INSTRUCTIONS AND PROPHECIES OF THE Blessed MOTHER ALIPIA GOLOSEEVSKY, Kyiv...
There are various versions about the origin of the Armenians, but the first, and still not lost its significance, the most reliable mention of this belongs to the "father of history" Herodotus.
This ancient Greek historian, who lived in the 5th century BC, wrote that the alleged ancestors of the Armenians - Phrygians (Phrygians) moved to Asia Minor from Europe, from the territory adjacent to Macedonia. The Byzantine writer Stephen (end of the 5th century - beginning of the 6th century) cites the message of the Greek author Knidli Eudoks, who lived before him 1000 years ago, which sounds as follows in the translation of the prominent orientalist I.M. Dyakonov: “The Armenians are from Phrygia and by language very similar to the Phrygians.
Another Byzantine author, Eustathius (XII century), referring to the message of the Greek author Dionysius Periegetes, who lived ten centuries before him, also notes the similarity of the Armenian and Phrygian languages. Modern researchers, based on this information given by ancient Greek authors, also suggest that the ancestors of the Armenians - the tribes of the Frigs, left their homeland in the Balkan Peninsula in a common stream, moved at the end of the 2nd millennium BC. to Asia Minor, to the territory of modern Turkey.
It is curious that although this migration took place chronologically during the decline of the most powerful state on the territory of Anatolia - the Hittite kingdom, there is no information about the Phrygians or Armenians in the Hittite texts.
At the same time, it is known that the Frigi in the VIII century BC. created a kingdom with a center in Gordion in the Sangaria valley (modern Sakarya) and sought to influence the political processes in the region.
Assyrian and Urartian texts provide the most complete information about the events of the subsequent period (VIII-VII centuries BC), where there is also no information about the Armenians.
He told a lot of interesting things about the falsification of facts related to the origin of the Armenians in an interview with a correspondent. website well-known Azerbaijani historian Ilgar Niftaliyev.
According to him, everything written about the ancestors of the Armenians regarding the period from the middle of the XII century BC. (that is, from the time of the alleged resettlement of the "proto-Armenians" from Balkan Peninsula to Asia Minor) and until the fall of the Armenian kingdom at the end of the 4th century, it is built mainly on the assumptions and assumptions of Greek and Roman authors, as well as the conclusions of Armenian chroniclers, which are not confirmed either by the results of archaeological excavations, or by the information of Assyrian chronicles, or by a philological analysis of place names and names of individuals.
By the way, the Phrygian and Armenian languages, although they belong to the Indo-European language family, have quite a lot of differences between themselves. Moreover, the differences are not limited to lexicological material and some grammatical indicators.
On this occasion, the well-known Russian historian and orientalist I.M. Dyakonov wrote in his time: “... the proximity of the Armenian language with Phrygian is not very great so that it would be possible to deduce Armenian from Phrygian.” It is no coincidence that in the Phrygian texts, the content of which has been determined, not a single fact about the Armenians is given.
How Tigranakert appeared
It is known that the Armenians, with their characteristic resourcefulness, resort to various tricks in an attempt to justify their territorial claims to Karabakh.
And one of the examples of this is the falsification of facts allegedly related to the discovery of the ruins of the capital of the mythical "Great Armenia" city of Tigranakert in the territory of the occupied part of the Aghdam region of the Republic of Azerbaijan.
According to the Azerbaijani scientist Ilgar Niftaliyev, this pseudo-idea was planted by the Armenians from the very beginning for a political purpose.
“The world scientific community has long been accustomed to such “shocking finds” by Armenian pseudo-scientists. Back in the 60s and 80s. of the twentieth century in Karabakh, Azerbaijani archaeologists carried out extensive research work. In Aghdam, scientists explored located on the outskirts of the modern city and related to the first half of the 2nd millennium BC. (Middle Bronze Age) Uzerliktepe settlement surrounded by fortified walls.
Azerbaijani archaeologists have studied on the territory of the villages of Aghdam - Shykhbabali and Papravenda - settlements surrounded by fortified walls and dating back to the 12th-9th centuries BC. These monuments testify to the formation of early urban culture in Azerbaijan, especially in its Karabakh region.
As for the temporal and spatial localization of Tigranakert, it follows from the sources that the ideas of the Armenian pseudo-scientists simply do not stand up to criticism.
For example, a contemporary of King Tigran, who ruled in the 1st century BC, the Greek geographer Strabo wrote in his Geography that “... Tigran built a city near Iberia, between this place and Zeugma above the Euphrates. He resettled here the population of 12 Greek cities plundered by him and named the city Tigranakert. However, Lucullus (a Roman commander, his campaign against Tigranakert dates back to about 69 BC), who fought with Mithridates VI (Pontic king), not only let the population go to their native places, but also destroyed the half-built city, leaving in its place only a small village,” said the scientist.
The Armenian historian M. Nersesyan, in his book “History of the Armenian people from ancient times to the present day”, published in 1980, notes that Tigranakert was built on the banks of one of the upper tributaries of the Tigris River. Tigranakert, which, moreover, was never completed, was located not only outside of Karabakh, but also in the Caucasus, in the southwest of Lake Van, on the territory of modern Turkey.
The myth of the Armenian Highlands
There are many conjectures about the origin of the so-called Armenian Highlands.
I.M.Dyakonov noted in this regard: “Since the ancient Armenian language is not related to the languages of the autochthons of the Armenian Highlands… it is clear that it was brought here from outside…. proto-Armenians came to this area in the 7th-6th centuries BC ... (“Armenian Highlands” - a term invented by Armenian authors - A. M. )
According to I. Niftaliyev , ancient Greek and Roman historians, as well as ancient Armenian chroniclers, have no concept of the "Armenian Highland", since it appeared with the light hand of Europeans in the late 19th - early 20th centuries.
Later Armenian authors politicized this concept, interpreting its geographic shape and size in its own way. Based on the Armenian version, reflected in the Armenian Soviet Encyclopedia, published in the 70s of the last century, this highland covers part of the territory of the USSR (the entire territory of the Armenian SSR, the southern part of the Georgian SSR and the western part of the Azerbaijan SSR), Iran and Turkey, and located between the Iranian and Asia Minor plateaus, the Black Sea, the Transcaucasian and Mesopotamian plains. It was also noted there that the territory of the Armenian Highlands is 400 thousand square kilometers, and it was entirely part of the territory of “Great Armenia”, where the Armenian people allegedly formed from ancient times.
Although on the territory of the so-called. 600 - 1000 years before the appearance of the ancestors of modern Armenians, and also after their appearance, various states existed and various peoples lived in the Armenian Highlands, for some reason the name of the highlands was designated as Armenian.
“Is it really true to associate the name of a mountainous relief with the name of a people who for more than a millennium did not play any decisive role in the political processes that took place on the map of the Near and Middle East, was not a state-forming ethnic group in this territory, lived for a long time mainly within the borders of the Muslim Turkic states, and only in 1918, due to a favorable set of circumstances, did he create his own national state for the first time?”, the scientist asked, noting the following important detail.
“Despite the fact that the highland is called Armenian, there is not a single Armenian toponym in the name of the mountain peaks that make it up.
Most of them have Turkic names: Kabirdag, Agdag, Koroglydag, Zordag, Sichanlydag, Karachumagdag, Partchenisdag, Pambugdag or Khachgeduk, etc. These mountain peaks make up the Agrydag Range from west to east - dormant volcano, which in Armenian historical literature received the name Ararat,” Niftaliyev pointed out, adding that in ancient sources this mountainous relief called Mount Taurus.
By the way, Armenian historians are so carried away by the fantasy of ancient Armenia that they still confuse ethnic and geographical concepts that are fundamentally different from each other.
“It is known that some countries are named after the peoples inhabiting them (Turkey, Germany, France, England), others, in accordance with the geographical or administrative name that determines the name of the inhabitants - by territory (Georgia, Italy, Azerbaijan, etc.). ). In ancient times, in modern Anatolia, which Armenians consider the cradle of the Armenian people, there were no geographical names that united the inhabitants of these areas, regardless of their ethnicity. Accordingly, there have never been communities called by the name of these geographical concepts. The fact that Armenia is a geographical concept has long been known. Naturally, all the inhabitants of ancient Armenia, or Arminia, were called Armenians, regardless of their linguistic and ethnic affiliation. The name of the geographical space was transferred to the name of a population with a different ethno-linguistic composition. This is the same as that the inhabitants of ancient Caucasian Albania were called Albanians, although they consisted of an association of 26 tribes that differed in their linguistic and ethnic composition. Thus, Armenians are the collective name of all the inhabitants of Arminia and do not express the name of any one ethnic group,” the historian continued.
According to him, no continuity can be traced between the population and the territory of ancient Armenia (located outside the Caucasus) and the Armenians and the territory of modern Armenia - neither ethnic, nor linguistic, nor geographical.
According to the Azerbaijani scientist, the assertion of modern Armenian researchers that the ancestors of the present-day Armenians have lived in these places since the first mention of the term “Armenian” in written sources is the same myth as the assertion that the Armenians descended from Noah.
“A term similar to the geographical name “Armenia” is first found in the inscription of Darius I (522-486 BC) on the Behistun rock (the territory of modern Iran). In this inscription, among the countries that make up the Achaemenid Empire, “Armina” is also mentioned. In the Behistun inscription, Armina is mentioned among a number of countries that rebelled against the Achaemenids after Darius I came to power in 522 BC. But in the inscription nothing is reported either about the people who rebelled in Armin, or about the leader of the uprising. We find further information about the territory of Armina's location in the aforementioned work of Herodotus "History". According to the Greek author, Armenia, or Armina, was located to the northwest of Lake Van, in the region of the sources of the Euphrates River. Herodotus included Armenia in the XIII district (satrapy) of the Achaemenid Empire. Moreover, the Greek author, mentioning the names of some tribes that inhabited the XIII satrapy, calls the Caspians, Paktians. Consequently, various ethnic groups lived on the territory, which, according to Herodotus, was part of the XIII satrapy of the Achaemenid state, and in the Behistun inscription this district was called Armina not by ethnicity, but by the ancient name of the territory, which has nothing to do with modern Armenians. - I. Niftaliev explained.
Armenian-zoki-Jews?
By the way, the existing versions about the origin of the Zok Armenians are also very curious.
For example, the Russian ethnographer of the late 19th century V. Devitsky wrote that the Zoks lived in the village of Akulis (Aylis) in the neighborhood of Ordubad (the current Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic), in 7-8 villages, had independent language, most of whose words were completely different from the Armenian. This gave grounds to assert that the Zoks were the remnants of some independent ethnic group, which, having adopted the religion and liturgical language of the Armenians, gradually became Armenianized, although they continued to speak their own language among themselves.
Developing the theme, the Azerbaijani historian added another interesting fact to it.
According to him, there is also a version that these were Jews who, due to historical circumstances (loss of statehood, resettlement), turned out to be neighbors of the Armenians and converted to Christianity.
Thus, despite the futile efforts of Armenian pseudo-historians, who zealously assert that the Armenian people are autochthonous, the real facts reflected in the collections of world scientists indicate the opposite, which calls into question the inflated myth about the ancient origin of the Armenians.
Matanat Nasibova
Artak Movsisyan, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Professor at YSU, Senior Researcher at the Institute of Oriental Studies, Armenologist Artak Movsisyan answers the questions of Vadim Arutyunov, the host and author of the project. The questions have been prepared on the basis of various discussions on the Internet on the history of Armenia and the Armenian people.
- The question is often asked about the origin of the Armenian people, in particular, where did the proto-Armenians come from?
This is a pretty big topic. On the Internet, I have a special lecture lasting about an hour on the origin of the Armenian people for those who are interested, and now I will try to present it in a very concise and more popular form. Speaking about the origin of the Armenians, it must be very clearly understood that the Armenians are an autochthonous people. Armenian legends testify that Armenians are an indigenous people. The Armenian historian of the 18th century Mikael Chamchyan and other historians, based on the Bible and Armenian sources, went even further. They argued that Armenia is the cradle of mankind, the country where life was reborn after the Flood, and the Armenians are the indigenous people of this divine, paradisal, biblical land, the land of Noah's ark.
But the 19th century came and what happened? When deciphering the cuneiforms found in Armenia, it turned out that they were not in Armenian, they were cuneiforms called Urartian or Biaynili cuneiforms, and the names of the kings - Menua, Argishti, Sarduri, were not mentioned by Movses Khorenatsi. Today, of course, it is clear and understandable why they are not there, but in the 19th century this gave rise to doubts. Moreover, the question was raised - where to look for the homeland of the Indo-Europeans or Aryans, as some scientists call them, that is, it was necessary to understand where the ancestral home of the Indo-Europeans is located. In the 19th century, among European scientists, it was generally accepted that the ancestral home of the Indo-Europeans is located in Europe, in the southeastern part of Europe - in the Balkans. That is, it turned out, on the one hand, that the cuneiform writings found on the Armenian Highlands were not read in Armenian, the kings were not mentioned at Khorenatsi, and on the other hand, it was commonly believed that linguistics believed that the homeland of the Indo-Europeans was in the Balkans. If it is in Europe, in the Balkans, then the Armenians came from there. And there was such a theory that, allegedly, the Armenians came from the Balkans, seized the territory of the Armenian Highlands, and later created their own state. And this, despite the fact that there were cuneiform inscriptions, where the most ancient variants of the name Armenia are mentioned, are mentioned more than 30 times even before the well-known Behistun inscription. The first mentions date back to the 24th-23rd century BC. Akkadian rulers - Sargon of Akkad, Naram-Suen and others, mention the country of Armani, which is the oldest form of the name Armenia. And since there was an idea that there were no Armenians here, they were newcomers, it was believed that the similarity of the names Armenia, Armenians, Ararat was random. If there were no Armenians here, then the similarity of the names is also accidental. Accident can be 1, 2, 3 times, but not dozens of times, there are hundreds of cuneiform writings where Armen, Hay, Ararat are mentioned in different versions. Subsequently, this Balkan theory was not developed, since it was discovered that the homeland of the Indo-Europeans was not in the Balkans, but in the north of Asia Minor, more specifically in the territory of the Armenian Highlands, in the east of Asia Minor, in the north-west of Iran and in the northern part of Mesopotamia. And this is confirmed today not only by the data of linguistics, archeology, but also by genetic engineering, and studies at the level of DNA study provide ultra-accurate data. Today we can say that the Armenians are an autochthonous people. The period of separation of the Armenian language from Proto-Indo-European, linguists erect by the end of the 4th millennium BC. X, and the data of genetic engineering even earlier, by the 6th millennium BC, that is, 8 thousand years before us. That is, we can clearly speak about the existence of a separate Armenian ethnos already over the past 8 thousand years, we can say that the Armenians created their entire history on this territory, on the Armenian Highlands, which, by the way, non-Armenian scientists called Armenian. In written sources, the most ancient Sumerian written sources from the 28th-27th century. to R. Chr. refers to the state of Aratta, which is ancient name Ararat in Sumerian sources.
At different times, Armenians and Armenia had connections with the Semitic peoples. Is it possible to say that in addition to the Indo-European beginning, a certain percentage of Semitic blood cannot be excluded from the Armenians?
In terms of origin, no. But in the course of history, when speaking Semitic, we must also have in mind, for example, the Assyrians. Of course, they lived in Armenia, they were our southern neighbors, in the 4th century we used the Assyrian language and writings, many works of Assyrian authors were preserved only in Armenian, the Assyrians used the Armenian language. There were contacts, of course, and a certain number of Assyrians assimilated with the Armenians. Some very small numbers of Jews may have assimilated with the Armenians. Today, when they speak Semitic, people for some reason are afraid of this term, understanding by this purely Jews. This is not so, in the end, we must not forget that there was a huge Arab world, the Arameans, who were the southern neighbors of the Armenians. In terms of origin, we are pure Indo-Europeans. But in a historical context, every nation communicates, everyone gives blood and takes, and this is natural. And recent DNA research has yielded startling results. Even in Chinese genetics, 4 percent of Armenian blood was found, which at first glance is very surprising. It can be shown as a result historical events, in what time intervals migration and emigration were observed. It is no coincidence that the share of Armenian blood is quite often found in the blood of other peoples, and not only the blood of other peoples is found in us, we did not live surrounded by a fortress wall. But in terms of origin, the Armenians are not of Semitic origin. Although, it must be said that according to the Jewish tradition, which was preserved by Josephus, the Armenians are the descendants of Aram, therefore, they are Semites, that is, they are related to the Jews. In the legends of many peoples of ancient and medieval ages, information has been preserved that they are related to the Armenians. But this has its simple explanation, because in the ancient and Middle Ages Armenia was a powerful state, the Armenians were a great people, and kinship with the powerful is always desirable. Here is a very simple explanation.
Considering that these same Semites: Assyrians, Jews, Arabs belong to the Armenoid subrace, it seems to me that they also have an Indo-European grain, thanks perhaps to the same Armenians.
There is such an opinion in science, and the author is not an Armenian - Igor Dyakonov. He put forward a theory according to which the Arameans, in ancient cuneiforms they are called Ahlamu, who came to Armenia from about the 14th century BC, began to be called Ahlamu-Aramaeans, and then - Arameans and Dyakonov put forward the point of view that the name Aram, ethnic the name they took from the Armenians. We know that the French, for example, took the name franc from the Germans, this is a normal phenomenon. Naturally, there were such connections, but one should not see any super-complex phenomena under this. I know that today there are extreme, deliberately politicized opinions, but that's all.
A lot of talk also goes around the state of Urartu. Who were its inhabitants and what language did they speak?
Let's start with the fact that the very term Urartu goes back to the Ashuro-Babylonian version of the name Ararat. As in the Sumerian sources it was Aratta, but in the Bible Armenia is always called Ararat. In Ashura-Babylonian cuneiforms there is an alternation of sounds a-u: Arme-Urme, Arbela-Urbilu, Ararat-Urartu. And interestingly, in Palestine in the Qumran caves, where they found a huge number of ancient manuscripts of the 1st millennium BC, Urarat is mentioned there instead of Ararat. Ararat-Urarat-Urartu, that is, even an intermediate transitional link has been preserved. That is, this is one of the names of Armenia. And today it is simply absurd to say that the Armenians are one people, and the Khayis are another, or Somekhs, as the Georgians call us, the third.
On what basis did you decide that Urartu is an Armenian state? Having deciphered the cuneiforms, they realized that they were not in Armenian. But let's not forget that three writing systems were used in Urartu: Assyrian was used in Assyrian cuneiforms, Urartian or Biaynian, relatively speaking, in local cuneiforms, and local hieroglyphics, a decoding that shows that this is the oldest Armenian. Both cuneiforms are imported, brought from Mesopotamia, and the local hieroglyphics, which goes back to the Armenian rock carvings, are Armenian. And even these letters already testify in favor of the Armenian origin. Many arguments can be made. For example, the Urartian hierarchy of gods is a classical Indo-European hierarchy, with three supreme deities, with a three-level structure, that is, there is no doubt that it is connected with the Indo-European world. As for the names of the kings, Menua has long been associated with Minos, Argishti with Argestes, etc., who were known in the Indo-European world. There are many criteria: in which case the state can be considered Armenian, say, Georgian, Russian or Mongolian. Is it possible to consider a dynasty sufficient condition? Of course not. A dynasty may be Armenian, but a state cannot be Armenian. For example, in Byzantium, the dynasty, which began in 867 when Vasily I ascended the throne, was Armenian in origin, but the state of Byzantium did not become an Armenian state from this. Or, let's say, the Arshakid dynasty, which established itself in Armenia, was Parthian in origin, but it is clear that this did not make Armenia Parthia. And there are many such examples. So in what case is the state considered, say, Armenian? If the vast majority of the population were Armenians, can we assume that the state was Armenian? Yes and no. No, because, for example, in the eastern regions Ottoman Empire, that is, in Western Armenia, the majority of the population was Armenians, but the state was not Armenian. Thus, comparing all the criteria, which of them can be considered decisive? There is only one answer. Namely: the determining factor is the interests of which ethnic group is represented by the supreme elite of the state. Stalin was a Georgian, but Soviet Union was not a Georgian state. On the contrary, Stalin spoke all the time about the great Russian people, and even had great Russian views, it is clear that he ascended the throne and had to submit to the interests of the Russians. Thus, returning to Urartu, the interests of which ethnic group did it express? Certainly Armenians. It was the first pan-Armenian state that absorbed the entire territory of the Armenian Highlands and neighboring regions. And it is no coincidence that final formation The majority of scientists refer the Armenian ethnos to the time of the existence of the state of Urartu. The Armenian tribes were numerous, and naturally united as part of a single state, merged together precisely during the Urartu period. And if there were some other ethnic group, then it would be mentioned somewhere in the future. How can it be that in the 7th century BC. e. Urartu is mentioned, but in the 6th century - no, no Urartians, no Urartu. No, because Urartu is Armenia, Urartians are the same Armenians. I often talk about this in my works, and I would like to know more about the fact that the term Urartu was used until the 360s, until the 4th century BC. e. That is, after the fall of the Kingdom of Van, the Kingdom of Urartu-Biaynili, the term was used for another 200-300 years. And it was used as an equivalent of the concept of Armenia. As in the Behistun inscription of 520 BC, which, as you know, is written in three languages, Armenia is called Armina in the Persian inscription, Harminua in the Elamite, Urartu in the Babylonian. In the Ashurian and Babylonian texts, Urartu is last mentioned in the cuneiform writings of the Achaemenid king Artaxerxes II, who ruled until 360 BC. e. In Babylonian texts, Armenia is called Urartu, and Armenians are called Urartians.
- Then where did the thesis come from that the Caucasian tribes came from the Urartians?
Here we are dealing with politics, and in its purest form. I'll tell you why. Back in the 1890s, the very famous Russian orientalist Nikolsky published the collection Cuneiform Inscriptions of Transcaucasia. And already in the preface he writes: “Why are we Russians interested in these cuneiform inscriptions, the culture of cuneiform writing? Because Urartu was the first state on the territory of the Russian Empire.” The same thing happened in the Soviet period: Urartu was considered the first state, a slave-owning state on the territory of the USSR. That is why quite a lot of work was done, excavations were carried out, rather large funds were allocated, all this was not done for the sake of the beautiful eyes of the Armenians. Look what happened in the end: do you remember what was written in Soviet history textbooks? That the descendants of the Urartians are Armenians, Georgians, Azerbaijanis. Azerbaijanis ... Turks, whose ancestors, the Seljuk Turks, appeared in these parts at best only in the 11th century AD, and Urartu existed in the 9th century BC, that is, 2000 years before that. But after all, the Soviet state promoted internationalism, and the Transcaucasian peoples were proclaimed descendants of the Urartians, while neither the Georgians nor the Azerbaijanis were in any way related to Urartu. And a theory appeared that it was necessary to tear Urartu from Indo-Europeanism. And there were even confessions - Boris Piotrovsky himself admitted that the corresponding directive of the Central Committee had been issued. At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century, Urartu was considered an Indo-European state, while Soviet Urartu studies received a directive to cut off Urartu from the Indo-European world. Naturally, Urartu, being cut off from the Indo-European world, is also separated from us, but this is our territory, Urartian words have been preserved in Armenian. When already in the 1960s and 70s a new thesis was put forward about deepening ties with the Russian state, because if it is an Indo-European state, then only Armenian, and the Armenians began to deal with the Russian Empire only after 1801, it was necessary to deepen the connection with the north. And then the North Caucasian, East North Caucasian and proto-Dagestan theory of the kinship of languages entered the arena, which was sharply criticized already in the 60s. Both Jaukyan, our well-known linguist, and the German scientist, a representative of the German linguistic school, simply did not leave a stone unturned from this theory. But the order was lowered from above. Unfortunately, studying the history of the study of Urartu, we see that it was mainly a political order that was carried out, and not pure science. We are currently working on a documentary about Urartu. I hope it will be ready by the end of the year and will be released in three languages: Armenian, Russian and English. I hope that our viewers, also on youtube, will have the opportunity to watch it and get answers to all questions. It will be a big film in 2 parts, each 40-50 minutes long.
It is known that there are Chechen historians who study the Grabar, as they are looking for their roots in the Armenian Highlands.
I myself saw maps where they consider Nakhichevan their city, since their self-name is Nokhchi, and avan is a settlement in Armenian. And it seems that Chechen authors also interpret the self-name Nokhchi as the son of Noah, Nokhchi, Nokhchavan and consider them their city.
The cult of the goddess Anahit is often discussed. Some associate her name almost with prostitution. What was the cult of this goddess?
In Armenian sources, Armenian authors considered Anahit the mother of all virtues. The very name Anahit is translated as immaculate, virtuous. Some Greek authors, in particular Strabo, mention that the cult of the goddess Anahit was widespread among almost all the peoples of the East, but the Armenians especially loved her. This goes back to hetaerism, the scientific name for sacred priestly prostitution. There was one day in the year when everyone could copulate with whomever they wanted. It should be noted that the Greek authors, often turning to the East, presented everything in an exaggerated form, wanting to stir up interest in their stories.
As for the cult of the goddess Anahit among the Armenians, there was a day in the year, it was the day of the cult of the goddess, when barren women, only barren ones, were allowed to have intercourse with another man. And this act of the ancient priests is worthy of respect and has nothing to do with prostitution. We live in the 21st century and the problem of infertility is still relevant today - mismatch of chromosomes, etc. What is done today with the help of medical intervention was then done in this way. Moreover, this was often done confidentially, the woman did not see the face of the one with whom she had intercourse, and this had nothing to do with prostitution. And if a child was born from this connection, he was often called Anakhtatur or Astvatsatur (God-given), he was considered a gift from the mother goddess and no one had the right to accuse this woman, or call her immoral or a prostitute. I consider this a manifestation of humanity. And today in the 21st century they love, get married, but often, when it is not possible to have children, the marriage falls apart and the couple gets divorced. And it is only worthy of respect that the priests in ancient times were also concerned about this problem: even on the day of the cult of the goddess of motherhood, a barren woman was given such an opportunity, and whoever wants to stick labels, let it be on his conscience.
Interviewed by Vadim Arutyunov
The fact that the Armenians are not an ancient Caucasian people is known to all Western and Russian historians, governments and special services. Most of all, this is known in Russia and the Vatican. However, it was the West and Russia who came up with the story of the "Caucasian Armenians" in order to later use the latter to fight against the Muslims of the Caucasus and the entire East. Thanks to the Russian Empire, namely to Peter Romanov and his descendants, the Armenians appeared in the Caucasus, in particular in Azerbaijan.
The appearance of Armenians in the Caucasus is the work of tsarist Russia. However, the idea of resettlement of Middle Eastern Armenians in Transcaucasia did not arise from scratch. The main role here was played by the Armenian Gregorian Church and its ministers.
The connections of the Armenian Gregorian Church with the Russian Empire and European states were established as early as the 17th century. The Armenians tried to convince the Europeans that Muslims "oppress the Armenian people, bound to Europe by the same faith."
In 1699, the Armenian Church instructed the Armenian Israilu Ori negotiate with European states and Russia. The church appointed a monk as his assistant Minas Vardapet. Arriving in Europe, these adventurers met with the Emperor of Austria and the King of Florence, informing the latter about the plans to create an Armenian state.
However, the efforts of the Armenians to get help from the Europeans did not give any results, and Israil Ori and his assistant went to Russia. Meeting in 1701 with the Russian Tsar Peter Romanov, Israil Ori acquainted him with the notorious Armenian plan to create a united Christian front against Ottoman Turkey. This idea clearly pleased Peter, who awarded Ori the rank of Colonel of the Carabinieri and sent him to Europe to recruit weapons specialists. In 1711 Israil Ori died in Astrakhan.
Ori's fantasies of creating an Armenian state were continued by Minas Vardapet, who by that time had become an archimandrite. In 1716 this the adventurer went to the possessions of the Qizilbash (Safavid Iran, Persia), to convey to the Russian ambassador Volynsky a letter from Prince Shafirov. The content of the letter was as follows: "Collect information about the Armenian people in Persia, about its numbers, the strength of gravity towards His Majesty the King. Here comes ... Minas Vardapet, familiar to you. Provide him with possible assistance without arousing suspicion ..."
In 1722, Peter joined Persian campaign. The Russians, moving along the coast of the Caspian Sea, captured Derbent, Baku, Lenkoran and some other Azerbaijani provinces of the Kyzylbash state. The western coast of the Caspian was in the hands of Russia. In October 1724, Peter allowed the resettlement of Armenians in the territories occupied by Russia.
It was from this period that Armenians massively settled in the Caucasus. According to Peter's order, the Armenians were allowed to settle "near Baku, Derbent and Salyan" (Russian historian Solovyov, 19th century). Emperor Peter did not forget to give instructions regarding the local Muslim population: "To try in every possible way to call on the Armenians, if any, and settle them, and reduce the Muslims in a very quiet way ..."
A new project for the creation of an Armenian state on the original Azerbaijani lands was drawn up by a certain Shamiryan. According to his plan, the Armenian king was to become the head of the newly created state. He was supposed to have an official representation in St. Petersburg, and to protect the new kingdom, a six thousandth Russian garrison was to be located here for 20 years.
However, in 1735 the Russians were forced to leave the western Caspian lands. This, although not for a long time, did not allow the Armenians to carry out their adventurous plans.
After 100 years...
The situation changed with the capture of the Erivan Khanate by Russia in 1827. Russian monarchs remembered the precepts of their ancestor regarding the Armenians. In turn, the Armenian Catholicos Nerses Ashtaraketsi prepared a special resettlement project. The Russian playwright and Russian ambassador to the court of the Qajars (a Turkic dynasty that ruled Iran in 1796-1925) A.S. Griboyedov did everything possible to implement this plan.In a letter sent in 1827 to Russian colonel of Armenian origin Yegizar Lazarev, Nerses wrote: “Now I have turned to the devoted defender of our Armenian people A.S. also made a request to his Excellency (we are talking about the commander of the Russian troops in the Caucasus I.F. Paskevich - approx. Amir Eyvaz) regarding all the Armenians from Persia and now I ask your Excellency about this: incline Paskevich to ensure that he at the moment negotiations, he did not forget to include in the agreement an article on the free return to Armenia under the auspices of the great Russian Empire of Armenians from the cities and villages of Persia.
Griboyedov and Paskevich really did not forget about the "poor and oppressed" Armenians, deciding to settle them on the lands of the Azerbaijani Turks.
Thus, Article 15 of the Treaty of Turkmenchay says: "His Majesty Shah ... kindly sends down a full and complete forgiveness to all the population and officials of the region called Azerbaijan ... In addition, he provides, starting from this day, one year of time to all officials and residents for free resettlement with their families from this region to Russia, for the transportation and sale of movables and property without any obstacles from the local authorities and without imposing any taxes and duties ... "
Griboyedov personally achieved the inclusion in this article of a clause on the abolition of punishment and prosecution of those Persian subjects who during the war committed treason in favor of the Russians. The fact is that most of them were Armenians.
As a result of the Russian-Turkish war of 1828-1829, the Adrianople peace treaty was signed with neighboring Turkey with similar conditions, which allowed Russia to resettle Turkish Armenians in the Caucasus. In just a few years, Russia resettled over 130 thousand Armenians from the Turkish and Persian regions to the Caucasus. And the resettlement policy existed in Russia until its fall, and was reborn during the Soviet period.
The Russian scientist and researcher Nikolai Shavrov wrote in 1911: "Of the 1,300,000 Armenians now living in Transcaucasia, more than 1,000,000 souls do not belong to the number of indigenous inhabitants of the region and were settled by us." However, even those 300,000 Armenians whom Shavrov considered "the native inhabitants of the region" can hardly be considered natives. They were resettled here a little earlier - during the time of Peter the Great.
The fact that the Armenians were resettled is clear. But the Russian Empire went further. As we remember, Peter personally ordered to settle the Armenians wherever they wish, even the lands of the Muslims, who, in turn, must be "reduced in a very quiet way." In fact, it was an order to give the lands of Muslims to the Armenians, without ceremony with the locals.
The Russian Empire not only resettled the Armenians, it rewrote the entire history of the region.
Perhaps the most important thing that the Russian Empire did for the Armenians is the liquidation of the Albanian Apostolic Church. Thus, the Russians untied the hands of the Armenians - the Armenians appropriated what did not belong to them, wrote their history on a foundation that did not belong to them.
It should be noted that the Albanian Church is the first church in the Caucasus, it was founded by the Apostle Bartholomew, whose remains were buried in Baku until the 9th century. Officially, Caucasian Albania adopted Christianity in 313. And the Armenian Gregorian Church was founded later, because as the Armenian Catholicos Abraham wrote in his letter to the Albanians: "The Throne of Albania, which was earlier than ours, Armenian ..." (Z. Buniyatov. "On the forced dialogue of Gevorg Emin").
Despite the spread of Islam in Azerbaijan, the Catholicosate was not liquidated in the Middle Ages, the Albanian population, which retained the Christian faith, freely attended Albanian churches, which were very numerous throughout Azerbaijan, especially in Karabakh.
These Christians continued to be called Albanians until the 19th century and lived mainly in Karabakh. However, the Russian Emperor Nicholas I in 1836 liquidated the Albanian Apostolic Church. All her property was transferred to the Armenian Church, despite the fact that it was considered lower in rank than the Albanian one. By the beginning of the 20th century, the Karabakh Albanians assimilated with the Armenians, and this is how the "Armenian" community of Karabakh arose...
During the years of the Russian Empire, the dream of Armenians about their own state (even as a Russian protectorate) remained a dream. But it was during this period that the precedent was set for the emergence of historical lands Azerbaijan Armenian State.
This is about renaming Russians Erivan and Nakhichevan khanates in the so-called "Armenian region" immediately after their conquest. Despite the fact that in subsequent years the "Armenian region" was abolished by the same Russian colonial administration, these lands received a kind of connection with the toponym "Armenia" (although historical Armenia is a small region in Asia Minor and has never had anything to do with the Caucasus).
On the basis of this, after the collapse of the Russian Empire, the Armenians demanded the creation of their own republic on the territory of the same “Armenian region”. In 1918, the Republic of Armenia was proclaimed in Tiflis, with its capital in Erivan. The Armenians put forward claims to other lands of Azerbaijan, and with the sovietization of the region with the support of Stalin, Mikoyan and other Turkophobia, they gradually began to achieve their goals.
Since the 1920s, the northeastern coast of Gokchi, Zangezur, part of the Sharur-Daralayaz district were torn away from Azerbaijan and transferred to the Soviets of the Armenian SSR. In Karabakh, the Bolsheviks created autonomy for the Armenians, because it was not possible to separate this region from the Azerbaijan SSR for economic reasons: because of the close connection of Karabakh with Baku.
In 1948-1952, according to the decree No. 4083 of the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated December 23, 1947, thousands of Azerbaijani Turks were resettled from Zangezur and Gokchi to the plain regions of the Azerbaijan SSR. This was done in order to eradicate the Turkic population of the region.
The eviction of Azerbaijanis from Zangezur and Gokchi was not just an act of ethnic cleansing. In fact, the resettlement policy of Russia (albeit Soviet) continued to create and strengthen the Armenian puppet state. Thus, Armenians from Lebanon, Iran and Syria were settled on the lands of the Azerbaijanis evicted in 1948-1952.
The aforementioned resolution of the Council of Ministers of the USSR stated: "To allow the Council of Ministers of the Armenian SSR the buildings vacated by the Azerbaijani population and residential buildings be used for the resettlement of foreign Armenians".
As can be seen, the policy of ethnic cleansing with the subsequent settlement of the region by a loyal population was carried out in Russia at the state level from the time of Peter I until the Stalin era.
Already in our days, the Armenians, already living in the ancestral lands of Azerbaijan, have occupied, in addition, the mountainous part of Karabakh (Upper Karabakh) and seven adjacent regions, where thousands of civilians were exterminated. Over a million Azerbaijani Turks have become refugees on their own land.
 |
| Monument "Maraga-150" (1978) |
As you can see, over the past 200 years, the Armenians have achieved from Europe and Russia the creation of their own state on the lands of Azerbaijan and the recognition of Armenians as the indigenous population of the Caucasus.
Only the local Turkic population remained oppressed, and the "long-suffering" Armenian people, in just over two centuries of their residence in the Caucasus, put an end to the lives of more than a million peaceful Azerbaijanis (massacres in 1905-1906, 1918, 1920, 1992), destroyed the Turkic-Muslim culture of Erivan, Gokchi, Zangezur, Karabakh, razing to the ground many mosques, khan's palaces, cemeteries, monuments...
Text of the 2006 article (published with minor edits)
With the collapse of the empire called the USSR in the 20th century, many stereotypes and fake concepts were refuted in world history.
During the years of Soviet power, the history of the territory of modern Armenia, as a rule, was written by pro-Armenian and Armenian researchers who put forward the theory of the existence of "Ancient, or Great Armenia." At the same time, consistent work was carried out to falsify the facts that take place in the history of such peoples living in this area as Jews, Greeks, Urartians, Aisors (Assyrians), Persians, Georgians, Albanians and, especially, the ancient Turks, whose direct descendants are Azerbaijanis. It should be noted that in world history it is difficult to find a more complicated and falsified history than the history of the Hays, the so-called modern Armenians. The same can be said about their ethnogenesis. This was noted in their studies by many Armenian scientists and European researchers.
Thus, the famous Armenian linguist Manuk Abeghyan confirmed that the Armenian language, like the Armenian tribe, is a hybrid one.
According to primary sources, in order to establish Christianity as the state religion, the Khays first arrived on the territory of modern Armenia (Hayastan) as missionaries. During the period of the Arab Caliphate, they, having taken possession of the places of worship of the Turkic tribes who had converted to Islam at that time, turned these temples into churches and began to falsify historical facts and events for your own benefit. The alphabet, presented today as Armenian and serving the missionaries for the spread of Christianity, was in fact the alphabet of the peoples who lived in Asia Minor and eventually disappeared from the historical scene. Note that the so-called creator Armenian alphabet Mesrop Mashtots was also a Christian missionary and never lived in what is now Armenia.
The history of the Khays was attached to world history, in particular to the Christian Gospels and mythological traditions. different peoples, the main characters of which served as prototypes for fictional Armenian characters, and the areas were used in a falsified history. The work of the “father of the history” of the Khays, the chronicler of the 5th century Movses Khorenatsi “History of the Khays” (despite the fact that in Armenian it is called “Hayos patmutyun”, i.e. “History of Armenians”, it was translated into Russian as “History of Armenia”) many Armenian scholars consider them to be scribbles of a compilative nature, consisting from beginning to end of anachronisms. The statement of Armenian historians about the existence of the Etchmiadzin Monastery from the beginning of the 4th century and the appearance of the Hai alphabet from the beginning of the 5th century seems surprising, while the oldest manuscript of the “History of the Hays” by M. Khorenatsi dates back no earlier than the 14th century.
This is explained by the fact that in these manuscripts, Armenian religious figures from time to time adjusted all periods of their history in accordance with the periods of the history of the peoples and states of the region. In Europe, "History" by M. Horentsai was first translated and published in 1695 in Amsterdam. Western scientists La Croza, A. Carriere, S. Martin, A. Gutshmidt, as well as Armenian researchers N. Emin, K. Patkanov, G. Khalatyants, M. Garagashyan came to the conclusion that, having rewritten the historical facts about the Urartians, Assyrians and the Medes, reflected in the Bible and the works of such ancient Greek scholars as Strabo, Herodotus, Ctesia, Xenophon, M. Khorenatsi, presented in his “History” the commanders and historical figures of these peoples as hayami, and the territories as Hayastan.
The famous Armenian historian Leo (Arakel Babakhanyan) pointed out that in the “History” of M. Khorenatsi, 59 names of sovereigns were mentioned for the 1800-year history of the descendants of Hayk (from the Haykazyan dynasty), of which 32 names were simply mentioned without indicating the time of their reign. Leo argued that M. Khorenatsi, who is considered the “father of Armenian history”, by fitting history to the Gospel, thereby rendered an artificial service to Christianity. This once again proved that he was not a devoted chronicler of the Khaykazian dynasty. Thus, Leo comes to the conclusion that the story written by M. Khorenatsi is a fictional story.
Another Armenian historian Bakhshi Ishkhanyan pointed out that the territory of "Great Armenia" extended beyond the borders of Russia into Lesser Armenia.
Russian researcher Alexander Anninsky wrote that the works of the authors (Mar Abas Katina, Agafangel, Zenob, Favstos Buzand), which M. Khorenatsi referred to, were questioned and denied as historical sources by European Armenian scholars.
Another Russian Caucasian scholar Ivan Chopin, examining the works of ancient authors, came to the conclusion that the Khays and Armenians different origin. In the XII century BC. Khai, together with their kindred tribes of Franco-Phrygians, moved from the Balkans to Asia Minor, namely, to the territory between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. According to mythological legends, the descendants of Gaik, the Khays, who defeated the Assyrian king Belin, settled in the area of the Lake Van basin, which was then called Hayasa (Hayastan). Living on the territory of the plateau of Ermeniyya (Armenia) in Anadolu, in the region of the basin of Lake Urmia and in the Caucasus, the Khays, having mixed with the Hurrians, appropriated the heritage and history of the Ermen tribe, which had disappeared by that time, who by origin were Subar Turks (or Mitans). As a result, at the present time the same nation has two names - it calls itself Hays, and others call it Armenians. It should be noted that the ethnonym Ermen is common not only in Anadolu and the Caucasus, but also in Central Asia and Transbaikalia (Erman Mountains).
Modern Armenian, European, Russian and even some Azerbaijani historians, describing the history of the South Caucasus and Western Asia and referring to the rigged history of M. Khorenatsi and other falsified historical books of the Armenian Church, thereby agree that the modern territory of Armenia is an ancient Armenian land. However, the partial resettlement of Armenians in the territory of present-day Armenia began in 1441, when during the reign of the emirs of Gara-goyunlu, the catholicosate was transferred from Cilicia to the church of the village of Vagharshapat, not far from the city of Irevan. Thanks to the financing of European states, the lands around these churches were acquired and the first Armenian settlements began to appear there. Of particular interest are the documents on the purchase and sale of land by the Church of Echmiadzin from Azerbaijanis, presented in the work "Jambr" by the Catholicos of Echmiadzin Simeon Yerevantsi (1763-1782) and the book of the historian A. Papazyan , compiled by him on the basis of documents on sale and purchase stored in the Matenadaran, which indicate from whom, when and for how much the lands belonging to Azerbaijanis were acquired.
In fact, the Armenian ethnos settled in the territory of the South Caucasus later than the others. In those days when the ancient Turks (Saks, Scythians, Cimmerians, Huns, Barsils, Oguzes, Kypchaks) ruled here, there was no Armenian trace in the Caucasus at all. This is evidenced by the Armenian historian Karen Yuzbashyan, who noted that the Turks are not alien tribes, but lived in the Caucasus region long before the Seljuks arrived here. The resettlement of the Turks in Asia Minor and the Balkans was observed in the 4th-7th centuries, and by the 8th-10th centuries this process had become widespread. The Armenian historian also noted that during the period of the Arab Caliphate, as a rule, the leaders of the Turkic tribes were chosen as emirs of the border regions.
After the occupation of the Iravan Khanate by Tsarist Russia and the signing of the Turkmanchay (1828) and Adrianople (1829) treaties, the mass resettlement of Armenians from Iran and Turkey to the territory of modern Armenia began.
Thus, the studies of many scientists and researchers prove that the modern Republic of Armenia and its capital Yerevan (Irevan) are not originally Armenian territory, but have belonged to the Oghuz Turks since ancient times.
Recently, attempts by the Armenian side to appropriate historical monuments and samples of Azerbaijani culture have become more and more widespread. Our troublesome neighbors steal and appropriate everything - from history to culinary recipes.
From this point of view, the study conducted in the book "Armenian Alien Tales" by the head of the State Copyright Agency is very interesting and revealing.Kamran Imanov.
Previously, the book has already been published, and was exhibited on the Internet, however, given that the information war against Azerbaijan is gaining momentum, we considered it necessary to bring it to the attention of readers again.
The book explores the roots, causes and consequences of Armenian falsifications and plagiarism in detail and with arguments.
We offer our readers chapters from this book.
The "History of the Armenian people" states that "... the cradle of mankind, its ancestral home is Armenia." Armenians are the most ancient people and the language of Armenians is the oldest of all known. The idea of exclusivity and a special mission of the Armenian ethnos continues to be maniacal even today, despite the warnings of some realistic politicians in Armenia that inflating exclusivity and rejection is a dead end for the Armenian ethnos. "To see all enemies - to become an enemy for everyone. This is not a path, this is an abyss" (Suren Zolyan).
One of the many facets of the created legend about Armenian exclusivity is the widespread assertion by the Armenians of the opinion that they are natives of the Caucasus, the heirs of "Great Armenia from sea to sea." The arrival of the Armenians, their settlement in today's and previous "transit" habitats has long been proven by historical science. Herodotus - "the father of the history of peoples" writes: "The country, located at the upper reaches of the Euphrates, was called Armenia." The Armenians "lived in the western part of the highlands, called Armenian" (Herodotus, "History; Ed. "Nauka", Leningrad, 1972). And here is the opinion of the famous historian I Dyakonov, reflected in his monograph published in Armenia: "Armenian ethnos formed outside the Caucasus" (I. Dyakonov, "Prehistory of the Armenian people", Yerevan, 1958). Now it is well known that Armenia is not the birthplace of the Armenian ethnos. And the Armenian scientists themselves have to reckon with this.
Academician M. Abegyan: "... where are the roots of the Armenian people, how, when, at what time, from where and by what ways did he come here ... We do not have accurate and clear evidence of this" ("History of Armenian Literature", Yerevan, 1975).
"The ancestors of the Armenians came from the Balkans" ("History of the Armenian people", Yerevan, 1980).
As the Armenian authors themselves now assert, “the most ancient core of the Armenians was the population of the northeastern part of Asia Minor. This country ... was called Armatana, and later Hayasa. BC).
It is historically known that in the IX century. BC. in Eastern Anatolia, near Lake Van, the state of Urartu (Biani) was formed, which in the middle of the VIII century BC. annexed Hayasa under the name of Arme. Thus, "Arme", as well as "Hayasa" - the name and self-designation of today's Armenia come from these geographical areas.
It is no coincidence that Dyakonov believes that "since the ancient Armenian language is not related to the languages of the autochthons of the Armenian Highlands, it is clear that it was brought here from outside."
Moreover, in the early Middle Ages and later, the presence of Armenians in the land inhabited by the Turkic ethnos allowed them to survive and ethnically survive. Famous expert Levon Dabeghyan: "...Armenians really owe their national existence to the Seljuk and Ottoman Turks. If we had remained among the Byzantines or other Europeans, the Armenian name could only be preserved in historical books."
One cannot but agree with such an Armenian revelation, since the Armenians themselves in their book "Armenian Medieval Literature", prepared by the Institute of Literature named after. M. Abeghyan and published by the publishing house "Sovetan Grokh" in Russian in Yerevan in 1986 with reference to their medieval historian Sebeos, they cite a historical document - a letter from the Byzantine emperor Mauritius (582-602) to the king of Persia Khosrov: "... the people ( Armenians) ... lives between us and stirs up ... ". And then it says that they need to be expelled from the lands of Byzantium and Iran. Comments here, as they say, are unnecessary.
According to historical chronicles, after the Armenian pogroms perpetrated by Byzantium at the end of the first millennium, the Armenian Catholicos turned to the Seljuk sultan Arp-Aslan with a plea for help to save the nation, and the sultan took the Armenians under his protection. We cite the opinion of 26 Armenian Catholicos Barses about Sultan Melik Shah, who improved the position of the Armenian Church after appealing to him: "He everywhere managed to create a peaceful and just government ... due to his greatness, he did not cause trouble to anyone."
And here is a quote taken from the Armenian historian Matevos about the residence of Armenians in the lands inhabited by the Turkic ethnic group, and the attitude of the Turks towards them. "The reign of Melik Shah was pleasing to God. His power extended to distant countries. It brought peace to the Armenians ... He was full of mercy for Christians, showed paternal care for the peoples ...". And the last quote that we cite is an Armenian testimony characterizing the reign of Sultan Fateh: "To say that with the conquest of Istanbul (Constantinople) by Sultan Fateh, a star was lit for Armenian destinies, means to emphasize the historical truth ...". It all ended, as you know, with the fact that the Armenians everywhere are trying to impose fabrications on the world community about the so-called genocide in Ottoman Turkey.
The penetration of Armenians into the region of the South Caucasus is associated with much later times. However, in Soviet time Armenians perpetrated a farce on the 2750th anniversary of the Erebuni fortress, the name of which was identified with Iravan (Yerevan). In the distant years of the heyday of Urartu, this Transcaucasian territory, according to sources, was considered by the Urartians as "enemy land" and which they subsequently conquered. It turns out that Erebuni was founded in an enemy country by Armenians in those years when they were part of the state of Urartu as a region.
Armenians, as an alien ethnic group, settled in the territory of historical Azerbaijan, starting from the 15th century, penetrating here from the territories of modern Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria. In the 16th century, the process of resettlement of Armenians to the lands of the Azerbaijani khanates intensified, and their penetration into the lands of the Iravan Khanate, the territory that, in essence, is today the territory of the Republic of Armenia, intensified. It was during these years that Revankhan, the ruler of the khanate, wrote to the famous Shah Ismail Khatai: "... from Mesopotamia, on the coast of Lake Van, and from there here, to the Caucasus, to the Oguz-Turkic lands, resettling in small parties of 5-10 people, Armenians instead of doing crafts, as was agreed, they tend to settle down, build churches and thereby try to create the impression that they are natives of the Caucasus, and this will bring us a lot of trouble in the future ... All this is financed from the funds placed in Ag Kil (Etchmiadzin) catholicasate..."
Indeed, these were prophetic words testifying to the origins of the settlement of the lands by Armenians: first by individual families, then by small groups and colonies, and thereby creating territorial prerequisites for Armenian statehood on the ancestral lands of the Irevan Khanate.
In order to create Armenian statehood in the lands of Azerbaijan, the Armenian church with the patriarchal throne was transferred to Ag Kil (Echmiadzin) in the 15th century, which assumed political and state functions in the absence of Armenian statehood. Since that time, the history of Iravan, Nakhchivan and Zangezur was presented by Armenians as the history of "Eastern Armenia".
And, of course, the resettlement of Armenians in the Caucasus, especially on the territory of the Nakhichevan, Irevan and Karabakh khanates, on the original Azerbaijani land, received powerful impulses after Gulistan and Turkmenchay. Nevertheless, if in the 16th century 15 thousand newcomer Armenians lived in the Irevan Khanate, then, despite the sharp increase in the number of colonists at the time of the creation of the Erivan region by the tsarist government in 1828 to replace the liquidated Erivan Khanate, its population still consisted of 80% of Azerbaijanis.
The extrusion of the indigenous Turkic element from the ancestral lands in subsequent years, including the Soviet period, acquired the character of deportation and, in essence, the resettlement of Armenians was an occupation of Azerbaijani lands. All this was accompanied by the provision of wider rights and privileges to the Armenian settlers compared to those enjoyed by the local Azerbaijani population. It should be recalled that after the Treaty of Gulistan (1813), Russia consistently liquidated the Azerbaijani khanates, and in 1822 the Karabakh khanate was liquidated. And when, a year after its liquidation, in 1823, the "Description of the Karabakh province" was compiled, despite the adoption of measures to expel Azerbaijanis from here, in this document, out of 18,563 families registered by the tsarist administration, only 8.4% accounted for Armenians. melikstv.
During the years of Soviet power, along with the eviction of Azerbaijanis from their historical places of residence, the territory of Azerbaijan was consistently annexed to Armenia. If until May 1920 the territory of Azerbaijan was 114 thousand square meters. km, then later it was cut by 28 thousand square meters. km and became equal to 86 thousand square meters. km. Thus, it was reduced in volume approximately equal to the territory of Armenia (29.8 thousand sq. km).
This is, in brief, the historical chronology of the settlement of the South Caucasus by Armenians at the expense of the Azerbaijani lands, which are now declared by the Armenians as the historical place of residence of their ethnic group. This process could not proceed peacefully, it was initiated by the Armenian terror, persecution against the local population, which took on the character of genocide. It has always covered itself with historical lies, forgeries and distortions, hypocrisy in relation to those who gave shelter to Armenian settlers, and continues to be accompanied by territorial claims to our lands in parallel with claims to our cultural heritage.
