"Azeri" "History" From Wiki
History of "Azerbaijan"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
This is a controversial topic, which may be disputed. Please read talk page discussion before making substantial changes.
The nation of Azerbaijan (also spelled Azerbeijan and (Azerbaijani: Azərbaycan, Azərbeycan) has been the home of culture and civilization since antiquity (a nation is not a home. H.). Its heritage is amongst the richest and most ancient, and the history of its land and people may be tens of thousands of years old. (Its current occupiers have nothing to do with its history as will be admitted by the "author" of this "article". H.)
Azerbaijan is located at the crossroads of different cultures and is the ancestral home of the Azerbaijanis (Azerbaijani Turks) (Azerbaijani Turks, not the indigenous peoples of the area, i.e. the Tats, the Talishes, the Udins, the Laz, the Armenians, etc. Based on what proof? H.) who, according to CIA (What's this obsession with the CIA? Doesn't this show their inability to cite a valid historical source? H.) and Ethnologue statistics, number more than 8 million in the Republic of Azerbaijan (none of them are non-Turkish ethnic groups, forcefully turkified by the self declared owners of the land. H.) and more than 20 million in the northwestern region of Iran (These are turkified Iranians. H.), reffered to by the United Nations as South Azerbaijan (No Kidding! H.). The independent Republic of Azerbaijan is the northern half of historic Azerbaijan (blatant lie based on no proof. There is only one historic Azarbaijan (Aturpatekan) and it's always been south of the Arax River. H.) while the southern portion is under the administration of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Scholars (i.e. of the kind of the revisionist "historian" Ziya Bunyatov. H.) consider the historical territory of Azerbaijan to include “the land populated today (yes, today, H.) by the Azerbaijani Turks" who inhabit the region stretching from the northern slopes of the Caucus mountains along the Caspian Sea to the central parts of what is (and has been since the dawn of history, you moron. H.) present-day Iran. According to the 10th century Balami History (you mean baloney History? BTW, didn't Balami write in Persian? If the "Azeri" translation of the work is done by Bunyatovs of this world then this pan-turkist may be right. H.), it is stated that the borders of Azerbaijan start at Derbent (present-day southern Russia) and end in Hamedan (present-day western Iran).
It was stated in the 10th century (by who? H.) that: "All these lands (between Derbent and Hamedan) are called Azerbaijan and all these lands belong to Turks ("ALL THESE LANDS BELONG TO TURKS", sounds like a five year old whining bully... H.)." Azerbaijan was divided in 1828 along the Araz river, (a country north of the Arax River called Azerbaijan NEVER existed before 1918. H.) which is a physical barrier that has divided the land politically up until now.
The people of Azerbaijan are the inheritors (read usurpers and destroyers H.) of ancient civilizations (you got to be kidding, then how on earth were they tent-dwelling nomads up until late 19th century? H.) such as Sumer (I'll be damned! H.), Elam, Aratta ( *!@#?# are you awake? H.), Urartu ( Over my dead body. H.), Mannai, Media and Caucasian Albania (and the Greeks and the Romans and the Persians and the Assyrians and the Babylonians and... It costs nothing to lie why not add a dozen others? H.) and are the descendants of various bodies of Turkic peoples (you got that one right. Now you only have to "prove" that Sumer, Elam, Aratta, Urartu, Manni, Medes and Aghvank are all Turks and everything will be self explanatory...H.), especially (especially H.) the Oghuz Turks who in the 10th century set the national foundation (with their tents, what a foundation... H.) of modern Azerbaijan.
The cave of Azykh in the territory of the Fizuli district in the Republic of Azerbaijan is considered to be the most ancient human habitation. Based on discoveries and recent exploration of the Azykh cave and a number of stone age sites, Azerbaijan's history can be dated back to 1.5 million years ago (Azerbaijan's history can in fact be dated back to the time of the dinosaurs. Scientists experimenting with fossils have managed to simulate the sounds a native Azerbaijani dinosaur would produce and guess what? It goes "Az - Ar - Bai - Jan" H.).
Remnants of the pre-ashel culture were found in the lowest layers of the Azykh cave. This culture is one of the oldest and in many ways similar to the Olduway culture in South Africa and Walloon culture in the southeast of France (and of course, they are Turks as well. H.).
The fragment of the lower jaw of a woman (you see, I wasn't kidding when I mentioned the fossils! H.) who lived about 350,000-400,000 years ago was unearthed from the 5th layer of the Azykh cave . This woman was very close to people of the ashel culture (and she spoke perfect Turkish employing solely a fragment of her lower jaw. H.), whose remnants were discovered in the Arago cave in France.
The Paleolithic (Homo Sapiens) period in Azerbaijan (as if it was called Azerbaijan in those days! H.) is represented in Taglar, Damjily, Yatagery and some other sites. It lasted for about 20,000 years and vanquished in the 13th millennium BC (probably by some nomadic Turkish invaders, although I guess the "author" of this "article" means vanished, just a slip of the "vanquishing" Turkish tongue. H.).
During the Mesolithic period, evidence of carved drawings in Gobustan demonstrate scenes of hunting, fishing, labor and dancing which can be seen on the rocks (I don't know about labor and dancing since the former is derogatory for the Turks (during the Ottoman rule they only aspired to become soldiers therefore frowned upon work), the latter is haram in their faith. I am OK with hunting (fishing? probably) since they have not evolved from their hunter-gatherer stage, otherwise they would have come in terms with their own past by now. H.).
The Neolithic period (6th - 4th millenniums BC) was the period of transition from the Stone Age to the Bronze Age (apparently missed by the Turks. H.). Many Neolithic settlements have been discovered in Azerbaijan, and artifacts show that during this period people built homes (then how on earth were they still living in tents not so long ago? "Retrovolution" instead of evolution H.), made copper weapons and were familiar with irrigated agriculture.
Tradition (which tradition? H.) places the Garden of Eden, considered by theologians as the birthplace of mankind, west of Urmiya (The Garden of Eden (fact or fiction) is situated in Armenia, check your sources. H.) in southern Azerbaijan .
Ancient peoples and civilizations such as the Sumerians and Elamites had interaction in the territory of Azerbaijan (what's that got to do with you? H.), and their ancient and distinct cultures still symbolize parts of Azerbaijan's modern character (do you really believe this crap yourself? H.).
Earliest written evidence of tribes that inhabited Azerbaijan (mostly in South Azerbaijan (nothing to do with you whatsoever. H.)) are dated to 2,300 BC. The manuscripts describe the tribes of Gutis, Lulubis, Kasis and Hurris (nothing to do with you whatsoever, either. H.). The Hurri (Hurra) tribal union played an extremely important role in the history of the ancient east and formed one of the great eastern civilizations.
Different political entities and states such as Mannai and Urartu as well as Media and Albania (Agvania) flourished on Azerbaijan's soil ("Azerbaijanis" must have been really generous and millions of times more tolerant than today to have allowed these non-Turkish cultures flourish on their soil. H.).
Chols, Cimmerians as well as Scythians and Massagets (both refered to as Ishkuz) lived in Azerbaijan before the Christian era (see the above comment. H.).
In the ninth century B.C., the seminomadic Scythians settled in areas of what is now Azerbaijan (so this makes them semi-Turkish I guess! H.)
The Assyrians (didn't I tell you? H.) also had a civilization (each and every one of them had a civilization except you Turks, stop lying and accept what you are maybe this will trigger an evolutionary mutation for you. H.) which flourished in the western part of Lake Urmiya in the years prior to Media and Albania (So this proves that (Lesser) Media (Aturpatekan) and Albania (Aghvank) are two distinct entities. H.). Most of the ancient documents and inscriptions that are used for historical analyzation of the area comes from the Assyrians.
In dealing with the history of Azerbaijan, most western scholars reffer to Greek, Arab, Roman, and Persian sources. It must be noted that many falsified (look who's talking! Have you ever uttered a true sentence in your pathetic existence? H.) versions of Azerbaijan's history were written by Iranian nationalists in the 20th century (So, all the historians since antiquity (Greek, Armenian, Arab, etc.), who have never mentioned an "Azerbaijan" north of the Arax were Iranian nationalists. Projection, is the dominant disease of the revisionist Turks. The falsified history of the region was written in 1960's. H.), and are disregarded in obtaining information regarding Pre-Islamic and Post-Islamic Azerbaijan (you disregard everything and believe your own excretion, maybe some ignorant fool will also swallow the liquid, unfounded crap you produce with your jelly brain. H.).
Media & Albania
Throughout much of its ancient history, Azerbaijan's northern portion was what became known as the state of Caucasian Albania, and its southern portion was what became known as the state of Media (Throughout...was what became... what a coherent sentence. So, this means that these two regions were unrelated throughout much of ancient history (until 1918 that is). H.). Azerbaijani scholars (means that no other scholars regard this crap to be serious. H.) regard both Media and Albania as predecessors of modern Azerbaijan (Isn't this a confession that "Azerbaijan" is just a "modern" fabrication? H.). Media and Albania (Mata and Agvan) shared similar characteristics (proof, please! H.) and the majority population in these areas before the 3rd century A.D. were composed mostly by central Asian (based on what, "scholar"? H.) tribes such as the Scythians (non-Turkish H.)who had migrated to the region in the 7th century B.C. (Strabbo has referred to 26 different tribes in Aghvank "who spoke different languages and had their own ruler". So how can the majority be composed of Turks? H.)
The state and civilization of the Medes is believed to have been highly influenced by the Urartu (paws off Armenian history. H.) and Mannai civilization and population which had previously been established in the land (yes, previously established, not invading nomadic cattle-herders. H.).
From around 550 B.C. until the 6th century A.D., the state religion of Azerbaijan was Zoroastianism (what state? Are you mad? Because of the diversity of tribes in Aghvank, the religious beliefs were also numerous. Speaking of a state religion in Aghvank, in times of Zoroastrianism is as absurd as it can get. H.) . Zoroaster, the prophet of Zoroastianism was born in Urmiya (Beside the fact that until now the exact date (anything from 2500 to 3000 years ago) and place of birth of Zoroaster have not been confirmed by all historians, one thing is sure: he was an IRANIAN. Avesta is written in old Persian. H.). Christianity, Shamanism and Buddhism were also practiced in Azerbaijan prior to the 6th century (So, this flushes the crap that the state religion of "Azerbaijan" was Zoroastrianism. H.). Churches in Tabriz (leave our churches alone, you have already distroyed thousands of Armenian churches and now you claim the ones still standing. H.), Urmiya, Qarabaq as well as Zoroastrian fire temples are some of Azerbaijan's pre-Islamic religious monuments.
Prior to the Islamic age, Persians, Greeks and Romans had invaded Azerbaijan (who's talking of invaders? This world must be upside-down. H.) and had incorporated it into their empires. The area was invaded by Persian king Cyrus in the 6th century B.C.E., by Alexander two centuries later and by Roman legions under Pompey three centuries after that. A boulder bearing what is believed to be the eastern-most Roman inscription survives just southwest of Baku.
Turks in Media & Albania
Throughout the history of pre-Islamic Azerbaijan, Turkic peoples had lived in the land for centuries (proof, please! Oh yes, Elchibey says they lived in the land for hundreds of thousands of years, not centuries. H.), although they were not fully unified. The Huns, Khazars, Bulgars, Barsils, Sabirs, Gokturks, Kutugurs, Kipchaks and others had been some of the Turkic people who had dwelled in Azerbaijan and participated in pre-Islamic Azerbaijan's state formations (what state? Have a grain of decency. H.).
The historian Ashurbeyli in "History of Azerbaijan" writes that in Azerbaijan "there were incurrsions (that's more like it. H.) of Turkic groups from the beginning of our era which increased in the 5th to the 7th and the 9th to the 11th centuries" and also states that "since antiquity" Turks have lived in Azerbaijan (then he is in contradiction with himself since he just said there were incursions. H.).
According to the 1911 encyclopedia (which one? H.) "the people of the Mada (Mata), the Medes, appear in history first in 836 B.C., when the Assyrian conqueror Shalmaneser II in his wars against the tribes of the Zagros received the tribute of the Amadai ....Herodotus gives a list of six Median tribes among them the Paraetaceni....names in the Assyrian inscriptions prove that the tribes in the Zagros and the northern parts of Media (Azerbaijan) were not Iranians nor Indo-Europeans (therefore Turks, scholarly conclusion one might say...That the Medes are Iranians is out of the question and no scholar will dispute this. The Iranian "name" Aturpat "proves that". H.), but an aboriginal population.....perhaps (and perhaps not. H.) connected with the numerous tribes of the Caucasus (northern Azerbaijan, Albania)....Gelae, Tapuri, Cadusii, Amardi, Utii and other tribes in northern Media (Azerbaijan) (No southern, the confession or a slip of the rectum! Besides, since when "Albania" became northern Media? You were just BS-ing about "the Caucasus (northern Azerbaijan, Albania)" .H.) and on the shores of the Caspian (you must be referring to the eastern shores. H.) were not Iranians. With them Polybius, Strabo and Pliny mention the Anariaci, whom they consider as a particular tribe; but in reality their name, the Non-Aryans, is the comprehensive designation of all these small tribes.....(therefore they are all Turks. The "Anariaci" thing reflects the apellation of peoples outside of Iran by the Iranians: (Iran, inside the Iranian territory; Aniran, outside) and has little to do with race. H.)
Richard N. Frye states the following regarding the ethnic composition of Media: "in Azerbaijan (Media) (So, Media is the real Azarbaijan. Yet another confession. H.) the Medes were in contact with a settled majority of non-Indo European (non-Iranian) speakers represented by the Urartians (leave us the fuck alone. I Urartu, you UralTurk, capice! H.), Mannaeans, Hurrians etc..possibly related to the peoples speaking "Japhetic" languages" also spoken in the Caucasus (northern Azerbaijan, Albania (what proof you have that they spoke Turkish? H.)).
According to historian Kalankatly (Movses Kaghankatouatsi, by the way, would you care to mention that he was Armenian? H.), in the period between 191-200 A.D., hordes (hordes indeed, like locusts... H.) of Barsil and Khazar Turks crossed the Kura river in Azerbaijan (he does definitely not say Azerbaijan since this side of Kura was Armenia and Azerbaijan north of Arax river still had to be artificially created in 1918 by the bolsheviks, the Georgian Stalin and the Tatar Lenin, to please the Ottomans who had invaded the Caucasus...).
According to the historian Tabari, descriptions of incursions (indeed! H.) into Azerbaijan (you mean the real one? H.) by Turks (Huns and Khazars) (non of which have been proved to be Turks, despite their relations, especially between the Khazars and the Turks. Tabari often mistakenly calls the Khazars Turks. This is used by this gray wolf to mislead the uninformed reader. H.) occurred in the 4th and 5th centuries. Tabari also states that by the mid-6th century, there was a significant Turkish presence in Azerbaijan (you mean the real one? H.).
Kalankatly also states that in the year 629, the army of the Gokturks as well as a series Khazar Turkic tribes entered Azerbaijan and declared the land to be "eternal possesion" of Turks (no sooner had they invaded, looted, raped, pillaged, pludered and razed everything to the ground, "they declared the land to be "eternal possession" of Turks". How pathetic and self-righteous they were and still are... H.).
From Movses Kaghankatouatsi's History of Aghvank, the work of the Armenian historian cited by the "Azeri" to support their fabrications, I wonder why they never quote this passage:
"In the 38th year of the rule of Khossrow (Khossrow Parviz, the Sassanid king of the time. H.) the Turkish Jabghu Khan arrived with his son. No one could count their army. When this horrific news came to Aghvank, Hayshak, the ruler of Aghvank who had been appointed to his post by Khossrow, decided to protect the people from the Turkish invaders and send them to the Partaw fortress... He thought he could resist with the aid of the notables. While he was worryingly anticipating the events, he heard news of the calamity visited upon the fortress of Chor (Darband. H.) and its defenders...
Indeed, in the time of the misfortune which we were all expecting... Hayshak saw the malevolent danger from evil and cruel people who had wide faces and looked like women. Their long hair was scattered over their faces and bodies... Not a grain of shame and decency could be discerned from their faces. They attacked the people of the city and chopped them into pieces in the streets and city squares. There was no sign of any mercy in the eyes of these butchers regarding the beautiful women either. They slaughtered the boys and girls as well. They did not even pity the harmless beings and the elderly who were unable to fight. Neither they spared the children nor the young and their hearts would not soften regarding suckling and babies. These innocent babies were lying on the torn apart cadavers of their mothers and were sucking blood from their teats instead of milk. The moment they entered a house, like fire in a haystack, they would burn every place to cinders and they would reduce everything to rubble. The moment they would leave a house they had broken into, they paved the way for the beasts of prey and scavengers..."
Nothing has changed. H.
Byzantine sources of the mid 6th century refer to the "settlement of Khazar Turks" in the left bank of the Kura river, and Moisey Khaghankatli (it's the same Armenian historian, Movses Kaghankatouatsi spelled earlier differently. H.), a historian from pre-Islamic Azerbaijan (piss off. H.) reffered to a "Hun state" on the left bank of the Kura River in the 7th century.
According to Professor Peter B. Golden, "In the course of the seventh century, the two major tribal unions emerged in Azerbaijan under the Turk banner: the Khazars and the Bulgars...the Khazars formed the bulk of the Turk forces used by the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius (610-640) in his counter-offensive against the Sasanids (rulers) in Azerbaijan" (Which one? If they mean the real one, then the counter-offensive must be from the Iranians, since it was part of Iran not Rome. By the way, what has the invasion of Khazars and Bulgars (which Turk banner?) to do with the indigenous people of Aghvank. That the Romans used the Khazars in their army against Iran is also irrelevant if not indicting. H.)
Pre-Islamic Turkic presence in Azerbaijan is evident in literature after the Islamic conquest of the region, in an era that was famous for its historical, geographical and scientific analyzations of the world by Muslim scholars and Islamic states. According to the 7th century work of Ubeid ibn Shariyya al-Jurhumi, the Muslim Caliph Mueviyyen (661-680) was told that Azerbiajan (notice that Azebaijan is outside the quotaion marks. H.) "has long been a land of Turks. Having gathered over there, they have mixed with one another (read raped, stolen the women and children of the natives and had them forcefully turkified. H.) and become integrated."
It must also be noted that the famous "Book of Dede Korkut" which is the epic of the Oghuz Turks (considered the main (and the only. H.) ancestors of Azerbaijanis) was written in Azerbaijan in the 6th and 7th centuries, indicating that the Oghuz Turks, who were a majority (according to which census? H.) in Azerbaijan in the 10th and 11th centuries and henceforth, were also present in the land prior to Islam.
Seeing the tendency of the Turks to rewrite history and the claim that "Dede Korkut" was written in "Azerbaijan", a funny remark by Enayatollah Reza, a contemporary Iranian historian, is not misplaced here:
"I remember when I was living in the Soviet Union, one of the disputed matters among the Turkish speaking peoples of that country was the famous story of "Dede GhorGhud" ("Dede Korkut") that apparently belongs to the Oghuz. Not only the inhabitants of Central Asia, but the Turkish speaking peoples of Caucasus and European parts of the Soviet Union considered it as theirs and would quarrel with each other over it.
This went on until 1948 when the story was declared a "reactionary phenomenon" by the Soviet statesmen of the time. No sooner this view was announced, the local polititians started to throw the innocent "Dede Ghorghud" at each other. From then on, politically motivated historians were determined to wash their hands of this "shameful stain". At first they accused other republics of this "crime", but since this was not approved by the central government, they thought of another wayout of this "shame" and by throwing this story to the Turkish speaking people of Turkey, they rid themselves of this "reactionary tale".
After the changes in the USSR that brought criticism of past policies, poor "Dede Ghorghud" also got the not guilty verdict. From then on, once again the fight over the tale started and everyone claimed it as theirs." H.
Throughout its pre-Islamic history, Azerbaijan wast subject to myriad invasions (mostly Turkish. H.), migrations, and cultural and political influences. The land became Islamic territory during the Arab conquest under Omar's caliphate sometime between 639 and 643. The implementation of Islam in Azerbaijan was not easy for the Arabs.
In the 8th century (9th century, you idiot, 800s don't mean the 8th century), rebels under the leadership of Babek (have some integrity, Babak e Khorramdin, as his name clearly shows was an IRANIAN, he spoke Persian, in fact it's hardly possible that he had ever heard or uttered a single Turkish word in his entire life. How come you don't bring up the non-Indo-European non-Aryan crap here, Mr.Kipchak Kutugur-Gokturk. H.) resisted Arab rule and started a revolt which lasted for close to 20 years. Babek's revolt became known as the "Khuremit Movement." Although Arab garrisons were placed in several strategic towns (Ardebil, Barda, Nakhchivan, Derbent, Maragha) the followers of the Khuremit movement resisted their control. The Arabs eventually defeated Babek and his followers, yet the legend of Babek still lives on in contemporary Azerbaijan , in both the northern (none of their goddamn business. Z.A) and southern spheres.
Prior to Babek, The Khazar Turkic tribes in a series of conflicts which became known as the "Arab-Khazar wars" also sought to efface Azerbaijan of Arab presence. (Wrong! They were trying to "conquer" Aghvank the same way as in the time of Khossrow Parviz, described by Movses Kaghankatouatsi some paragraphs above. H.) One of the major battles fought between the Turks and Arabs in Azerbaijan was near the historic city of Ardebil (in IRAN if you please, Z.A), which is one of the largest cities of present-day South Azerbaijan (Oh come on, get a life. H.).
The settlement of Arabs in Azerbaijan and the fact that non-Muslims paid higher taxes (here he is "inspired" by the fact that under Ottoman rule the non-Muslims were robbed of their entire possessions under the pretext of taxes of different designations: jizya, kharaj, etc. H.) led eventually to the Islamization of most of the Azerbaijani population (the brave Kipchak Gokturks gave in merely under the pressure of taxes. H.).
After the full establishment of Islam, centuries of prosperity as a province of the Islamic caliphate followed. Much of the Islamic architecture in Azerbaijan was built from the 7th until the 10th century (would you care to tell us by who? H.). During this period, many Azerbaijanis would travel to different Arab cities such as Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo for Islamic education (good for them. H.).
After the decline of the Arab caliphate, the Oghuz Turks in a series of mass migrations (read incursions. H.) from Central Asia created a majority in Azerbaijan in the 10th and 11th century (now you're talking, these are your earliest ancestors. H.) , during Seljuk rule (read tyranny, death and destruction. H.). The Oghuz Turks were the founders of the Seljuk state, and had recently began their domination (recently began their domination... H.) of the area under Seljuk leadership.
If the Oghuz "created" a majority, it follows that: I. To hell with the indigenous non-Turkish peoples who lived in the region for thousands of years. II. The majority of present day "Azeris" are direct descendants of the Oghuz, therefore they neither have the right to claim the heritage of the Aghvank (or all the others), nor they are entitled to use the Indo-European name Azarbaijan (Aturpatekan) and its bogus derivation "Azeri". H.)(The following paragraph bares it all. H.)
The modern statehood (modern and statehood must have different definitions for Turks. H.) , blood, language, literature, culture (??? H.) , garments, dances, folklore and national character of the Azerbaijanis comes from the 'Oghuz Turks.' (note the emphasis. What about Medes, Manni, Sumerians, Arrata, Urartu, Aghvank... Is this your level of affinity with "your" ancestors? Wait a minute, did you say literature, culture, dances? Are you joking? What culture? Unless you consider rape, plunder, mass murder, banditry, savage pleasure in mutilating innocent people, forced turkification, etc. as culture. H.) However, the disunified ancient Turks (prove that they were Turks! H.) of the land and their cultural traits were strengthened and revived (read: they became more savage. H.) by the newly arrived Oghuz (wish they had never arrived, the uninvited plunderers... H.).
During the Oghuz migration in Azerbaijan, there was also Oghuz migration (read cancerous infection. H.) into Anatolia (Turkey) (wrong retard! even if you call the Ottoman tyranny Turkey, you are still five hundred years too early. H.) and into parts of eastern Europe, The name "Seljuk" belonged to a Turkish sultan (bandit. H.) in central Asia ("the name" should have stayed in Central Asia where it "belonged". H.)
Seljuks & Modern Azerbaijan
The Seljuk period on Azerbaijan's history set the foundation of its ancient and modern culture and established the modern Azerbaijani-Turk nation (this is the most, if not the only, truthful sentence uttered by this delirious liar thus far. By "set the foundation of its ancient and modern culture" you clearly indicate that your most "ancient" Oghuz "culture" is as old as the Seljuk period of pillage and plunder. By the way, note that the hypocricy of vehement objections to calling a Turk a Turk is laid bare by the author's emphesized and hyphenized confession: "Azerbaijani-Turk nation" H.).
The Seljuk Atabeks were the governing elite from the 10th-12th centuries. Under their rule, Azerbaijan was characterized by a cultural growth and considered a period of renaissance (serve yourself, it costs nothing, Turkish "renaissance"... The situation of Aghvank was so mixed up, due to the number of rulers and the division in the region, that it was in no way favorable for a "period of renaissance". H.) in Azerbaijan. Palaces of the Ildeniz and the Shirvanshahs (Shirvanshahs were mainly Arabs and Shirvan in its north east, once used to be part of Aghvank. H.) hosted distinguished people of the time, many of whom became outstanding Muslim artists and scientists.
Great progress was achieved in mathematics, medicine, chemistry, philosophy, natural science, logic, law, and astronomy (and nuclear technology, rocket science, IT, genetic engineering, molecular science, robotics, space travel... add as many as you like, it's free. H.). Bakhmanyar, Khatib Tabrizi, Shikhabaddin Sukhravardi and many others (all IRANIANS, lying weasel. And get your eiches right: Bahmanyar, Shahabeddin Sohrevardi... H not KH. H.) were among those scientists.
New characteristic styles and trends arose in literature and arts in the 11th-12th centuries. Shirvan, Nakhchivan, and Arran (what happened to "Southern Azerbaijan"? H.) architectural schools that established principal features of Azerbaijani medieval architectural style shaped at that time .
Fortress walls of Baku, Ganja, Tabriz, Shamakhi, Beylagan, Maragha, and Absheron (and Athens, Rome, Alexandria, Constantinople, etc. H.) were built during this time, and towers, mosques, schools, mausoleums, and bridges with their distinct and original style are the most remarkable memorials of the contemporary architecture of that era (keep on stealing other peoples achievements Seljuk Doghuz-Oghuz. H.).
In 1225 the Shakh of Khorezm Djalaladdin occupied Azerbaijan, which put an end to the Atabek State.
The most famous of the Atabek kings was Shems al-din Ildeniz (Ildeniz the ill menace! H.) .
After Atabek rule came the Mongols who attacked parts of Azerbaijan but also built architectural sites (what can one make of this sentenence? Let's try. "came the Mongols who attacked" rather mild description of otherwise a barbarous invasion by their cousins. "also built architectural sites" maybe built in Mongolo-Turkish means desroyed... H.) (especially in the south (i.e. the IRANIANS built. H.)) and resided in Tabriz and other cities across the nation as rulers.
In 1231, the Mongols occupied most of Azerbaijan and killed Khan Djalaladdin (killing being their ancestral pastime. H.), who had overthrown the Atabek dynasty. In 1235 the Mongols destroyed (I don't get it, what happened to Mongols "built"? H.) Ganja, Shamkir, Tovuz, and other cities and fortresses in Azerbaijan.
Mongol through the Derbend passage at north stroke a severe blow on the national economy (the only economy Turks had and still have was and still is based on banditry. H.) and Azerbaijanis constantly rebelled against them. Being unable to resist the Mongol enemies, the Azerbaijani rebels who fought the Mongols were defeated (wolves killing wolves. H.), yet the long resistance eventually put an end to the Mongol supremacy in the region
Under Mongol rule, more Turks migrated to Azerbaijan from to escape invasion in central Asia (what the hell are you talking about? Whose invasion the Turks of Central Asia escaped from? H.). The Turks that arrived in the 13th and 14th centuries mostly belonged to the Kipchak Turkic tribes, which includes the Tatar and Kazak Turkic groups (no end in sight to the variety and number of this blood-thirsty species. H.).
The five Azerbaijani dynasties that came in the following centuries (Qara-Qoyonlu, Aq-Qoyonlu, Safavi, Afshar, Qajar (if any of these dynasties called themselves Azerbaijanis, I'll eat my head . H.)) as well as the existing Shirvanshahs in the northern part of Azerbaijan further developed the country and its national culture (what nation, let alone "national culture" are you talking about? The bogus Azerbaijani nationhood had yet to be artificially created by the bolsheviks in 1918. H.). These dynasties ruled over much of western Asia and Iran.
The Safavis, natives of Ardebil (in IRAN if you please H.), established their regime in Tabriz in 1501 and based their power under the ideology of Shia Islam. Thus, Shia Islam was imposed on the former Sunni population in Azerbaijan as well as other peoples who lived under their empire. The subsequent Shiaism which was bestowed on the Azerbaijanis seperated them from other Turkic peoples in that era such as the Ottomans (that was the point, Ottomans were Iran's fierce enemies. H.) and Uzbeks, who were mostly Sunni Muslim.
King Ismayil, the founder of the Safavi dynasty and a Turkic poet who wrote many poems in the Azerbaijani language under the pen name "Khatai" was forced to move his capital from Tabriz into the present-day Persian city of Isfahan after attacks by the Ottomans which became a series of wars between the Ottoman and Safavi Turks (The ruling class may have been of Turkish origin, but the people of Iran were Iranians. Therefore "Safavi Turks" is intentionally misleading. H.) which were based on religious reasons. (And guess who had to pay most dearly for the greed of these blood-thirsty rivals? Does the policy of scorched lands ring a bell? H.)
The territory of Azerbaijan was divided by the Safavis into four areas of Beklerbekliks, or administrations: Tabriz, Shukhursada (Nakhchivan) Shirvan and Qarabaq ("Qarabaq", this is the point of the whole falsification and rape of history. H.) .
After the collapse of the Safavi empire, Nadir Shah Afshar (Nadir Guli Bey) was crowned as king of Azerbaijan and Iran in 1737 (king of Iran, not Azerbaijan and Iran. H.). The coronation of Nadir Shah took place in Mugan, in the area of South Azerbaijan (get real. H.). Nadir Shah had formerly been a commander in the Safavid state, and was from the Afshar tribe of the Azerbaijani Turks (get real. H.) who lived in Khurasan (is there a territory on this planet or in the universe which is not a part of Azerbaijan?).
After his assassination 10 years later, Azerbaijan (you mean The Universe H.) was divided into several principalities known as "Khanates."
Division of Azerbaijan
Thus, the kingdom of Azerbaijan (no such kingdom ever existed in this universe. H.) was divided into a federal system with the Khanates of: Tabriz, Baku, Quba, Urmiya, Ardebil, Khoy, Sheki, Shamakhi, Qarabaq, Qaradaq, Maku, Maraga and Nakhchivan (and Mercury, Mars, Venus, Saturn, Jupiter, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto and all that is known or unknown...H.). The land of Azerbaijan was divided in 1828 between Russia and the Qajars who had lost in battle to the Russians. Azerbaijan is divided to this day. Due to its location astride the trade routes (Turkish banditry leading to the eventual decline of these routes H.) connecting Europe to Central Asia and the Near East and on the shore of the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan was fought over by Russia, Persia, and the Ottomans for several centuries. Finally the Russians split Azerbaijan's territory with Persia in 1828 by the Treaty of Turkmenchay, establishing the present frontiers and extinguishing the last native (native? What happened to the incursions? H.) dynasties of local Azerbaijani khans (and what a relief it was for the Armenians suffering for cenuries under their tyranny H.).
The beginning of modern exploitation of the oil fields in the 1870s led to a period of unprecedented prosperity and growth in the years before World War I.(Talking about the devil's luck! Without the oil-fields the Frankenstein monster named after the northwest Iranian region would never have to be created and the ficticious "nation" called "Azeri" would never have existed and a pathological liar like the "author" would not have made me waste my valuable time exposing his baloney history to the unsuspecting reader. If the psycopathic mass-murderer Stalin knew his creation would come to this, he would have thought twice approving of a name for this abomination of a "country". H.)
At the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1917, an independent republic was proclaimed in 1918 following an abortive attempt to establish a Transcaucasian Republic with Armenia and Georgia. Azerbaijan received de facto recognition by the Allies (read: by the United Kingdom of the Greatest Turkish Phallus Suckers. H.) as an independent nation in January 1920 (the wanton, whining bully got the lollypop at last. H.), an independence terminated by the arrival of the Red Army in April. Incorporated into the Transcaucasian Federative Soviet Socialist Republic in 1922, Azerbaijan (which one? Alas... they also did not change the name. H.) became a union republic of the USSR in 1936 (and the only one in the USSR to have implemented systematic ethnic cleansing, genocide and ethnocide in the Armenian province of Nachijevan, unfairly annexed to Azerbaijan along with Artsakh (aka Karabagh or Qarabaq) even though it doesn't share any borders with it H.). The late 1980s were characterized by increasing unrest, eventually leading to a violent confrontation when Soviet troops killed 190 nationalist demonstrators in Baky in January 1990. Azerbaijan declared its independence from the USSR on August 30, 1991.
What should one call someone who can produce such a huge pile of turkdung with such shamelessness? Wouldn't "Turk" best describe such a "person"? Does the "author" of the "article" believe in all the rubbish he puts out? It's ironic that the origin of the word Azerbaijan is traced back to the language family the Turks always refer to as a proof of the "non"-ethnicity of the people of the real Azarbaijan. After Alexander's victory over Darius III and the fall of the Achaemenid Empire, Iran came under the Seleucid rule soon after Alexander's death. However, a satrap named Aturpat (Atrpat, Atropat, Atropates) established an independent state in the northwest region of Iran (known as the Lesser Medes) which from then on was called Aturpatekan (Aturpayegan in Old Persian or Parthian) after him. After some 23 centuries, the region is still called Atrpatakan in Armenian as opposed to Adrbeijan (the approximate Arabic pronunciation) which is used to designate the bogus state north of the region. It should be noted that the Persian language underwent substantial changes after the Arab invasion. The Iranians, unlike almost all the other conquered nations managed to keep their language at the cost of thousands of original words being replaced by their Arabic equivalents and countless others adapting their pronunciation to some kind of Perso-Arabic, cf. "paradisa" = paradise became "ferdows", "Pars" became "Fars", etc. Rejecting the customs and laws of the Arabs, the Armenians held on to their culture at the cost of centuries long suffering and oppression under the Arab tyranny. As a result a considerable number of words can still be found in Armenian that share their roots with Pahlavi and other old Persian languages. The word Azarbaijan is the Persianized form of the Arabized word for Aturpatekan, the "z" sound replacing the Arabic "dhal" which is similar to the voiced "th" in "this", not existing in Persian. As stated earlier the Arabized word "Adrbeijan" is used in Armenian for the artificially created state, "d" being considered closer to the "dhal" than "z" in Armenian which also does not have any form of the "th" sound.
--------------------------The following is just an attempt and I have no Turkish style pretention to its absolute scientific veracity-----------------------
The Old Persian term aturpat is defined as "protector of fire". Although not of primordial importance, it may be possible to define this word by looking at its components in Armenian. Keep in mind that the "p", "k" and "t" in what follows are the non-aspirated variants of these consonants not found in English, they sound approximately like their corresponding consonants in Russian. The "a" is like the "a" in "far". The word "atr" is not used independently in modern Armenian, nevertheless, it has survived as a prefix meaning fire in words such as "atroushan" = a flame-holder in pagan or Zoroastrian temples, "atragouyn" = having the color of fire, "atr'tchanak" = revolver, etc. "pat" as a noun, meaning wall in Armenian, may have the same meaning as the "pat" in atropat. "pat" is also used as a suffix meaning surrounded with or covered with: "shrjapat" is Armenian for surrounding, "zrahapat" = armoured (covered in armour), etc. This way atropat could mean: surrounded with fire, protected by fire (pay in Aturpayegan is also considered as to watch, to protect. Therefore atropat is also defined as protector, keeper of fire. The Armenian infinitive "pahel" = to keep might also be considered), . We will leave it there. Finally, "kan" or "akan" is a suffix in Armenian meaning pertaining to or belonging to, for instance: "hndkakan" = Indian (like in Indian music), "fransakan" = French (like in french wine), "parskakan" = Persian (like in Persian food). "Atrpatakan", pertaining to Atropat or Atropat's land, the name used in Armenian for the northwest region in Iran is irrefutably of Indo-European origin. Not that I like the whole concept of the Indo-European / Aryan thing, but if we stick to the argument of the Turks that everything "Non-Aryan" is automatically Turkish and vice versa, the above explanation is worth the mention.
It works against the Turks both ways: whether we hypothetically consider the area north of the Arax river as Azerbaijan, it can not include the migratory, nomadic Turkic tribes, artificially "unified" and brought under the denomination, as native Azerbaijanis. Ironically the indigenous peoples of the area, Udins, Tats, Talishes, kurds, Lezgins and also Armenians should be considered the real Azerbaijanis! If we stay out of the realm of fiction, the indigenous peoples of the only Azarbaijan (Aturpatekan / Atrpatakan), various Iranian peoples and also Armenians, who have been a presence since antiquity -the westernmost part of the region having been part of the Urartu kingdom, should be considered as true Azarbaijanis again. The point is that the Turkic occupiers of the "country" known as the Republic of Azerbaijan do not have any rights -racial, ethnic, linguistic or otherwise, regarding the name they use to describe their "nation". By hijacking the name of a region in another country and by using and abusing it to the limits of sanity (read the "article" above without the comments and see if you can make out what the "author" means by the word Azerbaijan), the Turks can by no means conceal their origins, worse, they cannot become a part of the civilized world as long as they do not want to open their eyes and hearts and accept who they really are and where they really come from.
Turkish History For DummiesTo illustrate the absurdity of the Turkish reasoning when dealing with history and to somehow make the not acquainted perceive this absurdity, let's imagine you are a member of a family living in a house in a ranch established many years ago by your great, great, great, great grandparents. Let's for the fun call your family the Waltons. Your family, the Waltons, has had its share of good and bad days and over the years you have managed to keep the ranch going: you cultivate the land, graze your cattle, you build irrigation systems, your ranch house, the barn, decorative structures and everything you might have thought necessary for your ranch. One day some wild and uncouth horsemen attack your ranch, let's call these guys the Daltons, they raze everything you built to the ground and burn whatever is standing to cinders. They break into the house and rape every member of the family between ten and fifty, then they brutally slaughter most of them in front of your eyes with unimaginable savagery while taking endless pleasure in what they do. It so happens that you manage to escape this carnage. Now years have passed and you have been desperately trying to explain to the heartless world, whom economical circumstances have brought close to the Daltons, what happened to you but not many seem to be interested in your story. Rather they fight with one another over the courtship of the Daltons. And the Daltons? What do they say when they are asked for a reaction to your just claims? Well, generally speaking they replace the names "Waltons" by "Daltons" and vice versa and regurgitate your story. Specifically they say that "these lands have always belonged to Daltons" or "these lands are the eternal possession of Daltons". "The Olsens and the Engelses were living in nearby ranches countless generations ago. Although they moved out of the area many years ago and we will never be able to ask them, they are by no means related to the Waltons therefore they are in fact Daltons. Since they are Daltons and they settled in the nearby areas generations ago it definitely means that their lands also belong to the Daltons the same way the lands claimded by the Waltons belongs to the Daltons and has always belonged to the Daltons. It was in fact the Waltons who quite recently moved in Dalton land and massacred innocent indigenous Daltons"... You are not in an enviable situation, yet you will never give up hope and while you did manage to win back a tiny bit of your land in an unequal battle with the armed up to their teeth Daltons, you are surrounded by the killers of your entire family and the occupiers of your land. They neither feel any remorse for the horrendous crimes they committed (and still commit in form of destroying every bit of evidence: your graveyard and all else you built which would prove your just claims), nor will they feel any shame twisting the truth whatever way the moment dictates, fabricating stories that defy logic. All you have is faith, your rich family traditions and above all dignity. The future will show whether these will be sufficient to finally win back your lands from the Daltons and let justice prevail. Until then you have to hold on and you cannot afford to despair.