And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Nader Shah Is the Savior and King of Persia not “Azerbaijan”

Figure 28


Nader Shah (1688-1747)

The Safavid Shah Sultan Hussein (1694-1722) plunged the country into chaos because of his incompetence. The people gave him the nickname of mullah because of his religious zeal. Shiite excesses were introduced and non-Muslims were persecuted. This weakened the mighty Safavid Empire to the extent that in 1719 Mahmood (Mahmoud, Mahmud) Afghan, the Safavid vassal of Afghanistan revolted and invaded Isfahan, killed Shah Sultan Hussein in 1722, pillaged and ransacked the land which also affected the Armenians of New Jugha.

Vulnerable, the country was attacked from all sides: the Ottomans invaded from the west, Russians from the north while central Iran was being plundered by the Afghans. In such desperate circumstances, a true savior emerged from the northwestern region of Iran. Nader khan of Turkmen (Turcoman) origin and son of a peasant came to the rescue of his homeland Iran and miraculously liberated the country, repelling the multiple enemies and forcing them out of Iran. It’s worth mentioning that the Armenian Meliks (kings) of Karabakh (Artsakh) helped Nader in ridding Iran of the Ottomans once and for all, for which service they received Nader’s praise who reaffirmed their autonomy and recognized their rule of Artsakh.

By 1735 the country was free of enemy occupation and Nader declared himself king in 1736. He started to expand his empire and invaded Kandahar, Kabul, the Mughal Empire of India and massacred a large number of people for which he is cursed to this day by Indians. Despite his despotic behavior, he was a religiously tolerant person and tried unsuccessfully to reconcile the Shiites and Sunnis. His actions caused his own generals to plot against him and they killed him in his sleep in 1747.

Nader Shah Afshar rescued his country from the verge of perishing and if it were not for him, Iran would not have existed today. Calling him king of “Azerbaijan” is totally nonsensical given the fact he fought the Ottomans vehemently and made maintaining the territorial integrity of Persia the work of his life.

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Qajars Are Kings of Persia not “Azerbaijan”

Like in the case of the Safavids, and indeed when required in case of any ruling dynasty, Iranian or otherwise, the Qajar kings (1794–1925) are also hijacked as kings of “Azerbaijan”. The fact that the Qajars were a Turkmen tribe has given the impostors an adequate pretext to confuse the occasional non-Iranian individuals even more efficiently.

Agha Mohammad Khan, the founder of the dynasty and a ruthless man, set out with the same goal as Nader Shah, that is, to unify Iran and restore it to its glory after the chaotic period following the fall of the short lived Zand dynasty. He chose Tehran, then a mere village, as his capital, was crowned in 1796 and was murdered in 1797.

The Qajars are the least favored kings of Iran. The main reason, beside the abject condition of the country in the time of their rule or their concessions to foreigners, especially the British and the Russians, lies in Agha Mohammad Khan’s successor, his nephew Fathali Shah’s (1797–1834) defeat from the Russians and the humiliating treaties of Golestan (1813) and Turkmenchai (1828) which forced Iran to cede the lands to the north of the Arax (Araxes) River.

Nasseruddin Shah (1848-1896) is considered the smartest Qajar king in whose time western sciences and ideas were advanced in Iran. Especially his prime minister, Amir Kabir, is a bright star in Iranian history due to his reforms in all directions from boosting the economy to diminishing foreign influence, from promoting education to relieving the artificially ornate written language from its excesses which initiated the modern Persian prose. Rousing the jealousy of certain treacherous courtiers, he was rewarded for his services by the Shah by being murdered while bathing.

The Constitutional Revolution (1906-1911), a first in the so-called Middle-East, took place in the time of the Qajars. The Armenians played an important role with Yeprem Khan Davitian as the most successful military figure of the movement.

Whichever way one looks at it, the Qajars can in no way whatsoever be seen as kings of “Azerbaijan”. They are not the most favorite dynasty in the millennia-old Iranian history but they are unquestionably an integral part of it.

Here I would like to add that the Armenians had a difficult time under Muslim khans of the Caucasus, the vassals of the Persian kings who had the freedom to do as they pleased with the indigenous Christian population. For instance, Yerevan fortress, the most important and secure part of the city, housed the khan and his entourage. It was a city within Yerevan where the Armenians could have their businesses but had to leave before nightfall. In any case, the landlord of a city founded in 782 BC by the Armenian king Argishti I centuries before the rise of the Persian Empire by Cyrus the Great, was a second class citizen in their own home.

The persecutions of the Muslim khans rekindled the hope of liberation from their yoke in the minds of some, but not all, Armenians who fought in the Russian camp. Luigi Villari believes “…the very generals commanding the Russian invading armies were often Armenians, such as Lazareff and Loris Melikoff. It is indeed safe to say that but for the Armenians, Russia would never have conquered the Caucasus”. But the Iranian Armenian historic novelist Raffi remarks to his own regret that it was a decision which not only did not bring independence to Armenia, it caused the dissolution of the centuries old five Melikdoms of Artsakh (Moluk Khamsa of Karabakh) by the Russians who turned Armenia and Georgia into Russian provinces.

Unfortunately for the Armenians, many Iranians regret the loss of the so-called South Caucasus to this very day, a subject that comes up every time there is talk of relations with the Russians. It’s interesting that the loss of Afghanistan, an integral part of Iran until the 18th century AD, where ethnic, linguistic, religious and cultural ties are much closer, which happened only a century prior to the Russian victory is not remembered and mourned at all! The inability of many Iranians to see that Armenia is an ancient nation with a unique culture is detrimental not only to the Armenians, but the Iranians themselves. As mentioned elsewhere, the Armenian minority in Iran has not spared any effort to bring its share to the progress of Iran, culturally, politically, economically, scientifically, technically, etc.

The Armenians do not have any territorial claims on Iran, the majority, no matter from where, have an affinity with Iran and always support it. The fact that the lands ceded to Russians are no longer part of Russia but exist as independent states, confirms their non-belonging to one or the other. If the 1,648,195 km² vast, oil and gas rich Iran lets the almost two hundred years old grievance with the Russians go, the more or less 40,000 km² Armenia (including Artsakh) can still be a more important guarantee to harness wolfish pan-Turkist appetites of the Turks for the real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan), the main reason for calling the tail of Turkey with the same name. This said, the relations between Iran and Armenia can be described as cordial at present (2007) and the “complaint” is aimed more at the mentality of the intellectual class of Iranians with the Golestan/Turkmenchai complex.

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Stealing Iranian Cultural Icons

Any Iranian (or other) cultural, political, intellectual, scientific, etc. figure can be shamelessly turkified anytime the need arises. Recently (2007), at a commemoration ceremony for the great Iranian poet Molana Jalaleddin Molavi Balkhi known as Rumi in the West, the current Ottoman sultan Erdogan, howling the praise of someone whose ideas are incomprehensible for the Turk let alone his Persian verses, whimpered that Molavi was born in Afghanistan, a country that did not exist before the 18th century AD with current boundaries defined in the 19th century, and degraded him calling him a Turkish mystic. It goes without saying that the terms “Iran” or “Iranian” were not uttered by the liar.

Molavi was born in 1207 AD in Balkh (Bactria), a thriving city in the Iranian Khorasan province of the day, now near Mazar e Sharif in Afghanistan. Later he emigrated to Iconia (turkified into Konya), the Seljuk occupied Byzantium of the time, hence Rumi = of Rum (Rome).

Exploring Molavi’s world will take an entire lifetime, let us content ourselves with the knowledge that many references to Turks can be found throughout his poetry. Not a single case of praise or admiration! On the contrary, his Turks are either gullible boasters in stupid situations or downright condescended. The stories of his poems usually have a deeper, allegorical meaning which is out of the scope of our subject, yet the use of Turks as savages and idiots tells us about Molavi’s view of these arrogant pretenders who have shamelessly attributed him to their unworthy lot.

A short poem (Masnavi 2.93) called “The intention of the Oghuz to kill a man to scare another” tells the story of “those blood shedding Oghuz Turks” who attacked a village to plunder, found two rich men of the town, swiftly tied the arms of one of them to slaughter him. He asked them why and they told him they wanted to scare the other to show them the hiding place of their gold…

In another one (Masnavi 5.133), he tells the story of Satan presented as a Turk’s dog sitting at the door of the tent. The dog barks and attacks the strangers who pass by, like a lion, yet inside the kids pull his tail and humiliate it. In the poem the inability and clumsiness of the Turk to tame and silence his dog is shown in true satiric fashion.

One could imagine a bunch of suit and tie idlers sitting in a large hall whimpering about someone they haven’t the least comprehension, each appropriating him to their tribe or ethnicity, unable to read a single verse of Molavi, let alone understand it. It would be amusing to see the foolish look in their faces when this poem would be recited to them in their own language. I would love to see the stupor, then sudden stopping and falling of those rotating dervishes who have stolen Molana not knowing a damn thing about the guy.

The picture is the same for the “Azeri” sort. Here two important Persian personalities are presented as examples. Needless to say it is just a sample of the pile of rubbish Turkish “historians” put out continuously. If they can turkify Mesrop Mashtots, the inventor of the Armenian alphabet, the treasure of a people Turks have furiously continued to destroy, doing the same thing to Iranian icons should cause them no pangs of conscience.

Before pulverizing “Azeri” delirium around Nezami, let us quote a couple of verses from another great Iranian poet, Khaghani (1121-1190, Xagani according to their transliteration) equally claimed by these Tatars as being an “Azeri” Turk 800 years before the concoction of fake “Azerbaijan”:

Do not become the bosom pal of a stranger
Do not eat or drink from aliens’ abode

Do not eat of Turk’s food and at the table
Eat politely and not in the Turkish mode

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Nezami Is an Iranian Poet

Figure 29


Statue of Nezami in Tabriz, Iran

What can an artificially concocted “nation” do to legitimize its illegal presence in other people’s land? Relying on anachronistic, fallacious accounts of a nonexistent history, the “Azeris” are shamelessly attempting to fool the unsuspecting and the curious so that they form a false idea of a two sided feud between peoples of a region with equal rights and cultural background regarding certain disputed territories.

An unimaginably comical example is the posthumous - with almost nine hundred years of distance - appropriation of the great Iranian epic poet Jamaleddin Abu Mohammad Elias Nezami Ganjavi (c. 1141-1209, Nizami Gencevi according to Turkish transliteration). The poor guy would turn in his grave if he could hear that he metamorphosed into a fabricated ethnicity, about nine centuries after his own time. Nezami Ganjavi (of Ganja/Gandzak, in Armenia, formerly part of Persian Empire, under present day “Azeri” occupation), wrote his poems, how could it be otherwise, in Persian. He is regarded as one of major Iranian poets, along with the greatest Persian epic poet Ferdowsi.

None of the main subjects of Nezami’s stories deals with the Turks. His masterpiece is the collection of five epics, the Khamseh (Khamsa) of Nezami four of which have Iranian and Arabic fables as subject matter and the last one Eskandarnameh is about Alexander. Since the historic knowledge we have wasn’t available at Nezami’s time, it should be noted that his Alexander is the successor of the mythical Iranian kings of Kian.

Nezami has also written patriotic poems revealing his devotion of his worshipped Iran. His condescending remarks about the Turks clearly prove that in no possible way could he have anything to do with those primitive invaders who had ravaged his homeland in those days.

Praising his homeland Iran Nezami says:

The whole world is merely body and Iran its heart
He who’s saying this, is not abashed even in part

For Iran is the soul of the whole earth
And soul is higher than what body’s worth

In the introduction to Leili o Majnoon ordered to him by Akhtasan ibn Manoochehr shah of Shirvan, alluding to the injustice the Turkish sultan Mahmood did to Ferdowsi, the breach of his contract to pay him with gold coins, he writes from Shirvanshah’s viewpoint:

Turkishness is not the quality of our pledge
Turkish manner does not become our language

A propos, Mahmood Ghaznavi (Qaznavi) put an end to the Samanians, the first Iranian dynasty after Arab rule. Ferdowsi, destitute as a result of his dedication to writing the Shahnameh, had no recourse but to turn to Mahmood for support. At first he encouraged Ferdowsi having in mind stirring up the Iranian people against his rivals, the Turkish A’al Afrasiab family who were his allies against the Samanians. After a while Mahmood defeated his adversary and when Ferdowsi came to him, he disdainfully paid one dirham, instead of a gold coin, per verse for the 60,000 verse long Shahnameh, perhaps the greatest epic of all time. Disappointed, Ferdowsi spent Mahmood’s reward on going to a bath and a beer afterwards. To escape Mahmood’s anger he fled to Herat, later to Tabaristan and wrote a parody for Mahmood. Shahryar, the Iranian ruler of Tabaristan paid him 100,000 dirham to persuade him not to publish the parody.

Legend has it during a raid on India Mahmood remembered the great poet and regretted his mistreatment, sent 60,000 Dinars in gold with pomp at his door at the exact moment they were taking Ferdowsi’s body out… His daughter refused the gift and spent it on charity.

It did not end there. The reactionary mullah Sheikh Abulqassim Gorgani forbade him to be buried in a Muslim cemetery and refused to pray for his soul, because the master of epic had “wasted” his life on relating the deeds and lives of pre-Islamic legendary kings and heroes.

Back to Nezami, in Sharafnameh (a part of Eskandarnameh) describing a battle between Alexander and the Russians and his employing of the defeated Turks against the enemy, he praises the use of one enemy, i.e. the Turks to get rid of another; or in his words the Turkish “poison” to counter the Russian “poison”.

Proud of his Persian (Dari) poetry he boasts:

So much light I have brought in the eyes
That narrow eyes of the Turk have widened in size

Or still:

Since the fire of commending kindled in me
I have but spoken the Jewel of Dari

In a poem from Sharafnameh, Nezami’s Alexander is ready to fight the Mongol Khaghan (Khan):

He opened his mouth and the Turks he cursed
For without sedition was never born a Turk

His patriotism and praise of ancient Iranian customs have directed criticism from his contemporaries who have questioned his Islamic faith.

A truly funny document, written in bad German is at my disposal. The unfortunate thing is it is available as a PDF file on the website of Potsdam University. To provide some refreshing moments I translate some passages:

By: “NOURIDA ATESHI”
Title: “Nizami Gencevi is our Spiritual-Moralistic Legitimation.” (Talking about illegitimacy; they damn well know it! H.)

“We have chosen Nizami Gencevi as the patron (namesake) of our cultural institute because he was one of the first realistic poets of the Middle Ages and Azerbaijan.” While it is absurd to call Nezami an “Azerbaijani” eight centuries before the region was fraudulently named “Azerbaijan”, the nonsensical justification of naming their sham institute, and the irrelevant deduction, “because he was one of the first realistic poets” is as surrealistic as it can get. Plus, the use of the term realistic to describe Nezami’s poetry reminds us of the superficial Soviet evaluation of cultural icons of all epochs and nations, where sticking awkward labels on anyone was obligatory to make them acceptable for their red tyranny.

After a poorly written brief presentation of Nezami, she goes on: “The great Azerbaijani poets and thinkers are mentioned in classical German literature; however, they have been placed in the wrong countries, also Nizami who spent his whole life in his birthplace Gence (Gandzak/Ganja H.). Despite this fact, he was immortalized in Goethe’s “West-Östlicher Divan” as a Persian poet.” No comment!

“In a chapter of the book “Älterer Perser”, the Azerbaijani religious philosopher Zarathustra also receives Persian nationality”. This silly remark breaks the record of the brazenness of Turkish history invention. Besides the fact that Zoroaster (Zarathustra) is considered an Iranian prophet, not a mere philosopher, even the real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) was not called as such in the times of Zoroaster which although not definitely known, predate the times of Alexander by centuries. Moreover, the birthplace of Zoroaster is disputed: some believe he was born in Media Minor (later Atrpatakan/real Azarbaijan) because of the presence of the important Azargoshnasp temple; others situate his origins in Khorasan, northeast of Iran. Even in India his followers are known as Parsi (= of Pars, Persia i.e. Persian) and not “Azeri”. Stealing the crown of inanity, this doesn’t even call for a treatment in a separate Zoroaster topic.

Of course, all this fictitious self-praise wouldn’t serve any purpose if it weren’t to smear one of the real ancient nations of the region on whose homeland they have faked their bogus “Azerbaijan”: the Armenians. She breaks more stinking winds: “In Georgia, a monument was desecrated by the Armenians – the monument of Nizami Gencevi. Why? Some Armenians apparently think that because they cannot have Gencevi, others mustn’t have him either”. The desecrators supreme, who have annihilated every surviving ancient Armenian monument in “Azeri” occupied Armenian territories, accuse the Armenians of the barbarities they are the masters of… With their rich millennia old civilization, the Armenians don’t need to steal other peoples’ poets, prophets, scientists, philosophers, heroes, royal dynasties, territory, history, place names, etc., to justify their existence, unlike the cattle-herder, tent-dwelling nomads of less than a century ago, the Tatars of the Caucasus turned “Azeri”.

The icing on the cake or more accurately the fly on the pile of Turk-dung put out by this illiterate scholar is yet to come: “many people want to adorn themselves with Gencevi. Also Kurds and especially Persians, because he wrote his writings in the Persian language. A glance into Gencevi’s time shows what was happening in the 12th century A.D. The concept “Azerbaijan” or “Azerbaijani poet” did not exist back then (my emphasis H.). There was only the idea of Xorasan (Khorasan, northeast region of Iran H.) Literature.” Either the “scholar” must have gone totally bonkers in her rage weaving cock-and-turk stories, that on one hand she admits: “The concept “Azerbaijan” …did not exist back then” or on the other hand she is completely unaware of the actual existence of the real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) where a dialect of Pahlavi Persian was spoken long before and several centuries after Turks set hoof west of the Caspian.

Further on she presents her “proofs” of Nezami’s Turkishness, an example of which will suffice: “Nizami always felt that he was a Turk.” How do you know? “…in one of his works …“Sultan Sencer (Senjer/Sanjar H.) and the Old Woman” an old woman complains about sultan Sencer’s tyrannical behavior. She tells him that the Turkish government has made progress and has enriched the world with justice and righteousness. If the sultan is so cruel and violent, then he couldn’t be a Turk. Could a Persian poet characterize the Turks in such a manner? Has a Persian spiritual ever written or spoken in such a positive fashion regarding the Turks?” doubts the Turkish literary expert, well aware of the savageries of her kind. “Never and no one!” adds the lying Turk.

Advocates of Turkey’s invasion of EU beware! If it took nine centuries and genocide to totally turkify Armenia and Asia Minor, given the false “multiethnic” policies in the West, the diminishing interest in traditional family structures, hence population decrease in ethnicities of European origin, high number of present day Turks and the possibility for the male to have up to four wives, in less than two centuries after this intrusion, Europe will be completely turkified. Nevertheless, they should keep in mind that in the surfacing of any utterance (true or fabricated) by Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Rembrandt, Da Vinci, Michelangelo or Shakespeare in the line of “Turks aren’t such a bad bunch after all” will be interpreted as irrefutable proof of their being Turkish the moment they set their paws in the EU.
A mishmash of “historical” accounts, literary movements of the time in Iran and other subjects no business of the Turks follows where the ignorant sage dares compare Ferdowsi (Firdovsi in her gibberish) to Nezami and conclude that the former was a bigoted Persian nationalist whereas the latter was a tolerant Turkish internationalist. Here again the Soviet symptoms remind us of their ugly presence. It’s interesting that whenever the occasion calls for it, Ferdowsi is plagiarized and portrayed as a Turk. Perhaps the greatest Iranian after the Arab invasion, who is responsible for reviving the Iranian identity and Persian language which was supplanted by Arabic in written language, is cunningly misrepresented by the imposter to further her sophistical argument of lo, behold: Tolerance!

The truth is, Nezami prided himself of being the follower of Ferdowsi, thus, such an ugly analogy cannot diminish the greatness of any of the two but magnifies the illiteracy of a representative of the most intolerant hordes of genocidal savages that have exterminated all the highly civilized Christian indigenous nations living in the lands occupied and devastated by her sort, that most probably cannot even read Nezami’s poetry, and she goes on with her desperate history falsification, accusing the Iranians, Russians, Armenians and Arabs of the same: “The falsified history will be rewritten anew (my emphasis H.) and will not let itself be taken from its firm ground in Azerbaijan”, confesses the forger and with this glorious delirium she ends her “essay”.

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Babak Khorramdin Is an Iranian Hero

Babak Khorramdin has been presented in the “Islamic Historians” section under Massoudi; therefore, a short reminder must be adequate:

The Iranian hero, native of real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan), Babak Khorramdin started the Khorramdin movement in 820s AD, against the caliphate, who had taken over the rule of Persia after the Arab invasion which imposed the religion of Islam on Iranians. Babak’s aim was to restore the ancient Iranian religion and to free Iran from the Arab rule. This movement lasted almost two decades and dealt serious blows to the Arabs until Babak’s tragic mutilation.

The fact of Babak’s origins being from real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) has been twisted to suit “Azeri” historical contrivances to deceive both the real Azarbaijani Iranians and turn them against their people and the rest of the world to pretend that their counterfeit “nation” could also produce men of valor and integrity. Babak has been reconstructed as the greatest “Azeri” hero who fought the occupying Persians to liberate “Turkish” Azarbaijanis from the Iranian yoke two full centuries before the first Turkic invasions!

One must have a colorful imagination to believe that the Iranians in real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) or elsewhere in Iran had ever heard of the Turks in those days, but time and space are irrelevant to Turkish history forgers.

*****

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Historians about Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aluania

Greek and Roman Historians of Antiquity

Historic documents dealing with Aghvank (Aluania, Albania of the Caucasus) recorded by European historians from the first century BC to the third century AD, given Aghvank’s geographic situation, are obviously not the most exhausting of all. Nevertheless, since the mysterious peoples of the region have long disappeared from the world scene, these records are worthy of consideration.

Aristobolus, who participated in Alexander’s excursions, has recorded the existence of the Aghvans (Aluanians) in the 80s of the third century BC.

Although the peoples collectively called the Aghvans (Aluanians) appear in the fourth century BC in history, the earliest accounts of the tribes living in the region known as Aluania (Aghvank) come from the sixth and fifth centuries BC. Hecate (Hecataeus of Miletos) has noted the existence of a people called the Miks who lived near the Arax. Herodotus calls them Mycians and also mentions other ethnicities such as the Caspians and Utians. Strabo, who lived around 65-63 BC and 21-23 AD in Amasya in Asia Minor, speaks of 26 tribes who lived in Aghvank.

The authors of antiquity report that the state of Aghvank was founded in the first century BC.

Pompey’s invasion of the East brought the Romans to the shores of the Caspian and according to Strabo, Theophanes also went on the expedition. Later, in 34 AD, Marc Anthony reached Aghvank as well.

The historians of this era describe Aluania (Aghvank) a land limited to Armenia in the south (River Kur), Sarmatia in the north (Caucasus mountains), Iberia (Georgia, Olazanes River) in the northwest and the Caspian in the east; a land far smaller than the present day artificial state of counterfeit “Azerbaijan”, whose fabricated “history” cites half of the universe being inside the borders of “Albania”, to whose people and civilization the Tatars of the Caucasus turned “Azeri” have no relation or affinity whatsoever. As with the Islamic historians of a later epoch, the Greek and Roman authors consider the River Kur the border between Armenia and Aghvank.

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Herodotus (Hρόδοτος c. 484-425 BC)

To prove their absurd claim that the present day Azarbaijan (the real) and “Azerbaijan” (the fake) were one country trillions of quadrillions of millions of eons ago, besides pretending to be the descendants of Aghvans (they prefer the term “Albanians”) who had nothing whatsoever to do with the Turks, the “Azeris” also claim that the Medes, a people of Iranian origin and unrelated to Aghvans, were also Turks and that the Persians who defeated them, in fact broke up their unity. That the Medes are Aryan (Iranian) is obvious from all the names pertaining to Median Iran as the name Atrpatakan itself. Let’s hear it from ancient historians.

Herodotus says: “The Medes had exactly the same equipment as the Persians; and indeed the dress common to both is not so much Persian as Median. They had for commander Tigranes, of the race of the Achaemenids. These Medes were called anciently by all people Arians; but when Media, the Colchian, came to them from Athens, they changed their name. Such is the account which they themselves give.” (Translated by George Rawlinson) ●


Patrocles (3rd century BC)

Patrocles, an officer who around 283-282 BC was commissioned by Seleucus I (312-281 BC) and Antiochus I (281-261 BC) to undertake a reconnaissance expedition around the Caspian to realize the unfinished plans of Alexander, prepared an exhaustive report which is known to have been one of the most valuable sources about Aghvank (Aluania, Aran, Albania of the Caucasus). This work has not been recovered; however, quoting Eratosthenes, Strabo and Pliny have given accounts of Patrocles’ expedition and Strabo has used Patrocles’ report to inform about the Caspian Sea. It is believed that Patrocles knew about the Aghvans and the geographic situation of their land. ●


Eratosthenes (Eρατοσθένης 276-194 BC)

Strabo considers Eratosthenes and Theophanes more trustworthy and has discarded other authors such as Poseidonius. Strabo and Pliny have used Eratosthenes work in their accounts of the Caspian and the peoples living in the region. ●


Polibi (Πολύβιος Around 205 BC)

From the little that remains from Polibi’s Historiae, we learn about the Kadus (Talish) who lived around the western shores of the Caspian in the area between Aluania (Aghvank) and Aturpatekan (Azarbaijan the real) which confirms that the two were distinct since the earliest times Lesser Media had been called Atrpatakan. ●


Strabo (Στράβων 65/63 BC-23 AD)

Strabo has visited Armenia in the first century BC and has recorded his observations about the region including the Aghvank and the Aghvans. He has considered the work of Theophanes’ and third century BC authors such as Eratosthenes and Patrocles (who under Seleucus I and Antiochus I had organized expeditions around the Caspian), more trustworthy and has used them as reference.

In the eleventh chapter of his Geography, Strabo states: “Albania (Aghvank H.) is a land stretching from the south of the Caucasus Mountains to the River Kur and from the Caspian to the Olazanes River.” He also situates the “Atropatenean Media” to the south of Aghvank, thus confirming that the two were separate entities.

Describing the River Kur, he remarks: “The River Kur has its source in Armenia and flows into the plain between the Caucasus Mountains and joins the River Aragos (Aragvi) and other rivers that flow down these mountains and crosses Albania (Aghvank). This abundant river separates Albania (Aghvank) and Armenia… and pours into the Caspian.”

“The plains of Araxena and Sakasena that border Albania (Aghvank) through the River Kur, belong to Armenia… The River Kur is situated between Albania (Aghvank) and Armenia” Strabo confirms. ●


Pliny (23–79 AD)

Pliny has used Eratosthenes’ works for his accounts of the Caspian region and the lands surrounding it. In his Natural Geography, Pliny observes: “The Albanians (Aghvans H.) inhabited the vicinity of the River Kur and the Olazanes River (Alazan) separated them from the Iberians (Georgians H.)” He presents Kabalak (Կապաղակ) as the most important city of Aghvank. ●


Plutarch (Πλούταρχος Around 46-120 AD)

Plutarch’s Lives contains material dealing with Aghvank such as military aid to Tigran the Great of Armenia by Aghvan tribes. Describing Pompey’s invasion of Aghvank, their permission to allow the Romans to cross Aghvank and the subsequent, sudden Aghvan rebellion against the Romans, he mentions place names and as it appears from his writings, the rivers Arax and Kur did not meet and Arax flowed into the Caspian without mixing with River Kur. This confirms that Armenia’s easternmost border stretched to the Caspian.

Marc Anthony’s one hundred thousand strong army faced fierce resistance from Phraates (Farhad) IV, (c. 37-3 BC) in Atrpatakan and according to Plutarch after suffering heavy casualties (20,000 infantry and 40,000 cavalry) the Romans crossed the Arax River into Armenia.

This confirms that first: the Arax River was (and still is) the border between Atrpatakan (Azarbaijan the real) and Armenia and second: there was no “Azerbaijan” north of the Arax River and third: the two regions north and south of the Arax River were distinct, unrelated and never two parts of a single “Azerbaijan”. ●


Dionysus (2nd century AD)

The second century AD historian and geographer Dionysus has written about the Aghvans (Aluanians). He notes peoples from northwest to southeast of the Caspian Sea as follows: Saka (Scythians), Uns (according to some these were same as Huns others identify them with Udins), Caspians, Kadus (Talish), Aghvans (Aluanians), Mardes, Hirkanians, Tapirs but no races related to the Turks. ●


Cornelius Tacitus (c. 56–c. 117 AD)

Tacitus has written about the Aghvans, the Parthians and invasions of nomadic tribes into Aghvank. He relates the Roman invasion into Armenia in 58 AD when they turned Artashat into rubble and reduced it to cinders. It’s interesting to note that the Mardes (one of several peoples of Aghvank) ambushed the Romans several times but were defeated by the Romans who used the help of the Iberians (Georgians). In 60 AD, the Armenian king Trdat I (Tiridates), tried with no success to attack the Romans from Atrpatakan, therefore he went to Rome for peace talks to avoid the dangers coming from the northern tribes in the Caucasus, who also threatened the Roman interests. ●


Ptolemy (Πτολεμαῖος c 83–161 AD)

In his description of Armenia, Ptolemy writes in his Geography: “The greater Armenia borders Colchida, Iberia (Georgia) and Albania (Aghvank) along the River Kur”. Elsewhere he adds: “Albania (Aghvank) shares its border in the south with Armenia and Iberia… The cities and villages of Albania (Aghvank) are situated between Iberia and a river that flows from the Caucasus Mountains and joins the River Kur. This river stretches all along Iberia and Albania (Aghvank) and separates them from Armenia”. ●


Arrian (c. 86/92-c. 175 AD)

In his work Anabasis Alexandri, Arrian describes the battle of Gaugamela in 330 BC, where Aluanian (Aghvan) soldiers participated among the army of Darius III. He also notes that in the multinational Achaemenid army that included the Medes, Bactrians, Parthians, Aluanians (Aghvans), etc., Athropat (Atrpat, Atropat) was the commander of the Medes where the Saka, Kadus and Aghvans were also fighting under his command. He mentions Aluania (Aghvank) and Media Atropatena (Atrpatakan) as separate entities. ●


Dio Cassius (Around 165-235 AD)

In his Roman History, among the events of the years 68 to 47 BC, Dio Cassius narrates Pompey’s invasion of Albania (Aghvank) in detail. He says: “He (Pompey) spent the winter in Anaitida by the River Kurna (Kur) and divided his army in three parts… He couldn’t get through the winter without trouble because Oroyz the king of Albania (Aghvank) who lived to the north of the River Kurna (Kur) fought with him.” He also reports the existence of an Anahid temple near the River Kur which shows that religious beliefs of Armenians were also present in the area. ●

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Additional note:

In the Sassanid king Khossrow (Khosro, Khusrau) I Anushirvan’s time (531-579 AD) the Iranian Empire was divided into four administrative regions (koosts).

Figure 30


Kartir Inscription, Naqsh e Rajab, Iran

In his inscription, Kartir, the Zoroastrian high-priest living in the third century and contemporary of three Sassanid kings, speaks of the spreading of the Fire of Mughan (=magi of Zoroastrianism) and distinguishes interior lands of the Iranian empire from Aniran (lands outside Iran) where Aghvank also is a part of, confirming the fact that it was not a part of an imaginary “Azerbaijan”.

“…And I made prosperous many fires and magi in the empire of Iran. And I also, by command of the King of Kings, put in order those magi and fires which were for the territory outside Iran, wherever the horses and men of the King of Kings arrived -- the city of Antioch and the country of Syria (12) and what is beyond Syria, the city of Tarsus and the country of Cilicia and what is beyond Cilicia, the city of Caesarea and from the country of Cappadocia to Galatia, and the country of Armenia and Georgia, and Albania (Aghvank H.), and from Balaskan to the Alans' pass. And Shahpur, King of Kings, with his own horses and men visited with pillaging, firing, and havoc. (13) But I did not allow damage and pillaging, and whatsoever pillaging had been made by any person, those things I had taken away and returned to their own country.”

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Islamic Historians

The histories of what’s come to be known as South Caucasus, Armenia and Iran have been closely interrelated since the earliest periods of recorded history. The Iranian Median Empire posed serious threats to the Armenian kingdom of Van. According to Movses Khorenatsi, the Armenian king Tigran Yervandian (Orontid, ruled around 560–535 BC) helped Cyrus II (the Great) in overthrowing the Median king Astyages (Ajdahak) and establishing the Achaemenids. Of course, later on Cyrus annexed Armenia to his empire. Darius the Great (522-486 BC) also attacked Armenia and as stated by his trilingual inscription in Baghastana (Bistoon, Behistun), near Kermanshah, where he calls Armenia: Armina in Old Persian, Harmina in Elamite and Urashtu (Urartu) in Akkadian, he admits he had to fight five times to suppress the rebellious Armenians to subjugate them.

Figure 31


Darius’ inscription Baghastana (Bistoon, Behistun)

The history of Armenia remained related to Iran after the Arab invasion as well. The Arab conquest which also included both countries meant that the Islamic historians couldn’t overlook the events in Armenia. A considerable number of these are Iranian in origin but since for the first couple of centuries of the Islamic era, Arabic was imposed as the written language in the already Islamized Iran, the Iranian scientists, philosophers, travelers, geographers, historians, etc., have written in Arabic.

Aghvank and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) have always been referred to as separate entities by all Islamic historians. It’s true that at times, they have been put under the same administrative region but even then they were still considered two different lands. The same thing has also happened to Armenia, where sometimes a part of it has come under the administration of Aghvank and vice versa.

In any case, the interesting thing about the accounts of the Islamic historians is that almost all of them consider Aghvank (Aran or Ar Ran in Arabic) a part of Armenia, a point that they report as a most normal and ordinary truth, regardless whether, for instance, Artsakh was put under the administration of Aghvank or otherwise.

This is not good for the “Azeris” who claim to be the descendants of the Aghvans (among all other nations of the region and beyond), who they always refer to with the fallacious terms “Albanians” for the people and “Albania” for their country, the mistaken transliterations of some European historians. “Azeri” distorians who deny the existence of Armenia simply project their deficiencies on Armenians because examining every surviving historical document one will be wasting their time looking for a single mention of “Azeri” as a nation or “Azerbaijan” in the Caucasus whereas all historians who have written about the region, have reported extensively concerning Armenia and Armenians.

[Hellektor]

And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Baladhuri (?-c. 892 AD)
بلاذري
Full: Ahmad ibn Yahya Baladhuri
احمدبن يحيي بلاذري
Work: Futuh al Buldan (Conquests of Lands)
فتوح البلدان

The Iranian historian Baladhuri (died 279 Hijri) considers Aran (Aghvank) part of Armenia. He clarifies the fact of a considerable Armenian presence in Aran (Aghvank) as follows: “An inhabitant of Bardha (Partaw, Պարտաւ), Muhammad ibn Ismail and others, Abu Bara Anbassat ibn Bahr Armani also Muhammad ibn Bashar Qali from their notables and Barmak ibn Abdullah Dabili (of Dvin) and Muhammad ibn Mkhis Khlati and a number of others recounted about persons knowledgeable in affaires of the Armenians and I relate their words in a correct manner, matching them against one another and completing them. It’s been known that Shmshat and Qaliqla (Cilicia) and Arjis (Arjesh, Արճեշ) and Bajonis are parts of fourth Armenia and the Khora of Bosforjan (Vaspurakan) and Dabil (Dvin) and Seraj and Baghrevand (Bagrevand) is called third Armenia and Jorzan (Georgia) second Armenia and Sisjan (Sisakan) and Aran (Aghvank) and Tiflis (Tbilisi) are first Armenia… Jorzan and Aran fell under the Khazars and the rest came under Roman occupation.”

That Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aghvank were two completely separate entities throughout history is also reflected in the religious developments in both regions. Baladhuri tells us that the people of Azarbaijan (the real) were already Muslims short after the Arab invasions: “When Ali ibn abu Taleb became caliph, he appointed Saad ibn Saria Khazaii later Ash’ath ibn Qeis as rulers of Azarbaijan (the real H.) …When Ash’ath arrived in Azarbaijan (the real H.), he saw that most of the people had converted to Islam and read the Qur’an” while it is known that the acceptance of Islam did not go so smoothly in Aghvank. The Aghvans assimilated mainly with Armenians in the following centuries.

When in December 2005 the genocidal “Azeris” were barbarically destroying the centuries old stone-crosses of the ancient Jugha cemetery in Nakhijevan, in response to the pleadings of the head of the Armenian church Garegin II to stop the savagery, the religious leader of fake “Azerbaijan” Allahshokur Pashazadeh shamelessly retorted: “do not worry, these are the monuments of our Albanian (Aghvan H.) “ancestors”.” That Nakhijevan could never have been a part of faraway Aghvank is obvious however, it is noteworthy to quote a part of Baladhuri’s narration of the first Arab incursion into Aghvank: “the invaders reached Aran (Aghvank H.) from the south and crossing through Nakhijevan”. ●


Dinwari (Dinawari) (828-894 AD)
دينوري
Full: Abu Hanifa Ahmad ibn Dawood Dinwari
ابو جنيفه احمدبن داود دينوري
Work: Akhbar ut Tawal
اخبار الطوال

The renowned third century Hijri Iranian historian, scientist and literary figure, author of at least twenty one works in different fields, Dinwari (died around 281 Hijri) has also recorded information about geographic features of Armenia, Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aghvank through his account of Babak Khorramdin’s history. Aghvank is considered part of Armenia according to this historical narration.

He relates the administrative changes of the Iranian Sassanid Empire in the time of Anushirvan (Khosro, Khusrau I) as follows: “Anushirvan divided the Iranian kingdom into four major iqlims (realms, koosts) and appointed a trustee as the ruler for each. One of these iqlims was consisted of Khorasan, Sistan and Kerman; the other Isfahan, Ghom (Qom), the lands of Jebal (Medes), Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Armenia; the third Fars, Ahvaz and until Bahrain and the fourth iqlim included Iraq until the borders with the Romans.”

Dinwari confirms that the River Kur is the southernmost part of Aghvank and the Arax River separates Armenia from Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan). ●


Ya’qubi (?-897 AD)
يعقوبي
Full: Ibn Wadih Ahmad ibn abu Ya’qub Ishaq ibn Jafar Isfahani
ابن واضح احمدبن ابي يعقوب اسحاق بن جغفر اصفهاني
Works: Tarikh Ya’qubi (Ya’qubi History), Al Buldan (Countries)
تاريخ يعقوبي

Ibn Wadih Ahmad ibn abu Ya’qub Ishaq ibn Jafar Isfahani (died 284 Hijri) is a well known Islamic historian and geographer. He was a descendant of Wadih, the Abbasid caliph Mansour’s appointed governor of Armenia and Azarbaijan (the real). Ya’qubi lived in Armenia for some years and served some of its governors.

In his Tarikh (History), Ya’qubi considers Aran (Aghvank) a province in Armenia and says it was known as the third Armenia that was conquered by the Iranian king Ghobad (Sassanid king Kavad, Kaveh). He writes: “The third part (Armenia) includes Bardha (Partaw) a city in the province of Aran (Aghvank), Beylakan (Pytakaran) and Bab ul Abwab (Darband, Chor)”

In his geographic work Al Buldan (Countries) he names places and cities in three parts of Armenia, first: Dabil (Dvin), Qaliqla (Cilicia), Khlat, Shimshad, Savad; second: Bardha (Partaw, Պարտաւ), Beylakan (Pytakaran, Փայտակարան), Qabalah (Kabalak, Կապաղակ), Darband; third: Khazran (Jorzan, Georgia), Tiflis (Tbilisi), etc. As cities of Azarbaijan he cites: Ardebil, Varthan, Shiz, Marand, Tabriz, Mianeh, Urmia, Khoy, Salmas, etc.

In Al Buldan, Ya’qubi calls the language of the people of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) Pahlavi Azari and considers the people of that region of Iranian origin.

It’s noteworthy to mention the events of 238 Hijri (852 AD) in his History where the Turkish Buqa khan was sent by Al-Mutawakkil (847-861) to suppress the uprising of Armenians: “Buqa killed many Armenians and their leaders (why am I not surprised? H.)”, eventually Buqa was defeated by the rebels and the caliph appointed Muhammad ibn Khalid ibn Yazid ibn Mazid Sheibani as the ruler of Armenia. The rebels ended the uprising and Muhammad pardoned them. ●


Ibn Khordadbeh (c. 820-912/913 AD)
ابن خردادبه
Full: Abulqassem Ubeidullah ibn Abdullah ibn Khordadbeh
ابوالقاسم عبيدالله بن عبدالله بن خردادبه
Work: Al Masalek wal Mamalek (Roads and Countries)
المسالك و الممالك

Ibn Khordadbeh (died 300 Hijri) was the director of communication and information of western parts of Iran in the time of the Abbasid caliph Al Wathiq (842-847 AD). He is the author of a geographic work about the roads and countries. The roads of Armenia, Georgia, Aghvank up to areas around the Caspian are described in his work.

He says Armenia consists of four parts. He considers Aran (Aghvank) part of first Armenia (Armenia Maior). He writes: “The First Armenia includes Sisjan (Sisakan, Սիսական) and Aran (Aghvank) and Tiflis (Tbilisi) and Bardha (Partaw, Պարտաւ) and Beylakan (Pytakaran, Փայտակարան) and Qabalah (Kabalak, Կապաղակ) and Shirvan.

Ibn Khordadbeh gives separate accounts of cities in Azarbayegan (Azarbaijan, Atrpatakan) and Aran. He places cities and villages in Azarbaijan to the South of the Arax, north of Zanjan and Hamadan and describes Aran and Georgia with cities Tiflis (Tbilisi), Bardhae (Partaw), Beylakan (Pytakaran), Qabalah (Kabalak), Shirvan, etc. and mentions that they were conquered by Iranian king Anushirvan from Khazar rule.

Confirming yet again that a “great Azerbaijan” two sides of the Arax River is nothing but fairytale and a 20th century historic falsification, he lists the rulers of lands within Iran and outside its boundaries who obeyed the central Iranian government keeping some kind of independence: Great Kushan shah, Great Armanestan shah (Armenia), Borjan shah (Georgian), Gilan shah… Aturpatekan shah (Azarbaijan the real), Kerman shah, Alan shah (Alans = Ossetians), Turan shah… Kashmiran shah, Reyhan shah (in India), Aran shah (Aghvank), Shirvan shah, etc., etc., etc. ●