ROUBEN GALICHIAN REFUTES AZERBAIJANI THEORY ABOUT 'ARMENIANS BEING NEWCOMERS' TO SOUTH CAUCASUS
Society 15:17 16/12/2015
None of the Islamic-period historians, even those living in the
territory of the Azerbaijani Republic before the Soviet times,
denied the Armenians' presence in the southern Caucasus, namely,
in the territory of Shirvan, Artsakh, Partav, Sheki, Shamkhor and
neighbouring regions, according to the famous cartographer Rouben
Galichian's book Historical and Geographical Falsifications of
Azerbaijan, a historical, cultural and cartographical research based
on a detailed analysis backed by documentary evidence.
Galichian writes that the practice of denial of the fact began
in Soviet Azerbaijan as a result of Stalin's policy. "The rise of
nationalism became a Soviet tradition, which has been practiced by
the Azerbaijani historians and other specialists so far with even
more fervour and use of modern propaganda means," he writes.
In order to refute Azerbaijani claims regarding the Armenians as
newcomers to the area lying to the south of the Caucasus mountains,
Artsakh and in the territory of modern Azerbaijan, Galichian refers to
mainly non-Armenian sources, which are judged to be unbiased, reliable
and respected by all international academic circles and communities.
In particular, he analyses historical and geographical sources,
including the travelogues, where Armenia, Albania and Azerbaijan
are mentioned, as well as materials about the population of those
countries and other data.
For a more substantive analysis, Galichian first presents in detail
the dominating theses of the Azerbaijani 'Armenians being newcomers,'
according to which the first Armenians were brought and settled in
the region in the early 19th century by the Russian army and prior
to this date, there had never been Armenians residing in the region.
Under the guise of specialist research, the propagandistic book War
Against Azerbaijan 'brings Azerbaijani fabrication to its apogee.' As a
'typical example,' Galichian cites the following sentence from the
book: "Although the Republic of Armenia does not have an ethnic
Azerbaijani population now, its territory was a native land of
Azerbaijanis long before the Armenians appeared there for the first
time." This is part of the continuous rhetoric repeated even by the
president of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, in his New Year address to
his nation in 2011, Galichian highlights.
According to him, a crucial point is that until the twentieth century
there were no people calling themselves Azerbaijanis living in the
territory north of the River Araks since prior to 1918 these people
simply did not exist. The reality was that in Armenia, in addition
to Armenians there were Tatars, Turks, Kurds and other minorities,
as well as Persians and Iranian Azerbaijanis who were all able to
move within the Iranian-controlled area without hindrance until
the treaties of 1813 and 1828, when most of the Armenian territory,
Karabakh and Zangezur was still under Iranian control.
"Adding to these were the Turkic people called 'Caucasus Tatars' who
began to settle in the territory of Armenia. During the Soviet years
the situation changed in favour of the population of the Republic of
Azerbaijan, who were now called Azerbaijanis, and could still move
at will to the fertile and easily accessible lands of Karabagh and
Armenia," Galichian writes.
Next, he highlights the Azerbaijani historians' claim that the
'process of the Armenians' settling in the region apparently started
in the 15th century with Vagarshabad (Echmiadzin), the first Armenian
community in the Caucasus, and that the Armenians' mass resettlement
started in the 19th century from here.'
Galichian points out that the author has overlooked the fact that the
monastery of Echmiadzin was founded during the fourth century, when
Armenia became a Christian nation; Echmiadzin has been its religious
centre ever since. During the fifteenth century Echmiadzin was not
hardly established, as claimed in the book, but finally reaffirmed
in 1441 as the seat of the Armenian religious leader, the Catholicos,
after centuries-long absence of a permanent residence.
"One does not need to be a specialist to see that the ancient and
medieval capitals of Armenia, Dvin, Artashat and Yervandashat,
including major centres of religious learning have all been in the
South Caucasus, north of the Arax River. Even during the pre-Christian
era, the Armenian king Tigranes the Great (140-55 BCE) constructed
one of its major fortress-cities, Tigranakert ('City that Tigran
Built'), in Eastern Artsakh, near the borders of Albania proper,
with its Christian basilica built nearby during the fifth to sixth
centuries," he notes.
Galichian further refers to the Azerbaijani historians' studies. Mirza
Javanhsir Qarabaghi (1773-1853), whose History of Karabakh covers
the period until 1830, writes about the Armenians of the region as
the local population with no mention of their being newcomers. The
same could be said about another local historian, Mirza Adigozel
Beg (1780-1848), who claims in the prologue of his Karabakh-name,
written in 1845, that 'about certain occurrences I have referred to
the elderly local Georgians, Armenians and Muslims.' "A significant
record documenting the presence of Armenians in Karabagh is the
regional statistics gathered in 1823 by the order of General
Aleksei Yermolov (Ermolov) (1777-1861), based in Tbilisi, who was
the commander of the Russian forces in the Caucasus. The resulting
figures were published in Tbilisi in 1866, containing the details
of all the towns and villages with populations of Turks, Armenians,
'nomads' and others. The tables give the names of the town quarters,
ethnic background of residents, names of the heads of the families
and their taxes paid. These irrefutably prove the massive Armenian
presence in the region prior to 1828-30," Galichian writes.
As for the Azerbaijani thesis that after capturing the region in
1813 and 1828, 'Russia achieved a considerable demographic change by
resettling a great number of Armenians in the Azerbaijani territories,'
Galichian notes that the Azerbaijani historiographers refer to the
reports prepared by the French-Russian historian and ethnologist Ivan
Chopin (1798- 1870), who was consultant to the tax authorities in
the Armenian Oblast of Russia. In order to make the data suitable for
their claims, the Azerbaijani scholars omit many parts of the report,
which do not suit their requirements. Concerning the Armenians, who
arrived in the Armenian Oblast of Russia from Iranian Azerbaijan
and Turkey after the Treaty of Turkmenchay, Chopin presents the
following figures, which the Azerbaijanis keep silent upon: In total,
35,560 souls were resettled from Persia (23,458 in Yerevan; 10,652 in
Nakhijevan and 1,340 in Ordubad), and 20,666 souls arrived from Turkey
(20,639 in Yerevan and 27 in Nakhijevan).
Galcihian next refers to Chopin's contemporary Sergei Glinka, another
Russian historian, who states that the total number of Armenians
resettled in Russia from Iranian Azerbaijan was around 40,000.
According to Glinka's collection of documents, published in Moscow in
1931, 750 Armenian families were transferred to Karabakh Oblast from
Persia at the beginning of 1828. "It is worthy to note that the editor
of these reports was Ilya Petrushevsky, a well-known anti-Armenian,"
Comparing the above-mentioned three sources, he concludes that around
4,500 Armenians were resettled in Karabakh Oblast and notes that the
Armenian regions of Siunik and Artsakh were parts of that Oblast at
Regarding the Armenians, who were resettled from the Russian-captured
territories of the Ottoman Empire to the Russian Empire in 1829-1830,
Galichian notes that 14,044 additional families (apart from the
above-mentioned people), totalling up to 100,000 souls, were settled
in the Russian Province of Tiflis, which included the modern regions
of Shirak, Akhalkalaki and Akhaltsikhe.
When Azerbaijani scholars claim that there were no Armenians in the
territory of the Azerbaijani Republic and Artsakh before 1828, they
count the above families from the Ottoman Empire among the Armenians
settled in the region of 'Azerbaijan' by the Russian troops.
Galichian writes that these scholars need to be reminded that during
the first decade of the 17th century Shah Abbas of Persia deported
some 300,000-400,000 Armenians from Armenia to Iran. Only 10 percent
of their descendants managed to return home in 1828, after over two
centuries of exile.
In the Azerbaijani arsenal is to be found another omnipresent 'proof':
the photograph of a monument built by the local Armenians in 1978 in
the Armenian village of Maragha, Martakert region. The inscription
on the base of this monument says 'Maragha--150' commemorating the
150th anniversary of its founding. The Azerbaijani 'scholars' base all
their claims on the argument that if that one village was established
in 1828, then, prior to this date there were no Armenians living in
the territory to south of the Caucasus mountains.
"The proponents of this contrived supposition disregard the myriad of
references in western and eastern literature regarding the thousands
of Armenians who lived in the territory of the present-day Republic of
Azerbaijan, including Shamakhi, Shaki, Ganja, Shirvan and elsewhere,
who were forcefully expelled during 1989-92 from what they considered
as their hometowns and villages. Instead the Azerbaijani scholars
base their claims on the population of just one village, which was
destroyed by the Azerbaijani Omon forces in 1992," Galichian points
out and notes that on 10 April 2015, the Omon forces killed dozens
of people and took many hostages.
He presents more convincing evidence for the Armenians' presence in
the South Caucasus - multitude of manuscripts written in the Armenian
cultural religious centres of the region. "Up to the nineteenth
century, many Armenian-language manuscripts were written in the big
cities of the present-day Republic of Azerbaijan, some of which are
now kept in the Matenadaran in Yerevan. They bear witness to the fact
that in the past, cities such as Ganja, Shamakhi, Shaki and Baku
had well-organised and developed Armenian communities which were
able to support libraries and scriptoria, and which were producing
manuscripts," Galichian writes.
He presents a list of the manuscripts kept in just one centre, the
Matenadaran, all prepared prior to 1820 and proving the existence
of developed Armenian communities with rich cultural life in those
cities. The figures indicate the manuscript reference number with
its preparation date in brackets.
Ganja--3992 (1484), 8967 (1576), 9398 (16-18th cc.), 7980 (1639),
6771 (1667), 3541 (1671), 3576 (1673), 3994 (1683), 3044 (1779), 5234
(1783), 9517 (1819).
Karhat or Dashkesan--3196 (1655), 10044 (1656), 9448 (1665), 3856
(1669), 8965 (1675).
Shatakh, near Ganja--728 (1621), 713 (1636), 5072 (1661).
Shamakhi--8361 (1742), 8492 (1717-1720), 9729 (1765).
Shaki--4228 (1681), 4422 (1783).
Masaly--5997 (18th c).
According to a research carried out by London University geneticists
on the Y-chromosomes of male Armenians in the indigenous population of
Siunik and Karabagh, there is a 20-25% frequency in their fundamental
data, meaning that at least the same percentage of the forefathers
of this section of society have been living in the area for at least
40,000 years, i.e. from Paleolithic times, Galichian writes.
Notably, the Azerbaijani authorities have refused to give permission
for the same research to be carried out in the territory of the
republic. Instead, they preferred to claim that the Armenians of
Artsakh are the 'armenicised brothers of the Albanians,' Galichian
To be continued.
Born in Tabriz, Rouben Galichian is a descendant of refugees from
Van who survived the Genocide. He received scholarship and studied
engineering at Aston University, Birmingham (UK). Since in 1981, he
started to study the rich cartographical heritage in the libraries of
the UK and other European countries. His first research, Historic Maps
of Armenia (in English), was published in 2004. It was a collection of
maps from various libraries and museums in the world, where Armenia
was noted, beginning from the 6th century to the present times. His
second book, Armenia in World Cartography, was published in Yerevan in
2005. The research 'Countries South of the Caucasus in Medieval Maps.
Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan' (in English and Armenian) was
published in 2007. The book The Invention of History (in English)
was published in 2009.
In his book Historical and Geographical Falsifications of Azerbaijan,
published in 2013, the author details the reasons, aims and methodology
of the falsification of the history of Azerbaijan and the countries
of the region.
Rouben Galichian exposes myth of 'divided Azerbaijan' and Azerbaijani
scientists' falsifications of sources Rouben Galichian exposes
Azerbaijani historiography's contradictions to sources and even its own
theories Rouben Galichian: Azari is Iranian dialect, Turkic language
was introduced in region of in C11 with nomad Oghuzes Rouben Galichian:
For Azerbaijani historians, issues of their people's origin are
flexible and alterable theories Rouben Galichian: Ziya Buniatov played
key role in setting ground for conducting anti-Armenian propaganda
in Azerbaijan Rouben Galichian: Falsification of Azerbaijan's history
begins from school textbooks and youth believes in that lie Historical
and Geographical Falsifications of Azerbaijan. Rouben Galichian argues
on aims of appropriating others' history
And the Fraud Had a Name
Posted 16 December 2015 - 11:07 AM
ROUBEN GALICHIAN REFUTES AZERBAIJANI THEORY ABOUT 'ARMENIANS BEING NEWCOMERS' TO SOUTH CAUCASUS
- ED likes this
Posted 13 November 2016 - 09:11 AM
In the international exhibitions, Azerbaijanis and Turks introduce the carpets with Artsakh and Armenian old patterns as Azerbaijani and Turkish carpets. Director of the “Karabakh Carpet” LLC, Sevak Khachatryan, told in an interview with us that he often meets similar cases in international exhibitions. He says that they are so ignorant that by introducing the Armenian carpets as Turkish or Azerbaijani, they are unable to explain the meaning of the patterns, “I have seen many carpets with Armenian inscriptions on them.
Still, from Soviet years they were consistently buying Armenian hand-woven carpets from different villages of Artsakh, bartering them, taking some of the carpets as a trophy during the war, and now introduce them as a part of their culture. Sadly, we have a lot of work to do in this aspect, and they spend huge amounts of to be represented by Armenian carpets.”
Posted 07 March 2020 - 09:47 AM
Posted 07 March 2020 - 09:51 AM
Re-PRINTING history: Aliyev angered by Armenian toponyms on museum maps, orders new ones15:52, 6 March, 2020
YEREVAN, MARCH 6, ARMENPRESS. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev has been angered upon seeing Armenian toponyms on maps displayed at an Azerbaijani arts museum in the Tovuz region.
Apparently by not putting up with the fact that a state of Azerbaijan did not exist during the times of the Kingdom of Urartu, Aliyev demanded the museum to have new maps with names of so-called ancient Azerbaijani cities.
Aliyev instructed the museum’s director to replace the names of Dilijan, Sevan, Hrazdan and other Armenian areas on the maps with Azerbaijani ones.
Edited and translated by Stepan Kocharyan
Posted 12 March 2020 - 07:28 AM
Author Anna Mkrtchyan
Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s failure to find his “historical homeland” on the map at a local museum in the city of Tovuz a few days ago must have affected him deeply.
In his opening remarks at the first session of the Azerbaijani parliament’s (Milli Majlis) 6th convocation on March 10, Pres. Aliyev spoke, among other things, of Armenia’s "historical falsification" and maps.
“Just look at the maps published in the Russian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century to make sure that the overwhelming majority of the names of present-day territory of Armenia are of Azeri origin," Aliyev said, arguing that "historical justice" in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is on the Azerbaijani side, while Armenians have no serious arguments and are engaged in falsification and bribing some politicians.
Once again he referred to the Kurekchay Treaty signed by Ibrahim Khalil Khan and the Russian General Tsitsianov in 1805, stressing that it makes no mention of Armenians. There is no mention of Azerbaijan either in the document. Moreover, no historical document makes any reference to the present-day Azerbaijan until the beginning of the 20th century, in which Aliyev was personally convinced at the Tovuz Museum. That is also why he refers to the maps of the 20th century.
In general, Ilham Aliyev's obsession with manipulating the historical aspects of the Karabakh conflict would have been incomprehensible and absurd, if it had not been for the very pronounced tendency of "presenting the desired instead of the reality" in Azerbaijani propaganda and in Aliyev's public messages. It’s not clear at what extent Ilham Aliyev believes in his own words, but that mentality is striking in his March 10 speech.
He speaks of the establishment of democracy in Azerbaijan, successful and free parliamentary elections and the _expression_ of people’s will, whereas the reality is quite different, as stated by all serious international structures and reports. Aliyev speaks of sweeping reforms and increased role of the newly elected parliament, but his speech largely contained direct instructions on the deputies' future work. He complains that local executive officials are still referred to as khans, but he forgets about the cult of personality surrounding himself and his father Aliyev. The vivid evidence of this is also the remarks of the chief of staff of the Milli Mejlis addressed to Ilham Aliyev at the opening of the same session: "We express our deep gratitude to you for the creative continuity of the development strategy set up by the founder of the independent Azerbaijani state, great leader Heydar Aliyev ....”
Aliyev talks about interfaith dialogue, taking pride in the fact that the Pope praises Azerbaijan's achievements in this area, but in another part of the same speech, he urges lawmakers to play the Muslim solidarity card in the fight against Armenians.
In a nutshell, lies and hypocrisy are everywhere in the Azerbaijani authorities' couloirs. In all spheres, Ilham Aliyev resorts to a distortion of facts and realities that is typical of totalitarian regimes. While the current developments in Azerbaijan pursue only one goal – to keep public unrest under control through limited reforms.
No matter how much Ilham Aliyev tries to portray himself as an "enlightened monarch" or a "popular tsar", he remains an ordinary tyrant who has serious problems with the old maps.
- MosJan likes this
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users