Talk:Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

False attribution and misquoting of Georgian historian, Prof. Avtandil Menteshashvili

The version on which a certain user insists says the following:

"According to Georgian historian, Prof. Avtandil Menteshashvili, ethnic Armenians once comprised over 40% of the population in Nakhichevan, but their numbers slowly began to descrease due to emigration. By 1987, only two Armenian villages remained in the area. "

To this, I've added the following clarification:

"[clarification needed -- in which years was this true?]. However, according to all relevant censuses, Muslim (Azerbaijani) population has been in majority and was constantly decreased due to wars and immigration with simultaneous influx of ethnic Armenians from Persia and Ottoman Empire. Indeed, writing in middle of the 19th century, a British intelligence officer, diplomat and prominent researcher notes: "The Armenian population of Erivan and Nakhshevan, although numerically unimportant, deserves a brief notice." "

This user removed it on the grounds that Muslim majority is not questioned. Furthermore, he did not answer to the "clarification needed -- in which years was this true?" request about the ambiguous and highly unscholarly statement: "ethnic Armenians once comprised over 40% of the population in Nakhichevan, but their numbers slowly began to descrease due to emigration. By 1987, only two Armenian villages remained in the area". Obviously, the period during which Armenians might have constituted 40% should be identified. As my quote from Maj-Gen. Rawlinson shows, it is an incorrect to make such assumptions, and 40% Armenians in Naxcivan seems highly suspicious and in no legitimate sources did I see it. Moreover, there was no census done in 1987 -- the last Soviet census was done in 1989, whilst the previous one was done in 1979. Hence, it is strange to see the reference to 1987.

And indeed, upon checking the reference, it became clear that the Georgian prof. Avtandil Menteshashvili never said himself or claimed anything like this! Instead, on pages 45-46, the source of the information, Prof. Menteshashvili is only re-phrasing (and making it abundantly clear) Armenian claims as repeated by a British Parliamentarian:

"Thus, after his visit to NKR in April 1998 being a member of the delegation “Christian solidarity”, the member of the House of Lords of the Great Britain Mr.Gilton described in his memorandum 15 reasons, under which the people of NKR will never accept the form of government of Nagorni Karabakh from Azerbaijan. Here are three of them: <...> · it is still vivid the memory of persecutions of Armenians in Nakhichevan where in 1917 Armenians made over 40% of the total number of the population, whereas in 1987 only two Armenian villages were remained in Nakhichevan.9"

Moreover, the article goes on to give yet another obscure citation to this figures, “Centraljnaia Azia i Kavkaz” N1, 1998, pp. 131-135 (Russ)". The citation is by no means reliable -- it omits a lot of important information, such as the precise page of the information (currently, it probably shows all the pages on which the article was published), the authors name and the title of the article. I went into the archives of this journal, and did not find any such article or information: http://www.ca-c.org/journal-table-97-98.shtml In fact, I've searched all four (4) editions published in 1998, as well as the last edition in 1997 -- nothing! I've initiated a Google and Russian searching engines queries, and again, nothing.

Thus, not only is this information unrealiable and sloppy, but whoever inserts this reference to Wikipedia's Naxcivan page is also significantly mishandling it and misquoting the Georgian professor, who never said it and simply cited someone else. Imagine if one cites Hitler, and then someone attributes Hitler's words to him or uses that citation as an endorsement of Hitler's speech -- an extreme example, but that's what was done by this user.

I will get rid of the link and rephrase the quote, without any percentages, and restore my fully-cited, accurate and verifiable (scan of the page available upon request) reference to Henry Rawlinson. --AdilBaguirov 05:39, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll concede to this. I'll admit that I skimmed through Menteshashvili's work, so if I missed any information of importance, it was entirely my fault. I apologize. -- Clevelander 10:37, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I will revert this out, other than Russian resstlment of Armenians, through the century, only the Armenian population was discouraged to remain in Nakhichevan. I don't see how wars affecting the Ottoman and Persian frontiers could have disfaviored the Muslims any more than the Armenians, who not only migrated southern, but that there was a very huge recorded migration of Armenians for elsewhere, even in Europe and America. Fad (ix) 19:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Until you will bring proof to your assumptions and opinion, I will revert to the cleaned-up version. According to the official 1926 census, Armenians were only 10% of the population, by the way, far cry from "over 40%" that Armenians claim for 1917 (when no census took place, only some estimates). --AdilBaguirov 21:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Look, like I said, you can remove this Georgian historian for all I care, but you did more than removing this Georgian historian, you added things which are full of insinuations. The wars affected much more Armenians than Muslims, here above we were talking about Abbas, but there are various other instances which I will present, previously Abbas Grandfather, the Ottoman placed Sunnis and removed the Armenians, the same Sunni, which later the Persians started killing. In 12th century when the Mongols came, Julfa was entirly destroyed to the ground, it was rebuild later. I don't see how you can claim something like this when beside the Armenians the rest of the population serounding all the region were Muslim(Turkmens, Tartars, other Turkic tribs, Persians, Kurds etc.), how could the war have affected the Tartars, when both sides were removing the others Turkic population to place theirs, was there 'others' Armenians to be placed? No, Armenians were just pushed downwards or emmigrated all together. So, demographically speaking, only the Armenians ration could have decreased. Only was it under Russian rules that Armenians were advantaged, and only slightly, because they had to replace the Armenians that moved to Georgia and elsewhere. This is unbelievable, how all of you finger Russians ressetlement of Armenians back, when for centuries under Ottoman or Persian rules Armenians were removed from the Armenian plateau, many Armenians under Ottoman rules were removed from Nakhichevan and brought to the West as far as Constantinople, evem Smyrna had recieved its share of Nakhichevani Armenians. Fad (ix) 00:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually no, the region changed hands frequently, and its population suffered from constant wars. It affected everybody. Specifically during wars between Safavids and Ottomans, when Savavids killed sunnis, and Ottomans killed shias, which definitely affected Muslim population more than Armenians. And the rules don’t allow indiscriminate reverts, but you revert both the edits that you consider wrong and those that you don’t object to, and restore highly POV version of the article. Grandmaster 08:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Fadix, there are no insinuations -- I was fair in my re-wording, and despite removing the "Georgian prof" quote, I left intact the fact that Armenians were a sizeable minority which was eventually reduced to nearly zero. The only thing I removed was the outrageous "over 40%...in 1917" claim, which is contrary to all facts and was misattributed to the Georgian prof.

secondly, perhaps you didn't know, but the Armenians and their king was an ALLY to the Mongols! Yes, yes, he was an ally, and Armenians fought alongside the Mongols and Tatars against ... Turks, the other Turkic people! you can read about this from multiple Armenian chroniclers, as well as modern scholars like American prof. Weatherford (p. 171, 181, of his great book "Ghengiz-Khan and the making of the modern world"). Thus, Turkic people have suffered much more than Armenians. Remember another fact from history -- how 1) Ottoman Empire fought 2) Ilkhanid Mongols who simultaneously fought 3) Timurleng -- all were Turkic and all fought each other at the same time. So your insinuations a-la: "wars affected much more Armenians than Muslims" and "how could the war have affected the Tartars" are invalid and unsubstantiated. If needed, I can start quoting all those authors to show how loyal and great allies Armenians were to Mongols. I can also probably find Turkish sources about Armenians fighting alongside Seljuks in their conquests - in fact, I distinctly remember President Ozal mentioning that in one of his speeches.

Lastly, the 200,000-300,000 resettled Armenians into Iran by Shah Abbas is an unscholarly and groundless statement, unsupported by either facts or logic -- it was impossible to resettle so many Armenians into Iran even logistically, plus many more other Christians and Muslims (which could have then been one million people alltogether, since there is no evidence to support the notion that Armenians were the largest group affected). It's well known that this estimate (300,000) was hyperbolized and inflated by a factor of 10 by Armenian chroniclers. Moreover, simple demographics study shows it was impossible: if 300,000 Armenians were to be resettled into Iran in 1604, how many Armenians were to be in Iran by 1828? That's right, well over a million. Yet how many Armenians are in Iran even today? About 200,000. Since we know from Griboyedov and Shavrov and Glinka et al how many Armenians were being settled from Persia into Azerbaijan in 19th century, it won't be too hard to make an intelligent estimate. --AdilBaguirov 11:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

On khachkars destruction

On the Naxcivan page, in the bottom, there is a section of Disputes. There, at length, there is a lot of accusations against Azerbaijan by Armenia(ns) of destroying khachkars. Whilst nothing has been definitively proven yet, there is also another side to the story, which is definitive and accurate. Here's what I've added to the page:

"Despite all the accusations, independent investigation by Armenian journalists shows that Armenians themselves are engaged in destruction of khachkars and other historical heritage. - see: HETQ Online (Armenia), "We Need to Defend Ourselves from Ourselves", by Edik Baghdasaryan, April 10, 2006. "

The user deleted it on the grounds that it has nothing to do with Naxcivan. Actually, as made clear by this English-language investigative article by Armenian journalists and published in Armenia, it has everything to do with Naxcivan, which it even references to in the article, and shows that 1) Armenians themselves have been destroying what they claim to cherish and 2) lends some credibility to the fact that the what the video and pictures Armenians have shown on the Internet are probably Armenian workers/police/soldiers destroying khachkars on the territory of Armenia, possible Zangezur (Sisian, Megri, Kafan regions).

Hence, this quote must remain in the page. --AdilBaguirov 05:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps we can come to some compromise. If it is to be included, I believe that it should be revised. As it stands now, the way it's worded seems misleading, as if Wikipedia is telling the reader that "yes, there is solid proof that the Armenians destroyed their own khachkars in Nakhichevan." It should also be placed under the section regarding the destruction of the khachkars instead of starting a completely new section for it. I cleaned it up a bit and reworded it like so:

According to Armenian journalist, Edik Baghdasaryan, destroyed khachkars have emerged in Armenia. Though it is not clear exactly who destroyed these monuments, that fact that they have appeared on Armenian soil implies that the destruction was done by Armenians themselves. "Armenians everywhere have closed ranks to protest against the barbarous destruction of Armenian khachkars by Azerbaijanis in Nakhidjevan," Baghdasaryan said. "But who will protest, who will fight against us, here at home? Perhaps we should appeal to various international organizations and ask them to come and protect our treasures from ourselves?"

I still say that this new addition isn't that relevant. In fact, I would say that this article has a very tangential relation to Nakhichevan (the name itself only comes up in the article twice - the same goes for the word "Azerbaijani"). It seems to me that the point of Mr. Baghdasaryan's piece is that Armenians shouldn't be complaining about the destruction of something they cherish when they haven't been able to take care of it themselves. He does not prove that the Armenians themselves destroyed the khachkars in Nakhichevan nor does it make any outright accusations of such an occurance. Also, nowhere in the article does it state your speculation that the video and pictures that have surfaced on the internet (they actually first appeared on Armenian and Russian television) are probably Armenians destroying khachkars on Armenian territory. For the record, the author doesn't even mention Zangezur (today Syunik). In fact, Syunik, while mountainous, is very green (take an area like its capital, Kapan, for example). By contrast, Nakhichevan is very arid, mountainous, and practically a semi-desert. The group seen in the video footage destroying the khachkars seem to be located in a very mountainous, desert-like area, thus giving credence to the event taking place in Nakhichevan. If the monuments were destroyed in the Zangezur-Syunik area like you stated, then what happened to those khachkars in Nakhichevan that were reported to have vanished by the IWPR and Scottish traveler Steven Sim (as cited in this article)? And if this destruction happened in Nakhichevan, wouldn't the Armenians be noticed by the government of Azerbaijan? The Armenians who once lived there certainly could not have destroyed them as no more Armenians live in Nakhichevan. Furthermore, the ruins were found in Yerevan. It would be an incredible task to haul them to this area from either Syunik or Nakhichevan without being noticed (Julfa where the incident was reported to have taken place is quite a distance from Yerevan). Additionally, if the Armenians did indeed destroy their own monuments in either of these two areas just to rile the masses against the Azeris and Azerbaijan, then why would they toss the khachkars in an area where they can be easily found?

Regards, Clevelander 10:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

This edit is not perfect either and needs additional work. For example, it is clear from Baghdasaryan, that the khachkars in Yerevan were: 1) destroyed by Armenians and not by some vague "not clear exactly who destroyed these monuments" (which leaves at least 1% impression that Azerbaijanis could still have pulled it off, instead of clearly accusing Armenians themselves) and 2) he is clear that those khachkars were brought from elsewhere -- since most khachkars are from south parts of the country (indeed, there are no ancient khachkars near Yerevan), it means they are most likely from Zangezur. And this does lend credibility to my speculation (although once again, everything about this whole affair is a speculation). Secondly, I don't know if you've been to Zangezur and Naxcivan on the border of Iran, such as on the railroad which goes along the entire border of Zangezur with Iran -- where did you see "very green" areas of Zangezur, at least in the western half, that's closer to Naxcivan, or otherwise very different terrain from Naxcivan? The terrain immediately on the border with Iran -- which is crucial, as all photos and videos are, according to Armenians, taken from Iranian side -- is pretty much the same. And it's hard to distinguish which part is Naxcivan and which is Zangezur. BTW, Naxcivan is famous for its apples, apricots, and other fruits (one of its major exports) -- which cannot not grow in abundance in "very arid, mountainous, and practically a semi-desert" areas. The general classifications of those regions are not good in our more specialized discussion -- Naxcivan is very different, depending on the part, like all of Azerbaijan.

While not denying that some allegations are probably correct and indeed many khachkars were taken for either construction needs or other hardly understandeable reasons, nevertheless, it is not proven until there is an independent commission, which goes to all areas, not only Naxcivan, but also parts of Armenia (Zangezur and Yerevan primarily), as well as occupied territories such as Karabakh. The current paragraph is 80% Armenian claims, and only 20% denials from Azerbaijan, and indeed, the paragraph is way too long. The video was shot by Armenians from Iran -- and appeared first on the Armenian TV. Whether it later appeared on Russian TV, such as RTR Channel whose director general is an Armenian, as well, is unknown to me and not very relevant, especially since the commentary, voice over the video, is in Armenian -- what is, however, that the video is of poor quality and it is neither possible to determine that it is actually Naxcivan and not Zangezur, and that those are Azerbaijanis, and not Armenians. HETQ's article clearly shows that: "The headstones had been brought here from somewhere else. Apparently they had been in someone's way, and he or she “liberated” the territory and decided to use them as building materials. No one had tried to prevent the dislocation, the carnage of headstones." Hence, the current wording is 1) giving too much credibility to Armenians claims, being one-sided, and 2) presents the alleged destruction is some kind of a state-policy, and not more simple explanation like the one given by Baghdasaryan, which is carelessness and disregard for history in a modern consumption-oriented society which is only interested in endlessly using and abusing resources.

For some reason, the link about HETQ/Baghdasaryan was again completely removed -- someone is really afraid of it, I wonder why?

If we mention simply Baghdasaryan, and not HETQ of Armenia, then we should do same with IWPR, adn all other stories.

Here's what I propose:

According to a report and photo-evidence by the HETQ investigative journalists of Armenia publication, many destroyed khachkars have appeared in Yerevan itself, but brought from other parts of the country. The fact that demolished khachkars have appeared on Armenian soil implies that the destruction was done by Armenians themselves. "Apparently they had been in someone's way, and he or she “liberated” the territory and decided to use them as building materials. No one had tried to prevent the dislocation, the carnage of headstones", writes HETQ report's author, Edik Baghdasaryan. "Armenians everywhere have closed ranks to protest against the barbarous destruction of Armenian khachkars by Azerbaijanis in Nakhidjevan," Baghdasaryan said. "But who will protest, who will fight against us, here at home? Perhaps we should appeal to various international organizations and ask them to come and protect our treasures from ourselves?"

--AdilBaguirov 22:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll agree to that. I apologize if I over-generalized on Nakhichevan. I have seen photographs of areas such as Shakhbuz, which look really green, though I myself have never been there. On the other hand, I have seen lots of images of the desert-like and mountainous areas of Nakhichevan, which is what I usually tend to associate with it. Anyway, it doesn't matter, at least we reached a compromise and that's all that counts. Regards, Clevelander 22:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, most important is the agreement reached. You are correct about Naxcivan's environment in general-- indeed, most of it is the way you described, especially the part that is concerning us, which is near the Iranian border, Julfa, etc. But of course other parts of Naxcivan -- I am not sure about what percentage though, probably about 30% -- have both forests and nice pastures. Unfortunately, both Naxcivan and Zangezur are being deforested and have soil erosion problems. Not sure what they do about it, although I've witnessed some impressive initiatives from the Az. Ministry of Ecology to reverse deforestation in the past years. --AdilBaguirov 23:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

What is the relevency of referring to what happens in Armenia? True, the Armenian government is hypocritical and various Armenian monuments are in danger, they even had a military practice on the border threatning Ani monuments. But what is the relevancy of this here? Am I adding the Armenian genocide in khojali article? Fad (ix) 19:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

This matter is closed.--Eupator 21:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Fadix, let's not hyperbolize and blow things out of proportion. You are free to implement your suggestion, but remember that it's a two-way street, and immediately information about Khojaly massacre, March massacre, Van uprising, pogroms in Gugark, Spitak, etc., will appear as well in relevant Armenian pages. --AdilBaguirov 22:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

You should read carefully, I think I was clear. and no, this was not a suggestion. I requested the relevency of Armenia's hypocrasy which Steven Sim, who I personally know, document in Nakhichevan. True, some reliks and Khahkhars were brought from Nakhichevan, this is a secret for no one. You will find some exposed in Armenia. What we are talking here about is the destruction of countless numbers of them, not some trourist taking some pieces fallen on the floor and moving it illegally to Armenia. As for your second point, are you making threats of POV pushing? Fad (ix) 00:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Protected

Per a request at WP:RfPP, I've protected this page to interupt the current edit war. Please use the talk page to discuss changes to the article and let me know once protection is no longer needed. AmiDaniel (talk) 02:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

With regard to POV edits.

Fadix and Eupator revert the article to their POV version. They restore the reference to Georgian professor, which is false, as Adil has clearly shown in his above posting. Also Eupator removes the phrase that the settlement of the Armenians was massive, while even Griboyedov notes that ”Несоразмерность сия превышает всякое понятие” (Disproportion (of the settlement of Armenians) is beyond any comprehension). [1] I suggest they stop pushing for their POV version and discuss the changes on the talk page first. Grandmaster 08:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

That's dishonnest, I said that I was not reverting to have that Geogian guy, but revert Adil additions. As for massive, that is a relative term, there was no massive Armenian ressetlent in Nakhichevan, with the number of people living there, the Armenians would have constituted a majority had there been any such massive resettlment. Fad (ix) 17:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, see above, user Clevelander agreed to removal of the Georgian prof. quote and addition of the HETQ URL reference as well as language/wording, on which we both worked. Also, if Griboyedov's letters are not enough to show that Armenians were being settled en masse in the 19th century into Naxcivan as well as other regions of Azerbaijan, I will start invoking multiple other Russian and Western sources -- gladfully, I've got a bunch, such as census figures -- how Armenians increased by hundreds of thousands within a few decades in the Caucasus. [remove personal attack FrancisTyers · 10:23, 11 June 2006 (UTC)] --AdilBaguirov 09:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it's time to draw attention of Wiki community to what's going on at these pages, which I will definately do, unless Fadix and Eupator change their attitude. Grandmaster 10:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm shaking, learn first what NPOV is and why words such as massive or irrefutable [2] are not neutral, then perhaps you will understand why Adil additions were not neutral. Fad (ix) 17:37, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I tried doing a mediation before, but it kind of stalled, maybe with the page protected we can get some work done? It would help me enormously if you can be as concise and succinct as possible. In fact, I may just remove irrelevant stuff you post. I may well see if I can get another mediator in on this case. First things first, can each of the parties in this dispute introduce themselves. I'm aware of Fadix and Grandmaster, but who else wants to be involved in this? - FrancisTyers · 10:23, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Of course I do want to be included, since at least two issues -- quote by Georgian prof. and wording of HETQ article -- were initiated by me and agreed upon in a compromise with user Clevelander. --AdilBaguirov 11:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to be involved into this, I agree with AdilBaguirov and text of HETQ article should be included! Baku87 18:11, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Baku87

Vital Part

Because of the revert a vital part in the dispute section has been removed the fact that many destroyed khachkars have appeared in Armenia itself; Source: However, according to a report and photo-evidence by the HETQ investigative journalists of Armenia publication, many destroyed khachkars have appeared in Yerevan itself, but brought from other parts of the country. The fact that demolished khachkars have appeared on Armenian soil implies that the destruction was done by Armenians themselves. "Apparently they had been in someone's way, and he or she “liberated” the territory and decided to use them as building materials. No one had tried to prevent the dislocation, the carnage of headstones", writes HETQ report's author, Edik Baghdasaryan. "Armenians everywhere have closed ranks to protest against the barbarous destruction of Armenian khachkars by Azerbaijanis in Nakhidjevan," Baghdasaryan said. "But who will protest, who will fight against us, here at home? Perhaps we should appeal to various international organizations and ask them to come and protect our treasures from ourselves?"

This should be re-added into the tekst. Baku87 18:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)Baku87

This should absolutely not be added to the text. Have any of you even read the article except to scan for out of context quotes??? What we are talking about is ONE single, solitary instance of an Armenian moving ORDINARY tombstones (and by moving it could have been on the same lot the whole time, but moved carelessly aside for construction) which appear one or two hundred years old, which are NOT Khachkars, which are NOT intricately carved, and for an unclear purpose. They are certainly NOT works of art which would have no doubt been accepted as a UNESCO world heritage site, they are not numerous at all, there is no mention of any other such instance, AND it was reported in the press in Armenia in order to highlight that such activity cannot be tolerated (unlike Azerbaijan). To compare this to a state sponsored eradication of world-class works of art (some of Armenia's khachkars will be on display at the Louvre this year), or to imply with ANY certainty that these stones were moved more than 5 meters, or to imply this has EVER happened before and is normal, is grossly irresponsible. Stop grasping for straws. This article is about Nakhichevan, and the paragraph is about destruction in JUGHA, if you want to mention that ten unremarkable gravestones were moved an indeterminate distance for an indeterminate reason in Yerevan, then go to the Yerevan article and add it. Do NOT push your POV creative interpretation of the situation of tombstones in Armenia based on what this article did not even itself say! --RaffiKojian 04:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

You call this “moving”? The tombstones are broken into pieces. Grandmaster 04:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

That's classic - "moving"! I wonder if Raffi can say the same about whatever the unknown men in some khaki uniforms were doing on the video. Anyways, we've already agreed on it, and yes it makes perfect sense for the inclusion of it, as the article clearly alludes and makes parallels with the whole Naxcivan hoopola. It's interesting that many ordinary Armenians and a well-known Armenian journalist Onnik Krikorian actually were thankful for the HETQ story, and surprized that it got allowed to be published. Here's Onnik's very relevant words of wisdom:

"No doubt the armchair nationalists in Glendale or Central Yerevan who talk of no compromise or surrender to the Azeris and/or Turks will now cuss Edik to their hearts content. Nationalism is easy when you can get an adrenalin rush and your only feeling of self-importance without ever actually having to risk dying in defense of the “homeland,” as Edik did, for example.

Anyway, this story reminds me of a visit to Herik, formerly the Azeri and Armenian villages of Ahmadlu and Hayri respectively, in the Lachin (Kashatagh) district sandwiched between Armenia and Karabakh. There, one nationalist told me how disgusting it was that the Azeris used the village church as a cattle shed during the atheistic Soviet era.

Of course, he didn’t explain why the church door was locked now, but others did. The church was also used by the village’s new Armenian inhabitants to keep cows in, but the fanatics eager for war in Javakheti or stalemate in Karabakh won’t mention that because there’s no political mileage for them to exploit as the 2007 parliamentary elections approach."

http://oneworld.blogsome.com/2006/04/10/more-destruction-of-armenian-cultural-religious-monuments/

And here (http://oneworld.blogsome.com/2005/12/18/living-in-a-mosque/#more-536) Onnik shows how Armenians live in a Mosque in Kond in Armenia -- I guess indeed that's a better fate, than being razed to the ground as several other mosques were in Yerevan.

Also here (http://oneworld.blogsome.com/2006/05/24/more-cultural-vandalism/#more-860) he writes about yet more examples of cultural vandalism in Armenia itself. --AdilBaguirov 07:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine, and it has something to do with Nakhichevan? Fad (ix) 17:49, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think this should be be included to the article about Yerevan. Grandmaster 17:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Since vandalism and destruction of cultural heritage are not Naxcivan-specific, this information puts things in perspective. Just like the following PACE documents initiated by Azerbaijani deputies and supported by many other Europeans: "Seizure and destruction of Azerbaijani cultural heritage" http://assembly.coe.int/main.asp?Link=/documents/workingdocs/doc01/edoc9147.htm and "Destruction of the historical cemeteries and creation of new permanent “cemeteries” of catastrophe by Armenians in the occupied territories of the Republic of Azerbaijan" http://assembly.coe.int/main.asp?Link=/documents/workingdocs/doc02/edoc9516.htm --AdilBaguirov 18:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Placing things in perspective the way you do it is called original research, and not allowed in Wikipedia. Fad (ix) 18:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, of course, PACE documents became my own creation and "original research". ;-) Only information from Armenian websites is allowed at Wikipedia. --AdilBaguirov 20:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Adil, would you now please go back to MY reply at the beginning of this subsection and address what I actually wrote, instead of once again addressing things you imagine I would like to have said? Can you address how:

• the not so old tombstones in the article compare to the half a millenia old khachkars of Jugha.
• the condition of the tombstones in the article compare to the khachkars of Jugha (which are simply gone, while Grandmaster, the tombstones are mostly intact).
• the responsible party for moving the tombstones is almost certainly an individual, while the ones in Jugha were destroyed by a government
• the tombstones article in Yerevan have created absolutely no problem for the author of the article, versus a complete silence or denial of the confirmed destruction in Azeri press
• any of this relates to Nakhichevan

Thank you, --RaffiKojian 12:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Abbas depopulation

This has gone much too far, I don't want to repeat myself, but everything has been tried. Adil is even denying that at least 250,000 Armenians have been resettled from 1604-1605, when I presented records backed of materials of that time for two cities which alone is over the entire population of Julfa. He should understand that articles are written according to the positions which exist, and not according to what he find logic.

Worst of it, there can be no more implicit way. I didn't know it was the non-existance of a thing that should be documented. Grandmaster provides materials with words such as 'evacuation' but from the beginning I tried to explain him that there is a differences between evacuation during wars, and resettlment and implementation, permenancy. Armenians were brought in Iran to live there, peremanently. And not only those from Nakhichevan. In normal cases only one or two materials would suffice to say what is said about an issue, at least having a place as an existing position. But even this is a lot to ask. Here other sources, I get tired of providing sources after the others: During the reign of Shah Abbas I, a large portion of the Armenian population was transferred into Persia. The Gulf in the Seventeenth Century, Abdul Aziz M. Awad, Bulletin (British Society for Middle Eastern Studies) , Vol. 12, No. 2 (1985)p. 130. Where it this work does it speak of other groups resettlement from the Armenian plateau. Is Adil denying that there was at least 250,000 Armenians in the region? Richard Trapper (see: Shāhsevan in Safavid Persia, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 37, No. 2 (1974), pp. 321-354) covers pretty much the misconception about Abbas population evacuation. This misconception I think is also pretty much covered in Edmund Herzig paper "The Deportation of the Armenians in 1604-1605 and Europe's Myth of Shah 'Abbās I," in Persian and Islamic Studies in Honour of P. W. Avery, ed. Charles Melville (Cambridge: University of Cambridge Centre of Middle East Studies, 1990), 59-71. Arakel in his note about how the Ottoman followed the Persian Army and how the population followed, not to say(as I have repeated over and over again), that the path traced was where the very large majority of Armenian towns were, but ONLY Armenians faced forced resettlement policy.

And it appears also that Adil is also denying the resettlement of the 12th and 15th century which are also pretty much covered. Adil, it would be interesting to know if you also reject that Armenians from Nakhichevan were resettled in Smyrna and Constantinople to replace the Greek market supremacy there. Fad (ix) 17:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Fadix, which statement of mine you didn't like exactly? The titles you've quote don't mean anything to me without specific quotes and statistics - are you claiming they all state that 250,000 Armenians were re-settled by Shah Abbas from Julfa to Isfahan? And what do you mean by the "region"? Are you claiming that at least 250,000 Armenians lived in Julfa? Or in Naxcivan? Or in Naxcivan + other regions? Furthermore, are you denying that not only Armenians were resettled, but other people, both Christian and Muslim? Likewise, are you denying that some of the Armenians immediately after being resettled by Shah Abbas - returned back to Naxcivan and wherever they came from? Likewise, if we talk about 12-13 centuries -- Mongols -- do you deny that Mongols were best friends with Armenia, where Armenia was an ally to the Mongols? --AdilBaguirov 17:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Before commenting, you should first read what I say rather then insinuating what I may have said before you came. Also 250,000(I already said what this represent) is only those that have been permanently resettled and only for 1604-5. Beside, Arakel regardless of those few who returned says that after Abbas it was hard to find any Armenians who did not convert.

There was no permanent resettlment of Muslims, I am not denying anything, provide any evidences that other than Armenians and Georgians, there is any recorded significant numbers of Muslims from the region who were brought in Iran and resettled permanently. I have provided countless numbers of sources, requesting to bring sources of Muslims resettled is insinuating that there was any such resettlements. Every sources only include Armenians and Georgians, you have claimed much more Muslims were resettled, but you must explain why there is no record of such. We can not insinuate that Muslims were just because Armenians were. Armenians were resettled for various reasons.

Mongols were not the best friend of Armenians, they have destroyed Julfa and depopulated the population. Persians too were friendly with the Armenians, but this doesn't mean that Armenians were not resettled or that there was no forced conversions or so-called initiatives for their conversions. Fad (ix) 18:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Fadix, this page is called Nakhichevan. Do you have any statistics on 1604 population of the region? And you still have not responded to Francis’ question. What exactly are you trying to prove? Grandmaster 17:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I did answer Francis questions, when will you provide how many Muslims were resettled? And how those Armenians in Nakhichevan from North to South have no place in an article about Nakhichevan? Where is the evidences that Muslims from Nakhiochevan were resettled? The only evidences you came with was about some trib, and the same evidence say that soon after they were permitted back. There is no documentation about Muslims from Nakhichevan resettled permanently in Iran. It is your words, against the various records I have provided. Untill you don't provide any evidences that the Muslims from Nakhichevan were resettled, you have no right to insinuate. Fad (ix) 18:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I don’t need to provide anything, the article remains the way it is until you provide sources about population of the region. You claim that the Armenians were targeted, so show the figures for the popuation of Nakhichevan in 1604. As for information about Kengerli, it is sufficient to demonstrate that the Muslims were also resettled. And not all of them returned to Nakhichevan, as is obvious from this paragraph:

Today, there is a clan of the Haji Alilu tribe of Qaraja Dag by the name of Kangarlu. In 1960, it comprised some 25 households (Iranian Army Files). There is also a village by the name of Kangarlu 24 kms to the north of Meshginshahr, in the same general area (Razmara, p. 429). These are probably the descendants of Kangarlu who were moved to Qaraja Dag in 1604 and remained there. Grandmaster 19:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

WHAT DOES IT MEAN THAT YOU DON'T NEED TO PROVIDE ANYTHING? YOU DO NEED!!! I am really tired, Francis, give me a warning or block me I don't care, I will stop assuming good faith. Only from 1604 to 1605 at least 250,000 Armenians were resettled permanently in Iran, I have just above provided from an Iranian author that a large portion of the Armenian population in the entire region were resettled. Where the heck are those Muslims resetlled, moving does not equal to resettlment. True some may have decided to live where they moved, but this does not amount to a policy of permanency. Even your sources say: Many Kangarlu settled north of the Aras river, probably in around 1500, when the Ustajlu moved into Azerbaijan. In 1809, J. M. Jouannin, described these Kangarlu as "a small tribe established in Persian Armenia, on the shores of the Aras, and numbering up to four or five thousand individuals" (p. 459). In 1921, M. H. Valili Baharlu wrote that there were Kangarlu around Gökchay, Javanshir and Shusha (pp. 61ff.). Many of these are undoubtedly the descendants of Kangarlu who were forced to move south of the Aras river by Shah Abbas I in 1604, and were then allowed to return to their original grazing grounds by Shah Abbas II (r. 1642-1666) in an attempt to repopulate the frontier regions of his realm. Remark, they setled there, moved during the war, and mostly retourned under Abbas II. And this is short of even 1/10 of the Armenians resettled, and were only along the Arax river.

Up to now, you have given the example of one SMALL GROUP, A NOMADIC TRIBE WHO WERE MOVED FROME THE FRONTIER ZONE, just few km South, EVEN THEM, were not incorporated. But nowhere, even from the Iranian author I have provided, there is ANY mention of ANY Muslims from this same region being brought in Iran, where they were resettled permenantly. And unlike what you think, you OUGHT to DOCUMENT this. Do you know what represent 250,000 for one year, resettled? This amount to more than the Ottoman Armenians who survived in Eastern Anatolia and had to be resettled in Armenia, and for the beginning of the 17th century it is a HUGE number. Even figures of few thousands resettled for that period are recorded, so again Grandmaster, WHERE ARE THE RECORDS OF THE MUSLIMS RESETTLED? WHERE? Fad (ix) 20:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Were those 250 000 Armenians resettled from Nakhichevan? If not, why they are even mentioned? Please provide figures for the population of Nakhchevan or leave this topic alone, you know about no original research rule. We only know that the entire population of the region was resettled, but we don’t know how many of them were Muslim and Armenian. Until you establish that, we have nothing to talk about. My source clearly shows that Muslims were resettled as well and that not all of them returned to the region. Grandmaster 05:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Also note that Kengerli were a small group in 1809, well after the resettlement by Shah Abbas, when some of them settled in Iran. And if the resettlement targeted Armenians, why these people were resettled as well? Grandmaster 05:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

That's simply hypocritic, I haven't seen you having trouble in referrence to Erivan population and the said Muslim majority, in fact I even remember you fighting for it. That's it, I will be adding those, I will not tolerate any POV pushing anymore, I have provided countless numbers of sources and as I said, there was no Nakhichevan delimitation to provide any numbers for this. The Armenian Plateau is on Northern Nakhichevan and also includes this North, and Julfa is in its South, there is no original research repeating this simply because I referred to it just doesn't make it, since my sources specifically includes it. And no, you haven't provided a single source of Muslim resettlement, until you provide one, this cases is closed, stop pushing your POV. Fad (ix) 05:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

There was Nakhichevan delimitation and it had its own governor, who at the time was Maqsud Sultan Kengerli. This is not the first time you try to misrepresent the facts. You have not presented a single source on the population of Nakhichevan, and yet you’ve got the nerve to accuse others of POV push. According to the rules, the obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it. So where’s your reputable source about the population of the region? Not the "plateau", but the region of Nakhichevan in 1604? I don’t have to provide anything, I support the current version that states that the entire population of the region was resettled. This is confirmed even by your own source, Bournatian. If you want to say that Armenians were the majority of population or main target of resettlement, show the statistics. Otherwise, the case is closed. And see the same Bournatian for the population of Erivan khanate. Grandmaster 06:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Khachkar

The classical: Nothing happened... and if it is discoevered it happened: They did it. It is not only that it happened in Nakhichevani soil, and that nothing remained of it. But now, referrences alluding to some stupid tourists are now requested to be included as evidences with misleading allusions such as claimed to be evidences that 'Armenians did it.' Grandmaster, seriously, I was not expecting you to take part in this. Of course, I could go on and also fill the article with allusions, by saying that the Azeris autorities have lied by claiming that there was a destruction, they did not claim they didn't do it, but rather that such thing did NOT happen. I guess they were defending those Armenians that would go on to destroy a pieces of their history to then accuse the Azeris. Encyclopedia's are not written based on suppositions, but rather relevant materials. The relevant materials is that Armenia has accused Nakhichevan of destroying them, Nakhichevan denied that anything has been destroyed and even restricted access, and that reporters have indeed reported that there was nothing left. This is as reported, what Adil has presented and that Grandmaster now seems to support, doesn't say Armenians did it, and using it to come to a conclusion is original research and not allowed in Wikipedia. Again, a simple cases, which is rendered difficult. Fad (ix) 17:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting conclusions Fadix, perhaps these abundant quotes from the HETQ article might clarify your mistaken belief that: "doesn't say Armenians did it". It's interesting how much denial and suppression of information goes on in Armenia:

To start off, the title of the article: "We Need to Defend Ourselves from Ourselves"

"I had taken him along with me to show him how we Armenians treat our national treasures."

"We Armenians are now building one more restaurant or hotel using our ancestors' headstones."

"We are doing the same thing here in Yerevan."

"But who will protest, who will fight against us, here at home? Perhaps we should appeal to various international organizations and ask them to come and protect our treasures from ourselves?" --AdilBaguirov 17:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Exactly my point, how what Armenians do in Armenia, or some tourist do have any relevancy here? Fad (ix) 18:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

No, this wasn't your point -- your point was denial of the fact that Armenians are themselves destroying khachkars. However, even if we take your new point into account, still, the HETQ article is clearly writing about a topic that, at the insistence of Armenian side, is reflected in Naxcivan page (as if there are no other important topics to reflect there, like economy, blockade, etc), and the HETQ article mentions "Nakhidjevan" twice, making direct parallels, on the top of indirect one's, as this key quote signifies: "We are doing the same thing here in Yerevan" and this one, "But who will protest, who will fight against us, here at home? Perhaps we should appeal to various international organizations and ask them to come and protect our treasures from ourselves?". Thus if the section on khachkars is to stay, then so will HETQ - I've already compromised on language of the note, and that's the limit. --AdilBaguirov 18:37, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

That's actually my point, see my first reply in this section. Insinuations is original research, if you remove insinuations, there is no connection. Fad (ix) 18:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

The matter of fact is that Europarlament condemns destruction of cultural monuments both in Azerbaijan and Armenia. You try to present it as if it happens only in Azerbaijan, while Europarlament does not limit destruction to Azerbaijan only. Adil presented the facts of such destruction in Armenia, and they should be reflected in the Wikipedia articles as well. Grandmaster 18:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

So according to the same logic, I should add what happened to the Armenians in Maragha in the Khojali massacre article? Fad (ix) 20:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll say it again, nothing from the amateur online Hetq site is acceptable. An alleged destruction of khachkars in Armenia by alleged Armenians has nothing to do with Azeri governments destruction of khackars in Nakhichevan. Furthermore, if you have credible sources like IWPR or others regardig destruction of Azeri monuments in Armenia than go ahead and add it to the page of Armenia.--Eupator 19:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Europarlament is a credible source, isn’t it? Grandmaster 19:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Did I say otherwise? --Eupator 19:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Neither HETQ's Baghdasaryan, nor Onnik Krikorian are "amateur" sources - they are far more credible and better known than either some "Scotish" Sims or those Armenian websites with poor quality video and photos alleging smth, and incapable of proving *Who* exactly is doing what *Where*. Armenia has flourishing trade with Iran and building/expanding a gas pipeline -- and the terrain on Armenian-made photos/videos look like Western Zangezur, Megri region, along the railroad. With appearance of ancient khachkars in Yerevan, brought from elsewhere in the country, the theory about them brought from Zangezur deserves attention. Meanwhile, the *fact* of Armenians' destroying their own khachkars is without a single shaddow of doubt as high quality pictures -- and denialist, suppressive response from some -- testifies. --AdilBaguirov 20:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

WP:OR.--Eupator 20:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

That's original research, insinuations are yours. Fad (ix) 20:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Sigh. We're dealing with the same kind of people who try to justify the axe murder of an Armenian officer. They're going to counter any source you show them, whether they're valid or not. Grandmaster has brushed off a few sources shown by Fadix, stating that the people are "not experts in the region." Adil is basically doing the same. The "Scottish" Steven Sim wrote a detailed commentary on his visit to Nakhichevan; I suggest you read it before brushing it off as "amateur," as per usual. Hakob 02:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm simply just tired of this, I am wasting my time there. In any normal article, after 2 sources it would just be enought. His fictional Muslim resettlment has yet to be documented even from Iranian sources. As long as he doesn't provide one, I advice anyone to revert his POV pushing, I personally won't take part in this, but this is the only opinion as I have lost any hope for him to accept what is generally recognized, that he doesn't want it as position, even if it is the majority view picture him as a POV pusher. And the etymology of Nakhichevan word, is the most striking cases. Fad (ix) 06:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Very nice, so you are calling for revert war instead of dispute resolution. And calling other people POV pushers is not civil either. It’s about the time someone checks your behavior again. Grandmaster 06:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Hakop, before writing smth, it's important to think it through. And since you decided to mention a military man and an axe, and I see even created a page for that, why don't you all deal with this horrible and unworthy act instead, since it seems like Armenian army-men are well aquainted with axes and how to slaughter sleeping women with it (and then get away with brutal murder by getting only 2 years of prison):

http://www.stopvaw.org/Domestic_Violence4.html Published in: “ArmeniaNow” (http://www.armenianow.com), 11 April 2006 (Official translation)

Two Years Of Imprisonment For A Murderer

Contributed by Eduard Grigoryan, Women's Rights Center

The Malatia-Sebastia community Court of the first instance (judge – Tigran Petrosyan) sentenced Lieutenant-Colonel Pargev Abrahamyan, officer of the Headquarters of the RA Defense Ministry, to two years of imprisonment for killing his wife, Marine Maloyan, with an axe. Successors of the victim intend to file an appeal against this verdict of the court.

--AdilBaguirov 07:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but the Armenian people aren't calling those guys heroes and trying to justify the wife's murder. Hakob 21:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Azerbaijani government expressed condolences to Markarian's family and neither in the government, nor intelligentsia have made any heroes out of Safarov. What various ordinary people do or say is outside of control and can hardly be used to mislabel the whole nation and country as whatever Armenian media does. Instead, what a lot of Azeri media does, is mention that he is a refugee and victim of the conflict, and that the source of violence is due to Armenian occupation of NK and 7 other regions. Also, seems to me that the Lt-Col Pargev Abrahamyan got off very easy -- only 2 years for cruel and vicioius murder?! Is it a joke? The founder of ASALA, Varuzhan Karapetian, despite being a known terrorist, and having ASALA on the US list of terrorist organizations, and having killed dozens of innocent people, was repeatedly lobbied by Armenian presidents to France to be freed, and he was, ahead of his sentence (there too, despite killing so many people, he never got a life sentence). And of course they are not just heroes, but have monuments erected to them in Yerevan, such as to Soghomon Teyleryan, or various individuals like Andranik, Dro, etc. --AdilBaguirov 07:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Tired with POV pushers

Only on the web, can this sort of thing happen, thanks(an ironic thanks) to google. Francis, I will blame you here to not come and step. Francis, where have you seen Grandmaster ever providing ANYTHING which shows that Muslims from Nakhichevan were resettled? The only thing he provided was in relation to moving of population while Persia and Ottoman were fighting which does NOT EQUAL to resettlment as in changes of residency. He is shouting on his feet and doesn't even know it yet, Kengerli being placed as governor under Abbas actually shows that he is wrong, since the region after its Armenian population was resettled in Iran was placed under Turkic juridiction once again. And the claimed delimitation of Nakhichevan is simply a fabrication, it was only under Shah Nader in the 18th century that there was any real delimitation which still was different than those of today, Kengerli's Nakhichevan is not todays Nakhichevan.

Also, that Grandmaster include this quote reach simply sarcasm: the obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it. EXACTLY MY POINT!!! That Armenians were resettled, not just moved, I have documented that, that Armenians were specifically targetted, this too I have documented. Armenians were not simply moved during wars when population movement are important in the area affected, the Armenians were then transported in Iran and transplanted there, this too I have documented while Grandmaster will always requote his same soyrce again and over again, which only shows population movement and NOT resettlement, NO 'transplantation.' So Grandmaster: the obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it. Fad (ix) 17:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I am very tired of Armenian POV pushers too, who seem to stop at nothing. But facts are stubborn -- and they have been provided in abundance. I see that now Fadix is no more claiming that Georgians too were resettled. Good. Then let's see if in addition to all other facts presented, including by Grandmaster, we can have some more in regards to Muslims. Well, heres from Tarih-i Nadiri (History of Nadir shah), by Mirza Mehdi-khan of Astrabad, published in Moscow, 1938, Vol II, edited by Ivanov P.P.:

11 По словам Мухаммед Садыка Мервези Шах Аббас I, завоевав Мерв, поселил в нем один из каджарских родов —иззэддинлю. См. рукопись Публ. библ., V. 3; 23, л. 84а; ср. В. А. Жуковский. Развалины Старого Мерва, стр. 78, 79. Автор “Насих-ут-таварих” относит переселение племени каджаров к 995 г. х. (1586/87 г.). По приказу шаха Аббаса, каджары были переселены из Гянджи и Еривана и водворены на землях Астрабада. Те из каджар, которые поселились вверху крепости Мубарек-абад, были названы, говорит он, “юхари-баш”, а поселившиеся внизу крепости — “ашак-баш”. Другую половину каджаров шах Аббас поселил в Мерве. Этим мероприятием имелось в виду “охранить округ Астрабада и Мазандерана от набегов туркмен и оберегать земли Хорасана от беспокойств, причиняемых племенами узбеков” (“Насих-ут-таварих”, стр. 8).

The relevant sentence excerpt is: "By the order of shah Abbas, Qajars [Azerbaijani Turkic tribal confederation] were resettled from Ganja and Erivan, and put into the lands of Astrabad." Note - Astrabad is Gorgan city since 1930 name change.

http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/rus9/Mechdi/primtext.phtml

As promised, there are many more interesting references and scholarly accounts available. --AdilBaguirov 18:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

In the name of the Armenian editors here in Wikipedia, I REQUEST you to appologize for your prejudicial remark. If you have a problem with me and accuse me of POV pushing do so against me and don't use prejudicial remarks such as this, it is unacceptable. Neither Ganja nor Erivan are Nakhichevan, and Qajars were not moved from Nakhochevan and there was a purpouses in Abbas decision which could not have been applied to others. There were unrest of Lezgians, Ouzbeks and Turkmen applicable to the other regions, from which Abbas reorganized tribinal groups in respectif regions, this is how some Turkic majority were carved in some regions of present day Azerbaijan. But again, those are tribs and throwing words like 'Azerbaijani Turkic tribal confederation' won't give those tribs with limited population any grounds for your claim. You are simply searching for few words to support your position and it is evident that you lack the knowledge to process the data you accumulate, it isen't by searching like this that you will get this knowledge. Now, if you could please find relevant materials for Nakhichevan. Also, I am waiting you to appologize for your prejudicial remark. Fad (ix) 18:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, I have never denied anything in regard to the Georgians, I concentrated on Armenians, because I was referring to the Armenian plateau. Fad (ix) 18:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

You yourself have not provided a single reliable source on the population of Nakhichevan and the numbers of people resettled from Nakhichevan, and since you’ve been talking about “plateau”, info provided by Adil is quite relevant and shows that not only Armenians were deported from that “plateau”, but Muslims as well. And I think it’s you who should apologize first for calling other editors POV pushers. Grandmaster 19:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

By taking his defense, you are simply digging a hole. I have provided various sources which mention Nakhichevan, Adil source has nothing to do with Nakhichevan, Qajars resettlement into three spot is much well documented to silence unrests of other groups(which further confirms that even small groups resettlements are documented while your claimed resettlement of the Muslim population of Nakhichevan is not), it has no connection with Nakhichevan, neither do few small tribunal groups in Erivan qualify as any evidence for Nakhichevan. And no, I don't have to provide any figures unlike what you claim, since my proposed version does not contain any figures at all, and my documentation clearly mention that a large part of the entire Armenian population from the entire region. This is really implicit, it is not about few Armenian cities or towns, but rather a resettlement of large scale. Your claimed resettlement does not exist. Also, indeed you are a POV pusher, assuming good faith, there is no way anymore. But I won't go on to say 'Azeri POV pushers.' Fad (ix) 19:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

So far the sources only show that the entire population of Nakhichevan was moved to the other side of Araks. There’s no reason to think that the Armenians were the majority of population or were specifically targeted. If they were targeted, why moving the entire population, which was not Armenian? You provided sources claiming that Armenians were resettled from Armenia, Adil provided a source, showing that Muslim were resettled from the same area as well. While both your and his sources have nothing to do with Nakhichevan, it was you who started discussing resettlement of people from Erivan, instead of providing sources on Nakhichevan. Grandmaster 20:01, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

You are not reading me. First, Nakhichevan is NOT the Autonomious republic, second Arakel specificaly discribes Abbas tragectory and third, now pay a careful look at this. Resettlement does not amount to population movement. War was fought there, the Ottoman and Persia were fighting, the population movement was important, both side moved population where they were fighting, the differences being that the Armenians who were moved were transplanted in Persia, onces the war was over, slowly the Muslims who moved returned, THEY WERE NOT RESETTLED, THEY WERE NOT TRANSPLANTED. After Abbas, Arakel only report Muslims left there and even on Ararat plain which was controled by the Ottoman Empire and Kars, the Armenian population dropped significantly while the Muslim population did not, and further the Muslims returned. Adil referrence is totally unrelated with Nakhichevan, Qajars were not removed the same years and their removal is totally unrelated, they were removed to shut Lezgian, Turkmen and Ouzbeks revolts and they weren't the only tribs in that regard, Abbas moved significant numbers of tribs and formed 'sedentarism' out of nomads to screw the geoethnographical situation and further secure his power. But on the Armenian plateau, the Armenians were those whom mostly were affected, and this is what I have documented and which you refuse to accept. Fad (ix) 20:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, Fadix, since you don't like my quote about Qajars resettled from Ganja and Yerevan -- since "Neither Ganja nor Erivan are Nakhichevan" (as if that's not obvious) -- then 1) the 250,000 estimate of Armenians is also unrelated to Naxcivan, as so many Armenians did not live there, and thus I wonder why do you constantly mention it, and 2) I will *quote* you the person you refer to and allow yourself a lot of speculative allegations - Arakel Dawrijeci ("Book of Histories", trans. L.A.Khanlaryan, Moscow: Nauka State Publishing House, 1978, http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/rus2/Davrizeci/text1.phtml). He was the Armenian contemporary historian, and is the main source of information for all the accounts and researchers. Here's what he writes, all quotes in chronological order and have to do with Naxcivan or sometimes with "Ararat" (which is close, right next to Naxcivan) and Armenia (unclear what he meant by that, plus Ottomans were close, so Shah Abbas had only some territories, mostly in present day Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia, from which he could resettle anyone):

From Chapter 3:

1) "В эти дни шах приказал персидским войскам направиться в область Араратскую и ее окрестные гавары, поднять отовсюду мужчин, называемых райятами, будь то христиане, магометане или какого-либо иного племени, собрать и привести их в стан персов..."

"These days the shah has ordered to the Persian armies to be directed to Ararat region/area and its surrounding gavars [regions], to lift from everywhere the men named rayats, whether it be Christians, Muslims or any other tribe [nation, people] to collect [assemble] and bring [summon] them to the base of Persians..." (p. 54)

2) "А когда он, покинув Тавриз, приехал через Нахичеван в Ереван, чужбинники в Нахичеване, узнав, что шах тавризских чужбинников изгнал и переселил в Персию, сочли это для себя благом, и кое-кто из них поехал в Ереван, предстал перед шахом, дескать, мы тоже шахисеваны, и желаем поехать в страну персов. И шах, дабы ублажить их и обмануть этаких простаков, велел преподнести им хлхат, и им дано было пять хлхатов. [Шах] поставил над ними проводников, которые переселили их в Персию."

"And when he, having left [abandoned] Tabriz, has arrived through Naxcivan to Yerevan, the non-believers [i.e., Muslims, non-Christians, in text: чужбинники] in Naxcivan, having learned [having found out], that the shah has expelled the Tabriz non-believers [in text: чужбинников] and has moved them to Persia, have thought about it as a blessing, and someone from them has gone to Yerevan, has appeared before the shah, said, we too are Shahsevans [either the Azerbaijani Turkic tribe of Shahsevan's is meant or play of words -- "those who like the Shah"], and wish to go to the country of Persians. And the shah, to appease them and to deceive such gawks, ordered to present them khlkhat, and to them it has been given five khlkhats. [Shah] has put conductors above them which have moved them to Persia." (p. 61)

From Chapter 4:

3) "Поэтому и приказал выселить всех жителей Армении – и христиан и евреев, и магометан..."

"Therefore also has ordered to move all inhabitants of Armenia - Christians and Jews and Muslims..." (p. 62)

4) "[Население] собственно города Еревана, Араратской области и отдельных близлежащих гаваров [было поручено] Амиргуна-хану. Шах приказал под страхом меча, смерти и плена выселить [жителей] отовсюду, куда только они могли добраться, изгнать их и не оставить ни единой живой души, будь то христианин или магометанин, согласный [на переселение] или несогласный или нарушитель приказа царя."

"[Population] of actual city of Yerevan, Ararat region and separate nearby gavars [regions], [was entrusted] to Amirguna-khan. The shah has ordered under fear of a sword, death and a captivity, to move [inhabitants] from everywhere where only they could reach, expel them and not leave uniform alive soul, whether it be the Christian or Muslim, [either] concordant [on resettlement] or not consent or the infringer of the order of tsar." (p. 63)

5) "Из [числа] армян, переселенных в Исфахан, отделили пятьсот домов и поселили в Исфахане, пятьсот же домов отделили, повели в Ширазскую область и поселили там."

"From the Armenians that were resettled to Isfahan, five hundred houses [households] were separated and have been lodged in Isfahan, whilst [another] five hundred houses [households] have separated, have led to Shiraz area and have lodged/settled there." (p. 68)

So there we go: 1) Arakel, an Armenian and Christian writer with deep biases and resentment of Turks and Persians (Iranians), acknowledges that not only ethnic Armenians were resettled from "Armenia" (by which he most likely refers to Naxcivan as well), but all Christians, as well as Jews and of course Muslims. In fact, he mentions that many more times in his book, I just reproduced what was relevant to Naxcivan and nearby region of Ararat.

2) Since all Julfa residents of Armenian origin, whom Arakel notes were the richest among Armenians and indeed good traders, were resettled to Isfahan, and Arakel specifically mentions only 1,000 families, that makes anywhere from 5,000 Armenians (if we assume 5 people family) or even 6,000-7,000 (if we assume that Armenian families were much larger in the past).

Thus, the estimated 250,000 Armenians that were resettled have nothing to do to Naxcivan - only about 5,000-7,000 ethnic Armenians from Julfa and surroundings were resettled by Shah Abbas to Isfahan.

Once again, this is from a unrealiable and biased source, yet that's the primary source used by all Armenian researchers. And it is unfortunate that we have to concentrate so much only on Armenians, whilst the equal or greater suffering of Muslims and other Christians and others, is ignored and not mentioned in the article at all. --AdilBaguirov 05:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Concessions

I have modified it and under Francis request sourced it.

• "In 1604, Shah Abbas I, concerned that the lands of Nakhichevan and the surrounding areas would pass into Ottoman hands, decided to institute a scorched earth policy [1]. He forced most of the local population on the border to move [2]. He decided to make that permanent for the Armenians by resetteling a large portion of their population deeper in Persia and transplanting them in various cities[3]; only from 1604 to 1605 a reported 250,000 Armenians were resettled[4]. According to many authors this policy contributed in rendering the Armenians a minority in parts of the Armenian plateau (which includes Nakhichevan)[5]."
  1. D.M. Lang in Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 32, No. 3 (1969) p. 622
  2. The Status of Religious Minorities in Safavid Iran 1617-61, Vera B. Moreen, Journal of Near Eastern Studies Vol. 40, No. 2 (Apr., 1981), pp.128-129
  3. Shah 'Abbas and the Royal Silk Trade 1599-1629, Linda K. Steinmann, Bulletin (British Society for Middle Eastern Studies), Vol. 14, No. 1 (1987), pp. 68-74
  4. The Armenians and the East India Company in Persia in the Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth Centuries by R. W. Ferrier, The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 26, No. 1 (1973), p. 39
  5. An Ethnohistorical Dictionary of the Russian and Soviet Empires by James S. Olson, Lee Brigance Pappas, Nicholas C. J. Pappas, Greenwood Press, 1994 p. 44

Oppose. There’s absolutely no reason to specifically mention Armenians. Armenians lived in significant numbers only in Julfa, and Julfa is already mentioned in the article. All the sources provided by you have nothing to do with Nakhichevan. And what 250 000 resettled Armenians have to do with Nakhichevan? How many of those were from this region? 200 000? Or 20? Now let’s have a look at your sources.

1. His motives in removing the Armenians townsfolk to central Iran were twofold: he wished to discourage future invasions by a scorched earth policy in the frontier region around Ararat; and he desired to make use of industrial and commercial talents of the Armenians... (Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 32, No. 3 (1969) p. 622)

As anyone can see, there's no information about Nakhichevan here.

2. In order to secure his peripheral western frontiers from possible Armenian-Ottoman collusions, Shah Abbas found it expedient in 1604-5 to depopulate those areas and distribute the Armenian population through Iran. ...Shah Abbas had still another reason for moving Armenians to his real: he hoped to benefit from their great artistic and commercial skills. (The Status of Religious Minorities in Safavid Iran 1617-61, Vera B. Moreen, Journal of Near Eastern Studies Vol. 40, No. 2 (Apr., 1981), pp.128-129)

Where Nakhichevan is mentioned? Right, nowhere. What does it have to do with the region? Nothing.

3. Shah 'Abbas and the Royal Silk Trade 1599-1629, Linda K. Steinmann, Bulletin (British Society for Middle Eastern Studies), Vol. 14, No. 1 (1987), pp. 68-74

Could not find any quote from this source, but I’m sure it’s exactly the same like others. It probably talks about resettlement of Armenians from Erivan and says nothing about Nakhichevan.

4. Shah Abbas devastated his frontier areas, which included parts of Armenia, as a defensive measure and so displaced nearly all the population. [from it] He settled some 13,000 families in the silk-growing northern provinces of Gilan and Mazanderan bordering on the Caspian. (Source: The Armenians and the East India Company in Persia in the Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth Centuries by R. W. Ferrier, The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 26, No. 1 (1973), p. 39)

Can anyone see any information about Nakhichevan? Neither can I.

5. For the next four centuries, Armenians, who had begun their dispersion after the fall of Ani and the Seljuk Turkish invasions in the eleventh century, continued to emigrate. In the meantime, Persia ( Iran) experienced a revival under the Shi'i Safavids, who became the adversaries of the Sunni Ottomans. From 1501 until 1639, the two fought each other periodically in Armenia. Armenians were uprooted during these wars, and, in 1604, some 250,000 Armenians were forcibly transferred by Shah 'Abbas to Iran. By the seventeenth century, the Armenians had become a minority in parts of their historic lands. The merchants of Julfa in Nakhichevan were among those who were brought to Iran by Shah 'Abbas; he moved them to a suburb of Isfahan where they built the New Julfa community. The support of 'Abbas and subsequent shahs enabled the Armenians to expand Iran's trade with India, China, Russia, and Western Europe. These merchants helped to make the Persian Gulf an important trade center. An Ethnohistorical Dictionary of the Russian and Soviet Empires by James S. Olson, Lee Brigance Pappas, Nicholas C. J. Pappas. p. 44

This one only mentions Armenians from Julfa, which is already mentioned in the article and I never opposed to that. But it says nothing about resettlement of Armenians from the entire Nakhichevan region, and does not provide any figures for the region, so it’s impossible to say if there were Armenians anywhere else in Nakhichevan other than Julfa. Grandmaster 05:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

My proposed edit:

In 1604, Shah Abbas I, concerned that the lands of Nakhichevan and the surrounding areas would pass into Ottoman hands, decided to institute a scorched earth policy. He ordered the governor of Nakhichevan Maqsud Sultan Kengerli to evacuate the entire population of the Nakhichevan region to the other regions of Safavid empire.

This information is verifiable and is supported by sources. Grandmaster 07:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Grandmaster, from the above, don't ever wish me to assume good faith after this, until you come clean.

You are manipulating scholarly published works as if my presented footnotes only refers to the quotes I have provided. First example, the first footnote you claim there is no reference to Nakhichevan, which actually there is, he writes: ...Armenians whom he deported from Julfa, Nakhichevan and Erivan. I already told you that Lang was talking about Nakhichevan in the talk page, you must assume good faith, and this is one of the reasons which I can not assume good faith in your cases, because you think I have some purpouses of manipulating sources. But as usual you think that I am 'manipulating' or that I am simply fabricating.

Second footnote, before entirly fabricating a purpouses for my uses of this footnote, read for what it is used. He forced most of the local population on the border to move. Which is actually what the quote is saying, and Nakhichevan was on the border.

Now, the third footnote, what you are doing is simply suggesting a content for a work which you have not read. That work discribes the implamentation of the Armenian population deeper in Persia, this is what it is supposed to support He decided to make that permanent for the Armenians by resetteling a large portion of their population deeper in Persia and transplanting them in various cities.

Forth footnote, the frontier area is the plain of Ararat and Nakhichevan, I don't make the frontiers, that's that.

Fift, that's ridiculous, the other sources too covers them. I have provided one specifically referring to Nakhichevan as a land which its Armenian population was deported, another one, on how the names were Tukified after the Armenians left, the others only refer to resettlement of the Armenians not others. That's that.

As for your version, totally dismissed, you are POV pushing, you know that resettled does not apply to Muslims so now you use vague words like evacuate. Sorry, this is not how it works. Fad (ix) 17:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I don’t know if you are familiar with the way sources are cited here, but it does not work like you say. According to the rules you should provide a proper quote from your source. I could not find the quote from Lang anywhere, and now you are presenting it and accusing me of something. As for your sources, they don’t justify your proposal. As we know from sources (including Armenian ones, like Arakel), the entire population of the region was resettled to Persia, including Muslims, Armenians, Jews and others. I don’t see why Armenians should be specifically mentioned, why others suffered equally. There’s no statistics on the population of the region in any of your sources. As for Muslims, we don’t know if they were allowed to return or not, we only know that the resettled tribe of Kengerli, which was only a part of Muslim population of the area, was allowed to return by shah Abbas II, one of the successors of shah Abbas I, and that was some 40 years after the resettlement. We don’t know if this applied to the whole resettled Muslim population or only to this particular tribe, and not all of Kengerli returned. Some of them already settled in Qaraja Dag, others moved to other areas. We don’t know what happened to the people of the city of Nakhichevan, biggest in the region, which was a Muslim city. Did they return or were replaced by other people? So we can only say that the population of the region was resettled, and that affected all the people of the region. Grandmaster 19:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe that you will take Adil manipulation of Arakel and claim this. There is an official translation and it is in French, which is the one that I use, as by comparaison it is very concordant with the original. Livre d'Histoires, translated from Armenian by Marie-Félicité Brosset, in Collections d'Historiens Arméniens ( St. Petersburg, 1874), vol. I.

Lets take back what Adil wrote.

The first one: These days the shah has ordered to the Persian armies to be directed to Ararat region/area and its surrounding gavars [regions], to lift from everywhere the men named rayats, whether it be Christians, Muslims or any other tribe [nation, people] to collect [assemble] and bring [summon] them to the base of Persians.. Lets see what he say then, so that they with the Persian army could fight ...and they helped the Persian troops. And he continues: In order to fight when the offensive started..., they pushed the Christians, to substitute them under the fire and sword the Armenians on the middle being destroyed from both sides, the Ottoman from the front and the Persians from the back.

This is the first quote which is supposed to support your position? Adil quotations are full of such selectivity. Arakel only talk about the resettlement of Armenians not Muslims, population movement does NOT equal to resettlement.

Ararakel differenciate various time in his work between what happened to the Armenians and Muslims, I don't know the quality of the Russian version, but you should check where he discribes what happened after he destroyed Yerevan fortress and what he did of the Armenians. Do he talk about Muslims? Or a little after this description, regarding the displacement of the Armenians on Winter. Does he refer to Muslims? Or the offensive in Van and later where they reached? Again, Christians, where does he refer to Muslims? And after Erzerum? What he write? Again: on the expulsion of Christian population and the destruction of Armenia. He calls Abbas the destroyer of the Armenians country and its depopulation, the devil, Satan. Again, I don't know if the Russian translation is accurate, if it is, I don't know what to say, it would mean that he know what Arakel is discribing and that he is attempting to mislead me as if I don't have access to it. Or who they placed as the 'lord' of Armenians, with a continuious policy. Or how the Armenians were later robbed attacked and pushed again. Or his manipulation of the 1,000 families, as if it was a total.

Shah Abbas turned towards Nakhidjevan and, with all his men, set out to follow in the tracks of the hordes going to Persia. The Osmanlis, for their part, set out hot on the heels of the Persians. There were therefore, three great and endless assemblies: that of the populations; of the Persians; and of the Osmanlis. As a result, it came to pass that when the populations began to move off, Shah Abbas and the Persians swooped down on their former camp and, when they left the place, it was occupied by Dshqal-Oghli, with the Osmanli troops. They followed one after another, putting their feet in the same tracks, until the people and the Persians had reached the village of Julfa and the Osmanlis Nakhichevan [Nakhidjevan]. From then on, the Persians did not allow the people to halt not even for an hour: they hustled them, hurried them, caused some of them to die from blows with sticks, cut the ears or noses off others, cut off heads and stuck them on posts. It was in this way that Iohandjan, brother of the Catholicos Arakel, and another man had their heads cut off and stuck onto a pole by the side of the river Araxes.

But since you have access to the Russian version now, thanks to Adil, there are entire sections about how Armenians were transplanted, does he include Muslims? He tells us the path they took, and any other description which was not war justifiable of attacks, he say specifically Armenians were targetted.

And no, you are wrong, I don't need to quote an entire work when I can simply talk about its overal message, you don't question what the footnote is actually saying in a work which you read. I placed Lang there, because he was referring to Nakhichevan, and I already told you he did refer to Nakhichevan in this talk page, so you can't say as if I haven't talked about its content. Jstor is a databases that a large amjority of Wikipedians have access to, it would be foolish from my part to claim something which is not on those works.

And the last part of your post is full of insinuations, Kengerli were indeed resettled and not only moved, this I already admitted, but I also said why they were. You can not assume all the Muslimjs were resettled just because one small trib happens to have been. It is for you to document that the Muslim population was resettled, which is just more than moving. When Albanians were deported from Kosovo, it ended up being mostly temporary. We can not assume that population movement is permanent, only if they are peramently resstled could we claim that. We know Armenians were, and Arakel discribes this clearly in his work. Muslims were just not. Fad (ix) 21:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Fadix, stop your personal attacks and mud-slinging! And don't accuse me of any "manipulations", "falsifications", and other nonsense, as it's obvious who engages in that, and it's definitely not me, who provides full citations and verifiability. The very beggining of your argument, where you write this: "There is an official translation and it is in French, which is the one that I use, as by comparaison it is very concordant with the original. Livre d'Histoires, translated from Armenian by Marie-Félicité Brosset, in Collections d'Historiens Arméniens ( St. Petersburg, 1874), vol. I." if already unscholarly. First, how is your translation "official"? Second, how is 1874 translation better than a more modern one from 1978 -- with Wikipedia preferring more recent sources? Third, how is an Armenian -> French -> English translation better than an Armenian -> Russian -> English, especially since the Russian text is accessible and anyone can verify with a good online translator at least some of the key terms, such as "Muslim", "house", "five hundred", etc? Fourth, is French Brosset really better than an Armenian native, L.A.Khanlaryan, or it's just another baseless claim in the string of many claims? Finally, can someone in sane mind really expect an Armenian, Christian author of that era to preoccupy himself with the suffering of Muslims?! It's enough that he mentions Muslims on many occassions as being resettled along with Christians and Jews into Persia -- and obviously he is not going to write more, since his major concern are his folk, the Armenians. That's why he exagerrates and inflates many facts. Myself and Grandmaster provided more than enough sources to disprove your allegations -- and after providing VERIFIABLE quotes from Arakel himself, who is clear on only 1,000 families, or to be more precise, 500 + 500 (which is of course rounded), you have nothing to contradict. Here's another one, from prof. Ronald Grigor Suny in his article in Encyclopedia Britannica: "During the war that broke out in 1602, Shah 'Abbas I strove to regain the lost territories, and in 1604-05, with the aim of stimulating trade in his dominions, he forcibly transferred thousands of Armenians from Julfa to Esfahan, where those who survived the march settled in the quarter named New Julfa." There we go, yet another Armenian source admit that only "thousands" were resettled from Julfa, not "tens of thousands" or "hundreds of thousands". From: "Armenia." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 14 June 2006 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-44272>. Thus, you are once more trying to supress information, while also trying to dismiss the truth, ignore clear evidence and insult people. Not good. --AdilBaguirov 21:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, let's remember this is about Naxcivan, and not about other cities - thus whatever Arakel, an Armenian, Christian, anti-Muslim, anti-Turkish, anti-Iranian author writes about other cities, etc., is not very rellevant here. Once again, only 1,000 Armenian families were resettled from Julfa, of which 500 were settled in Julfa and others elsewhere. That's it, all other words and numbers are insinuations. Also, let's not forget about the science of demographics, which allows to estimate population size. If in 1828 Iran had perhaps 200,000-300,000 Armenians, that means that 200 years ago they could not have been even close to that number, as natural growth among Armenians is very healthy, and even 100,000 resettled Armenians (on the top of those who lived in Iran from before) by shah Abbas should have become *at least* 500,000 after so much time. --AdilBaguirov 21:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I have news for you, I did come accross the Russian translation and used Systran translation, and it do match with the French translation. So, you do indeed have some explaination to do there, since now we do indeed have to conclude that you purpously selectivly quoted. Also, I am waiting you to appologize for your prejudicial remarks about the Armenians, and how you still continue to do so. Arakel does not exagerate, he also discribes the crimes perpetrated against the Jews and how they were deported, more particularly under Abbas II because of descrimination. Also, before saying trash about Brosset, you should be aware that that person was an autority in Armenian literature and a linguist as well as official translator of Armenian records, as the first translation scholarly used. The translation in French provided match with Bournoutian's translation which was published in 2005. I don't have it at hand now, but will have it again in two weeks. I would believe a direct English translation is the closest for you, while I still find that the Armenian one in my cases is more than enought, but to not alienate most here who don't know Armenian I will retract using it.

As for Arakel, he provides one instances for Isfahan and for a specific group, and not the totality of Julfa and for a specific date. Unlike what you wrongy claim Arakel is not the sources of those 'claims' as you percieve, there are records of the Armenians resettled in British records from correspondances(see for example: British Library. India Office Library and Records E/3/6-E/3/12. Original correspondances, Steinmann makes use of them., as well as primary sources like decree on the numbers of Armenian families resettled), and Suny point does not contradict in any way what I have been saying.

Also, your request just does not add up, you have very often used terms such as 'defy logic' but your claims does not compute. Since Armenians were resettled in regions now part of Azerbaijan, and many have converted. Also, the Armenians were used by Abbas to trade with India and China, many Armenians traversed the coast the Indian ocean up to the coast of China (see: Armenian European relationship in India, 1500-1800: No Armenian foundation for European Empire? By Bhawati Bhattacharya) and even reported Armenians in Japan. The Abbas decision dissolved the Armenian population, and many Armenians after Abbas II decisions have just left the region, either returning for the Ottoman Empire or leaving for Europe or America. You can find 250,000 as illogical as you want, it is recorded, and used in scholarly articles, in 1979 at the time of the revolution there was 300,000 Armenians in Iran. Population growths supposes that emigration and immigration are stable, which in this cases, even less after crises of the 18 century. So, I wonder under which pyramidal tables had you calculated 500,000? You can not uses population stable theory, neither any simple function of growth without balancing the immigration and emigration, had you done so, you would have recorded a decrease and not an increase. And besides, it is well known that a minority group very often does reach a critical point where a positive increase is unreachable and for various reasons.

In short, Arakel does not talk about the Muslim resettlement from the Armenian plateau, he clearly differenciate what happened to the Armenians and Muslims, and scholarly published works clearly refers to the Armenians as being resettled independently from population movement. My proposition is footnoted, and this excludes the various sources I have provided. Neither you or Grandmaster have provided any sources which document any similar decision against the Muslims. Movement does not equal resettlement, it isen't for me to document a non-existance, it is to you to document its existance. I am waiting and also it would be relevant if you could address my proposed version and where is it not sourced? Fad (ix) 23:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, you should read the last parts of Arakel work on that page, I have checked all is there, more particularly the section where Arakel discribes the dispositions taken by the Shah to restrict Armenians to return, even as going as far as deporting the Muslim population to resettle Armenians insteed. Fad (ix) 01:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

In the end of his chronicle Arakel gives a brief summary of what was described in more detail in the chapters. Here’s a quote for the year of 1605:

В 1054 (1605) году восстал Юларкасты. В том же году восстал Али-паша Джанполад, который был эмиром Килисы; усилившись, он захватил город Халеб и, восстав против царя, владел им (городом) два с половиной года. Опять в том же году прибыл в Ереван сардар Джгал-оглы с большим войском. Это было его первое нашествие, когда выступил он против шаха. Именно поэтому шах Аббас первый выселил население области Атрпатакан – армян, мусульман и евреев – [и всех] их вместе погнал в Исфахан – это и есть великий сургун. И опять в том же году, пока Джгал-оглы [сидел], укрепившись, в Ванской крепости, а персидское войско осаждало ее, он вышел через потайные ворота, сел на корабль и убежал в Арцкэ, а оттуда попал в крепость Хнусскую; затем, поехав в Эрзерум, собрал вокруг себя свое войско. А войско персидское, обобрав область Рштуник, ушло восвояси. [3]

The same year sardar Jigal-oglu arrived to Yerevan with a big army. This was his first invasion, when he set out against the shah. That was why shah Abbas the First moved the population of Atrpatakan area (oblast) – Armenians, Muslims and Jews – and drove them [all] together to Isfafahan – that was the great surgun (exile).

It is obvious from this that Muslims, Jews and Armenians shared the same fate. I see no point in your further arguing. And still you have no information about the population of Nakhichevan, and this is the page about Nakhichevan. There’s no evidence to support the view that Armenians were specially targeted or suffered more, etc. We have already mentioned that Armenians from Julfa were settled in Isfahan, and there’s no reason for any additional mention of Armenians, because Muslim population suffered equally, if not more. Grandmaster 07:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and I didn't quite understand all the stuff coming from Fadix - who is selectively quoting? Me, who sticks to the relevant quotes about Naxcivan, resettlement of both Christians and Muslims and Jews from there, who gives the only population figure relevant to Naxcivan -- or Fadix, who brings bunch of irrelevant quotes, in which he is selective to supress the information about Muslim and other Christians' and Jews' suffering? What does Systran have to do with this -- it's only meant to give one a rough idea about the writings, not make a professional or expert translation. And I doubt very much that a 19 century French translation can be better than a 1970s translation by an Armenian in Moscow, capital of a country to which Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia belonged to. And all other. Anyway, more than enough solid references and scholarly sources have been presented by myself and Grandmaster, he also proposed a very fair wording for the section, and I consider this issue closed, as there is nothing more to add to the words of Arakel in regards of Julfa. Best, --AdilBaguirov 09:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

It should always be for you a question of Armenian vs Azerbaijani. And the worst of it, you specificallyt know of what Arakel is talking about and yet you selectivally quote to change the entire meaning of what he said.

When he banished the Christians and moved them in Isafan and its serounding settlements, many Muslims were evicted from their homes and their houses were given to the Christians. Shah Abbas words have been kept, and it has been carried out, presently, all the men who were borne in Armenia and who were moved to Persia are dead now; and although they have dreamed to return to their country, they were not able to return for the above reasons or them haven't allowed the Persians (note, the reasons enumerated all concerned the Christians) although some of them – pious and honest people- wanted to move for Armenia, the Persians haven't made that possible. Shah Abbas used very possible method to force to keep the Armenians in his country, had he not tried, the Armenians would never have remained there in the first place. Their sole concern was to convert Armenians under any pretext to Islam... ... the Persians did everything possible to prevent them[Armernians] to leave their[Persian] country, much like the Egypsians did with the people of Israel.

Atrpatakan, is the area of Azerbaijan, Nakhichevan is on the area of Armenia, and never does he say that after the war Muslims were restricted to return, he only talk about the things that have been done to prevent Armenians to return. You are just making up a Muslim suffering more than Armenians, which you imply, you are simply making up things which you can not back up.

Comming to Adil, as I have shown above, yes! Indeed he was selectivally quoting, Arakel also discribes about the Armenians who were left there and who were coverted, I already quoted that one out. It is also funy that he talks about supression of information, since you and Adil are those who want to supress information and build some sort of equal victimness, which neither is documented in Arakel chronicle, neither is it documented in any scholarly notable publication. In some extent, the Sunni at first felt victim when they were accused of supporting the Ottoman. Also, it is funny that Adil bring back again the French translation, I said 'official' which it is, it is the one used generally, and it was only in 2005 that we had finally an English translation by Bournoutian, and it matchs with the French translation. Also, I wonder what scholarly sources is he talking about, what have you presented to support your position, and which section of my proposition is not sourced? Fad (ix) 16:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

You’ve been already explained that Arakel is not a neutral source. In fact, he was very negative towards Turks, Persians and Azeris, and Muslims in general, and of course did not care to elaborate on their suffering. He was concerned only with the fate of his people. But even this source mentions that shah Abbas I deported the entire population of the region. And he specifically mentions only Armenians of Julfa, but not of any other towns in Nakhichevan, for obvious reason. There was no significant Armenian population anywhere in Nakhichevan other than Julfa. I suggest we end this dispute, it leads nowhere. Armenians of Julfa are mentioned in the article, and I did not object to that. It was a verifiable fact. You current proposal is not, we still have no information about the population of Nakhichevan. Grandmaster 17:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

That's a very poor excuses, your insignuations could have had some sense had you had any other relevant sources to back you claims. You do not have any. We write an encyclopedia based on the existing relevant material, not from insignuations such as: "Imagine him an anti-Muslim say so, so it must have been worster" when it is known that Arakel made many mistakes in dates and that Edmund Herzig in his work debunk such myths as those you propose here without backing. Fad (ix) 14:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Fadix, we established that the entire population of Nakhichevan was resettled by shah Abbas and not some specific group. There’s no reason to make specific mention of Armenians, ignoring all others, and the number of 250 000 which you propose to include has nothing to do with Nakhichevan. It was you who objected to inclusion of the statistic of population if Erivan into this article, why should we now include the numbers, unrelated to the region? And since you have no population statistics on Nakhichevan, we don’t even know if there was any significant Armenian population anywhere else in Nakhchevan other than Julfa. As I said, Julfa is mentioned in the article, and that should be enough. Grandmaster 21:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

We have established this only in your imagination, and beside it was agreed to delete the Erivan reference which was added by I don't know who. Muslims were never subjected to permanent resettlement, they were never sent hundreds of kilometers accross. As if Abbas had ever needed to do so while he could have moved Muslims from few km Northern Gilan or all the other places where the Armenians were moved. I am tired of this, but of course you don't have any concept of what tired means, neither that established, facts and what have you is an alien term here in Wikipedia. And you know very well why the 250,000 was included, I was clear there. There was no delimitation between Nakhichevan and the plain of Ararat, you could very well specify this, and I have no problem adding informations which are relevant to the article, Erivan was clearly delimited in 1828, while figures of what was called 'Armenia' were very vague back in the 17th, because it supposes that Nakhichevan had its own independent statistics of population movement. As for the Armenian population, it is with unsupported claims like this that you are affecting your own credibility. As if I care Armenians could have been 2 or 10, but you take pleasure of playing with data's of the time when you have shown not having much knowledge of the borders or the people. Also, it could be of no relevency that Turkmens and Kurds were mostly the Muslim population there after the desertion of the 16th and following the movement of the population. Fad (ix) 00:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi everyone. I realise how frustrating a Wikipedia debate can seem, but it's really important that everyone remains WP:Civil, otherwise we risk getting derailed from constructive discussion. Happy editing, Tewfik^Talk 00:06, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

The Erivan reference was deleted by the insistence of you and certain other people. As for Nakhichevan not having its delimitation, why then it had its own governor and what was he governing then? We can only include statistics for Nakhichevan, any other figures are not relevant to the topic. Also, the fate of Muslim population is unknown, we just know that they were moved out and one of Turkic tribes was allowed to return some 40 years later by one of the successors of shah Abbas I. And there’s no indication of any serious Armenian presence anywhere in Nakhichevan other than Julfa. For example, Nakhcivan was a pure Muslim city even according to Arakel.

He describes how shah Abbas’ general Zulfugar khan besieged Nakhichevan, which was under the Turkish control, and then persuaded the people of Nakhichevan to surrender and allowed the Turkish garrison to leave with their families and property. And then he says:

К Зилфигар-хану пришли многие из воинов города и сказали: «Те, что собираются уйти, не коренные жители города сего, что же касается нас, мы коренные жители города и не желаем уходить отсюда. До сей поры власть в городе принадлежала хондкару – ему мы служили, отныне, так как власть перешла к шаху Аббасу, желаем остаться здесь и служить ему». Хан весьма охотно согласился с их речами, благосклонно и милостиво принял их и приказал быть посему. И воины, пришедшие [к хану], быстро сняли с себя османскую одежду, постригли длинные бороды свои, облачились в кызылбашскую одежду и стали похожи на стародавних кызылбашей.

Many of the city’s warriors came to Zulfugar-khan and said: “Those who are going to leave are not natives of this city, as for us, we are natives and we don’t want to leave. Until now the city was ruled by hondkar (Turkish sultan), and we served him, but from now on since shah Abbas took the power we want to stay and serve him”. Khan gladly agreed with them, graciously treated them and ordered to be so. And the warriors, who came to the khan, quickly took of osman clothes, cut their long beards, put on kizilbash clothes and became resembling the long-time kizilbash. [4]

As you can see, Armenians are not mentioned, the native people of Nakhichevan were Muslim who started serving Abbas after he took the power in the region. Grandmaster 07:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

And I agree with Tewfik, we should abide by the civility rules, and I have called for this many times already during this discussion. Grandmaster 07:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

And? I don't see your poing at all. Fad (ix) 14:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

To tell the truth, Fadix's point is not seen at all -- what is the argument about that's relevant to Naxcivan? Does anyone dispute the Armenian historians' information about only a few thousand of Armenians resettled from Julfa to Iran by Shah Abbas? Or does anyone dispute their information about resettlement and suffering of Muslims, other Christians, Jews? --AdilBaguirov 14:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Arakel is not saying that only few thousands were resettled, he discribes the first phases of the transfer of the Armenians from Julfa. As I have shown, Arakel does not support your position at all. I have quoted from various works, I have referred to various others. This is what is said mostly by the Academia, what you believe to be the truth is totally irrelevant, Wikipedia limit itself to what is recognized by the Academia. And up to know neither you or Grandmaster were able to provide any published material which support the point you are trying to make. Fad (ix) 14:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Really? Strange, I thougth Enc. Britannica and Arakel the Armenian chronicler, just to name a few sources QUOTED, were academic and shed light on the question which interests us. I guess I was wrong, I guess your citations of some unquoted works are better? Interesting. Meanwhile, Arakel is very clear - only 1000 Armenian families were resettled from Julfa to Iran -- there are no stages, phases, etc. That's it, only 1,000 families. That's about 5,000-7,000 Armenians. Which makes perfect sense, the entire population of Julfa was only 20,000 people, whilst in 1828 and later years more than 40,000 Armenians would be resettled from Iran into Azerbaijan. --AdilBaguirov 15:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Arakel doesn't say such a thing, he only talk about a group of people, neither does Britannica support your point, it doesn't even talk about any Muslim resettlement, also before saying nonesense you should pay a closer look at the material I have provided. I have provided one sources for a specic area in which Armenians were resettled equaling alone 12 thousand families and this according to primary sources of the time. As resettlement in Azerbaijan in 1828, as if there was any Azerbaijan beyond a geographic area, and not only have they 'resettled' from what you call Iran, also it is rather interesting that you have nothing to say about the fact that part of this resettlement policy was to replace the 20,000 Armenians who left for Georgia. Fad (ix) 18:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

What does this have to do with Nakhichevan? How many people were resettled from Nakhichevan? If you have such information, it can be included, otherwise I see no point in discussing irrelevant figures. Grandmaster 18:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

And what relevency has the resettlement of Armenians in Erivan in 1828? This is more relevant than the mention about Erivan, since Ararat plain is on North of Nakhichevan, and Julfa on its South. So sorry, it stays. Fad (ix) 18:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Ararat plain is not in Nakhichevan and is irrelevant to this article. And it’s not in the article anyway to stay there. We don’t include irrelevant information. Grandmaster 19:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, suppose now that you are not a POV pusher, why have you fought then for the inclusion of Erivan statistics? Why is the reference to Erivan still there? As for Ararat plain, well it takes part of northern Nakhichevan, since as recognized as geographically taken from the plain and included in the plain of Ararat from one side to the plateau of Armenia on the other. Erivan was delimitated, Nakhichevan was not, so since there was no delimitation as there is in modern time, it is relevant. Lack of clarification does not justify deletion unless one is a POV pusher and is trying to get a well sourced information deleted. Fad (ix) 23:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

You say time after time that Nakhichevan was not delimitated, how do you know that? Cite your sources. If it was not a province, why then it had its own governor? We even know the name of this person. Please answer these questions. I can also cite old Muslim chronicles which refer to Nakhichevan as a distinct province, Hamdallah Gazvini, for example. And stop personal attacks, you’ve been warned many times already by so many people, including admins. Grandmaster 18:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Copy editing

Two minor corrections:

• uyezd is spelled inconsistently (two lines below)
• The second "Geography" section merely repeats some information from the first

Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 04:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)