Jump to content

Falsification of history in Azerbaijan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by InternetArchiveBot (talk | contribs) at 21:35, 9 August 2023 (Rescuing 7 sources and tagging 1 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (Whoop whoop pull up - 14394). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The medieval Armenian monastery of Gandzasar in the historically Armenian-populated[1] Nagorno-Karabakh. The monastery was built by Hasan-Jalal and until the 19th century. was the center of the Aghvan (Caucasian Albanian) Catholicosate of the Armenian Apostolic Church.[2] According to Azerbaijani scientists, this means the Caucasian Albanian ethnicity of its builders.[3][Comm 1]

Falsification of history in Azerbaijan is an evaluative definition, which, according to a number of authors, should characterize the historical research carried out in Azerbaijan with state support. The purpose of these studies, according to critics, is to exalt the Caucasian Albanians as the alleged ancestors of Azerbaijanis and to provide a historical basis for territorial disputes with Armenia. At the same time, the task is, firstly, to root Azerbaijanis in the territory of Azerbaijan, and secondly, to cleanse the latter of the Armenian heritage.[4][5] In the sharpest and most detailed form, these accusations are presented by specialists from Armenia, but the same is said, for example, by Russian historians Victor Schnirelmann,[6] Anatoly Yakobson,[7] Vladimir Zakharov,[8] Mikhail Meltyukhov and others, Iranian historian Hasan Javadi,[9] American historians Philip L. Kohl[10] and George Bournoutian.[11]

According to the researcher Shireen Hunter, the distorted understanding by many Azerbaijanis of the true nature of cultural, ethnic and historical ties between Iran and Azerbaijan is associated with the legacy inherited by the modern Azerbaijan Republic from "the long Soviet practice of historic falsification" – to such historical myths she refers, in particular, the idea of the existence in ancient times of a unified Azerbaijani state, which included most of the territory of present-day northern Iran, which was divided into two parts as a result of the Russian-Iranian conspiracy.[12]

The concept of "Albanian Khachdash"

See also: Destruction of the Armenian cemetery in Julfa and Khachkar
Armenian khachkars of Julfa, declared in Azerbaijan "Caucasian Albanian khachdash", and destroyed in 2003.

One of the most typical and widespread medieval Armenian monuments are khachkars[Comm 2] (Armenian: խաչքար, lit. 'cross-stone'[13]) - stone steles with a cross and carvings used as tombstones and objects of worship. Khachkars remained in large numbers on all lands where Armenians lived. Therefore, an important manifestation of the "Albanization" of the Armenian cultural heritage was the theory proclaiming the Armenian khachkars of Nagorno-Karabakh, Nakhichevan and (separating them) the Armenian Syunik as Albanian artifacts under the name "khachdashi" (with the replacement of the Armenian – car, "stone", with the Azeri – dash of the same meaning). According to the Azerbaijani architectural historian Davud Aga-oglu Akhundov [az], khachdashi are distinguished by the fact that they bear in their decor signs of a fusion of Christianity with pre-Christian Albanian beliefs and contain symbols of Mithraism and Zoroastrianism.

In 1985, at the All-Union Archaeological Congress in Baku, Davud Aga-oglu Akhundov made a report in which he expressed these ideas, which provoked a scandal. The Armenian delegation announced its readiness to leave the conference, Leningrad scientists assessed Akhundov's report as a pseudoscientific political action. American archaeologist Philip L. Kohl believes that this report was a deliberate political provocation and aimed at creating a knowingly false cultural myth.[10]

As Russian and Armenian critics later noted, Akhundov simply either did not know or deliberately ignored the well-known features of Christian iconography, declaring these subjects to be Mithraic, and also looked over the Armenian inscriptions on the "khachdash" he studied. According to the Russian specialist A. L. Yakobson, "Mithraist fog envelops almost all the monuments that the authors of <D. A. Akhundov with co-author M. D. Akhundov>, not to mention their generalizations". So, describing the Julfa khachkars of the 16th–17th centuries, Akhundov sees in the images of a lion, a bull and a bird "the eternal companions of God Mithra", while, according to experts, these are undoubted symbols of the Evangelists.[6][7][14] The concept of "khachdash" was finally completed in Akhundov's book "Architecture of Ancient and Early Medieval Azerbaijan", reviewed by Academician Ziya Buniyatov, Doctor of Historical Sciences V.G. Aliyev and Doctor of Art History, Professor N.A Sarkisov.[15][16]

This theory is now officially accepted in Azerbaijani science and propaganda. Thus, the chairman of the Azerbaijan Copyright Agency, Kamran Imanov, denounces the "Armenian tradition of appropriating our cultural values" as follows: These "scientists" at one time stole almost all the wonderful examples of our Christian past – memorials, churches, steles, tombstones, our khachdash, announced "Khachkars".[17] According to the latest theories of Azerbaijani scholars, the custom of erecting stone khachdash crosses was brought to the Caucasus by the Turks back in the "pre-Albanian era".[18]

Accusations in falsification

Accusations of source falsification

According to the point of view prevailing in Azerbaijani historiography, the Armenians appeared in Transcaucasia only after 1828, when these territories were ceded to Russia. Nevertheless, there are a large number of Armenian, Persian, Russian, Arab and other primary sources that record a significant presence of Armenians in the Transcaucasus and, especially, in the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. According to George Burnutyan, the greatest irritation among Azerbaijani historians was caused by the fact that Muslim primary sources on Transcaucasia living in the territory of present-day Azerbaijan, such as Abbas Quli Bakikhanov, after whom the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan is named, and Mirza Adigozal bey, also clearly note a strong Armenian presence in Karabakh before 1828. To neutralize this fact, Buniyatov and his colleagues, neglecting academic conscientiousness, began to republish medieval primary sources, in which information about the Armenians was deleted.[19] George Burnutyan also gives similar examples of falsification by the Azerbaijani historian Nazim Akhundov in the 1989 reprint (according to Akhundov's statement) of Mirza Jamal Javanshir's book Tarikh-e Qarabagh (History of Karabakh), in places where the manuscript talks about the Armenian possessions of Karabakh the word "Armenian" is systematically omitted.[11]

The distortion of the translation of Bakikhanov's book Gulistan i-Irem by Buniyatov was noted by historians Willem Floor and Hasan Javadi:[20]

"This certainly is the case with Zia Bunyatov, who has made an incomplete and defective Russian translation of Bakikhanov's text. Not only has he not translated any of the poems in the text, but he does not even mention that he has not done so, while he does not translate certain other prose parts of the text without indicating this and why. This is in particular disturbing because he suppresses, for example, the mention of territory inhabited by Armenians, thus not only falsifying history, but also not respecting Bakikhanov's dictum that a historian should write without prejudice, whether religious, ethnic, political or otherwise."[20]

— Willem Floor and Hasan Javadi.

Victor Schnirelmann also notes that for Azerbaijani historians headed by Buniyatov, "the way to underestimate the presence of Armenians in the ancient and medieval Transcaucasia and diminish their role is to reissue ancient and medieval sources with cuts, replacing the term "Armenian state" with "Albanian state" or other distortions of the original texts",[6] the fact of reprinting with cuts was also noted by the Russian orientalist Igor M. Diakonoff,[21] the Armenian historian Muradyan[22] and the American professor George Bournoutian.[11]

Historians Mikhail Meltyukhov, Alla Ter-Sarkisiants and Georgy Trapeznikov note that in this publication, when translated from Farsi into Russian and Azerbaijani, "a lot of words and geographical terms ("Azerbaijan","Azerbaijani") appeared in the text, which, as any historian can understand, were absent in the Persian original".[23] In the preface to the book Two chronicles on the history of Karabagh, a professor at the University of California, Barlow Ter-Murdechian, also notes Buniyatov's numerous distortions of the original texts of historians Mirza Jamal and Mirza Adigozal-Bek.[24] According to George Burnutyan, such actions mean that without the publication of a facsimile copy of the original, Azerbaijani editions of sources related to Karabakh are unreliable:

"There are still a number of Persian manuscripts on Karabakh in the archives of Azerbaijan which have yet to be examined critically. Some of this primary material has already appeared in edited Azeri translations and others will undoubtedly follow. Unfortunately, unless they include a certified facsimile of the original manuscript, the tententious scholarship demonstrated above will render all these translations highly suspect and unusable by scholars. // Such blatant tampering with primary source material strikes at the very heart of scholarly integrity. The international academic community must not allow such breaches of intellectual honesty to go unnoticed and uncensured."[11]

— George Bournoutian.

Robert Hewsen in the Historical Atlas of Armenia, in a special note, warns of numerous distortions of the original texts of primary sources published in Soviet and post-Soviet Azerbaijan, the edition of which does not contain any mention of the Armenians present in the original work.[25]

Sh. V. Smbatyan finds numerous distortions of sources in the work of Geyushev Christianity in Caucasian Albania. For example, the book by Hakob Manandian Feudalism in ancient Armenia is cited as Feudalism in ancient Albania by Geyushev, in the title of Suren Yeremian's article Moses Kalankatuisky on the embassy of the Albanian prince Varaz-Trdat to the Khazar Khakan Alp Ilitver the words of the Albanian prince Varaz-Trdat are given to Albania, the facts described with references to The History of the Country of Albania by Movses Kagankatvatsi are absent in this source.[26] Armenian historian Hayk Demoyan, analyzing a photograph of a historical monument from the Historical Geography of Western Azerbaijan,[27] comes to the conclusion that it was falsified from one of the three famous khachkars of the Goshavank monastery, created by the master Pogos in 1291.[28] The Goshavank khachkar is considered one of the best examples of Armenian khachkar art of the 13th century.[29]

Victor Schnirelmann also notes that inscriptions on khachkars are falsified in Azerbaijan.[30] Philip L. Kohl, Mara Kozelski and Nachman Ben-Yehuda point to the falsification of the Mingachevir inscriptions by the Azerbaijani historian Mustafayev, who tried to read them in Azerbaijani (Turkic).[31]

The Armenian historian P. Muradyan, analyzing the translation by Z. Buniyatov of the Armenian Anonymous Chronicle of the 18th century, reveals numerous distortions and "corrections" of the original text. For example, Buniyatov replaced the mentioned Armenian toponyms with Turkic ones, and in a number of places the academician completely deleted the word "Armenia" ("Ottoman troops attacked Armenia" became "the land where Armenians lived").[32] Muradyan[32] and other historians note another example of falsification of a source by Buniyatov, in particular, the 15th century "Journey" by Johann Schiltberger.

Original text by Hans Schildberger Falsified text by Hans Schildberger
I also spent a lot of time in Armenia. After the death of Tamerlane, I got to his son, who owned two kingdoms in Armenia . This son, by the name of Shah-Rokh, used to winter on a large plain called Karabagh, which is distinguished by good pastures. It is irrigated by the Kur River, called the Tigris, and the best silk is gathered near the banks of this river. Although this plain lies in Armenia, nevertheless it belongs to the pagans, to whom the Armenian villages are forced to pay tribute. The Armenians have always treated me well, because I was a German, and they are generally very disposed in favor of the Germans (nimits), as they call us. They taught me their language and gave me their Pater Noster. I spent a lot of time in Armenia. After the death of Tamerlane, I came to his son, who owned two kingdoms. This son, by the name of Shakh-Rokh, used to winter on a large plain called Karabag, which was distinguished by good pastures. It is irrigated by the Kur River, also called the Tigris, and the best silk is gathered near the banks of this river.

Books of medieval sources were republished in Azerbaijan with the replacement of the term "Armenian state" with "Albanian state".[33] Muradyan points to a similar distortion in the 1989 "Brief History of the Country of Aluank" by the Armenian historian Yesai Hasan-Jalalyan.[34]

The original text of Yesai Hasan-Jalalyan Falsified text of Yesai Hasan-Jalalyan
Gathering up to 10,000 selected and armed men, and with them a host of our priests and servants, with great pomp and triumph, considering the Armenian state (զիշխանութիւն հայոց) re-established, we moved and three days later stopped near the city of Ganja in the Cholak area. Gathering up to 10,000 selected and armed men, and with them a host of our priests and servants, with great pomp and triumph, considering the Albanian state re-established, we moved and three days later stopped near the city of Ganja in the Cholak area.

Accusations of distortion of quotations and references

Historians A. A. Akopyan, P. M. Muradyan, and Karen Yuzbashyan in their work "On the Study of the History of Caucasian Albania"[35] note that the Azerbaijani historian Farida Mammadova in the book "Political History and Historical Geography of Caucasian Albania"[36] in confirmation of his the concept of the Armenian-Albanian border distorts the quotation of S.V. Yushkov,[37] refers to books that do not contain such information[38] (the authors find a similar reference in the work of Buniyatov[39]). The authors also give an example where Mamedova, referring to Stephen of Syuni, distorts his message about the presence of several dialects, directly called by Stephen of Syuni Armenian dialects, presenting it as a message about the existence of various languages.[40] The authors note that Mamedova criticizes the Armenian author of the late fifth century Pavstos Buzand for his tendentious attempt to prepare the population for the anti-Persian uprising that took place before Pavstos Buzand wrote the work.[41] A. A. Akopyan, P. M. Muradyan, and K. N. Yuzbashyan summarize Mamedova's work as follows:

"voluntarism in the study of antiquity, the falsification of the very concept of historicism, already the result of unhealthy tendencies, cannot be characterized otherwise than as an attempt to deceive one's own people, instill in them unworthy ideas, and tune in to wrong decisions."

Doctor of Philology E. Pivazyan gives an example of falsification of F. Mamedova in her work "Political History and Historical Geography of Caucasian Albania", which on pages 24–25 attributed the translator's notes, which were absent in the original, to the author of the medieval code of law Mkhitar Gosh.[42]

Historians K. A. Melik-Ogadzhanyan and S. T. Melik-Bakhshyan also give examples of distortion of quotations and references to nonexistent statements.[43][44] A.V. Mushegyan discovers false references to authoritative authors by academician Z. Buniyatov.[45]

Schnirelmann gives another example of distortion of links in the works of Mamedova and Buniyatov:

"Later, some Azerbaijani scholars began to completely reject the participation of Mesrop Mashtots in the creation of the Albanian writing system and tried to find an ally in this in the person of A.G. Perikhanyan (Mamedova, 1986, p. 7; Buniyatov, 1987c. P. 118). Meanwhile, in the work of Perikhanyan, only a hypothesis was expressed that Mesrop Mashtots attracted the Albanian Benjamin as his assistant, passing him the experience of creating writing. Perikhanyan clearly demonstrated that the Albanian alphabet was created under the unconditional influence of the Armenian one. Consequently, she did not in the least question the fact of Mesrop Mashtots' participation in his invention." (Perikhanyan, 1966, pp. 127–133).

Leningrad historian D.I. n. A. Yakobson, criticizing the attempts of Azerbaijani historians to record the Gandzasar Monastery as a monument of Albanian (according to Yakobson, thus also Azerbaijani) architecture, also finds examples of distortion of quotations[46] from the Azerbaijani historian Geyushev.[47] Analyzing the report of D. A. and M. D. Akhundovs "Cult symbols and the picture of the world captured on the temples and steles of Caucasian Albania",[48] Jacobson comes to the conclusion that the definitions given by the authors are "fake", and the report itself "distorts the artistic content and origin of the Armenian medieval decorative arts".[49]

State support for history falsification

V. A. Schnirelmann notes that there is a direct state order for publications with distortions of the source texts in Azerbaijan, designed to "clear" the history of Armenians:

"Another way to underestimate the presence of Armenians in ancient and medieval Transcaucasia and diminish their role is to republish ancient and medieval sources with cuts, replacing the term "Armenian state" with "Albanian state" or with other distortions of the original texts. In the 1960-1990s. Many such reprints of primary sources were published in Baku, which was actively pursued by Academician Z. M. Buniyatov. In the most recent years, describing ethnic processes and their role in the history of Azerbaijan, Azerbaijani authors sometimes generally avoid discussing the issue of the appearance of the Azerbaijani language and Azerbaijanis there, thereby making the reader understand that they have existed there from time immemorial.


It is unlikely that Azerbaijani historians did all this exclusively of their own free will; they were dominated by the order of the party and government structures of Azerbaijan."[50]

Ilham Aliyev: "... present-day Armenia, the territory called the Republic of Armenia on the map, is primordially Azerbaijani land. It is truth. Of course, Zangezur, the Iravan Khanate are our lands! ... Our children should know all this, they should know that today's Armenia is located on the ancestral Azerbaijani lands"[51]

According to George Bournoutian, propaganda "historical" books are published in Azerbaijan by order of the government, in which Azerbaijani historians try to prove that Armenians appeared in the Caucasus after 1828.[52]

At the ceremonial meeting dedicated to the anniversary of the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic (1999), the then President of Azerbaijan Heydar Aliyev directly called on historians to "create substantiated documents" and "prove that Azerbaijan belongs to the lands where Armenia is now located".[53] Thus, according to Schnirelmann, the Azerbaijani authorities gave direct instructions to historians to rewrite the history of Transcaucasia.[54] Farida Mammadova admits that Heydar Aliyev personally demanded from her scientific criticism of every book about the history of Albania published in Armenia.[55]

The existence of the state program of falsification of the history of the Transcaucasus in Azerbaijan is also noted by the historians Mikhail Meltyukhov, Alla Ter-Sarkisiants and Georgi Trapeznikov.[23]

Historian Vladimir Zakharov, deputy director of the MGIMO Center for Caucasian Studies, commenting on the words of Ilham Aliyev that Armenia was created on the primordial Azerbaijani lands, notes that "historical research in Azerbaijan is at the service not of science, but of the political ambitions of the leaders," and Azerbaijani historians are engaged in deceiving their own people.[8]

On 14 December 2005, Ilham Aliyev, the President of Azerbaijan, in a speech on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, called on Azerbaijani scientists to get involved in the program of justifying the lack of historical rights of the Karabakh Armenians to Nagorno-Karabakh before the world community. President Aliyev promised to subsidize the program of uniting the efforts of Azerbaijani specialists in the development and propaganda of his thesis that "the Armenians came to Nagorno-Karabakh, an integral part of Azerbaijan, as guests," arguing that "in the 70s of the last century, a monument was erected there, reflecting their settlement, the 150th anniversary of the settlement of Armenians[Comm 3] in Karabakh was celebrated" and therefore "the Armenians have absolutely no right to assert that Nagorno-Karabakh in the past belonged to them".[56] On 26 April 2011, at the annual general meeting of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev repeated these theses and stated:[57]

"Our scientists, responding positively to my call, in a short time have created excellent and based on real facts work related to the history of this region"

De Baets from Wesleyan University notes that historians are persecuted in Azerbaijan for "incorrect" interpretation of historical concepts.[58] Thus, in December 1994, the historian Movsum Aliyev was arrested for publishing the article "Answer to the falsifiers of history."[59]

Formation of the image of the "enemy" in Azerbaijan and Armenia

Sergei Rumyantsev, candidate of sociological sciences, director of the Novator Center for Social Research, notes that the Karabakh war caused a complete break between Armenians and Azerbaijanis. In Azerbaijan, this led to the formation of an image of a victim, combined with revanchist aspirations. On the other hand, in Armenia, where genocide has become the main factor shaping identity, Azerbaijanis are promoted as de facto Turks.[60] As an example, the researcher cites the construction of the image of a "historical enemy" on the basis of a literary work of the Turkic world of the 11th–12th centuries. "Kitabi Dede Gorgud", which is not only presented as a "historical chronicle of our fatherland", that is, Azerbaijan, aged thirteen centuries, but also the replacement of the Kipchak tribes (which served in the Turkic epic as an authentic image of the "infidels" with whom the Oguzes fought) by the Armenians and Georgians. As the author notes, "basically all the appeals to the text of the epic in the textbooks were intended to serve as the basis for the constructed image of the" historical enemy ". The events of recent years ... have led to the fact that this "honorable" place was taken first of all by the Armenians". Sergei Rumyantsev illustrates this with the example of a school textbook on Azerbaijani history (Ya. Mahmudlu, R. Khalilov, S. Agayev. Fatherland. Textbook for grade V. Third edition. Baku, 2003)[61] Since the publication of textbooks is controlled by the state, we are talking, according to Rumyantsev, about the state political order, carried out by historians. According to independent experts in Armenia and Azerbaijan, this policy makes the differences more and more insurmountable every year. A generation of young people has grown up, for whom "Armenian" and "Azeri" have become an ideological cliché, an image of an "enemy".[60]

Counter-accusations of Azerbaijani historians for distorting the facts of the history of Transcaucasia

In turn, Azerbaijani politicians and scientists believe that it is the historians of other countries who invent the facts of the history of Transcaucasia. Thus, the Great Russian Encyclopedia was accused of distorting the facts. The Azerbaijani Embassy in Russia announced a note and demanded to withdraw the circulation of the encyclopedia. The Russian authorities did not react in any way to the note of the Azerbaijani authorities. Khazar Ibrahim, spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, said:

"There are fictitious facts that do not correspond to history and offend the Azerbaijani people. First of all, we insist on the withdrawal of the circulation so that a negative image of the Azerbaijani public is not created, as well as for the Russian public, reading this book, to get an idea based on real facts, and not on the insinuations that took place in this circulation".[62]

Great Russian Encyclopedia, accused of "falsifying" the history of Azerbaijan

Director of the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, Yagub Mahmudov, also believes that the historical presence of Armenians in the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh is "a strong distortion of history" and offers Russian historians assistance in presenting the "historical truth":

"I am familiar with this article, which was inserted into the 31st volume of the 62-volume Great Russian Encyclopedia. It greatly distorts the history of Nagorno-Karabakh, says that this is an ancient Armenian land, although on the basis of historical documents it is known that the resettlement of Armenians to Karabakh began in the 19th century, they were resettled from the Ottoman Empire and Iran. Other serious distortions have also been committed, one of which, for example, is the presentation of Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent state.

[...]

We can and are ready to help the Russian side provide historical data based on archival materials that will represent the historical truth".[62]

Mahmudov also opposed the atlas "Turan on old maps" published jointly by Russian and Kazakh scientists.[63] In the opinion of the director of the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan, this publication is one of the results of the activities of Armenian nationalists, concerned about the huge successes of Azerbaijan in the international arena. Mahmudov characterizes this atlas as "an unthinkable anti-scientific, deliberate attack on Azerbaijan", in which there was no place for "the powerful states of Azerbaijan, which has a 5000-year history of statehood", while the map, according to Mahmudov, is fictional and is a falsification of Great Armenia, presented in the atlas many times.[64]

Head of the Department of Karabakh History of the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan (ANAS), Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor Gasim Hajiyev accuses Russians, Armenian and those Azerbaijani historians who "serving Armenians and Russians, also refuse to recognize the Turkic origin of Azerbaijanis of falsification of the ancient history of Transcaucasia." He noted that Turkic states existed on the territory of Azerbaijan even before the creation of the ancient states of Atropatena and Caucasian Albania. Speaking about 26 tribes, according to Strabo living in the territory of Caucasian Albania, Hajiyev notes that in the historical literature "the Turkic origin of such tribes as Saki, Gutii, Cimmerians, Gargars was completely denied. The Turkic origin of the Albanians themselves was also denied".[65]

At the event on the topic "The problem of Nagorno-Karabakh – 20 years: The causes and results of defeats at the first stage", the former Minister of Education of Azerbaijan, Professor Firuddin Jalilov said:[66]

"It is time to stop conducting a historical discussion with the Armenians at an amateurish level, and to involve specialists who know the history and characteristics of this people in the study of the Armenian problem. ... Immediately I note that you cannot call them Armenians, since they call themselves Khays, the Khay people, whose language is divided into Grabar (Balkan dialect) and Syrian. ... All the arguments that Armenia is an ancient country of Hays immediately become groundless and abstract, since there is no such nation as Armenians, there is a very ancient historical region of Armin in Asia Minor, where Turkic-speaking peoples lived ...

[...]

Our main problem and weakness, in my opinion, lies precisely in ignorance of these historical basics, confirmed by world science, but not advertised and hushed up everywhere due to the geopolitical interests of large countries. For the same political reasons, the Hays, who migrated and settled in the Arminu region in the Middle Ages, today also do not advertise their real self-name, although in their own language they continue to call themselves Hays, and the country Hayastan."

Azerbaijani architects D.A. and M.D. Akhundov believe that the accusations of the Russian historian and art critic D.I. n. Anatoly Yakobson is that their work on the Gandzasar Monastery (in which they argued that Gandzasar is an "Albanian" monastery, and the khachkars are in fact "Azerbaijani" cultural monuments) "distorts the semantic and artistic content and origin of Armenian medieval decorative art "Are incorrect, and in Jacobson's work" it is impossible to find at least one proposition that would correspond to historical reality. It is only unclear whether we are dealing with a deliberate falsification of history or the fruits of unprofessional creativity before us."[67]

Senior Researcher of the Institute of Archeology and Ethnography of ANAS, Doctor of Historical Sciences Abbas Seyidov, commenting on the accusations against Azerbaijan regarding the destruction of khachkars in Julfa, claims that it is the Armenians themselves who are "total falsification of the history and culture of Azerbaijan", and in this they were helped in leadership USSR and "scientists like Piotrovsky" (M. Piotrovsky – Doctor of History, Director of the Hermitage; protested against the destruction of khachkars).[68]

According to the director of the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan Yagub Mahmudov, "Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, who has deep and comprehensive historical knowledge," calls on "to go on the offensive in the information war against Armenian falsifiers". Mahmudov notes that the path outlined by Aliyev is the only one for "bringing historical reality to the attention of the world community."[69]

Aydin Balayev[70] in the book "Ethno-linguistic processes in Azerbaijan in the XIX-XX centuries" claims that the main falsifier of the history of Azerbaijan was the founder of the scientific school on the ancient history of Azerbaijan, director of the Institute of History named after A. A. Bakikhanov of the Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences[71] Igrar Aliyev:

"The dubious fame of the founder of this "scientific" direction in national historiography rightfully belongs to Igrar Aliyev. For more than half a century, it was he who led the "crusade" against the national memory of Azerbaijanis. It should be admitted that during this period he single-handedly achieved much greater achievements in falsifying the ethno-linguistic history of Azerbaijanis than all anti-Azerbaijani centers abroad taken together. Suffering from a pathological form of turkophobia, I. Aliyev, starting from the 40s. XX century, in his numerous works with perseverance worthy of better application, he preached the "idea" according to which the leading role in the formation of the Azerbaijani people was played by the Iranian and Caucasian-speaking tribes and nationalities that inhabited the ancient Media and Atropatena, as well as Caucasian Albania."[72]

Wikipedia is also accused of falsifying the historical facts of Azerbaijani history. Director of the Institute of Information Technologies of ANAS Rasim Alguliyev believes that "by placing distorted information on the pages of this encyclopedia in different languages, the enemies of the Islamic world are waging an information war."[73]

On 7 December 2012, a meeting was held at the Presidium of ANAS, at which various information about the history of Azerbaijan was discussed, including publications in Wikipedia, which were regarded as falsification of the history of Azerbaijan. Solmaz Tovhidi, PhD, noted "the importance of creating a structure at the Institute of Cybernetics for the correct use and management of Wikipedia."[74]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ During the Karabakh war, the monastery was deliberately bombed by Azerbaijani long-range artillery and military aircraft. See Lord Hilton's Report on Nagorno-Karabakh Visit
  2. ^ In November 2010, the art of making khachkars with the wording "Symbolism and craftsmanship of khachkars, Armenian stone crosses" was included in the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity (See: UNESCO: Armenian cross-stones art. Symbolism and craftsmanship of Khachkars.
  3. ^ Schnirelmann believes that the problem of resettlement of Armenians in Transcaucasia occupies one of the key places in the modern anti-Armenian propaganda in Azerbaijan, which claims that in this way the Russian authorities tried to create a Christian outpost against Muslims. Also, Azerbaijani historians claim that the Armenians appeared in Karabakh after 1828 and that the Armenian graves in Karabakh are not older than 150 years old (as of 1989). According to Schnirelmann, these views of Azerbaijani historians are based on a note allegedly drawn up by Griboyedov (according to Schnirelmann, Griboyedov had nothing to do with it), and from the works of Russian chauvinists of the early 20th century, such as Shavrov and Velichko, and ignore documents from the 18th-early 19th centuries. (See Victor Schnirelmann. Войны памяти: мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье (in Russian). pp. 236–237.) However, historical sources show that the Armenians were the majority of the population of Nagorno-Karabakh until 1829–1830. For example, the American historian George Burnutyan, analyzing the results of the census of the population of the Karabakh Khanate, conducted by the Russian authorities in the first half of 1823, indicates that the Armenian population of the Khanate was mainly concentrated in 8 out of 21 magals (districts), of which five (Gulistan, Jraberd, Khachen, Varanda, Dizak) – that is, Armenian melikoms with an overwhelming predominance of the Armenian population – make up the modern territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, and three more were located in Zangezur. In 1836, official data on the population of the Caucasus were published in St. Petersburg. According to these data, approx. 19 thousand Armenians and approx. 35 thousand Tatars (Azerbaijanis), that is, Armenians accounted for 35.2% of the population of Karabakh. At the same time, it was clearly indicated that the Armenian population is concentrated mainly in the mountainous regions of Karabakh (usually referred to as Nagorno-Karabakh). Thus, 35.2% of the population of Karabakh (Armenians) lived on 38% of its territory, where they constituted the absolute majority (See George A. Bournoutian (1999). The Politics of Demography: Misuse of Sources on the Armenian Population of Mountainous Karabakh. Vol. 9. New York: The Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies. pp. 99–103.)

References

  1. ^ Ilya Pavlovich Petrushevsky (1949). Очерки по истории феодальных отношений в Азербайджане и Армении в XVI – начале XIX вв. Л. p. 28.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link):

    Хасан-Джалалян происходил из знатной армянской фамилии наследственных меликов округа Хачен в нагорной части Карабага, населённой армянами; предок этой фамилии Хасан-Джалал был князем хачена в период монгольского завоевания, в XIII в. При кызылбашском владычестве Хасан-Джалаляны сохранили своё положение меликов хаченских...
  2. ^ Игорь КУЗНЕЦОВ, «Удины» [Материалы к изучению Кавказской Албании]
  3. ^ Причинно-следственная связь Карабахской проблемы. Историческая справка
  4. ^ Bournoutian, George A. (2009). A Brief History of the Aghuank Region. Armenian Studies Series #15. Mazda Publishers. pp. 9–10. ISBN 978-1-56859-171-1.

    In 1988, following the demands of the Karabagh Armenians to secede from Azerbaijan and join Armenia, a number of Azeri academics, led by Zia Bunyatov, to justify their government's claims regarding the Armenian populated region of Nagorno-Karabakh, rushed to prove that the Armenian population of Karabagh had only arrived there after 1828 and thus had no historical claims to the region. Lacking any sources written in Azeri-since the Azeri alphabet was created in the twentieth century, and refusing, for obvious reasons, to cite Armenian sources, they had to rely on sources written in Persian, Arabic, and Russian, among others. Therefore, to substantiate their political claims, Bunyatov and his fellow academics chose to set aside all scholarly integrity and print large numbers of re-edited versions of these not easily accessible primary sources on Karabagh, while deleting or altering references to the Armenians.
  5. ^ Victor Schnirelmann (2003). Войны памяти: мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье (in Russian). Moscow: Academbook. p. 210. ISBN 5-94628-118-6.

    Другим способом преуменьшить присутствие армян в древнем и средневековом Закавказье и умалить их роль является переиздание античных и средневековых источников с купюрами, с заменой термина «Армянское государство» на «Албанское государство» или с иными искажениями оригинальных текстов. В 1960—1990–х годах в Баку вышло немало таких переизданий первоисточников, чем активно занимался академик 3. М. Буниятов. В самые последние годы, описывая этнические процессы и их роль в истории Азербайджана, азербайджанские авторы порой вообще избегают обсуждать вопрос о появлении там азербайджанского языка и азербайджанцев, тем самым давая читателю понять, что они существовали там испокон веков.

    Вряд ли азербайджанские историки делали все это исключительно по своей воле; над ними довлел заказ партийно-правительственных структур Азербайджана.

    [...]

    Здесь-то на помощь политикам и приходят историки, археологи, этнографы и лингвисты, которые всеми силами стремятся, во-первых, укоренить азербайджанцев на территории Азербайджана, а во-вторых, очистить последнюю от армянского наследия. Эта деятельность не просто встречает благожелательный приём у местных властей, но, как мы видели, санкционируется президентом республики.
  6. ^ a b c Victor Schnirelmann (2003). Войны памяти: мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье (in Russian). Moscow: Academbook. pp. 216–222. ISBN 5-94628-118-6.
  7. ^ a b Anatoly Yakobson [in Russian] (1984). "Гандзасарский монастырь и хачкары: факты и вымыслы". Historical-Philological Journal (in Russian). ISSN 0135-0536.
  8. ^ a b IA REGNUM. 8 January 2010. Vladimir Zakharov. Историческая безграмотность, или Агрессивные устремления. Zakharov Vladimir Alexandrovich — Senior Researcher, Deputy Director of the Center for Caucasian Studies, MGIMO.
  9. ^ The Heavenly Rose-Garden: A History of Shirvan & Daghestan. pp. xvi, 5.

    This certainly is the case with Zia Bunyatov, who has made an incomplete and defective Russian translation of Bakikhanov's text. Not only has he not translated any of the poems in the text, but he does not even mention that he has not done so, while he does not translate certain other prose parts of the text without indicating this and why. This is in particular disturbing because he suppresses, for example, the mention of territory inhabited by Armenians, thus not only falsifying history, but also not respecting Bakikhanov's dictum that a historian should write without prejudice, whether religious, ethnic, political or otherwise. [...] Guilistam-i Iram translated with commentary by Ziya M. Bunyatov (Baku. 1991), p.11, where the translator has deleted the words 'and Armenia' from the text, which shows, as indicated in the introduction, that his translation should be used with circumspection, because this is not the only example of omissions from Bakikhanov's text.

    Floor and Javadi – Iranianists, authors of numerous articles in an authoritative encyclopedia Iranica
  10. ^ a b Philip L. Kohl (1996). Nationalism, politics, and the practice of archaeology. Cambridge University Press. pp. 154. ISBN 9780511558214.

    The young Azeri's seemingly innocuous, abstract archaeological paper was a deliberate political provocation: all the crosses on today's territory of Azerbaijan, including significantly Nagorno-Karabagh and Nakhichevan, were defined as Albanian, a people who in turn were seen as the direct ancestors of today's Azeris. // The rest, as they say, is history. The Armenian archaeologists were upset and threatened to walk out en bloc. Protests were filed, and even Russian scholars from Leningrad objected to this blatantly political appropriation, posing as scholarship. [...] // Thus, minimally, two points must be made. Patently false cultural origin myths are not always harmless.
  11. ^ a b c d Rewriting History: Recent Azeri Alterations of Primary Sources Dealing with Karabakh George A. Bournoutian Archived 10 November 2001 at the Library of Congress Web Archives. The author is a senior professor of history and political science at Iona College, USA [1] One of the authors of the authoritative encyclopedia Iranica [2] : There are still a number of Persian manuscripts on Karabakh in the archives of Azerbaijan which have yet to be examined critically. Some of this primary material has already appeared in edited Azeri translations and others will undoubtedly follow. Unfortunately, unless they include a certified facsimile of the original manuscript, the tententious scholarship demonstrated above will render all these translations highly suspect and unusable by scholars. // Such blatant tampering with primary source material strikes at the very heart of scholarly integrity. The international academic community must not allow such breaches of intellectual honesty to go unnoticed and uncensured.
  12. ^ Shireen Hunter (1998). Shireen Hunter:Iran and Transcaucasia in the Post-Soviet Era. Routledge. pp. 106. ISBN 0714646008.

    In the Republic of Azerbaijan, the long Soviet practice of historic falsification has left a legacy which has distorted both the views of many Azerbaijanis of Iran and the true nature of their cultural, ethnic and historic connections. The following are some examples of this process of falsification, which, incidentally, in the last few years, has been picked up and given new credence by a number of Western commentators. Several myths with significant policy implications shape the Azerbaijanis' views of their country, its origins, and its relations to Iran.
  13. ^ The Grove Encyclopedia of Medieval Art and Architecture. Vol. 2. Oxford University Press. 2012. p. 222.
  14. ^ Bagrat Ulubabyan Магические превращения, или Как были «албанизированы» хачкары и другие армянские памятники // Literary Armenia. 1988. № 6. pp. 84–92.
  15. ^ Akhundov D.A.. Архитектура древнего и раннесредневекового Азербайджана. Baku: Azerbaijan State Publishing House, 1986.
  16. ^ Victor Schnirelmann. "Войны памяти: мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье." (in Russian), p. 213
  17. ^ Кямран Иманов: «Притязания армян на наше материальное и нематериальное культурное наследие — очевидное следствие территориальных претензий армянства к Азербайджану, восходящих к мифу о „Великой Армении“»[permanent dead link]
  18. ^ Armenians try to pass off Albanian stone crosses as their own – Faig Ismayilov:«Впоследствии в создании и развитии искусства резьбы крестов из камня сыграли большую роль кавказские албанцы. Но их кресты существенно отличались от армяно-григорианских, так как албанцы украшали свои кресты орнаментами, декорировали их различными образами. Армянские же кресты были и остаются скудными, лишенными изобразительного ряда».
  19. ^ Bournoutian 2009, pp. 8–14

    In 1988, following the demands of the Karabagh Armenians to secede from Azerbaijan and join Armenia, a number of Azeri academics, led by Zia Bunyatov, to justify their government's claims regarding the Armenian populated region of Nagorno-Karabakh, rushed to prove that the Armenian population of Karabagh had only arrived there after 1828 and thus had no historical claims to the region. Lacking any sources written in Azeri-since the Azeri alphabet was created in the twentieth century,6 and refusing, for obvious reasons, to cite Armenian sources, they had to rely on sources written in Persian, Arabic, and Russian, among others. [...] Even more irritating was the fact that Muslim historians, who had lived in the territory of what later became the Azerbaijan Republic, men like Abbas Qoli Aqa Bakikhanov Mirza Jamal Javanshir and Mirza Adigozal Beg, the first of whom was honored by the Academy of Sciences in Baku as the father of the history of Azerbaijan, had clearly indicated a strong Armenian presence in Karabagh prior to 1828 and had placed the region within the territory of historic Armenia. [...] To legitimize this edition as unbiased, Bunyatov stated that Tigran Ter-Grigorian, an Armenian scholar working at the History Institute of Baku, had prepared the Russian translation (from which the Azeri version was translated).
  20. ^ a b The Heavenly Rose-Garden: A History of Shirvan & Daghestan. Abbas-Kuli-Aga Bakikhanov, Willem Floor, Hasan Javadi. — Mage Publishers, 2009 — ISBN 1-933823-27-5. p. xvi. Floor and Javadi are Iranianists, the authors of many articles in the authoritative encyclopedia Iranica
  21. ^ И. М. Дьяконов. Книга воспоминаний. Глава последняя:«герой Советского Союза, арабист, прославившийся впоследствии строго научным изданием одного исторического средневекового, не то арабо-, не то ираноязычного исторического источника, из которого, однако, были тщательно устранены все упоминания об армянах»
  22. ^ Paruyr Muradyan [in Armenian] (1991). Два искаженных издателем памятника (in Russian). Yerevan: Yerevan State University. pp. 225–235. ISBN 5808401151.
  23. ^ a b Mikhail MELTYUKHOV, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Alla TER-SARKISYANTS, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Georgy TRAPEZNIKOV, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Academician of the UN MAI. Historical falsifications with political overtones
  24. ^ Two chronicles on the history of Karabagh by G. Bournoutian. Mazda Academic Press, 2004. Communicated by Barlow Der Murgdechian to Society of Armenian Studies List. George Bournoutian's new book, "Two Chronicles on the History of Karabagh" has been published by Mazda Academic Press. The study is an annotated English translation of two Muslim historians, Mirza Jamal and Mirza Adigozal Beg, who in the first half of the 19th century wrote histories of Karabagh. Contrary to current Azeri claims, both sources detail a strong Armenian presence in Karabagh centuries before the Russian conquest of the region. Azeri academics, led by the late Ziya Buniatov, have removed most references of an Armenian presence in Karabagh in new editions of these and other primary sources. Bournoutian has used the original manuscripts in Baku and has indicated the expunged material. In addition, the book contains various other primary non-Armeian sourcesand, for the sake of objectivity, is practically devoid of works by Armenian historians. The 300-page book includes an introduction, glossary, five maps, and an index. It can be obtained from NAASR or form Mazda Press in early October.
  25. ^ Robert Hewsen (2001). Armenia: A Historical Atlas. University of Chicago Press. p. 291.:

    Scholars should be on guard when using Soviet and post-Soviet Azeri editions of Azeri, Persian, and even Russian and Western European sources printed in Baku. These have been edited to remove references to Armenians and have been distributed in large numbers in recent years. When using such sources, the researchers should seek out pre-Soviet editions wherever possible
  26. ^ Sh. V. Smbatyan. ЗАМЕЧАНИЯ ПО ПОВОДУ КНИГИ Р. ГЕЮШЕВА «ХРИСТИАНСТВО В КАВКАЗСКОЙ АЛБАНИИ» (in Russian) («К освещению проблем истории и культуры Кавказской Албании и восточных провинций Армении», Yerevan., 1991, ISBN 5-8084-0115-1)
  27. ^ S. Asadov; scientific. ed. B. Budagov. «Историческая география Западного Азербайджана». Baku: Azerbaijan Publishing House, pp. 1998.- 560
  28. ^ Сфальсифицированное изображение было представлено как «каменный памятник взятый из гробницы Ахи Таваккюля», на котором «армяне в верхней части камня внутри восьмигранных звёзд на левой и правой стороне искусно поместили один большой и два маленьких креста». Г. Демоян отмечает, что азербайджанские фальсификаторы "не заметили с трудом, но все же поддающуюся расшифровке армянскую надпись 1291 г. на постаменте, который «поставили» под новую версию памятника, превратив его в не известный природе и науке азербайджанский памятник, сперва продублировав нижнюю часть так называемой розетки, потом с помощью того же «фотошопа» «отреставрировав» нижний постамент хачкара с аркадами и прибавив три куска копий от одного сохранившегося". See. «Voice of Armenia», 31 August 2006
  29. ^ В. В. Шлеев. (1960). Всеобщая история искусств. Vol. 2, кн. 1. М.: Искусство. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |agency= ignored (help):«Кроме отдельно стоящих хачкаров встречаются целые группы, поставленные на общий постамент; нередко хачкары получали специальное архитектурное обрамление или, подобно рельефам, укреплялись в кладке стен зданий. Лучшие образцы, сохранившиеся в Бджни (илл. 59 а) и Гошаванке (исполнен в 1291 г. мастером Павгосом), поражают высоким мастерством обработки камня».
  30. ^ "Глава 13. Албанизация армянского населения". Войны памяти: мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье (in Russian). p. 213.

    На самом деле именно в Азербайджане известны попытки фальсификации надписей на хачкарах.
  31. ^ Philip L. Kohl; Mara Kozelsky; Nachman Ben-Yehuda. (2007). "3. The Writing of Caucasian Albania. Facts and Falsifications". Selective remembrances: archaeology in the construction, commemoration, and consecration of national pasts. University of Chicago Press. pp. 119.:

    The extremely limited nature of the originally available Albanian epigraphic remains was such that it was possible also, for example, to decipher and read the Mingechaur inscription on the pedestal as Azerbaijanian (i.e., Turkic) (Mustafaev 1990: 23–25), an unsuccessful attempt, like numerous others, to demonstrate a long-standing Turkic ethnic and linguistic affiliation with such eastern Caucasian tribes as the Albanians, the Gargars, and the Udins (see Gadjiev 1997:25–27). Such falsifications, pseudoscientific discoveries, and conclusions are not only formidably shortsighted but also rather dangerous, especially for the development of interethnic and international relations in multiethnic Dagestan and the Caucasus.

  32. ^ a b К освещению проблем истории и культуры Кавказской Албании и восточных провинций Армении. Ер.: Издательство Ереванского гос. университета. 1991. pp. 231–235. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |agency= ignored (help)
  33. ^ В. А. Шнирельман (2003). Войны памяти: мифы , идентичность и политика в Закавказье. М.: Академкнига. p. 210.
  34. ^ П. М. Мурадян (1990). История—память поколений: Пробл. истории Нагор. Карабаха. Айастан. p. 88.
  35. ^ Akopyan A.A.; Muradyan M.M.; Yuzbashyan K.N. (1991). К изучению истории Кавказской Албании (in Russian). Yerevan: Yerevan State University. pp. 321–352. ISBN 5808401151.

    ...волюнтаризм в изучении древности, фальсификация самого понятия историзма, будучи уже результатом нездоровых тенденций, не могут быть охарактеризованы иначе, как попытка обмануть собственный народ, внушить ему недостойные идеи, настроить на неверные решения.
  36. ^ Farida Mammadova "Политическая история и историческая география Кавказской Албании (III BC – VIII , Baku, 1976, p. 73)
  37. ^ Akopyan A.A.; Muradyan M.M.; Yuzbashyan K.N. (1991). К изучению истории Кавказской Албании (in Russian). Yerevan: Yerevan State University. ISBN 5808401151.

    Можно ли считать серьезным исследователя, который обвиняет своих оппонентов в неверном представлении точек зрения предшественников и для этого приводит неполную фразу С. В. Юшкова: «Нельзя думать, что Албания при Страбоне занимала только долину по левому течению реки Куры», 34пытаясь создать у читателя впечатление, будто учёный настаивал на вхождении в Албанию и правобережья (p. 73). В действительности, С. В. Юшков полемизировал с А. Яновским, помещавшим Албанию лишь на левобережной равнине вплоть до Кавказских гор, и доказывал вхождение в эту страну также и большей части Дагестана.
  38. ^ Akopyan A.A.; Muradyan M.M.; Yuzbashyan K.N. (1991). К изучению истории Кавказской Албании (in Russian). Yerevan: Yerevan State University. ISBN 5808401151.

    Далее в книге читаем: «X. Хюбшманн и И. Маркварт вообще считали Сюник албанской областью» (p. 106). Даётся ссылка только на с. 216 «Die altarmenischen Ortsnamen» Г. Гюбшманна. Конечно, несерьезна уверенность Ф. Мамедовой в том, что вхождение Сюника в Албанию можно доказать ссылками на авторитеты, минуя материал источников. Но самое интересное то, что ни Г. Гюбшманн, ни И. Маркварт не относили Сюник к Албании. На с. 216 сочинения Г. Гюбшманна нет даже слова «Сюник». Приписанного ему утверждения нет и на других страницах работы немецкого филолога, так же как и в фундаментальном историко-географическом исследовании И. Маркварта! Как же понимать такого рода «аргументацию»?
  39. ^ Akopyan A.A.; Muradyan M.M.; Yuzbashyan K.N. (1991). К изучению истории Кавказской Албании (in Russian). Yerevan: Yerevan State University. ISBN 5808401151.

    С той же целью ту же страницу указывал 3. Буниятов (p. 100)
  40. ^ Akopyan A.A.; Muradyan M.M.; Yuzbashyan K.N. (1991). К изучению истории Кавказской Албании (in Russian). Yerevan: Yerevan State University. pp. 124–126. ISBN 5808401151.

    Далее она пишет: «Сюнийский автор VIII в. Стефан Сюнийский отмечал, что в его время в Сюнике и Арцахе говорили на сюнийском и арцахском языках» (p. 106, p. 108). Даётся ссылка на издание «Толкования» Степаноса Сюнеци48. Если допустить, что Ф. Мамедова прочитала текст на армянском языке и постигла его смысл, то это её утверждение трудно охарактеризовать иначе, как ложное. В соответствующем разделе армянский учёный VIII в.49 в шести пунктах и на шести страницах (по изданию) перечисляет то, что необходимо знать для занятий грамматикой. Во втором абзаце четвёртого пункта, посвященного знанию языков, он говорит: «И также /следует/ знать все окраинные диалекты (զբառսն եզերականս) своего языка (զքո լեզուիդ), кои суть корчайский и хутский и Четвёртой Армении и сперский И сюнийский и арцахский (զՍիւնին, եւ զԱրցախայինն), а не только срединный и центральный, ибо /и диалекты/ эти пригодны для стихосложения, а также для истории полезны, дабы не пустить /что-то/ из-за незнания языков»
  41. ^ Akopyan A.A.; Muradyan M.M.; Yuzbashyan K.N. (1991). К изучению истории Кавказской Албании (in Russian). Yerevan: Yerevan State University. ISBN 5808401151.

    Оказывается, что Павстос Бузанд, изложивший примерно в 70-х гг. V в. историю своей страны в IV в., благодаря которой до нас дошли ценнейшие сведения, в том числе и об армяно-албанской границе по Куре, был искусным фальсификатором и тенденциозно расширял пределы Армянского царства IV века (с. 124—126). Почему? «Чтобы идеологически подготовить население к антиперсидскому восстанию (450—451 гг.), необходимо было создать труд, гиперболизирование) изображающий мощь Армении, её территориальную целостность... С этой целью Фавстос Бузандаци (!) включает в состав Армении... наряду с другими землями и албанские области правобережья Куры — Ути, Арцах и Пайтакаран» (с. 125). Но как может труд, созданный в 70-х гг. V в. (у Ф. Мамедовой — в конце V в.), подготовить население к восстанию 450 — −451 гг.?
  42. ^ Em. A. Pivazyan. Ещё раз о Мхитаре Гоше. (In the collection "On the coverage of the problems of the history and culture of Caucasian Albania and the eastern provinces of Armenia", Yerevan State University Press, 1991, ISBN 5-8084-0115-1).

    Мамедова приводит этот фрагмент по русскому переводу: «Предприняли мы это дело в 633 году армянского летосчисления: вычтя цикл (в 532 года), будет 101 год по календарю, который называется (у нас) Малым календарём, а по греческому летосчислению—в 405 году (то есть 1184 г.)...» (с. 24—25). Как видим, в оригинале нет взятого в переводе в скобки местоимения «у нас». Его добавил переводчик Судебника на русский язык А. Паповян, чтобы прояснить текст. И вот этих отсутствующих в оригинале слов Мамедовой оказывается достаточно, чтобы написать: «Итак „у нас"—у албан существовал даже свой метод летосчисления в отличие от армянской эры—Малый календарь...».
  43. ^ K. A. Melik-Ogadzhanyan . Историко-литературная концепция 3. Буниятова. (In the collection "On the coverage of the problems of history and culture of Caucasian Albania and the eastern provinces of Armenia", Yerevan State University Press, 1991, ISBN 5-8084-0115-1):

    При этом 3. Буниятов ссылается на книгу М. Орманяна «Армянская церковь» (Москва, 1913), с. 45 и 118, хотя на указанных страницах книги нет даже намёка на это. Эти слова принадлежат самому 3. Буниятову (с. 97) и вторично на с. 99—100, когда он приходит к выводу, что причину исчезновения агванской письменности «надо искать в антиалбанской политике григорианского католикоса, узурпировавшего в итоге все права албанской церкви». Иного мнения о причине исчезновения агванской письменности придерживается цитируемый 3. Буниятовым академик А. Шанидзе, говоря: «Письменность эта продолжала... существовать и после покорения страны арабами в VII веке, в период постепенного перехода албанцев в мусульманство и их денационализации, усилившейся с X века и принявшей угрожающие размеры в монгольскую эпоху». См. цитируемую 3. Буниятовым (на с. 99) работу А. Шанидзе «Новооткрытый алфавит Кавказских албанцев и его значение для науки», стр. 3. Вот вам четкий ответ А. Шанидзе на вопрос о причине исчезновения агванской письменности.

    «То, что в „Судебник" без всякой системы и руководящей нити вошли,— читаем дальше,— наряду с законами Восточной Римской империи, албанские законы, „Законы Моисея" и армянские народные обычаи, вовсе не подтверждает принадлежность его к документам армянского права».

    Эта цитата с приведенными в кавычках словами «законы Моисея» отсылает читателя к переводу «Истории» Киракоса Гандзакеци (см. Примеч. 590, Т- И. Тер-Григоряна, стр. 260).

    Чтобы ясно представить себе научно-исследовательские методы З. Буниятова и неряшливое отношение к редакторской работе 3. Ямпольского, нам хотелось бы воочию познакомиться с той нелепостью, куда отсылают они читателя, выяснить, достаточно ли научны основания, за которые они так энергично цепляются.

    Т. Тер-Григорян, научный сотрудник Института истории АН Аз. ССР, на которого опираются 3. Буниятов и 3. Ямпольский, пишет: «В состав „Судебника" без всякой системы и руководящей нити вошли, кроме законов Восточной Римской империи, албанские и армянские народные обычаи, церковные каноны, „законы Моисея"» (курсив наш—К. М.-О.).

    Внимательный читатель без труда заметит, как произвольно обращаются автор и редактор его с источниками, как они жонглируют для обоснования своей лженаучной концепции.

    Что же им удалось «научно» обосновать? Они лишь переставили одни обороты, другие—разъединили, словечка два заменили или поместили в кавычах. В результате получился новый текст-конгломерат с тенденцией отрицания армянского происхождения «Судебника».
  44. ^ T. Melik-Bakhshyan. Об одном «разъяснении» З. Буниятова (In the collection "On the coverage of the problems of history and culture of Caucasian Albania and the eastern provinces of Armenia", Yerevan State University Press, 1991, ISBN 5-8084-0115-1):

    Нетрудно заметить, что 3. Буниятов, «переработал» первоисточник. Искажая ясные и четкие сведения историка, он создаёт компилятивный текст, заключает его в кавычки и со спокойной совестью отсылает читателей к соответствующей странице русского перевода, не забывая даже указать на страницу английского перевода. Это уже, как говорится, своеобразный «новаторский» подход к первоисточнику, авторское право на который, бесспорно, принадлежит 3. Буниятову.

    Разумеется, мы вовсе не считаем, что никто не вправе усомниться в правильности того или другого сведения древних историков. Но в таких случаях добросовестный исследователь обязан ознакомиться со всеми первоисточниками и ещё раз проверить все сообщения о событии, вызвавшем его сомнения, уметь отделить главное от второстепенного и только после этого критическим анализом источников подкрепить свои новые выводы. Однако, как видим, эти элементарные правила, обязательные в любом научном труде, вовсе не касаются 3. Буниятова.

    Сосредоточив все своё внимание на выстроенном им самим отрывке Истории Мовсеса Каганкатваци и умышленно умалчивая: о других многочисленных свидетельствах как армянских, так и других авторов, 3. Буниятов старается навязать читателю свою версию о том, будто сожжение армянских князей и вельмож арабскими завоевателями в 705 г. имело место не в современном городе Нахичеване на Араксе, а где-то в ином месте. Далее, с целью придания некоторой правдоподобности своим словам, он обрывает повествование историка и сразу же после упоминания о сожжении армянских князей в Нахичеване ставит точку. Между тем, в тексте историк продолжает свой рассказ о сожжении князей «и в местечке Храм». 3. Буниятов делает это совершенно сознательно. Из текста он выбрасывает два весьма важных упоминания, чтобы затем на искаженных строках построить свою версию о другом Нахичеване. Так, из свидетельства Мовсеса Каганкатваци он пропускает слово «город», весьма определенно характеризующее Нахичеван, и упоминание о местечке Храм. Цель этой «операции» ясна. Из нескольких Нахичеванов, находящихся в Армении (в районе Кагызмана в Карсской области, в окрестностях города Ани и в Карабахе, близ города Шуши), с древних времен «городом» назывался только лишь Нахичеван на Араксе. Опуская термин «город» из сообщения историка, 3. Буниятов оправдывает свои поиски другого Нахичевана. Для Буниятова серьезной помехой явилось и «местечко Храм», которое также изымается им из контекста. Местечко Храм, к счастью, существует и по сей день, недалеко от современного Нахичевана, а ныне именуется азербайджанцами Неграм (Նեհրամ).

    Таким образом, лишив читателя возможности точной локализации Нахичевана с помощью находящегося невдалеке от него местечка (աւան) Храм. 3. Буниятов начинает искать другой Нахичеван и, хотя у него имелись большие возможности выбрать даже Нахичеван на Дону, он все же скромно останавливается на небольшом селении Нахичеван в районе Кагызмана, к которому поспешно прикрепляет термин «город». Вот что он заявляет со всего безапелляционностью: «Таким образом ясно, что описываемые в источниках действия арабского полководца—разгром византино-армянских войск, пленение армянских князей и сожжение их в храме Нахичевана—все это никакого отношения к Нахичевану—на Араксе не имеет».

    3. Буниятов полагает, что искажением Мовсеса Каганкатваци и нехитрой фальсификацией нехитрых эпизодов истории он вполне достигает искомой цели.
  45. ^ Псевдоалбанская литература и её апологеты
  46. ^ Anatoly Yakobson. Из истории армянского средневекового зодчества (Гандзасарский монастырь XIII в.) (In the collection "On the coverage of the problems of history and culture of Caucasian Albania and the eastern provinces of Armenia", Yerevan State University Press, 1991, ISBN 5-8084-0115-1):

    Об этом недвусмысленно сообщает персоязычный аноним XIII в. в своем географическом сочинении «[Хачен] это область (вилайет) трудно доступная, среди гор и лесов; принадлежит к округам (а'мал) Аррана; там есть армяне...» (Н. Д. Миклухо-Маклай, Географическое сочинение XIII в. на персидском языке («Учёные записки Института востоковедения», IX, 1954, стр. 204); Я. Геюшев цитирует это сообщение из вторых рук, притом недобросовестно, опуская то, что ему не подходит.
  47. ^ Geyushev R. B., О конфессионально-этической принадлежности Гандзасарского монастыря. – In collection: Material culture of Azerbaijan. VII, 1973, pp. 366–368.
  48. ^ Reported at the IV International Symposium on Georgian Art in Tbilisi and published as a separate brochure in 1983
  49. ^ Anatoly Yakobson [in Russian] (1984). "Гандзасарский монастырь и хачкары: факты и вымыслы". Historical-Philological Journal (in Russian). ISSN 0135-0536.

    Таким образом, определение орнаментики хачкаров из Нораванка как азербайджанской просто неверно, если не сказать фальшиво. Непонятно, зачем понадобилось авторам искажать смысловое и художественное содержание и происхождение армянского средневекового декоративного искусства, легко и бездумно «присоединяя» его то к уже не существовавшему в то время искусству Албании (а в понимании авторов—к искусству Азербайджана), то непосредственно к искусству Азербайджана.
  50. ^ Victor Schnirelmann (2003). Войны памяти: мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье (in Russian). Moscow: Academbook. ISBN 5-94628-118-6.
  51. ^ НА:REGNUM. Виктор Шнирельман: Ну, зачем же приписывать господствующие в Азербайджане взгляды «мировой науке»?
  52. ^ George Bournoutian. Book Reviews. Yaqub Mahmudov (ed.) Irevan Xanliği [The Erevan Khanate], Baku: «Bakikhanov Institute of History, National Academy of Sciences», 2010, 620 pp. (Dedicated to the memory of the late Heydar Aliyev, with a short preface by President Ilham Aliyev) // Iran and the Caucasus 16 (2012) 331—333
  53. ^ Victor Schnirelmann Войны памяти: мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье (in Russian) Reviewer: Leonid Alayev. — М.: Acamedbook, 2003. — С. 250. — 592 с. — 2000 — ISBN 5-94628-118-6.

    Отмечая в качестве азербайджанской щедрости «добровольный» отказ Азербайджанской Демократической Республики в 1918 г. от «Иреванской области» в пользу Армении, Алиев называл территорию современной Армении азербайджанской землёй и призывал историков «создавать обоснованные документы» и «доказывать принадлежность Азербайджану земель, где ныне расположена Армения» (Алиев, 1999а; 19996).
  54. ^ Victor Schnirelmann Войны памяти: мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье / (in Russian) Reviewer: Leonid Alayev. — М.: Academbook, 2003. — p. 252. — 592 p. — 2000 — ISBN 5-94628-118-6.

    Таким образом, празднование юбилея Нахичевани стало хорошим поводом для переписывания истории Закавказья не только с одобрения, но даже по поручению президента Азербайджана.
  55. ^ Газета «Эхо», № 76 (1316) Сб., 29 Апреля 2006: «Армяне в год издавали 15—19 книг, и Гейдар Алиев требовал на каждую книгу научную критику. Так я начала развязывать армянский узел. Одна карта считается 4-летним трудом учёного. А таких карт у меня 7. Я думала, что за эти карты меня похвалят, а оказалось, наоборот... Я на фактах показала, что армян на Кавказе не было»
  56. ^ Речь Президента Азербайджана Ильхама Алиева в торжественном собрании, посвященное 60-летию Национальной Академии Наук (copy Archived 6 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine )
  57. ^ Trend.az. 27 апреля 2011. Президент Ильхам Алиев: Необходимо разработать дополнительные механизмы для привлечения азербайджанской молодёжи в науку (copy Archived 6 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine)
  58. ^ Antoon de Baets «Defamation Cases against Historians» (History and Theory, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Oct. 2002), pp. 346—366). "The second improper use of defamation laws implies that politicians and civil servants should tolerate more criticism of their activities than other individuals and, therefore, use defamation laws sparingly or not at all. In practice, the reverse is the case. In Thailand, for example, several historians were charged with lese- majeste because their work criticized the monarchy. Many incumbent heads of state have eagerly used the defamation instrument to repress unwelcome historical statements11 11. For the Thai monarch, see the cases of Saman Kongsuphol, Sulak Sivaraksa, Thongchai Winichakul, in De Baets, Censorship of Historical Thought, 459—460; see also R. J. Goldstein and S. Bumroongsook, "Lese-majeste: Europe, Thailand, « in Jones, ed., Censorship, 1397—1402. For other examples (Heidar Aliyev in Azerbaijan, Alyaksandr Lukashenka in Belarus, Franjo Tudjman in Croatia, Suharto in Indonesia, Nursultan Nazarbayev in Kazakhstan, Hastings Banda in Malawi), see De Baets, Censorship of Historical Thought, 57–58, 63,140,286, 321,339–341.»
  59. ^ Antoon de Baets. Censorship of historical thought: a world guide, 1945—2000. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002. ISBN 0-313-31193-5, 9780313311932. «In December 1994 historian Movsum Aliyev was arrested for insulting President Heidar Aliyev in a September 1993 article he wrote for the newspaper Azadliq, entitled "The Answer to the Falsifiers of History". He was held in an overcrowded prison in Baku for several months before his release in February 1995. In 19 % or 1997, the Ganja local government confiscated all 2,400 copies of a book about the nineteenth-century Russian occupation of Ganja.»
  60. ^ a b Sergei Rumyantsev. ИМПЕРИЯ И НАЦИЯ В ЗЕРКАЛЕ ИСТОРИЧЕСКОЙ ПАМЯТИ. Героический эпос и конструирование образа исторического врага. (in Russian) «New publishing house» 2011 pp.328—356
  61. ^ Sergei Rumyantsev. Героический эпос и конструирование образа исторического врага. (in Russian) Ab imperio, 2/2005.
  62. ^ a b Молчание Кремля Archived 10 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine (copy Archived 29 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine)
  63. ^ Akbulatov I.M. (Museum of Archeology and Ethnography of the Center for Economic Studies of the Ufa Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, head. department of archeology), Badmazhapov Ts.B. (PhD, Faculty of Humanities MIPT), Baulo A.V. Malyavin V.V (Director of the Institute of Russia, Tamkang University). «Атлас. Туран на старинных картах: Образ пространства — Пространство образов». «Дизайн. Информация. Картография». (in Russian) 2008. ISBN 978-5-287-00555-9.
  64. ^ Ya.M. Makhmudov. САМЫЙ ОПАСНЫЙ ВЫМЫСЕЛ В ИСТОРИИ. (in Russian) Bakinskiy rabochiy. 28 January 2009. (copy on KSAM, archived copy Archived 29 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine)
  65. ^ Зеркало. 2007, 9 November, pp. 1-2. Азербайджанцы уничтожают свои же памятники. «В этой фальсификации Г. Гаджиев обвинил русских, армянских и тех азербайджанских учёных, которые, служа армянам и русским, также отказываются признавать тюркское происхождение азербайджанцев.» (copy)
  66. ^ 1news.az 13 February 2008 16:05 Почему хаи называют себя армянами? (in Russian), (copy Archived 29 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine)
  67. ^ D. A. Akhundov, M. D. Akhundov. К вопросу о «спорных» моментах в истории и культуре Кавказской Албании
  68. ^ Nash vek (newspaper). Friday, 5 – 11 May 2005, № 18 (361). Кампанией вокруг хачкаров армяне хотят отвлечь внимание мира от агрессии Армении против Азербайджана (in Russian). «Вслед за этим, в марте в Ереване побывал директор Эрмитажа Михаил Пиотровский, который также не обошел вниманием тему хачкаров, выступив с осуждением в адрес Азербайджана. То, что Пиотровский, родившийся в Ереване и имеющий армянские корни по материнской линии, выступил с подобным заявлением, в принципе, не стало для нас новостью... Ещё задолго до разжигания карабахского конфликта армяне вели тотальную фальсификацию культуры и истории Азербайджана. В этом им содействовали не только различные круги в руководстве бывшего СССР, но и учёные, подобные Пиотровскому» (archived copy, (copy)
  69. ^ Ya.M. Makhmudov. САМЫЙ ОПАСНЫЙ ВЫМЫСЕЛ В ИСТОРИИ. (in Russian) Bakinskiy rabochiy. 28 January 2009. «Выдающийся государственный деятель современности — Президент Азербайджана Ильхам Алиев во всех своих встречах на высоком уровне, в речах и выступлениях особо подчёркивает, что армяне являются пришлым населением на Южном Кавказе, и после обоснования их на этой территории напряжённость в регионе возросла, а современная Республика Армения и неконтролируемый марионеточный режим в Нагорном Карабахе превратились в гнезда терроризма. Обладая глубокими и всесторонними историческими знаниями, Президент Азербайджанской Республики заявил всему миру, что нынешняя Республика Армения была создана на землях исторического Азербайджана — на территории бывшего Иреванского ханства. Глава нашего государства призывает все соответствующие структуры перейти в наступление в информационной войне против армянских фальсификаторов. Чтобы одержать победу над армянским фашизмом и освободить родные земли, необходимо прежде всего одержать победу в информационной войне. Наш народ должен отозваться на призыв главы государства и ещё теснее сплотиться вокруг Президента страны с целью создания могущественного в военном и экономическом отношении азербайджанского государства. // Путь, намеченный Президентом Азербайджана во имя восстановления территориальной целостности нашей страны, единственно верный путь: довести историческую действительность до сведения мировой общественности и тем самым одержать победу в информационной войне, создать очень сильное в военно-экономическом отношении азербайджанское государство! И этим поставить на колени армянский фашизм, стремящийся к террору, геноциду и насильственному присвоению чужих земель. Другого пути нет! »
  70. ^ Doctor of Historical Sciences, Leading Researcher at the Institute of Archeology and Ethnography of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan.
  71. ^ Igrar Habib oglu Aliyev // Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (saved copy Archived 6 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine)
  72. ^ quoted from: Sergey Rumyantsev. (2010). "Первые исследования и первые специалисты: ситуация в области социальных и гуманитарных наук в постсоветском Азербайджане". Laboratorium (in Russian) (1): 284–310. Archived from the original on 16 April 2012.
  73. ^ НАНА. 23 November 2007. Состоялось собрание «Международные связи, медиа- и информационные технологии» XI съезда дружбы, братства и сотрудничества тюркских государств и обществ (in Russian) (copy Archived 19 August 2014 at the Wayback Machine, copy)
  74. ^ В НАНА обсуждена статья академика Р. Мехтиева «Шах Исмаил Сефеви как историческая личность, освещенная высокой целью» (in Russian) // Day.az, 8 December 2012. (copy Archived 6 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine)

Literature

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Falsification_of_history_in_Azerbaijan&oldid=1169561322"