supporting individual khans of Azerbaijan from the predatory aspirations of Iran and Turkey, did not at all intend to grant independence to these feudal rulers, although, for some reasons, after the khanates entered under the protection of Russia, it intended to preserve the khan's power in internal administration for some time, to guarantee compliance with internal regulations and customs.
During this period, Prince P. Tsitsianov, descended from an old Georgian noble family, who in September 1802 was appointed Commander-in-Chief in the Caucasus, became the conductor of the colonial policy in Transcaucasia. The tsarist government, having entrusted to him all civil and military power in Transcaucasia, hoped to "pacify" the Caucasus with his help. Tsitsianov was distinguished by a contemptuous and cruel attitude towards the peoples of the Caucasus. This is evidenced by his humiliating letters sent during the conquest of Azerbaijan by Russia to many Azerbaijani khans. Using the territory of Eastern Georgia as a starting point, the tsarist government began to implement its plan for Azerbaijan.
General Tsitsianov attached great importance to the capture of the Ganja Khanate, since the Ganja fortress was the key to the further advance of Russian troops deep into Azerbaijan.
The Ganja Khanate was annexed to Russia without bloodshed, and was turned into a district, and Ganja was renamed Elizavetpol in honor of the wife of Alexander I.
The annexation of Georgia, the conquest of part of Northern Azerbaijan by Russia caused discontent on the part of the ruling circles of Iran and Turkey, as well as England and France, friendly to them during this period. Over the next few decades, these states made attempts in various ways to turn the local ruling elites into their allies and provoke social unrest in the country, directed primarily against Russia.
In 1800, Malcolm, an English officer, a "specialist in Oriental affairs", arrived in Iran and concluded an agreement with the Shah's government directed against Russia. In negotiations with the Shah's court, the British widely used bribery. K. Marx noted that England, in the name of its predatory interests, spent crazy money in Iran to bribe everyone and everything - "from the Shah to the camel driver."
The Iranian feudal elite, headed by Fethali Shah, in May 1804 demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops from Transcaucasia. The demand was rejected and on June 10, 1804 there was a break in diplomatic relations between Russia and Iran. The Russian-Iranian war began, which lasted about 10 years.
The foreign policy position of Russia and the peoples subordinate to it at that time was unstable. The peoples of the Caucasus, including Azerbaijan, played a significant role in this war. For example, even before the invasion of Karabakh, Abbas-Mirza threatened the Kazakhs , that in case of refusal to recognize the authority of Iran, their "families will be captured" and all the cattle will be driven away. However, the Kazakhs rejected this demand and fortified strategically important points. When the Shah's troops invaded Gazakh, the locals organized a large detachment and defeated them, capturing many trophies in the process.
Taking advantage of the respite during hostilities, the Russian government hastened to subjugate the Shirvan, Baku and Quba khanates in order to expand its possessions in the Transcaucasus. On December 27, 1805, an agreement was signed on the transfer of the Shirvan Khanate to Russian rule.
Having taken the Shirvan Khanate, Russia opened the way to Baku. Baku was the most attractive port for Russia and the most important strategic point on the Caspian coast and was taken without any military action. Huseynguli Khan fled to Iran and on October 3 Baku was finally annexed to Russia, and the Baku Khanate was abolished.
Thus, at the end of 1806, the entire territory of Northern Azerbaijan, with the exception of the Talysh Khanate, was in the possession of Russia. However, the position of the southern borders was not simplified by this.
At the end of 1806, Turkey launched a war against Russia. Russian troops won a number of victories on the Caucasian and Balkan fronts of the Russian-Turkish war.
At that time, social unrest swept through the territory of Azerbaijan. Having coped with uprisings and other uprisings in the northern khanates of Azerbaijan, the commander-in-chief of the Russian troops, General Gudovich, contributed to some rearrangements among the local feudal lords. Thus, the Derbent and Quba khanates were temporarily placed under the rule of Shamkhal Tarkovsky, and later turned into provinces of the empire. Jafarguli Khan Khoysky, who had defected to the side of Russia at the beginning of the Russian-Iranian war, was appointed Sheki Khan. A significant part of the population moved to Sheki from the Khoy Khanate - Azerbaijanis and Armenians, forming a number of new villages, as well as a new suburb of Nukha - Yenikend. In Karabakh, Gudovich approved Mehtiguli Khan, the son of Ibrahim Khalil Khan, in power. Turkey also stopped hostilities against Russia under the Treaty of 1812. Thus, Iran had to fight Russia alone
The Russo-Iranian war ended with the Gulistan peace treaty on October 12 (24), 1813, signed in the town of Gulistan on behalf of Russia by Lieutenant-General N. F. Rtishchev and on behalf of Iran by Mirza Abul-Khasan. Truce negotiations began as early as 1812 on the initiative of the Iranian commander, Abbas Mirza, heir to the throne.
The ruling circles of Iran, even after the conclusion of the Gulistan peace treaty, did not renounce their predatory claims to the Transcaucasus. As before, England pushed Iran to war with Russia. In 1814, she signed an agreement with Iran directed against Russia. In the event of a war between Iran and Russia, England undertook to pay the shah 200 thousand fogs annually, which were to be spent under the supervision of the British ambassador. The agreement also provided for the "mediation" of the British, that is, their direct intervention, in determining the Russian-Iranian border. This treaty not only placed Iran in a dependent position from the British government, but also provoked it into a war with Russia.
England sent its officers to Iran, with their help regular regiments were formed, which were supplied with British weapons. In Iran, British agents who delivered important information in England.
Incited by England, the Iranian government presented Russia with demands for the cession of the Talysh Khanate and Mugani. With the assistance of the British ambassador in St. Petersburg, the Shah's court tried to revise the terms of the Gulistan Treaty. For this purpose, an extraordinary ambassador was sent from Tehran to St. Petersburg.
In turn, the Russian government sent a diplomatic mission to Tehran headed by General Yermolov. As a result of the intrigues of English diplomacy, he met with a hostile reception. No agreement was reached on any of the issues negotiated, and Russo-Iranian relations continued to be strained.
Iran was preparing for a new war. The Russian consul reported from Tabriz about the cannon firing of the troops of Abbass Mirza, who were constantly conducting exercises. "The artillery in its image and charter is completely English," wrote A. P. Yermolov from Iran.
Iran tried to raise rebellions in the khanates of Azerbaijan, with the help of the khans who had fled to Iran. In addition, Iran wanted to improve relations with Turkey to fight Russia.
On July 16, 1826, the 60,000-strong Iranian army under the command of Abbas Mirza crossed Arak without declaring war and invaded the northern part of Azerbaijan. Enemy troops exterminated, robbed and tortured the population of Transcaucasia - Azerbaijanis, Armenians, Georgians.
The main forces of the Iranian army moved to Karabakh. Foreign officers who were in the service of Abbass Mirza took an active part in the siege. Russian soldiers with the help of the population staunchly defended the city. The defenders of the fortress threw burning rags soaked in oil from the walls, and the flames illuminated the columns of the attacking sarbaz. Even women and girls took part in the defense of the city: under enemy fire, they gave cartridges to the soldiers, bandaged the wounded. The assault was repulsed.
The enemy again and again tried to seize Shusha. During one of these attempts, advancing on the orders of Abbass Mirza drove hundreds of captured residents of Karabakh in front of them. The Iranian command threatened the prisoners that they would all be killed if they did not persuade their compatriots to surrender the city. But the prisoners said: "Let it be better that several hundred people die than the whole people fall under heavy oppression ...".
The defense of Shushi lasted 48 days. Abbas Mirza's army was never able to capture the city. The heroic defense of the fortress delayed the advance of the main forces of the invaders for a long time.
At the same time, the Iranian army attacked other khanates of Azerbaijan. As a result of the invasion of Iranian troops and rebellions organized and led by khans, many provinces of Azerbaijan, barely healed after the first Russian-Iranian war, were again devastated.
By the autumn of 1826, reinforcements were transferred from Russia to Transcaucasia. The command of the troops was entrusted to General I.F. Paskevich, and A.P. Yermolov remained in command in the Caucasus for some time. Soon the Russian army launched a counteroffensive.
Russian troops began to win and return the khanates captured by Iran. The Shah's government, extremely alarmed by the victories of the Russian troops, hastened to start peace negotiations.
Accession to Russia saved the Azerbaijani people from the danger of being enslaved by backward Iran and Turkey. Only by linking their fate with the Russian people, the peoples of the Caucasus, tormented by foreign conquerors, escaped extermination and got rid of the devastating invasions and raids of Iranian and Turkish feudal lords.
The outstanding Azerbaijani philosopher, playwright, educator and public figure Mirza Fatali Akhundov highly appreciated the immediate progressive consequences of the accession of Azerbaijan to Russia, who wrote in 1877: "... Thanks to the patronage of the Russian state, we got rid of the endless invasions that took place in the past" and robberies of the predatory hordes and finally found peace.
In the northern part of Azerbaijan, the tendencies towards aggravation of feudal fragmentation were eliminated, internecine wars, which ruined the country and hindered its development, ceased. The elimination of political fragmentation and the associated first steps towards the economic development of Northern Azerbaijan by Russia were of great importance for its subsequent development.
One of the immediate results of the accession of Azerbaijan to Russia, which had an impact already in the first quarter of the 19th century, was a noticeable development of commodity-money relations. In the 19th century Azerbaijan gradually began to be drawn into the mainstream economic development Russia, joined the Russian market and through it was involved in world trade. Under the influence of the Russian economy in Azerbaijan, although slowly, economic isolation was destroyed, productive forces grew, capitalist relations arose, and a working class began to form.
The accession of Azerbaijan to Russia significantly contributed to the introduction of the Azerbaijani people to the advanced Russian culture. Russia, with its progressive culture, had a beneficial effect on the Azerbaijani people and other peoples of the Caucasus.
At the same time, the heavy oppression of tsarism, the landowners and capitalists put pressure on the Russian people and on all the peoples of Russia. The masses of non-Russian nationalities, including the Azerbaijani people, were subjected to the double oppression of tsarism and local exploiters. Relying on local landlords and the bourgeoisie, tsarism pursued a cruel colonial policy in Azerbaijan, fiercely suppressed the national liberation movement, and hampered the development of the Azerbaijani language and culture.
But even under the colonial oppression of tsarist Russia, being powerless and oppressed, the peoples of the Caucasus invariably gravitated towards the Russian people, in whose person they found a friend and protector in the struggle for their social and national liberation. "Under the powerful influence of the revolutionary movement in Russia, in the future, a the liberation movement in Azerbaijan.The people of Azerbaijan, together with the other peoples of our country, led by the Russian people, waged a struggle against the common enemy—tsarism, the landowners, and the bourgeoisie.
The accession of Transcaucasia to Russia had a huge international importance. It dealt a blow to the aggressive aspirations of the Shah's Iran and Sultan's Turkey and the British and French colonialists standing behind them, contributed to the subsequent rapprochement of the peoples of Russia and the East.
Introduction.
Azerbaijanis, Azerbaijani Turks, Iranian Turks - this is all the name of the same modern Turkic people of Azerbaijan and Iran
On the territory of the now independent states, formerly part of the Soviet Union, live 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 of South Transcaucasia were expelled from their native lands.
According to some researchers, Azerbaijanis make up one third of the total population of modern Iran and occupy the second place in the country after the Persians in this indicator. Unfortunately, science today does not have accurate data on the number of Azerbaijanis living in northern Iran. Approximately their number is determined from 30 to 35 million.
Azerbaijani is also spoken by Afshars and Qizilbash living in some areas of Afghanistan. The language of some Turkic groups of southern Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey and the Balkans is very close to the modern Azerbaijani language.
According to tentative estimates of researchers, today 40-50 million people speak the Azerbaijani language in the world.
Azerbaijanis, together with the Anatolian Turks 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 issues of the ethnogenesis of Azerbaijanis, a wide variety of thoughts, assumptions and conjectures have been expressed. At the same time, despite the existing diversity of opinions, they all basically boil down to two main hypotheses.
Proponents of the first hypothesis believe that the Azerbaijanis are the descendants of the ancient ethnic groups that inhabited the western coast of the Caspian Sea and adjacent territories in ancient times (the Iranian-speaking Medes and Atropatenes are most often called here, as well as the Caucasian-speaking Albanians), who in the Middle Ages were "turkified" by the newcomer Turkic tribes. In the Soviet years, this hypothesis of the origin of Azerbaijanis in the historical and ethnographic literature became a tradition. 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 for argumentation in almost all cases these authors referred readers to the works of Herodotus and Strabo. Having penetrated into a number of generalizing publications (the three-volume "History of Azerbaijan"), the Median-Atropateno-Albanian concept of the ethnogenesis of 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 writings of ancient authors were sometimes considered as evidence. Igrar Aliyev defended this hypothesis most aggressively in Azerbaijan. Although from time to time he expressed diametrically opposed views and ideas.
For example, in 1956, in the book "Medes - the most ancient state on the territory of Azerbaijan", he writes: "It is not serious to consider the Median language as unconditionally Iranian, at least not seriously." (1956, p 84)
In "History of Azerbaijan" (1995) he already states: "The Median language material currently at our disposal is sufficient to recognize the Iranian language in it." (1995, 119))
Igrar Aliev (1989): "Most of our sources, Atropatena is indeed considered part of the Media and in particular such an informed author as Strabo."(1989, p.25)
Igrar Aliyev (1990): “One cannot 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 testify that in ancient times the Persians and Medes were called Aryans.” (1995, p. 119)
Igrar Aliyev (1956): "The recognition of the Iranians in the Medes is undoubtedly the fruit of the tendentious one-sidedness and scientific schematicity of the Indo-European migration theory." (1956, p. 76)
Igrar Aliyev (1995): "Despite the absence of related texts in the Median language, we, now relying on significant onomastic material and other data, we can justifiably speak of the Median language and attribute this language to the northwestern group of the Iranian family." (1995, p. 119)
One can cite a dozen more such 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 argue that the ancestors of the Azerbaijanis are the ancient Turks, who have lived in this territory since time immemorial, and all the newcomer Turks, of course, mixed with the local Turks, who have lived since ancient times in the territory of the southwestern Caspian Sea and the South Caucasus. The existence of various or even mutually exclusive hypotheses on a controversial issue in itself, of course, is quite acceptable, but, according to the famous scientists G. M. Bongard-Levin and E. A. Grantovsky, as a rule, some of these hypotheses, if not most, not accompanied by historical and linguistic evidence. (one)
However, supporters of the second hypothesis, as well as supporters of the first hypothesis, mainly rely on toponyms and ethnonyms mentioned in the works of ancient and medieval authors to prove the autochthonous nature of Azerbaijanis.
For example, an ardent supporter of the second hypothesis G. Geybullaev writes: “In ancient, Middle Persian, early medieval Armenian, Georgian and Arabic sources, numerous toponyms 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 Albanian ethnos of Albania in the early Middle Ages... The oldest Turkic toponyms include some toponyms in Albania, mentioned in the work of the Greek geographer Ptolemy (II century) - 29 settlements and 5 rivers. Some of them are Turkic: Alam, Gangara, Deglana, Iobula, Kaisi, etc. It should be noted that these toponyms have come down to us in a distorted form, and some of them 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 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 in the meaning of "passage" (cf. the modern meaning of the word doggaz "passage") is still preserved in Azerbaijani dialects and undoubtedly goes back to the Turkic ol, olam, olum, "ford", "crossing". The name of the mountain Eskilyum (Zangelan region) is also connected with this word - from the Turkic eski "old", "ancient" and ulum (from ol) "passage".
Ptolemy at the mouth of the Kura River indicates the Gangar point, which is probably the 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 these toponyms refers to the 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 Iobul is probably the most ancient, but distorted name of Belokan in northwestern Azerbaijan, in which it is not difficult to distinguish the components of Iobul and "kan". In the source of the 7th century, this toponym is noted in the form of Balakan and Ibalakan, which can be considered a link between Ptolemy's Iobul and modern Belokans. This toponym was formed from the ancient Turkic bel "hill" of 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 Azeri. su "water" and dagylan "collapsed". The hydronym Kaishi is possibly a phonetic formation from koisu "blue water"; note that the modern name Goychay means "blue river". (Geibullaev G.A. To the ethnogenesis of Azerbaijanis, v.1 - Baku: 1991. - pp. 239-240).
Such "proofs" of the autochthonous nature of the ancient Turks are actually anti-proofs. Unfortunately, 90% of the works of Azerbaijani historians are based on a similar etymological analysis of toponyms and ethnonyms.
However, most modern scientists believe that the etymological analysis of toponyms cannot help in solving ethnogenetic problems, since toponymy changes with the change of population.
So, for example, according to L. Klein: “People leave toponymy not where they lived more or originally. Toponymy remains from the people where its predecessors were completely and quickly swept away, not having time to transfer their toponymy to newcomers, where many new tracts arise that require a name, and where this alien people still lives or continuity is not broken later by a radical and rapid change of population " .
At present, it is generally recognized 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 proceeding to a comprehensive consideration of the problem of interest to us, I would like to dwell on some facts that are directly related to our topic.
First of all, this concerns the so-called "Medes heritage" in the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijanis.
As is known, one of the authors of the first hypothesis we are considering is the chief 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 the book by I.M. Dyakonov "History of Media". In particular, for most researchers, the key point in this book was the indication of I.M. Dyakonov that “there is no doubt that in the complex, multilateral and lengthy process of the formation of the Azerbaijani nation, the Median ethnic element played a very important, in certain historical periods - a leading role ".(3)
And suddenly, in 1995, I.M. Dyakonov expresses a completely different view of 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. At that time everyone 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 partisanship, everyone was all right (or so it was believed); some could speak Persian, but mostly they were busy eating each other. Most of the Institute's staff 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 the Media - a large, thick, well-reasoned volume. (four)
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, therefore, in 2001, European orientalists decided to get together and finally solve this problem by joint efforts.
Here is what famous Russian orientalists Medvedskaya I.N. 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 within the framework of the cooperation program between the Universities of Padua, Innsbruck and Munich in 2001. whose reports are published in a peer-reviewed volume. It is dominated by articles, the authors of which believe that the Median kingdom did not exist in essence ... that the description by Herodotus of the Medes as a huge ethnic group with a capital in Ecbatana is not confirmed by either written or archaeological sources (however, we add from ourselves, and are not refuted by them). (5)
It should be noted that in the post-Soviet period, most authors of ethnogenetic studies, when writing their next book, cannot brush aside a very unpleasant factor called “Shnirelman”.
The fact is that this gentleman considers it his duty in a mentoring tone to “criticize” all authors of books on ethnogenesis published in the 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.).
So, for example, V. Shnirelman in the article "Myths of the Diaspora" writes that many Turkic-speaking scientists (linguists, historians, archaeologists): in the steppe zone of Eastern Europe, in the North Caucasus, in Transcaucasia and even in a number of regions of Iran. (6)
About the ancestors of the 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, fell into the situation of the diaspora. This determined the features of the development of their ethnogenetic mythology during the last century and, especially, in recent decades. (6)
If in the Soviet era, “specially empowered critics” like V. Shnirelman received orders from various special services to destroy authors and their works that were not pleasing to the authorities, now these “free literary killers” work, apparently, for those who pay more.
In particular, the article "Myths of the Diaspora" was written by Mr. V. Shnirelman at the expense of the American John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.
At whose expense V. Shnirelman wrote the anti-Azerbaijani book “Memory Wars. Myths, Identity and Politics in the Transcaucasus" was not found out, however, the fact that his opuses are often published in the newspaper of the Armenians of Russia "Yerkramas" speaks volumes.
Not so long ago (February 7, 2013) this newspaper published a new article by 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 the Transcaucasus”, claims that it “provides fundamental research problems of ethnicity of Transcaucasia. It shows how politicized versions of the past are becoming 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 his “Response to my Azerbaijani critics”. According to Shnirelman, he would very much 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 (“Wars of Memory. 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 unworthy of their attention; She just doesn't notice it." (eight)
Here 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 status of an indigenous people was urgently needed for the Azerbaijanis, and this required proof of their autochthonous origin.
In the second half of the 1930s. Azerbaijani historical science received a task 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 depict the Azerbaijani people as an autochthonous population and tear them away from their Turkic roots.
By the spring of 1939, the initial version of the history of Azerbaijan was ready and in May it was discussed at the scientific session of the Department of History and Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences. It carried the idea that Azerbaijan had been continuously inhabited since the Stone Age, that local tribes did not lag behind their neighbors in their development, that they valiantly fought against uninvited invaders and, despite temporary setbacks, always retained their sovereignty. . It is curious that in this textbook the “proper” importance of Media in the development of Azerbaijani statehood was not yet given, the Albanian theme 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 in fact the first systematic presentation of the history of Azerbaijan prepared by Soviet Azerbaijani scientists. The most ancient population of the region was enrolled in the Azerbaijanis, as if it had changed little over the millennia.
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 was held, 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 shall see, Azerbaijan lived in dreams of a close reunion with its kinsmen in Iran. Almost the same group of authors participated in the preparation of the new text of the "History of Azerbaijan", supplemented by specialists from the Institute of Party History who were responsible for sections on recent history. The new text was based on the previous concept, according to which the Azerbaijani people, firstly, formed from the ancient population of Eastern Transcaucasia and Northwestern Iran, and secondly, although they experienced some influence from later newcomers (Scythians, etc.) ) was insignificant. What was new in this text was the desire to further deepen the history of 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 17th and 18th Congresses of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan, held in 1949 and 1951, respectively. They called on Azerbaijani historians to "develop such important problems in the history of the Azerbaijani people as the history of Media, the origin of the Azerbaijani people."
And the following year, speaking at the 18th Congress of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan, Bagirov portrayed nomadic Turks as robbers and murderers, who did not correspond much to the image of the ancestors of the Azerbaijani people.
This idea was clearly voiced during the campaign against the epic "Dede Korkut" in Azerbaijan in 1951. Its participants constantly emphasized that the medieval Azerbaijanis were sedentary people, bearers of high culture, and had nothing in common with wild nomads.
In other words, the origin of Azerbaijanis from the settled population of ancient Media was sanctioned by the Azerbaijani authorities; and scientists had only to work on the justification of 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 allegedly 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 ever lived on the territory of Azerbaijan was indiscriminately considered to be Azerbaijanis and opposed to Iranians.
Meanwhile, there were no scientific grounds to confuse the early history of Albania and South Azerbaijan (Atropatena). In antiquity and in the early Middle Ages, completely different groups of the population lived there, not connected with each other either 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 to write the "History of Azerbaijan" anew. This three-volume work appeared in Baku in 1958-1962. Its first volume was devoted to all the early stages of history up to the accession of Azerbaijan to Russia, and leading specialists of the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the Azerbaijan SSR participated in its writing. There were no archaeologists among them, although the volume began from 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 fought for independence and freedom against foreign invaders for centuries. Northern and Southern Azerbaijan were considered as a single whole, and the accession 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 hardships. Therefore, the authors emphasized the struggle of local peoples for independence and welcomed the collapse of the Seljuk state, which made it possible to restore Azerbaijani statehood. At the same time, they were aware that the domination of the Seljuks laid the foundation for the widespread dissemination of the Turkic language, which gradually leveled the former linguistic differences between the population of South and North 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-speaking ancestors. Consequently, the original connection with the lands of Caucasian Albania and Atropatena turned out to be much more significant factor than language, although the authors acknowledged that the establishment of a linguistic community led to the formation of the Azerbaijani people.
The reviewed edition served as the basis for a new school textbook, published in 1960. All of its chapters devoted to history until the end of the 19th century were written by Academician A.S. Sumbatzade. It even more clearly loomed the tendency to link the early Azerbaijani statehood with the kingdom of Manna and Media Atropatene. It was said about the early Turkic waves of the pre-Seljuk time, although it was recognized that the Turkic language finally won in the 11th-12th centuries. The role of the Turkic language in the consolidation of the country's population was also recognized, but the anthropological, cultural and historical continuity, rooted in the deepest local antiquity, was emphasized. This seemed sufficient to the author, and the question of the formation of the Azerbaijani people was not specially considered.
Until the early 1990s. this work retained its significance as the main course of the history of Azerbaijan, and its main provisions were perceived as instructions and a call to action.”(10)
As we can see, V. Shnirelman believes that the "fifth" concept officially approved and adopted by the authorities back in the 60s of the XX century (in our book it is considered as the first hypothesis) is still dominant outside of 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. to deal with the problems of the ancient and medieval history of Azerbaijan (Ziya Buniyatov, Igrar Aliyev, Farida Mammadova and others), created a certain concept of the country's history, according to which the Turkization of Azerbaijan took place in the 11th century and it is from that 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-1950s. three-volume "History of Azerbaijan", but also Soviet school textbooks. At the same time, they were opposed by another group of historians (Mahmud Ismayilov, Suleiman Aliyarov, Yusif Yusifov and others), who advocated a deeper study of the role of the Turks in the history of Azerbaijan, in every possible way made the fact of the presence of the Turks in Azerbaijan ancient, believing that the Turks are 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 who were 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 from outside. In the first case, the number of publications of representatives of the second group increased markedly, and they began to publish articles on 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 Turkification of the country in the 11th century was declared incorrect and harmful, and its representatives were, at best, declared retrogrades. The struggle between the 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 beginning of the 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 of the two directions in Azerbaijani historiography unfolded because of 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 one-volume "History of Azerbaijan". And here the pages devoted to the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijani people were the main ones, because otherwise there were no differences. As a result, in one book it is stated that for the first time the Turks appeared on the territory of Azerbaijan only in the 4th century, while in the other the Turks are declared an autochthonous population living here at least from 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, the same is explained as a derivative of the name of the ancient Turkic tribe "as"! Surprisingly, both books deal with the same tribes and peoples (Sakas, Massagets, Cimmerians, Gutians, Turukks, Albans, etc.), but in one case they are declared part of the Old Iranian or local Caucasian group of languages, in Otherwise, these 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, confining themselves to a brief statement that only in the Middle Ages, in the period from the 4th to the 12th centuries, the process of formation of the Azerbaijani people took place on the basis of various Turkic tribes that constantly arrived in these centuries, mixed at the same time with local Iranian-speaking and other tribes and peoples. In the second book, on the contrary, this issue was singled out 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 in the territory of Azerbaijan since ancient times.
As the reader could see, the problem of the origin of Azerbaijanis is still very far from being resolved. Unfortunately, to this day, none of the hypotheses of the origin of Azerbaijanis has been fully investigated, that is, in accordance with the requirements that modern historical science imposes on such ethnogenetic studies.
Unfortunately, there are no reliable facts supporting the above hypotheses. Until now, there is no special archaeological study dedicated to the origin of Azerbaijanis. We do not know, for example, how the material culture of the Manni differed from the culture of the Medes, Lullubis, Hurrians. Or, for example, how did the population of Atropatena differ from each other in anthropological terms 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, Gutians, Caspians, Manneans have been preserved in the Azerbaijani language? Without finding the answer to these and many similar questions in archeology, 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”, you can, of course, build as many hypotheses as you like, deployed in any direction. But this is if there are no facts. Facts hold. They limit the band of possible searches.”(12)
I hope that the analysis of the archaeological, linguistic, anthropological, written and other materials discussed in this book and their evaluation will enable me to determine the true ancestors of the Azerbaijanis.
Literature:
1. G. M. Bongard-Levin. E. A. Grantovsky. From Scythia to India. Ancient Aryans: Myths and History M. 1983. p.101-
2. G. M. Bongard-Levin. E. A. Grantovsky. From Scythia to India. Ancient Aryans: 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, page 6
4. (I.M. Dyakonov Book of memories. 1995.
5. Medvedskaya I.N., Dandamaev M.A. The History of Media in Recent 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. Wars of memory: 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. Wars of memory: myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia. - M.: ICC "Akademkniga", 2003.p.
11. Klein L.S. It's hard to be Klein: An autobiography in monologues and dialogues. - St. Petersburg:
2010. p.245
Was Azerbaijan called Azerbaijan in ancient times? October 31st, 2017
Since I will be making a series of posts dedicated to Azerbaijan, I want to remind readers about the history of the name of this country, various misunderstandings often arise about this. General information about the term "Azerbaijan" can be found in Wikipedia.
There is a strong notion that the term "Azerbaijan" was never applied to the territory of the current state of Azerbaijan and referred only to the northwestern parts of present-day Iran, and allegedly this term was artificially transferred to present-day Azerbaijan only at the beginning of the 20th century during the formation of Azerbaijan republics.
Historical documents indicate that this is a false notion. Due to the close historical connection of the entire region of Transcaucasia, many geographical and political terms were mixed up and could change their meaning, but the term "Azerbaijan" was consistently applied to the territory of the current state of the same name, along with other more famous names - Caucasian Albania, Arran, Shirvan and Armenia . The main reason why the current northern Azerbaijan was connected with the southern Iranian one is the subordination of this territory to the centers of power, which were located much to the south (where this term originated), for example, Sasanian Iran or the Arab Caliphate. Plus, the steady desire of the rulers who controlled Azerbaijan to see it as a single part with the entire Transcaucasus, in connection with this, Azerbaijan could even be called the entire Armenian Highlands, including part of the territory of modern Turkey.
Some examples of the use of the term "Azerbaijan" in historical documents:
The famous geographer Yakut al-Hamawi (12th century) confuses Azerbaijan and Armenia most revealingly.
"Dictionary of countries" ("Mujam al-buldan")
"The borders of Azerbaijan stretch from Barda in the east to Arzinjan in the west..."
According to Yakut, Azerbaijan extended from the current Turkish city of Erzinjan (Arzinjan) to the city of Barda in modern Azerbaijan.
Therefore, according to Yakut al-Hamawi, Azerbaijan included almost the entire Armenian Highlands.
Accordingly, the Armenian city of Dvin, which is now in modern Armenia not far from Yerevan, was also part of Azerbaijan.
About the city of Barda.
“Barda is a city in the farthest part of Azerbaijan, built of baked bricks and limestone and located on a plain. According to al-Istakhri, Barda is a very large city. I say that this description is old, for at present there is nothing left of the city. In Azerbaijan, I met people from the inhabitants of Barda and asked them about the city, and they told me that the city was badly destroyed and that there were now very few inhabitants in it, almost like in a village, the situation there is restless, poverty is obvious, need is visible, houses are destroyed, ruin universal. Praise be to the one who makes changes, but does not change himself, who destroys, but is not destroyed, and he disposes of his creatures in such a way that the secret of his craft is not visible in any of them!
Colonel Burnashev, who lived in Tbilisi as a representative of the Russian government under Tsar Erekle II, wrote the following in his description of the political state of the Azerbaijani regions in 1786:
“Georgia, that is, the kingdoms of Kakheti and Kartalinsky, is adjacent to the current position of those lands that are understood under the name Adrebidzhani, starting from the north; from the east the Caspian Sea and: the province of Gilan, from noon the region of Iraq, from the west Turkey ... Azerbaijani owners should be divided into autocratic and dependent, and the first - into powerful and weak. Derbent or Kuba Khan is among the powerful, they consider him quite rich, his own strength consists of 3000 people, but he calls for important enterprises against his neighbors as the neighboring Aderbidzhan khans, such as: Nukhinsky, Shirvansky and Shushinsky, owners from Dagestan and brings the Lezgian vagabonds…” VN Leviatov Essays from the history of Azerbaijan in the 18th century. - Baku: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the Azerbaijan SSR, 1948. - P. 144.
Firman Aga Mohammed Shah Qajar to all "Aderbaijan" and Dagestan rulers:
“The highest ruler of Persia, the firman, is to let you know and be aware that I have already been honored to be Shah in Persia; the Aderbeidzhan khans and owners all submitted to me ... ”Dubrovin N.F. History of the war and domination of Russians in the Caucasus. - St. Petersburg, 1886. - T. 3. - S. 64.
Fatali Khan wrote to Catherine II (at the end of 1782) that the whole of Azerbaijan was dissatisfied with the actions of Tsar Heraclius and Ibrahim Khan (imprisonment of the Ganja and Yerevan khans). He, Fatali Khan, "recognized for his position in order to protect the honor and right of the Adyrbaydzhan khans." O. P. Markova. Russia, Transcaucasia and international relations in the XVIII century. The science. Moscow, 1966. Pp. 176
The capture of Erivan (Yerevan) by Russian troops in 1827. Painting by Franz Roubaud. Prior to the capture by the troops of the Russian Empire, Yerevan was the capital of a small Azerbaijani Erivan Khanate. 
Profitable geographical position and favorable climatic conditions of Azerbaijan contributed to the appearance of man on its territory already in ancient times. In the north-west of Azerbaijan, on Mount Aveydag and in the Azikh cave in Garabagh, stone tools were found. In addition, the lower jaw of one of the oldest forms of the Neanderthal was found in the Azykh cave. Monuments of the Bronze Age were discovered in Khojaly. Gadabey, Dashkesan, Ganja. Mingachevir, in Nakhchivan. Not far from Baku, in Gobustan, on the site of the settlement of ancient people, rock paintings, whose age is about 10 thousand years, have been preserved. There is also a rock with a Latin inscription, which tells about the stay in Gobustan in the 1st century AD of the centurion of the Roman legion: "The time of Emperor Domitian Caesar Augustus Germanicus, Lucius Julius Maximus. Centurion of the XII Lightning Legion.
At the end of III - beginning of II millennium BC. e. prerequisites for the emergence of the first class societies. The first state formations on the territory of Azerbaijan were the tribal unions of the Mannei, and then the Medes.
In the 1st millennium BC. e. Cadusians, Caspians, Albanians, and others also lived on the territory of Azerbaijan.
In the ninth century BC. e. the state of Mana arose. In the 7th century BC. another large state arose - Media, which later extended its power over a vast territory. This state reached its greatest power during the reign of King Cyaxares (625-584 BC), turning into the largest empire of the Ancient East.
By the middle of the IV century BC. e. power in Media passed into the hands of the Persian Achaemenid dynasty. The Achaemenid state fell under the blows of the troops of Alexander the Great and at the end of the 4th century BC. the state of Atropatena ("country of fire keepers") was formed. The main religion in Atropatene was fire worship - Zoroastrianism, high level economic and cultural life reached the country, the Pahlavi script was used, monetary circulation expanded, crafts developed, in particular, the manufacture of woolen fabrics was widely known.
In the 1st century BC. - I century AD the state of Caucasian Albania arose.
At the beginning of the 4th century, Christianity was adopted as the state religion in Albania, temples were erected throughout the country, many of which have survived to this day.
At the beginning of the 5th century, Albania developed its own alphabet of 52 letters. Throughout its history, Azerbaijan has been repeatedly invaded by foreign conquerors; raids by nomadic tribes, Huns, Khazars, etc. were carried out through the Derbend Pass.
In the middle of the 7th century, the Arab invasion of Azerbaijan began. During the resistance, the Albanian commander Jevanshir, the head of the feudal estate Girdiman, who later became the ruler of Albania, became famous.
At the beginning of the 8th century, the Arab Caliphate captured Azerbaijan. Since then, the religion of Azerbaijan has been Islam.
In the 9th century, a major popular uprising took place, which grew into a peasant war under the leadership of Babek. The war covered a huge territory, equal to the territories of modern European powers. For twenty years, Babek, thanks to his extraordinary leadership and organizational talent, led the peasant state. In the 2nd half of the 9th - 1st half of the 10th centuries, a number of feudal states were formed and strengthened in Azerbaijan, among which the state of the Shirvanshahs with its center in the city of Shamakhi stood out in particular. It existed until the 16th century and played a huge role in the history of medieval Azerbaijan.
For many centuries, the Azerbaijani people, their scientists, poets and writers, architects and artists have created a high culture, making their contribution and the treasury of world civilization. An outstanding monument of Azerbaijani folk literature is the heroic epic "Kitabi Dede Gorgud". Prominent scientists Makki ibn Ahmed, Bahmanyar, poets-thinkers Khatib Tabrizi, Khagani, poetess Mehseti Ganjavi and others lived and worked in the 11th-12th centuries. Azerbaijan has preserved masterpieces of architecture of this era: the mausoleums of Yusuf ibn Kuseyir and Momine-khatun in Nakhchivan, etc. The pinnacle of the social and cultural thought of Azerbaijan of that period was the work of Nizami Ganjavi (1141-1209), which entered the golden fund of world literature.
In the 20-30s of the 13th century, the Mongol invasion interrupted the economic and cultural rise of Azerbaijan, and from the end of the 14th century, Tamerlane's troops invaded Azerbaijan. These invasions slowed down, but did not stop the development of the culture of Azerbaijan.
In the XIII-XIV centuries, outstanding poets Zulfigar Shirvani, Avhedi Maragai, Izzeddin Hasan-ogly, scientists Nasireddin Tusi - the founder of the Maraga observatory, philosopher Mahmud Shabustari, historians Fazlullah Rashidaddin, Muhammad Nakhchiv ani and others lived and worked.
The main centers of Azerbaijani culture at the end of the XIV - XV centuries. - Tabriz and Shamakhi. During this period, the palace of the Shirvanshahs was erected in Baku - a masterpiece of medieval Azerbaijani architecture, the Blue Mosque was built in Tabriz, etc. At the beginning of the 16th century, the Safavid state arose with its capital in Tabriz, which played a significant role in the history of Azerbaijan. The founder of this state was Shah Ismail I (1502-24). For the first time, all the lands of Azerbaijan were united as part of a single state. In the middle of the 18th century, the process of formation of independent states - khanates - began on the territory of Azerbaijan. Different khanates were famous for various types of crafts. Sheki was the center of silk weaving, the production of copper utensils and weapons developed in the Shirvan khanate, carpet weaving in Guba, etc. The historical conditions of the 17th-18th centuries found their expression in the culture of Azerbaijan.
An outstanding monument of folk art is the heroic epic "Koroglu", named after the national hero - the leader of the peasants who opposed foreign and local oppressors. Among the outstanding monuments of Azerbaijani poetry of the period of the 16th-17th centuries is the work of the great poet Fuzuli. In the first half of the 19th century, as a result of the Russian-Iranian wars, Azerbaijan was divided into two parts. According to the Gulistan and Turkmenchay peace treaties of 1813 and 1828, concluded between Russia and Iran, the Garabagh, Ganja, Shirvan, Sheki, Baku, Derbend, Guba, Talysh, Nakhchivan, Erivan khanates and other territories ceded to Russia. The oil industry played a great role in the development of Azerbaijan and its capital, Baku. Oil has been extracted in the Baku region since time immemorial. In the second half of the 19th century, an unprecedented increase in oil production began. The first large industrial enterprises appeared. Primitive oil wells were replaced by boreholes. Since 1873, steam engines have been used in drilling.
High profits attracted domestic and foreign capital to the oil industry of the Baku region. In 1901, oil production here amounted to about 50% of the entire world oil production. In the middle of the 19th century, the German firm "Siemens" built two copper smelters in Gadabey, which accounted for a quarter of the copper smelted in Tsarist Russia. On May 28, 1918, the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic was proclaimed. It was the first republic in the entire Muslim East. The republic lasted almost two years and was overthrown by Soviet Russia. On April 28, 1920, the 11th Red Army entered the capital of Azerbaijan. According to the Constitution of 1936, Azerbaijan became a union republic within the USSR. After the collapse of the USSR, the Supreme Council of Azerbaijan adopted a declaration "On the restoration of the State Independent Republic of Azerbaijan", and the sovereign Republic of Azerbaijan was proclaimed.
After gaining independence in 1991, Azerbaijan faced a number of difficult problems associated with the collapse of the planned economy and the difficulties of the transition period. In solving these and other tasks, including those related to strengthening the republic's independence, the contract signed in September 1994 with the Consortium of leading international oil companies, also called the "Contract of the Century", is of great importance.
Azerbaijanis have always been distinguished, despite any hardships, by faith in the future and great optimism. And today, when our young republic has embarked on the path of its independent development, we believe that Azerbaijan will take a place worthy of its past, present and future in the world.
Monuments of history and culture are evidence of the centuries-old history of Azerbaijan. For thousands of years, the bright and multifaceted history of Azerbaijan has been embodied by the talent of the people in numerous priceless relics. The country has preserved the ruins of ancient and medieval cities, defensive structures - fortresses and towers, magnificent architectural monuments - temples, mosques, khanegs, mausoleums, palaces, caravanserais, etc.