Book Review

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.

The book represents independent, comprehensive and up-to-date research of one of the most disastrous modern wars in the Caucasus region. It can definitely serve as a good reference point for anybody who is interested in the post-Soviet development of South Caucasus countries. Numerous references, original interviews with top officials of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Russia, Turkey and other courtiers offer an invaluable piece of information, which could not be found anywhere else.

At 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.

There are very few books published on Karabagh (Artsakh). The author discusses the events leading up to the war from both Armenian and Azerbaijani perspectives. Unlike other books which tend to be dry historical accounts, this book presents the rich culture and history of the region and how and what conditions led to the war and what possibilities if any exist for peace in the region. Highly recommended.

Unlike many previously written texts on the Karabakh conflict, I have to admit that Thomas de Waal has retained a very neutral view of the issue expressing views of both conflicting parties. I am Azerbaijani student in the USA. Thomas has clearly revealed many issues about our so called "enemies" Armenians, their views, beliefs and worries, of which I had only a blurry view. Any foreign author, who considers the Karabakh subject important enough to write a book on it, often ends up with a very biased composition in his hand. Thomas de Waal has managed to do what, not every passionate writer could; stay thrilled by the subject, meanwhile baring a very neutral position with a hint of insignificance.

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"

Does this book say that Karabagh is an essential part of Azerbaijan and its occupied by Armenian armed forces?

This is a delightful little book. I just couldn't put it down when I first got it! My husband and I had been quite anxious about making our first trip to Armenia and Karabagh this year, and the advice in the book really eased our minds by letting us know what to expect when we got there. Just KNOWING what to expect was such a help especially for someplace so far-off like Armenia. The advice about getting around and just getting by on a daily basis was very practical. And it's an easy read. As pertains history and facts about ancient churches and so-forth, it only skimmed the surface but we didn't really expect a scholarly treatise about religious history and architecture, so we weren't disappointed. Still, a bit more "trivia" would have been welcome. We were thrilled to see so such thorough coverage of Karabagh, but would have liked to have seen more information about Echmiadzin (the "Vatican of Armenia"!) and Gyumri. I suggest reading parts of the history book "Looking Toward Ararat," (by Suny) and another one called "Rediscovering Armenia" (authored by Kiesling), which was sort of an encyclopedia of historical monuments and quite detailed (although a bit of a mish-mash and difficult to read). We also had the Lonely Planet book which we thought was just dreadful.

I used this book when I went to Armenia in August. It's a very good book to read before you go because there is a lot of background information in addition to all the usual hotel and restaurant listings and etc. The pictures were really good so I saved the book after my trip. I would say the best part was on Karabagh. This is the only book I have ever found that has any good travel information on Karabagh. I carried it around everywhere and I would definitely recommend it to buy.

This book consumed three days of my time and I had a hard time trying to mire what seemed like an attempt at writing a historical account of a tragic eventin such a fairy tale style. This however is one of the less egregious comments about this book. The most crucial criticism about this book is its total one sided portrayal of a so called "oppressed" group of Karabagh Armenians. I find this account of this conflict disturbing to say the least. And having lived in Azerbaijan ( a US citizen) I can tell you from the Azeri point of view that the so called "Karabagh Freedom Fighters" were more like the Karabagh ( in cohorts with their russian provacateurs) agressors. I am not going to waste my time like other reviewers going into the academic context of this conflict to support my criticism of this book. Anyone who reads this book and immediately elicits any sympathetic feelings about the Karabagh Armenians ought to take a two day trip the boundry regions of Karabagh and say hello to the Armenian snipers who take joyous potshots at innocent kids. The author never mentions the agressive nature of the Karabagh Armenians. Nor does he mention that Armenians during the Soviet regime in Baku and before the revolution almost dominated higher positions in the Baku government and professional positions-thanks to the help of their colonial masters the Russians.

The 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.

The main theme of this book is the conflict in Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan which still goes on. Unfortunately, the author failed to show all sides of the story and is definitely biased towards the Armenian side. In fact, the Armenian side is actually the aggressor in this war and is the side that virtually expelled all Azerbaijani population of Zangezur, Goyche, and Karabakh from their homeland, thus completing an unprecedented ethnic cleansing campaign. Therefore, it is sad that L. Chorbajian et, al try to "forget" this fact and support the openly racist policy of Armenian side.

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.

FROM: The Aeolian Kid / Aeolian_Kid@hotmail.com...

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.

I would advise to read this book to noone, maybe only to knowledgeable people, who know the real situation and won't be misled by the tricky description of the author. Why? Just to see the real face of Armenian nationalism in its veil of "national democracy".

The problem with ethnic issues is that often the only people that care about them are people of that ethnicity -- therefore, this author is going to be called biased and unbiased by the 2 sides. I found this book an interesting account of how the issue of Karabagh was used by the National Democratic Movement (a loaded term -- basically, the people who were pro-democracy in the end of the USSR who also happened to all be of the ethnicity) in promoting their own goals. I read this book twice in an academic setting and found it to be one of the best on the subject.

The conflict over the Armenian territory of Artsakh, also known as Garapakh (hence the title of the book), has been intractable since the fall of the Soviet Union. Yet few today remember how the conflict originated, how Joseph Stalin's purges and ethnic engineering shaped the region, and how the Mountain Turks (called "Azeris" since WWI), the Armenians, and indeed most of the Soviet Union's subjects were used in the often arbitrary Stalinist decisions. In this mostly objective work, the origins of the conflict are traced in such a way as to explain why feelings in that region of the world are so strong, why the Mountain Turks want Artsakh from the Armenians, and the relation between the Genocide of the innocent Armenians in 1915 by murderous Turkey itself still has ramifications in the present.

The book presents several Armenian myths as a reality. Shortly after Armenians migrated to Transcaucasia from Middle East (during the Ottoman Empire and Russian rules), the entire nation of Armenians became a victim of so-called "historians". They invented several myths, such as "the most ancient nation", "the first Christian nation", and "Great Armenia, from sea to sea". All those myths were intended to create in hearts of ordinary Armenian men and women a hatred towards their neighbors, on whose lands they settled, and encourage ethnic wars and massacres of non-Armenian population. Their goal was to "clear the land from Turks, Kurds, Jews and others", and create an "ethnically cleans state". However, they needed some "historical facts", in order to justify their crimes. And this book - is one of those myths, presented as a "historical facts".

The authors can get credit, however, for creativity in using a name of "Azerbaijani historian", to backup their writings. Of course, the poor "Azerbaijani historian" had no idea that his name would be used centuries later to sign somebody's hateful fantasies.

The book present a classic tool of Armenian propaganda. The facts are distorted, the true writings of Mirza Jamal Javanshir have been changed by the "translator" Bournoutian to fit his version of Karabakh's history. This ancient Azerbaijani land, the home of the greatest Azerbaijani writers, poets, musicians and statesmen, where ancient Albanians (ancestors of Azerbaijanis) first accepted Christianity, has been portrayed as a "part of Great Armenia". To make his "annotations" credible, the "translator" uses the name of Azerbaijani historian, in order to further mislead the readers. The author/ "translator"...END

For a long time I wanted to get a view on Karabakh from a perspective of an Azeri historian. I would like to note that unlike many now day's historians, Mirza Jamal did not pursue political ends in exploring the history of the region. His was simply writing history for the sake of history not political implications. This made him unbiased towards Armenians and Aeries.

I highly recommend this book especially if you would like to get an unbiased glance of Azeri historian on region of Karabakh.

Libaridian's disjointed narrative makes excuses for the failings of the autocratic ruler he served as advisor--some would say éminence grise. Claiming confidentiality, he fails to reveal anything new; not that his "revelations" would have been particularly credible. One might have hoped for a coherent explanation with a touch of self-criticism. One would have been disappointed.

The other reviewer has some valid points, but I think he may be blinded by the fact that quite a few people disagree with certain choices that the author has made in his personal and political life. In my opinion, this does not take away from the fact that this is the most honest and realistic books on the current political situation in Armenia. One who is not familiar with some of the basic issues in Armenia politics may not enjoy this book as much.

I loved this text because it talks about some of the more valiant points in Armenian political life. Libaridian speaks about topics of Armenia's government that are very rarely talked about. He supports his claims with evidence, most of it first-hand, so the reader must recognize, and at least respect, his views.

It takes a lot of guts to denounce the Diaspora and to speak in-favor of an unpopular President. The book definetely provided insight on Armenia's government and some of the issues they were struggling with since the inception of statehood in 1991. Some of Armenia's problems that were discussed were the Armenian Genocide and how to handle it, the non-existant economy, and the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute.

The book was written around 1997, 1998, so the current Kocharian Administration is not really talked about. I hope Libaridian writes a follow-up on Armenia in the 21st century. I would love to hear his probably controversail views about Armenia today and the handling of "Artsakh" versus the terroristic and human-rights violations champion Azerbaijan.

.....

"Caucasian Knot" is the most important book ever written on the region of Nagorno-Karabakh. It highlights the causes of the opposition of this Armenian region to the authorities of the self-proclaimed "Azerbaijani Republic," a Moslem state committed to weed out the indigenous Christians from the territory she currently controls by virtue of having petroleum, and, thus, some political clout beyond her borders. The book is well-written, well-researched and presents many invaluable documents in native languages. Recommended to anyone who is serious about history of the Caucasus.

This is a wonderful book for anyone interested in the history and politics of a fascinating little country called Nagorno Karabagh, or Artsakh in Armenian. It should not be overlooked by anybody who is keen to learn more about the Caucasus, Azerbaijan, and Armenia. The text traces Armenian history from its earliest forms to recent times with impressive detail. It is academic but readable and enjoyable. This is an example of how a good history book should be written. I am delighted to have such a memorable book on my library shelves. The authors presented deeply revealing guide to modern culture and politics of the volatile Caucasus that fills a wide gap in general knowledge. The tone of the text is balanced but maybe too scholarly. It rendered me great assistance when I was working on my dissertation on Caucasian politics back in mid-1990s. The book is free of any offensive or biased remarks concerning any ethnic groups in the Caucasus and is notable for its clear humanistic appeal. When I visited the region three years ago on a humanitarian mission, my own experience only confirmed the value of the "Caucasian Knot."

"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.

The "Caucasian Knot..." is undisputedly the most objective and thorough analysis of history and politics of one of the most significant parts of larger Armenian homeland-Artsakh-known today as Nagorno-Karabagh. This amazing work offers tremendous detail and insight and is a terrific effort by talented historians and political scientists. I found the book informative, colorful, and convincing. The Christian people of this tiny region, before they won independence in 1991, were in struggle for freedom with Azerbaijani Turks, (Azerbaijanis, Azeris, or Caucasian Tartars), the descendants of nomadic Moslem migrants from Central Asian steppes. Azerbaijani chauvinists, violent and racist as they are, denied political and cultural rights of Azerbaijan's Christian minorities and in 1987 spearheaded the policies of "ethnic cleansing," thus producing blueprints of violence lately put to work in the Balkans.

Not 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.

can't do better in faking information, historical fact and contemporary events... certainly not a book for a historical research...

This book is the collection of lies. The writer has no idea about what is going on in that region. It is his imagination. Too bad that these kind of books still are being published.

have never in my life seen a bigger lie..... Very sad that people nowadays change history in their own aims.