That's right, the terms might be anachronistic, as they're tied to the formation of a modern state which had not yet been established. However, the ethno-linguistic roots of what is now considered "Azerbaijani" do predate Stalin-era policies, hence, their usage to recognize the presence of Turkic groups in the region. Your point is well-taken though.

@@NicholasKlaus-fh7srOnce more, we encounter an effort to compare a formed nation as Irish one, with diverse and often conflicting with each other unconsolidated tribal turkic groups. Please comprehend that such comparative theories, wherein you liken so called azerbaijani people (in the context of the 11th to the 19th centuries) to nations such as the Irish, Spaniards, would only mislead individuals with minimal education.✌🏻

@@NicholasKlaus-fh7srYes, yes, continue. It’s amusing.

@@NicholasKlaus-fh7srno, azeris are a mix of multiple peoples that never had a country before 1918, actually, they arent even homogeneus and the only thing that ties them togheter is theyre 1918 national identity and the turkic language that is used as a binder and as a assimilation tactic, pure Türks and Mongols(not Azerbaijanis or Caucasian Tatars how they used to be called) held control over most of the south caucasus(except often the Kingdom of Artsakh or the principality of khachen)from the 11th century to the 15th century with the Seljuks, Eldiguzids, Mongol Empire, Ilkhanate, Timurid Empire, Aq Qoyunlu, and Qara Qoyunlu. Only that since 1501 onwards the region was once again under persian rule until it was annexed by russia.

@@NicholasKlaus-fh7sr as for Ireland, it is united by the people being of similar genetical background and also all speaking the same language or langauges(If they keatned thyre native language which is Irish/Gaelic).

Absolutely, the diverse "Persian" governing class and the critical pre-Khanate deportations shaping Eastern Armenia's demographics are good points. I admit, I have to take a closer look at it, thanks for bringing this up.

@@AkravHistory Heres a text that describes it well: The Persians were the elite in the region, and were part of the settled population.[40] The term "Persians" in this specific matter refers to the ruling hierarchy of the khanate, and does not necessarily denote the ethnic composition of the group.[39] There were thus ethnic Persians and Turks who spoke Persian and saw themselves as Persians among the ruling "Persian" elite of the khanate.[39] This ruling elite were primarily the members of the governors' household, his close associates, the officer corps, the members of the local Persian bureaucracy, and some of the prosperous merchants.[36] The Persian ruling elite was a minority among the Muslims in the khanate.[39] During the 1826-1828 war, which lead to the Russian conquest, a number of the Persian ruling elite was killed; the remaining number, basically migrated "in toto" to Iran proper after the Russians decisively gained control of the province.[40][36][k]

Will do, thank you!

Thanks so much!

Thank you so much for your encouraging words! That's absolutely right. If we avoid the topic, opportunists will fill the void with misinformation. Stay tuned for more!

At least your ass is real!

😂😂😂 Damn, that's funny , but goddamn you right 🤣 ​@@AkravHistory

Thank you for the support!

So and Armenia could theoretically assert claims over Georgia and the entire South Caucasus, given that the Armenian kingdom, at its peak, encompassed those territories.

However, we understand that it's inherently unjustifiable.

@@mEtalec nah, we care about which Ethnicity ruled the territory the most amount of time, and georgia ruled the regions in Georgia longer than Armenia did, for example, we dont care If the Mongols had the Caucasus under theyre control for 50 years, we care who ruled the longets and who is native there, the reasoning u try to apply is bad

@@Niggexp38 It's debatable, but honestly, I won't delve into that.

Or Iran. Thank you for your kind words! I will look into Georgian-Armenian relations and see if it can become a video. I've always thought it was a shame relations aren't better than they are there.

It most certainly isn't! 💪

@@AkravHistory and even if I am part Azeri I still know the truth and I am not brainwashed. The Azeris of Azerbaijan who I have met on the internet think I have been brainwashed And side note, Azeris are an Iranian people who speak an Turkic languages because if you look in history you can find a people called old Azeris who spoke an Iranian language closely related to Kurdish and this language survived as Tat Tati and Talysh

@@qpdb840Azerbaijanis are a mix of Turkic, Iranian and even a little caucasian genetics, what they have in common is that a turkic language took over them and this turkic language also was spoken by other Turkic(recently or earlier) immigrated from central asia. South and North Azerbiajani even get seen as distinct languages by ISO, and north are a different ethnic group from north azerbaijanis, since theyre ethnic composition is quite different.

azerbaijan is Armenia

@@fahik not all of it, eastern parts belong to Iran, Tat Iranians of the Caucasus and Lezgians like Udi people(ancestors of caucasian albanians). While Azeris, or how I call them Shirvani Turks, or just Shirvanis(cuz theyre genetically more akin to Iranian), becuz they live in the shirvan region, also can be part of a republic made up by lezgians, Tats, the Shirvanis/North Azeris.

Their indoctrination runs deep, to a truly alarming degree. However, the realization of the truth will be profoundly devastating.

Unfortunately, this is true and our reality... But we keep going, right?😊

Thanks for tying to engage in these tough conversations. It's not easy to break through deeply ingrained views. We're up against heavy misinformation, so it's an uphill battle and keeping the discourse grounded in history is key.

@@AkravHistory for real for real, also I recommend a video about Armenian deportations and msscres excluding the acts made by the ottoman empire, like how timur klld so much of the population, or how Shah Abbas resettled 300.000 Armenians from Iranian Armenia into proper Iran.(Thats also why New Djulfa exists in Isfahan, and why Armenians were a minority in Iranian Armenia except Artsakh)

@@cheeesussswell well, we indeed do

It surely does not, thank you very much!

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲

Thanks for watching and the comment!

Thank you!!

Frfr, whats even funnier is that unlike Spain, Azerbaijan didnt even exist as a national identity of empire before 1918, so what Azerbaijan is doing is even worse

Well, your comparison with the Spaniards doesn't hold because the turkic tribesmen, who didn't have the ethnonym ‘azerbaijanis’ back then, didn't actually rule anything independently; they were subjects of the Persian sovereign.

@@mEtalec true, I should have said lived instead of ruled

Yes, and Spain actually ruled over Machu Picchu. Whereas this is about continuing a dark legacy against Armenians.

Oh yes, the "Western Azerbaijan" concept predates the 2020 war, but he did go crazy with it after 2020.

Thanks so much, glad you enjoyed it!

Thank you, glad you enjoyed it!

Welcome! Thank you!

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

You're very welcome, thank you!

Thanks so much!

Thank you very much!

Thank you! Cheers!

Thank you for watching, and sharing!

Hey! Dal-E generated the bases and I did some editing on most of them, mostly to work out kinks or just blend them in together. Thanks!

@@AkravHistory Dear Akrav thanks for replying my comment! I really like your content style and it's entertaining and educational , speaking of educational you are the only large enough education chanel to talk about the topics that are going on in present Caucasus as the history of this land of ours has real messy history with large protaganda (or misinformation ) spreading over it Also I really like this artstlye you made for yourself ,even if it's ai made it is broad enough and has enough human input into it that it doesn't make it robatic.Most of the time I am not a fond of ai art for the way it makes the art(mostly by stealing art from artists without crediting them)but you are an exception.

It's pretty fun to work with too!

Thanks! I've a few videos about the prehistory of Armenians, ie Hayasa-Azzi, Nairi, Urartu, etc.

Armenians aren't Aryans. Aryan refers to a specific branch of the Indo-European language family, the Indo Iranians.

@sakogekchyan7366 if you go back in history far enough, you will find we are part of the original Arians. I know we have crossed paths with sythians too. But what I'm intrested in is the religious practices of that time by our ancestors. I know the baccic and orphic traditions also impacted us. These were traditions deeply rooted in the use of drugs. I can't break it down here but dr ammon hillman explains it well as he is a trained philologist specializing in ancient Greek. So to be clear I'm looking for a religious/historical view of our past. Not just who conquered who, but what did the people then do? How was religion practiced? At what capacity? Did they worship trees? (Joke). I suspect if it was anything like it was everywhere else around the world at that time, I imagine our people were deeply rooted in drugs and sex. Here's a fun fact. The alabaster stone which is also an ointment box used for Anointing was really a stone dildo onto and into which viper venoms, and the bodily fluids were put , then inserted as a suppository to cause visions. Some drugs caused demonic hallucinations while others caused visions of god. In Mark 14, Jesus is caught with a naked young boy for which he gets arrested for. When he does, he tells the Roman's, don't treat me like a "pirates" in greek. The pirates were heavily involved in sex trafficking and child trafficking for the use of these people in mystical rites. That's why Jesus says that. Jesus got caught administering the ancient rites reluctantly because he was about to castrate that boy. How old do you think the apostles were? 35? Try teenagers. I'm not trying to bash Christianity, but rather I'm being real, looking at ancient sources in their original language as written. The reality is the ancient mystery was wide spread and im sure it impacted armenia. That is the context I seek.

I didn't forget. Armenians came from an amalgamation of those cultures, that's clear. But there is a line that when crossed those people would not themselves claim to be Armenian. I asked around in Armenian circles and it seemed to be Urartu is where answers get split, so I colored it a lighter blue and called it a day. I admit, the reality is more complicated than that.

Appreciate your insight btw!

@@AkravHistory well, Armenians didnt call themselves Armenians before the Satrapy of Armenia, they had various names for themselves before the satrapy of Armenia, but genetically and linguistically I would definetly put them in there(especially with the mew genetical evidence for the atmenian hypothesis): Recent studies have shown that Armenians are indigenous to the Armenian Highlands and form a distinct genetic isolate in the region.[5] Analyses of mitochondrial ancient DNA of skeletons from Armenia and Artsakh spanning 7,800 years, including DNA from Neolithic, Bronze Age, Urartian, classical and medieval Armenian skeletons,[6] have revealed that modern Armenians have the least genetic distance to them compared to neighboring peoples such as Turks and Azerbaijani Turks, but followed closely by Georgians. Armenians are also one of the genetic isolates of the Near East who share affinity with the Neolithic farmers who expanded into Europe beginning around 8,000 years ago. There are signs of considerable genetic admixture in Armenians between 3000 BC and 2000 BC but they subside to insignificant levels since 1200 BC, remaining stable until today. Analysis of ancient DNA edit In a study published in 2017,[6] the complete mitochondrial genomes of 52 ancient skeletons from present-day Armenia and Artsakh spanning 7,800 years were analyzed and combined with 206 mitochondrial genomes of modern Armenians and previously published data of seven neighboring populations (482 people).

@@AkravHistory Armenins had lots of names for themselves before the satrapy of Armenians, but genetically nothing really changed, I think just from that alone it makes sense to include it, just like Colchians didnt call themselves georgians, yet are still part of georgians history, but I can understand ur point of view too, both are reasonable frfr🥂

@@AkravHistory heres the study I base most on: Recent studies have shown that Armenians are indigenous to the Armenian Highlands and form a distinct genetic isolate in the region.[5] Analyses of mitochondrial ancient DNA of skeletons from Armenia and Artsakh spanning 7,800 years, including DNA from Neolithic, Bronze Age, Urartian, classical and medieval Armenian skeletons,[6] have revealed that modern Armenians have the least genetic distance to them compared to neighboring peoples such as Turks and Azerbaijani Turks, but followed closely by Georgians. Armenians are also one of the genetic isolates of the Near East who share affinity with the Neolithic farmers who expanded into Europe beginning around 8,000 years ago. There are signs of considerable genetic admixture in Armenians between 3000 BC and 2000 BC but they subside to insignificant levels since 1200 BC, remaining stable until today.

Thank you so much for the thoughtful comment! Indeed, combating Azerbaijani propaganda is a challenge.

Shnorhagalutyun 🙏

Apres sounds better than maladets...

Thanks for your comment and compliment!

First and foremost you're spewing some chauvinistic agenda here, Azerbaijanis have nothing to do with Armenians, Georgians or other people you've mentioned there genetically. You yourself should go and check what Azerbaijani people are autosomal DNA-wise. And yeah there is no Bakurakan as well.

Hey, thanks for the insightful comment! Regarding your first point, I was more focused on Yerevan's history, and perhaps I should have made that clearer. I have spoken about the Kingdom of Cilicia in my Armenian Dynasties video, and of course the Khamsa (Melikdoms of Artsakh) in my Artsakh video. And your second point is well received, I should have at least mentioned the Armenian deportations. I have made a note of it and will mention it the next opportunity I get. Thanks again!

Let me add, when Yerevan celebrated her 1000ths birthday, there still was no Azerbaijan

@@AkravHistory absolutely 👍

@@AkravHistory I don't want to appear like an Azerbaijan defender here, but if Armenians can claim Urartu, which obviously has nothing to do with later Armenian statehood nor is Urartian language the same as Armenian, why can't for example Azerbaijanis associate themselves with "Azerbayjan" mentioned in the works of Ibn Al-athir who calls modern day Dvin area (corresponding to modern day Armenia)? or the "Azerbaijan" of ahadeeth (orally transmitted stories of Prophet Muhammad's life) where it says that 3rd Caliph Uthman was having a war against people of Armenia and Azerbaijan?

@bagratcolchian3434 Thanks for your comment, it's a fair point! Well, for one, I'd say the transition of Urartians to Armenian is widely recognized as a formative period for Armenian identity. This continuity is supported by archaeological, linguistic, and historical evidence showing a seamless cultural evolution into what became the Armenian nation. This is fundamentally different than Azerbaijan's claims. There's no continuous Azerbaijani statehood or cultural identity in those regions. The term "Azerbaijan" historically referred to a region south of the Aras River, now in Iran.

@@bagratcolchian3434 just a let you know Azerbaijan became a county by Stalin in 1918 if you check old map there was no signs of Azerbaijan. Also Azerbaijan name became from Iran which is until today it’s called Adrbadakan that is also has Armenian history. To add this Urartu There is Armenian Urartian alphabet 1200-650 B.C You can find online.

Thank you so much!

Bravo kez axper!

Thank you for the kind words, they're very motivating!

Yes! Nice picture 😉

That's not a bad idea actually!

@@AkravHistorythanks you can include how old azeri language turkified by seljuks and other turks (there are so many sources show that old azeri was related to today’s kurdish talysh and zazaki languages) especially sheikh safi al ad din ardabili the creator of safavid dynasty spoke and write in old azeri and azeris are actually descendants of parthians and medes people because old azeri belongs to northwestern iranian language and arab historians and travellers said that tabrizis use a dialect of fahlavi/pahlavi(parthian language) as an azerbaijani from Baku i can say that you are 100% correct in ur videos i laugh when i see our textbooks or other things the name is persian city names are persian some traditions are persian we were part of persia until 1828 I am very upset to see that pan turks claim history of udi people(caucasian albanian kingdom) they say it was turkic but even the names of dynasties aren’t turkic like Mehranids or arsacids etc don’t know what to do or say 😂

Thank you!

w!

Right now, Armenia is an easy target. If Armenia is no longer an option, and Aliyev's need to score points at home, they'll start from Iran and move outwards gradually with their claims. My 2c!

@@AkravHistory you are right 👍. Unfortunately.

Ճիշտ

Aliyevin dandzinel ci ,vonc uzum anuma , HALALA✊✊✊✊😂😂😂

All of his crimes? I don't think KZfaq servers can handle a video that long!

@@AkravHistoryplease make video about real history of azeris and azerbaijan region

Cool

Azerbaijani historiography claims Armenians were never in the region, and I have debunked that in another video, as you pointed out. But it would be similarly obtuse to entirely deny that there were Turkic tribes living in the Khanate during Persian rule.

The flags weren't there, but the language was there.

@@AkravHistory language weren't there ether: Soviet made az"E"rbijan in 1920s who's roots trukish tribes have noting to do with Iranian az"A"rbijan who's roots is atrapaten

I understand that the name was manufactured from the region of Iran, I have mentioned this in previous videos. But are you claiming that Turkic tribes were not present in the region in the 1800s?

@@AkravHistory Turkic tribes that Soviet manufactured name az"E"rbaijan have nothing to do with atropatanians who live in Iran and know as az"A"rbaijan. The Iranian az"A"rbaijanian were living in Iran way before turkish tribes moved there. And this is exactly how a Turkish/SovietMade/azErbajianis leader by stilling Iranian/azArbajianian identity trying to present the world that they are owner of those land and ethnicly belongs to them. And you with lack of knowledge promothing Turkish/SovietMade/azErbajianis by presenting them as same as Iranian/azArbajianis..

They conquered the lands and now they exist there. What claim in the video is "fake history"?