Campaign on granting Nizami the status of the national poet of Azerbaijan

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search

Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found. Campaign on granting Nizami the status of the national poet of Azerbaijan (the term Azerbaijanization [1][2] is also used) – is a politically and ideologically motivated revision of the national-cultural origin of one of the classics of Persian poetry, Nizami Ganjavi, which began in the USSR in the late 1930s[1][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] and was arranged to coincide with the celebration of the 800th anniversary of the poet. The campaign was crowned with jubilee celebrations in 1947 but its effects continue up to this day: on one hand this process was beneficial for many cultures of the multi-cultural Soviet Union and for the Azerbaijani culture in the first place; on the other hand this brought to an extreme politicization of the question on Nizami’s cultural-national identity in the USSR and in modern Azerbaijan.[10][11]

The reasons and the background of the campaign

The first allegation of Nizami’s ethnic Turkic origin before the late 1930s

In 1903 Azerbaijani publicist and writer Firidun Kocharlinski in his book “Literature of Azerbaijani Tatars” called the poet a ‘Tatar from Elizavetpol’ (up until the 1930s the Azerbaijanis were called ‘Tatars’[12]).[13] According to Soviet orientalist A. E. Krimsky Kocharlinski’s theses were based on Jóhannes Sherr’s assumptions on that Nazimi’s mother was an Azerbaijani from Gyanja, contrary to the testimony of the poet himself according to which his mother was Kurdish.[14]

Kocharlinski brings Nizami as an example of an Azerbaijani poet who wrote in Persian language in the light of a general trend of borrowing religion, language and literature from Persians by the Azerbaijanis. At the same time Konchalovski, referring to an accepted opinion, ascribes Azerbaijani literature to the first famous poet of those times Vaqif who wrote in Azerbaijani language (18th century).[13]

American historian Yuri Slezkine also mentions that in 1934 on the First Congress of Soviet Writers the representative of the Azerbaijani delegation called Nizami a Turk from Gyanja.[3]

The situation in the field of science in the late 1930s

In world Orientalism the dominant view was to consider Nizami as a representative of Persian literature. Soviet Orientalists also held the same view till the late 1930s. According to encyclopedic dictionaries published in Russia[15][16][17][18] ,[19] Nizami was a Persian poet and a descendant of city of Qom in central Iran (this fact was subsequently questioned and the contemporary scientists tend to consider Gyanja as his birthplace) .[20] Thus, the Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary states (the author of the article is Agafangel Krimsky):

The best Persian romantic poet (1141–1203) is a descendant of Qom but has a nickname ‘Gyanjevi’ (from Gyanja) because he spent most of his life in Gyanja (now Elizavetpol) where he died.[21]

Encyclopaedia Britannica (1911) also characterises the poet in a similar way:

Persian poet born in 535 in Hidżra (1141 A.D.). His motherland, or at least the place where his father lived, was in the highlands of Qom, but as he lived almost all his days in Gyanja in Arran (present-day Elizavetpol) he is known as Nizami from Gyanja or Gyanjevi.[22]

The reasons for the revision of Nizami’s status

The ideological needs of Soviet Azerbaijan in the 1930s

According to Victor A. Shnirelman after the dissolution of the Transcaucasian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic in 1936 the newly formed independent Azerbaijani SSR needed a special history which would on one hand allow distancing the republic from Shiite Iran for avoid suspicions in the counterrevolutionary pan-Islamism and on the other hand to separate the Azerbaijanis from other Turkic people (in the light of the official struggle against pan-Turkism). At the same time the Azerbaijanis desperately needed proofs of their own autochthony, since being considered as a ‘nation of newcomers’ created a direct threat of deportations. As a result, a Chair of Azerbaijani history was established in the Faculty of History of the State University of Azerbaijan and rapid Azerbaijanization of historical heroes and preceding historical-political entities on the territory of Azerbaijan was launched.[1]

Yuri Slezkine mentions that in the self-determined republics the efforts directed at the formation of cultures of titular nations were doubled at that time. According to the national line of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks all the titular nations were supposed to have “great traditions” which according to Slezkine was, if necessary, to be invented so that all the national cultures except Russian became equivalent.[3]

George Bournoutian reviews the issue of classifying Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet (also Rudaki as Uzbek and Rumi as Turkish) within the framework of the general policy of weakening the connection of Turkish nations with Islam and developing in them а sense of pride towards their glorious, albeit fictional, national identity[23]

The jubilee campaigns of the late 1930s

In the second half of the 1930s along with the establishment of “Soviet patriotism”[4] jubilee celebrations were held throughout the whole Soviet Union – the Russians were celebrating the 100th anniversary of A. S. Pushkin’s death and the 750th anniversary of The Tale of Igor's Campaign (1938); there were also national celebrations, including those taking place in Transcaucasian republics, among them the 1000th anniversary of the Armenian national epic poem David of Sasun (1939, the poem was completed by the 10th century[24]) and the 750th anniversary of Georgian classic poem The Knight in the Panther’s Skin (1937). For affirming an equal status with other Transcaucasian republics Soviet Azerbaijan was to hold a jubilee celebration of an equivalent scale.[10] In the framework of those all-Soviet jubilee campaigns the preparations for the 800th anniversary of Nizami as a great Azerbaijani poet were launched.[1][6]

The course of the campaign

Declaring Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet

A. O. Tamazishvili notes that declaring Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet was essential by his 800th jubilee.[10] Victor Shnirelman mentions a more precise date – 1938.[1]

Analyzing the sequence of events Tamazishvili comes to a conclusion that the initial idea of recognizing Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet occurred to the First Secretary of the Azerbaijan Communist Party M. D. A. Bagirov. Having strong anti-Iranian convictions and being a patriot of Azerbaijan he considered the Persian identification of Nizami as ideologically unacceptable. However, by the end of the 1930s the solution of this question was beyond the competence of politicians on the Republican level. Besides, the attempt to label Nizami as an Azerbaijani could be assessed by the Soviet authorities as a nationalistic act; also objections could be expected on the part of scientists and first of all those from the prominent Leningrad school of Orientalism.[10]

In 1937 the “Anthology of Azerbaijani poetry” was to be published in the USSR. In the initial version of it Nizami’s poems were not included.[25] However, on the 1st of August newspaper “Bakinskiy Rabochiy” published a note which said that the works on the anthology were completed and Nizami’s poetry was included in it despite all the efforts of “the enemies of the nation” to make the anthology look as thin and feeble as possible”.[26]

For supporting the inclusion of Nizami into the list of Azerbaijani poets the views of Orientalist Yuri Marr (the son of academician Nicholas Marr) were elaborated on; in 1929 he had declared that Nizami was native to Caucasus and that his poetry was honoured more in Azerbaijan than in Persia.[27] According to Tamazishvili Yuri Marr did not claim that Nizami was an Azerbaijani poet but he was the only one whom the supporters of such view could refer to. Besides, Yuri Marr was enjoying the ‘beams of fame’ of his father who was quite influential in those years in academic and political circles. Later the Azerbaijanis would claim that academician N. A. Marr had also taken part in the revision of the “positions of the Bourgeoisie Orientalist science which distorted the image of the Azerbaijani poet”.[10]

In the same year, the Institute of History of Language and Literature of the Azerbaijani affiliate of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR also started publishing Nizami’s works.[28]

On 5 April 1938, a Decade of the Azerbaijani Art was held in Moscow, and for this occasion an anthology of Azerbaijani poetry, edited by poet Vladimir Lugovskoy, was published in Baku which included Konstantin Simonov’s translation of Nizami’s poetry. The foreword to the edition said, “Among the Azerbajani poets Nizami’s image gloriously stands out”.[29] On the opening day of the decade the editorial article of Pravda said:

“Early in the epoch of feudal lawlessness the Azerbaijani nation gave birth to greatest artists. The names of Nizami, Khakani, Fizuli of Baghdad compete in popularity with famous Persian poets Saadi and Hafiz. Both Nizami, Khakani and Fizuli were passionate patriots of their nation, while they served the foreign newcomer only because they were forced to yield to their power.[30]

On April 18, 1938 Pravda published a front page article titled The triumph of Azerbaijani Аrt in which the same three poets – Nizami, his contemporary Khagani Shirvani and Fizuli of Baghdad were named as portrayers of “turbulent, brave and enraged soul” of the Azerbaijani nation, passionate patriots of their nation, champions of freedom and independence of their country”.[31]

In Azerbaijan they realised that they could achieve success only by the involvement of Orientalists, and primarily those from Leningrad. Orientalist Yevgeni Bertels took the most active part in this process; he had earlier called Nizami a Persian poet but in the beginning of February 1939 published an article “Genius Azerbaijani poet Nizami”[32] in Pravda which, according to Tamazishvili's assumption, was ordered to him and hence biased.[10]

According to Ivan Luppol the mention of Nizami’s name in Pravda was an action directive for the Academy of Sciences:

If half a year ago an article on Nizami appeared in the lower half of the page of Pravda, if in the Soviet Union a party member wrote an article on Nizami, this meant that each conscious resident of the Soviet Union was supposed to know who Nizami was. This was an instruction to all the directive organizations, all the authorities of republican, district and regional levels and in this regard the Academy of Sciences was to say its word without challenging its high scientific standing on this matter.[33]

Joseph Stalin's role

On 3 April 1939 an issue of Pravda was published containing an article by a Ukrainian poet Mykola Bazhan in which he described his meeting with Stalin:

Comrade Stalin spoke about Azerbaijani poet Nizami and quoted his works in order to break, using the very words of the poet, the groundlessness of the assertion that this great poet of our fraternal Azerbaijani nation was to be given to Iranian literature only because he supposedly wrote most of his poems in the Iranian language. Nizami himself confirms in his poems that he was forced to resort to the Iranian language since he wasn’t allowed to turn to his nation in his native tongue. This was the part quoted by comrade Stalin who managed to grasp with genius scale of his mind and erudition all the outstanding creations in the history of mankind.[34]

Walter Kolarz emphasizes that the final verdict supporting the stance that Nizami was a great Azerbaijani poet, who spoke against the oppressors but was forced to write in a foreign language, was made by Joseph Stalin. Nizami was not supposed to belong to the Persian literature notwithstanding the language of his poems.[5]

On 16 April, Pravda published a poem on behalf of Baku intelligentsia (Samad Vurgun, Rasul Rza, Suleyman Rustam) expressing gratitude for ‘returning’ Nizami to Azerbaijan.

Foreigners possessed our Nizami, having ascribed him to themselves,
But the nests woven by the poet in the hearts of the faithful are strong.
You returned his poems to us, returned his magnitude to us
And have enlightened the pages of the world with his immortal word (translation from Russian)[35]

However, as noted by Tamazishvili, Bertels never mentioned Stalin’s role in the question of the ‘repatriation’ of Nizami; there is no word about Stalin in Russian publications either, including the publications of Azerbaijani authors.[10] Nevertheless, in Azerbaijan the role of Stalin regarding the question about Nizami was stressed more than once. Thus in 1947 the Deputy Chairman of State Planning Committee of Azerbaijan SSR (from 1970 the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of Azerbaijan SSR) Ali Ibragimov characterised Stalin’s role in promoting the studies of Nizami’s literary heritage in the following way:

The question of studying Nizami’s work at a larger scale in terms of studying his multifaceted and rich heritage was launched by the Soviet scholars in 1939 after our great leader comrade Stalin, an expert in history in general and in the history of the nations of the Soviet Union and in national issues in particular, at his meeting with writers spoke about Nizami and quoted his writings. After this, having received a bright, deep and scientifically correct directive, the Soviet scholars launched an exceptionally large research on Nizami's work and his epoch[36]

Nizami – “A poet returned to Azerbaijan”

During the jubilee anniversaries it was mentioned for many times that the Soviet authorities and Stalin personally returned Nizami to the Azerbaijanis. Thus in 1940 in the framework of the Decade of Azerbaijani Literature in Moscow the leading Azerbaijani poet Samad Vurgun made a report in which he mentioned that Stalin had returned to the Azerbaijani people their greatest poet Nizami whom “the sneaky enemies of the nation, nationalist-Mousavatists, panturkists and other betrayers wanted to steal for the sole reason that he wrote most of his works in the Iranian language”.[37]

On 22 September 1947, Pravda published an article titled Nizami written by the Deputy Chairman of the Union of Soviet Writers, Nikolai Tikhonov:

It is well known that Nizami wrote his poems in the Persian language. This fact was more than once used by the enemies of the Azerbaijani nation, bourgeoisie historians and Iranian nationalists for declaring Nizami as an Iranian poet, as though he had nothing in common with his motherland – Azerbaijan. But this outrageous lie will not deceive anyone.[38]

At the jubilee ceremonies of September 1947 held in Baku, the General Secretary of the Union of Soviet Writers Alexander Fadeyev made an even more categorical statement:

If it hadn't been for the Soviet authority the greatest genius of Azerbaijani nation and the genius of all mankind would not have been known even to the Azerbaijani nation.[39]

However, as mentioned by Tamazishvili, by the end of Stalin’s life the version of his role in 'returning' Nizami came to its demise as its further shameless exploitation could be of no use any more; as for Stalin himself, he was not interested in dubious laurels in the sphere of Nizamology, especially in the post-war period.[10]

Other Arguments

The formation of Azerbaijani ethnos was completed mostly by the end of the 15th century.[40] However the 'territorial principle' was one of the cornerstones of the ideology of “Soviet nationalism” which applied also to the history. The national principle in the USSR presupposed the extrapolation of 15 republics back into the past. In particular this concept distinguished Azerbaijani literature from Persian literature classifying Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet based on the fact that he lived in the territory which later formed part of Soviet Azerbaijan.[4][5][41][42] Thus, as a proof for Nizami’s Azerbaijani identity Bertels used the argument of methodological fallacy of ascribing to Iran a whole complex of Persian literature irrespective of the place of its creation and the ethnic origin of the author[43] Azerbaijani commentators interpreted a number of parts within Nizami’s poetry as an expression of Turkish ethnic identity of the author.[44][45]

The course of Nizami’s 800th anniversary celebrations

In May 1939 a special ad hoc committee of the Council of People's Commissars of Azerbaijan SSR was established for preparing and holding the 800th jubilee anniversary of the “great Azerbaijani poet Nizami” which was to take place in 1941.[46] In autumn the Anthology of Azerbaijani Poetry was published, the plans for the release of which had been announced earlier. The foreword to the anthology contained arguments proving that Nizami was an Azerbaijani poet, which also included references to Yuri Marr, the letter being characterised as a leading Soviet Iranologist; also a reference was made to the “special decision on Nizami’s jubilee” in which the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR “firmly and decisively recognized Nizami as a great Azerbaijani poet”. In Nizami’s works “the life and the mode of life of the Azernbaijani nation were portrayed”.[45] The Azerbaijani authors explained the lack of any research on Nizami in Azerbaijan by “the plots of sneaky agents of fascism, bourgeois nationalists and great-power chauvinists” who “did all they could to hide from the Azerbaijani nation the heritage of her great son – poet Nizami”.[47]

The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia of 1939 likewise called Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet (the author of the article was Yevgeni Bertels who had previously referred to Nizami as a Persian poet).[48] The article in the official Soviet Encyclopaedia completed the process of revising Nizami’s nationality in Soviet Oriental studies.[10] After 1940 Soviet scholars and encyclopaedias acknowledged Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet.[49][50][51][52][53] Any other point of view started to be considered as a serious political mistake.[54]

In December 1939 in Literaturnaya Gazeta Bertels published an article titled “preparations for Nizami’s jubilee” in which he particularly noted the description by Nizami of a utopian country of universal happiness (at the end of his poem “Iskander Nameh”). Bertels presented this description as an anticipation of the establishment of the future Soviet Union.[55]

Nizami’s works were translated into Azerbaijani language (all were published in Azerbaijani translations between 1941 and 1947).[56]

The jubilee celebrations, planned for autumn 1941, were postponed because of the war, although the jubilee conference took place in December 1941 in Ermitage in Leningrad at the time of the blockade. With the war being over the campaign was renewed. In May 1945 Nizami’s museum opened in Baku; on the "wall of one of the halls comrade Stalin’s words were engraved in golden letters about Nizami being a great Azerbaijani poet who had to resort to the Iranian language as he was not permitted to turn to his nation in his native tongue".[57] The exposition mostly consisted of paintings on the themes of Nizami’s poems. Despite the lack of authentic portraits of Nizami the central painting of the exhibition was the portrait of the poet by painter Ghazanfar Khalikov which met Bagirov’s requirements. Since the 1960s this portrait became canonical for the Azerbaijani textbooks while Ghazanfar Khalikov was acknowledged in modern Azerbaijan as the creator of Nizami’s artistic image.[58][6][59] The campaign was crowned with celebrations that took place in Baku in May 1947.[10]

Consequences

The role of Nizami’s national identity in the Soviet culture

According to the ‘territoriality principle’ Nizami, as a native of future Azerbaijan SSR, was to a certain extent a ‘poet of Soviet Union’ and his image was exploited for ideological purposes in this very sense.[5] According to Sergei Panarin the research in the field of Eastern literatures in the USSR focused on the changes that these literatures and Eastern nations in general had undergone due to socialism. One could not make those conclusions based on the analysis of literary works, that’s why the researchers had to cling to separate historical facts such as the birthplace of this or that author. As a result, the authors who wrote exclusively in Arabic or Persian language were ‘appropriated’ by the Soviet republics for creating an impression that the best part of the pre-Soviet cultural heritage of the nations, which once constituted a single civilization, was created within the boundaries of the future USSR. The Soviet propaganda offered the following scheme – Nizami wrote in Persian, but was born and lived on the territory of future Azerbaijan SSR; he reflected the aspirations of the Azerbaijani nation and foresaw a brilliant future for the USSR. The fact that he made his predictions not as a foreigner but as an Azerbaijani made him twice as great. For that reason the Azerbaijanis can be considered as ‘elect’ builders of socialism as they foresaw the bright future and granted a progressive poet-prophet to the world. Panarin notes that this was not in any way related to the true national renaissance of the Azerbaijani nation but was a mere ideological initiative.[8]

The cultural consequences of the campaign

According to Tamazishvili, presenting Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet and ascribing his work to the achievements of the Azerbaijani literature was “the most important revolutionary result for the Soviet science achieved by this ‘jubilee’ campaign”.[10] In Azerbaijan the acknowledgement of Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet resulted in the creation of multiple works of art – poet Samad Vurgun wrote the drama Farhad and Shirin (1941), composer Fikret Amirov wrote the symphony To Nizami’s Memory (1947), Kara Karaev from 1947 to 1952 created a range of musical compositions based on the motives of Nizami’s poems (ballet Seven Beauties and a suite with the same title as well as a symphonic poem Leyla and Mejnun, Afrasiyab Badalbeyli wrote opera Nizami (1948), in 1982 film Nizami was released. Monuments to the poet were erected in Gyanja (1947) and in Baku (1949; the author of both these works is Fuad Abdurakhmanov). In 1985 in Baku a metro station called Nizami Ganjavi opened in the place where according to the tradition the poet’s grave was located.

Tamazishvili notes that despite the fact that the conclusion on the national affiliation of the poet was based on a priori assertions rather than on scientific research, this conclusion was still beneficial for the multinational Soviet culture. Nizami’s poems were translated into Azerbaijani and Russian languages. The Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR included in the work plan of 1938 the writing of a scientific monograph on the Life and Work of the Great Azerbaijani Poet Nizami. An active part in propagating Nizami’s work was assigned to Yevgeni Bertels who headed the group engaged in the critical translation of the series of poems by Nizami called Khamsa and in 1940 published a book Great Azerbaijani poet Nizami: Epoch, Life and Work, adapted according to ideological standards of his time”.[60] Accompanied by the politicised jubilee campaign and to a great extent thanks to this campaign a massive translation, scientific-research and publishing works of political and cultural importance were launched and enhanced in scale. According to Bertels by 1948 in the USSR a new science was created – nizamology, and the works written about Nizami within the last decade have “for a number of times exceeded the volume of literature written in Western Europe within a century and a half”. The politicised analysis of Nizami’s works which was accepted in the USSR presupposed that the poet could dream of a communist society, which raised protests against Bertels in 1947. One of the main results of the jubilee campaign and of declaring Nizami as an Azerbaijani was the wide popularization of Nizami’s writings in the Soviet Union.[10]

The state of the question in the USSR after 1939

After the Great Soviet Encyclopaedia called Nizami an Azerbaijani poet in 1939[48] in subsequent works he began to be described not only as a ‘crown’ of Azerbaijani poets of the 12th century but also as an element in the chain of ancient Azerbaijani literature which includes authors not only from the territory of Azerbaijan SSR but also from Iranian Azerbaijan (Khatib Tabrizi, Abul-Hasan Ardebili); the first works of Iranian Azerbaijan are considered to be Median tales written by Herod and Avesta of Zarathustra which “portrays the religious, philosophical, social and everyday beliefs of the ancient Azerbaijanis” .[61][62] This scheme was dominant in encyclopaedias throughout the whole Soviet period.[63]

Bertels’ attempt to move away from the ethno-geographical principle of identification

In 1948 Bertels made an attempt to break with the ethnic-territorial approach in the Iranian philosophy. He published an article titled “Literature in Persian language in Central Asia” in which, based on the idea of integrity of Persian literature, he declared that he would consider as Persian all the literary works "written in so-called ‘new-Persian language’ irrespective of the ethnic origin of their authors and of the geographical location where these works originated".[64]

This announcement by Bertels immediately made him an object of politicised criticism which accused him in adopting “false standpoints of Western-European orientalists” and bourgeois cosmopolitanism and for diverging from Marxist–Leninist views on the literature of nations of Central Asia and the Caucasus.[7][10] In April 1949, at an open party meeting in the Institute of Oriental Studies, devoted to the struggle against cosmopolitanism, it was announced that Bertels “was helping to spread new bourgeois-nationalistic concepts about supposed dominance of Iranian culture over the other cultures of neighbouring countries of Iran, especially the Soviet Socialist Republics of Central Asia and Transcaucasia”.[7]

Bertels tried to defend his stance declaring about the methodological absurdity of classifying writers according to their ethnic or territorial affiliation.[65] However, after receiving new accusations in reactionary pan-Islamism and bourgeois cosmopolitanism from his colleagues he had to admit his ‘big mistakes’.[7]

The current state of the issue

The world science

In the contemporary literary studies the predominant view is that the 12th-century poet Nizami Ganjavi wrote in Persian and lived in Gyanja, in those times had a mixed population, predominantly Persian, and was under the influence of Persian culture.[66][67] What is known about Nizami’s ethnic roots is that his mother was Kurdish[68] .[69] Some researchers believe that his father was from the city of Qom in Central Iran.[70]

Beyond the boundaries of the former Soviet Union in the biggest national and biographical encyclopaedias of the world Nizami is recognized as a Persian poet while the Azerbaijani version is not even considered. Most leading experts in Persian poetry also hold this view.[71] Most of the researchers of Persian literature consider Nizami as a typical representative of the Iranian culture, a poet who influenced the Islamic culture of Iran and of the whole ancient world.[72][73][74]

Scholars of modern history such as T. Swietochowski and A. Altstadt call Nizami a Persian poet and at the same time consider him as an example of synthesis of Turkish and Persian cultures.[75][76] Criticising Altstadt’s point of view the critics note that it translates the ideological views of Soviet Azerbaijani researchers.[77] According to Shireen Hunter by ascribing Nizami to Azerbaijani literature Altstadt continues the policies of Soviet falsifications of the history of Azerbaijani-Iranian relations.[78] Reviewing the concept of the synthesis of Turkish and Iranian cultures in Nizami’s works Lornejad and Doostzadeh conclude that there are no grounds to consider that this kind of correlation actually exists.[79]

In 2012, in the Yerevan volume on Orientalism a book On the Politicization of the Persian Poet Nezami Ganjavi by S. Lornejad and A. Doostzadeh was published; the book provided a detailed examination of the question of Nizami’s identity and the process of his politicization which received a positive criticism from a number of famous Orientalists. A. Bournoutian mentions that this work "not only exposes multiple falsifications but also, based on a thorough research of Nizami’s works, proves that Nizami was without doubt an Iranian poet”. Paola Orsatti believes that the book demonstrates the historical inconsistency of attributing Nizami to the Azerbaijani culture.[79] Kamran Talattof considers this kind of work to be absolutely essential given the process of appropriation of the Iranian heritage of the ancient and modern times.[11]

Rebecca Gould notes, that in most of the books on Persian literature published in Azerbaijan the significance of Persian poets born in the territory of the South Caucasus, among them Khaqani Shirvani or Nizami Ganjavi, boils down to the project of enhancing the ethnic prestige. “Nationalization” of classical Persian poets, which was a part of general policy of nation-building in Soviet times, in a number of former Soviet republics has now become a matter of political speculations as well as a subject of pseudo-science, which pays attention solely to ethnic roots of medieval figures.[80]

Russia

After the break-up of the Soviet Union the encyclopaedias in Russian language continue to refer to Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet.[81][82][83] Encyclopaedia Krugosvet in an article on Azerbaijani literature (author - Chingiz Husseynov) completely recovers the scheme of the origin of the Azerbaijani literature from “Avesta” as well as explains the writings of the poets of the 10th-13th centuries in Persian by the fact that it was “the language of the Persian empire”.[84] Other Russian scholars speak of Nizami as of a Persian poet.[1][6][10][85][86]

In 2002 a monument to Nizami was erected in St. Petersburg at the opening ceremony of which the presidents of Azerbaijan and Russia were present. In his speech made at the opening ceremony Russian President Vladimir Putin said, “A very happy and solemn event is taking place now – we are unveiling a monument to the prominent son of East, to the prominent son of Azerbaijan – poet and thinker Nizami.[87][88] The head of the Iranian Philology Department and the dean of the Oriental Faculty of St. Petersburg State University I. M. Steblin-Kamensky, speaking of this monument characterises the description of Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet as a fruit of nationalist tendencies and as an “outright falsification”.[86]

Azerbaijan

The political aspect of the question of Nizami’s national affiliation was intensified after the transformation of Azerbaijan SSR into the sovereign state of Azerbaijan.[10] According to Sergei Rumyantsev and Ilham Abbasov in modern Azerbaijan Nizami has occupied a firm place along with many other heroes and cultural figures from Dede Korkut to Haydar Aliyev, serving as an example for today’s youth.[89]

In the opening article to the three-volume collection of Nizami’s compositions published in Baku in 1991 doctor of philology Aliev Rustam Musa-ogli characterises the poet in the following way:

Nizami is one of the brightest geniuses not only of the Azerbaijani nation but also of the whole humanity. He is a rare phenomenon in whom all the best genetic qualities have been accumulated – talent, wit, conscience, honour, sagacity and clairvoyance which were always inherent to our nation.[90]

“The history of Azerbaijani literature” (The Institute of Literature after Nizami at Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences 2007) repeats the Soviet scheme which derives the Azerbaijani literature from Avesta.[91]

The version of Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet establishes itself by

  • Territorial belonging of Nizami to Azerbaijan. At the same time the state of Atabegs of Azerbaijan, under the rule of which Nizami lived, is regarded as an Azerbaijani national state. Also the applicability of the concept “Iran” to that epoch, given the absence of a state with that name on the political map, is rejected;[92]
  • Claims about Nizami’s ethnic Turkish origin.[92][93][94]

This point of view is predominant in Azerbaijan. In 2007 an “unacceptable” opinion on Nizami’s Talish rather than Azerbaijani origin was mentioned by the prosecution on the trial of Novruzali Mammadov who was charged with state treason.[95][96][97][98]

In 2011 making a speech on the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliev declared that no one in the world doubts about Nizami being an Azerbaijani poet and that this can easily be proved. The perception of Nizami as a non-Azerbaijani poet Aliev explained by saying that Azerbaijani culture is so rich that other nations make attempts to attribute it to themselves.[99]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Victor Schnirelmann. The Value of the Past: Myths, Identity and Politics in Transcaucasia. National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, Japan, 2001. P.102-103

    In brief, Azerbaijan was in great need of its own history, and in 1940–1941 the Department of History of Azerbaijan was established and a course in the history of Azerbaijan was introduced to the curriculum of the Historical Faculty of the ASU (Ibragimov, Tokarzhevsky 1964: 27). By that time, both aforementioned Iranian and Armenian factors had been conducive to rapid Azerbaijanization of historical heroes and historical political formations in the territory of Azerbaijan, hi particular, in 1938 the 800-year anniversary of Nizami was celebrated, and he was declared a great Azeri poet (Istoriia 1939: 88-91). In fact, he was a Persian poet and that was no wonder, since the Persians accounted for the entire urban population in those days (Diakonov 1995: 731). This was recognized in all the encyclopedias published in Russia before the 1930s, and only in 1939 did the Big Soviet Encyclopedia called Nizami a "great Azeri poet" for the first time (Cf. Brokgauz, Efron 1897: 58; Granai 1917: 195; BSE 1939: 94). In the 1940s the Safavi Dynasty became Azerbaijani rather than Turkic, let alone Iranian (Altstadt 1992: 159; Astourian 1994: 53).

  2. Регнум. 17:05 18.03.2006. Иран против азербайджанизации поэта Низами (Iran against the Azerbaijanization of Poet Nizami). «Все написанное бывшим президентом Ирана Мухаммедом Хатами о том, что Низами Гянджеви является иранским поэтом, истинная правда. Низами писал и творил на фарси, у него нет ни одного произведения на азербайджанском языке». Об этом в беседе с журналистами заявил посол Исламской Республики Иран в Азербайджане Афшар Сулеймани" (Translation: 'The ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran to Azerbaijan Afshar Suleiman in the meeting with journalists declared, "All that was written by the former president of Iran Mohammad Khatami, on Nizami Ganjavi being an Iranian poet, is an absolute truth. Nizami wrote and composed in Persian, and he doesn't have a single work written in Azerbaijani"').
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 Yuri Slezkine. The Soviet Union as a Communal Apartment // Stalinism: New Directions. Rewriting Histories. Sheila Fitzpatrick. Routledge, 2000. ISBN 0-415-15233-X. , p. 335.

    The Azerbaijani delegate insisted that the Persian poet Nizami was actually a classic of Azerbaijani literature because he was a „Turk from Gandzha“, and that Mirza Fath Ali Akundov was not a gentry writer, as some proletarian critics has charged but…

  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 «‘Soviet Nationalism’: An Ideological Legacy to the Independent Republics of Central Asia’». Dr. Bert G. Fragner (Austrian Academy of Sciences (Vienna): Executive Director (Institute of Iranian Studies)) // Willem van Schendel (PhD, Professor of Modern Asian History at the University of Amsterdam), Erik Jan Zürcher (PhD. held the chair of Turkish Studies in the University of Leiden). Identity Politics in Central Asia and the Muslim World: Nationalism, Ethnicity and Labour in the Twentieth Century. I.B.Tauris, 2001. ISBN 1-86064-261-6. Стр. 20

    It was up to the central power to solve these kinds of contradiction by arbitrary decisions. This makes clear that Soviet nationalism was embedded into the political structure of what used to be called ‘Democratic Centralism’. The territorial principle was extended to all aspects of national histories, not only in space but also in time: ‘Urartu was the oldest manifestation of a state not only on Armenian soil but throughout the whole Union (and, therefore, implicitly the earliest forerunner of the Soviet state)’, ‘Nezami from Ganja is an Azerbaijani Poet’, and so on.

  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 Walter Kolarz. Russia and Her Colonies. Archon Books, 1967, с. 245.

    The attempt to ‘annex’an important part of Persian literature and to transform it into ‘Azerbaidzhani literature’can be best exemplified by the way in which the memory of the great Persian poet Nizami (1141—1203) is exploited in the Soviet Union. The Soviet regime does not pay tribute to Nizami as a great representative of world literature, but is mainly interested in him as a ‘poet of the Soviet Union’, which he is considered to be because he was born in Gandzha in the territory of the present Azerbaidzhani Soviet Republic. The Soviet regime proclaims its ownership over Nizami also by ‘interpreting’his works in accordance with the general pattern of Soviet ideology. Thus the leading Soviet journal Bolshevik stressed that Nizami’s ‘great merit’consisted in having undermined Islam by ‘opposing the theological teaching of the unchangeable character of the world’. // Stalin himself intervened in the dispute over Nizami and gave an authoritative verdict on the matter. In a talk with the Ukrainian writer, Mikola Bazhan, Stalin referred to Nizami as ‘the great poet of our brotherly Azerbaidzhani people’who must not be surrendered to Iranian literature, despite having written most of his poems in Persian.

  6. 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Igor M. Diakonoff Книга воспоминаний (memoir) — СПб.: Европейский дом, 1995. — 766 с. — (Дневники и воспоминания петербургских ученых). — ISBN 5-85733-042-4. С. 730—731.
  7. 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Тамазишвили А. О. Послесловие [к публикации доклада Б. Н. Заходера «Е. Э. Бертельс»]. — Иранистика в России и иранисты. М., 2001, с. 185—186. (Tamazishvili, A.O. (2001), “Posleslovie”, Iranistika v Rossii i iranisty, Moscow: 182-92)
  8. 8.0 8.1 Sergei Panarin «The Soviet East as a New Subject of Oriental» // State, Religion, and Society in Central Asia: A Post-Soviet Critique. Ithaca Press (GB). ISBN 0863721621. Vitaly Naumkin (Editor). Pp. 6, 15.

    «The partisans of classical oriental studies were also made to take refuge in the hoary past. In some disciplines — ancient and medieval history, for instance — they had to completely give up studying the inherent features of a civilisation and concentrate all efforts on its formation. For those specialising in cultural creation studies, it was impossible. But this did not prevent the introduction of such limitations into the blueprint for research.

    So in studying oriental literature, scholars looked above all for indications of the transformation apparently experienced by the peoples of the East within the socialist context. And as analysis of literary works did not yield sufficiently convincing proof, recourse was made to fortuitous facts of history like the birth place or residence of an author. With their help even cultural figures who wrote only in Arabic or Persian were claimed by the future Soviet republics.

    This gave the impression that the greatest and best part of the pre-Soviet heritage of peoples once part of the same civilisation but recently divided by the magic line of the Soviet borders was created within the future USSR. And this was not the result of a national awakening among the Azerbaijanis, Uzbeks or Tajiks, but of an initiative by the ideological authorities. In fact, by forcing scholars to search the past for signs of a unique mission predesignated by history not only for Russia, but for the entire empire, they attributed a significant part of the Russians' Messianism to their oriental 'younger brothers'.4

    From the 1960s to the 1980s, the paths of Soviet oriental studies and the Soviet East diverged even more. A new research school appeared — 'Third World studies'. Many scholars began to examine the political situation as well as the processes of social modernisation and economic growth in the developing nations of the East.

    4. Here are primary arguments from L. I. Klimovich’s afterword to the Russian translation of Nizami’s Iskander Namah: 'The flight of thought characteristic here of Nizami no doubt reflects the people’s aspirations. … Nizami appears before us … as a thinker of genius who had given a glimpse of mankind’s bright future life in the dark medieval night. . .. Speaking of Nizami, Comrade Stalin pointed out that the language of his works (Persian — S.P.) by no means served as a reason for linking him with the literature of Iran.' [Nizami, Iskander Name (Iskander Namah), Moscow, Izdatelstvo Khudozhestvennoi Literatury, 1953, pp. 756-57.] On the whole, the following pattern was suggested: Nizami wrote in Persian, but had been born and lived in the territory of the future Azerbaijan SSR. He reflected the aspirations of the people of Azerbaijan. He foresaw a brilliant future for the USSR. Because he predicted this not as a stranger, but as an Azerbaijani, he was doubly great. So the Azerbaijanis should be considered 'chosen' builders of socialism because they had a presentiment of a bright future and gave the world a progressive poet-prophet.''»

  9. Dr. Paola Orsatti (Associate Professor of Persian language and literature, Sapienza University of Rome). Back Cover Comments // Siavash Lornejad, Ali Doostzadeh. On the Modern Politicization of the Persian Poet Nezami Ganjavi. Edited by Victoria Arakelova. YEREVAN SERIES FOR ORIENTAL STUDIES, Yerevan 2012

    This book provides a full survey of the distortions – dictated by nationalistic purposes – which have been pervading the field of the studies on the Persian poet Nezami of Ganje since the Soviet campaign for Nezami’s 800th birthday anniversary. The authors discuss, with critical accuracy, the arguments put forward by Soviet scholars, and more recently by scholars from the Republic of Azerbaijan, which term Nezami as an “Azerbaijani poet” and his work as pertaining to an alleged “Azerbaijani literature;” and show the historic unsoundness of such theses.

  10. 10.00 10.01 10.02 10.03 10.04 10.05 10.06 10.07 10.08 10.09 10.10 10.11 10.12 10.13 10.14 Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  11. 11.0 11.1 Kamran Talattof. Siavash Lornejad: Ali Doostzadeh, On the Modern Politicization of the Persian Poet Nezami Ganjavi (Yerevan Series for Oriental Studies—l), Yerevan: "Caucasian Centre for Iranian Studies", 2012, 215 pp. (review) // Iran and the Caucasus (journal) 16 (2012) 380-383

    Nezami Ganjavi is one of the most famous Iranian poets of the classical period. He was born to native Iranian parents in the city of Ganja, which is now located in Azerbaijan Republic. At Nezami's time, Iranian ethnic elements and Persian culture and language were dominant in Ganja as noted by primary sources. Nezami is famous for his five monumental books of narrative poems collectively known as Panj-ganj or "Five Treasures", all considered Persian masterpieces. He also wrote a number of Persian lyric poems. // The above information about the poet is very basic, universally acknowledged, and found in countless literary and encyclopaedic publications over the past several centuries and has thus never been a point of contention. That is until recently. A number of politicians and activists in the newly established Azerbaijan Republic have attempted to deny Nezami's Iranian nationality and even his native language. Amazingly, the Iranian authorities seem to not have even noticed this distortion of history. // However, Siavash Lornejad and Ali Doostzadeh, in their book entitled On the Modern Politicization of the Persian Poet Nezami Ganjavi, have noticed the vulgarity of the claim and have traced it back to the ideologically inspired writings on Nezami Ganjavi done by some scholars of the Soviet era.

  12. Victor Schnirelmann. The Value of the Past: Myths, Identity and Politics in Transcaucasia. National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, Japan, 2001.
  13. 13.0 13.1 F. Kocharlinski. Literature of the Azerbaijani Tatars. Tbilisi 1903, p. 3-5, 15:«Знаменитый Низами, написавший на персидском языке свои чудные и проникнутые возвышенным чувством любви поэмы, был татарин родом из Елисаветполя. (…) Вакиф считается основателем татарской литературы» (translation: "Famous Nizami, who wrote in Persian his amazing poems filled with sublime feelings of love, was a Tatar born in Elizavetpol (…) Vaqif is considered to be the founder of Tatar literature.”).
  14. Крымский А. Е. Низами и его изучение. — 1947. «К промахам приходится отнести также замечание автора (стр. 27), что дух тюркизма должна была воспитывать в мальчике Низами его мать. Очевидно, взята эта догадка из Кочарлинского, который привел дилетантское соображение Шерра, что, если отец Низами, был пришлый человек из Кума, то его мать была гянджинка родом, „гянджяли бир гыз“ (т. 1, 1925, стр. 65); полагаем, что ясное заявление самого Низами о благородном курдском происхождении его матери должно было бы предохранить Мик. Paфили от повторения несостоятельной гипотезы Шерра и Кочарлинского». (Translation: Another mistake is the note of the author (p. 27) saying the spirit of Turkism must have been instilled in the young Nizami by his mother. This assumption is most probably taken from Kocharlinski who referred to an amateur depiction by Cher that while Nizami’s father was a newcomer from Qom his mother was a Gyanjevi „гянджяли бир гыз“ (т. 1, 1925, стр. 65); we consider that Nizami’s clear statement about the noble Kurdish origin of his mother was supposed to guard M. Rafili against repeating an unsupported hypothesis).
  15. Krimsky repeats the characteristic of Nizami as a Persian poet in his work Persia and its Literature of 1900, second edition of 1906 and also in the third edition of 1912.
  16. The emergence of the first statements in the USSR about Nizami’s Azerbaijani identity is directly expressed in the following quotes:
    • Victor Schnirelmann. The Value of the Past: Myths, Identity and Politics in Transcaucasia.
    • Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie” :
    «Главным, революционным для отечественной науки результатом этой кампании стало отнесение Низами к поэтам азербайджанским, а его творчества к достижениям азербайджанской литературы, в то время как в мировом востоковедении (а ранее и в советском) доминировал взгляд на него как представителя литературы персидской» (translation: "Main, revolutionary result of this campaign for our native scholarship became attributing Nezami as an Azerbaijani poet, and his works as achievements of the Azerbaijani literature, while in the realm of the world Oriental Studies (and prior to this in the Soviet as well), the viewpoint of him as a representative of Persian literature").
    «Ю. Н. Марр еще в 1929 г. утверждал: „Низами является своим для Кавказа, в частности для той этнической группировки, которая до последнего времени сохранила персидскую традицию в своей литературе, то есть для Азербайджана, где гянджинский поэт все-таки более в почете, чем в Персии“. Конечно, „свой для Азербайджана“ — это не то же, что „азербайджанский“, но в середине 1937 г. скончавшийся в 1935 г. Ю. Н. Марр был единственным из советских востоковедов, на чьи исследования могли опереться сторонники взгляда на Низами как поэта азербайджанского» (translation: " Back in 1929, Yu.N. Marr asserted that “Nezami is its own for Caucasus, especially for the ethnic group that has kept the Persian tradition in its literature until recently, i.e. for Azerbaijan, where the Ganjian poet is more respected than in Persia.”[10] Of course, “its own for Azerbaijan” is not the same as “Azerbaijani,” but in the middle of 1937, Marr who had died in 1935, was the only Soviet Orientalist on whose research could the proponents of the view of Nezami as an Azerbaijani poet lean").
    V. M. Sisoev in "Начальный Очерк Истории Азербайджана (Северного)" for the schools of the USSR (Archaeological Committee of Azerbaijan, 1925) calls Nizami a poet of both Persia and Azerbaijan and considers him a representative of Persian literature.
  17. Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary, author of the article — Agafangel Krimsky: «Низамий (шейх Низамоддин Абу-Мохеммед Ильяс ибн-Юсоф) — лучший романтический персидский поэт (1141—1203).»
  18. Бартольд. Сочинения. Том 2, часть 2. Москва, 1963. Статья «Могила поэта Низами»: «…другого персидского поэта, умершего в самом начале XIII века, Низами…» (translation: Poet Nizami’s grave”: “… another Persian poet who died in the beginning of the 13th century, Nizami…).
  19. Евгений Бертельс, «Очерки истории персидской литературы», 1928: «Психологический анализ — отличительная черта Низами, отделяющая его от всех других поэтов Персии и сближающая его с европейской литературой» (translation: “Psychological analysis – the unique feature of Nizami distinguishing him from all the other “poets of Persia” and bringing him closer to the European literature”).
  20. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found. «Nizami Ganja’i, whose personal name was Ilyas, is the most celebrated native poet of the Persians after Firdausi… His nisbah designates him as a native of Ganja (Elizavetpol, Kirovabad) in Azerbaijan, then still a country with an Iranian population, and he spent the whole of his life in Transcaucasia; the verse in some of his poetic works which makes him a native of the hinterland of Qom is a spurious interpolation.»
  21. // Низамий//Энциклопедический словарь Брокгауза и Ефрона: В 86 томах (82 т. и 4 доп.). — СПб., 1890—1907.
  22. Encyclopedia Britannica 1911, : NIZAMI. Nizam-uddin Abu Mahommed Ilyas bin Yusuf, Persian poet, was born 535 A.H. (1141 A.D.). His native place, or at any rate the abode of his father, was in the hills of Kum, but as he spent almost all his days in Ganja in Arran (the present Elizavetpol) he is generally known as Nizami of Ganja or Ganjawi
  23. George A. Bournoutian. A brief history of the Aghuankʻ region. Mazda Publishers, 2009. ISBN 1-56859-171-3. Стр. 28.

    This was done to distance the Turkic groups from Islam, as well as to instill in them the pride in a glorious, albeit fictional, national identity by claiming the Persian or Byzantine heritage as their own. Hence, the great Persian poet Nezami became the national poet of Azerbaijan; the medieval Persian poets and thinkers of Central Asia, such as Rudaki, became the national poets and philosophers of Uzbekistan, while Rumi was transformed into a great Turkish mystic poet

  24. Большой энциклопедический справочник. Olma Media Group. ISBN 5-901227-33-6. С. 489.
  25. Шамилов С., Луговской В., Вургун Самед (редакторы первоначального варианта «Антологии азербайджанской поэзии»). Поэты Азербайджана на русском языке. — Бакинский рабочий. 16.05.1937, № 112 // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  26. «В своё время к антологии приложили свою подлую руку враги народа (…) они сделали всё, чтобы антология выглядела возможно более тощей и хилой» (translation: “At that time the enemies of the nation had their dirty involvement with the anthology(...) they did their best to make it look as thin and feeble as possible”). Антология азербайджанской поэзии на русском языке. — Бакинский рабочий. 01.08.1937. № 177. // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  27. Араслы Г., Ариф М., Рафили М. Поэзия азербайджанского народа. — Антология азербайджанской поэзии. М., 1939. Стр. XIX
  28. Ягубов А. Л. Научная работа в Азербайджане.— Бакинский рабочий. 28.02.1938. № 48 // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  29. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  30. Искусство азербайджанского народа. — Правда. 05.04.1938. // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  31. «Но несмотря на все запреты и гонения, наперекор преследованиям, героический азербайджанский народ выдвигал из своей среды выразителей его мятежной, мужественной и гневной души. Ещё во время феодального бесправия он родил таких крупнейших художников, как Низами, Хакани, Физули. Они были пламенными патриотами своего народа, поборниками свободы и независимости своей страны» (translation: However, despite all the prohibitions, persecutions and harassments the Azerbaijani nation managed to bring forward those who could portray its turbulent, courageous and furious soul. Early in the epoch of feudal lawlessness the Azerbaijani nation gave birth to such great artists as Nizami, Khakani and Fizuli. They were passionate patriots of their nation and champions of the independence of their country). Торжество азербайджанского искусства.— Правда. 18.04.1938, № 107 // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  32. Е. Бертельс. Гениальный азербайджанский поэт Низами. Правда. 03.02.1939 № 33
  33. И. К. Луппол (философ, академик АН СССР). Архив РАН. ф. 456. оп. 1.Д. 18, л. 70-71. Cited from: Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  34. Правда. 03.04.1939, № 92. // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  35. Цитируется по: Самед Вургун, Расул Рза, Сулейман Рустам. Письмо бакинской интеллигенции товарищу Сталину. Литературный Азербайджан. Баку, 1939, № 4, с.3—12. // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  36. Ибрагимов Мирза. Заключительное слово. — Низами Гянджеви. Материалы научной конференции посвящённой жизни и творчеству поэта (3-6 июня 1947 г.). Баку, 1947, с. 134. // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  37. «Подлые враги народа, националисты-мусаватисты, пантюркисты и прочие предатели хотели отнять Низами у своего родного народа лишь по той причине, что большинство своих произведений он писал на иранском языке. Но великий гений трудящихся, наш отец и вождь товарищ Сталин вернул азербайджанскому народу его величайшего поэта Низами» (translation: “The sneaky enemies of the nation, nationalist-Mousavatists, panturkists and other betrayers wanted to steal Nizami from his nation for the sole reason that he wrote most of his works in the Iranian language. But the great genius of the working people, our father and leader comrade Stalin returned to the Azerbaijani nation its greatest poet Nizami”). Садых А. Москва! Сталин! — Декада азербайджанской литературы в Москве. Баку. 1940. (Вургун Самед. Доклад на вечере в Военно-политической академии им. Ленина.)
  38. Тихонов Николай. Низами. — Правда. 22.09.1947, № 250.
  39. Речь товарища А. А. Фадеева. — Бакинский рабочий. 23.09.1947, № 187.
  40. История Востока. В 6 т. Т. 2. Восток в средние века. М., «Восточная литература», 2002. ISBN 5-02-017711-3
  41. Muriel Atkin. Soviet and Russian Scholarship on Iran. // Iranian Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2/4, Iranian Studies in Europe and Japan (1987), pp. 223—271. Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of International Society for Iranian Studies. «In addition to research expressly on Iran, additional pertinent work is done under the rubric Azerbaijani studies. In theory Soviet and Iranian Azerbaijan fall into separate categories, with the northern part belonging to the domain of Soviet history while the southern part belongs to the domain of the Orientalists. However in practice the lines blur. Thus the twelfth-century poet Nezami, who was born in what is now Soviet Azerbaijan and wrote in Persian, is studied as a great Azerbaijani writer. In addition, the Academy’s Nezami Institute of Literature and Language has a section, established in 1976, dealing with the Azerbaijani language and literature of Iranian Azerbaijan.»
  42. Peter Ulf Møller. Writing the History of World Literature in the USSR // Culture & History, v5. Københavns universitet. Center for sammenlignende kulturforskning, Københavns universitet. Humanistiske forskningscenter. Museum Tusculanum Press, 1989. p. 19-38. «Another problem is the historically changing concept of a nation. It is evident that IVL projects the present 15 Soviet republics back Into history. As early as In vol. 2 (the Middle Ages) there Is a special section devoted to the literatures of Caucasus and Transcaucasia (with chapters on the literatures of Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan). This is clearly justified in the case of Armenia and Georgia, while it is rather more problematic to separate a special Azerbaijan literature from Persian literature. The 12th-century poet Nizami, usually considered one of the great Persian classics, Is In IVL an Azerbaijan poet, since he lived in a town now within the territory of the Soviet republic of Azerbaijan. Persian literature is called Persian-Tajik, thus anticipating the Soviet republic Tajikistan.»
  43. Бертельс. Великий азербайджанский поэт Низами. Баку, 1940. Cтр. 16-17. «Все это, вместе взятое, заставляет пересмотреть укрепившиеся в востоковедении* взгляды на персидскую литературу. До сих пор под персидской литературой обычно понимают все, что написано на персидском языке, вне зависимости от того, где и в каких условиях эта литература сложилась. Затем весь этот сложный комплекс приписывают Ирану, понимая ' под этим ту политическую единицу, которая носит это название в данное время. Однако, такое перенесение понятия XX в. на тысячу лет назад, конечно, методологически грубо неправильно. Персидская литература сложилась не только на территории современного Ирана, в ее создании принимали участие десятки различных народов» (translation: All this, taken together, makes us revise the established view of Persian literature in Orientalism*. Up until now all that was written in Persian language, irrespective of the place and circumstances of its creation, was considered as Persian literature. Besides, this whole intricate complex of literature is attributed to Iran, the latter being defined as the political entity which carries this name in the given time period. However, the transfer of this concept of the 20th century back for thousand years is of course a big methodological mistake. Persian literature was formed not only on the territory of contemporary Iran but dozens of different nations also contributed to its creation).
  44. Рафили. Древняя азербайджанская литература. Баку, 1941. Стр. 36-37. «Каково этническое происхождение родителей Низами — не так уж существенно для его социальной биографии. Низами относился с большим уважением к своему азербайджанскому происхождению, был полон глубокой любви к своему народу, для него слово „тюрок“ несовместимо со злом, жестокостью, несправедливостью. Могущество тюркских племен, их возвышение, он видит только в их гуманности в справедливости…».
  45. 45.0 45.1 П.р. Луговского и Самеда Вургуна. Антология азербайджанской поэзии. Баку, 1939. Авторы предисловия Араслы Г., Ариф М., Рафили М. «Чрезвычайно любопытно, что одну из лучших своих поэм „Лейли и Меджнун“ Низами намеревался писать не на фарсидском, а на родном, азербайджанском языке. На это имеются ясные намеки в начале поэмы, где Низами объясняет причины создания им „Лейли и Меджнун“. Низами рассказывает здесь о том, как его желанию помешало появление посланца шаха с письмом, в котором он требовал от поэта создания новой поэмы, поставив условием — писать ее только на фарсидском языке.».
  46. В СНК Азербайджанской ССР. — Бакинский рабочий. 04.05.1939, № 100. // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  47. «Подлые агенты фашизма, буржуазные националисты, великодержавные шовинисты делали всё возможное, чтобы скрыть от азербайджанского народа наследие великого его сына поэта Низами». Научно-исследовательская литература о жизни и творчестве Низами. — Литературный Азербайджан. 1939. № 3, с. 73-74. // Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  48. 48.0 48.1 Бертельс Е. Э. Низами. — БСЭ. Изд. 1-е. Т. 42. М., 1939, с. 93.
  49. Azadă Ru̇stămova. Nizami Ganjavi. «Elm» Publishers, 1981. «The immortal woman images which have been so masterfully portrayed by the Azerbaijan poet Nizami»
  50. Иран. Автор раздела — И. С. Брагинский. «Вершиной развития гуманистической литературы на языке фарси явилось творчество Омара Хайяма (около 1048 — после 1122) и азербайджанского поэта Низами (1141—1209), особенно его „Пятерица“ („Хамсе“).»
  51. Г. З. Анчабадзе (ведущий научный сотрудник Института истории и этнологии АН Грузии). Краткий исторический очерк «Вайнахи». «В сокровищницу мировой литературы вошли поэма „Витязь в тигровой шкуре“ грузина Шота Руставели и творчество азербайджанского поэта Низами»
  52. Культура народов Закавказья в эпоху феодализма. Академия Наук СССР. Институт Истории. Издательство «НАУКА». Москва. 1966. «Великими современниками царицы Тамары и Шота Руставели были два замечательных азербайджанских поэта — Низами и Хакани»
  53. Академик Б. Б. Пиотровский. В годы войны (Статьи и очерки). М.: Наука, 1985. С. 5-58. «В октябре 1941 г научные учреждения Ленинграда праздновали 800-летний юбилей великого азербайджанского поэта Низами»
  54. Александр Фадеев. Письма и документы. Издательство Литературного института им. А. М. Горького, 2001 г. ISBN 5-7060-0043-3. Стр. 91 «В 30-е годы в СССР стало принятым считать Низами Гянджеви (ок. 1141 — ок, 1209) не иранским, но азербайджанским деятелем. Иная точка зрения рассматривалась как грубая политическая ошибка».
  55. Бертельс Е. Э. Подготовка к юбилею Низами. — Литературная газета. 10.12.1939, № 68.
  56. Низами. Статья в БСЭ, 2-е изд. Азербайджанские издания Низами к 1953 г.: Лирик шеирпэр, Бакы, 1947; Сиррлар хэзинэси, Бакы, 1947; Хосров вэ Ширин, Бакы, 1947; Лейли вэ Мэчнун, Бакы, 1942; Едди кезэл, Бакы, 1941; Искэндернамэ, Ьиссэ 1—2, Бакы, 1941.
  57. Гик Я. Музей великого поэта. — Известия. territoriality principle’ Nizami, 21.09.1947, № 223.
  58. Victor Schnirelmann. The Value of the Past: Myths, Identity and Politics in Transcaucasia. National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, Japan, 2001. p.112

    On the one hand, the role of Turkic language in the consolidation of the local population was also recognized, but, on the other hand, biological, cultural and historical continuity, rooted in the very remote local past, was emphasized. This seemed sufficient to the author, who did not go deeper into the issue of the formation of the Azeri people (Istoriia 1960). The paragraph on the "great Azeri poet" was supplemented by a portrait of Nizami Ganjevi, drawn by the artist, G. Khalykov, in the 1940s. Although an authentic portrait of the poet did not exist, in accordance with Muslim norms, the portrait in question met Baghirov's requirements, and has ever since been reproduced in all Azeri textbooks

  59. В Баку отметят 110-летний юбилей создателя портрета Низами (Азербайджан, Баку, 25 ноября /корр. Trend Life Эльдар Гусейнзаде/) «Юбилей Газанфара Халыгова — автора художественного образа выдающегося поэта и мыслителя Низами, признанного во всем мире, будет отмечен в Баку во второй половине декабря».
  60. Michael Zand. BERTHELS, EVGENIĭ ÈDUARDOVICH // Encyclopædia Iranica. (Last Updated: December 15, 1989)
  61. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  62. БСЭ, 2 изд,, М., 1949, т.,1, стр. 461, ст. «Азербайджан»
  63. The dominance of the scheme is reflected in the following encyclopaedias:
    • БСЭ, второе издание. 1959 год. Т. I. Статья «Азербайджанская Советская Социалистическая Республика»
    • БСЭ, третье издание. Статья «Азербайджанская Советская Социалистическая Республика», глава XIV «Литература»: «Азербайджанский фольклор. Во многих памятниках сохранились черты древнего фольклора: мидийские легенды (7 — 6 вв. до н. э.), записанные Геродотом и связанные с иранскими завоевательными войнами, религиозно-философские древние тексты в „Авесте“ и др. … Многие памятники письменной азербайджанской литературы древнего периода до нас не дошли, но известно, что ещё в 5 в. в Кавказской Албании (на С. современного А.) существовала высокая культура; были написаны оригинальные и переводные религиозные книги и художественные произведения. … Вершиной азербайджанской поэзии 12 в. является творчество Низами Ганджеви, одного из корифеев мировой поэзии».
    • Алексей Александрович Сурков. Краткая литературная энциклопедия (том 1). Советская энциклопедия, 1962. Стр. 85.
    • «Истории всемирной литературы» (том 2) (Институт мировой литературы им. А. М. Горького, 1984 год.
    The fact that the scheme was dominant in Soviet sources is also evident in the following monographs, articles and textbooks (in reverse chronological order):
    • Зияддин Багатур оглы Геюшев. Очерки по истории азербайджанской философии, Зияддин Багатур оглы Геюшев. Изд-во Академии наук Азербайджанской ССР, 1966. Стр. 5-7.
    • Шейдабек Фараджиевич Мамедов. Развитие философской мысли в Азербайджане. Университет, 1965. Стр. 2-7.
  64. Бертельс Е. Э. Литература на персидском языке в Средней Азии. — Советское востоковедение. Вып. V. М.-Л., 1948, с. 200.
  65. «Выяснять этническую принадлежность каждого заслуживающего внимания автора, а затем расклассифицировать их по разным литературам — но такая задача, во-первых, была бы невыполнимой потому, что данных об этнической принадлежности старых писателей у нас нет и, вероятно, никогда не будет; во-вторых, это методологически было бы порочно до самой последней крайности. Следовательно, мы тогда строили бы литературу по признаку крови, по признаку расы. Едва ли нужно говорить, что так строить литературу мы не можем и не будем, я, во всяком случае, не буду, если кто-нибудь другой хочет — пожалуйста, его частное дело (…) Как провести раздел между персидской и таджикской литературой — я, скажу откровенно, не знаю. Если встать на такую позицию, что мы должны писателя отнести обязательно к тому месту, где он родился и где он большую часть своей жизни действовал, то этот принцип нас никуда не приведет». — Архивный фонд МГ ИВ АН СССР. Цит. по: Иранистика в России и иранисты / Рос. акад. наук. Ин-т востоковедения; [Отв. ред. Л. М. Кулагина]. М. : ИВ РАН, 2001. С. 184.
  66. C. A. (Charles Ambrose) Storey and Franço de Blois (2004), «Persian Literature — A Biobibliographical Survey: Volume V Poetry of the Pre-Mongol Period.», RoutledgeCurzon; 2nd revised edition (June 21, 2004). Pg 363: «Nizami Ganja’i, whose personal name was Ilyas, is the most celebrated native poet of the Persians after Firdausi. His nisbah designates him as a native of Ganja (Elizavetpol, Kirovabad) in Azerbaijan, then still a country with an Iranian population…»
  67. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.

    The fact that numerous quatrains of some poets (e.g. Amir Šams-al-Din Asʿad of Ganja, ʿAziz Šarvāni, Šams Sojāsi, Amir Najib-al-Din ʿOmar of Ganja, Badr Teflisi, Kamāl Marāḡi, Šaraf Ṣāleḥ Baylaqāni, Borhān Ganjaʾi, Elyās Ganjaʾi, Baḵtiār Šarvāni) are mentioned together like a series tends to suggest the author was in possession of their collected works. Nozhat al-mājales is thus a mirror of the social conditions at the time, reflecting the full spread of Persian language and the culture of Iran throughout that region, clearly evidenced by the common use of spoken idioms in poems as well as the professions of some of the poets.

  68. V. Minorsky, Studies in Caucasian History, Cambridge University Press, 1957. С. 34: «The author of the collection of documents relating to Arran Mas’ud b. Namdar (c. 1100) claims Kurdish nationality. The mother of the poet Nizami of Ganja was Kurdish (see autobiographical digression in the introduction of Layli wa Majnun). In the 16th century there was a group of 24 septs of Kurds in Qarabagh, see Sharaf-nama, I, 323. Even now the Kurds of the USSR are chiefly grouped south of Ganja. Many place-names composed with Kurd are found on both banks of the Kur.»
  69. V. Minorsky: «review of G. H. Darab translation of Makhzan al-Asrar» 1945 Minorsky, BSOAS., 1948, xii/2, 441-5): «Whether Nizami was born in Qom or in Ganja is not quite clear. The verse (quoted on p. 14): „I am lost as a pearl in the sea of Ganja, yet I am from the Qohestan of the city of Qom“, does not expressly mean that he was born in Qom. On the other hand, Nizami’s mother was of Kurdish origin, and this might point to Ganja where the Kurdish dynasty of Shaddad ruled down to AH. 468; even now Kurds are found to the south of Ganja.»
  70. article by Dr. Julie S. Meisami (Oxford)
  71. The opinion that Nizami is a Persian poet is reflected in the leading national and biographical encyclopaedias outside the former Soviet Union – there Nizami is described exclusively as a Persian poet:
    • Encyclopaedia Britannica, article «Neẓāmī»: «Neẓāmī (Persian poet) — greatest romantic epic poet in Persian literature, who brought a colloquial and realistic style to the Persian epic».
    • Encyclopaedia Brockhaus (сайт), статья Nisami: «Nisami, Nezami, eigentlich Abu Mohammed Iljas Ibn Jusuf, persischer Dichter, * vermutlich Gäncä (Aserbaidschan) 1141».
    • Encyclopaedia Larousse (сайт): «Ilyas ibn Yusuf Nezami ou Ilyas ibn Yusuf Nizami — Poète persan (Gandja, vers 1140-Gandja, vers 1209)».
    • Encyclopædia Iranica (сайт), article «PERSIAN LITERATURE»: «Neẓāmi’s Five Treasures (Panj ganj). Eliās Abu Mo-ḥammad Neẓāmi of Ganja was born around 1141 of a Kurdish mother and a father named Yusof».
    • Chelkowski, P. "Nizami Gandjawi, jamal al-Din Abu Muhammad Ilyas b. Yusuf b. Zaki Muayyad. Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2008. Brill Online. Excerpt one:"Nizami Gandjawi, Djamal al-Din Abu Muhammad Ilyas b. Yusuf b. Zaki Muʾayyad, one of the greatest Persian poets and thinkers."
    • Encyclopedia of Literary Translation Into English, Taylor & Francis, 2000, ISBN 1-884964-36-2, стр. 1005: «Nizami 0.1141-0.1209 Persian poet».
    • Persian Literature: A Bio-Bibliographical Survey, C.A. Storey, Francois De Blois(Professor School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London), Routledge, 2004, ISBN 0-947593-47-0, стр. 408: «Memoir of the life and writings of the Persian poet Nizami».
    • The Arabian Nights Encyclopedia, Ulrich Marzolph (Akademie der Wissenschaften, Göttingen), Richard van Leeuwen, Hassan Wassouf, ABC-CLIO, 2004, ISBN 1-57607-204-5, стр. 225: «Persian poet Nezami (d. 1209)».
    • Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, Julie Scott Meisami (Lecturer in Persian, University of Oxford, Oriental Institute, Editor «The Journal of Middle Eastern Literatures»), Paul Starkey. Автор статьи — Gregor Schoeler (Базельский университет). Стр. 69: «Persian poet Nizami».
    • The Oxford Dictionary of Islam, John L. Esposito, Oxford University Press US, 2003, ISBN 0-19-512559-2, Стр. 235: «Nizami, Jamal al-Din Abu Muhammad II- yas ibn Yusuf ibn Zaki Muayyad (d. ca. 1209) Persian poet. Author of the Khamsa».
    • Encyclopedia of Asian History: Vols 1-4. Ainslie Thomas Embree (Professor Emeritus of History Columbia University), Robin Jeanne Lewis, Asia Society, Richard W. Bulliet. Scribner, 1988. Стр.55: «..five historical idylls (1299—1302) as a rejoinder to the Khamsa of the Persian poet Nizami…».
    • New Encyclopedia of Islam: A Revised Edition of the Concise Encyclopedia of Islam. Cyril Glasse (Columbia university), Huston Smith. Rowman Altamira, 2003. ISBN 0-7591-0190-6. «NizamI (Abu Yusuf Muhammad Ilyas ibn Yusuf Nizam ad-Dîn) (535-598l\ 141—1202). A Persian poet and mystic, he was born in Ganja in Azerbaijan».
    Besides, this characteristic of Nizami is vividly portrayed in the following contemporary monographs (in reverse chronological order):
    • Christine van Ruymbeke (University of Cambridge, Doctorat en Iranologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium). Science and Poetry in Medieval Persia: The Botany of Nizami’s Khamsa. Cambridge University Press, 2007. ISBN 0-521-87364-9. Стр. 8. «Nizami is one of the main representatives of Persian poetry at the time».
    • A History of Literary Criticism in Iran, 1866—1951: Literary Criticism in the Works of Enlightened Thinkers of Iran--Akhundzadeh, Kermani, Malkom, Talebof, Maragheʼi, Kasravi, and Hedayat, Iraj Parsinejad (Tokio University of Foreigh Studies), Ibex Publishers, Inc., 2003, ISBN 1-58814-016-4. Стр. 225: «…a new edition of Persian poet Nezami…».
    • Kamran Talattof (Associate Professor, Near Eastern Studies at the University of Arizona, Tucson), Jerome W. Clinton (professor emeritus of Near Eastern studies and a scholar of Iranian culture and society), K. Allin Luthe. The Poetry of Nizami Ganjavi: Knowledge, Love, and Rhetoric. Palgrave, 2001 ISBN 0-312-22810-4. Стр. 2: «…and blameless character in a degree unequaled by any other Persian poet…».
    • Ronald Grigor Suny (editor), Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies, American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies. Nationalism and Social Change: Essays in the History of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. University of Michigan Press, 1996. ISBN 0-472-09617-6. Стр. 20: «…the great Persian poet Nizam ud-Dih Abu Muhammad Ilyas…»
    • History of Muslim Philosophy, M. M. SHARIF (Director of the Institute of Islamic Culture, Lahore Pakistan). 1963. Глава 54: «The most important classical poet of this period is Shaikhi. His version of IChusrau we Shirin of the Persian poet Nizami is more than a mere translation».
    This characteristic is also repeated by Turkish authors:
    • Johan Christoph Burgel (Editor), Christine van Ruymbeke (Editor), Nizami: A Key to the Treasure of the Hakim (ISS), Leiden University Press (2010): «This „Key“ to the Khamsa consists of thirteen essays by eminent scholars in the field of Persian Studies, each focusing on different aspects of the Khamsa, which is a collection of five long poems written by the Persian poet Nizami of Ganja. Nizami (1141—1209) lived and worked in Ganja in present-day Azerbaijan. He is widely recognized as one of the main poets of Medieval Persia, a towering figure who produced outstanding poetry, straddling mysticism, romances and epics».
    • Gülru Necipoğlu Julia Bailey. Muqarnas: An Annual on the Visual Culture of the Islamic World. BRILL, 2005, ISBN 90-04-14702-0. Глава написана Aysin Yoltar-Yildirim (Ph.D. in Art History and Archeology). Стр. 99: «Trying to emulate another great Persian poet, Nizami…»
    • Walter G. Andrews, Mehmet Kalpakli. The Age of Beloveds: Love and the Beloved in Early-modern Ottoman and European Culture and Society. Duke University Press, 2005, ISBN 0-8223-3424-0. Стр. 59: «the fourth in a series of five mesnevi poems (a hamse or „pentad“) intended to match the famed thirteenth-century hamse of the Persian poet Nizami of Ganja».
    The opinions of scholars on Nizami's Persian identity are discussed in the following sources:
    • C. A. (Charles Ambrose) Storey and Franço de Blois (2004), «Persian Literature — A Biobibliographical Survey: Volume V Poetry of the Pre-Mongol Period.», RoutledgeCurzon; 2nd revised edition (June 21, 2004). Стр. 363: «Nizami Ganja’i, whose personal name was Ilyas, is the most celebrated native poet of the Persians after Firdausi. His nisbah designates him as a native of Ganja (Elizavetpol, Kirovabad) in Azerbaijan, then still a country with an Iranian population…»
    • Lalita Sinha notes, that the scholars of Persian literature consider Nizami as the greatest representative of Persian literature. Dr. Lalita Sinha (Universiti Sains Malaysia, Senior Lecturer in Comparative Literature and Comparative Religion). Garden of Love. World Wisdom, Inc, 2008. ISBN 1-933316-63-2. Стр. 24: «Hailed by scholars of Persian literature as the greatest exponent of romantic epic poetry in Persian literature (Levy 1969, XI), Nizami is also referred…»
    • Annemarie Schimmel, «And Muhammad Is His Messenger: The Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety (Studies in Religion)»,The University of North Carolina Press (November 30, 1985). Стр. 18: «In Persian sources, his search for knowledge takes precedence over world conquest. In the Iskandar-namah (Book of Alexander) by the Persian poet Nizami, Alexander is depicted as the half-brother of the conquered King».
    • Richard N. Frye Reviewed work(s): The Turkic Languages and Literatures of Central Asia: A Bibliography by Rudolf Loewenthal. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 21, (Dec., 1958). Стр. 186: «…publications on the Persian poet, Nizami (page 73)…»
    • Yo’av Karny, «Highlanders : A Journey to the Caucasus in Quest of Memory», Published by Macmillan, 2000. Стр. 124: «In 1991 he published a translation into Khynalug of the famous medieval poet Nezami, who is known as Persian but is claimed by Azeri nationalists as their own».
    • According to Tamazishvili, «главным, революционным для отечественной науки результатом этой кампании стало отнесение Низами к поэтам азербайджанским, а его творчества к достижениям азербайджанской литературы, в то время как в мировом востоковедении (а ранее и в советском) доминировал взгляд на него как представителя литературы персидской. Точки зрения, что Низами персидский поэт, и сегодня придерживаются ученые многих стран, в первую очередь — Ирана» (translation: "Main, revolutionary result of this campaign for our native scholarship became attributing Nezami as an Azerbaijani poet, and his works as achievements of the Azerbaijani literature, while in the realm of the world Oriental Studies (and prior to this in the Soviet as well), the viewpoint of him as a representative of Persian literature"). Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.
  72. Chelkowski, P. "Nezami's Iskandarnameh:"in Colloquio sul poeta persiano Nizami e la leggenda iranica di Alessandro magno, Roma,1977). "Nizami was a typical product of the Iranian culture. He created a bridge between Islamic Iran and pre-Islamic Iran and also between Iran and the whole ancient world. His great humanism, strong character, sensibility, drama, colorful description of nature, rich language, and the poetic genius created a new standard of literary achievements and captured the imagination of countless imitators"
  73. Ali Asghar Seyed-Gohrab, "Layli and Majnun: Madness and Mystic Longing" Brill Studies in Middle Eastern literature, Jun 2003, pg 76-77. : Although Majnun was to some extent a popular figure before Nizami's time, his popularity increased dramatically after the appearance of Nizami's romance. By collecting information from both secular and mystical sources about Majnun, Nizami portrayed such a vivid picture of this legendary lover that all subsequent poets were inspired by him, many of them imitated him and wrote their own versions of the romance. As we shall see in the following chapters, the poet uses various characteristics deriving from ‘Udhrite love poetry and weaves them into his own Persian culture. In other words, Nizami Persianises the poem by adding several techniques borrowed from the Persian epic tradition, such as the portrayal of characters, the relationship between characters, description of time and setting, etc.
  74. Ali Asghar Seyed-Gohrab еще и в Iranica: "But Neẓāmi’s Leyli o Majnun changed the image of Majnun decisively from the twelfth century onwards. Despite its simple structure and plot, the romance is among the most imitated works in Persian, and in other languages under Persian cultural and literary influence, such as Pashto, Urdu, Kurdish, and the Turkic languages."
  75. Tadeusz Swietochowski and Brian C. Collins/ Historical Dictionary of Azerbaijan. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Lanham, Maryland, & London, 1999, p. 93. "Nizami Ganjevi, one of Iran`s greatest poets, today he is recognized as an example of the amalgamation of Turkic and Iranian culture, and of Azerbaijan`s contribution to it."
  76. Audrey L. Altstadt. The Azerbaijani Turks. Power and Identity under Russian Rule. Hoover Institution Press, Stanford University, 1992, p. 12. "Nizami Ganjevi is seen as an example of the interconnections between Turkish and Persian cultural strands and of Azerbaijan`s place in Turco-Persian Culture"
  77. Beatrice Forbes Manz. Reviewed work(s): The Azerbaijani Turks: Power and Identity under Russian Rule by Audrey Altstadt. Russian Review, Vol. 53, No. 3 (Jul., 1994), pp. 453-455. "A clear discussion of existing controversies and of the ideological constraints behind the Soviet account of Azerbaijani history would have been a great help here. As it is, the reader is not certain whether Altstadt is presenting her own view of Azerbaijani history or that of Soviet Azerbaijani scholars"
  78. Shireen Hunter. Iran and Transcaucasia in the Post-Soviet Era // Central Asia meets the Middle East / David Menashri. — Routledge, 1998. "The problem is that Western scholars are accepting and legitimating these distortions. For instance, Alstadt refers to 'Azerbaijani Turkish literature from Nizami to Saeb Tabrizi'. Yet Nizami wrote in Persian and on Persian themes. Saeb Tabrizi was born and lived all his life in Isfahan, even if his forefathers had fled from Tabriz. It is amazing that any serious scholar can call Nizami's works 'Azerbaijani Turkish literature"
  79. 79.0 79.1 Siavash Lornejad, Ali Doostzadeh. On the Modern Politicization of the Persian Poet Nezami Ganjavi. Edited by Victoria Arakelova. YEREVAN SERIES FOR ORIENTAL STUDIES, Yerevan 2012
  80. Rebecca Gould (Assistant Professor of Literature at Yale-NUS College, specialises in the literatures of the Persian and Islamic world in a comparative context). Форум «Наука и псевдонаука» // «Антропологический форум», 2013. № 18. pp. 62-63
  81. Кругосвет. Низами: «Низами Гянджеви (1141 — предпол. 1204) — азербайджанский поэт, мыслитель, философ, писал на языке фарси». Чингиз Гусейнов
  82. «Энциклопедия для детей» Аванта+. «Низами Гянджеви — азербайджанский поэт, мыслитель. Писал на персидском языке».
  83. This viewpoint is reflected in those encyclopaedias which define Nizami as an Azerbaijani poet who wrote in Persian language:
  84. Чингиз Гусейнов. Азербайджанская литература
  85. Брагинский Владимир Иосифович, д.филол.н. The Comparative Study of Traditional Asian Literatures: From Reflective Traditionalism to Neo-Traditionalism. Routledge, 2001. ISBN 0-7007-1240-2. Стр. 119: «…great Persian poet Nizami»
  86. 86.0 86.1 Стеблин-Каменский Иван Михайлович (заведующий Кафедрой иранской филологии, декан Восточного факультета Санкт-Петербургского государственного университета). Восточный факультет давно готов сотрудничать с Западом. «Мы готовили таких специалистов <в „новообразованных государствах“>, но, как показывает наше с ними общение, там очень много националистических тенденций, научных фальсификаций. (…). В их трудах присутствует националистическое начало, нет объективного взгляда, научного понимания проблем, хода исторического развития. Подчас — откровенная фальсификация. Например, Низами, памятник которому воздвигнут на Каменноостровском проспекте, объявляется великим азербайджанским поэтом. Хотя он по-азербайджански даже не говорил. А обосновывают это тем, что он жил на территории нынешнего Азербайджана — но ведь Низами писал свои стихи и поэмы на персидском языке!»(копия)
  87. Сайт президента России. Выступление на открытии памятника Низами, Санкт-Петербург, 9 июня 2002 года.
  88. Невское время. 11 июня 2002. В Баку — Пушкин, у нас — Низами.
  89. Сергей Румянцев, Ильгам Аббасов. С кого начинается Родина? Парадоксы формирования национальной идентичности путем аппроприации «экстерриториального» национального героя. «Ab imperio», 2/2006.
  90. Низами Гянджеви. Собрание сочинений в 3 т. Баку, 1991. Т. 1. С. 5.
  91. Издан второй том шеститомника «История азербайджанской литературы», подготовленный в Институте литературы им. Низами НАНА
  92. 92.0 92.1 Адиль Багиров, к.п.н. Присвоение и отторжение культурного и исторического наследия Азербайджана иранским и армянским правительствами на примере великого азербайджанского поэта Низами Гянджеви
  93. Рамазан Кафарлы. Философия любви на древнем Востоке и Низами. Санкт-Петербург, Лейла, 2001, сс. 93-100. «…если бы в XII столетии „язык не имел значения“, то Ахситан не подчеркивал бы особо, чтобы его заказ-поэма „Лейли и Меджнун“ был выполнен именно на фарси, то есть не опасался бы широкого распространения тюркского языка в ущерб персидскому и арабскому языкам. Тем самым он косвенно указывал, что население Ширвана, которым он правил, говорило на тюркском (под „тюрко-подобными словами“ шах имел в виду простонародную речь и хотел продемонстрировать, что эта речь „не подобает их шахскому роду“), а Низами создавал произведения и на родном языке. (translation: “… If in 12th century ‘the language had been of no importance’ then Akhsitan wouldn’t have emphasised that the poem Leyla and Mejnun, which he had ordered, was written exactly in Perian, i. e. he wouldn’t have worried for the wide spread of Turkish language at the expense of Persian and Arabic languages. At the same time he indirectly implied that the population of Shirvan, which was under his rule, spoke Turkish (by ‘Turkish-like words’ Shah meant a common colloquial speech and wanted to demonstrate that this speech “was inappropriate for their Shah family”), while Nizami wrote his works also in his mother tongue»).
  94. Мамед Эмин Расулзаде. Азербайджанский поэт Низами. Баку, 1991, с. 31. «…кто смеет сказать „он не тюрк“ поэту, который называет а) красивого и великого — тюрком, б) красоту и величие — тюркизмом, в) красивое и великое слово — тюркским, г) страну красоты и величия — Туркестаном. В эпоху, когда жил Низами, язык как таковой не имел значения, с точки зрения же чувств, души, патриотических аргументов, доказывающих тюркское происхождение поэта, не одно, а тысячи. (translation: “who dares say “he is not a Turk” to a poet who calls a) the great and the beautiful - a Turk, b) beauty and greatness – Turkish, c) beautiful and great words – Turkish language, d) the country of greatness and beauty – Turkestan. In the epoch during which Nizami wrote, the language as such was of no importance; as for the feelings, spirituality and patriotic arguments proving the Turkish origin of the poet, there is not just one but thousands of those”»).
  95. Заявление института Мира и демократии (Талышский вопрос).
  96. Яна Амелина. Талышский вопрос
  97. «Права человека в СНГ и Балтии» Бюллетень № 12, февраль 2008.
  98. Editors of «Tolishi sedo» newspaper took stand of betrayal of country l
  99. Official website of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan. 26 April 2011. Closing speech by Ilham Aliyev at the annual general assembly of the National Academy of Sciences, saved copy

Bibliography

  • Тамазишвили А. О. Послесловие [к публикации доклада Б. Н. Заходера «Е. Э. Бертельс»]. — Иранистика в России и иранисты. М., 2001, с. 185—186. (Tamazishvili, A.O. (2001), “Posleslovie”, Iranistika v Rossii i iranisty, Moscow: 182-92)
  • Тамазишвили А. О. Из истории изучения в СССР творчества Низами Гянджеви: вокруг юбилея — Е. Э. Бертельс, И. В. Сталин и другие // Наумкин В. В. (отв. ред.), Романова Н. Г., Смилянская И. М. Неизвестные страницы отечественного востоковедения : [cборник] — М. : Вост. лит., 2004. Рос. акад. наук, Ин-т востоковедения, С.-Петерб. фил. арх. РАН. Стр. 173—199. (Tamazishvili, A.O. (2004), “Iz istorii izučenija v SSSR tvorčestva Nizami Gjandževi: vokrug jubileja — E. È. Bertels, I. V. Stalin i drugie”, ed. by Vitaly Naumkin, N. G. Romanova, I. M. Smiljanskaja (eds.), Neizvestnye stranicy otečestvennogo vostokovedenija: [sbornik], Oriental Studies Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg: 173-99.)
  • Walter Kolarz. Russia and Her Colonies. Archon Books, 1967.
  • Siavash Lornejad, Ali Doostzadeh. On the Modern Politicization of the Persian Poet Nezami Ganjavi. Edited by Victoria Arakelova. YEREVAN SERIES FOR ORIENTAL STUDIES, Yerevan 2012
  • Вадим Гомоз. Азербайджанизация Низами // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Серия 13: 2011. Вып. 3. стр. 113—120
  • Дроздов В. А. Отзыв о статье Вадима Гомоза азербайджанизация Низами // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Серия 13: 2011. Вып. 3. стр. 121—126

External links

  • Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  • Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  • Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  • Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  • Siavash Lornejad, Ali Doostzadeh. On the Modern Politicization of the Persian Poet Nezami Ganjavi. Edited by Victoria Arakelova. YEREVAN SERIES FOR ORIENTAL STUDIES, Yerevan 2012.