From: dbd@urartu.sdpa.org (David Davidian)
Subject: To Blame the Victims -- Armenians in Azerbaijan, Part 1
Summary: The Armenian-Azeri Conflict Part 1-4 
Organization: S.D.P.A. Center for Regional Studies
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 02:11:21 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.060610.16054@mail.cornell.edu> Mark Lipsits <ml12@cornell
.edu wrote:

[ML] I've been seriously flamed for posting a follow-up article to the
[ML] President Ter-Petrossian letter.  I am sure the remark was arrogant, but
[ML] I have perfect reasons for it.  
[ML]    I am absolutely convinced that the Karabach affair was started by
[ML] Armenians.  No, I am not talking about Armenians in general.  It would be
[ML] very dumb to assume that your average working man, who have enough
[ML] domestic worries would all of the sudden go out on the streets and demand
[ML] that Karabach is annexed to Armenia ASAP.   No, here I am speaking about
[ML] Armenian leaders.  The Karabach conflict was nothing more than a
[ML] political intrigue.  And anyone would agree with me that whoever were the
[ML] people who started this were smart enough to be able to predict the
[ML] cosequences.  So, weren't the Armenians who lived in Azerbaijan virtually
[ML] sacrificed?  And in whose interests?  In the interests of those who died
[ML] in that pointless war?  Or in the interests of those who lack the food
[ML] and medication now?  And then Mr. Davidian, (who doesn't even have enough
[ML] intelligence to conduct a discussion without personally insulting his
[ML] opponent with obscenities) is trying to tell me that it was done in the
[ML] interests of the enire nation!  And don't give me that historical or
[ML] statistical b.s. !  I have heard it from all the angles.  You might as
[ML] well demand the restoration of Rech Pospolitaya, or better yet, why don't
[ML] we give some of the parts of the Texas or California heavily populated by
[ML] Latinos back to Mexico.  And don't tell me about the genocide.  First, it
[ML] is very questionable against whom the genocide took place, and second,
[ML] and most important is that it all is nothing but an international
[ML] vendetta!  And because of people like you, Mr. Davidian & Co. this
[ML] vendetta will not end soon.  

Before we continue, it seems you need both some background on this subject, as
well as learning something about your opponent -- the Armenian people. Please 
read the following study, which was assembled during the 1990 exodus of 
Armenians from Baku, written by request for UseNet readers.

You foolishly assume I am some kind of fanatic nationalist. Well sir, if I 
were,  I would not be here behind a workstation in Cambridge, Massachusetts, I 
would be behind an AK-47 in Karabagh killing Azeris! If I were a fanatic, I
would have stayed in Armenia, having been in region twice in the past two 
years. Sir, I know what I am talking about, and can back it up.


  ------------------------- PARTS 1-4 out of 7 -----------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: This was written before the collapse of the Soviet Union, to be complete
this study needs to include the final 6 month of the Soviet Union, the latest 
struggle for Nagorno-Karabakh, and unrest in Nakhitchevan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

			The Armenian-Azeri Conflict

		   (c) Center for Regional Studies 1990

			    by David Davidian
                           dbd@urartu.sdpa.org

Contents:

Section 1.	Introduction

Section 2.	Origins of the Armenians and Caucasian Albanians

Section 3.	Historical Geopolitics of the Eastern Caucasus

Section 4.	The Formation of the Azerbaijanis

Section 5.	Early Twentieth Century Clashes.

Section 6.	Transcaucasia in the Final Stages of World War One.

Section	7.	From the Dismemberment of Soviet Armenia to Glasnost

				Introduction

The origins of the Armenian-Azeri conflict cannot be explained by religion 
alone. It is not sufficient to state that differences in religion between the
Christian Armenians and Moslem Azerbaijanis are the root cause of this 
conflict. To begin with, in general, Armenians are Christian or atheist and 
the Azeri Turks are Moslem or atheist. 

The Armenian-Azeri conflict cannot be understood by over-simplifying the 
geopolitics of the area nor ignoring the historic reality and background of 
the conflict.

The roots of the current problem are twofold; firstly, the seventy-year-old
Armenian claim to Nakhitchevan and Karabagh (both having been under Azeri rule
since 1923); secondly, the social and political origins of Azeri nationalism.
This can lead to speculation beyond simplistic political models considering
the backdrop of a changing Soviet Union.

The purpose of this study is to provide a brief introduction to the whole
topic. It is not intended to be an in-depth study; however, it can be used to
enlighten readers about a subject limited by a relatively small number of 
English language references.


	The Origins of the Armenians and Caucasian Albanians


This section concentrates on the origins of the Azeri people. However, a brief
note on the origins of the Armenian people is included here for the sake of 
completeness. A detailed discussion on the origin and history of the Armenians
can be found in any reputable encyclopedia.

			The Armenians

Modern day Armenians are descendents of the Urartian peoples, who were an 
intermixture of Anatolian stock comprising Hitites, Chaldians, Hayasa,
Hurrians, and others. By the seventh centiry B.C. the Urartian kingdoms fell
into decline and those people came to be  known as Armenians by the sixth 
century B.C.

About this time the Persians referred to the land of "Armina". Thus the term
"Armenia" is an area bordered to the west by the Euphrates sourcewaters, to 
the south by the Mesopotamian lowlands, to the east by the middle Caucasus, 
and to the north the Black Sea. (It should be noted that in the Armenian
language Armenians refer to themselves as "Hay", not Armenian; thus Armenia
was reffered to as Hayastan, not Armenia. Only non-Armenians speaking other 
languages referred to Hayastan as Armenia.)

Armenians inherited a sophisticated culture from the Urartians. The language 
spoken by these early Armenians was a proto Indo-European language, similar to
Phrygian, according to Herodotus [1].

By 66 b.c., a short-lived Armenian empire extended from the Caspian Sea to 
Palestine. After the contraction of Armenia, the kingdom alternated between a 
semi-independent and fully independent state, depending on the current power, 
either from Rome or Persia.

Over the years, Armenia was ruled by various regional powers: Roman, various 
Persian (Median, Parthian, Seleucid, Achaemedian, Sassanid, etc.), Byzantine, 
Arab, Seljuk, Ottoman Turk, and Russian. In the fourth century, the Armenians 
adopted Christianity as their state religion.

By the nineteenth century, Armenia was divided into Russian and Turkish
regions. Caucasian Armenia came under Russian domination after the final 
defeat of the Persians by the Russians in 1828. During this period, most of 
the people of the southern Caucasus were under Tsarist rule, including the 
people from the area which is today called Azerbaijan.

During the late nineteenth century there was a cultural and intellectual 
re-awakening in both Turkish and Russian Armenia. By the turn of the twentieth
century, Ottoman Turkey was in rapid decline, unable to adjust to the current
social and economic situation. The transformation of the Ottoman state was
defined by the removal of the old order, and was then replaced by a new 
nationalist order which expelled those social and cultural institutions 
labelled foreign, and which mandated the removal of any strong non-Turkic or 
non-turkifiable minority. After the loss of the Balkan states prior to World 
War One, the Armenians were the largest non-turkifiable minority left in 
Turkey. They lived mostly in the heartland of Anatolian Turkey -- the center 
stage of Modern Turkey. During World War I, the Turkish government expelled 
the 2.5 million Armenians living within Turkey, carrying out systematic
genocide on 1.5 million of them in the process. Today there are effectively no
Armenians living in eastern Anatolia now known as eastern Turkey.


			The Azerbaijanis

The origin of the people who are generally referred to as Azeri Turks today is
clouded by quite a bit of speculation due to a lack of direct and readily 
available references.

An understanding of the formation of the Azeri people requires us to go beyond
a discussion of Shiite Moslems, Turkification of native populations, etc. The 
most general statement one can make on the subject is that the people today 
called Azeris are a mixture of at least three major distinct peoples: the 
remains of the Caucasian Albanians, the descendants of northwestern Iranian 
peoples (including perhaps Medians), and nomadic Turkic conquerors, (the 
latter which imposed their language on the others). The name Albanian, not to 
be confused with the Balkan Albanians, is known to us by the Armenian name for 
these people, "Aghvan". There is no real tangible information on how or why 
the Armenians called these people Aghvans. [2]

The racial demographics of these people today are rather distinct. The 
population in the northern part of Azerbaijan is essentially Albanian, (which
is related to the non-Turkic peoples east of Georgia, or Daghestan), while 
south of the Araxes river we see an Iranian and Turko-Iranian intermixture. 
According to Strabo [3], the Albanians were originally a group of twenty-six
tribes, each with its own king and language. Sometime before the second 
century B.C., Albania had federated and come to be ruled by a single king. [4]
Its territory covered most of today's Azerbaijan SSR north of the river Kur.

It appears that the bulk of the Albanian people became Christian. This may 
have been due, at least superficially, to their proximity to Armenians. Their 
church was related directly to the Armenian Apostolic church. To this day the 
Albanian language survives in a few villages, spoken by a people called the 
Udi or Udin. They belong to the same church as do the Armenians. (It would be 
interesting to determine if the Udi survived the anti-Armenian pogroms over 
the past two years in Azerbaijan). During the early Christian period, Albania 
came under Sassanid rule as a province of Persia, except between 114-117 A.D.,
when it was a province of Rome.

The creator of the Armenian script, Mesrob Mashtots, apparently created an 
Albanian script as well. Albania became culturally Armenized especially after 
some Armenian principalities in the east were ceded to Albania in 387 A.D., 
including present day Karabagh and its adjacent territory.

In the period during 639-643 A.D., Albania, under the Arab Caliphate, became a
battlefield in the Arab-Khazar war, from which Albania never recovered.

The term Azerbaijan [(Arabic: Adharbayjan, Greek: Atropatini, Armenian:
Atrpatakan, Georgian: Adarbadagani all derived from the Persian, Aturpatakan
(middle Persian), and Adharbadhagan (Persian)], is allegedly named after the
Achaemenid governor of Media. Others claim that the term comes from the
Persian "Adhar", denoting fire. Upon examining the Armenian/Persian roots of 
the term Adar-abad-agan we find its meaning is "the place having to do with 
fire". This agrees with the legend of the "land of fire", for at night the 
local population in and around the area later to be known as Baku used to 
light the surface oil, whose flames lit the night skies.

			--- notes for Section 2 ---

[1] _Herodotus_ LCL 7.33

[2] _The History of the Caucasian Albanians_, Movses Daskhurantsi, translated 
by C.J.F. Dowsett, Oxford University Press, 1961. [This may very well be one 
of the few sources on the subject and is the only English translation of the 
Armenian, _Patmutiun Alvanitz_. Most of what is known about the Caucasian 
Albanians is known through old Armenian sources.]

[3] Strabo 11.4.6 as quoted in _Classical Armenian Culture_, Samuelian, 
Scholars Press, 1982, University of Pennsylvania. page 33

[4] _Classical Armenian Culture_, page 33.


		Historical Geopolitics of the Eastern Caucasus

This section will attempt to set the stage for the subsequent struggle for 
control of the southern and eastern Transcaucasian peoples prior to the shift
in power just before and during World War One.

The impact of an expanding Russia was perhaps the most influential element 
in moving the peoples of the Transcaucasus. This was especially true for the 
Armenians, for they viewed Romanov Russia as part of a modern civilization 
having all the advancements of modern society. In the southern and eastern 
realms of the Transcaucasus, as in many other areas of Tsarist Russia, the 
call for equality of minorities, in reaction to restrictions put upon them, 
combined with "new" social theories of the time which generated a flurry of 
utopian thought. All this in a part of the world where such an atmosphere 
never existed under Persian Kings or Turkic Khans.

After the Persian-Russian War of 1826-1828, the treaty of Turkmanchai awarded 
the khanates of Yerevan, Nakhitchevan, and the area of Ordubad to Russia. The 
treaty recognized the regions of Karabagh, Ganja, Shirvan, Baku, etc. under 
Russian control, as won in the 1813 war. Just after the Turkmanchai Treaty was
concluded, a war began between Russia and Turkey. In September 1829, Turkey 
agreed to relinquish Akhaltsik if Russia withdrew its forces from Erzerum and 
Kars.  During this war the Russians enlisted large numbers of Caucasian Tartars
(later called Azerbaijanis), capitalizing on the antagonism of the Shiite 
toward the Sunni branch of Islam, which Ottoman Turkey represented [1]. In the
years following the treaty of Turkmanchai, Tsar Nicholas issued a decree 
creating the "Armianskaia Oblast" or the Armenian province which included the 
Yerevan and Nakhitchevan regions. The Armenians had some degree of autonomy 
under the decree. (Note the lack of a similar decree for the Azeris).

The separation of Azerbaijan into Russian and Iranian political spheres set 
the stage for different histories to begin for the former Persian land. The 
population of this newly acquired Russian zone, besides Azeris, included 
Caucasian peoples like Lezghians and Persian-speaking Tats to the north along 
the Georgian frontier, ethnic Persians along the Caspian, Kurdish and Turkoman
nomads in the middle, the Talish (related to to the Iranians) in the 
southeast, and Armenians in Karabagh. Fifty years after the expansion of 
Russia into the southern Caucasus, the former Ottoman provinces of Kars, 
Ardahan, and Batum were annexed by Russia. At this time, all Azeri lands north
of the Araxes, most all Armenian lands east of Baku extending towards Kars, 
and all the lands associated with the Georgians came under Russian domination. 
(Note the term Azeri did not formally exist until 1923; it is being used here
for purposes of simplification).

In addition, the stage is set for the European fear of Russian expansionism, 
which will have its effect during and just after World War One. In the 
meantime, Russia bowed to Western European pressure and revised the Treaty of 
San Stefano, which ended the Turko-Russian war in 1878. Russia returned 
Bayazit and the Plain of Alashkert (effectively Erzerum) to Turkey.

During 1840 the 'Armenian Oblast' decree was rescinded and Transcaucasia was 
reorganized into a Georgian and a Caspian district. The attempt was to setup 
more uniform administrative zones throughout the Empire. By re-drawing 
boundaries for the purpose of dividing peoples and social units, the Tsar 
received stiff resistance. For example, Mountainous Karabagh (Nagorno-Karabagh)
was assigned to the Caspian Oblast, notwithstanding its majority Armenian
population and physical border with the Yerevan province. There was also
opposition by Moslems in the region especially in the Caspian Oblast. In 1844,
the Transcaucasus was divided up further with each region separated into 
smaller counties. By 1870, the Georgian-Caspian Oblast was changed into the 
Kutais (north of Batum, along the Black Sea), Batum, Kars, Yerevan 
(including Nakhitchevan), Tiflis, Elisavetpol (including Ganja), Baku, 
Daghestan (just north of Baku), and Zakatal (in the center of the mess) 
administrative districts. Noteworthy is the artificial border created by 
attaching half of Karabagh to the Yerevan province, leaving the rest as part 
of the new Elisavetpol province.

During the early years of Russian rule in Transcaucasia, the policy of 
integration (Russification) seemed tempered by Prince Mikhail Vorontsov, the 
first Russian Viceroy of the region. He chose cooperation rather than hard and
fast policies. He upgraded the power and prestige of local Azeri beys and 
aghas as per the December Rescript of 1846 [2]. This declaration directly 
restored traditional Muslim estate policies, which were similar to serfdom.

The rather mild policies of Vorontsov began changing after his retirement in 
1865. Tsar Alexander III, in 1881, terminated any special status that the 
Transcaucasus enjoyed. The continual shifting of borders and administration
caused huge population shifts, and was setting seeds for future discontent. 
The Georgians were the most comfortable and commanded considerable power due 
to their concentration and minimum population disruption. In the case of the 
Azeris and other Moslems, population shifts were commensurate with those of 
Armenians in Armenian areas, but in the mostly Moslem areas of of the old 
Caspian Oblast, population shifts were minimum. It was the Armenians who were 
the victims of mass population movements. Except in the area near Yerevan, 
Armenian population shifts were continual, fueling political and national 
awareness already aflame. Armenian discontent with the forced population
shifts manifested itself in resistance to Russian rule. During 1890, in
Tiflis, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation was formed, partly in direct 
reaction to the unabated anti-Armenian policies of the Tsar, and in part to 
the horrible oppression many Armenians were living under just across the 
border in Turkey.

The Municipal Law of 1870, part of the Great Reform era, granted limited 
self-government in urban areas. The Law originally set the number of 
non-Christian members at one-half. However, by 1892, the number was reduced 
to one-third, while at the same time the central government began encouraging 
ethnic Russians to emigrate to the region. Many of the ethnic Russians in 
present day Baku can trace their origins to this period.

In review, we see an initial decree granting semi-autonomy to the Armenians in
Yerevan and Nakhitchevan later being rescinded. The earlier relaxed policies 
of the Tsars were replaced by unnatural border changes. The granting of 
traditional Moslem land practices (mainly in the countryside), incited 
conflict with the dumas (municipal ruling body) who fought to maintain control
of the perifery of their cities. These all caused resistance to the central 
government, which became a contributing factor in Azerbaijani political 
awakening.

In 1905 Armenians proposed that the agrarian districts, zemstvos, already 
setup in other areas of Russia be introduced in the Transcaucasus. They 
proposed several Armenian provinces: Yerevan, Kars, Akhalkalak, Lori, and 
Nagorno Karabagh. It is interesting that this proposal was rejected by both 
Georgians and Moslems, for some of the provinces under discussion became 
points of contention between the independent republics of Georgia, Armenia, 
and Azerbaijan 15 years later. The then Russian Viceroy, Count I.I. 
Vorontsov-Dashkov (a relative, not to be confused with Prince M. Vorontsov of 
50 years earlier -- however, an interesting coincidence), whose policies kept 
the various forces in the area from open warfare, was overruled by the 
Caucasus Governor General Golitsyn, who ordered that all non-Russian schools, 
after being closed for some time, could be re-opened but with a Russian-based 
curriculum. Given the close connection between Armenian schools and the 
Armenian Church, such a decree was a blow to the Armenian community. The 
overwhelming majority of schools in the south were Armenian. This decision was
not as debilitating to the rural Azeris as it was to the Armenians.

The combination of solid Armenian demands for the region, the reaction by 
Moslems (not just Azeris) to Russian negotiation with Armenians (even if 
rejectionist), and an Armenian terror campaign against local unjust Russian 
officials, caused the Russians to take a new look at the role of the Azeris 
as a means of quelling an Armenian political movement which could upset the 
entire region. Russian officials were counting on Azeri nationalism to counter
what was 'perceived' as an Armenian attempt to gain at the expense of 
Russification.

Armenians, Georgians, and Russians were generally better educated than their 
Moslem counterparts, and in many cases owned small and medium sized businesses.
These enterprises employed the less educated as workers. In the major cities 
of the southern Transcaucasus there were Armenian owners and Azeri workers. 
Even in Tiflis, a large percentage of the capital was controlled by Armenians.
The failed policy of continual artificial border manipulation, etc, of 
Vorontsov resulted in a large influx of the poor into the urban areas. Due to 
the disparity between those educated and those not, the traditional Moslem
practice of serfdom upon non-Moslems was effectively countered. Moslems 
were by economic necessity to work for Armenian capitalists in Baku and the 
larger cities. In addition, the oil boom centered around Baku in the 1870s was
dead by the turn of the century.

The rather liberal policies of allowing the peoples of this region to attend 
institutions of higher education in Moscow and in the major cities of Europe, 
gave birth to an intelligentsia, schooled in the latest social and political 
theories of the time. During 1892, the Revolutionary Armenian Workers' 
Association was founded in Tiflis, the Russian Social Democratic Party was
founded in Tiflis and Baku (whose organ was edited by V. Lenin), etc. In many 
cases their written material was not available in Turkish, thus precluding
Azeri access to to political literature of the time.
 
In 1905, the Caucasus Governor General ordered the confiscation of all 
non-essential religious property of the Armenian Church by the state. This 
policy only applied to the Armenians, neither the Georgians nor Azeris came 
under such decree. Needless to say, political terror tactics were used by 
Armenians until the decree was rescinded. Such confiscation "resulted only in 
increased revolutionary activity by the Armenians against the government" [3].
Vorontsov was key in partially defusing an explosive situation...only for the 
time being.

This brings us to the 1905-1907 Armeno-Tatar (Azeri) conflicts. This period 
was maked by a rise of Azeri nationalism.

			--- notes for Section 3 ---

[1] _Russian Azerbaijan 1905-1920, The Shaping of National Identity in a 
Muslim Community_, Tadeusz Swietochowski, Cambridge University Press, 1985, 
page 7.

[2] _Russian Azerbaijan_ page 13.

[3] _The Armenian Crisis, 1912-1914_  Roderic Davison, George Washington 
University, New York, 1948, page 6.

Aditional Reference:

_Armenia on the Road to Independence 1918_, Richard Hovannisian, University of
 California Press, 1967.


			The Formation of the Azerbaijanis

The intent of this section is to introduce the concept of Azeri nationalism, a
phenomenon that was not seen by these people until the turn of the twentieth
century, who for many years were called Tatars, Caucasian Turks, Shiite Turks,
Caucasian Tatars, or simply Moslems. 

1905 became a turning point for the history of the Azeri Turks, in that the 
modern history of these people began. The influx of Russian immigrants into 
Baku during the previous decades provided an opportunity for some Azerbaijanis
to be exposed to the Russian environment. As the importance of Baku as an oil 
center grew so did the necessity of an educated class to manage such affairs. 
In addition, the policies of Vorontsov (see section 3) allowed some limited
local autonomy, made the requirement of education essential. In the meantime, 
educated Armenians filled this void rather quickly, with the Azeris playing 
catch up.

Within the ranks of the emerging Azeri intelligentsia were calls for secular 
institutions, a simplification of the Arabic script used by Moslems in the 
Caucasus, and a rejection of Persian influences which permeated most social 
and cultural aspects of Azeri life. This came at a time when alternative 
identities had already been reached by some Ottoman Turkish reformers. One of 
many schools of thought in Ottoman Turkey was Turkism, pan-Turkism, which
called for the re-alignment of social and cultural institutions with the 
"glory of Turkic conquerors". This was not unlike the Nazi German association
with its perceived Aryan identity, and the "glory of Teutonic princes". The 
Azeri Turks, again were always playing catch up. The Sublime Porte coup in 
1913 finally brought the proto-fascist pan-Turanists to power with their eyes 
locked on the eastern shores of the Caspian, the eastward expanse of an 
envisioned Turkic state, based on the glorified birthplace of the western 
Turkic peoples: the Altai Mountains east of the Caspian Sea. Certainly the 
role of pan-Turanism had its place in shaping the direction taken by the 
neo-intelligentsia in Baku, but it was not the sole external political model. 
The entry of the Turkish army into Azerbaijan in the later stages of WWI had 
all the manifestations of a pan-Turanist push, but was rather late in 
resonating the rural Azeri populace. However, this was not the case in Baku
toward the end of WWI. Let's see why.

The leading Azeri author, intellectual, and playwright of a generation earlier,
Mirza Fath Ali Akhundzada provided much of the basis for the future political 
and social direction taken by the Azeri Turks. Akhundzada was an advocate of 
simplifying the Arabic alphabet used in writing Turkish. He would praise 
pre-Islamic Persia and come down hard on the Arabs for destroying it.
Sprinkled in were anti-Ottoman sentiments along the same lines. Akhundzada
tended to advocate the development of a secular Azeri literary school of 
thought for he felt that an all-encompassing religion was an obstacle to 
learning. Of course the Russians encouraged the development of an Azeri 
identity as it would further isolate the peoples on opposite sides of the 
Araxes river. A new Azeri identity north of the Araxes would by definition not
be pro-Persian, serving the foreign policy interests of Russia, if kept in 
check.

By the late 19th century, the Azeri literary revival had solidified somewhat. 
However, an interesting sidelight is that Azeri writers had a 
disproportionately large number of Sunnis within their ranks. This allowed the
idea of a Turkic revival; for these Sunnis were mainly trained in Ottoman 
Turkey. The successors to Akhundzada generated a myriad of plays, dramas and 
comedies. The first Turkish language newspaper in Russia was founded in Baku 
during 1875 called Akinchi. The paper was written with the common person in 
mind. Unfortunately, the idea of a newspaper, while accepted practice among 
Sunni Turks schooled in Istanbul, was considered contrary to the teachings of 
Shiite Islam, and was viewed as an infidel institution. Also, the language 
used in Akinchi was more Turkic than Persian, which became a point of 
resistance by conservative pro-Persian Azeris. Due to the paper's obvious 
catering to the neo-intelligentsia and its pro-Ottoman reformist leanings, 
Tsarist pressures caused Akinchi's eventual shutdown. In the wake of this 
newspaper's shutdown, until 1905, similar publications demonstrated an
increase in Ottomanization of Azeri literary style. In any case, parochial 
Azeri ideals took a back seat. The natural result of all this activism and 
Tsarist resistance caused many intellectuals to consider education as the 
primary force effecting change. Since schooling in a traditional Moslem 
community was directly connected with theology, the move toward progressive 
institutions caused a further rift between conservative theologians and the 
Baku progressives. The literacy rate among the Azeris was in the single 
digits. Add to this equation active Russification and one can see the seeds 
of anti-Russian sentiment, as Armenians and Azeris clashed head on with the 
policies of the central government and each other.

There were many forces keeping the Azeris from entering the 'modern age'. A 
combination of conservative clergy, pro-Persian sentiment, Russification, and
an intelligentsia unable to articulate a reconciliation between Islam and Turk,
caused the adoption, in many Baku circles, of the current wave of reforms 
gathering strength in Ottoman Turkey. In the wake of the Tanzimat reforms 
(later to be rescinded by the Sultan), there were calls for the establishment 
of a uniform Turkish script across all Turkic peoples. Also, a re-evaluation 
of the rather modernizing tendencies of the Volga Tatar Jaddist program began,
which had non-Islamic elements in their method of schooling. The easiest of 
all movements to be associated with was the Istanbul/Salonika-based growing
identity with Turkism as a the key to self-identity.

In partial reaction to pan-Slavism, (and in conjunction with pan-Germanism), 
while at the same time, perhaps, adopting much of the same ideological 
structure, Ali Huseynzada was the first Azeri to spread the ideology of a 
Turanic state. Needless to say, this went against the official policies of 
both pre-Ittihadist (Young Turk) Turkey and Tsarist Russia. While in Istanbul,
Huseynzada was associated with societies later to be part of the Young Turk 
movement. Ziya Gokalp, the progenitor of pan-Turanism, whose philosophical
writings engendered the final Young Turk government in Turkey (1913), 
acknowledged Huseynzada as one of his important teachers [1]. The philosophies
of Huseynzada & Gokalp found a better audience in Baku than in Ottoman Turkey, 
prior to 1908.

In review we had three somewhat contending threads within the Azeri community.
All were based mainly in Baku by the turn of the 20th century: pan-Turanic, 
conservative Islamic, and truly liberal ideas. In a sense we witness, in a 
microcosm, the same forces that were shaping reforms in Ottoman Turkey; 
although in Azerbaijan it was always a game of catch up. Some important 
differences between Turkey and Azerbaijan is that the Azeris were governed by 
Russians and the Azeris didn't suppress their pro-Islamists or liberals just 
prior to the outbreak of World War One.

			--- notes for Section 4 ---

[1] Uriel Heyd, _Foundations of Turkish Nationalism, The Life and Teachings 
of Ziya Gokalp_, London, 1950, pages 107-108.


...next posting contains parts 5-7


-- 
David Davidian dbd@urartu.sdpa.org "It has been ever thus in all things, son, 
SDPA Center for Regional Studies    Whatever we thrash we give to the wind, 
P.O. Box 382761                     We too have been blown by the world's wind
Cambridge, MA 02238                 The chaff is gone but the grain remains."