Once more about the ethnos of destroyers...
or what V.A.Shnirelman's bell rings about (the review of the book by A.Shnirelman «Войны памяти. Мифы, идентичность и политика в Закавказье» Moscow, 2003)

The candidate of historical sciences A.F.Alekperov

They had forgotten their God who saved them … and turned their faces to Baal Peor (Tellim 106:21,28). Ketuvim. Jerusalem, 1978

Investigating the history of ethnopolitical processes always differs for its features, in particular when it concerns such a morbid question as search of the reasons and the objective decision of mutual relations between the conflicting parties. Naturally, in such conditions each of the parties, appealing to various facts, will try to prove its correctness, thus accusing the opposite party. However, there is another objective reality, not subject to any sort of interpretation.

As usual, in the phase of resolution of such conflicts arbitrators are shown up and, strangely enough, they appear like mushrooms after a rain. During the Soviet regime such arbitrators were usually called "time-servers" or "trimmers". Now they usually hide their activity under various "grants" and "projects".

It was a 1988th year when the events subsequently known in mass-media as «Nagorno-Karabakh events» had begun in the USSR. And in these conditions like on a fertile field various "mushrooms" began to show up; these were experts in the field of ethnopolicy. There were also academicians of nuclear physics, and the leader of a political party, whose mother Russian, and lawyer father, and at last, the member of scientific research institute unknown to anybody before. I hope everybody remembers Henrych Borovik's TV-program "Позиция"/"Position" or visiting of Baku by academician A.Saharov and G.Starovojtova, political adventuress, subsequently the deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation who made prompt career on blood of Azerbaijanians and deservedly got a bullet in the head as a divine "reward" (1).

It was my duty of a scholar to return once more to the problem of "ethnos the destroyer" after I read the monograph by V.A.Shnirelman, the doctor of historical sciences, leading expert of Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Science, member of Academia Europea.

As it is clear in the opening address, the author explains the reason of writing this book: «… what happened in Transcaucasia was not something exclusive, and it allowed to consider disputes on historical problems which exceeds the limits of particularly historical subjects. I believe, the appeal to this human tragedy can teach the historians with the greater responsibility to concern to a subject of the studies, and will show the politicians the danger of reckless not critical dealing with historical materials» (2) (my italics - the author).

To make sure about V.A.Shnirelman's sincerity in these judgments it is not necessary to get personally acquainted with him or look into his eyes; it is enough to familiarize oneself with his book and get convinced how he "cares" for the destiny of Armenian or Azerbaijani people.

Reading his book, I recollected an event which occurred to in 1982, once after the acceptation of the Provision program at the XXVI CPSU congress in 1981. At this time the whole population of the USSR discussed the Program; in spite of sharp increase of prices the deficiency of foodstuffs proceeded. That day I went to a book store to look through the new literature and there I heard a man's voice: «It appears, they know!!!». I turned back and saw a well-dressed old Russian man who pointed at the book entitled "The Provision program in developing countries of Asia and Northern Africa" [Moscow, 1982]. Seem paradoxical, doesn't it? These "experts", who drove the country up to ruin, unable to solve a the provision program were prying somewhere into Africa!!! In this case V.A.Shnirelman's position is identical to a position of those "provision-mongers" who, having no imagination of what is going on in there own country were trying to solve food questions in Africa. A question, first of all, arises: «Why doesn't this ethnopolicy and interethnic relations expert prosecute the subjects of how Israel disobeys the resolution of the UN General Assembly 181 (II) November, 29th, 1947 about creation of Israel on Palestine territory; a Jewish state which so far occupies the Arabian lands, even despite the fact that National Council of Palestine in had legally proclaimed establishment of the Palestinian state in 1988?» (3).

But in first, it is necessary to pay attention to structure of the book observed. It consists of three parts: 1. The Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. 2. The Georgian-Abkhazian conflict. 3. Beyond the Caucasian range (it concerns the Ossetin problem - author). As the second and third parts are dedicated to Georgian-Abkhazian and Georgian-Ossetin relations I should let my colleagues from Georgia, Abkhazia and Ossetia regard the questions raised there.

To make sure what V.A.Shnirelman's "hand bell" is ringing about, still it is necessary to pay attention to a couple of remarkable facts. First is the list of the literature used; the author of the book "read" a plenty of literature in Armenian, Azerbaijani, Georgian and Ossetin languages. Anyone more or less familiar with the manners of Armenians, knows their adaptability to conditions of the region which they have chosen as another victim for their idea of "great" Armenia, i.e. our judgements are lead to the fact that hardly "mister" V.A.Shnirelman could manage to learn all abovementioned languages and enough to read the original sources. But here V.A.Shnirelman does not want to puzzle the reader - as he writes, the "benevolent" attitude toward his "trues" was shown by a certain S.A.Arutiunov, chairman of the department for Caucasus of Ethnography Institute, a Corresponding Member of Russian Academy - ethnic Armenian/Hay (4). [note - As present Armenians call themselves "hay", in order not to confuse the reader by the fact that the ancient ethnos "Arm/Arme" is not genetically related to the present carriers of this name, I suggest to call them by their own name "hay" - author].

The second is that V.A.Shnirelman is unfamiliar not only with the above-mentioned, but Arabian, Persian and Turkic languages as well and the ones like as S.A.Arutiunov purposefully "presented" the corresponding information. It becomes evident on an example concerning his thoughts about the Turkic epos «Book of my Father Korkut/Gorgud/» concerning which he writes: «… In February, 1999 there was a ceremonial meeting the state commission Azerbaijan dedicated … to the 1300-anniversary epos «Kitabi Dede Gorgud» which original is written down in Persian» (5) (my italics - author). To not be accused that the stated idea it just the position of an Azerbaijani researcher, I want to remind mister Shnirelman something from V.P.Kurylev's researches who writes: «The book of 'My Father Gorgud' - is the work of Oguz national creativity … (my italics - the author). Under the most full manuscript stored in the Dresden library, it consists of the introduction and 12 legends combined before XV century... In the second quarter of XV century the oguz epos was written down and kept so far in this edition…

Today two manuscripts of the epos are known. One of them, stored in the Dresden library, had been found out at the beginning of the last century and till 1925 it was the unique object of study before another manuscript had been found in Vatican. The beginning of scientific research of the «Book» was put in 90th years of XIX century by academician V.V.Bartold. He and other … scientists investigated the epos mainly as a literary and historical source … the scene of the action is Eastern Anatolia and Transcaucasia. "Oguzs' winterings lay in the valley of the upper stream of Araks from Hasan Kala up to the line of Ararat and Sevan lake (we don't know if Shnirelman is aware of historical Turkic name of lake 'Sevan' - Goyja - author), and in the valleys of the rivers Iory and Kura as well. They estivate near the pastures in foothills of Ararat (in Tirkic Agridagh - author) and foothills of Somheti» (my italics - author) (6). In 1939 the epos was issued in Baku by academician Hamid Arasly and much later - in Tabriz in Persian by "Ibn Sina" publishing house (7).

Of course, there is no opportunity to answer all questions connected with ethnogeny withhin the limits of this article. But it would be desirable to notice, that in my former articles I repeatedly specified that ancient Turkic outlook exists in mythology of Ancient Asia Minor, Balkans and Apennines people (8). The influence of Turkic outlook on Greek, ancient Persian and Latin mythological tradition is evident from comparison of such characters, as Tepegez ~ Polyphem, Boz Gurg ~ Spaka ~ Canis which Latin name corresponds Turkic "canjik" [canish//canis//canjik] in the meaning of "she-wolf". Undoubtedly the sources of the epos "Father Korkut/Gorgud" go back to remote antiquity, i.e. by time of pelasgues and Crito-Mycenae when nobody knew about present Hays. Much longer time should have passed before as a result of the subsequent mutation (8а) this ethnos appeared, who began calling itself "hay" after forgetting its genetic background and usurping the traditions of neighboring ethnoses. The influence of Turkic outlook upon hays' traditions can be proven by examples from their mythology. There is a myth about legendary Haik's grandson - Turk* Angekh//Arevik - transl. as «solar boy», whose name according to rotasism-lambdaism conformity [plus the personification suffix 'k' (for example, Mazda+k, Sparta+к(us), Sagchi+k - author) is identical with Turkic Alev/Аlоv ('fire') +к, i.e. «the fiery boy». This corresponds to the lexical meaning implied in Armenian (Hay) language; and social terminology of Armenian language - for example, ishkhan, naharar, ahurapet (9).

If we deeper regard the Hay mythological terminology we will see that the name of Armenian mohophysitism symbol - "khach" ('cross') is of Turkic origin as well (10). I admit that what I said about the Turkic-Greek-Persian-Latin-Hay (Armenian) linguistic parallels may be characterized as an ordinary coincidence by many people particularly those like V.Shnirelman. But I want to note in advance: everything happens in accordance with the laws of Nature except for only suddenness - how could people of such reputation as pathological bloodthirstiness happen to be ranked as normal? **

But in this case, in order not to puzzle V.Shnirelman with searches of "ancestral homeland" of Hays (anyway he will not find what never existed - author), I want to pay his attention to a mentioning made by V.P.Kurylev where he precisely outlines the zone where the Turkic Oguz tribes wintered and estivated in Southern Caucasus according to the "Dede Gorgud" epos (11). This is another proof that Armenians//Hays even at that time could not be prevailing ethnos in this region.

Even despite the fragmentariness of messages in written sources, it is possible to make conclusions about quantity of Hays//Armenians in Asia Minor in XIII-XIV centuries. For example Gourden de Severaques: «...Turkey which is also called Asia Minor, is populated by Turks and in the least number schismatic Greeks and Armenians» (my italics - author) (11а).

I think, lack of knowledge of oriental languages did not allow V.Shnirelman to pay attention to such an essential detail as the title page of the Dresden edition of "Kitabi Dede Gorgud" made in Arabian hieroglyphics with preservation of norms and plural of the Persian language: «Kitabi Dedem Gorgud ala lisani taifei oguzan//the Book of My Father Gorgud in Oguz language» - (!!! - author).

A little receding from the topic so that nobody has any doubts about the map of Turkis' location according to "Book of Father Gorgud", submitted by V.P.Kurylev, I want to note, that in V.A.Shnirelman's list of literature the "Report" made by an employee of Azerbaijan Democratic Republic Foreign Ministry A.Shepotjev is mentioned as well. V.A.Shnirelman must have not noticed what it read. So, for mister Shnirelman personally, I cite a fragment of the "Report" from A.Shepotjev's conversation with allies representative, English general Bich: «On January, 25 (1919 - author) English general Bich, the civil-political mission chief talked to me. The general was interested about the borders of Azerbaijan with me with the neighboring republics … After detailed explanations concerning our claims on this or that territory, I pointed out that our borders begin from Dagestan (Samur river), having added, that two districts of Daghestan - Kuri and Samur are populated by Turkic people… I drew a line on the map from Dagestan borders which circumscribed Zaqatala district, a part of Signah district entirely populated by moslems, the lower part of Borchali district, a part of Tiflis district up to Tiflis itself, the kurdish population of Echmiadzin district, Erivan district with the city of Erivan, Surmali district, and the whole area of Kars province. As to the western moslems I declared, that we consider Ardaghan, Akhalzih and the Batumi area as an integral part of Azerbaijan and, only as a last resort we could agree to form an independent unit of this territory, but still considered it as a part of Azerbaijan Republic. The general noticed, that in this case there is no lands for Armenians in Transcaucasia and asked whether there should be in my opinion, an independent Armenian Republic. I answered, that on the assumption of real location principle, there is no Armenia in Transcaucasia (my italics - author) … » (12). Apparently from this report A.Shepotev's data fully complies map of Turkis' location in the territory of Southern Caucasus outlined in the epos "Father Gorgud". The same position of "omissions" V.A.Shnirelman shows when he unreasonably criticizes academician Ziya Buniatov for considering the turki Nizami Ganjevi to be Azerbaijani poet who wrote his works in Persian, or Moses of Kalankat, Mhitar Gosh and Kirakos Ganzakezi to be ethnically of Albanic origin, but wrote in Armenian. Concerning Nizami Ganjevi, V.A.Shnirelman corrects Z.Buniatov marking: «actually he was the Persian poet» (13).

It is known, that Turk Mahmud Kashgarly wrote his word entitled «Divan lughat at-Turk» in Arabian. Did he become Arab? It's easy to find another example. V.A.Shnirelman's book is written in Russian language, moreover, the author resides in Russia. Did he become Russian? No. Besides I want to remind mister Shnirelman who has Russian citizenship that on May, 9, 2002 in St.Petersburg Nizami Ganjevi's monument was set with participation of presidents of two states - Geydar Aliev and Vladimir Putin. At the ceremony the Russian president confirmed the fact indubitable for everybody except Armenians and Shnirelman: Nizami is Azerbaijani thinker of a world scale.

The general effect of Shnirelman's book could be characterized by Karp's words (from film «Place of a meeting unchangeable»//"Место встречи изменить нельзя" after Veiner brothers). As the reader remembers, Karp spoke about "rescuing the drowning men". Now Shnirelman wants to show his "mercy" and rescue the drowning Hays/Armenians. According to his judgments he wants to give the politicians a kind of "visual aids" for solution of interethnic conflicts in Caucasus. However, according to the methods chosen by the author, his philosophical judgements the only thing is clear: he failed to make Fierbach who, as the classics of communism say, could manage to put Hegel's doctrine upside down. Probably, this «pre-Feirbach stand» bored Shnirelman strongly and obscured his mind, because according to his judgements it turns out that, it were Turkis from their birth trying to expel Armenians/Hays from their "familiar spots". Or it were Turkis/Azerbaijanis who long before creation of "Armenian zone" (February, 10, 1828 by Nikolay (Nicholas) I decree - author), and then Armenian republic on Azerbaijani lands committed genocide of Azerbaijanis putting into practice ethnic cleansings on their native grounds, in Irevan, Zangezur, Baku, Shusha, Shemakha, Urmia, Kuba in 1905 and 1918? Maybe, it were Azerbaijanis who burned Baku Opera Theatre in 1984 in their own city - Baku and exploaded buses, trains, subway? Or was it Uzeir Hajibeyli who had stolen his own-composed operetta «Arshin mal alan» from Armenians in 1913, and later in 80th years «Mens' chorus» from the operetta «Not that so this», composed at the same time as «Arshin mal alan», having plagiarized it into «Vaharshapat dance» by means of adding two notes? At last, was it Azerbaijanis who slaughtered the population of Hojaly (Khojaly), occupied 20% of the historical Azerbaijani lands in Armenia and do not obey the UN resolutions so far?

In general Shnirelman classifies all historians according to three categories:

1) Mutators

2) Conservatives

3) Revisionists.

Showing respect to Hays/Armenians, V.A.Shnirelman recons among first group his Armenian colleagues who faced with the dilemma - whether first Dryopithecus was Hay by origin or if there is on Hayastan/Armenia on Mars.

It is possible to attribute to the second group all who refuse to see the wood behind the trees, and resting on "generally accepted" (but not proven so far!!!) historical concept of mankind origin, are beating the air so far, thus justifying the intervention into internal affairs of the various states by various sorts of politicians subsequently. Not having awaken from long-term "hibernation" (most likely it is result of a long-term and purposeful policy implemented for sake of achieving world supremacy which now is called "globalism" - author) such historians operate by a principle «cannot be because never can be!». In the given case I doubt whether to attribute V.A.Shnirelman - to mutators or conservatives - as Tacitus wrote in his time: «Really, I do not know!!!».

The third group (revisionists) according to V.A.Shnirelman consists of all historians (in particular the researchers from Azerbaijan) not concordant with the established invention both Russian-Soviet, and the Armenian researchers, i.e. "revisionists" are all those trying anyhow to give the correct analysis of the historical sources concerning ethnogeny problems and statehood in territory of Azerbaijan. If the mutagenesis process had stroken only Armenian scribblers it would have been just a half the trouble. But, as we will see below, in this process they are not individual. For example, Y.Baskin and D.Feldman studying the history of neutrality institute in the Roman right, give the war of Rome with Bosporian empire as an example when Roman commander Gneus of Pompeii secured Iberia's and Albania's neutrality which allowed him to lead Roman army through their territory. «Later, - Y.Baskin and D.Feldman remark, - during the Roman-Persian wars IV AD, both Armenian states (i.e. Iberia and Albania - my italics - the author) concerning which condominium existed, were recognized neutral, and this position was confirmed with the contract in 380th again» (14).

Or see what another bell ringer of the Armenian ideology Jafery Hosking writes: «Armenian people was destroyed and expelled from their ground constantly (?!!- my italics) by powerful neighbors. This is why the most painful for inhabitants of the republic was the question of Nagorno-Karabakh, mostly populated by Armenians (another lie - the author). However, under decision peoples' commissariat Nagorno-Karabakh was attached to Azerbaijan in 1921. The insult put upon national feelings of Armenians (?!! my italics - author), was aggravated by the fact that … the preference appeared to the Azerbaijan minority in all aspects (?!! my italics - author): in distribution of domicile, employment, in education system and construction of manufacturing enterprises ***. In 1988 the discontent accepted open forms. The special Committee for Karabakh was created… In February at the demonstration organized by the Karabakh committee, at least half-million person (!!! - Another fake: according to the statistical data at this time (1988 year) there resided not more than 125 thousand Hays/Armenians in Karabakh (15) - author) were participant. The demonstrators demanded to attach Karabakh to Armenia. In the answer Azerbaijanis immediately implemented the bloodshed. In … Sumgait (Azerbaijan) … tens, if not hundreds Armenians were killed within two days (?!! - author) … In January, 1990 well prepared congress of the Popular front took place in Baku … Afterwards huge crowds of people among which there were Azerbaijani refugees from Armenia began hunting for Armenians who remained in Baku. The commentator of the Moscow radio had noticed in this occasion it seemed as if the modern city had returned to the Middle Ages …» (16).

How do you like this? As the close reader can be convinced, it is clear that Hosking worked on the same «flipped material» as Shnirelman did. But the army of "hoskings" can easily be unmasked by the facts from hayastan/Armenian press which wrote that for the acceleration of social-economic development of Nagorno-Karabakh Azerbaijan SSR goverment had allocated 500 million roubles in 1988 ****. But at the same time Azerbaijanis had inconsiderately been expelled from the homeland, in Hankendi (which was renamed into "Stepanakert" by Hays/Armenians) the Azerbaijani sector was destroyed, Azerbaijanis were prohibited from building new houses, various industrial, cultural and educational objects were abolished. And all these had been implemented at the period of a certain V.Volsky's (Shnirelman's congener) board in Karabakh (18).

But Hosking as well as V.Shnirelman holds back the fact that the first victims of this conflict became two Azerbaijanis from Aghdam; that a certain Eduard Grigoryan (armenian by nationality) concealing his ethnic origin raped and killed the Armenian women subsequently to accuse the inhabitants of Sumgait of his group's sins (now Grigorian walks in freedom). Isn't it surprising that the next day Hays/Armenians erected a monument for the victims of Sumgait tragedy in Hankendi/Stepanakert? With the help of all these examples it is possible to imagine the chorus pro-armenian "singers". I have to wander, what role is allocated for V.Shnirelman in the chorus?

Therefore, the basic orientation of the chapter entitled "The Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict» - is not the auhor's knowledge of ethnic problems in general, but tendentious enlightenment of occurrence of the given problem, encouragement of an aggressor and “sticking of labels” upon the heterodox. At the same time I want to note, that generally Shnirelman's work is formulated on veiled "objectivism" based on a principle «divide et impera // divide and dominate», which now is called “double standard policy”. Concerning ethnogeny problems V.Shnirelman uses the position of conservatives - to prevail with the help of authority's opinion without making his own research. Of course - in his efforts Shnirelman is impeded by the methodology according to which the Turkic element was "alien" to the East Europe BC. I.e., the personage from A.Pushkin's tale "About the priest and his worker Balda" could also act according to the principle of Shnirelman's conclusions.

Criticizing late academician Ziya Buniatov for his scientific position, in particular for his doctor's degree thesis and the same monograph «Azerbaijan in VII-IX centuries» (Baku, 1965), as well as for the book «The State of Azerbaijani Atabeks», (Baku, 1978) (19), "venerable" ethnopolitist skillfully paves the way for his next demarche. He writes: «…In 1971 alongside with other Azerbaijani historians … he was accused by the first secretary of C.P.S.U. Central Committee of Azerbaijan G.Aliev of deviation from party membership, idealization of history… However, … for G.Aliev it was a standing statement to please higher authorities (!!! - my italics) … It is interesting, that in his long speech Geidar Aliev still managed (!!! - author) not to say a word about bourgeois nationalism … All historians mentioned by G.Aliev… continued to develop their conceptions… They were encouraged by Azerbaijani authorities… Much later close relations with G.Aliev received solid acknowledgement. With Aliev's coming to power in independent Azerbaijan Z.Buniatov became one of the propresidential party «New Azerbaijan» founders, member of his Political bureau and the deputy of Azerbaijan's new parliament" (my italics - author). At last, Shnirelman's «ideological swoop» is shown in the way he accuses G.Aliev for that the latter emphasized that Azerbaijani people must know the true history of the native land, that international law is on Azerbaijani people's side and the most important what he repeatedly emphasized was that Azerbaijan is able to resist the aggressor (Armenia) (20).

I would like to let V.Shnirelman know that all absurd ideas about creation of so-called "great" Armenia (21) are known not to the Russian historians and policies only (22). V.Shnirelman's Armenian colleagues, and all Armenian people should comprehend after all, that they semantically confuse the concepts of "Great" in political sense to an adjective "big" in geographical meaning (in fact there also was "small" Armenia), i.e. 'Armenia' was a geographical area where settlements of Hays/Armenians (23) were scattered (not solely Armenians'). During the history of mankind Armenia never played special role (24). It is possible to speak about the greatness of Assyria, Rome, Seljuk Turks, the Osman Turks, but not Tigran's Armenia on any account. As to Tigran, his army consisting of many thousands scarpered by literal before two Roman cohorts (about 900 soldiers - author), headed by Lucullus. According to Plutarch, in this over a hundred thousand infantrymen were lost, not a single horseman could escape in this runaway whereas the Roman army hardly made the twentieth part of the defeated. The same Plutarchus wrote that having run from the battlefield, Tigran the 'great', put the diadem on his son's head and then, already knelt before the winner and gave in to him (25) (emphasis mine - author). Basically, Tigran (not as great as Hays/Armenians believed) could surrender in compliance with his dignity. But it causes suspicion why did Tigran give in to the Roman emperor on all fours?

It is surprising that the first Armenian historian Moses Horenatsi (V century AD) due to known reason holds back Tigran's 'feats'. But at the same time he left more interesting information about the "heroism" of Armenian leaders. This is what he wrote about Bagratians: «At the same time /Arshak/ appoints his brother Vaharshag to be the regent in our country, and gave him to possess the north and the west… Having defeated the Macedonians and stopped wars, the bravest Parthian started to develop the country *****. First of all he renumerated the powerful and wise Jewish man - Shamba Bagarat (Smbat Bagratuni) by giving him the right both to assign on Arshakians and be named Bagratuni… This Bagarat abandoned himself by all essence (!!! - the author) to Vaharshag on his free will even before the war with Macedonians» (26). It is necessary to note, as they say, like father like son. This pathology of Bagratuni for long centuries was kept in consciousness of Hays/Armenians. Probably, for these 'features' Anastas Mikoian, one of the "Dashnaktsutun" party members whose hands are reddened Azerbaijanis' blood, using the membership card of the communist party (27) as a fig leaf had managed to win the status of "favourite" of Joseph Stalin (Jugashvili, Georgian Jew), who loved to frolic with him (28).

But there is an essential difference between sodomic courtesy of Parthian regent Vaharshag and courtesy of Jugashvili (J.Stalin). For example, whereas Shambat Bagarat voluntarily, abandoned himself by all essence to Vagarshag, the latter could not manage to think him out of observing the Jewish law and consequently left him alone (29). But Jugashvili/Stalin did not recede. I guess, "introducing" his chromosomes into Anastas during the implementation of "courtesy", Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin did not miss a case to talk over about the problems of Communist Party at the same time, thus 'driving' into Mikoian's psychology "stalinist" way of thinking, making him great mutator in the field of national policy. In fact it is known that Stalin (Jugashvili) had signed the Decree about eviction of Azerbaijanis from their historical lands (now conditionally called "Armenia"), to the Kura-Araks plain not without Anastas Mikoian's participation.

If we closely look at the stage-by-stage development of "Karabakh problem" we will notice, that Hays/Armenians by literal trace the process which is now called «Palestinian problem». It is possible to confirm by the examples how both states, Israel and Armenia ignore the UN resolutions. Or whereas Hays/Armenians rave about «Great Armenia», the Jewish politicians actively introducing into the world community consciousness the ideas of globalization, dream of universal supremacy. Just like in a joke about a Hay/Armenian who asked a Russian saleswoman: «Do you have the globe of Haysatan/Armenia/?».

However, in the antagonism for superiority the Armenian ideologists have no ideological substantiation of their primogeniture as compared to Semitic-Jews who consider "Ibrahim/Abraham" to be their forefather. And as Hays/Armenians do not and cannot have any, they "suck" their history from wherever. V.A.Shnirelman understands this fact quite well which we see from how he reacts to Armenians' attempt to ascend their genealogy to Noah (30). The Jewish ideologists who do not want to recognize Armenian's "genocide" fable, also understand this fact. At the same time, mentioning these facts, I 'd like to remind V.A.Shnirelman, that Armenian lobbyists' claims for Karabakh and Nahchivan (I bet, an ordinary Armenian is far from all what impose his ideologists - author) is initial stage their subsequent ideological struggle with Jews for the right of being called "the Chosen people".

But Hays/Armenians also contrived to outclass Jews. So, whereas there are many representatives of various nationalities including Arabs, to avoid "self-determination" problems subsequently Hays/Armenians have practically expelled all non-Hays, including Jews, thus having transformed Armenia into monoethnic republic.

It is necessary to note, that in his polemics with Hay/Armenian colleagues concerning ethnogeny and Armenians' appearance in Asia Minor in general, V.A.Shnirelman adheres to I.M.Dkonov's opinion about Thraco-Phrygian origin of Armenian ethnos (31). All it is known, Hays/Armenians do not bear being compared to the Semites, but still such statements periodically appear in different publications (32). In order to not be proofless I want to apply to a number of evidences confirming the aforesaid. For example, the memoirs of a Russian general, the participant of events of the beginning of XIX century A.P.Ermolov from Jacob Gordin's book, which name a little coincides with the name of V.A.Shnirelman's book:

«I remember duke Zizianov calling them "lousy Armenians". That is it,  breed of people (if it is decent enough to call them 'people'), the most contemptible... whose only god is their own benefit and no duties concerning all others. Europe should not shun Jews; they conveniently obey the order and under strict supervision can do as much harm as Armenians, but they are similar for their worst features» (33). Certainly, V.A.Shnirelman would be interested to read a excerpt from the memories of a French oriental spetialist M.Mischeaud who had visited Caucasus in 30th years of XIX century: «Armenian people differ in their speculative spirit and character inclined to trading activity. These people think little about their origin and memoirs about Erivan, Edesse and the Euphrates coasts do not interest them absolutely. Armenians consider any land rich for precious metals to be their homeland, they know all ways and means of extraction of money; they do not neglect to achieve what they want. These people are especially artful to store a treasure; the chest can hardly be opened until they die. No obstacles or fatige can restrain them from achieving their selfish ends. With great pleasure I would compare the Armenians to Homer's patient donkey who never leaves the  pasture until he  guzzles the gramma completely even if one hits him with a stick. The vision of gold gives Armenian children the activity, some elegance which obviously contrasts with awkwardness peculiar to them» (34).

To confirm M.Mischeaud's words it is possible to apply to the message from the report of the Russian imperial police lieutenant colonel concerning dashnaks' ("Dashnaktsutun" is Armenian revolutionary party - author) provocative activity. He reported as follows: «… the Armenian empire was formed alongside with the others on ruins of the Persian empire before Christmas. Armenians were compelled to get in touch with migrators and submit to their law. It was then that their specific national features, by the way, rather similar with Jewish were developed by virtue of self-preservation instinct, as well as at the Jews who had left native land. They resemble Jews (more than others) in outward appearance as well. Distinctive features of their mentality is national isolation which resulted in contempt and hatred to other peoples and hard egoism. Alongside with these qualities, due to centuries of slavery, duplicity was developed as well: a worship and flattery before the strongest and itch for making harm at the same time. Constant relations with new peoples developed inclination to trade, at the same time to a deceit and acquisition of wealth, the more so as due to historical reasons having developed observation in themselves, Armenians understood, what a big power the capital is today, not only for a single person but the state» (35).  German professor Tunmann (XVIII century) who holds the same opinion about Hays/Armenians: «In Crimea Armenians are most numerous element after Tatars. Almost all of them are engaged in trade, but here they are not as rich as in Oriental countries. According to descriptions they are lazy, dishonest, dirty and ignorant» (my emphasis - author) (35а). It is very interesting that the that the aforesaid proves to be true according to antique geographer Strabo who wrote: «In fact Armenians, Syrians and Arabs are close to each other relationship not only concerning language, but in a lifestyle, similarity of a constitution as well, especially because they live in closest neighborhood…». (36) If we admit this statement it turns out, D.A.Olderogge was right asserting that Mesrop Mashtots had not "invented", but simply adapted the Ethiopian alphabet to the norms of Hay/Armenian language (37). Though, considering the statement of Armenian chronicler M.Horenatsi (V century) that Hayk's grandson's name was Turk, it is possible to believe, that F.Agasioglu is more correct as he earnestly proved the Turkic origin of ancient Arme people (>>> http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk017.htm), who underwent assimilation. As to the "Albanian alphabet", which is  nowadays the subject of discussions so far it is necessary to note, that the identity "Albans~Turkis" is not doubtable and F.Agasioglu who proved (quoting the statement of M.Horenatsi) that the Albanian alphabet was created on the basis of 'white khazars language which resembles gargarian' (38). Azerbaijani historians repeatedly criticized the position of Hay/Armenian 'histerians'. Investigating the reasons of confrontation and consequences of the conflict, V.A.Shnirelman comes to the conclusion, that «during the conflict both parties had to reconsider the former stereotypes essentially: Armenians got rid of an image of a helpless victim, and Azerbaijanis on the contrary received the image of people, as if centuries long oppressed by the Armenians» (39). In my opinion, a representative of the nation who underwent the Holocaust should not have told that. In fact it should be well-known to Shnirelman, that unlike the Christian states, Turkis have always been tolerant with the Jewish; as Turkis (moslems) alongside with Mohammed recognize Moses and David as the prophets, there has never been any anti-Semitism here in Azerbaijan. Jewish authors themselves write what Turkis of Ottoman empire had sheltered Jews after anti-Semitic actions of Marans in Spain, headed by Thomas Torkvemada [who was Jewish by origin] in 1492 (40). Probably, V.A.Shnirelman remembers also that it was not Turkis but Armenians who participated in murdering of Jewish sportsmen in 1972!!! As an expert in the field of ethnopolicy Shnirelman should have paid attention that all Azerbaijani historians who witnessed the events of XIX - beginning of XX centuries and could tell the truth to the younger generations, who saw how Armenian cutthroats slaughtered Azerbaijanis - they were all executed by Kalmyk-Jewish Vladimir Lenin (41) aforementioned Jugashvili and his deeply beloved Mikoyan. That history long Turks neither receded before Hay/Armenian nor cried in kerchief and killed their congeners to achieve their nonsensial ideas. V.A.Shnirelman knows quite well that whereas due to communistic terror and nonsensical communistic idea of class struggle and «brotherly internationalism» a veto had been imposed on elucidation of Armenians' villainy in Azerbaijan -  a  'monument' of pseudo-genocide (as if committed made by Turkis) was erected in Armenia. Therefore I want to note, that if from the moment of the beginning of Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict there were no "aritrators" whose interest is only resources of our country, not the human destinies, Azerbaijan would have driven Hays/Armenians into their den (called «Nowhere») long time ago. As it is known Azerbaijan guided by international law from the moment of restouration of Independence, proceeded from principles of humanism and respect. According to the position of Azerbaijani historians (unlike Shnirelman wants to represent), it is time that the world community should know «who is who». Speaking about the reasons of preservation of Karabakh within the structure of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic and about retaliatory measures of Karabakh general-governor Hosrovbek Sultanov (42) concerning  provocative activity of dashnaks led by earless Andronik and Dro in Karabakh and Zangezur, V.A.Shnirelman keeps silence about the main instigators of Azerbaijani people's genocide in spring and autumn of 1918 - the bolsheviks headed in Baku by a proselyte-Jew Shaumov (who turned into 'Stepan Shaumjan' after he accepted grigorianity); he does not mention the name of Armenian fascism founder, Hirler's close friend, Romanian dictator Ioana Antonesku whose true name was Levon Karapet Paljian (43) [=Catholicos Vazgen]. At last, he does not mention the main instigators of explosion of underground in Baku, Khojaly genocide and in Karabakh problem in general - shurtvaz by origin ****** Zori Balaian and present Hay/Armenian president Robert Kocharyan, whose hands are in blood of Karabakh Azer-Turkis. According to the recent researches, 2.5 million Turkis were slaughtered by Armenians from the moment «Armenian question» had been arisen. Earlier our experts applied to the evidence of  Hay/Armenians' villainy only in Northern Azerbaijan. However, the present facts testify that Armenians organized slaughters in Suothern Azerbaijani provinces - Urmia, Hoy, Sharafhan, Gushchu etc. For example, Ali Dehgani in the book «Urmia: the Land of Zoroastr the Prophet» wrote that on March, 17, 1918 (i.e. for two weeks before the beginning of massacre in Baku - author), on the eve of Novruz Bayram 10 thousand. Azerbaijani Turkis had been killed in Urmia (44). As a  result of massacres committed by Armenians and Aysors in Southern Azerbaijan (1918) 130 thousand civilian Azerbaijanis were lost (44а).

Continuing his opuses concerning researches of the Azerbaijani historians, V.A.Shnirelman writes: «… in year 1970 Azerbaijani historians went over from hushing up to assignment of Armenian historical heritage (45) … the propaganda brochures issued in Armenia from the end of 1980th, completely denied Azerbaijanis' autochtonity and, proceeding from rigid and indissoluble ties between language and ethnic origin connected their appearance exceptionally with Turkic migrations from Transcaspian regions» (46). First of all I want to note, that Hays/Armenians' morbid absurdity is connected with certain political-juridical motives; to substantiate their claims on our lands they need to prove their "autochthonism" and the 'fact' that Turkis (Azerbaijanis - specifically) are 'alien'. Probably V.A.Shnirelman knows quite well about Armenians' frauds starting with cuisine ending with high ideas. Mentioning the following facts, it would be desirable to remind Shnirelman about Venetian mhitarists - conductors of Catholicism in the Middle East, about Israil Ory and his associate Minas (Vardapet), about fugitive Hay/Armenian Muradjan Hasan (XVIII century) who was courtier to Ottoman court yard, then ran away to France changed his name and became d'Оssogne, about descendants of Manuk Lazarev (Lazarian) who under the Azerbaijani regents of Iran managed to rise to the rank of major chief and paymaster and whose grandson had been appointed even as the governor of Dzhulfa; his descendants later escaped to Russia, Catherine II and with the help of their new patrons founded Lazarev Oriental Language Institute with the purpose of anti-Turkic and anti-Muslim propagation (47). Perhaps, our ethnopolicy expert V.A.Shnirelman is aware about about how Hays/Armenians swindled with their religion as well, long time posing as orthodox before Russians. This began in 1799 when Hay/Armenian Joseph Argutinsky recited the liturgy in honor of Paul I.. The swindle was disclosed in 1891 during the process of Hay/Armenian priest Ter-Voskanov when it became evident that there were no prayers in honor of Paul in Armenian churches. For this deception the Hay/Armenian church property had been confiscated (48). In the answer Armenians anathematised the betraid the regnant house. Therefore, Hays/Armenians of all ranks from catholicoses up to swindlers, wandering the Europe were trying to create themselves an image of bleating "lamb" who lost its passport. For example, a certain pseudo-puritan, the patriarch of Armenian church of Istanbul Mkrtich Hrimian (1864-1879) the day before the Berlin Congress incited Armenians to violence. For some unknown reason V.A.Shnirelman using such enormous number of the literature, ignores Erich Figle's book who shows real face of Armenian fascism (49). As it is known, on February, 21, 2003 the USA State Department presented the report on Southern Caucasus where the reporters pointed out that in year 1970 in the CIA archive a document presenting the Upper Garabagh ("Nagorno-Karabakh") as Armenian territory (pay attention, this document was furtively put 18 years before the Hays/Armenians started this conflict - author). On August, 1, 2003 this document was publicated in the USA mass-media. After this in the State Department officials regarded this document as grounless and expressed  regret concerning the information of 34-years prescription. They also marked that applying this fraud the US mass-media represented Upper Garabagh as the ethnic and religious center of Armenia up to year 1988 (50). This very report read that in Upper Garabagh and other Azerbaijani areas occupied with the help of Armenian lobby people suspected of terrorism are sheltered under the guise of displaced people; 24 of them are already known to the State Department. It's clear, that Hays/Armenians by fair means or foul to achieve separation of Upper Garabagh from Azerbaijan, are trying to increase quantitative structure of region. V.A.Shnirelman's position is not clear again. He either purposefully forges the facts or obviously has discord with maths. So, шт 1823 (after subscription of the Gulustan peace treaty - author) the number of Hays/Armenians in Karabakh was as follows: urban population 421 souls, villagers 3945 souls - 4366 in total whereas the Turkic-Muslim population consisted of 1111 urban population, 14618 villagers - 15729 in total (51). After subscription of the Turkmenchai treaty on February, 10, 1828 between Russia and Iran 8249 Armenian families had been moved to the territory of Irevan province, Karabakh, Shamaha (XIV clause of the treaty supposed Russians' emigrant policy in Azerbaijani lands - author) (52). Soon after subscription of the  Turkmenchai treaty 40 families families were brought to Azerbaijan (53). Since 1828 to 1830 after the subscription of Adrianople treaty between Russia and Turkey 84000 Armenians were moved to Ganja, Irevan, Borchaly, Ahaltsih, Ahalkalaki from the territory of The Ottoman Empire. At same time 324000 Armenians  were brought in the mountainous areas of Gandzha (Elisabethpol province) (54). There are no present data about Armenian immigrations in Southern Caucasus during the Crimean war (55). During the Russo-Turkish war of 1877 85000 more Armenians were brought to the Southern Caucasus. Many Armenians moved in these lands since 1893 till 1896 and by 1908 the aggregate number of Armenians in these territories made 1 million 300 thousand, from which only 300 thousand. (56) lived in conditions of strip farming before the beginning of "Eastern question» realization which major part was "Armenian question". In the memorandum about the redemption fee for the Transcaucasian lands dated 1912; about agricultural census of 1917 the quantity of Armenians in Karabakh was 170 thousand whereas the Muslim population (Turkis [Azerbaijanis], Kurds) was 415 thousand (57). These facts should not cause V.A.Shnirelman's doubt, as Armenians had proved it establishing in this occasion a monument in Agdere (arm. Mardakert) in 1978 [http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/hisday/armyanstvo11.htm]. However, committing ethnic cleansings of Upper Garabagh by any means Hays/Armenians managed to change numerical strength of these territories in their favor. But still Hays/Armenians  can not implement their emigrant policy to increase the population of Karabakh as ordinary Karabakh Armenians who stupidly swallowed the bait of their propagators understood that sooner or later they will have to be responsible for what their instigators had committed in our lands. Basically I want to point out that neither Karabakh nor as 'Hayastan' (Armenia) itself are necessary for Hays/Armenians. Otherwise they would not settle in Russia, France, the USA, Argentina in so large numbers.

But Armenians, with their heels dug in the ground like the Homer's pet, want to prove their superiority and for this purpose continue to disturb their relatives who conveniently arranged their lives abroad. So since 1992 up to 2000 Hay/Armenian families were moved to Karabakh from abroad:

1. France: Paris - 3 families (1992), 5 families (1995). 19 families (1999); Marseilles - 15 families (2000); Lyons - 8 families (2000);

2. Lebanon: in total 42 families, 8 of which were settled in Hankendi (Stepanakert) in 1999;

3. Argentina: Buenos Aires: 5 families (2000);

4. The USA: Washington - 4 families (1999), New Jersey - 7 families (1998), California - 11 families (1999), 4 families (2000);

5. Libya (Tripoli) - 16 families (1995);

6. Sudan (Khartum) - 3 families (1999).

The specified facts are known to the USA State Department officials who expressed concern in this occasion (58). It is clear that diligence of Hay/Armenian lobbyists to increase their tribesmen's quantitative strenghth in Upper Garabagh has juristic cause as according to International law, ethnic minority, has no right of self-determination (59).

Speculating international law, Hays/Armenians want to oppose the peoples' self-determination principle to two preceding principles:

1. Principle of imperishability of frontiers;

2. Principle of territorial integrity.

I.e., asserting the principle of self-determination Hays/Armenians thus overlooking the fact they total ethnic minority on the territory of Azerbaijan (and Caucasus in whole - author); violate the general principle of parity of the United Nations Organization principles. Perhaps, V.A.Shnirelman is aware of self-determination principle which for the first time was put forward by Vudro Wilson at the Paris Peace Conference, defined (naturally considering the subsequent struggle of mother countries for new colonies) self-determination of colonies.

As Azerbaijan was not a colonial state, but itself was a colony of Russian empire for long time, this principle is not applicable to Azerbaijan. The principle of self-determination can be given only once; Armenia has already been defined (not without participation of the Allies), on Azerbaijani lands. So, the self-determination of Hay-shurtvaz union of Upper Garabagh would be conformable to self-determination of Hays/Armenians in Russia or America.

It's not a secret (except Shnirelman), that what Armenians did in Azerbaijan, starting even from 1988, can only be estimated as state terrorism which contradicts all principles of International law and jus cogens in first as to a principle of self-determination of peoples (60), against Azerbaijan.

Thus, summing up the aforesaid I want to note haw well could all people live if International law operated in the true sense, and thus there would be no reason for such arbitrators as V.A.Shnirelman to act as probationers. I would advice Shnirelman to read closely the chapter «Zigzags of history» from Lev Nikolaevich Gumilev's «Ancient Russia and Great Steppe» (M., 1989.)

P.S.

In the end I would like to tell speak a little concerning my 'revisionism'. I think, V.A.Shnirelman wanted to flatter me. Actually, in 1992 I defended my Ph. D. thesis entitled «Azerbaijan's relations with Northern countries before Seljuks' intrusion (the second part of IX - 60th years of XI century)". The dissertation was authorized by the Higher Examination Board of the USSR. In this dissertation on the basis of comparison of various written sources (mainly Slavic and Muslim), I have come to the conclusion, that early Midieval authors mentioning sklavin/sakаlib tribe meant Bulgar Turkis and that the rus who were the kin of saklabs according to Ibn Hordadbekh had no relation to Kiev. It is strange that V.A.Shnirelman made such a statement in my address without his own analisys of the sources. Not going deep into a subject of polemics, in this case I want to remind our ethopolicy expert, that in the period mentioned in my dissertation, the rus undertook 10 military campaigns to the Caspian region and Azerbaijan.

So, I have a special test prepared for my opponent - there is a many-volume Slavic source entitled Full Collection of Russian Annals. Therefore, if V.A.Shnirelman is interested let him try to find a single proof that at least one of the aforestated campaigns had been organized by the Kiev state. If he can manage, I will be glad to call him "ethnopolitician" once more. What is more, the one claiming to be an ethnopolitician should know that according to Muslim sources Azerbaijan ranged from Derbend in the North up to Zenjan in the South; that Barda, subjected to plunder by the rus in 944 is located not in Shirvan, but Arran, i.e. historical Caucasian Albania.

____________

Notes

* A question may arise - if mythical Hayk's grandson is Turk, who is Hayk himself then? This statement by Moses Horenazi completely refutes Hay/Armenian researchers' attempts to prove an ethnic origin of Armenia people and 'alienness' of Turkis to this region region.

** About Armenians' brutality and other generally pathological features we will speak below.

*** Hosking's description is so vivid as if he witnessed those events. The authors's position reminds me Kupi-prodai - the profiteer from film «Shadows disappear at midday», who suddenly could smell smoke through prograted and burnt trousers sitting in a boat (i.e., thousands of kilometers away from Karabakh, elsewhere in America).

**** Whereas other regions of republic were in much worse condition, and Azerbaijan was one of those republics besides Russia which received grants from the USSR budget (17).

***** It would be desirable to note, that Scytho-Sag problem is also in our "ethnopolitician's" scope of interests (V.A.Shnirelman, Indicated thesis, p.173) And once again V.A.Shnirelman shows ignorance of the ethnogeny problems. I want to note, that areal research of the given problem testifies that in the Scytho-Sag confederation was of Turkic origin in majority (see Alekper Alekperov «About the disputable moments of ethnic history of Europe and Asia Minor in view of studying of Caucasian Albania history» // newspaper Elm 4-20 May, 2000 [http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk004.htm]; «About an origin saklab ethnonym» // the Medieval East.. 2.. Баку.1993.. with 22-41 - [http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk005.htm]). Concerning Parthian problem I want to point out that according to my researches the name Parthia coinsides with Parsua and means not "edge" as I.M.Dyakonov believed, but ascends to Turkic «bars//mountain lion» that was the matherialized manifestation of Ahuramazd (Alekper Alekperov «About the disputable moments … »; «About an origin of Mugham» // Azärbayjan milli musiqisinin tädqiqi problemläri...  №3. Бакы.1999.с.36-55 [http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk015.htm]; «About 'insignificant' confuse of Russian historiography» //

Kitabi Dädä Qorqud dastanının 1300 illiyinä häsr olunmuş elmi-näzäri konfransının materialları. № 1. Бакы.1999.с.75-85-[http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk003eng.htm; http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk003ru.htm]). There is conformity in such name going back to earlier epoch of pre-Semitic monoteism - Tengrianity. Bars as well as Boz Gurd prefer to live and hunt alone. This feature which left a deep trace in Turkis' outlook as compared to peoples preferring commune lifestyle, is embodied in Dede Gorgud. That is what was reflected in performance of Azerbaijani mugham. At the same time whereas Hay/Armenian histerians accuse the Turkis of infringement of their rights, is interesting how such Armenian authors as Moses Horenazi or Smbat Sparapet had opposite views.

****** "Shurtvaz" is the nickname (which can be literally translated from Armenian as "turn-upside-down") used by the residents of Armenia to name so-called 'Karabakh Armenians'. It would be desirable to ask Shnirelman as well as Hosking: why if Armenia and Karabakh residents (of Armenian origin) ethnically homogeneous (though karabakh Armenians' language considerably differs from language of Armenia residents - author) they do not get on with each others? In fact they all profess gregorianity? If present Upper Garabagh Armenians had really been of Armenian origin (but not armenianised) they would not have addressed the Russian emperor calling themselves "Aghvan/Albans" (Армяно-русские отношения в первой трети XVIII в. т.2.ч.2 Ереван.1967.с.30) Another question arises: if Albans were Hays/Armenians, why did even Moses Horenazi oppose the specified peoples to each other?

Bibliography

1. Алекпер Алекперов «Армяне-хаи как этнос-разрушитель» // Sosial bilgiler. Baki.2001. № 1.с.19 (16-20) (http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/armyanstvo/arm5.htm)

2. Шнирельман В.А. « Войны памяти …» с.8

3. Черниченко С.В. Теория международного права. М.1999 с.200-201

4. Шнирельман В.А. Указ.соч.с.8

5 .Там же с.

6. Курылев В.П. «Общественный строй огузов по данным эпоса «Деде Коркут»// VII Международный конгресс антропологических и этнографических наук. Москва.агуст.1964. М.1964. с.1-2

7. Äfändiyev P. «Xalq dühasının ölmäz bädii abidäsi» // Kitabi Dädä Qorqud dastanının 1300 illiyinä häsr olunmuş elmi-näzäri konfransının materialları № 1.Bakı.1999.s.8-14; “Китаби Деде Коркуд» Тебриз, 1976. (на персидском)

8. Алекпер Алекперов «О кресте, рождестве и раскрытии их мифологической сущности»; «Азербайджан - это Атропатина или страна Света?» // Sosial bilgilär informasiya bülleteni, Bakı.2000, № 8-9 [http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk010.htm; http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk012.htm]; Алекпер Алекперов «Все дороги ведут к Тенгрианству» // Sosial bilgilär, 2001.№ 1. ss.3-9 [http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk008.htm]; его же «К характеристике названий Кентавр и Минотавр» // Sosial bilgilär.2002.№ 4. ss. 3-14 [http://karabakh-doc.gen.az/ru/turkologiya/trk001.htm]

8 ^а В.Н.Гордлевский «Там, где в старину жили армяне» Изб.соч.М.1961.т. III