More Pages: azerbaijan Page 1 2 3


A rare eyewitness account

Best Travel Guide to Anywhere!Perhaps the best recommendation for this books comes not just from the many expatriots who rely on it, but from the native Azeris who are astounded at how well Mark Elliott (native of UK) knows their country. Azeris are famous for assuming (perhpas rightly so) that the rest of the world knows nothing about their country. So, when Azeris recommend a book about their country, written by a foreigner, it is a pretty good endorsement.
By far the best aspect of the book are the scores of maps and illustrations--all done by the author. As a trained geographer, I appreciate the excellent maps loaded (almost overloaded) with information. They are easy to read maps that make it difficult for the traveler to get lost. I am particularly impressed by how a map can simultaneously accurate and amusing! My favorite entry is the map of the fascinating town of Quba that includes "Old Men" sitting in the park. Damned if they weren't still sitting there. On another map, the author suggests looking for grey beards at the point where you're supposed to make a particular turn. Sure enough, there they were.
Living in Baku, my family and often make use of Elliott's recommendations for restaurants. Of course restaurants come and go, but the information is nearly always accurate and detailed.
My eight-year-old son and I have enjoyed taking his "scavenger hunt" for artistic architectural oddities in the city. I think we've now found all the objects in the second edition, but a third one is already on the drawing boards.
Mark Elliott has a delightfully respectful attitude towards Azerbaijan and the Azeris. This is different form many travel books (Including the Lonely Planet Guide to the South Caucasus) which often take on a preachy attitude which tends to poke fun at the local cultures rather than respectfully describing them as Elliott does.
In addition to being a good travel book, this book also is a worthy source of information on the country for anyone interested in learning about it.
Having lived or traveled extensively in over fifty countries I can recommend this book most highly.
Practical but loving
Packed With Info, Yet a Lively Read All the Way!Baku or bust!


Rightful intentions, wrongful neutralityAt the same time, however, the book has single but fundamental flaw. Apparently, in pursue of not being accused of siding with either party of this conflict, the Author obstinately balances the "pro-Armenian" and "pro-Azeri" facts with each other in order to create some facade of neutrality. In most of the cases it is expressed in improper comparisons, putting accents on incomparably important aspects of the conflict and sometimes even bringing about unchecked (if not dubious) information in order to counterbalance the well-known facts. As a result the truth is often obscured, hidden or even compromised. After all, the reality is much more uneven than 50-50 formula adopted in the "Black Garden...".
First of all, one of the greatest misleading simplifications (hopefully, not intentional) is equalization of Turkey-Azerbaijan with the Russia-Armenia ties. Turkey-Armenia relationship can only be wished to be better. Turkey spends millions of dollars every year to deny the fact of 1915 Genocide. It refuses to have any diplomatic relationships with Yerevan; it keeps the land border locked damaging badly Armenian economy, and sometimes even retreats to open bullying of Armenia. Meanwhile Russian-Azerbaijani ties, even at the worst point, included diplomatic, economic and military aspects (e.g. Gabala radar station). Today Russians' attitude to Azeris is hardly less favorable than to Armenians. The Russian president Vladimir Putin in a friendly gesture (rarely ever made to others) is planning to attend Azeri president's birthday party. Russian oil companies have heavy share in developing Azeri oil and Russian language, TV and newspapers are still very popular in Azerbaijan. At the same time, the level of Azeri-Turkish relationship is often expressed as "two countries - one nation" by top officials of both countries.
Perhaps the most astonishing example of the Author's strictly enforced "complimentary policy" is the chapter covering the pogroms of Armenians in Sumgait. Apparently, he considered the section - for obvious reasons - too "pro-Armenian". In order to somehow "neutralize" such impression, he went as far as trying to console Azeris by citing cases of similar atrocities committed by other nations widely recognized as civilized, such as English. As if it wasn't enough to "smooth away the differences" between the sides, the Author, in another part of the book referring to the same timeframe, quotes the "study" made by an Azeri about scores of Azeri victims of pogroms on the territory of Armenia. This information, never confirmed by any independent source, seems highly doubtful since in 1988, under relatively well-organized Soviet Government, it was practically impossible to violently kill 127 people without any trace in official statistics. Although throughout the book the Author seems to be very reluctant to rely on information given exclusively by either side of the conflict, in the above part - evidently to "balance" Azeri pogroms of Armenians - he decided to depart from this logic.
Less significantly, but equally unfair is "matching" of Ziya Buniatov and Zori Balayan. The first "discovered" and propagated a completely bogus (as the Author confirms himself) theory of Karabakh being historically Azeri land belonging centuries ago to "Caucasian Albania" - and consequently Armenians being only guests there. Today this theory is still the moral foundation of Azeri side of the conflict, thus Buniatov's role in instilling the hatred over Armenians is indeed tremendous. In turn, Zori Balayan's biggest sins are cited to be connecting dots between the 1915 Genocide and the pogroms in Sumgait, calling Turks "an enemy" (if they are not, then tell me what "enemy" means) and Arax river "Armenian" (which it may be called as it runs not only on Azerbaijan's border, but also on Armenia's). Sometimes it looks like the facts in the book are really stretched to fit each other...
Many other examples could follow. Most importantly, however, the Author seems to fail recognizing (or at least to properly illustrating in the book) the significant political, demographic and territorial differences between the sides of the conflict. With the history of narrowly escaping the full physical extermination 88 years ago - Armenians still seem to battle with the same dreadful perspective. Less than three millions of Armenians with 80% of their borders blocked by hostile neighbors since the independence are scrambling to survive in today's eventful reality. It takes looking at the map to understand that any potential change in great powers' stance is prone with the deadliest consequences for Armenians (taking into account that Turks are so much stronger, and still never even apologized for the Genocide of 1915 - who would guarantee Armenians' security?). On the other side are eight millions Azeris - with 15+ millions more in Iran - have open access to the sea, plenty of oil (which seem to have hypnotizing effect on Western democracies, too), and with 60 millions Turkey (the second strongest NATO army in the region) as their staunchest ally. The asymmetry is obvious, and it is impossible to understand the history of Karabakh conflict without recognizing it. Not by coincidence, Andrey Sakharov, the prominent Russian scientist and dissident, a person with huge personal moral authority, was quoted to say "Karabakh is a matter of honor for Azeris, but matter of survival for Armenians". It seems, the Author - who spent so much time studying the history of the region - would agree with such statement, but is very unwilling explicitly acknowledging it in the book.
Despite of the above-mentioned weaknesses the book is definitely worth your time and money, especially if you are able to read between the lines, use your judgment and not fall into "all-balancing" trap skillfully set by the Author.
A Rare Portrait of an Historic Region
So far the best book written on "Black Garden"...I had not heard of Sayat-Nova, which the author quoted in the book. Throughout the book there were moments of grief for my own people and for those across the border. As a young son of Azerbaijan, often exploding with nationalistic thoughts like "we will win back our lands", after reading this book, will need to start considering what Sting sang in "Russians":
"There is no such thing as a winnable WAR,
It is a lie we (Europeans) don't believe anymore"


The East will rise again!"Devil's Garden" tells the story of a young American kidnapped while working for a relief program in that troubled region. Because Peters' victim is the daughter of a US senator, consequences of the kidnapping go far beyond local problems and feed a growing maelstrom that threatens to destroy order already fragile with the collapse of the USSR. Among the unlucky Yankees caught up in the chaos are the Islamic fundamentalists who carry-out the kidnap, the local chieftains who can't be sure what their own role in the kidanpping is, the American intelligence officer sent to lead the rescue, his lover, her husband, the republic's leaders ready to tear their oil-rich state to shreds and an army willing to battle anybody to the death - if they can just learn how to shoot. As a good indicator of the managed chaos, our hero, the aforementioned intelligence officer, tries to determine who would kidnap the senator's daughter by trying to find who's responsible. Bit with the fate of the tiny asian republic's oil at stake, and the militant forces welling up in the population, it's soon clear that nobody is responsible for anything. Peters manages this chaos well. something I appreciate through all of Peters books is his resolute reluctance to point fingers and lay blame - his charachters do that, but are compensated with well nuanced faults that make their objectivity suspect. The guerrillas are fearsome, but not the murderous, callous warriors of god we've seen in other books (or on CNN for that matter). The region's warlords, despite sparking a war that threatens to explode beyond their own borders, are just greedy and - in a masterful anti-climax occurring when the factions meet - go at each other much as the corporate directors in a hostile buy-out. One wonders how the directors of Time-Warner and Disney would have settled their cable-disputes if they had to fight with guns and soldiers instead of lawyers, bloated stock prices and otherwise empty content. The biggest revelation is the hero himself, who, despite being an expert on the region, is actually more lost than any of his fellow Americans. It's all chaotic, but Peters keeps the novel from falling apart and the chaos only adds scale to a blighted country and those who live there and are set on destroying it.
On a par with Dickens' 'Tale of Two Cities'
Reality Hurts--Joint Chiefs Don't Want to Face It

Russian and a Divided AzerbaijanWritings in English on Azerbaijan are meager and not of the highest quality. Russia and Azerbaijan improves matters by helping to make sense of the country's history, but its account is limited to coverage of the northern (i.e., Russian) part and to a dry, top-down history (for the Russian imperial period the author relies inordinately on literary magazines).
Current interest in Azerbaijan stems from its dramatic return to history as a vital pivot between Russia, Turkey, and Iran; as a newly important oil exporter; and as the Armenians' opponent in a vicious war since 1988. Contemplating the Turkish-Iranian rivalry for influence over independent Azerbaijan, the author foresees Turkey connecting Azeris to the larger world; but Iran, because of its Islamic emphasis and its inclusion of souther Azerbaijan, will have a greater impact on their evolving national identity.
Middle East Quarterly, December 1995
Thorough, objective, and well-researched.
Substantial addition to understanding of Azerbaijani problem The author's expertise on the complicated issues of both Russian and Middle Eastern history, politics, economy, culture and languages is beyond doubt. Indeed, while reading the book one cannot escape the impression that Tadeusz Swietochowski knows a great deal more than he writes about. Out of respect for his readers he carefully and skilfully selects the most salient and convincing facts and events to enable a better understanding of his subject matter which is not widely known to Western, and not only to Western, audiences.
Thus, he correctly points out that the Treaty of Turkmanchai signed on 10 February 1828 between Russia and Iran constituted a momentous event in the history of Transcaucasia, and, in particular, in the history of the Azeri people, that is of the natives of Azerbaijan. For the Azeris, the conquest of their earlier semi-independent Khanates by Russia and Iran, finally provided for in the 1828 Treaty, meant a partition of their land and people that has lasted to this day. 'The international aspect of Azerbaijan's division', the author remarks, 'created a delicate balance of power in one corner of the turbulent Middle East, a situation resembling that of nineteenth-century East Central Europe, where maintenance of a partitioned Poland ensured lasting peace among Russia, Austro-Hungary and Germany'. Internally, the two Azerbaijans, the Iranian one to the south of the Araxes, and the Russian, later Soviet and now independent Azerbaijan to the north of it, were put on different tracks of historical development. The author's coverage of Russian and later of Soviet policy in Azerbaijan is a splendid piece of research into a subject which has only been lightly covered by Russian and Soviet authors themselves. Given all the dark and bright sides of Russian colonial rule, there is one feature, as Mr Swietochowski rightly assumes, which stands out: Russian and Soviet domination contributed to the Azeris' development into an independent nation with political, cultural and religious aspirations running contrary to the deep-rooted beliefs of their Southern relatives in Iran. The process of historical differentiation has gone so deep that even the most radical nationalists in the last days of the former Soviet Azerbaijan hesitated to advance the slogan of unification of the Azeri nation. The Programme of the People's Front of Azerbaijan, adopted in June 1989, merely provided for the restoration of economic, cultural and social ties between the divided nation and the creation of direct human contacts between relatives and friends.
Pan-Turkic and Muslim sentiments in the former Soviet Azerbaijan certainly exist, and they are scrupulously analysed by the author. Extreme bitterness over the dramatic events in Azerbaijan's conflict with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabagh especially contributed to the rise of anti-Western and anti-Russian feelings in Baku. Yet, even at the peak of the crisis these feelings did not become dominant in Azerbaijani society. This is one of the principal explanations of the seemingly paradoxical fact of the recent reappearance of former Soviet nomenclatura rulers on the political scene and the virtual collapse of the nationalistic People's Front. It also explains, at least partly, the reasons lying behind the relative international stability of the new independent Azerbaijan which has found itself at the very epicentre of Russian-Turkish-Iranian geopolitical rivalry. The author also gives other well-founded reasons for that. Until now neither Iran nor Turkey has expressed any desire to fill the power vacuum in Transcaucasia created by Russia's retreat. Iran is obviously reluctant to incorporate six million well-educated, Turkic-speaking people from the former Soviet Azerbaijan, fearing that this might dramatically change the character of the Iranian state itself. For its part, Turkey fears any distraction from its goal of integration with Europe. Meanwhile, both states as well as Russia restrict themselves to securing strategic and economic advantages in Azerbaijan without incurring undue burdens.
Finally, as the author concludes, the people of Azerbaijan itself, 'are apt to take guidance from their ancient political heritage: moderation and compromise'. There, he believes, 'extremism locks a fertile ground, and its avoidance has been understood as the essence of the community's survival'.
Based on original sources that include Azerbaijani, Russian, Polish, British and American archives, this elegantly written book by American scholar Tadeusz Swietochowski, who already enjoys a high reputation as a researcher of both Middle Eastern and Russian history and politics, substantially adds to our knowledge of the fascinating problems and developments in this region of the world.
VICTOR KIRILLOV


Nonsense
A delightful little book
Beautiful and Informative

The best coverage of Karabakh conflictIn fact, Armenia proved to be the aggressor, Azerbaijan was the victim! The crimes of Armenian military units against Azerbaijani women, children, elderly can not be described in any human language. Dead bodies were mutilated, eyes pierced, ears torn, people were burned alive. I know that because I have seen the pictures and actually visited the sites of these massacres. And I am grateful to Thomas Goltz that he made sure the world knows about the truth. Particularly, the chapter of the book concerning Khodjali massacre deserve a special recognition.
Who were those Armenian militants, what did they want?
They were so-called "freedom fighters", their desire was to create "Great Armenia", "Black Sea to Caspian", "to clean Caucasus from Azeri Turks' (i.e. Azerbaijanis). They were armed by Russian weapons and ideological fiction of Armenian "historians" which completely ignored the facts and rewrote the entire history of the region. Their idea was about the "supreme", "most ancient" Armenian nation which has a "historical right" to take back "its lands", by killing, raping destroying everybody on its way. And that is how the Karabakh war started.
Ironically, this ancient Azerbaijani land now invaded by Armenian military was the home for most of Azerbaijani poets, writers, musicians. There is no credible record in the history that Karabakh ever belonged to Armenia. Even the ancient churches in there were built by Caucasian Albanians, the Christian ancestors of modern Muslim Azerbaijanis. The first Armenians moved there only 150 years ago, supported by Russian Empire.
Anyway, it is sad that Thomas Goltz is one of the few reporters who had enough courage to write the truth about this region. The conflict is still not finished, and Azerbaijan is still subject to illegal Armenian occupation on the verge of 21st century. The country with huge oil reserves and strategic interests of the West is also a constant subject of Russian political-economical attack. Unfortunately, century long propaganda machine of Armenia managed to mislead the world and hide the crimes committed against Azerbaijani population of Karabakh and other lands invaded by Armenians.
Great for anyone interested in Caucasus.The author skillfully unmasks the atrocities committed by Armenian military against civilian Azerbaijani population of Karabakh. He also mentions how these crimes were hidden from the world and Armenia was pictured as a "victim" while Armenian army gradually occupied Azerbaijani land, brutally killing and destroying everything on its way.
Another interesting point in the book is the historical aspect. Thomas Goltz reveals the classical example of "rewriting" history. That is how Armenian "historians" created myth of "Great Armenia" and used it to "inspire" Armenian youth into the war against their neighbors. That is similar to what Serbian government tried to do in Kosova. The only difference is that here, in Karabakh, Armenian so-called "patriots" succeeded in ethnic cleansing and managed to mislead the world community.
Strangely enough, fair journalist from the West

Completely portrays one side of the issueThe author poorly utilizes 1,000+ year historical accounts to justify the actions of the Karabagh Armenians. All accounts are of course footnoted by Armenian scholars.
Overall, this book lacks any balance and crediblity, especially since the author is of Armenian origin. To have someone such as Chorbaijan produce a book which may have an adverse long-term effect on millions of people, specifically the 565,000 Azeris whose lands are being used as buffer ( ie-kill zones) zones, is a complete act of propaganda. This book is even more dangerous as it sits on the shelves of some congressman who is completely blindsided by certain lobbying groups who have an interest in this whole conflict.
Controversial text.Not only the modern conflict is pictured from a wrong angle, but the entire history of the region is "rewritten". For example, ancient Azerbaijani lands of Karabakh and Zangezur were depicted as "historically Armenian", and the Armenians who first migrated into Caucasus about 250 years ago were claimed to be "the oldest nation" in this part of the world. Such unprofessional remarks are very dangerous considering the already unstable relations and ethnic tensions in Caucasus.
I hope the readers of this book will try to gather enough information from independent sources and look at the issue from that perspective. In any case, I wish the authors of "Caucasian Knot" to add little objectivity to their future works.
Historically Accurate, Thorough & Objective.TO: All amazon.com Readers...
DATE: 3-19-2000, 5:16 PM EST, WAMESIT...
ITEM: THE CAUCASIAN KNOT: THE HISTORY AND GEOPOLITICS OF NAGORNO-KARABAGH (POLITICS IN CONTEMPORARY ASIA)
Dear Reader,
... If people want to know and understand the historical truth (NOT the historically-revised propaganda of certain powerful political entities) about Armenians and Armenia in general, and the ancient Armenian region of what is now called "Nagorno-Karabagh" in particular, then this is a very valuable book to read.
... Every sinle statement is backed-up with academic references in the notes section of the book. It is NOT light reading - and not intended to be. But, if you are the kind of person who likes to "dig deep" into a topic, you can dig no deeper than this book: it is a substantial tome to be reckoned with! The authors are ALL highly acclaimed scholars and researchers in their respective fields, and it is quite clear that each of them knows their history and knows what they are talking about - big time. The "mass-media" regular-press has NOT fully informed the general public about the total truth of the Armenian struggle that has been taking place in Nagorno-Karabagh! A lot of this has to do with the oil that is coming out of the Caspian Sea through Azerbaijan, as well as the fact that Turkey is both a close NATO ally of the United States and Israel.
... This mountainous, sacred, rich, and beautiful part of ancient "Hayastan" - the Armenian name for Armenia - is sincerely desirous of its reunification back with the motherland, back to its original state before the Soviet Union, under Stalin, "assigned" its geographic placement within the political borders of Azerbaijan for reasons that suited the Soviet Union more than it suited its Armenian ancient inhabitants. These people have lived here, as Armenians, since the times of the ancient Urartian Kingdom - WAY BEFORE The Azeris, The Russians, and The Turks laid claim to this area.
... Like the struggles for independence taking place in Northern Ireland, in Palestine, in Tibet, on the island of Cyprus, and with The Kurds, the Armenian people of Nagorno-Karabagh want their national, geographic, and political autonomy back. Reading this book will prove to you that the Armenian people deserve it. It is theirs; it belongs to them - and with them it should stay.
... Please, do NOT read this book if you wish to remain ignorant about this important matter or to remain deceived about the historical truth of the situation in Nagorno-Karabagh! It may open your eyes.


Recommended to all students of the Caucasus
"Caucasian Knot:" Notable for its Humanistic Appeal"Caucasian Knot" is about the current plight of the people of Nagorno Karabakh, a long suffered Armenian Christian land that freed itself from the Azerbaijani yoke a decade ago. It is a sorry situation since the Armenians of Artsakh are among the oldest distinct population groupings of Eurasia. Armenian settlements and a distinct political entity have existed in Artsakh since the 2nd century B.C. The book shows that Armenian independence prevailed there until the collapse and partition of the first Armenian state in the 5th Century A.D. At that time, between 480 and 483, Moses of Xoren wrote his famous "History of Armenia"-a manifestation of importance of Artsakh in Armenian civilization. In contrast to other Armenian lands, until the late Middle Ages, the Armenian principalities in Artsakh retained their independence under Persia's nominal rule.
The Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh were among the first in the region to embrace Christianity back in 301 A.D. in the aftermath of the missionary activities of St. Gregory the Illuminator. In this context, the repeated destruction and rebuilding of the Monastery of Amaras symbolizes the resilience and determination of the Armenians of Artsakh. First built around 330 A.D. by St. Gregory the Illuminator, it has been repeatedly damaged and destroyed by countless invaders--such as the Arabs, the Persians, the Mongols and the Turks--only to be rebuilt again and again by the local population. The Monastery in Amaras was last damaged by the Azerbaijani chauvinist bigots in 1992, during Nagorno Karabakh's bitter war for independence. It has since been rebuilt and its centrality in Armenian religious life restored.
"Caucasian Knot" shows that the Armenians' quest for independence has long history. In the late 1980s, as the population of the then Soviet Union was awakened to rediscover national roots, as well as cultural and religious heritage, so did Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh. By then, they had a history of quest for independence despite Soviet oppression. Significantly, since 1923, Nagorno Karabakh was a distinct Autonomous Region within Azerbaijan-a status that reflected the population's distinction. The Armenian population became restive due to severe discrimination by the governing Communist regime in Baku since the thaw of the early 1960s, including protests in the late 1960s demanding self-determination within the confines of the USSR.
In the late 1980s, the Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh were alarmed by the rise of Turkic militancy in Azerbaijan. The legacy of the 1918-1920 slaughter of Armenians by Turkish and Azerbaijani forces-especially the March 1920 destruction of Shushi, an Armenian cultural center that lost its Armenian population and character until recaptured in May 1992- was revived by pogroms in Baku and "ethnic cleansing" of Armenian population throughout the region since 1988. No less alarming was the Azerbaijani blockade aimed to starve the Armenian population into surrender and self-imposed exile. Hence, once the Armenians' quest for self-determination was rejected by the Soviet and subsequently Azerbaijani authorities, the Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh embarked on their quest for independence as the sole guarantor for their self-survival.
The Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh declared their independence and vowed to defend the Armenian character of their land. They then withstood a three-year long brutal war in which the vastly superior Azerbaijani forces strove to destroy them completely. Presently, the population of the Republic of Nagorno Karabakh is a mixture of the local population and Armenian refugees from parts of Nagorno-Karabakh still held by Azerbaijani forces, as well as ethnically cleansed Armenian communities in other parts of Azerbaijan, most notably Baku. They are trying to rebuild their country. A mere 150,000-200,000 people surrounded by a sea of hate with only a corridor to Armenia as a life-line of sustenance.
Therefore, we should recognize the determination of the Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh to preserve and revise their heritage and take control of their lives. In an era where the United States has stood up to the rights of endangered minorities to self-determination, stability, and betterment of life, we should not neglect the legitimate rights and aspirations of the Armenian people of Artsakh. They have already fought and sacrificed enormously in order to attain these rights. They deserve not only our congratulations, but our recognition and help, so that they can continue to grow and develop free of existential threats.
Outstanding, scholarly accurate, the best work on KarabaghNot surprising, this book continues to enrage Azerbaijani nationalists, as it masterfully deconstructs their genocidal fantasies and exposes their goals: to grab the lands of their Christian as well as Persian-speaking neighbors, "expropriate" their cultural legacies, and then evict them from their own lands. As it is widely known, Azerbaijani pastoral tribesmen did not exist as a nation and even as a single ethnic group before 1920s, with their Soviet-crafted "statehood" being an unfortunate yet dangerous side-effect of the 19th century Caspian oil boom. Envious to the ancient cultures of the indigenous peoples of the Caucasus and Iran-Armenians, Georgians and Persians-and driven by a desire to justify their ever growing territorial ambitions, Azerbaijanis recently embarked on a project to enrich their thin historical record, either by manufacturing it from scratch or by producing bizarre tales and myths which, understandably, quickly become anecdotes in western scholarly circles.
However, there exist objective reasons for Azerbaijani historical revisionism. The book shows how young Azerbaijani nationalism replicates the path once walked by its ethnic kin, Turkish nationalism. In 1920s and 1930s the Turks tried to "prove" that all world languages derived from Turkish (it was the so-called "Sun Theory of Languages," a schizophrenically funny Kemalist project) and that the ancient Trojans and Hittites, for example, were all, in fact, "proto-Turks." In the similar fashion, Azerbaijanis, who treat Turkey as a model of their nation-building, try today to "prove" that all historical, cultural, and architectural monuments found on the territory of today's Azerbaijan were created not by the indigenous settled Christians or Zoroastrians of the Caspian, centuries ago before the first Turkic herdsman put his foot on the land of the Caucasus (together with his sheep), but by Azerbaijanis themselves.
The authors of the book vividly demonstrate how the myth about the "Caucasian Albanians" (or correctly speaking, Aghvanians, a mysterious Christianized people, extinct by the 7th century), were conveniently used to deny the political and cultural rights of native Armenians of the region. The putative "Albanian" homeland was "stretched" by the imaginative Azerbaijani map-makers far, far westward to include contemporary Nagorno-Karabagh, with Armenian architectural monuments declared as "Albanian." Despite the vigorous protests of local population, 75 churches and monasteries, whose Armenian roots were especially difficult to deny as their walls were covered by Armenian engraved texts, were blown up or otherwise demolished by Azerbaijani KGB troops, between 1954-1991. Priests and monks were imprisoned or killed right on site. (Fortunately, 850 more churches in Nagorno-Karabagh survived the ordeal and the stone-borne Armenian texts are still there, telling the stories of glory and pride).
The authors of the "Caucasian Knot..." demonstrate that according to the 18th century Azerbaijani chronologists, nomadic Turkic tribes from Iran were settled in the mountainous part of Karabagh only in the late 18th century, not constituting even 5% of its population both in the 19th and 20th centuries. One of these chronologists is Jamal Javanshir Qarabaghi, whose book "History of Karabagh" (Tarikh-E Qarabagh) is available at AMAZON.COM. Jamal Javanshir Qarabaghi's text proves that the Armenians solely inhabited western Azerbaijan-west to the Kura (or Kur) river-from pre-Christian times and, thus, constituted an absolute demographic majority in Karabagh's mountainous part by mid-XVIII century. However, the Azerbaijani nationalists are so deeply entranced by their own myth-production, they have little idea what their own historians have to tell them!
The violent game of the revisionists seems to be close to its end. Due to the absurd nature of their claims, Azerbaijani "scholars" quickly become pariahs in western universities, which no longer accept academic exchange-visitors from Azerbaijan's notorious Academy of Historical Sciences. As to the literature on Nagorno-Karabagh, it is ever popular, especially as the region quickly becomes a beloved destination for the growing number of both western tourists and scholars.

Brook, Stephen. Claws of the Crab: Georgia and Armenia in Crisis. Sinclair-Stevenson, 1992.
This is another treasure of a book about the Caucasus that I unearthed from the bowels of the Wandsworth Public Library system in south London. Only one other person had borrowed it, back in September 1999 when I was working in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi. Reading this book, I discovered that Stephen Brook had got there before me when all the exciting stuff was happening at the start of the nineties. Independence from the Soviet Union, the overthrow of the tyrannical president Zviad Gamsakhurdia and the battles for Nagorno Karabakh - Brook was there or thereabouts. Studiedly sympathetic to the Armenians and guardedly admiring of the Georgians, Claws of the Crab is a rare eyewitness account of many of the events that made independent Georgia and Armenia what they are today. Suffice to say that there's been remarkably little change since the book's completion in 1992.