Azerbaijani pundit invites Armenian scientists to Aghdam to see "ruins of Tigranakert"

Political scientist Fuad Akhundov invited Armenian historian, Doctor of Sciences Stepan Stepanyants to come to Aghdam and inspect the Shahbulag fortress in order to finally put an end to historical falsifications around the mythical "Tigranakert".

"Armenian historian, Doctor of Sciences Stepan Stepanyants has once again decided to "substantiate" the imaginary "rights" of Armenia to Karabakh, stating that, they say, there is a "Tigranakert" in Karabakh, but there is no "Alievabad". For which he received an ironic answer from the Armenian historian Philip Ekozyants that there is no "Kocharyankert" or "Sargsyankert" in Karabakh either.

It should be recalled that the Shahbulag fortress in the Aghdam region of Azerbaijan and the settlement located next to it were misrepresented as "Tigranakert". The fortress was built in the XVII century and cannot be considered "antique" in any way, a slightly altered Muslim bathhouse was passed off as remnants of an ancient Armenian church; historical traces of later and purely Muslim buildings were also tried to pass off as 'ancient Armenian fortress'," Akhundov told Report agency analyzing the "arguments" of Armenian scientist.

"First of all, if we analyze the Armenian sources, it becomes clear: what was excavated on the bank of the river Hachinchay is the fourth "Tigranakert" discovered on the territory of Asia Minor and the South Caucasus. Each of these cities, logically, was the capital of Greater Armenia. But how could it be that Tigranes, even the Great, built four cities during his reign? Building a city is a huge task, which requires a country to put much effort, resources, and money. Suffice it to recall Peter the Great and the construction of St. Petersburg. So, King Tigranes, whose power is far from Peter's, built four "Tigranakert"? And the information about them can be found only in Armenian sources?" Akhundov noted.

The political scientist also wonders why information about different "Tigranakerts" appears out of nowhere at the very time when the territories where they are "discovered" happen to be at the center of political storms.

"Tigranakert" at the place of today's Diyarbakir was found, for example, on the eve of the First World War and the plans to "form" "Western Armenia" on the territory of six vilayets of Turkish Eastern Anatolia. "Tigranakert" in the occupied Azerbaijani Aghdam as if by magic was discovered at a time when Armenia was required by the UN Security Council resolutions to withdraw its troops from there. Is it such a coincidence?" the political pundit said.

He notes that Armenian sources even found khachkars in the "ancient settlement" in Aghdam, while these cross-stones belong to the Christian era.

"Another ambiguity. Armenian historians, whom Philip Ekozyants calls "vardapets," prove as if they dug up an "ancient settlement" in Aghdam. This version, referring to Armenian sources, is presented, in particular, by RBC. But a khachkar was found in this "ancient settlement." How should this be understood? Cross-stones, even according to the Armenian version, are related to the Christian tradition and could not appear before the III century AD. How did the khachkar end up in the "ancient settlement"? Finally, where is the reliable information about "Tigranakert" in the territory of the Karabakh Khanate in non-Armenian primary sources? Excuse me, but modern video blogs or the "Maps of Greater Armenia" posted on social networks, where the Mingachevir reservoir, built in the fifties of the twentieth century, is found, cannot be accepted as evidence," Akhundov stressed.

"We are well aware that a correspondence video discussion on YouTube is not the best way to go about it. Therefore, we officially invite Mr. Stepanyants and his colleagues to visit the Aghdam region of Azerbaijan and the fortress of Shahbulag, which is called "Tigranakert" in the Armenian scientific community, the settlement located nearby, etc. Of course, the Azerbaijani side undertakes the solution of all financial issues, organization of the trip, and security, including demining," the political scientist said.

He stressed that there are generally accepted ways of dating historical buildings in the world, which take into account the technology of construction, stone processing, mortar, which fastens the stones, masonry technology, etc.

"Finally, there are "national peculiarities" of architecture, which allow us to answer quite accurately the question of whether this or that fortress was built by the Mamluks, the Seljuks, the Crusaders, or anyone else. We are sure that Stepan Stepanyants, Doctor of Historical Sciences, knows these obvious truths. And he will not try to engage in hoaxes, as they do with the tourists in the capital of Armenia, showing them a twentieth-century remake under the guise of 'Erebuni Fortress,'" said Akhundov.

"Armenia should know how heavy the price of "fakes" with a subtext in the form of claims to foreign lands can be. The audience of both countries well remembers how in the hard days for Armenia, without any irony, after the defeat in the 44-day war, the spokesman of Armenia's Defenсe Ministry Artsrun Hovhannisyan was beaten up in Yerevan airport - for all his statements like "we broke the back of the Azerbaijani army", "I am in Hadrut now, and there are no Azerbaijanis here", etc. But it seems to us that it's better not to "confuse the minds" of its citizens with dangerous "fakes", otherwise someone will again get paid for their consequences," the political scientist recalled.

"And most importantly, we consider it our duty to remind Mr. Stepanyants that no historical facts, even perfectly proven, can be the basis for a forceful redrawing of internationally recognized borders. The evidence on the world map is abundant - from Cologne, founded by the Romans, which is part of Germany, not Italy, to Spain, where there are many traces of the Caliphate of Cordoba. Not to mention Alsace and Lorraine, South Tyrol, and many more territories that have changed hands repeatedly in recent centuries.

The story of "Tigranakert" suddenly "unearthed" in all senses in the Aghdam region of Azerbaijan is not impeccably proven, it is not even a coherent historical fact. I remember well how an Armenian professor wondered in an interview with an Armenian journalist: why did they say it was Tigranakert because no evidence was presented? In a word, Mr. Stepanyants, I invite you and your fellow Armenian scientists to come and look at these so-called ruins of Tigranakert and then answer one simple question: whether these ruins can be referred to as constructions of ancient times. I am sure that despite the pressure that any more or less unbiased scientist is experiencing in Armenia, you will not be afraid to admit the fact, no matter how it contradicts the postulates accepted in Armenia," the political scientist concluded.