Leadership and Nationalism in Azerbaijan: Ali Mardan Bey Topchibashov, Founder and Creator 1138352772, 9781138352773

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Series
Title
Copyright
Contents
Prologue
List of illustrations
Introduction
1 The start of a long road: from Tiflis to St. Petersburg
2 The capital of an oil kingdom: on the eve of great events
3 The year 1905: Baku on fire
4 Leader of the Muslim peoples of the Russian Empire
5 Living history between two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)
6 A heavy burden on the eve of independence
7 The Istanbul mission of the extraordinary and plenipotentiary minister
8 Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul (January–April 1919)
9 The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris
10 Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence by the Versailles Supreme Council
11 The active struggle for restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence (1920–1923)
12 The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)
Conclusion: in the memory of descendants
Abbreviations
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

Leadership and Nationalism in Azerbaijan

Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov was a prominent politician who played a crucial role in the history of Azerbaijan. One of the most striking personalities in the history of Azerbaijan, the founder of liberal ideas, and the first President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, he led the Muslim faction in the first Russian Duma and the Union of Muslims of Russia and was a central figure of the Caucasian émigrés in Europe. This book analyzes and presents the lives of the first independent Azerbaijani political leaders. Based on extensive research from archives in Azerbaijan, France, Georgia, Russia (Moscow and Kazan), and the UK, some of which is newly accessible, the book traces the political personality of Topchibashov, one of the most important Muslim leaders and founder of the Azerbaijan Republic. At the same time, it offers insights into the history of the formation and creation of the national consciousness of the Russian Muslims and tracks the challenges in the national and religious policies of the Imperial administration of the Soviet Union. The author sheds light on the significant problems of the Russian Empire (nationalities specifically) and global movements such as the post–World War I  settlement and the difficulties of the many non-Russian groups that declared independence after the Bolshevik rise in power. Filling a lacuna in modern Azerbaijan history, this book will be of interest to academics working on Russian, Soviet, South Caucasus, and Central Asia history, in particular the Russian Empire, Muslim nations, and nationalism in Central Asia and the Caucasus. Jamil Hasanli is an Azerbaijan historian and was a visiting professor at East China Normal University in Shanghai from 2016 to 2017. Previously he taught at Baku State University and served two terms as a member of Azerbaijan’s Parliament. He has published numerous books and articles, including Foreign Policy of the Republic of Azerbaijan (Routledge, 2016).

Routledge Studies in the History of Russia and Eastern Europe

The Warsaw Pact Reconsidered International Relations in Eastern Europe, 1955–1969 Laurien Crump Reassessing Orientalism Interlocking Orientologies during the Cold War Edited by Michael Kemper and Artemy M. Kalinovsky Governing Post-Imperial Siberia and Mongolia, 1911–1924 Buddhism, Socialism, and Nationalism in State and Autonomy Building Ivan Sablin Creating Nationality in Central Europe, 1880–1950 Modernity, Violence and (Be) Longing in Upper Silesia Edited by James Bjork, Tomasz Kamusella, Timothy Wilson, and Anna Novikov The Russian Liberals and the Revolution of 1905 Peter Enticott The Politics of Culture in Soviet Azerbaijan, 1920–40 Audrey L. Altstadt Women’s Experiences of Repression in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe Kelly Hignett, Melanie Ilic, Dalia Leinarte and Corina Snitar Leadership and Nationalism in Azerbaijan Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, Founder and Creator Jamil Hasanli For a full list of available titles please visit: www.routledge.com/RoutledgeStudies-in-the-History-of-Russia-and-Eastern-Europe/book-series/SE0329

Leadership and Nationalism in Azerbaijan Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, Founder and Creator Jamil Hasanli

First published 2019 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2019 Jamil Hasanli The right of Jamil Hasanli to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978-1-138-35277-3 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-429-43456-3 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Apex CoVantage, LLC

Contents

Prologuevii List of illustrationsx

Introduction

  1 The start of a long road: from Tiflis to St. Petersburg

1 8

  2 The capital of an oil kingdom: on the eve of great events

19

  3 The year 1905: Baku on fire

31

  4 Leader of the Muslim peoples of the Russian Empire

46

  5 Living history between two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)

62

  6 A heavy burden on the eve of independence

88

  7 The Istanbul mission of the extraordinary and plenipotentiary minister

109

  8 Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul (January–April 1919)

123

  9 The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris

139

10 Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence by the Versailles Supreme Council

159

11 The active struggle for restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence (1920–1923)

178

vi  Contents

12 The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)

199



Conclusion: in the memory of descendants

222

Abbreviations Bibliography Index

226 229 241

Prologue

As the Western leaders gathered for the peace conference in Paris in 1919, most of them, their staffs, and the populations they represented were overwhelmed by the destruction of the war just ended. Even Paris, which was by no means hardest hit, showed the marks of war “refugees . . . piles of rubble. . . . A gaping crater marked the Tuileries rose garden.”1 The Entente leaders intended to lay blame on the defeated, especially Germany, to punish and to extract land and reparations. Physically and spiritually this ruined world would be T.S. Eliot’s “Wasteland,” inhabited by “hollow men,” and Gertrude Stein’s “lost generation.” Paradoxically, Paris in 1919 was also a place of opportunity. Alone among the major leaders, Woodrow Wilson envisaged a new world order arising from the ashes. The centerpiece of Wilson’s vision was a League of Nations that would resolve conflicts and make war obsolete. The prospect buoyed the US president and gave hope to survivors of the war who were striving to create new nationstates for their people. Into this atmosphere came delegations from fragments of old empires, still inchoate or recently formed states crafted for their nations based on historic claims, demography, and economic need. One of these delegations came from the Republic of Azerbaijan, an oil-rich remnant of the Russian Empire at the crossroads of Europe and the Middle East. Azerbaijan lay along the border of Iran and the now-disintegrated Ottoman and Russian Empires. After the Bolsheviks’ separate peace treaty with Germany at Brest-Litovsk in March 1918, anti-Bolshevik or “White” forces fought to unseat this new regime. Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin had promised the non-Russian populations the right of self-determination, and in the spring of 1918 leaders of many national movements declared independence. In May, under pressure from Germany and its Ottoman ally, the major peoples of the Caucasus – Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan – formed republics on the basis of their history, language, religion, folklore, music, and other cultural components defined and refined in vibrant national movements of the nineteenth century. Azerbaijan had forged a national program whose intellectual leaders now headed the republic and comprised the Peace Delegation to Paris. The life of Ali Mardan Bey Topchibashov who is the subject of this unique book by Azerbaijani historian Jamil Hasanli, offers a window into the national movement of

viii  Prologue the Azerbaijanis, a Muslim and Turkic people of the south Caucasus. As a cultural and political leader who worked with like-minded reformers, Topchibashov shaped the emerging Azerbaijani press, the reform of education, and the struggle for female equality starting with access to schools and ending with women’s enfranchisement in the republic’s constitution. He participated in the establishment of democratic governance in the Baku City Council and then the Russian imperial State Duma after the 1905 Revolution. With the creation of the Azerbaijan Republic in 1918, he became the head of its parliament and then the head of its peace delegation to Paris. The peace conference became the central event in the lives of the Azerbaijani representatives not because their own national movement was heading toward independence, in fact the leaders fought only for autonomy within the empire, but because the peace conference pulled them into an international context. In Paris, recognition of new states had less to do with the merits of their delegations’ arguments, and much more to do with the Entente leaders’ own national interests or, in the case of former Russian lands, their views of the Bolsheviks. Hasanli shows us that Topchibashov understood this well. The British cared very much about Baku oil and the approaches to India while France looked ahead to post-turmoil Russia as a future counterweight to a revived Germany. Western views of the Bolsheviks grew more negative with the flow of rhetoric and policies from Moscow and the actions of the Red Army. For Azerbaijan and its neighbors, as for other parts of Europe, new states could form because their neighbors were too weak and too busy with internal turmoil to retake them. Once the former overlords recovered – as we know from the familiar case of Hitler’s Germany seizing Sudetenland, then all of Czechoslovakia – the independence of these states ended. Azerbaijan was the first of the states in the Caucasus to fall to the Red Army in April 1920. The Bolsheviks needed Baku oil and the communist leadership hoped to spread its revolution to the Middle East. The Bolshevik overthrow of Azerbaijan’s republican government stranded the peace delegation in Paris. Without a government, the Azerbaijani delegation struggled to carry out its mission of getting diplomatic recognition. As its neighbors were similarly taken down by Bolshevik forces, the delegations formed partnerships to fight recognition of Soviet Russia and the sovietization of their countries. They quickly joined clandestine anti-Bolshevik efforts. Perhaps predictably, all of them fell victim to the political needs of larger states, most decisively the 1934 French-Soviet rapprochement in the wake of Hitler’s accession to power in Germany. Topchibashi died later that same year. Jamil Hasanli makes use of materials in several languages  – hard-to-obtain journals and newspapers, publications of the Azerbaijani peace delegation, memoirs, and a wealth of archival materials in Azerbaijan, Russia, France. He provides such a comprehensive and detailed picture that readers may well feel like they themselves have been in the archives. Moreover, Hasanli situates his subject, the people and their ideas, in the context of their time, from struggles of the Muslims of the Russian Empire to Topchibashi’s delegation navigating the waters of postwar politics. The result is a deep dive into an aspiring national community

Prologue ix that formed a state out of one war only to lose its independence to the Bolshevik steamroller. A new Azerbaijan Republic would reemerge again after the Soviet collapse, and Hasanli himself was active in the independence movement. Azerbaijan’s natural wealth and strategic global position are as relevant today as they were when a tiny delegation of educated and secular leaders presented the case for recognition to the victorious Entente a century ago. Audrey L. Altstadt

Note 1 Margaret MacMillan, Paris 1919; Six Months That Changed the World. New York: ­Random House, p. 26.

Figures

1.1 Ismail bey Gasprinskii, Hasan bey Zardabi, and Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, 1894. 3.1 Participants of the first all-Russian Congress of Muslims on board the Gustav Struve. On deck, from left: Fatih Kerimov, Gabdrashid Ibrahimov, Isamail bey Gasprinskii, and Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov. Nizhnii Novgorod, August 1905. 4.1 Member of the Russian State Duma I of Baku province: Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov. St. Petersburg 1906. 5.1 Ismail bey Gasprinskii and Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, 1908. 5.2 Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov with family members and relatives. Sitting second from the right: Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, third Peri khanym Topchibashova, on hands Peri khanym Enver bey, standing second from the left Alekber bey, third Sara khanym, sitting in front from the left Rashid bey and Sever khanym, 1912. 10.1 The delegation of the Republic of Azerbaijan at the Paris Peace Conference (Hotel Claridge). From left to right: Abbas bey Atamalybeyov, Mahammad Maharramov, Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, Akber agha Sheikhulislamov, Jeyhun bey Hajibeyli, and Mir Yagub Mirmehtiev. Paris 1919. 11.1 Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov in his office in Paris, 1920. 12.1 Mahammad Emin Rasulzade utters farewell speech at the funeral of Ali Mardan Topchibashov in the cemetery of the Western Paris suburb of Saint-Cloud. November 1934.

15

40 51 65

83

161 182 216

Introduction

Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov is one of the most striking personalities in the ­history of Azerbaijan. In the 1880s he graduated from the Tiflis gymnasium and entered St. Petersburg Imperial University, considered the most advanced educational institution in the Russian Empire at the time. He then became a respected politician in Russia. During various periods of his life he was the leader of ­Russian Turks, of all Muslim nations of the empire, and of Caucasian emigrants. M ­ ahammad Emin Rasulzade noted that Topchibashov devoted at least fifty years of his life to the people.1 After beginning his labor activity in Tiflis, Ali Mardan bey soon left for Baku, which had become a center of the global oil industry. During these years Azerbaijan’s fate and history took a radical turn as the cultural-educational ideas of Mirza Fatali Akhundov and Hasan bey Zardabi took on more nationalistic and political meaning. The whole world was entering an age of nationalism. Azerbaijani enlighteners moved from the centuries-old paradigm of an Asian community toward the nationalist thinking of the new century, including a transition from Eastern spiritual schools to secular education. Ali bey Huseynzade, Ahmed bey Aghayev (Agaoglu), and Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, who were inspired by the great enlighteners, carried the burden of transition from a community to a nation on their shoulders. After receiving an excellent legal education, Ali Mardan bey headed the growing nationalist movement among Caucasian and Russian Muslims at the turn of the twentieth century. He became the leader of the Muslim nations of the Russian Empire, organized them into a single political force, and brought national memory and self-consciousness back to Turks scattered all over the huge empire. The first Russian revolution (1905–1907) led Ali Mardan bey onto the political scene of the empire as the key champion of national rights and an ardent supporter of liberal values. He played a role in major events not only in Baku but also in Ganja, Tiflis, the Northern Caucasus, St. Petersburg, and the Volga region, constantly adding a national element to the Muslim movement. As the creator of the Union of Muslims of Russia and head of the Muslim faction of the first State Duma Committee, Ali Mardan bey was at the heart of political processes, writing policy documents and the texts of bills submitted to the Duma. His legal activity remains a vital aspect of Azerbaijani parliamentary history.

2  Introduction Ali Mardan bey believed that the triumph of liberal values would lead to freedom for Russia’s Muslims and their becoming citizens of the empire with full rights. During the first Russian revolution these values brought the Muslim faction closer to the People’s Freedom Party, better known as the Party of Cadets (Constitutional Democrats). In his memoirs Pavel Miliukov, one of most prominent Russian politicians of the time, recalls the name of Ali Mardan bey with great respect, though their opinions on the rights of the empire’s Muslim nations did not coincide. Miliukov evoked the memory of Topchibashov as a prominent representative of nations of the Russian Empire who later led the Azerbaijani state in the Central Committee of the People’s Freedom Party.2 Cooperation with that party strengthened Ali Mardan bey’s belief in liberal values and added a practical element to his efforts at reform. In this sense he can be regarded as one of the founders of Azerbaijani liberalism. The 1907 reaction to reforms in Russia put an end to many political careers. Most politicians who had been at the forefront of the revolutionary movement were unable to withstand the counterattack by conservatives. Some fled abroad, while others cooperated with authorities, lived within a family circle, or committed suicide. Although the period from 1907 to 1917 is viewed as a lull in the political life of Russia, Ali Mardan bey’s life offers a striking example of active struggle. While many of his former associates left Russia, he continued to fight autocracy, serving his time at Kresty Prison. Ali Mardan bey’s activity covered a wide territory; Russian Muslims in the Caucasus and Urals, in Crimea’s gardens, along the Volga River, and in Kazan, Siberia, Astrakhan, and the Turkmen steppes viewed him as their hope. He chaired a Congress of Muslims in St. Petersburg in June 1914, drafted a reform of the religious institutions of Russian Muslims as well as the system of schools and spiritual schools, and called for introduction of the zemstvo as a self-governing body in the Caucasus. The beginning of World War I marked a period of difficult new tests for Muslims of the Russian Empire, torn by contradictory feelings: their civil responsibility in regard to the empire and their religious-ethnical sympathies for Ottoman Turks on the other side of the trenches. Ali Mardan bey felt that the war might accelerate the realization of the hopes of Russia’s non-Christians for freedom, including Southern Caucasian Muslims. But regional Muslims support for Turkey brought hardships. The Russian Army included Armenian detachments, which committed acts of banditry and atrocity. In 1915 Ali Mardan bey went to Kars, Batum, and Ajaria as a lawyer to investigate the violence and looting against Muslims. His memorandum submitted to the Caucasian deputy led to the establishment of a special commission to investigate these crimes. Through his attempts to defend the rights of the Muslim population, Ali Mardan bey himself fell under suspicion. A secret police report of 1916 viewed him as the chief pan-Islamist of Azerbaijan. Ali Mardan bey was a tireless propagandist of the unity and solidarity of the Caucasus nations. During the first Russian revolution the Caucasus was full of interethnic conflicts that left an indelible trace in his soul. As a public figure propagating liberal concepts, he tried to find a way out of the situation. Ali Mardan bey promoted friendship between Georgians and Azerbaijanis. His words “Live and

Introduction  3 let live” at the grave of the great Georgian poet Akakiy Tsereteli in January 1915 became a kind of national security concept to which he remained devoted until the end of his life. Ali Mardan bey strongly opposed dividing Islam into separate sects. He understood that it was essential to rely on the fundamental principles of Islam. From the first Muslim congresses in the early twentieth century to his last days, he believed that the strength of Islam was not division into different sects but unity of the faith. The Baku Congress of Caucasian Muslims chaired by Ali Mardan bey and the Moscow Congress of Russian Muslims outlined the concept of development from an Asian community to a nation. Ali Mardan bey was the lead initiator of Islamic reformism among Russian Muslims. From the August 1905 congress in Nizhnii Novgorod to the May 1917 Moscow Fifth Muslim Congress, he remained an ardent supporter of reform of Islam and promoter of the concept of Islamic modernism. Through this tireless nationwide struggle, Ali Mardan bey stood out among the builders of an independent Azerbaijan. He was elected the first head of the Azerbaijani parliament, led the peace delegation in Paris, and earned international recognition for his country at Versailles.3 He was the first Azerbaijani political leader received by US president Woodrow Wilson. After the Bolsheviks overthrew the legal government of Russia in April 1920, Ali Mardan bey remained at the forefront of the hard struggle for Azerbaijan’s independence until his final days, adding his name to the chronicle of national revival. As the national movement expanded in the 1980s–1990s in the process of restoring Azerbaijan’s independence, interest in Topchibashov and his mission in history have increased. Documents and materials on his private and public correspondence, his diplomatic efforts, and his life have been published, adding to his political portrait.4 Two almanacs of documents published in 2012 by Dr. Salavat Iskhakov, a prolific Russian researcher, are particularly important. His introductions, comments, and analysis have clarified a number of circumstances.5 Scholars displayed interest in the personality of Topchibashov when he was still alive. A series of books, articles, and other works published early in the twentieth century reflected elements of his remarkable activities, confirming his leadership in the Russian-Muslim movement.6 Of particular interest is a long article by G. Alisov (a pseudonym) titled “The Muslim Issue in Russia,” published in the magazine Russkaia Mysl’ in 1909. The author is probably Ismayil bey Gasprinskii who analyzed the development of the Muslim movement in Russia with great professionalism and underscored the role of Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov. The article touches upon private corners of Ali Mardan bey’s life that only Gasprinskii, who was close to him and was proud of his crucial role, could know. During the 1920s–1930s, after the Bolsheviks occupied Azerbaijan, Topchibashov became a target of Soviet ideology. Some publications discussed his activity after the February 1917 revolution, his diplomatic efforts at the Versailles Conference, and some of his letters from abroad, although with some misinterpretations. The authors of such publications were among the earliest victims of the 1930s repressions.7

4  Introduction The first serious efforts to study the liberal movement at the beginning of the twentieth century were made in the 1970s. Dr. Dilara Seidzade made a successful start and put subsequent works on the right path. Her scientific monograph on the Azerbaijani members of the Russian State Duma Committee covered the most striking period of Ali Mardan bey’s political struggle.8 The breakdown of the Soviet Union and the subsequent independence of the Azerbaijan Republic made it possible to address the national heritage by studying the careers of early ­twentieth-century political figures. These studies reflect some aspects of Topchibashov’s political and public activities.9 Fascinating works devoted to the Muslim movement, the Muslim faction of the State Duma, and Muslim congresses as well as works by foreign authors translated into Russian published recently examine the activities of Ali Mardan bey. His position at the forefront of the Russian-Muslim movement is beyond dispute.10 Historical research published in Turkey and in some Western countries also examines his contributions. These publications cover certain periods of life and activity of Topchibashov.11 A  noteworthy work by Dr. Vugar Imanov was published by Istanbul Bogazichi Universiteti in 2003. Although it contains some inaccuracies in regard to historical events and biographical data and some unreliable opinions, it can be regarded as the first major monograph on Topchibashov. Dozens of publications on the history of the Muslim movement in the former Russian Empire and Muslim leaders’ lives and activities have appeared since the fall of the Soviet Union, in which Topchibashov is a major figure. The four volumes printed in Moscow in 2016–2018 based on Topchibashov’s Paris archives and supplemented by the Georgian historian Dr. George Mamoulia’s detailed foreword are a major contribution to study of Topchibashov’s efforts at the Paris Peace Conference and aspects of his life in exile.12 According to Mamoulia, the scientific study of these documents and materials answers a number of fundamental questions in the historiography of Azerbaijan as well as other Caucasian states.13 The series of articles “Russia and World War I,” published by the Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 2014 and partly devoted to the Caucasus and Azerbaijan, also covers various aspects of Topchibashov’s life and political activity, emphasizing his diplomatic practice.14 These collected papers compare the activities of Muslim representatives (Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, Haydar Bammatov, Abdul-Mejid Chermoyev, Sadri Maksudov, Gaiaz Iskhakov, Mustafa Chokayev, Ibrahim Heydarov, and others) at the Paris Peace Conference and in various European countries.15 “The Asian Russia Revolt in 1916,” prepared by the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences and devoted to the political life of Russian Muslims, presents interesting information on the struggle of Turkestan’s Muslims. It examines the activities of politicians such as Ali khan Bukeikhanov (leader of Muslims in Turkestan), Muhamedjanov Tynyshpayev and Mustafa Chokayev (organizers of an anti-Russian revolt in Semirechie in 1916), and others. Topchibashov criticized the discrimination policy against Muslims in Turkestan during the Duma elections and put forward his positions on social conditions, ethnic identity issues, and modernization of madrasah education.16 This study contains all newly obtained information on Topchibashov’s legacy. He was nominated as a Duma deputy by both Caucasian

Introduction  5 and Turkestani Muslims in 1917. A joint article by Kyrgyz researcher Chynara Israilova-Khar’ekhuzen and Russian historian Tatiana Kotiukova in this collection confirms that the Union of Russian Muslims headed by Topchibashov was close to the party of Constitutional Democrats but nevertheless reflected purely Muslim demands and expectations.17 Approximately twenty years ago French historian Dr. Vincent Furnieau addressed some questions emerging in the study of Topchibashov’s life and activity. I have utilized archives in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Istanbul, Paris, and London, the Hoover Institute Library at Stanford University, and hundreds of documents and materials now in the collections of private individuals to reconstruct the majestic picture of Topchibashov’s struggle, including the period between the 1905 and 1917 revolutions, the movement for independence from 1918 to 1920, and his life in exile from 1920 to 1934. This book provides a broad view of his activity for fifty years. My research has included materials and documents from the Political Archive of the German Foreign Ministry; State Archive of the Azerbaijan Republic; Historical Archive of the Azerbaijan Republic; State Literature and Art Archive of Azerbaijan; Archive of the Political Documents under the Executive Office of the President of the Azerbaijan Republic; Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov Archive at the Paris Institute for Russia, the Caucasus, and Eastern Europe; St. Petersburg Central Historical Archive; Russian State Historical Archive; Russian State Archive of Social and Political History; State Archive of the Russian Federation; Russian State Military-Historical Archive; National Archive of the Republic of Tatarstan; Diplomatic Archive of the Foreign Ministry of France; National Archives and Records Administration of the United States; Archive of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia; and other centers of documentation. Most of the documents pertaining to Ali Mardan bey now stored at the State Archive of the Azerbaijan Republic and the State Literature and Art Archive of Azerbaijan have been examined by Ramiz Abutalybov at various times. It is noteworthy that Topchibashov’s granddaughter, Zarifa-khanym Kurdamir-Topchibashi, contributed some valuable documents to the Azerbaijan Republic at the end of the last century. Those materials relating to the fifty-year history of Azerbaijan that she sent through Ramiz Abutalybov played an invaluable role in the making of this monograph. I am far from thinking that I  could comprehensively reflect Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov’s life, multifaceted struggle, and unprecedented role in the fate of Russian Muslims in this work. Nevertheless, it is satisfying to attempt to describe the life of this politician through archival materials and published references. It is up to the reader to judge whether this attempt is a success.

Notes 1 Kurtuluş, December, 1934, # 2, 35. 2 See: Pavel Miliukov, Vospominania. Moscow: Politizdat, 1991, 325. 3 See: Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference. 1919, vol. IX. 4 See: Ali Mardan-bek Topchibashi. Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 1. 1919–1923: Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 2. 1921–1923.

6  Introduction 5 Ali Mardan-bek. Topchibashev. Diplomaticheskie besedy v Stambule. Baku: Ėrgiun, 1994; Ali Mardan-bek. Topchibashev, Pis’ma iz Parizha. Baku: Azerneşr, 1998; Azerbaidzhanskaia Demokraticheskaia Respublika (1918–1920 gg.). Vneshniaia politika Dokumenty i materialy. Baku: Azerbaycan, 1998; Iz istorii azerbaidzhanskoi emigratsii. Sbornik dokumentov, proizvedenii i pisem. Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2011; A.M. Topchibashi i M.E. Rasulzade: Perepiska 1923–1926 gg. ­Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2012; A.M. Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov. 1903–1934 gg. Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2012. 6 G. Alisov, Musul’manskii vopros v Rossii, Russkaia mysl’, Vol. 7, 1909, 28–61; Tretii Vserissiiskii musul’manskii s’ezd: Postanovlenia III Vserossiiskogo musul’manskogo s’ezda v Nizhnem Novgorode. 16–21 avgusta 1906 g. Kazan’, Tang ioldyzy, 1906; Topchibashev, Musul’manskaia parlamentsaia fraktsia. Baku: Kaspii, 1907; Мusa Bigiyev (Bigi), Osnovy Reformy. Petrograd: Tipografiia M.A. Maksudova, 1917. 7 Galimdzhan Ibragimov, Tatary v revolutsii 1905 goda. Translated from Tatar by G. Mukhamedovoi. Edited by G.F. Linstser. Kazan: Gosizdat TSSR, 1926; Aleksandr Raevskii, Angliiskaia interventsia i musavatskoe pravitel’stvo. K istorii interventsii i kontrrevoliutsii v Zakavkaz’e. Baku: Azguz, 1927; Aleksandr Raevskii, Musavatskoe pravitel’stvo na Versal’skoi konferentsii. Donesenia predstavitelei azerbaidzhanskoi musavatskoi delegatsii. Baku: AzGNII, 1930; Iakov Ratgauzer, Bor’ba za Sovetskii Azerbaidzhan. Baku: AzGNII, 1929; Iakov Ratgauzer, Revoliutsia i grazhdanskaia voina v Baku. Vol. 1. 1917–1918. Baku: AzGNII, 1927; Arshaluis Arsharuni and Khadji Gabidullin, Ocherki panislamizma i patiurkizma v Rossii. Riazan’: Izdatel’stvo “Bezbozhnik,” 1931. 8 Diliara Seidzade, Iz istorii azerbaidzhanskoi burzhuazii v nachale XX veka. Baku: Ėlm, 1978; Diliara Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii. Baku: Azerneşr, 1991; Azerbaidzhan v nachale XX veka: puti, veduschie k nezavisimosti. Baku: [s.n.], 2004. 9 Khagani Mammadov, Azərbaycan milli hərəkatı (1875–1918-ci illər). Baku: Sabah, 1996; Böyük diplomat və görkəmli dövlət xadimi. Ə.B.Topçubaşovun anadan olmasının 135 illiyinə həsr edilmiş elmi-nəzəri konfransın materialları. Baku: ADK, 1998; Sevda Süleymanova, Azerbaycanda ictimai-siyasi herekat (XIX yüzilliyin sonuXX yüzilliyin evvelleri). Baku: Azerbaycan Dövlet Kitab Palatası, 1999; Irada Bagirova, Politicheskie partii i organizatsii Azerbaidzhana v nachale XX veka. 1900–1917. Baku: Ėlm, 1997; Afet Safarova, Ideia Kavkazskoi Konfederatsii v emigrantskii period politicheskoi deiatel’nosti A.M. Topchibasheva. Izvestia National’noi Akademii nauk Azerbaidzhana: Seria istorii, philosphii i prava. 2001, 3; Afet Safarova, Politiko-­ diplomaticheskaia deiatel’nost’ Ali Mardan beka Topchibasheva. Dissertatsia na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni kandidata politicheskikh nauk. Baku, 2007; Ramiz Abutalybov, Gody i vstrechi v Parizhe. Moscow: SJS Media, 2007. 10 Adile Aida, Sadri Maksudi Arsal. Per. s tur. V.V. Feonovoi. Nauch.red., prim., posleslovie Salavat Iskhakova. Moscow: B.I., 1996; Musul’manskie deputaty gosudarstvennoi Dumy Rossii. 1906–1917 gg. Sbornik dokumentov i materialov. Compiled by L.A. Iamaeva. Ufa: Kitap, 1998; Larisa Iamaeva, Musul’manskii liberalism nachala XX veka kak obschestvenno-politicheskoe dvizhenie (Po materialam Ufimskoi i Orenburgskoi gubernii). Ufa: Gilem, 2002; Diliara Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v rossiiskom parlamente. 1906–1916. Kazan’: Fen AN RT, 2005; Vserossiiskie musul’manskie s’ezdy 1905–1906 gg. Nizhnii Novgorod: NIM “Makhinur,” 2005; Forumy rossiiskikh musul’man na poroge novogo tysiacheletiia. Edited by D.V. Mukhetdinov. Nizhnii Novgorod: Makhnur, 2006; Ol’ga Seniutkina, Tiurkizm kak istoricheskoie iavlenie (na materialakh istorii Rossiiskoi imperii 1905–1916 gg.). Nizhnii Novgorod: Medina, 2007; Al’mira Tagirdzhanova, Kniga o Muse-efendi, i ego vremeni i sovremennikakh. Kazan’: B.I., 2010. 11 Vinsent Fourniau, Ali Mardan Toptchibachi: Deux Langues, Trois Pays, Pour Quelle Societe Plurielle?; Сemil Hasanlı (Jamil Hasanli), Rusiya Turklerinin Lideri A.M. Topçubaşi. Turk Dunyası Araştırmaları, 2000, # 127, 139–155; Vügar Imanov,

Introduction  7

12

13 14 15

16 17

Ali Merdan Topçubaşi. (1865–1934). Lider Bir Aydın ve Bağımsız Azerbaycan Cumhuriyeti’nin Temsili. Istanbul: Boğaziçi Universitesi Yayınevi, 2003; George Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals. Le cas de la Georgie (1921–1945). Paris: L’Harmattan, 2009; Zurab Avalov, Nezavisimost’ Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoi politike, 1918–1921. Paris: Impr. de Navarre, 1924. Ali Mardan-bek Topchibashi, Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 1. 1919–1921. Compiled, translated, and introduced by Georgii Mamoulia and Ramiz Abutalybov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 2016; ———, Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 2. 1921–1923. Compiled, translated, and introduced by Georgii Mamoulia and Ramiz Abutalybov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 2016; ———, Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 3. 1924–1930. Compiled, translated, and introduced by Georgii Mamoulia and Ramiz Abutalybov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 2017; ———, Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 4. 1931–1940. Compiled, translated, and introduced by Georgii Mamoulia and Ramiz butalybov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 2018. Topchibashi, Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 1. 1919–1921, 166. Rossiia i Pervvaia mirovaia voina: ėkonomicheskie problemy, obshchestvennye nastroeniia, mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia. Collected papers. Executive editor Iu. A. Petrov. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo “Institut rossiiskoi istorii RAN,” 2014, 361–382. Salavat Iskhakov, Predstaviteli musul’manskikh narodov Evropeiskoi Rossii, Sibiri, Kavkaza, Kryma i Tsentral’noy Azii na Parizhskoi mirnoi konferentsii. ———, Rossiia i Pervvaia mirovaia voina: ėkonomicheskie problemy, obshchestvennye nastroeniia, mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia, 383–404. Vosstaniia 1916 g. v Aziatckoi Rossii: neizvestnoe ob izvestnom. Collected papers. Executive editor Tatiana Kotiukova. Moscow: Russkii impul’s, 2017, 258–273. Chynara Israilova-Khar’ekhuzen and Tatiana Kotyukova, Deiatel’nost’ “Komiteta v zashchitu prav magometanskikh tiurko-tatarskikh narodov Rossii” kak popytka politicheskoi destabilizatsii situatsii v Rossiiskoi imperii v gody Pervoi mirovoi voiny. Vosstaniia 1916 g. v Aziatskoi Rossii: neizvestnoe ob izvestnom. Edited by T.V. Kotiukova. Moscow: Russkii impul’s, 2017, 75.

1 The start of a long road From Tiflis to St. Petersburg

Ali Mardan bey traveled a long and glorious path of struggle. Researchers have suggested various birth dates.1 The latest publications cite 1863.2 In August 1887, a certificate from St. Petersburg Imperial University states that he was twentyfour years old,3 which would confirm that date. A December 22, 1887, certificate gives his birth date as May 4, 1863.4 The four life stories personally compiled by Topchibashov in the 1930s (two in manuscript and two typewritten) at the Paris Institute of Russia, the Caucasus, and Eastern Europe all mention 1865.5 However, “Personal Data of Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov” (typed) has a small correction: the last digit of “1865” was written in pencil.6 The same archive contains an anonymous biography compiled in 1951 stating that he was born on May 4, 1862.7 The archive also has Topchibashov’s undated notes (from the mid-1920s) on the birth dates of family members, including his granddaughters Zarifa (1921) and Gulnar (1923). These notes say that he was born on May 4, 1863.8 He seems to have had some doubt about the date. Although he cited 1865 in some documents, his family members inscribed 1863 on his tombstone in Saint-Clois. Topchibashov’s birth certificate, discovered in the Russian State Historical Archive, has clarified the issue. Issued by the Transcaucasian sheikh-ul-Islam Akhund Molla Ahmed Huseynzade (grandfather of the great enlightener Ali bey Huseynzade) on April 6, 1870, it said that Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov was born to the family of Shiite Muslim Alekber bey Topchibashov and Sever khanym, daughter of Mahammad Hasan bey Vekilov, on May 4, 1863, in Tiflis.9

Topchibashov’s family The child was named after his great-grandfather Ali Mardan Topchibashov. Residing in Tiflis near a royal palace, the Topchibashovs were of Ganja ancestry. His great-grandfather served at the court of the Georgian kings Heraclius II and George XII.10 A certificate issued in 1818 by the sons of the Georgian kings said that Topchibashov’s great-grandfather Ali Mardan bey and his son Mirza Jafar were noblemen: Ali Mardan bey Ali ibn Akber, his son Mirza Jafar, and his cousins Agha Mahammad and Agha Hasan asked us to reaffirm that they belong to the

The start of a long road  9 gentry, after the Persian shah moved them from the province of Khorasan to Tiflis with the Tskheli [fortress guards]. Their ancestors held senior positions under a decree of the Georgian kings and enjoyed superiority over others. During the capture of Tiflis by Turks, Alekber bey went to Khorasan and later returned to Tiflis due to the efforts of Heraclius and, as he was versed in artillery, was granted the title “topchibashi” because he was a “gentleman” by birth. When Heraclius gained a victory over the Turks under Atskhuri, Ali Akber bey was killed in action. His sons became orphans (Ali Mardan bey, Haji Agha, and Agha Huseyn). Later they were educated as royal kulhuhchu [officers in the palace]. During the capture of Tiflis by Agha Mahammad khan, Ali Mardan bey was taken prisoner but later released due to Javad khan’s [Ganja khanate] intercession. He became related to the khan of Ganja, Javad khan Ziyadoglu, by marrying his daughter and was granted the title of nazir [minister]. With this in mind, we are testifying to the nobility of Ali Mardan bey and his son Mirza Jafar and his cousins, which we witness by our signatures: lieutenant-general, senator, and cavalier Prince David, Prince Franavaz, Prince John, Prince Bagrat, Prince Teymuraz.11 In his biographical notes written in Paris, Ali Mardan bey refers to his ancestor’s top position at the Georgian court, as artillery regiment commander and as governor of a fortress built by Arabs in the eighth century on the right bank of the Kura River, where the royal palace was located. His great-grandfather was the last governor and the first in the family of Topchibashovs.12 Ali Mardan bey’s grandfather, Mirza Jafar Topchibashov, was born in Ganja in 1784 and educated at home. He spent his youth in Tiflis, where his father worked. Mirza Jafar noted in his memoirs that his family resided close to the royal palace. He was only eleven years in September 1795 when Iranian troops seized Tiflis.13 After the end of Georgian independence in 1803, Mirza Jafar accompanied Prince Teymuraz Bagrationi (1782–1849), son of George XII, to Teheran. The prince and his people left there in 1810. Teymuraz was permitted to live in St. Petersburg under supervision. Georgian researcher Rusudana Orbeli noted that Mirza Jafar Topchibashov was among those who arrived in St. Petersburg in 1811, together with Bragrationi.14 This seems probable, given that Mirza Jafar’s father served at the court and was in the prince’s suite. Some sources say that Mirza Jafar was proficient in several languages, including Turkish, Persian, Arab, Georgian, and Armenian. Other sources say that he arrived in St. Petersburg as a member of the Iranian mission. Russian Orientalist Nikolai Veselovskii wrote that he arrived in St. Petersburg in 1817 with the Iranian Embassy and remained there.15 This is confirmed by Professor Vasilii Grigorev: He was educated at a madrasah, like any other Muslim, learned the Arabic language, visited some regions of Persia and contiguous regions of Transcaucasia, and arrived in St. Petersburg in 1817 with the Iranian Embassy. He enjoyed life among the “infidels,” and when the Iranian Embassy left, he stayed in St. Petersburg and took service with the Russians.16

10  The start of a long road This choice predetermined the rest of Mirza Jafar’s life. He quickly learned Russian and became famous in St. Petersburg as a connoisseur of Oriental and Caucasian languages. In 1819 he was invited to teach these languages at St. Petersburg Imperial University.17 Russia began expanding eastward in the nineteenth century, creating a need for experts in Oriental languages. Mirza Jafar was hired by the Asian department of the Russian Foreign Ministry.18 He made use of his Russian-language skills at major state and educational institutions. In 1823 Topchibashov dedicated a poem to Alexander I titled “Triumphal Song,” eulogizing the victory of 1812 over Napoleon and describing a monument erected on this occasion. Some episodes of the poem were reminiscent of eyewitness accounts interwoven into a poetical wreath. All this is evidence that Mirza Jafar witnessed the hardships of the patriotic war. Ali Mardan bey’s father, Alekber bey, chose military service and reached the rank of lieutenant.19 Documents in the St. Petersburg Historical Archives say that Alekber bey was born in 1820, began serving at the Transcaucasian Muslim cavalry regiment in 1843, and commanded a subunit of this regiment in 1845. From 1853 to 1856 he took part in the Crimean War, was repeatedly decorated, and earned the rank of second lieutenant.20 In his memoirs Ali Mardan bey wrote that his father served in the Russian army, stationed in Warsaw.

Muslim Madrasah, Tiflis gymnasium, and the Imperial University From his childhood Ali Mardan bey was in the care of his grandmother, who “had great integrity and succeeded in suggesting wholesome rudiments of life to her grandson.” He received his early schooling at a special Muslim madrasah and continued his studies at a Russian-language Tiflis classical school.21 Ali Mardan bey made good progress in his studies, showing a talent for languages and public activities, and earned various awards.22 A general certificate of education from the Tiflis classical school (1884) states that Ali Mardan bey behaved well, made progress in written work, and showed his ability to acquire knowledge and enthusiasm for studying science. He received a Caucasian government scholarship, and a teachers’ meeting mentioned his progress in language, literature, and history.23 Documents of this type opened the door for entry into universities. Ali Mardan bey dreamed of entering St. Petersburg Imperial University after finishing the gymnasium. In 1884 he received a passport from the Tiflis municipal police department, authorizing him to live in other regions of the country.24 In summer 1884 Ali Mardan bey entered St. Petersburg Imperial University in the department of history and philology, as noted in a certificate of September 3, 1884.25 A document issued on October 15, 1884, noted that he was registered at St. Petersburg Imperial University and had the right to reside freely in the capital of Russia for a year, until October 15, 1885.26 The Topchibashov family was well known in scientific and political circles when Ali Mardan bey started his studies in St. Petersburg. Although his grandfather Mirza Jafar had died in 1869, his numerous disciples continued working at

The start of a long road  11 St. Petersburg Imperial University and various other institutions in the 1880s. Mirza Jafar influenced many Russian Orientalists, helping them master Arab, Persian, and Turkic languages and study gems of Oriental literature. Zaki Validi Togan, a famous thinker, historian, and well-known political figure as well as a disciple of Ali Mardan bey, wrote: “Mirza Jafar Topchibashi, grandfather of Ali Mardan bey and a professor of the Persian language at St. Petersburg University, holds a major position in the history of the Russian Muslims’ struggle for their country’s freedom and sovereignty. I studied the life of Mirza Jafar and the history of the Borchaly that tribe he belonged to.”27 Ali Mardan bey arrived in St. Petersburg at a time when the name of Mirza Jafar still enjoyed respect in the scientific and political circles of the capital. On September 18, 1884, Ali Mardan bey asked to be exempted from paying for lectures in the second half of 1884.28 The same request was sent to the university directors by the Tiflis municipal police department. The Topchibashov family received no money, pensions, or allowance and lived in poverty.29 The university directors complied with the request and provided Ali Mardan bey with a scholarship. Despite this, he did not remain in the historical-­philological department for long. After the first semester, on January  25, 1885, he asked permission from the rector of the university to transfer to the law school.30 Ali Mardan bey passed additional examinations and became a student of law, but he lost his scholarship.31 Ali Mardan bey explained that his studies in the historical-philological department were primarily based on learning languages. Russian universities prioritized Slavic languages and dialects, which displeased Muslim students. Yet he did not sever ties with the department and even attended some lectures in the department of Oriental studies, where his grandfather had once taught.32 On May 29, 1885, he asked the dean of the law faculty to accept him into the law program.33 Attached to his request was “a certificate of poverty” from the Tiflis police department. However, he did not receive a scholarship the first year. He tried again in his second year. On June 22, 1885, during summer vacation, Ali Mardan bey received a “certificate of poverty” from the police department, saying that “he had no property, pensions, or allowances and his relatives could not help.”34 To avoid university fees, Ali Mardan bey appealed on September 20, 1885, to the rector, stating that “a certificate of poverty” and a health certificate had been submitted to the dean of the law faculty.35 No information is available on the outcome of this appeal except for a receipt stating that Ali Mardan bey paid five rubles for a fifth semester during the 1886–1887 academic year.36 On August 28, 1887, the inspector of student affairs of St. Petersburg Imperial University prolonged his Topchibashov’s stay in the capital for another year, certifying that he professed the Muslim faith and was permitted to reside freely in St. Petersburg until August 20, 1888.37 According to archival materials, he was registered at Kazanskaia Street 46, apartment 14.38 While in law school, Ali Mardan bey was actively involved in collegiate life and public affairs. Under the guidance of Professors Alexander Gradovskii, Ivan

12  The start of a long road Toynitskii, Nikolai Douvernois, Yulii Yanson, and others he made interesting reports at meetings of the student scientific circle. During this time, the political situation in the Russian Empire grew worse.39 On March 1, 1887, on the anniversary of Alexander II’s death, there was an attempt to assassinate Alexander III. Among others implicated in the attempt were students of St. Petersburg Imperial University, including members of the People’s Freedom Party, such as Aleksandr Ulianov. On May 8, 1887, the principal participants in the attempt were executed at the Schlüsselburg Fortress. Other participants were sentenced to twenty years to life. This attempted assassination led to persecution. Student and teacher participants in secret societies were arrested or expelled from the university. This wave of repression caught Topchibashov as well: he was expelled from the university for participation in clandestine circles and banished from the capital.40 On August 28, 1887, he sent an explanatory note to the university directors, denying his participation in illegal organizations and fund-raising for revolutionaries. However, he failed to attain his goal. He believed that he was wrongfully expelled from the university and banished.41 Appeals to the Ministry of Education brought no result. Letter #18258 suggested that the university directorate expel him. On December 17, 1887, he was expelled from the third year of law school. It should be noted that Topchibashov took an active part in the public life of the university. He later conceded that he really had been a member of a secret student society in 1887. He was the leading figure in a small circle of Muslim students, and his apartment was frequently searched. One member of the circle was Ali bey Huseynzade, a student in the mathematics department at the university in St. Petersburg. In addition, Ali Mardan bey regularly sent articles to Caucasian newspapers and the St. Petersburg newspaper Novosti.42 Ahmed bey Aghayev, who had come to study at the Polytechnical Institute, attended meetings of the populists (narodniki) with Ali Mardan bey and Ali bey.43 Ali Mardan bey could not reconcile himself to the injustice of being expelled. Even teachers stood up for him. With aid from Professor Nikolai Duvernois, a civil law professor at the university, Ali Mardan bey went to court, demanding restitution of his rights. The court transmuted his expulsion from the university into incarceration in a punishment cell.44 This was a short-term arrest in the higher educational institutions and barracks of tsarist Russia. Ali Mardan bey chose this type of punishment.45 Having served his time, Ali Mardan bey continued his education at the university in 1888 and passed examinations for the last semester. He defended a thesis on local self-government, on “state law and right of property.” An academic council of the university confirmed his excellent marks in the law school. On June 1, 1888, he asked rector Mikhail Vladislavlev for an interim certificate upon graduating from the university,46 which he received on June 3. It stated he had passed oral examinations as a degree candidate and that his thesis would be considered by the University Council in due time, showing that it was regarded favorably by the law faculty.47

The start of a long road  13 On November 28, 1888, the academic council approved Topchibashov’s thesis. He paid six rubles for “diploma printing” on November 30.48 The civil law faculty showed great interest in Topchibashov’s work and suggested offering him a professorship. Under a new university charter adopted in 1885, however, only Christians could hold academic posts in the Russian universities.49 Ali Mardan bey was encouraged to change his faith, but he refused. He remained a Muslim residing in the Russian Empire, unlike his grandfather, who had been allowed to teach at St. Petersburg Imperial University. After the University Board approved his degree work, Ali Mardan bey received a diploma on January 13, 1889: The Council of the St. Petersburg Imperial University resolves that Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, 25, Muslim, joined the university in August 1884, passed a complete set of courses at the law school, and received marks as follows: jurisprudence and political science; history of Russian law; history of Roman law; common law; Russian state law; ecclesiastical law; criminal law; criminal justice; civil law; civil justice; international law; Roman law; ­German-language  – excellent. Political economy and forensic medicine  – good. Worthy of a candidate’s degree and approved in this capacity. . . . This is to certify that A.M. Topchibashov has all the rights and privileges as set forth in the laws of the Russian Empire.50

His wedding: Peri khanym Zardabi The policy of separatism for Muslim peoples of the Russian Empire prevented Ali Mardan bey from obtaining an appropriate post at the university. He had to return to Tiflis and began working at the district court on February 9, 1889. On September 2, under a decision of the Tiflis district court, he was assigned to the second city sector as a magistrate’s assistant for civil matters and petty offenses. He worked in this capacity until May 11, 1890. He was appointed a secretary of the Tiflis district court on May 8 and took up his duties on May 16. On December 20, 1891, he was given the civil title “collegiate councilor” by the Heraldic Board of the Senate.51 His great talents enabled Topchibashov to rise to the peak of his career in Tiflis, the acknowledged political center of the South Caucasus. He worked as an investigator for the city court and simultaneously delivered lectures on state and civil law at the Tiflis agricultural school.52 He also continued his public activity, combining civil service with the duties of secretary and librarian of the Caucasian Juridical Society, and often published articles in the newspapers of Tiflis and St. Petersburg on behalf of his compatriots and fellow Muslims. Ali Mardan bey served as a legal advisor to the Tiflis-headquartered Religious Board of Transcaucasian Muslims and the Spiritual Majlis, which established charitable societies and institutions to protect the interests of Muslims being pressured by Russian authorities. The ruling circles in Russia repeatedly threatened to deport him from the Caucasus during the 1890s because of his work in the Muslim

14  The start of a long road environment of Tiflis. Despite these difficulties, Ali Mardan bey was given the rank of titular counselor by the Heraldic Board of the Senate on June 22, 1893.53 In 1893, when Ali Mardan bey was thirty, he decided to cast his lot with Peri khanym (born December 25, 1873), the elder daughter of Hasan bey Zardabi (official name Melikov), who had founded the Muslim world’s first secular newspaper, Ekinchi, in 1875. Hasan bey was among the first Azerbaijanis to be educated at Moscow University. He attached great importance to secular education and sent Peri khanym to Tiflis to study at the local gymnasium.54 Hasan bey’s son Midhat bey also studied in Tiflis. Hasan bey had met his wife, Hanifa khanym, in Tiflis as well. He read a list of female graduates from St. Nina’s school in Kavkaz in 1872, discovered the name of the only Muslim girl, and immediately left for Tiflis. There he succeeded in finding Hanifa khanym Abayeva, a Balkar Turk. As soon as the girl gave her consent, “he invited a mullah to the gymnasium and contracted a marriage with her.”55 The wedding ceremony of Ali Mardan bey and Peri khanym took place on December 31, 1893, in Tiflis. Hasan bey and Midhat bey attended the wedding. On January 1, 1894, Peri khanym wrote to her mother, saying that she and her husband had moved to Starotamozhennaia Street in the Vitalov quarter immediately after the wedding. She added that the wedding was modest due to lack of money. Hasan bey had suggested adding a sum of 10,000 rubles in gold in the marriage contract to enhance the bride’s prestige. According to Sharia, a husband should pay this amount to his wife if they divorce. Ali Mardan bey had no money at this time, however, and feared that he could not pay the required sum if needed. Peri khanym wrote in her letter: “I didn’t care what amount would be written in the contract. Also, my father understood that it wasn’t worth breaking the engagement.” Peri khanym told her mother that Ali Mardan bey had lost his parents very early, so he treated her parents as his kinfolk.56 This is supported by Ali Mardan bey’s letter of January 29, 1894: “Dear mummy! The word ‘mummy’ pleases my eye, and this is the first time I have used this word, whose meaning remained incomprehensible for me until recently. From now on, I pronounce this word ‘consciously,’ hoping to find a sympathetic response in your motherly heart and become established as your own child.” Deprived of his mother in his early childhood and head of a family in his thirties, Ali Mardan bey regarded Hanifa khanym as a woman to replace his mother in the true sense of the word.57 In the letter he apologized for failing to arrange a rich wedding as traditions required. “Both Peri and I are looking forward to having a heart-to-heart talk with you.” He stressed that “your son-in-law must, in the first place, love your daughter.”58 Ali Mardan bey compared Peri khanym with an angel that burst into his life. Topchibashov believed that an alliance with such a great public champion of his people as Hasan bey Zardabi could contribute to the enlightenment of unfortunate Muslims and benefit them.59 Topchibashov’s marriage to the daughter of the great thinker of the Azerbaijani national movement drew Topchibashov nearer to the forefront of national struggle. In the person of Hasan bey, he gained a great teacher and a standby in his life. His entry into a family life in the last day of 1893 marked a crucial new period of his destiny. Ali Mardan bey wrote that Peri

The start of a long road  15

Figure 1.1 Ismail bey Gasprinskii, Hasan bey Zardabi, and Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, 1894.

khanym with her saintly patience became an adornment of his life and a stronghold in the great battle. On May 4, 1894, Ali Mardan bey took a two-month holiday in Baku, where he met Ismayil bey Gasprinskii, publisher of the newspaper Tarjuman. The newspaper’s tenth anniversary had been celebrated in Baku and Tiflis as well as in Bakhchisarai. An anonymous article was published in Kaspii on April 7, 1893, on the anniversary. The author of the article was Ali Mardan bey,60 as indirectly evidenced by his parting words on the death of Gasprinskii in September 1914. He quoted from a letter from him at the end of April 1893.61 A year later, on April 19, 1895, Ali Mardan bey received the rank of collegiate assessor for his work at the Tiflis district court from the Heraldic Department of the Senate. On April 21 he retired from the court for domestic reasons.62 He applied to the Court Chamber for permission to be called to the bar as a practicing lawyer, which required five years of faultless service in the judicial system according to Russian law at the time. On May 8, 1895, the Court Chamber accepted him as a lawyer of the Tiflis Court Chamber.63 By this time he was already a distinguished representative of the Muslim Society of Tiflis. Despite his successful activities in Tiflis, Ali Mardan bey decided to move to Baku. In 1896 he and his family left Tiflis, where he spent had spent thirty-three

16  The start of a long road years of his life. Many severe trials were awaiting him in Baku, the world’s largest oil center, at the end of the nineteenth century and the heart of the Azerbaijani national idea.

Notes 1 Ali Merdan bey Topçubaşi: Tercümei halı 1862–1934, Kurtuluş, December, 1934, # 2; Fourniau, Ali Mardan Toptchibachi, 305; Fourniau, Deux Langues, Trois Pays, Pour Quelle Societe Plurielle? Journal of Azerbaijan Studies, Vol. 1, Issue 2, 1998, p.  3; Imanov, Ali Merdan Topcibaşi. (1865–1934), 21; Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 50; Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiiskom parlamente, 565; A.M. Topchibashi i M.E. Rasulzade: Perepiska. 1923–1926 gg., 3. 2 Azerbaycan Khalq Cümhuriyyəti Ensiklopediyası. Vol. 2, Baku: Lider, 2005, 402. 3 Certificate issued by Topchibashev an inspector for students of St. Petersburg Imperial University, August 28, 1887, Central State Historical Archive of St. Petersburg (hereafter referred to as CSHASP), fund (f.) 14, record (r.) 3, vol. (v.) 24308, page (p.) 37. 4 Certificate issued by Topchibashev the rector of the St. Petersburg Imperial University. December 22, 1887, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 46. 5 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bey Ali Akbar bey oglou, Le Center d’Études des Mondes Russe, Caucasien et Centre-Européen (CÉRCEC), École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (ÉHÉSS), Archives d’Ali Mardan-bey Toptchibachi (hereafter referred to as AAMT), carton no 6/2, 1. 6 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 7 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey. December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 1. 8 Notes Topchibashev on birthdates of His Family Members, AAMT, carton no 9/17, 1. 9 Birth certificate of Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. April 6, 1870, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 4; Akhund Molla Ahmed Huseynzade Salyani (1812–1887) headed the Spiritual Administration of the Muslims of the Caucasus in 1862–1885. 10 Kishmishev, Pokhody Nadir shakha v Gerat, Kandagar, Indiiu i sobytiia v Persii posle ego smerti, 303. 11 Certificate issued by the Georgian king and princes to Ali Mardan bey Alekber bey oghlu, his son Mirza Jafar, cousins ​​ Agha Hasan and Aghamamed. 1818, Georgian State Historical Archive (hereafter referred to as GSHA), f. 213, r. 1, v. 945, pp. 3–4. 12 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 13 Kishmishev. Pokhody Nadir shakha, 304; Tofig Veliev, Novye Materialy o M.D. Topchibasheve, Izvestiya AN Azerbaidzhanskoi SSR. Seriia istorii, filosofii i prava. 1983, # 3, 19. 14 See: Guliev, Azerbaidzhanskaia filologicheskaia mysl’ i russkaia literaturno  – ­obschestvennaia sreda (pervaia polovina XIX veka), 33. 15 Nikolai Veselovskii, Svedeniia ob ofitsial’nom prepodavanii vostochnykh iazykov v Rossii, St. Peterburg: Tipografiia br. Panteleevykh, 1879, 148. 16 Grigorev, Mirza Dzhafar Topchibashev (nekrolog), Izvestiia Imperatorskogo russkogo arkheologicheskogo obschestva. Vol. VII. St. Peterburg, 1872, 303. 17 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 18 For more information about the activities of Mirza Jafar Topchibashev at St. Petersburg University, see: Synopsis of the book “Imperial University of St. Petersburg in the First Fifty Years of Its Existence. Historical note on behalf of the Council of the University written by intern professor of the department of history East V.V. Grigorev. St. Petersburg, 1870,” AAMT, carton no 6/2, 12–18. 19 Certificate of the rector’s office of St. Petersburg Imperial University issued to A.M. Topchibashev. December 22, 1887, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 46.

The start of a long road  17 20 For more information about Alekber bey Topchibashev see: CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, pp. 8–9. 21 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 22 Biographical information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 23 Biographical information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 24 Passport issued to Topchibashev Tiflis City Police Department, June  23, 1884, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 5. 25 Certificate issued by Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev in St. Petersburg Imperial University, September 3, 1884, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 100. 26 Certificate issued by Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev inspector for students, October 13, 1884, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 12. 27 Zaki Validi Togan, Vospominaniia. Moscow: Moskovskaia Tipografiya no 12, 1997, 432–433. 28 Statement Topchibashev to inspector for students of St. Petersburg Imperial University, September 18, 1884, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 11. 29 Letter Tiflis City Police Department to the directorate of St. Petersburg Imperial University, October 6, 1884, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 15. 30 Topchibashev’s written request to the Rector of St. Petersburg Imperial University, January 25, 1885, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 13. 31 Imanov, Ali Merdan Topcibaşi. (1865–1934), 23. 32 Biographical information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 2. 33 Statement Topchibashev to the dean of the law department of the St. Petersburg Imperial University, May 29, 1885, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 14. 34 “Certificate of poverty,” issued to Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev in Tiflis, June  22, 1885, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 19. 35 Topchibashev’s statement addressed to the rector of the St. Petersburg Imperial University, September 20, 1885, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 18. 36 Petition from Topchibashev addressed to the University directorate, August 22, 1886, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, v. 25. 37 Certificate issued to Topchibashev Inspectorate for students of St. Petersburg Imperial University, August 28, 1886, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 37. 38 Document on the passport registration Topchibashev, August 29, 1887, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 39. 39 Biographical information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 2. 40 Ibid. 41 Topchibashev’s statement addressed to the rector of the St. Petersburg Imperial University, August 28, 1887, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, v. 41. 42 Biographical information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 2. 43 More fully on this, see: Holly Shissler, Iki Imparatorluk arasında, 65–115. 44 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 2. 45 Biographical information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 2. 46 Topchibashev’s statement addressed to the rector of the St. Petersburg Imperial University, June 1, 1888, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 53. 47 Temporary certificate issued by the Topchibashev from rector of the St. Petersburg Imperial University, June 3, 1888, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 54. 48 Statement Topchibashev by the Board of Petersburg Imperial University, November 30, 1888, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 50. 49 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bey Ali Akbar bey oglou, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1.

18  The start of a long road 50 Diploma issued to Topchibashev by St. Petersburg Imperial University, January  13, 1889, CSHASP, f. 14, r. 3, v. 24308, p. 57. 51 Certificate issued to Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev by chairman Tiflis District Court Fedor Bykov, May 21, 1896, State Historical Archive of the Republic of Azerbaijan (hereafter referred to as SHARA), f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 93. 52 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bey Ali Akbar bey oglou, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 53 Certificate issued to Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev by chairman Tiflis District Court Bykov, May 21, 1896, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 93. 54 Notes Topchibashev on birthdates of his family members, Archives d’Ali Mardan-bey Toptchibachi, carton no 9/17, 1–2. 55 Ağazadə, Həsən bəy Məlikov “Zərdabi”nin Tərcümeyi-Halı. Əkinçi, 31. 56 Letter from Peri Melikova-Topchibasheva to Hanifa Zerdabi-Melikova, January  1, 1894, State Archive of Literature and Art of the Azerbaijan Republic (hereafter referred to as SALAAR), f. 653, r. 1, v. 39, p. 1. 57 Letter from Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev to Hanifa Zerdabi-Melikova, January 29, 1894, SALAAR, f. 653, r. 1, v. 38, p. 1. 58 Ibid., 1. 59 Ibid., 2. 60 Kaspii, April 7, 1893. 61 Kaspii, September 13, 1914. 62 Certificate issued to Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev by chairman Tiflis District Court Bykov, May 21, 1896, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 93. 63 Certificate issued by Chairman of the Tiflis District Court Bykov to Ali Mardan bek Topchibashev, June 9, 1895, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 95.

2 The capital of an oil kingdom On the eve of great events

In 1896 Ali Mardan bey moved to Baku with his family. Hasan bey Zardabi, formerly a resident of Goichai uyezd, arrived in Baku at the same time. After his newspaper was closed, Hasan bey was exiled to Stavropol province in 1878 for a five-year term. The authorities tried to prevent his return to Baku. He sought a job, but all doors were closed to him. During his exile he was prohibited from starting any publishing activity and denied the opportunity to teach.1 After arrival in Baku, Ali Mardan bey was put on the list of lawyers of the circuit court.2 At this time attorneys who knew a local language, were familiar with the mode of life of Muslims, and could protect their interests were hard to find. The developing urban bourgeoisie found an authentic advocate of Muslim business circles in the person of Ali Mardan bey. Rumors about him spread through the city. This period saw extreme growth in petroleum production, drilling equipment, and the purchase/sale of oil-bearing areas in Baku.3 The highly educated young Muslim lawyer became a godsend for the local population. As the number of successful cases grew, so did his list of clients. This made Ali Mardan bey prosperous and strengthened his role in the public life of the city.

Muslim deputies of the Baku Duma The move to Baku proved to be successful for both Ali Mardan bey and Hasan bey. In October  1897 they were both elected to the Baku City Duma. Despite being new to Baku, Ali Mardan bey polled the most votes (271 for and 117 against) and took first place among Muslim candidates.4 In accordance with current law, Ali Mardan bey and Hasan bey were elected to the Duma as guardians of Baku orphans.5 Members of the Duma had to own property to qualify. Neither Ali Mardan bey nor Hasan bey possessed property of this sort at the time, so they were registered as guardians of the children of a Baku family and thus became admissible to the Duma. Hasan bey and Ali Mardan bey, Habib bey Mahmudbeyov (elected in 1897), and Farrukh bey Vezirov were the first Muslim intellectuals elected to the City Duma, at the end of the nineteenth century. Questions of education mattered most for Muslim city councilors. Ali Mardan bey and well-known philanthropist Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev, as well as Hasan bey (one of the first to found a secular

20  The capital of an oil kingdom school in Azerbaijan) and mining engineer Farrukh bey Vezirov, joined a school committee as full members after a Duma meeting on December  3, 1897.6 Ali Mardan bey was also elected as a member of the organizational commission on December  8.7 His election to the Baku Duma played a key role in consolidating Muslim city councilors. It was common during this period for the Russian and Armenian deputies, who constituted a majority in the Duma, to ignore the interests of the Muslim population and infringe on their rights. Hence Azerbaijani deputies had to intensify their activity in the Duma and promote issues on behalf of the Muslim population of Baku. Ali Mardan bey’s appointment as the editor and publisher of the daily Russian-language newspaper Kaspii and the chair of the enlightenment society Nijat increased his public activity. He later became a member of many Muslim charitable organizations and cultural centers not only in Baku but in other towns in the Caucasus region.8

A legendary city Although Tiflis was the administrative and political center of the region, the development of the petroleum industry, trade, and transport had turned Baku into one of the major cities not only in the South Caucasus but throughout Russia by the end of the nineteenth century. Foreigners and adventurers from throughout the empire were attracted to Baku by the opportunity to earn money quickly and without restraint. The new arrivals included emigrants from Iran (particularly South Azerbaijan) engaged in the oil sector. Between 1891 and 1904 the Russian consulate in Tabriz issued 312,000 entry visas to those seeking to find jobs in Baku.9 Because of this influx of people and the industrial revolution in Baku, European consulates took a great interest in the city. For instance, in 1903 the German consul sent a report to Berlin about demonstrations by workers in the Baku industrial area.10 Three weeks later the consul submitted an additional report to Reichschancellor Bernhard von Bülow on the situation in Baku.11 The population of Baku in 1863 was only 14,500. By 1903 the figure stood at 143,786, making Baku the largest city of the South Caucasus. The sudden population growth was attributable to the newly arrived foreigners and changes in the national-ethnic composition.12 The expansion of Jadidism (Muslim modernist reform) in response to growing oil revenues contributed to the transformation of Baku into a center of national political thought and the ideology of Turkism and Muslimism. The accelerated development of the petroleum industry during the last thirty years of the nineteenth century gave impetus to the economic life of the Russian Empire and enlivened the public, political, and cultural life of Baku. The world saw the unprecedented prosperity of Baku based on oil production. It was a major strategic commodity, as shown by production indices for the last three decades of the nineteenth century. On the Apsheron peninsula 26,000 tons of oil was produced in 1872. The figure stood at 818,000 tons in 1882, at 4,658,000 tons in 1892, and at 10,979,000 tons in 1902. Thus, the petroleum industry in Apsheron increased four hundred-fold over thirty years. This growth turned Baku into the world center of oil production.13 In the early twentieth century Baku produced

The capital of an oil kingdom  21 671.1 million poods of oil, more than half of the total world output. Hasan bey Zardabi wrote that Baku petroleum is developing not by the day but by the hour. The Caspian Sea cannot transport all the oil by sailing vessels. Therefore a railway has connected Baku with Tiflis and Batum. In addition, a Transcaucasian railway has been built. The image of the city, formerly a place of exile, has visibly changed. Oil-gushers have created crowds of millionaires, and millions and millions in Russian and foreign investments have been drawn into Baku industry.14 Legends about Baku oil were current in the United States. Peter Hopkirk, a British intelligence officer in the Middle East, wrote: At the end of the last century Baku has become one of the richest cities of the world. The discovery of large oil reserves in this land located on the outskirts of the Russian Empire was the main reason for the influx of different nations to this city. . . . If a single match was to be lit in the Caspian Sea, it would burn into an inferno. Being in Baku was like winning the jackpot at a casino. . . . There was a time where the city itself produced more oil than the whole USA combined.15 In the early twentieth century Baku outpaced the United States to become one of the two largest world oil producers.16 The developing petroleum industry and related innovations impacted the national life of Azerbaijan. The appearance of millionaires (including Musa Naghiyev, Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev, Shamsi Asadullayev, Murtuza Mukhtarov, and others) essentially consolidated the social and economic foundations of the Azerbaijani national idea. At the turn of the twentieth century Ahmed bey Aghayev and Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov arrived in Baku. They would have a serious influence on the destiny of Azerbaijan in shaping national self-consciousness and awareness of a shared identity with the united Turkic family.

Kaspii: a daily Russian-language newspaper in the national spirit In December  1896 the well-known Azerbaijani millionaire Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev purchased the Baku weekly Russian-language newspaper Kaspii and its printing house. After Nikolai Sakalinskii’s death in 1898, the newspaper was edited by Ali Mardan bey, who became famous among the people of the city. A little later the printing house was put at his disposal. As a result, Muslim intellectuals acquired authoritative printed materials in Russian.17 On June 24, 1898, Ali Mardan bey took on his responsibilities as editor. His column in issue 133 resembled an article by Hasan bey Zardabi in the first issue of Ekinchi. The new editor of Kaspii promised to cover the activities, customs, traditions, and events

22  The capital of an oil kingdom of secular and religious life in the capital of the “oil kingdom” (Baku) and in the Caucasus and Central Asia as a whole. As editor it was Ali Mardan bey’s sacred duty to educate the whole population of the Caucasus, regardless of nationality, religion, and social status. This was the only way to get boys and girls out of poverty and destitution. He promised to pay special attention to the urban life of Baku and the activities of municipal and public self-government and administration.18 Haci Zeynalabdin Taghiyev, the owner of Kaspii, selected young intellectuals brought up in the national spirit and educated abroad to contribute to the newspaper, which had protected the national interests of Russian Muslims since the 1890s. When asked why it was issued in Russian, not “Turkic-Azerbaijani,” Ali Mardan bey replied: Naturally, not using the native language is a negative factor, but it was a forced step. The problem is that the Caucasian rulers did not allow Muslims to issue newspapers in their native language and even prohibited any press activity. For a long period Kaspii was reputed to be the only daily newspaper in all of Transcaucasia.19 Kaspii, once headed by Viktor Kuzmin, Vladimir Lichkus-Khomutov, and Nikolai Sokolinskii, under Topchibashov’s leadership turned into a nationally oriented organ with experienced press operators such as Hasan bey Zardabi, Ahmed bey Aghayev, Firudin bey Kocharli, Hashym bey Vezirov, and Rza bey Khalilov, all educated intellectuals. It was “Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov’s leadership that helped Kaspii to take on a purely Muslim nature.”20 Ali bey Huseynzade also sent articles from Istanbul. The turn of the twentieth century was characterized by nationalist trends. Ismayil Gasprinskii’s newspaper Tarjuman in Bakhchisarai and Ali Mardan bey’s Kaspii in Baku became major centers of the nationalist idea on the eve of great events. Ali Mardan bey later noted that Kaspii left its imprint on the political, economic, and spiritual life of the region, especially Azerbaijan, until 1906. “I’m confident that historians of the future will pay attention to the great educational work done by the editors of Kaspii and its contributors.”21 The Russian authorities could not remain indifferent to a press organ headed by Muslims. Local authorities responded harshly to some “pan-Islamic” articles in Kaspii. The Chief Press Department in St. Petersburg received reports about its Islamic tendencies. The newspaper Novoe Vremia was particularly active along these lines, along with other central newspapers notorious for their anti-Islamic position. Ali Mardan bey fell under suspicion and was repeatedly summoned to the gendarmerie. The Baku governor’s deputy was personally responsible for censoring articles in the newspaper that described the life and traditions of Muslims. Dozens and hundreds of lines and pages of articles were banned.22 In 1901 the Baku vice-governor, Pavel Lileev, reported to the special mission supervisor, Lieutenant David Khechinov, about Kaspii’s violation of censorship regulations. Inspections were held at the printing house of Kaspii on August 25, November 25, and December 3; appropriate protocols were established; and Topchibashov was

The capital of an oil kingdom  23 brought to trial.23 On November  25 Lileev wrote to Khechinov, “I  ask you to sue Topchibashov for violation of censorship regulations and inform me about appropriate court proceedings.”24 The vice-governor sent an identical letter to Khechinov on September 1 that year, noting that on August 25 Kaspii had printed eleven lines formerly deleted by a censor. He considered it necessary to prosecute Topchibashov according to the law on censorship.25 Despite all prosecutions and the toughening of censorship, however, Kaspii continued to publish articles about the life of millions of Caucasian Muslims in Povolzh’e, the Orenburg region, and Turkestan. These articles tried to discover the reasons for their backwardness and gained the respect of Russian-Muslim intellectuals. Ali Mardan bey wrote that the newspaper succeeded in consolidating the Turkic-Tatar intellectuals around it. Baku became the natural center of an enormous part of the population.26 Like the Russian Empire, the Ottoman government was cautious about Kaspii, which had subscribers in Istanbul. As a result, deliveries of some editions of the newspaper were intentionally delayed. Turkish governmental bodies were suspicious of the newspaper and hampered its dissemination across the country. Ali Mardan bey was surrounded by government spies during his travel to Istanbul in 1900. To avoid attention from the special services of the Ottoman Empire, Ali Mardan bey met with progressive scholars of Turkey in secret places in Istanbul through the mediation of Ali bey Huseynzade, who lived there. Sometimes these meetings were arranged in the Prince Islands in the Marmara Sea.27 In 1900 Ali Mardan bey made an extended voyage across European countries. He visited Sofia, Belgrade, Budapest, and Vienna then went to the World Exhibition in Paris and London and Liverpool before returning to Russia via Belgium and Germany. He sought to learn more about Europeans’ knowledge of the life of Russian Muslims.28 His travels and meetings with progressive people in Europe left a deep impression on Ali Mardan bey. He shared his reflections in editorials in Kaspii.

The first school for Russian-Muslim girls At the beginning of the twentieth century Topchibashov was in the first ranks of the movement for reform in Azerbaijan. His articles in Kaspii supported opening an educational institution for Muslim girls in Baku. The great patron of art, literature, and education Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev took on the responsibility of financing this noble project. Hasan bey Zardabi had long thought of opening secular schools for girls in Baku. As far back as January 1896 he had shared his concept of opening a one-year school for Turkic girls with Taghiyev. In 1903 a senator named Aleksandr Kuzminskii inspected Baku province and included in his report the idea of opening a Russian-Muslim school for girls, noting the influence of Hasan bey (who formerly taught at the local college) and the famous millionaire Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev.29 Ali Mardan bey was among the honorary wardens of the first girl’s college in Baku. At Taghiyev’s suggestion, Hasan bey Zardabi drew up the charter of the new school. Only a well-educated Muslim woman could be appointed the headmistress.

24  The capital of an oil kingdom The best nominee for this post was Hanifa khanym, Hasan bey’s wife and Ali Mardan bey’s mother-in-law, who was finally authorized to invite girls to apply to the school in September 1901. Hanifa khanym was appointed headmistress at the recommendation of the Guardianship Council in June 1901. Meriam khanym Sulkevich, a Lithuanian Tatar, became her assistant and a teacher. Asmet khanym, daughter of Mahammad Emin Efendi, an Akhaltsik Turk, was hired as a teacher of Sharia (religious law) and the Turkic language.30 Girls from all over the Caucasus flowed into Baku in the summer of 1901 to get an education. Before the school opened, these girls resided in Hasan bey’s apartment.31 For a short time, the school building had finally been erected. On August  21, 1901, Ali Mardan bey published an article in Kaspii titled “Baku Russian-Muslim Women’s School,” noting: “The building of the Russian-­Muslim Women’s School located on one of Baku’s most beautiful streets will adorn the city with its architecture.” The article included the charter of the school and touched upon its budget and the activity of the Guardianship Council.32 On September 22–23, 1901, Ali Mardan bey published a long article in Kaspii titled “On the Opening of the Russian-Muslim Women’s School in Baku.” In regard to the importance of education for Muslim girls, he pointed out: “It is very difficult to imagine the future prospects of Muslims, especially their struggle for cultural-economic development, without satisfying the daily needs of Muslim life as a whole.” Ali Mardan bey considered the opening of this school to be the culmination of Taghiyev’s enlightenment activity. The new school would play an important part in the spiritual development of Muslims in the future.33 Religious circles initially objected to opening a women’s school. Muslims from all parts of the Russian Empire sent protest letters. Ali Mardan bey responded in two issues of Kaspii on the significance of women’s education in Muslim society: It was necessary to convince Muslims that the Russian Muslim School in Baku pursues the aim of providing future women, wives, and mothers with necessary knowledge; academic knowledge will not drive them from their family or make them social outcasts deprived of their native language and belief. People should be assured that educating Muslim women does not mean teaching them only Russian, to make them forget their native language; and it does not mean that education will condemn traditions and customs or divert women away from their female and motherly duties to visit balls and theaters. Rather, the Russian Muslim School is going to provide an education so that a Muslim woman can speak Russian, dress well, and be a genuine wife for her husband and a good mother for her children.34 The official opening ceremony was named after Empress Alexandra. “Event of the Day” in Kaspii noted that “today all supporters of humanity’s progress are celebrating women’s education as a triumph of light over darkness.”35 Representatives of the Baku power structure, prominent intellectuals, and public figures attended this momentous event.

The capital of an oil kingdom  25 Early in the morning of October  7 the school on Nikolanevskaia Street was decorated with a banner. A large hall on the second floor of the building was overcrowded with guests by noon. A report about the history of school’s building was presented, and then debates started. Speakers appreciated the school opening as an event of paramount importance.36 Twenty-five years later Ali Mardan bey recalled: “Hasan bey and all the Muslim intellectuals that gathered around Kaspii rejoiced at such a cultural achievement. An address was presented to the founder of the school, Taghiyev, signed by Hasan bey Melikov-Zardabi and accompanied by the words: ‘Long live Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev!’ ”37 Finances for the school budget came from the primary capital of 125,000 rubles placed in the bank by H.Z. Taghiyev for the school as well as from token sums paid by girls for their studies. As a rule, girls from poor families were exempt from payment. In 1901, the first year of training, fifty-eight girls, aged eight to eleven, from the South Caucasus, North Caucasus, and Tatarstan were admitted to the school, of which thirty-five studied free of charge. The school had ten teachers, including Hanifa khanym. Sharia lessons were taught along with secular subjects, and one classroom was designed for namaz (prayer).38 Hanifa khanym was mistress of the Russian-Tatar Women’s School for five years.

Attempts to reform Muslim society The first Russian-Tatar school was opened in Baku in 1887. Hasan bey Zardabi became the chief proponent of opening Russian-Tatar schools in the country. He appealed to Baku city authorities to open a Russian-Tatar school. In 1896 he demanded that the leaders of the secondary school give him an official certificate for his activity as a teacher there.39 As a member of the Duma and head of the municipal election body since 1902, Ali Mardan bey actively helped Hasan bey to perform his noble mission. When a financial commission of the Baku-Duma suggested reducing the number of free students in gymnasiums from 35  percent to 10  percent in 1898, deputies Hasan bey, Ali Mardan bey, and Aleksandr Benkendorf gained the Duma’s consent to remain at a level of 25 percent. Baku had only three Russian-Tatar schools when Hasan bey and Ali Mardan bey arrived, which grew to sixteen by 1906 due to their activity. They were elected honorary trustees of most of these schools. By 1913 the number of Azerbaijani students of these schools had reached 2,249, of whom 337 were girls.40 Ali Mardan bey wrote: With his straightforwardness and aspiration for education among the urban population, Hasan bey applied efforts to educate the most backward [the Muslim portion of the population]. As a member of the municipal college commission, Hasan bey applied great effort and energy to increase the number of initial schools as a whole and the so-called Russian-Tatar schools in particular, to improve the situation and the teaching process.41

26  The capital of an oil kingdom Ali Mardan bey continued his role as a voluntary “librarian” in Baku that he had so successfully performed at the Tiflis gymnasium. Despite his duties as newspaper editor and member of the City Duma, he appealed to the governor for permission to open a reading room. Ali Mardan bey had also served as a librarian in St. Petersburg. On February 18, 1901, the Baku governor’s office notified the head of the municipal library that Topchibashov, as editor and publisher of Kaspii, was permitted to open a library in Baku for reading services.42 This library of Russianlanguage and Azerbaijani-language books began operating under the auspices of Kaspii in 1902. As a rule, Ali Mardan bey provided libraries, reading halls, and educational institutions of Baku and other Caucasus towns with current issues of Kaspii for free. On December 22, 1904, the director of the Novo-Alexandrovskii Agricultural Institute sent a letter of gratitude, asking him to continue his noble mission in 1905.43 Ali Mardan bey, Hasan bey, Ahmed bey, and other figures consistently promoted the expansion of education for the Muslim population of Baku. In November 1901 the Baku governor’s office informed the police department of new trends in Tatar literacy and the Muslim movement of the country. Approximately 70 percent of Baku province’s population was Muslim, mainly Shiite. Sunni Muslims were largely concentrated in Guba uyezd, and many were moving to Turkey. The document said that the Shiite population was extremely ignorant, “fully subject to the influence of the clergy and far from new tendencies.” It reported that innovations in Tatar literacy had been initiated by Muslims in Baku, particularly Topchibashov, along with Ahmed bey Aghayev, Hasan bey Melikov, Nariman Narimanov, Soltan Mejid Ganiyev, and Habib bey Mahmudbeyov.44 On the eve of the Russian revolution, Ismayil bey Gasprinskii stated that the current stage of the Muslim enlightenment movement had exhausted itself: it was now necessary to launch a new, more vigorous political stage. Kaspii was gradually turning into the Muslim newspaper of the empire. One of the leaders of the Muslim movement, Gabdrashid Ibrahimov, wrote to Ali Mardan bey from St. Petersburg on November 29, 1904, noting that Kaspii was performing a noble mission by disseminating culture and progress among the Muslims of Russia. The newspaper should have its own correspondent in the areas of Ufa, Kazan, Orenburg, and other towns who was familiar with these places and the needs of Muslims. Ibrahimov recommended Ibnyamin Akhtyamov, a graduate of St. Petersburg Imperial University, Bashkir by nationality and a resident of Ufa.45 At the end of 1904 Ali Mardan bey received a letter from Akhtyamov, consenting to contribute to Kaspii.46 The newspaper published an article by Akhtyamov on December 12, 1904, titled “A Letter from Ufa.” Thus, the scope of information provided had expanded. Interest in Kaspii increased across the Caucasus in the early twentieth century, particularly in Azerbaijan, as evidenced by letters to the editorial office and to Ali Mardan bey personally from Baku, Elizavetpol, and Erivan. For example, the engineer Agha Ashurov from Baku wrote: “Dear Ali Mardan bey! You have strengthened the authority of Kaspii and thus opened up the path to serve our people.” He could not help the newspaper financially but offered to disseminate

The capital of an oil kingdom  27 it personally.47 A  letter from Adil khan Ziyadkhanov from Ganja expressed his respect to the newspaper’s contributors: Hasan bey, Ahmed bey, and Mahammadrza bey Vekilov, a close friend of Ali Mardan bey.48 Questions on the rights of Azerbaijan were put on the agenda in the cultural life, literature, and press, against the background of the deepening Jadidist movement. On the threshold of the first Russian revolution, the Azerbaijani national bourgeoisie and nationalist representatives began to intervene in the political sphere. The influx of many foreigners threatened the Muslim traditions and customs as well as the Turkic self-consciousness of the local population. The main purpose of the Azerbaijani nationalists was to counter this danger and preserve the national image and Muslim content of urban life in the face of large-scale demographic changes.

Advocate of Muslim interests in the Baku City Duma The role of Azerbaijani intellectuals in the political, economic, and cultural life of Baku was steadily growing. They aspired to gain rights in the bodies of urban self-government equal to those of Christians. This issue had been partially resolved by the adoption of new election regulations for the Duma in 1900. Representatives of the Muslim population of the city tried to gain an advantage from the new regulations that took effect on December  15, 1900. The 1892 regulations had reduced the quota of Muslims in the bodies of urban self-government to one-fifth the total number of deputies. Muslims had been granted the right to occupy one-third of the total seats in the Duma by the urban reform of the 1870. In fact, the regulations of 1892 were primarily directed against Jews, who were concentrated in some towns of the empire, but Muslims of the South Caucasus were the worst affected. Following the enactment of these regulations the bodies of self-government of Baku, Erivan, and Shusha, where the Muslim population represented an absolute majority, were seized by Armenians.49 Caucasian Muslims whose rights were restricted by these regulations were discontented. Prominent Muslim figures, including Hasan bey, demanded that the Baku governor change the provisions. In addition, they lodged their complaints with the Council of Ministers of the Russian Empire. They were supported by representatives of the nationalist bourgeoisie, including Taghiyev.50 On April 28, 1898, the Council of Ministers adopted new election regulations for the Baku City Duma.51 The tsar approved these regulations on May 15, 1899, and the State Council issued a decree on December 15, 1900. This time Ali Mardan bey acted as a principal advocate for the interests of Muslims. As a lawyer, he defended the right of Baku Muslims to have broader representation in the Duma. According to the new regulations, the number of non-Christian deputies of the Duma could not exceed the number of Christian deputies.52 In other words, the Muslim bourgeoisie and the Turkic intelligentsia could count on only half of the deputy seats. Elections to the Baku City Duma for the next four years were held on October 29 and November 18, 1901. A list of candidates published on the eve of the elections did not include the

28  The capital of an oil kingdom name of Ali Mardan bey, which was later inscribed under number 1956a. He won the election by a large margin.53 The total number of Muslim deputies represented half of the total deputies.54 The struggle of Ali Mardan bey and other Azerbaijani enlighteners backed by the national bourgeoisie produced successes. Despite a growing inflow of Christians, the representatives of Muslims held a well-deserved place in the Baku Duma, which opened in 1878. Ali Mardan bey, a Muslim, was elected the chair of the Duma in 1902.55 Second to the chair of the Duma was the secretary. From 1899 to 1903 this post was held by Mahammad bey Huseynbeyov; Najaf bey Vezirov became secretary in 1903. Broader representation in the bodies of municipal self-government proved to be a major success of the Azerbaijani nationalist forces on the eve of the great upheavals to come. As chair of the City Duma, Ali Mardan bey was engaged in political life as well as economic matters. His duties included receiving honorary guests and arranging banquets. For instance, the shah of Iran was expected to arrive in Baku on April 26, 1902, on his way to Europe. On April 10 a meeting of the Duma was held to discuss the grand welcoming ceremony and decoration of the city streets with flags. The mayor notified the Duma that Mozaffar ad-Din Shah Qajar would be staying in Baku until April 29. The Duma allocated the necessary funds to the city administration.56 The shah’s extended visits across Europe and Russia ended in Baku. After a meeting with Nicholas II in St. Petersburg, the shah spent two days in Baku, where he received a cordial welcome from Topchibashov among others. He was accompanied by Atabey Azam Mirza Alesker khan, Mirza Hasan khan (the Iranian ambassador in St. Petersburg), and top Russian officials. During his tour of the city on September 13, 1902, the shah visited the Russian Muslim Women’s School. Kaspii wrote that he met with Taghiyev and asked several questions. Taghiyev told the shah that this was the first women’s school for the Muslim population of Russia, 20 million strong, and that it was designed to produce educated Muslim women and future mothers.57 Ali Mardan bey took an active part in the ceremony. Visiting the Muslim Women’s School and witnessing the growing cultural environment of Muslim intellectuals proved to be instructive for the Iranian shah, who was going to carry out identical reforms in his own country. He intended to invite Ali Mardan bey to Iran and entrust him with reforming the justice system of the country. By the time of the first Russian revolution, Ali Mardan bey had accumulated great experience in social, political, cultural, and spiritual life. Mahammad Emin Rasulzade wrote: “When he entered the active path of his life, a new period in the national life of Russian Turks and Azerbaijanis began. It was the nationalcultural movement initiated by enlighteners Mirza Fatali Akhundov, Hasan bey Zardabi, and Ismayil bey Gasprinskii that gave impetus to the struggle for political rights.”58 Ali Mardan bey had appeared in Baku in 1896 as a lawyer and advocate for the rights of a separate people. By 1905, however, he was already acting as an advocate for the national movement.

The capital of an oil kingdom  29

Notes 1 Topchibashi Ali Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 4. 2 Ali Mardan bey notes that Hasan bey Zardabi moved to Baku in 1896. See Topchibashev, Maiak Azerbaidzhana, compiled, translated, and introduced by V. Guliev. Baku: Mütercim, 2010, 73. 3 Topchibashi Ali Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 4. 4 List of Members of the Baku City Duma, Elected by the Election Meetings on 14 and 25 October 1897, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 60, p. 88. 5 Topchibashev, Maiak Azerbaidzhana, 73–81. 6 Letter from Belyavskii to Baku Governor Odintsov, December  22, 1897, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 60, p. 104. 7 Ibid., 103. 8 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bey Ali Akbar bey oglou, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 9 See: Tadeusz Swietochowski, Russia and Azerbaijan: A Borderland in Transition. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995, 21. 10 Kaiserreich Deutsches Konsulat in Baku. Bericht über den Arbeiterausstand in Bakuer Indostriebezirk, August 4, 1903, Politisches Archiv des Auswärtigen Amts (hereafter referred to as PA-AA), R 11059, pp. 1–4. 11 Kaiserreich Deutsches Konsulat in Baku. Ergänzung zu Meinem Sonderbericht über den Arbeiterausstand in Baku, August 21, 1903, PA-AA, R 11059, pp. 1–4. 12 See: Baku po perepisi 22 oktyabria 1903 goda. Baku: Bak. Gor. Obshchev. Upr., 1908, 7–8. 13 Azerbaycan tarikhi. Baku: BDU, 1990. Vol. 4, 215. 14 Kaspii, October 5, 1899. 15 Peter Hopkirk, On Secret Service East of Constantinople: The Plot to Bring Down the British Empire. London: Oxford University Press, 1994, 331–332. 16 Monopolisticheskii kapital v neftianoi promyshlennosti Rossii (1883–1914): Dokumenty i materialy. Moscow: Nauka, 1961, 8–9. 17 Topchibashi Ali Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 4–5. 18 Kaspii, June 24, 1898. 19 Ibid., 75. 20 Topchibashi Ali Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 5. 21 Topchibashev, Maiak Azerbaidzhana, 76. 22 Topchibashi Ali Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 5. 23 See: On the Verification in the Newspaper “Kaspii” and Drawn Up Reports, 1901, State Archive of the Republic of Azerbaijan (hereafter referred to as SARA), f. 45, r. 1, v. 36, pp. 88–91. 24 Letter from Baku Vice Governor Lileev to Lieutenant Khechinov, November 26, 1901, SARA, f. 45, r. 1, v. 36, p. 87. 25 Letter from Baku Vice Governor Lileev to Lieutenant Khechinov, September 1, 1901, SARA, f. 45, r. 1, v. 36, p. 86. 26 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bek Ali Akbar bek oglou, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 2. 27 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 6. 28 Topchibashi Ali Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 6. 29 Vsepoddanneishii otchet o proizvedennoi v 1905 godu po vysochaishemu poveleniiu, senatorom Kuz’minskim revizii goroda Baku i Bakinskoi gubernii. St. Peterburg: B.M., 1906, 410. 30 Kaspii, June 24, 1901. 31 H.Z.A. Cabbarov, Tağıyevin qız məktəbinin tarixindən. Baku: Azərbaycan Nəşriyyat, “MTMuzeyi,” 2011, 16. 32 Kaspii, August 21, 1901.

30  The capital of an oil kingdom 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58

Kaspii, September 22, 1901. Kaspii, September 23, 1901. Kaspii, October 7, 1901. Hacı Zeynalabdin Tağıyev, 138; for more information about the opening of school, see: Kaspii, October 9, 1901. Topchibashev, Maiak Azerbaidzhana, 87. Azerbaycan tarikhi. Vol. 4, 198–199. Certificate issued by Hasan bey Melikov at the Baku Technical college, January 19, 1896, SHARA, f. 653, r. 1, v. 5, p. 1. Mir Celal, Azerbaycanda edebi mektebler (1905–1917). Baku: Ziya-Nurlan, 2004, 38. Tpchibashev, Maiak Azerbaidzhana, 85. A Letter from the Office of the Governor of Baku City to Library Directors, Bookstores and other Institutions, February 18, 1901, SHARA, f. 45, r. 1, v. 36, p. 18. Letter of Gratitude of the Director of the Novo-Alexander’s Agricultural Institute to the Editorial office of “Kaspii” Newspaper, December 22, 1904, SHARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 4, p. 2. Information of the Office of the Governor of the Baku Police Department, November, 14, 1901, SHARA, f. 45, r. 1, v. 35, pp. 34–35. Letter Ibrahimov to Topchibashev, November  29, 1904, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 4–5. Letter Ibrahimov to Topchibashev, 1904, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 21–22. Letter Ashurov to Topchibashev, December 16, 1903, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 28. Letter Ziyadkhanov to Topchibashev, December  9, 1903, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 26. Iorg Baberovski, Vrag est’ vezde: Stalinizm na Kavkaze. Moscow: Rossiiskaia Politicheskaia Éntsiklopediia (ROSSPÉN), 2010, 47. For more information about Hanifa khanum Melikova-Abaieva, see: Ziyəddin Göyüşov, Həsən bəy Məlikov Zərdabi. Həsən bəy Zərdabi və “Əkinçi” (Bioqrafiq məqalələr, məktublar, xatirələr, tətdiqatlar). Baku: Azerbaycan, 2010, 88–91. See: On Urban Reform in Baku, n/d., CSHASP, f. 1268, r. 22, v. 77, pp. 1–4. Letter of the Mayor of Baku to the Baku Governor, November  23, 1901, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 60. The List of Persons Entitled to Participate in the Elections in 1901 to Baku City Duma, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 22. List of Persons Elected to the Baku City Duma for 1902–1905, November 23, 1901, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 68. Letter of the Mayor of Baku to the Baku governor, 1902, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 91. See: Protocoles of the Meeting of the Duma from April 9–10, 1902, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 194, p. 86. Kaspii, September 14, 1901. Kurtuluş, December, 1934, # 2, 35.

3 The year 1905 Baku on fire

The revolution in Russia started on January 9, 1905. Although the revolutions that shook Europe and America in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries reached Russia very late, the empire underwent a powerful revolutionary movement in 1905. Military failure in the war against Japan at the end of 1904 caused a wave of mass discontent and stirred up the thirty million Muslims in the empire. Baku, in a distant province, was industrially the third city of Russia. It was only natural that such a proletarian center could not stand aloof during the revolution. This period of drastic changes became a turning point in the life of Topchibashov. From the first days of the revolution, the editorial office of Kaspii became the headquarters of the struggle for national rights. The editors were engaged in drawing up an initial program of struggle for the social, political, and cultural rights of Muslims not only in Azerbaijan but in all of Russia. The regular military failures of the tsarist government gave impetus to the struggle against autocracy. Old Muslim enlighteners such as Zardabi and Gasprinskii united their efforts with the activities of young Turkic politicians, including Topchibashov and Aghayev. They demanded an end to censorship and political, civil, and religious rights for the Muslim population, which had become the object of mockery by various missionary societies.1 Prior to the revolution Topchibashov had been particularly active in the Caucasus and Azerbaijan, but now he entered the general Russian political arena and became a leader of all Turkic Muslims of the Russian Empire.

The first Russian revolution and the beginning of the struggle for national rights During the November elections of 1904 Ali Mardan bey was elected to the Baku City Duma for the third time. Hasan bey Zardabi, after eight years of fruitful work at the Duma, was not a candidate due to the deterioration of his health and was replaced by Ahmed bey Aghayev. For the first time in history, a representative of the local population – Kamil bey Safaraliyev – was acting as head of the city council. The Russian Empire sustained a great defeat in the Russo-Japanese War late in 1904. News of military defeats in the Far East further aggravated the national crisis. The Council of Ministers held a meeting in November 1904 to find a way out

32  The year 1905 of the imminent tragedy and discuss methods of lessening the crisis. The ministers submitted a program titled “Salvation of the Fatherland” with eleven clauses to the emperor. Tsar Nicholas II signed a decree on December 12, 1904, instructing the government and senate to draw up a large-scale program of reforms aimed at strengthening the role of the zemstvo and city bodies in local self-government, restructuring the courts, and improving the land and agricultural policy. Progressive people of Azerbaijan adopted the central elements of this decree to promote the interests of the nation. Aghayev, an active contributor to Kaspii, on January 18, 1905, demanded that the Duma provide equal rights for Muslims in the bodies of self-government based on the December 12 decree. He noted that the rights of Muslims in the city self-government had been restricted “This restriction cannot be justified and in practice causes great damage to the interests of Muslims and prevents city self-governments from proper functioning.” He demanded rights for Muslims in city self-government “equal to the rights of other residents of the empire,”2 calling on Duma leaders to discuss this question. Aghayev also invited self-governing bodies of other South Caucasian towns to join this appeal. Muslims of the South Caucasus had fewer rights within the system of city selfgovernment than not only Christians but also Muslims from other regions of the Russian Empire. On January 25 Aghayev’s appeal was considered by an enlarged session of the Duma chaired by the mayor, Konstantin Iretskii. Forty-two Duma members joined the debates. The mayor and some deputies attempted to distort the appeal by replacing the property qualification required for elections with an educational qualification. Deputies Ambartsum Melikov, Christofor Antonov, Stepan Tagiianosov, Gaik Kiandjuntsev, and others suggested replacing “Transcaucasian Muslims” with “non-Christian population of the empire.” Ali Mardan bey, Aghayev, Habib bey Mahmudbeyov, Isa bey Hajinskii, and other deputies realized that this change in the qualifications would affect primarily the Muslim population of South Caucasian towns, whose educational level was much lower than that of non-Muslims. An Armenian-initiated call for consideration of Aghayev’s appeal likely was intended as a distraction from the main problem. He therefore declared: “Inside Russia the rights of Muslims in city self-governments are not restricted; the restriction applies only to Transcaucasian Muslims and is hence of an exclusive and local nature. . . . I ask Christians to make Muslims equal in rights; we shall support any agreement along this path.”3 Thus, in the first days of the revolution in Russia, Azerbaijani intellectuals managed to pass a resolution through the Baku City Duma granting rights to Muslims of the South Caucasus equal to those of the Christian population of Russia on an official basis.

Bloody events in Baku Russian-Armenian relations cooled in the 1890s. Duke Gregorii Golitsyn, assigned in 1896 as a Caucasian deputy, took measures aimed at weakening the Armenian influence and improving relations with Muslims. He dismissed a group of public servants of Armenian origin and invited Muslims to fill the vacancies.

The year 1905  33 A decree of June 12, 1903, confiscated Armenian Church property. The Dashnak Party appealed to the Armenians, warning that “the tsarist despotic monarchy and its immoral representative Golitsyn are going to deliver a final blow to Armenians. The goal is to cleanse Armenia of Armenians.”4 Swayed by the saccharine speeches by Armenian leaders, Prince Golitsyn had recently permitted 42,000 “peaceable, industrious Armenian peasants” allegedly prosecuted by the Turkish authorities to resettle in the Caucasus. This group, skillful in destabilizing the situation in Turkey, was placed near Tiflis on his order. Prince Golitsyn was its first victim. On October 14, 1903, these “peasants” attacked the deputy, trying to hack him to pieces. It was a wonder that the heavily wounded prince escaped.5 As a result he had to leave the Caucasus. On May 11, 1905, the central committee of the Baku branch of Dashnaktsutyun (the Armenian Revolutionary Federation) rendered a verdict against Baku governor Mikhail Nakashidze.6 He was charged with confiscating lands of the Armenian Church in Erivan province.7 Secret correspondence of the Caucasian police said that Dashnaks and Droshakists (named for the newspaper Droshak) had intended to kill Nakashidze as far back as 1903, when he was governor of Erivan.8 Political assassinations of Russian officials by Armenian terrorist organizations led to an Armenian–Muslim confrontation that was unprecedented during the period of Russian control over the region.9 In April 1905 Nicholas II reinstituted the post of Caucasian governor-general and in May appointed Count Illarion Vorontsov-Dashkov. Unlike Prince Golitsyn, Vorontsov-Dashkov did not conceal his pro-Armenian stance, believing that a friendship with Armenians would consolidate Russia’s sway in Transcaucasia.10 Due to his efforts, St. Petersburg had to return the church property to Armenians.11 Vorontsov-Dashkov’s appointment incited the activities of Armenian gangs in the Caucasus and enhanced interest in the Armenian question. Western European states believed that only Russia was capable of helping Armenians and alleviating the situation of the Armenian people in Turkey.12 The Baku developments in 1905 took place against the background of a “national massacre.” After sustaining a defeat in Turkey in the 1890s, the Dashnaks moved to the Caucasus, including Baku. The Russian authorities collaborated with Armenians in all their initiatives in the Caucasus. Thus, Armenians seized administrative control in Tiflis, the center of the Caucasian region ruled by the governor-general. Eight out of ten officials in the Russian municipal bodies were Armenians.13 They became the interpreters of Russian laws in the region, construing any law in favor of Armenians. Even worse, the Armenian organizations of Baku were secretly armed. Vorontsov-Dashkov conceded in his 1907 report to the government that supplying Armenians with arms and ammunition played a key role in the Baku events. He believed that the Dashnaks’ open fundraising and purchase of the latest types of arms allegedly to protect Armenians against a “pan-Islamist movement” greatly alarmed Muslims.14 Topchibashov, Huseynzade, Aghayev, Zardabi, Farrukh bey Vezirov, and other progressive Azerbaijanis undoubtedly sensed this distress. The first days of 1905 in Baku were full of rumors of an “Armenian-Muslim war.” These rumors soon became reality. On February 6 the Armenians began the first offensive, which lasted four days. As a

34  The year 1905 result, four hundred people were wounded and 130 Muslims and 170 Armenians were killed.15 The police were informed that Armenian committees were sending terrorists via Istanbul to Batum on board the Tsar to stage acts of terror and explosions on the Caucasian railroad and against individuals.16 It was obvious that Armenians were preparing for the Baku events soon to come and regarded them as the start of a big operation in the Caucasus. Against all expectations, they sustained a defeat. Their carefully prepared actions were prevented on February 10. Topchibashov greatly contributed to ending the conflict. On March 1, 1905, the City Duma discussed the bloody events in Baku. The debates were chaired by Mayor Iretskii. In attendance were city council members Dmitrii Arttem’ev, Kamil bey Safaraliyev, and Mikhail Beliavskii; Muslim deputies Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, Hasan bey Zardabi-Melikov, Ahmed bey Aghayev, Asadulla bey Aghayev, Hebib bey Mahmudbeyov, and Haji Aslan Ashurov; and Armenian deputies. Mentioning the innocent lives that had been lost, Iretskii noted that “there are no reasons for conflict and enmity between the two parties. The persons responsible for atrocities must be punished.”17 The Duma approved a decision assigning 50,000 rubles to persons with losses on February 6–9, irrespective of their nationality and religion. To avoid further aggravation, the Duma and the Union of Oil Industrialists, under the guidance of the mayor, decided to set up a committee of six Muslim and six Armenian deputies as well as two neutral persons and two press representatives. Ali Mardan bey joined the committee as a press representative. The Armenian press was represented by Christopher Sarkisov. Asadullah bey Aghayev, Israfil bey Hajiyev, Isa bey Hajinskii, Najafguli bey Sadygov, and Ismayil bey Safaraliyev were members of the committee. The agenda of the meeting also included other questions, but the deputies considered it improper to deal with irrelevant questions at this time of mourning in the city. The meeting adopted a resolution on Baku events: Composed primarily of representatives of the Muslim and Armenian populations and well versed in mutual relations between the two, the Duma categorically declares that the confrontation did not result from any religious, national, or economic difference, so it would be wrong to assign the responsibility to Armenians or Muslims. Only an unbiased investigation will reveal the reasons for this unprecedented grievous event.18 But Armenians exploited the Baku developments in their favor. They set rumors afloat that “bloodthirsty Muslims” had killed 10,000 to 15,000 Armenians in Baku. Russian newspapers such as Birzhevie Vedomosti, Novosti, Rus’, and others readily accepted these inventions. I. Dolukhanov published a long article titled “Caucasian Misfortune” in the newspaper Rus’, claiming that prior to the slaughter the Baku mullahs had called on Muslims to kill Armenians.19 But Kaspii, led by Topchibashov, incessantly countered these fabrications. Dolukhanov had to tender written apologies and express his regret in Kaspii for the misinformation in Rus’. His excuse was that at the time “he had no news about the noble, humanitarian role of the Muslim clergy.”20 Kaspii was published only in Baku and could not

The year 1905  35 inform St. Petersburg readers about the Baku developments, which were distorted and falsified by the Russian press. To combat the anti-Muslim smear campaign, it was essential to get access to the metropolitan press. After brief debate this mission was assigned to Ahmed bey Aghayev, who was successful. The most prestigious newspaper, Sankt Petersburgskie Vedomosti, published two major articles by him titled “The Truth about Baku Events”: Ahmed bey wrote: “While Muslim intellectuals and respected people attempted to reconcile those involved in the conflict, explaining the malignancy of fratricidal carnage, Armenian propagandists were circulating telegrams across the world and worsening the situation. They alleged that 10,000 to 15,000 Armenians had been killed in an effort to present Muslims as bloodthirsty animals.”21 Aghayev emphasized that Muslims did not conceal their wrongdoing, seeking to atone for their sins and make their peace with Armenians. At the same time, he warned, “Muslims are not going to take the sins of the Armenians on their shoulders.”22 In fact, the Caucasian authorities secretly reported to St. Petersburg that the Armenians were the instigators of the bloody events. Following acts of terror against Russian top officials, the Caucasian authorities apprehended Armenian nationalists. They were not in a hurry to disarm the Armenian detachments and toyed with them. According to Vladimir Maevskii, the cardinal error of the Russian administration in the Caucasus could be attributed to their failure to act against Dashnaktsutyun: “all disasters in our Eastern Transcaucasia come from this culpable omission by the authorities and the criminal activity of ‘Dashnaktsutyun’ as a ringleader of the repression.”23 Vorontsov-Dashkov, although far from sympathetic to the Muslims, had to concede that armed detachments of Dashnaktsutyun were responsible for ethnic massacres in the region. Even the Armenian population was well aware that Dashnaks played a crucial role in the ArmenianTatar conflict.24 Further developments showed that the government itself was to blame for the events in Baku. Neglect of duty by the ruling circles led to the bloody clashes. Kaspii wrote in July  1906 that the Baku developments were a “governmental secret.” The newspaper unmasked former deputy minister of internal affairs Prince Sergei Urusov, nicknaming him “marauder.” The main individuals guilty of carnage remained in the shadows. Sultan Krim-Gerey, a former aide to the Caucasian governor-general, conceded that the conflict in the Caucasus was stirred up by the government.25 In August 1905 the Armenian attacks resumed in Baku, Nakhchivan, Erivan, Echmiadzin, Jebrail, Shusha, Ganja, Tiflis, Batum, Gazakh, and Zangezur.

The St. Petersburg mission of Ali Mardan bey The international carnage in the Caucasus failed to push the national-liberation revolution into the background. Earlier in 1905 the tsar, in retreat, issued an edict on February  18, 1905, on preparation of a draft for the State Duma. This mission was assigned to internal minister Aleksandr Buligin, who set up a meeting of the government on March 15 to identify the rights and duties of the people’s

36  The year 1905 representatives. Topchibashov wrote an appreciative article in Kaspii on the establishment of such a representative institution, saying that the draft should take into account the interests of Muslims and thus renovate life in the Caucasus. A meeting on March 8 with the Baku City Duma was begun by reading telegrams from various South Caucasian towns on the tragic events in Baku. Topchibashov suggested sending letters of gratitude to all those who backed the victims of the terror. Members of the Duma sent such letters to Gori, Erivan, Batum, and other towns. The Duma then discussed candidates to attend a meeting of the internal minister to comply with the edict of February 18. Hasan bey Zardabi stated that a special meeting was expected to be held in St. Petersburg in a week. It was time to select two deputies to participate. Aghayev suggested that they should not indicate the number of participants and should provide each delegate with several assistants for consultations. He added that each nationality had its own distinctive features, so it was necessary to send a great number of people to explain the situation. He believed that it was unnecessary to restrict the number of representatives, insisting that representatives from Shusha, Derbent, Erivan, Elizavetpol, and other towns as well as from Baku and Tiflis should also take part in the St. Petersburg meeting. At his urgent request, the Baku mayor sent invitations to the heads of these towns, asking them to join the process. Ali Mardan bey also supported participation in the meeting. He offered to set up a special committee to identify the needs of the Caucasus and draft a report on problems of district councils, town self-government, and so forth to be submitted to the government in St. Petersburg. Armenian deputy Nikolai Ayvazov made a suggestion on “appointment of deputies to the meeting.” Once Duma deputy Paul Gukasov was in St. Petersburg, he could represent their Baku City Duma. In the meanwhile, the Muslim deputies unanimously put forward Topchibashov as a delegate. The Duma approved Topchibashov and Gukasov as members of the delegation. Haji Aslan Ashurov suggested that Mayor Iretskii should also go to St. Petersburg, but his proposal was not accepted. The Duma passed a decision to send a telegram to internal minister Buligin: “The Baku City Duma is confident that the situation in the Caucasus as a whole and in the Baku district in particular will be remedied when the population becomes convinced that the Caucasus, on an equal basis with other regions of the empire, will be included in domestic reforms and have its own representatives at the meeting to be convened on February 18.” The telegram asked for the acceptance of the three-member delegation from the Baku Duma.26 Headed by Buligin, the special secret meeting began its work on March  12, much earlier than the fixed date. It immediately became evident that debates over the law on the State Duma would be long. Therefore, Ali Mardan bey preferred to send a special mission to St. Petersburg. Progressive Azerbaijani intellectuals, gathered at Taghiyev’s home on March 15, decided to send a document prepared by Topchibashov titled “Statement on the Needs of Muslims” (consisting of seventeen clauses) to the government. The national needs of Caucasian Muslims included renovation of city life, expansion of the rights of Muslims in the municipal administration, and improvement of living conditions and the educational level. The meeting authorized Ali Mardan bey, Ahmed bey Aghayev, Ali bey

The year 1905  37 Huseynzade, and Farrukh bey Vezirov to notify the government of these demands. The Baku City Duma also decided to ask that Baku province would receive three seats.27 Topchibashov arrived in St. Petersburg in April  1905 and met with the internal minister and Buligin, the developer of the draft for the State Duma, and gave him the document compiled by Topchibashov.28 In April  1905 Buligin submitted the petition of the Baku representatives to the Cabinet of Ministers. On April  17, 1905, based on this petition, a governmental decree was signed that took into account only a few of the Muslims’ demands. They were allowed to elect muftis, kazis, and local clergy. During this same period Topchibashov was received by the new Caucasian governor general, Vorontsov-Dashkov, which proved to be an important result of the mission.29 He succeeded in convincing the governor-general of the urgent need to reform the administration, courts, land, taxes, and other elements. On April 22, 1905, permission was given to issue a daily newspaper, Hayat, in Turkic.30 Upon his return to Baku, Topchibashov as the owner of Hayat entrusted Ali bey Huseynzade and Ahmed bey Aghayev with issuing the newspaper. As secretary of the Baku governor at the beginning of the twentieth century, Asef bey Atamalybeyov was appointed as state censor of Hayat. The first issue was published on June 7, 1905. The newspaper inspired new life in Turkic public thought and national self-consciousness. The St. Petersburg trip of the Azerbaijani enlighteners became an important event in shaping All-Turkic unity. On April  8, 1905, Ali Mardan bey, Ali bey Huseynzade, Ahmed bey Aghayev, Farrukh bey Vezirov, Bunyamin Ahmed, and Sadri Maksudov gathered at the apartment of Gabdrashid Ibrahimov in St. Petersburg. They concluded that it was necessary to create a political party of Russian Muslims. The organization should be called Ittifak al-Muslimin (Union of Muslims) or, as some documents say, “Union of Russian Muslims.”31 After long debates, they decided to send Ali Mardan bey’s appeal to all prominent intellectuals residing in Muslim regions of Russia. The appeal emphasized the necessity of uniting all Muslims around a common program, to struggle for equality of rights between Muslims and other peoples of the empire.32 The St. Petersburg meeting of Topchibashov and Gasprinskii grew into an intimate friendship. In her memoirs Gasprinskii’s daughter Govhar khanym confirmed that Topchibashov repeatedly came to Bakhchisarai to discuss the problems of Russian Turks. A decision on the creation of the union was adopted in June 1905 in Chistopole, at the wedding of the sister of Muslim religious figure Mullah Kamalov. In the presence of five hundred enlighteners, it was decided to convene a congress in the summer of 1905 in Nizhnii Novgorod and inform the government of their intention to establish an all-Russian Muslim organization. Russian Muslims advocated a constitutional monarchy and supported the establishment of an assembly of people’s representatives on the basis of universal and equal election rights and providing Muslims with freedom of religion, conscience, speech, meetings, and the press.33 The newspaper Tarjuman provided information about the meeting in Chistopole on June 7 and 10. Gabdrashid Ibrahimov published a long article in the Baku newspaper Hayat on June 21.

38  The year 1905

An audience with the Caucasian governor-general and Tiflis discussions After returning to Baku, Topchibashov left for Tiflis on June 10, 1905, to meet with Vorontsov-Dashkov, informing him of the conditions of Caucasian Muslims and the Armenian-Muslim confrontation throughout the region. He outlined the problems of Muslim areas of the South Caucasus, pointing out that the authorities treated Caucasian Muslims like stepchildren and mistrusted them. They were discriminated against in public institutions and excluded. After listening to Topchibashov’s explanations, the governor-general accepted his claims and the necessity of reforms in this area. He promised to open native-language schools, women’s colleges, and Muslim religious educational centers. Vorontsov-Dashkov also considered it possible to issue newspapers and literature in Azeri and to relax censorship. However, he linked the implementation of most of these proposals with the restoration of tranquility and order in the Caucasus.34 In June 1905 twelve prominent Baku figures and Topchibashov met with senator Aleksandr Kuzminskii, who had arrived from St. Petersburg to investigate the Armenian-Muslim conflict. The senator was informed about the situation in the city and the province as a whole. Ali Mardan bey gave him a copy of his petition to the governor-general and repeatedly visited Ganja and Tiflis in summer 1905 to explain the situation and mobilize the Muslim community. In addition, at a meeting held in Hajikent, Topchibashov explained the political, social, and economic needs of Caucasian Muslims and advocated the establishment of bodies of local self-government. Ismayil khan Ziyadkhanov, Alekber bey Rafibeyov, Alekber bey Khasmamedov, Adil khan Ziyadkhanov, Jahangir khan Khoskii, and Khalil bey Khasmamedov were instructed to hold meetings of this sort in the future. The Hajikent meeting also appointed Topchibashov, Adil khan Ziyadkhanov, and Alekber bey Khasmamedov to raise the question of the rights of the Muslims of Elizavetpol province before governmental bodies. In summer 1905 Topchibashov sent appeals to St. Petersburg concerning living conditions and the aspirations of Muslims from Ganja, Zakatala, Sheki, and Javad uyezds.35 In July 1905, acting on behalf of Muslim community of Baku, Topchibashov raised the question of immediate cancelation of the restrictions imposed on the local population during elections to the Baku Duma as well as temporary suspension of elections to the Duma of 1905–1906 before the governor-general. He also drew up charters for a Muslim charitable society and the Society for Literacy among the Muslim Population of the Caucasus.36 All these documents were submitted to the governor-general in early August  1905. Due to Ali Mardan bey’s efforts, permission was granted in late 1905 to open a Muslim charitable society. Taghiyev was elected as chair of the society and Aghayev as secretary. Other intellectuals, including Topchibashov, became members. In 1906 the education society Nashri-Maarif began operating in the city. However, the restrictions on Muslims during elections to the Baku Duma remained in force. These 1905 developments highlighted Topchibashov’s role as a leading figure of Muslims, the Caucasian intelligentsia, and public thought. He won fame far

The year 1905  39 beyond Russia. Thus, he was invited by Iranian shah Mozaffar ad-Din to act as minister of justice. The shah sent his representatives Mirza Hasan khan Mushirul-Mulk to Baku to hold talks with Topchibashov. The Bakhchisarai newspaper Tarjuman wrote that “Topchibashov will do well at his post, but he needs experience, vigor, and knowledge.”37 Gasprinskii was glad that the shah’s initiative failed: “I’m happy that you did not become a minister: forget it.”38 When the struggle for the Constitution of Iran occurred in early 1910, the Iranian government again considered inviting Ali Mardan bey to work in Teheran.

The Muslim congress on the River Oka In August 1905 Topchibashov left Tiflis for Nizhnii Novgorod, where a congress of Muslim representatives from all over Russia was to be held. Some authors refer to Gasprinskii and Ibrahimov as the initiators of the congress.39 In his autobiography Ali Mardan bey notes that he personally suggested the idea, which was authorized in St. Petersburg in April–May 1905. He then circulated letters to prominent Muslims.40 The congress of Muslims was not without adventure. Various Turkic enlighteners, religious figures, and well-to-do persons from the Caucasus, Crimea, Turkestan, Povolzh’e, the Urals, Siberia, and Itil-Ural began gathering together in Nizhnii Novgorod on August 10. Topchibashov, Yusuf Akchura, Gasprinskii, Gabdrashid Ibrahimov, and Musa Bigiyev were responsible for the preparations.41 Fatih Kerimi, Sayid-Girey Alkyn, Gabdulla Apanay, and others aided in the organizational activities. On August 18 the governor of Nizhnii Novgorod did not approve Topchibashov’s request to authorize the congress. On August 13 Mullah Ali Yaushev gave a banquet in honor of the Baku guests: Ali Mardan bey, Shamsi Asadullayev, Ahmed bey Aghayev, Najaf bey Vezirov, and Taghizade. Twentyfive participants in the congress were also invited. Topchibashov and Ibrahimov made speeches. It was decided to ask the governor again. Abu-s-Suud Akhtyamov, a representative of the Ufa Tatars, received a negative reply. Ali Mardan bey suspected that the tsarist government feared the idea of Muslim unity, so local authorities were ordered from St. Petersburg to prevent a Muslim congress in Nizhnii Novgorod.42 In response, Ibrahimov leased the pleasure boat Gustav Struve, which took the Muslim participants beyond the borders of Nizhegorod province. The captain was paid three hundred rubles for the outing and four hundred rubles for the banquet. The money was collected from the congress participants, six rubles per head, except for students. Thus, the first congress of Muslims was opened on August 15, at 1 p.m. on the River Oka. Debates lasted until 11.43 When the boat set out from the Macarius pier, Vladikavkaz imam Shakir Sadyg efendi Rahmangul began reciting prayers from the Quran as a means to unite all the delegates. Then the people went up on deck and took their seats. Sunnis and Shiites discussed their common problems by mutual consent like brothers. The delegates from different parts of the empire were welcomed by Gasprinskii as the editor of Tarjuman. He suggested electing Topchibashov and Yusuf Akchurin (Akchura) to the presidium of the congress.44 Selim Girey Janturin from Ufa

40  The year 1905 province acted as secretary. Topchibashov made an extensive report on the political, economic, cultural, national, and religious issues of Russian Muslims: Oh, faithful, I’m so happy today, I cannot find words to express my joy and gratitude. I will never forget this day. Beyond any doubts, it will be an annual holiday for the Muslims of all Russia. We are all Turks, of the same origin, kin, and religion. The lands of our ancestors stretched from the west to the east. Although our ancestors were heroic people, today we are scattered. . . . Here, on the surface of the water, we are free to open our minds to one another, see our faces, put our arms round each other. I’m confident that even if we fail to see each other on the water, we will meet in heaven and celebrate our holiday.45 This statement touched everybody deeply. “Most of those present cried over his words. Topchibashov’s speech was long but meaningful.” Ali Mardan bey was followed by Abu-s-Suud efendi Akhtyamov, Gasprinskii, and others.46 Their speeches stressed the necessity of establishing a political party capable of uniting all Muslims of Russia. Seyid-Girey Alkin, Musa Jarullahi Bigiyev, Gabdulla Apanay, Ahmed bey Aghayev, Galiasker Syrtlanov, Gabdrashid Ibrahimov, Gayaz Iskhanov, Fatih Kerimov, Mahammad-Zakir Ramiyev, Kutlug Mahammad Tevkelov, Fuad Tiktarov, and Mullah Ali Yaushev all backed this idea.

Figure 3.1 Participants of the first all-Russian Congress of Muslims on board the Gustav Struve. On deck, from left: Fatih Kerimov, Gabdrashid Ibrahimov, Isamail bey Gasprinskii, and Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov. Nizhnii Novgorod, August 1905.

The year 1905  41 Topchibashov’s statement was the basis for adoption of a resolution consisting of five clauses: 1 2

3

4

5

It is essential to bring Muslims from all parts of Russia together in a timely fashion, based on the public, cultural, and political requirements of presentday Russian life. To attain the assigned goals, a progressive faction of Muslims who share the values of progressive Russian society is making efforts to establish a legal society and order in the country and seek the participation of people’s representatives in the legislative and administrative affairs of the state. A progressive faction of Muslims is seeking to cancel all restrictions against Muslims as set forth in the present legal enactments, governmental decrees, and administrative practice as well as to make Muslims equal to the Russian population in terms of political, civil, and religious rights. Muslims must be guided by the existing requirements and regulations of political life of Russia. In so doing, they should focus on the cultural development of Muslims, open diversified schools in line with the needs of Muslim propaganda, and disseminate principles of modern life using books, newspapers, magazines, popular courses, reading halls and libraries, and other educational institutions. To achieve these objectives, it is imperative to set up local majlises [assemblies] under the authority of the regular Muslim congresses.47

The resolution of the first congress provided for the division of Muslim regions of Russia into sixteen districts, with Baku as a temporary center. In addition, the congress passed a decision to make August 15 a holiday for all Russian Muslims.48 Topchibashov was charged with organizing the second congress of Russian Muslims.49 After thirteen hours of fruitful work, the boat returned to Macarius pier. When it was moored, police officers started searching the participants of the congress. Gasprinskii suggested throwing the documents into the water. However, Gabdrashid Ibrahimov declared, “Sink or swim, I’ll keep the documents anyway.” As soon as the boat had docked, he quickly got into a phaeton booked ahead of time and left the port unnoticed. In so doing, he managed to save the penciled documents of the congress.50 On August  17 Ali Mardan bey, on behalf of thirty Caucasians from Baku, Ganja, Shamakhy, Salian, and other towns, gave a supper for the congress delegates, all of whom voiced their satisfaction with the work of the congress and its results.51 On August 20 the guests left Nizhnii Novgorod with hope and optimism. The congress played a crucial role in uniting the Russian Turks and forming them into an independent, unified political force.

Baku on fire: plans to resettle the Muslim villages of Absheron When Ali Mardan bey returned to Baku from Nizhnii Novgorod, the city was on fire. Searches in the Armenian quarters of the city revealed arsenals with

42  The year 1905 arms and ammunition. In the summer of 1905 the Armenian terror in Shusha incited ­disturbances in Baku. On August 18 and 19 Muslim leaders gathered in Baku at the Madrid and Islamiia hotels and demanded that the Armenians disarm and ensure the security of Azerbaijanis. Armenian coachmen of the Baku konka (a horse-drawn traction-based tram) who went on strike on Saturday were replaced by soldier-strikebreakers. Three Armenian terrorists started shooting, leading to deaths and casualties. This resulted in barricades and trenches that traversed the streets. Municipal authorities had no power to stop the carnage between peoples. The cruelty and atrocities of Armenian detached forces in Baku evoked the growing indignation of Muslims in outlying districts. On August 22 a Cossack regiment prevented Muslim detachments from penetrating into the city. Unlike the February events, the Baku events in August exceeded the bounds of the city. Fires spread in the oil fields of the Absheron peninsula and in Baku’s villages. Half the oil derricks were destroyed or disabled.52 The overwhelming majority of these derricks were owned by Armenian oil industrialists. Seasonal workers from Iran added to the pogroms. Their activities against Armenian employers raise a few questions. Some historians do not exclude the possibility that members of the British special services competing with Russia in the Middle East encouraged Iranian workers to set fire to the oil fields. Fires transformed the oil fields of Balakhany, Zabrat, Ramana, Bibi-Heybat, and other places into an inferno. Vorontsov-Dashkov, the Caucasian governor-general, also responded to the bloody events. On September 7, 1905, he arrived in Baku and was received by a Muslim delegation headed by Topchibashov, who promised to make a detailed report about the perpetrators of the Baku events, the instigators and organizers of the bloody massacres. He assured the governor-general that the always tranquil and loyal Baku Muslims were eager for peace.53 The governor-general called for a meeting of Muslim and Armenian representatives and offered terms of armistice to both parties, as drawn up by Baku’s bishop, Ananii Shirvanskii. On September 14 the parties accepted these terms. The Muslim, Armenian, and Russian populations of Baku arranged a joint peace demonstration. Despite various promises and even a joint performance of the lezginka (a Caucasian dance), however, no long-term peace in Baku was achieved. The problem was that “mutinous Armenians hostile to Muslims” served in the Russian troops stationed in Baku, according to the newspaper Russkoe Slovo.54 Despite serious efforts by the Muslim intelligentsia headed by Ali Mardan bey, an Armenian-Muslim war broke out in Baku on October 20, 1905. This confrontation was particularly destructive and lasted until October 30. The St. Petersburg telegraph agency reported that “Baku looks like a city at war. Russians demand that Armenians be disarmed and evicted. According to the police, twenty, thirty, or fifty bombs have exploded every day.” Armenians alleged that eight hundred bombs were enough to raze Baku to the ground.55 Numerous appeals to Prime Minister Sergei Witte yielded no results. He replied: “What can I do? The situation is identical across Russia. This is not up to me.”56 Following large-scale fires at the oil fields, the Armenian oil industrialists, allegedly in order to ensure the safety and stabilization of the oil output, asked the

The year 1905  43 authorities to resettle all Azerbaijanis from villages located near oil fields. They even succeeded in bringing this question to the notice of authorities in St. Petersburg and started a debate in the Cabinet of Ministers. A special meeting headed by the minister of finance, Count Vladimir Kokovtsev, was scheduled to discuss this issue. To protect the interests of Muslim oil workers employed at oil fields and Baku peasants facing the threat of resettlement, Ali Mardan bey and Ahmed bey Aghayev had a meeting with Kokovtsev in September 1905, explaining that the population of Baku was entirely Muslim, so such a government action would be viewed as an act of international discord. Ali Mardan bey submitted a written report on Muslims employed in oil fields and populated localities in the oilproducing region. The manifesto of October  17 promised a constitution to the country. Therefore, the Russian Cabinet of Ministers considered it expedient to suspend debates over the resettlement of Azerbaijani peasants, as demanded by the Armenian oil industrialists.57 In October 1905 all the railways of the country were involved in strikes, so Topchibashi and Aghayev faced great difficulties until they reached Baku. As in other large towns of Russia, the manifesto of October 17 caused great concern in Baku. Deepening revolution and a growing national-liberation movement led to official recognition of political parties in Russia and the gaining of some freedoms. The document heightened the people’s expectations of organizing the Union of Russian Muslims. Upon his return to Baku, Ali Mardan bey started drawing up a draft charter. The manifesto provided for the establishment of political parties, so Topchibashov tried to seek official proclamation of the Union of Russian Muslims as a political party before elections to the City Duma. The second congress of the union was scheduled for mid-January 1906 to complete work on its legalization.

Notes 1 Biographical information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 6–7. 2 Protocols of the Meeting of the Baku City Duma, January 25, 1905, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 260, p. 28. 3 Ibid., 30. 4 Appeal of the Dashnak Party to the People. Report of the Police, 1903, SARF, f. 102, r. 231, v. 1360, p. 216. 5 Alexander Alektorov, Inorodtsy v Rossii. St. Petersburg: Tipografiia I. V. Leont’eva, 1906, 59–60. 6 Secret Police Information about the Acts of the Armenian Terror Against Tsarist Officials, 1905, SARF, f. 102, r. 231, v. 11, p. 24. 7 Order Caucasian Committee of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation about Caucasian Administration of the Russian Government, May 18, 1905, Archive of Political Documents of the Presidential Administration of the Republic of Azerbaijan (hereafter referred to as APDPARA), f. 276, r. 8, v. 61, p. 84. 8 Secret Police Report About the Planned Attempt on Nakashidze, 1903, SARF, f. 102, r. 232, v. 1840, p. 10. 9 The Report of the General Bolkhovitinov to Assistant Military Governor of the Caucasus, December 11, 1915, RSMHA, f. 200, r. 1, v. 646, p. 47. 10 More Details About Vorontsov-Dashkov, see: Dina Ismail-zade, Illarion Ivanovich Vorontsov-Dashkov. Istoricheskie Siluety. Moscow: Nauka, 1991, 20–62.

44  The year 1905 11 Baberovski, Vrag est’ vezde. Stalinizm na Kavkaze, 79. 12 The report of the General Bolkhovitinov to Assistant Military Governor of the Caucasus, December 11, 1915, RSMHA, f. 200, r. 1, v. 646, p. 47. 13 Alektorov, Inorodtsy v Rossii, 59. 14 Vsepoddanneishaia zapiska. Po upravleniiu Kavkazskim Kraem. General-adiutanta grafa Vorontsova-Dashkova. St. Peterburg: Gosudarstvennai︠a︡ tip., 1907, 11. 15 Sankt-Peterburgskie vedomosti, April 22, 1905. 16 Police Report About Sending of Armenian Terrorists to the Caucasus, February  6, 1905, SARF, f. 102, r. 231, v. 11/1, p. 2. 17 Protocols of the Meeting of the Baku City, March 1, 1905, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1. v. 260. p. 44. 18 Ibid., 45. 19 Əhməd bəy Ağaoğlu (Ağayev), Seçilmiş əsərləri. Tərtib edənlər: Əziz Mirəhmədov, Vilayət Quliyev. Baku: Şərq Qərb, 2007, 339–340. 20 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 7. 21 Sankt Petersburgskiie vedomosti, April 21, 1905. 22 Ibid. 23 Vladimir Maievskii, Armiano-tatarskaia smuta na Kavkaze kak odin iz fazisov armianskogo voprosa. Tiflis: Tipografiia Shtaba Kavkazskogo Voennogo Okruga, 1915, 28. 24 Vsepoddanneishaia zapiska. Po upravleniiu Kavkazskim Kraem, 12. 25 Kaspii, July 9, 1906. 26 Protocoles of the Meeting of the Baku City Duma, March 8, 1905, SHARA, f. 50, r. 1, v. 260, pp. 49–51. 27 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bek Ali Akbar bek oglu, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 2. 28 Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 12. 29 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 8. 30 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 7. 31 Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiiskom parlamente, 134. 32 Topchibashev. Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, Archives d’Ali Mardan-bey Toptchibachi, carton no 7, 7. 33 See: Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 30. 34 See: Petition de musulmans du Caucase au gouverneur general Vorontsov-Dashkov. June 1905, AAMT, carton no 8, 1–7. 35 Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 14. 36 Kaspii, August 10, 1905. 37 Musul’manskaya pechat’ Rossii. Oksford: Society for Central Asian Studies. Reprint series, Issue 12, 1987, 40. 38 Letter Gasprinskii to Topchibashev, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 49. 39 Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiiskom parlamente, 134. 40 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bek Ali Akbar bek oglou, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 2. 41 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 8. 42 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 7–8. 43 Galimdzhan Ibragimov, Tatary v revoliutsii 1905 goda. Translated from Tatar by G. Mukhamedovoi. Edited by G.F. Linstser. Kazan: Gosizdat TSSR, 1926; Topchibashev. Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 8. 44 Forumy rossiiskikh musul’man na poroge novogo tisiiacheletiia, 121. 45 Nadir Devlet, Rusiya Türklerinin Milli Mücadile Tarihi (1905–1917). Ankara: T. K. A. Enstitüsü, 1985, 103. 46 Bigiyev, Osnovy Reform, 176. 47 Topchibashev, Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 9–10. 48 Ibid., 10.

The year 1905  45 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 11. Bigiyev, Osnovy Reform, 178. Topchibashev, Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 10. See: Baberovski, Vrag est’ vezde. Stalinizm na Kavkaze, 76. Tiflisskii listok, September 10, 1905. Russkoe slova, August 27, 1905. Tiflisskii listok, November 4, 1905. Tiflisskii listok, November 2, 1905. See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 8–9.

4 Leader of the Muslim peoples of the Russian Empire

On December 11, 1905, Emperor Nicholas II declared the convocation of the State Duma, to which the Caucasian Muslims were admitted. Unlike elections in central Russian regions, the Duma elections in the Caucasus were run directly by the governor-general. He had the right to set the date, establish constituencies, determine the number of deputies from provinces, and even disenfranchise civilians on the basis of nationality. According to the State Duma statute of August 1905, special regulations for national outlying regions were also in effect. Most importantly, persons without proficiency in Russian could not become members of the State Duma. A few days after the announcement of the convocation of the State Duma, Topchibashov and Aghayev went to St. Petersburg to prepare for the Second Congress of Russia’s Muslims. Topchibashov and Gabdrashid Ibrahimov, who took an active part in the political life of Russia’s Turks, discussed preparations for the congress, draft charters, and programs.1 By the end of 1905 the press of Baku, Kazan, Bakhchisarai, and other regions was informing readers about this congress.

The second congress of Russian Muslims Delegates to the congress began arriving in St. Petersburg on January 10, 1906. Yusif Akchurin and Musa Jarullahi Bigiyev as organizers gave a banquet. Topchibashov, Huseyzade, Aghayev, Dr. Gara bey Garabeyov, and Allahyar Akhundov debated how to get permission from the authorities to conduct the congress. On January  13 a representative of the commercial bourgeoisie of the capital, Mahammad Alim Maksudov, petitioned the St. Petersburg governor, asking him to permit a number of Muslim meetings in the capital to discuss creating a religious office for Muslims; to explain the influence of the tsarist manifesto of October 17, 1905, on the of Muslims; to identify Muslim attitudes toward the State Duma; and to discuss the programs of various political parties.2 However, the Internal Ministry prohibited any meetings of a political and economic nature in St. Petersburg, so these petitions were denied. When the delegates came to the assembly point, the building had already been cordoned off by police. The police announced that the municipal authorities had forbidden the congress and asked them all to go home.3 Sultan Haji Gubaydulla Chingizkhan (a retired general from

Leader of the Muslim peoples  47 Kazakhstan), Ali Mardan bey, and others appealed in vain to Petr Durnovo, the internal minister, who said that if he authorized Muslims to hold a congress, other nationalities in Russia, such as the Jewish or Polish populations, would wish to do the same.4 Hence the approximately one hundred delegates to the congress decided to hold their Second Congress unofficially, in the form of meetings at hotels or in homes. Prior to the congress, representatives of the Union of Russian Muslims had held meetings with members of the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP) and discussed the possibility of forming a joint bloc before the election. With that end in view, the heads of the Union of Russian Muslims (Topchibashov, Akchurin, and Alkyn) attended the Congress of the Constitutional Democratic Party in St. Petersburg on January 5–11, 1906. The first meeting of the Second Congress of Russian Muslims was held at the apartments of Hasan Habibulla, a rich Muslim of St. Petersburg. The participants discussed the program and charter of the Union of Russian Muslims as set forth by Topchibashov, who had drawn up both documents. Ibrahimov and Aghayev took part in the initial debates. Subsequent developments in Russia forced official circles to permit freedom of assembly. The delegates gathered at Habibulla’s home for the first meeting, chaired by Gasprinskii and Ibrahimov (Topchibashov chaired the subsequent meetings). A  draft charter of twenty-three articles was adopted on January  22, 1906. However, the debates over the program were postponed until the Third Congress.5 The charter created a unified Russian-Muslim party to act as a single organization in the empire, stipulating that the Central Committee of the Union of Russian Muslims would be headquartered in Baku, which was also the political center of all Russian Muslims. Congress documents said that the choice of Baku indicated the delegates’ great respect for Ali Mardan bey, the editor of Kaspii, and Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev, the richest oil millionaire of the Muslim world.6 The charter divided the provinces populated by Muslims into sixteen regions: the Caucasus (Baku); Crimea (Bakhchisarai); Moscow and St. Petersburg (St. Petersburg); Lithuania (Minsk); Nizhnaia Volga (Astrakhan); Verkhnaia Volga (Kazan); the Orenburg region (Orenburg); the Ufa region (Ufa); Turkestan (Tashkent); Siberia (Irkutsk); Ravnina (Uralsk); the Omsk (Omsk); the Semipalatinsk (Semipalatinsk); the Semirechensk region (Alma-Ata); the Akmolinsk region (Petropavlovsk); and the Zakaspiskii (Ashgabat). Local majlises were to be established in these centers, which would be subordinate to the all-Russian congresses of Muslims and held between congresses of the Chief Board of the Union of Russian Muslims. The charter stipulated membership dues of fifty kopeks to five rubles as well as receipt of private donations. The money raised could be expended to comply with any decision of the local majlis. An annual congress of Russian Muslims would include two representatives for each region and one representative for each municipal majlis. All members of the union would be subject to congress decisions.7 The congress also discussed the question of collaboration with the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP) in upcoming elections to the Duma. The delegates

48  Leader of the Muslim peoples unanimously concluded that joint participation by the Union of Russian Muslims and the CDP was in the interests of the Muslim population, noting that nonRussian peoples were represented in the CDP. This recommendation applied to minority Muslim constituencies.8 “All Russian Muslims will collaborate with the Constitutional Democratic Party and attend the elections in a united bloc.”9 The congress also wanted to compete for seats in the Duma in proportion to the size of the Muslim population and geography of their settlements. The unofficial Second Congress became an important event in the history of Turkic and Muslim peoples: Ali Mardan bey succeeded in entering the All-Russian political arena. The results of the congress showed his growing authority among Russian Muslims and in the political life of the country. The decision to collaborate with the CDP was attributable to the Constitutionalists’ interest in peripheral national areas, so their program paid attention to the problems of Russia’s peoples. At this Second Congress the Constitutionalists demonstrated their support for the right of the peoples in the empire to use their mother tongue, be educated in this language, and have their own press. Constitutionalists opposed the policy of assimilation of the non-Russian peoples of Russia, which Topchibashov also opposed. The leaders of the CDP (such as Iosif Gessen and Lev Petrazhitskii) attached great importance to collaboration with the Union of Russian Muslims on the eve of the Duma elections. The Constitutionalist press and party leaders often emphasized the similarity between their program and the demands of Muslims, based on liberal ideas. In addition, Russian intellectuals supported this party, which was often called the “people’s freedom” party or the party of “professors.”10 The recognition of the national rights of Poland and Finland by the CDP strengthened the Muslim intelligentsia’s growing confidence in the concept of the “people’s freedom.” The Bolsheviks called the Muslim-­ Constitutional bloc “Tatars’ constitutionalism in a turban.”11 According to Audrey Altstadt, however, during the first Russian revolution “no Russian political party would ally with national minorities or add nationality demands to their program until the Constitutional Democrats (Cadets) did so in 1906–1907 – and they did not entirely fulfill their pledges.”12

Baku deputy of the first State Duma The tsar issued a decree on elections on December 11, 1905, drafted by Sergei Witte, chair of the Cabinet of Ministers. It stipulated that Russian Turks, who had long been deprived of national and political rights, could be represented in the Duma. For the first time since the occupation of Turkic-Muslim territories by Russia (1552), Muslim peoples became part of Russian national affairs. Topchibashov’s controversial activities at Muslim congresses and during Duma elections had attracted public attention, and he gradually became a leader of the national movement. At noon on May 31, 1906, elections to the first State Duma from the city of Baku were held. Ali Mardan bey won a victory over Iraklii Mamulashvili, a candidate from the local Social-Democratic Party.13 Kamil bey Safaraliyev, head of the city administration, congratulated Ali Mardan bey, pointing out that it was

Leader of the Muslim peoples  49 necessary to justify this trust by protecting the interests of Baku residents at the State Duma. Israfil bey Hajiyev, Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii, and others spoke at a meeting on the results of the election. Hajinskii noted that many promises had been made but not all of them had been fulfilled and demanded another promise. “I’ll do my best to protect the program; however, if I fail to do that, I have the right to join those who walk out of the State Duma. We don’t need half-and-half decisions, either all or nothing.” Ali Mardan bey replied: “Your representative will raise high the banner that you have presented and will be a part of the State Duma to oppose compromises.”14 Mahammad Taghy Aliyev and Asadulla bey Muradkhanov were also elected to the first State Duma from Baku province. All three of these delegates from Baku were members of the People’s Freedom Party. On June  2 Kaspii published detailed biographies of them. Baku was the only city and province in the ­Russian Empire that elected deputies of the local nationality to the State Duma – ­Azerbaijanis.15 (Deputies of Russian nationality were elected to the State Duma from Kazan, Ufa, and Orenburg, whose population was primarily Muslim.) This victory resulted from the deepening national movement in Baku. Ali bey Huseynzade wrote in Hayat that “Caucasian Turks are the most freedom loving among Turks. . . . The Caucasus is likely to play an important role in the history of this free world, and the most pivotal role in this regard belongs to the Caucasian and Azeri Turks.”16 The Duma elections in Baku, Elizavetpol (Ganja), and Erivan province took place in the second half of May. Elected to the first State Duma from Azerbaijan were Ali Mardan bey, Ismayil khan Ziyadkhanov, Asadulla bey Muradkhanov, Abdurrahim bey Akhverdiyev, Mahammad Taghi Aliyev, and Agha khan Erivanskii. In early June all of them headed for St. Petersburg.

Leader of the Muslim faction On June  21, 1906, the first session of deputies from the Muslim provinces of Russia was held in St. Petersburg. Topchibashov was elected as the leader of the Muslim faction of the Duma by the twenty-two delegates present. Before his arrival in St. Petersburg, attempts to create a Muslim faction had failed. The total number of deputies was thirty-six, and the number of bureau deputies was seven: Ali Mardan Bey, Sayid-Girey Alkyn, Ismayil khan Ziyadkhanov, Abu-s-Suud Akhtyamov, Salim-Girey Janturin (secretary of the bureau), Shahaydar Syrtlanov, and Mahammad Zakir Rameyev (treasurer). The Muslim faction of the first State Duma operated for only eighteen days, from June 21 to July 9,17 meeting twice a week, on Wednesdays and Saturdays. It produced reports on the work of the Duma for Muslims residing in St. Petersburg, established ties with Muslim provinces, and prepared for the Third Congress of Russian Muslims, scheduled for August 15, 1906.18 Relations between the faction and the Duma parties were a serious problem. In the course of debates, many faction members declared their support for the People’s Freedom Party (Constitutionalists). Topchibashov was instructed to establish

50  Leader of the Muslim peoples ties with leaders of that party and discuss cooperation. Through the mediation of Pavel Miliukov, the leaders of the Constitutionalists decided to invite the Muslim faction to join them and participate in the elections of the central committee of the CDP. A meeting of the faction was scheduled for July 10 to reply to this invitation.19 On July 9, however, the State Duma was dissolved. Topchibashov’s program of cooperation between Muslims and the Constitutionalists was submitted to the Second Congress of Ittifak for discussion. He also attached great importance to relations with national groups within the Duma. As a leader of the Muslim faction, he was elected co-chair of the Association of Autonomists initiated by Alexander Lednitskii, a deputy from Poland.20 Ismayil bey Gasprinskii wrote to Ali Mardan bey on June 28, 1906, that he followed the work of the faction through articles in Krimskii Vestnik. He had his own view on the agrarian question but supported the deputies’ activities. You must remember that you are watched by the whole Muslim world. You must remember that the Russian story should add your name to history. You must be a serious state and public figure and make our faction respected both from the right and from the left as a Muslim or nationalist.21 As a deputy from Baku, Topchibashov spoke for all Turks and Muslims. On behalf of the faction, he opposed the policy of governmental officials sowing discord between the local population of the Northern Caucasus and the alien Russians, between Chechens and Ingushes. Jointly with deputy Tashtemir Eldarkhanov, he lodged a deputy’s enquiry to the Duma on the subject. Illegal actions of the land commission in Kirgizia, violence committed by Aveliani (head of the Ganja district), and unprecedented infringement of human rights in Turkestan sparked protests. His major report on the faction pointed out that the five million indigenous people of the Turkestan region were represented to the Duma by six deputies, while 300,000 alien Russians were represented by five deputies: one deputy per 834,000 Muslims and one deputy per 60,000 Russians.22 The bureau headed by Topchibashov put forward proposals to revise the law on elections and bring the number of deputies and voters into proportion. Ali Mardan bey asked: Is it necessary to repeat that the concept of popular representation suffers a mortal blow in a country where 20 million Russian Muslims are represented by only 36 deputies? An outrage against justice has been committed against Muslims when distributing deputy seats by regions. In some places this injustice has reached a horrific level.23 Dr. Vincent Fourniau writes that Topchibashov “was a genuine creator of a historical period that occupies a special place in the hearts of Russian Muslims.”24 Though the First Duma did not last long, the Azerbaijani deputies did convince the Russian government that the bloody tragedy of 1905 in the Caucasus was caused by the Russian government’s undisguised patronage of Armenian terrorists

Leader of the Muslim peoples  51

Figure 4.1 Member of the Russian State Duma I  of Baku province: Ali Mardan bey ­ Topchibashov. St. Petersburg 1906.

and that violence was an integral part of the empire’s policy. Ismayil khan Ziyadkhanov, the deputy from Ganja, unmasked this policy at the Duma: It’s our turn now to be active and cease keeping silent. One hundred years ago Transcaucasia was captured by Russia. Over this same period we Muslims

52  Leader of the Muslim peoples have lived like prisoners and been persecuted like slaves. As soon as our country was occupied, invaders began pillaging our national riches. Dear deputies, every minute I  receive horrific news from my motherland. Piles of corpses. Our patience has run out. We have witnessed our babies being stabbed, our pregnant women being disemboweled. We declare war on all those taking delight in dismembered dead bodies and the moans and groans of mothers and children.25 The Muslim faction then put forward a proposal to establish a Duma committee to investigate the Caucasian events. However, premature dissolution of the Duma made it impossible to carry out this initiative.26

The Vyborg declaration On July  9, 1906, the doors of the Tavricheskii palace were closed. A  meeting between the Muslim faction and Muslim representatives of St. Petersburg was scheduled for the same day at Topchibashov’s apartment to discuss preparations for the Third Congress of Russian Muslims. A session of the Muslim faction was to be held at 1 p.m.27 Topchibashov remembered the participants’ reaction to the dissolution of the Duma: “All of them were greatly disturbed and felt pity for the Duma, upon which the Muslims of Russia set such great hopes. Having discussed the question of the Third Congress of the Muslims, the invitees departed, full of disturbing vague apprehensions about the nation’s prospects.”28 It should be kept in mind that Petr Stolypin’s participation in the July 4 session of the Duma was costly. On July 7, 1906, he made his way to Tsarskoe Selo with a report on the dissolution of the Duma. On July 8 the Russian government appointed him chair of the Council of Ministers and internal minister. On July 9 Nicholas II decreed the dissolution of the State Duma, according to the Associated Press. At 4 a.m. a government manifesto was sent to the Governmental Bulletin for publication.29 Having learned about the manifesto from the newspaper Rech’, Miliukov told all Central Committee members of the CDP to convene an extraordinary meeting. A CDP manifesto was soon drawn up, but it was impossible to hold a meeting of the already dissolved Duma in the capital: the Tavricheskii palace and other adjacent buildings were surrounded by soldiers. Some people suggested going to Vyborg, others to Helsinki and even Stockholm. Led by Topchibashov, six Muslim faction members went to Vyborg, along with 220 deputies. Ali Mardan bey refers to 246 deputies.30 At 11 p.m. on July 9 Topchibashov was taking part in a meeting at the Vyborg hotel Belvedere. A manifest titled “To the People from the People’s Representatives” was drawn up. On Topchibashov’s recommendation, nine out of the nineteen members of the Muslim faction in Petersburg signed the “Vyborg Declaration,” including Ziyadkhanov (who had shocked the Russian government and press with his statement of June 12), Akhtyamov, Alkyn, Janturin, and Ali khan Bukeykhanov.31 The appeal called for citizens of Russia not to pay taxes or let a soldier into the army until elections to the new Duma were held and the government

Leader of the Muslim peoples  53 became accountable to the Duma.32 After learning of the document signed by 186 deputies, the government prohibited the meeting at the Belvedere. The governor of Vyborg was charged with taking adequate measures. On July 10 members of the Duma and one hundred journalists returned to the capital by train.33 That same evening Muslim deputies met with about forty representatives of the Muslims of St. Petersburg. They decided to hold the Third Congress of Russian Muslims in mid-1906, in Nizhnii Novgorod. The congress was later rescheduled.34 On July 11 Stolypin sent a telegram to the governor-general of the Caucasus and city authorities, demanding that they take drastic measures against troublemakers. “The struggle is not against society but against the enemies of society.”35 On July 15 the Baku governor-general ordered newspapers and printshops not to publish the appeal of the former Duma members.36 Sanctions against Topchibashov and Ziyadkhanov started long before they returned to Azerbaijan. Stolypin had already drawn up plans to impede the reelection of 169 signatories of the Vyborg Declaration in the Second Duma, including Topchibashov. To bar political activists from the reelections, the Russian Empire, guided by articles 129 and 132 of the Criminal Code, instituted legal proceedings against them. The manifesto was signed in Vyborg, so an inquest was conducted by the appropriate bodies of Finland. Topchibashov, Ziyadkhanov, and other deputies were charged with calling for disobedience by the Russian population and inciting people against the government.37 The dissolution of the First State Duma and persecutions of deputy-­signatories of the Vyborg Declaration caused great alarm among the Muslims of Russia. Mustafa Davidovich, a Lithuanian Tatar and mayor of Bakhchisarai, wrote to Ali Mardan bey two weeks after the dissolution of the Duma: We are lost and perplexed: what is going to happen next? In the meanwhile the Crimean Tatars, despite their enthusiasm, awareness of their human dignity, and sense of patriotism, are currently falling into their traditional apathy, so I doubt that alms will come from Allah.38

Ali Mardan bey’s leadership at the Nizhnii Novgorod congress While the Vyborg legal proceedings were underway, Topchibashov had been engaged in arranging the Third Congress of Russian Muslims, in which he played a central role. Active involvement in the political processes of the first Russian revolution had made him a charismatic leader. The authorities permitted the congress that opened on August  16, 1906, in Nizhnii Novgorod at the central club. Local mullah Khalil read out a surah from the Quran. Five hundred out of eight hundred delegates had a vote.39 Topchibashov was elected chair. The presidium had fifteen members, including Ali Mardan bey, his deputy Ismayil bey Gasprinskii, Gabdrashid Ibrahimov, Mustafa Shirvanskii, Said Girey Alkyn, Yusuf Akchurin, Musa Bigiyev, Shahaydar Syrtlanov, Selim Girey Janturin, and others.40 About twenty journalists covered the congress, representing well-known

54  Leader of the Muslim peoples organs such as Rech’, Oko, Strana, Kaspii, Tovarisch, Irshad, Russkie Vedomosti, Russkoe Slovo, and Novyi Put’. The first meeting of the congress was held on August 16 from 1 p.m. to 10 p.m. Gabdrashid Ibrahimov told the congress that he was serving unified Islam, pointing out that all Muslims were related and must advance in one direction.41 The second meeting was held on August 17, at 6 p.m. The congress received a great number of salutary telegrams from Hasan bey Zardabi, Caucasian mufti Huseyn Gayibov, Tatars sheikh Zeynullah Rasulov (Rasuli), Crimean mufti Karamiyskin, and others.42 The presidium considered it necessary to answer some of them. A telegram signed by Topchibashov was addressed to Stolypin, protesting against the dissolution of the State Duma. Criticizing the government’s policy in regard to the meeting of people’s representatives, Topchibashov stressed the inadmissibility of dissolving the State Duma convened by the emperor’s decree and composed of the best representatives of the empire. The telegram demanded the immediate calling of a Second Duma.43 Topchibashov was followed by Akchurin, who declared the necessity of establishing a Muslim People’s Party. Muslims should avail themselves of the manifesto of October  17 to engage in political activity and create their own party based on the principles of nationalism and religion. The party could not operate properly without an appropriate program, so Akchurin offered to accept a draft program suggested by Topchibashov at the Second Congress.44 Gasprinskii, Saydashov, Syrtlanov, and Ibrahimov agreed. During the debates, Ali Mardan bey said that the question had two aspects: spiritual and political. Speakers should not go beyond the scope of the agenda. “What impedes Islam in Russia? They say ‘missionaries,’ but I disagree with this. Missionaries are not strong enough to oppose. Our enemies pay missionaries to come here from St. Petersburg. We must stand up.” Ali Mardan bey singled out “freedom of religion” as an effective method of struggling against missionary work. “We cannot live without religion. We want everything; we have nothing, no books, madrasahs, or clergy. We are in serious trouble. Our youths want books. We need everything. In the first place, we need unity. Please, focus on this.”45 At 11:30 p.m. the debates ended. It was decided to set up a committee to work out the draft program; the committee included Ali Mardan bey, Mustafa Davidovich, Gabdulla Apanayev, Galimjan Barudi, Hadi Maksudov, Sadri Maksudov, Shahmardan Koshchegulov, Jihangir Bayburin, Yulbas Bikbov, Aliskender Ashurov, Shahaydar Syrtlanov, Lutfulla Iskhakov, Jamaleddin Khuramshin, Gabdulla Bubi, and Musa Bagiyev.46 The third meeting of the congress started under the chairmanship of Ali Mardan bey on August 18, lasting from 6 to 11 p.m. The delegates focused on education, considering it necessary to set up a committee for schools and madrasahs, chaired by Gabdulla Apanayev. On August 18–19 he criticized the policy of Russification in respect to Muslims. A document on schools and madrasahs with thirty-three articles was adopted. The committee harshly criticized a decision of the Ministry of Education on March 31, 1906, which had been promoted by Christian missionaries and provided for teaching the Russian alphabet and language at madrasahs. “The teaching of the Russian language is dependent upon the desires of every nation. It cannot be done against their will.”47

Leader of the Muslim peoples  55 Some of the delegates did not know Russian, so the fourth meeting on August 19 was conducted in Tatar. Topchibashov replaced Yusif Akchurin as chair. The committee for religious reform headed by Galimjan Barudi (Galiyev) submitted a draft resolution of thirteen articles. Topchibashov declared: “There is no difference between the principles of divine service. At any rate, these differences, if any, cannot interfere religiously in the formation of a unified institution to organize the religious affairs of Russian Muslims.”48 He viewed farfetched differences between Sunnis and Shiites as a major obstacle along the path for all Muslims to unite and make progress. Every Muslim wishing good for his people must from now on say that there are not and cannot be any sects, no Sunnism, Shiism, Azamism, Hanifism, etc., and hence no differences prevent us from building common institutions and running the spiritual affairs of Russian Muslims.49 This proposal was unanimously adopted. Ali Mardan bey’s speech was so touching and heartfelt that Sunni delegates stood up with tears in their eyes and exchanged kisses with delegates from Azerbaijan.50 That was a brilliant page in the history of Islam and eloquent testimony to the historical transition from an Islamic community to Turkic nationalism. One of the major decisions of the Third Congress was directed against Christian missionaries who acted under the aegis of the government in Muslim provinces. The laws of the Russian Federation were restricting the civil rights of Muslims and promoting the interference of Christian missionaries in their religious and cultural affairs. With support from the government, missionaries were successful in sowing discord in the Muslim community. There was no freedom of conscience in the empire, so it was not possible to withstand harmful propaganda and missionary intrigues. The only possible solution was applying civic freedoms as set forth in the manifesto of October 17 to Muslims and convoking the new State Duma.51 On August 20 the congress passed a resolution on Christian missionaries signed by Topchibashov and sent an appropriate telegram to Stolypin. The main point of the congress was the adoption of a revised and improved version of Topchibashov’s program of the Union of Russian Muslims.52 “The purpose of the union is to unite Russian Muslims and establish mutual ties in political, economic, public, and religious areas to comply with the call of the times and the present situation and in accordance with the provisions of this program.”53 The program had eleven sections and seventy-five paragraphs, based on the principles of the People’s Freedom Party. The newly adopted document gave the union a national character as a superclass structure. It favored the concept of a constitutional monarchy and declared private property to be inviolable.54 The political commission suggested that the congress adopt the program as the basis for subsequent improvements by the council committee and permanent bureau in St. Petersburg.55 Reaffirming the civil, national, and religious rights of Russian Turks, Topchibashov’s program expressed liberal ideas.

56  Leader of the Muslim peoples The congress elected a central committee with fifteen members: Topchibashov, Galiyev, Gasprinskii, Ibrahimov, Akchurin, Alkyn, Apanayev, Sadri Maksutov, Hadi Maksulov, Shahaydar Syrtlanov, Musa Jarullahi Bigiyev, Gabdulla Bubi, Muftafa Davidovich, Shahmarjan Koshegulov, and Salim Girey Janturin. A  bureau of five was later elected at the Moscow conference (Topchibashov, Ibrahimov, Alkin, Kerimi, and Akchurin), headed by Ali Mardan bey.56 A  final document stipulated that another five members would be added to the central committee: three Muslims from Baku, Ganja, and Erivan provinces; one from Turkestan; and one from the Orenburg region. Ali Mardan bey not only headed the Union of Russian Muslims but also was a member of the committees for religion and legal questions.57 Bureau members were paid 2,400 rubles a year and were to live in St. Petersburg.58 The Third Congress completed its work by deciding to hold the Fourth Congress of Russian Muslims on August 10, 1907, in Nizhnii Novgorod. Topchibashov as chair of the Muslim faction of the State Duma and head of the Union of Russian Muslims was officially recognized as the leader of Russian Turks. Musa Jarullahi Bigiyev, a participant in the congress who later studied Topchibashov’s political activity, noted that Ali Mardan bey was an excellent expert in law, proficient in political sciences, and a true intellectual.59

The beginning of political persecutions The dissolution of the State Duma and the end of the Third Congress of Russian Muslims were followed by the exclusion of Ali Mardan bey, openly and secretly, from the political processes of the empire. First, the authoritative newspaper Hayat ceased to be published. Ali Mardan bey was upset by this, especially because Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev stopped financing the newspaper. The question of Topchibashov’s expulsion from the Baku City Duma was raised in February 1907. Despite some deputies’ resistance, it became impossible to keep his seat at the Duma, for the government ordered him expelled.60 Gasprinskii wrote to him from Crimea: “You do not spare yourself; you are setting tasks of too grand a scale.”61 The People’s Freedom Party failed to stand fast against the reactionary pressure. The Constitutionalists’ calls to oppose the counterrevolution were in vain. A week after the dissolution of the Duma, the Baku governor-general circulated an order among editors of local newspapers and printing houses that prohibited printing of the proclamations of the former State Duma deputies. Violators were to be punished severely by administrative means.62 Ali Mardan bey considered it necessary to register the Union of Russian Muslims with the authorities and issue a party newspaper in St. Petersburg. Central committee members could not agree on the language in which to publish it. Some suggested French and Tatar. However, the number of St. Petersburg Muslims proficient in French was insignificant, so Ali Mardan bey objected to this. The union had already become a purely party organization that required its own amendments and supplements to the charter and program. These questions were to be discussed at a regular convocation of the central committee in the second half of October.

Leader of the Muslim peoples  57 Given Topchibashov’s growing role in the union, Gasprinskii wrote to him in September  1906: “You are well aware that I’m resistant to your criticisms and praises, because you are too close to me. When I compromised at Nizhnii, I hoped that you would remedy the situation that was spoiled by Ibrahimov. I attach no importance to his influence . . . however, even Siberians mistrust him.” Ismayil bey was supportive of legal party activity and believed that legalization was necessary. “Even provincial meetings are illegal for Muslims who are unwilling to gather together without authorization. . . . I’m writing these words with hope of concentrating ebullient energy into cold intention, for excessive enthusiasm may end in collapse.”63 Some issues that had remained unsettled at the Third Congress of the Union of Russian Muslims had again been debated at the Moscow conference of the central committee on November 18–20, 1906. The conference was followed by presentation of the party’s charter and program translated into Russian by Ali Mardan bey and into Tatar by Musa Bigiyev. These were submitted to the governmental bodies of St. Petersburg for registration. However, on February 28, 1907, the documents were returned for technical failings. After they had been amended, their updated texts were again sent to the governmental bodies of St. Petersburg for registration in April 1907. On May 15 and May 28, 1907, the charter and program of the Muslim Party were discussed at the state institutions. After a protest by the mayor of St. Petersburg, Daniil Drachevskii, the documents were recalled.64 Thus the Union of Russian Muslims was deprived of the opportunity to act legally until the February Revolution of 1917. Despite the dissolution of the First State Duma, the tsarist government did not dare to ignore the convocation of the conference of people’s representatives. After the government had made the necessary preparations, elections to the Second State Duma were announced in late 1906 and early 1907. Prior to the elections in September 1906, however, the Council of Ministers discussed the unacceptability of simultaneous public service and political party membership. A relevant decree said that the calls of some political parties to combat the government meant nonrecognition of the government that authorized the activities of these parties. They cited the Vyborg Declaration as an eloquent example. In fact, this meant that members of the State Duma who signed this declaration should be barred from new elections. Indeed, when Ali Mardan bey was mentioned in the list of candidates to the Second State Duma, his name was deleted by the government’s order.65 On the eve of the elections, the Tiflis branch of the People’s Freedom Party asked Ali Mardan bey for assistance. “We know that you enjoy great authority among the Muslim population of Tiflis. With that end in view, the Party is asking you for help.”66 The Constitutionalists were going to issue a magazine in Tiflis to deal with Caucasian matters, covering the social, political, and economic life of this region. Julius Semenov, the editor of the magazine, asked Ali Mardan bey to prepare “material about Tatars, their needs, and living conditions.”67 The government did its utmost to prevent the magazine from being published. Ali Mardan bey published an article on January 31–February 1, 1907, in the newspaper Kaspii titled “Muslim Parliamentary Faction.” This article was issued

58  Leader of the Muslim peoples as an independent monograph that same year.68 Beginning on January 16, he published a series of articles generically titled “On the Elections.” Nineteen of these articles had appeared by February 18. In his first article Ali Mardan bey contended that there were no grounds to believe that the second Duma would be less oppositional that the first one.69 Elections to the Second State Duma in Baku and Baku province were held on February 6, 1907. That day Kaspii published an article by Ali Mardan bey. Today the whole of our land and all nationalities of the Caucasus should give their answer to a serious and imperative question posed for Russia on the fatal day of July 9 last year. Today our Caucasus should express its view on the future Duma, on changes in our current social and state structure as condemned by the government itself.70 The total number of deputies to be elected from the Caucasus was twenty-eight: eight from the Northern Caucasus; twelve from the Eastern Caucasus; and eight from the Western Caucasus. Thus the South Caucasus was represented by twenty deputies.71 In Baku nonparty member Ismayil Taghiyev, the son of Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev, was elected. He was forty-two years old and had lived earlier in Moscow and in Tiflis during the elections.72 Unfortunately, Taghiyev failed to go to St. Petersburg and attend the Duma meetings. The progressive forces of Baku were very upset that the voice of this large industrial city of the Russian Empire, a center of the nationalist idea and Muslim movement, would not be heard at the meeting of people’s representatives. Others elected were Mustafa Mahmudov, a twenty-nine-year-old Constitutionalist from Kurdemir, and Zeynal Zeynalov, a thirty-year-old social democrat from Amirjan in Baku province; Fatali khan Khoiskii and Khalil bey Khasmamedov from Elizavetpol province; and Mahammad agha Shahtakhtinskii from Erivan province. Ali Mardan bey highly appreciated two deputies from Elizavetpol province with a higher juridical education, Khoiskii and Khasmamedov.73 The Second State Duma got down to work on February  20, 1907. The CDP had fewer seats than in the First State Duma. Constitutionalist Fedor Golovin was nevertheless elected as chair, although he had less authority than the chair of the previous Duma, social Constitutionalist Sergei Muromtsev. The presidium of the State Duma consisted of representatives of various opposition parties, including Sadri Maksudov, a member of the Muslim faction of the First State Duma. He was one of the five deputies of the secretary of the State Duma.74 As a whole, the Muslim provinces of Russia were represented by thirty-eight deputies.75 On March 17, 1907, a Muslim faction was established by Ali Mardan bey. As in the First State Duma, the faction consisted of twenty-two Muslim deputies. Azerbaijani deputies joined this faction, and Khoiskii and Khasmamedov were members of its bureau.76 This Muslim faction included economic, legal, and religious commissions. Ali Mardan bey was invited to come from Baku to head the religious commission.77 He arrived in the capital on March 30 and took an active part in drafting the platform of the Muslim faction on the agrarian question. On

Leader of the Muslim peoples  59 April 2, 1907, a joint meeting of the Union of Russian Muslims, Muslim faction of the Second State Duma, and Muslim community of the capital was held. Ali Mardan bey’s arrival in St. Petersburg clearly reanimated the activity of the Muslim faction. He chaired general meetings, drafted a political platform jointly with the central committee of the Union of Russian Muslims, and composed deputy inquiries. He was elected as a member of the permanent Muslim bureau set up by the central committee of the Union of Russian Muslims (which had two other members, Gabdrashid Ibrahimov and Fatih Kerimov). Topchibashov coordinated the faction’s activities outside the Duma.78 The bureau was engaged in assisting the Muslim faction and individual deputies in their parliamentary activities. Thus, Ali Mardan bey revived his parliamentary activity that had been suspended by the dissolution of the First State Duma.79 All bills put up for debate by the Muslim faction were drawn up by Topchibashov and Alkin.80 Ali Mardan bey drafted the faction’s program of activities, which was issued in St. Petersburg in 1907.81 But the Second State Duma did not last long. Debates over the agrarian question did not meet the government’s expectations. Fatali khan Khoiskii gave a major report on migration policy on April 2 on behalf of the Muslim faction. It should be noted that Stolypin’s agrarian project faced resistance from the opposition at the Duma. Thus, the Second Duma did not justify the hopes of the ruling circles. On June 3, 1907, Nicholas II issued a manifesto dissolving the State Duma, stressing that most members of the Duma were inclined to shake the foundations of the empire. The First State Duma existed for seventy-two days, the Second State Duma for 103 days. Hopes to change Russia by means of liberal reforms ended in failure. Hard days were expected to come, including the arrest of Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov.

Notes 1 Some authors’ attribution of the union’s program to Gabdrashid Ibrahimov has not been documented. On Topchibashev’s authorship, see Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 9; More information about Gabdurrashid Ibrahimov, see: Ismail Türkoğlu. 20 yüzyılde bir türk seyyahı, Toplamsal Tarih. Sayı 20, 1995, Ağustos. 2 Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiickom parlamente, 135. 3 Novoe vremia, January 21, 1906. 4 Topchibashev, Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 12–13; Rech, August 13, 1906. 5 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 9. 6 Forumy rossiiskikh musul’man na poroge novogo tysiacheletiia, 21. 7 Ustav Soiuza musul’man Rossii. January  1906, CSHASP, f. 821, r. 133, v. 473, pp. 239–242. 8 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 9. 9 Devlet, Rusiya Türklerinin Milli Mücadile Tarihi, 107. 10 Pavel Miliukov, Vospominaniia. Moscow: Politizdat, 1991, 325. 11 Ibragimov, Tatary v revoliutsii 1905 goda, 150. 12 Audrey Altsdadt, The Politics of Culture in Soviet Azerbaijan, 1920–1940. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2016, 5.

60  Leader of the Muslim peoples 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

Kaspii, June 1, 1906. Ibid. Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiiskom parlamente, 149. Hayat, June 2, 1906. Topchibashev, Musul’manskaia paramentskaia fraktsiia, 2–3. Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 10. Topchibashev, Musul’manskaia paramentskaia fraktsiia, 19. See: Ali Mardan bey Topchibashi (Terchumeyi-hal 1862–1934), Kurtuluş, December, 1934, # 2, 48. Letter Gasprinskii to Topchibashev, June 28, 1906, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 39. Topchibashev, Musul’manskaia paramentskaia fraktsiia, 15. Kaspii, February 1, 1907. Fourniau, Ali Mardan Toptchibachi, 306. Hüseyin Baykara, Azərbaycan istiqlal mücadiləsi tarikhi. Istanbul: Azerbaycan Halk Yayınları, 1975, 126–130; Kaspii, June 18, 1906. Kaspii, July 2, 1906. Kaspii, February 1, 1907. Topchibashev, Musul’manskaia paramentskaia fraktsiia, 19–20. Kaspii, July 16, 1906. Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 10. Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiiskom parlamente, 157. Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 11. Kaspii, July 12, 1906. Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiiskom parlamente, 138. Kaspii, July 13, 1906. Baku, July 16, 1906. Miliukov, Vospominaniia, 272–273. Letter Davidovich to Topchibashev, July 24, 1906, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 31. Ali Mardan bey wrote that there were up to 1000 delegates from the Caucasus, the Crimea, the Volga area, Siberia, Turkestan, and Kyrgyzstan. See: Topchibashev. ­Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 15. Topchibashev. Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 15. Tretii Vserossiiskii musul’manskii s’ezd, 4. Topchibashev, Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 19. Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 11–12. Tretii Vserossiiskii musul’manskii s’ezd, 5. Мusa Bigiev (Bigi), 1906 sene 16–21 avqustta ijtimaq itmeş Rusiya Muselmannarının nedevesi. Kazan: Bratii Kerimovı, 1906, 43–44. Vserossiiskie musul’manskie s’ezdy 1905–1906 gg., 37. Baykara, Azerbaycan istiqlal mücadilesi tarikhi, 132. Ibid., 139. Topchibashev, Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 17. Ibid., 17. Kaspii, September 1, 1906. III Congres des musulmans de Russie, AAMT, carton no 7, 2–3. Kaspii, September 3, 1906. See: Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 35. See: Topchibashev, Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 18; For more information see: National Archives of the Tatar Republic (hereafter referred to as NATR), f. 199, r. 1, v. 722, p. 178.

Leader of the Muslim peoples  61 56 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 12. 57 Topchibashev, Congresses of the Muslims of Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 17–18. 58 Kaspii, September 3, 1906. 59 Bigiyev, Osnovy Reform, 172. 60 Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 50. 61 Letter from Gasprinskii to Topchibashev, September 24, 1906, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 45. 62 Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 50. 63 Letter from Gasprinskii to Topchibashev, September 24, 1906, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 43–45. 64 See: Rech, September 19, 1907. 65 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 12. 66 Dzhamil’ Gasanly, Ali mardan-bek Topchibashev. Zhizn’ za ideiu. Moscow: Flinta and Nauka, 2014, 171. 67 Letter from Semionov to Topchibashev, October 17, 1906, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 20, pp. 62–63. 68 See: Topchibashev, Musul’manskaia paramentskaia fraktsia, 26. 69 Kaspii, January 16, 1907. 70 Kaspii, February 6, 1907. 71 Ibid. 72 Kaspii, February 7, 1907. 73 Kaspii, February 8, 1907. 74 Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiyskom parlamente, 166. 75 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 12. 76 Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 56. 77 Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiyskom parlamente, 171. 78 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bek Ali Akbar bek oglou, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 3. 79 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 12–13. 80 Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiyskom parlamente, 175. 81 See: Programma Musul’manskoi gruppy vo 2-oi Gosudarstvennoi Dume. St. Peterburg: Tipografiia N. Avizhanskogo, 1907, 1–16.

5 Living history between two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)

Little information on Topchibashov’s activities between 1907 and 1917 is available. Researchers generally pass over this decade of his life in silence, briefly outlining some classical aspects of the period to link the 1907 events with the revolutionary outbreak of 1917.1 In actuality, however, these were the most brilliant years in Ali Mardan bey’s life. He had become a founder of the current history of Muslim peoples and, despite being deprived of his political rights, took on the burden of social and political progress. One of his friends who witnessed these titanic efforts rightly predicted that Ali Mardan bey’s name would add brilliance to the history of Azerbaijan. After the Third Congress of the Union of Russian Muslims, Ali Mardan bey arrived in St. Petersburg to carry out his work as the chair of the union and because of legal proceedings involving deputies of the First State Duma who signed the Vyborg Declaration.

Hasan bey Zardabi: the parting ceremony While the St. Petersburg court was completing the case of Ali Mardan bey, an irreplaceable loss befell the newly formed Azerbaijani nation. On November 28, 1907, Hasan bey Zardabi, who had laid down the principles to build the new Azerbaijan, died. Ali Mardan bey could not attend the mourning ceremony two days later. His close friend Ahmed bey Aghayev led this ceremony, which was also attended by Ali bey Huseynzade, Gara bey Garabeyov, Mahammad Emin Rasulzade, Hashym bey Vezirov, Baku kazi Mir Mahammad Kerim agha, and other prominent members of the intelligentsia and clergy of the Nijat and Nashri-Maarif societies. Contributors to the newspaper Kaspii noted that on November 29, a day before the burial of Hasan bey, Aghayev published a biography of the great enlightener in Irshad. Hasan bey’s obituary called him a person well known to all peoples of the Caucasus and Russian Muslims and “the father of journalists.”2 He had asked to be buried without any pomp, but that was impossible.3 For the first time in the history of Baku, a Russian-Muslim leader was buried and representatives of all nationalities and intellectuals came to see him off. Nikolai Baizdrenko noted in his article in Kaspii on December 7, 1907, that “a person who throughout his long life thought and worked for others remained alone at the end of his life.”4

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  63 Condolence telegrams came from all parts of the Caucasus and Russia, from prominent Muslim figures. Telegrams from St. Petersburg, Bakhchisarai, Kazan, Ufa, Orenburg, Astrakhan, Teymurkhan Shura, and other towns highly expressed appreciation for Hasan bey’s role in the cultural and political life of Russian Muslims. On December 8 Hasan bey’s widow, Hanifa khanym, and elder son, Midhat, voiced their gratitude in the newspaper Irshad to all those who had sent condolences or taken part in the funeral.5 Ali Mardan bey received news of the Hasan bey’s death on November 29, 1907. That same day members of the Muslim faction of the Third State Duma came to offer their condolences and sent telegrams of condolence to Hasan bey’s widow. On Sunday, December 2, Hasan bey’s memorial service was held in St. Petersburg. The ceremony started with prayers from the Quran offered by Lutfulla Iskhakov, the akhund (cleric) of St. Petersburg’s mosque. Then Mirza Kazym Abdinov, Mahammad Shakir Tukayev, and Khalil bey Khasmamedov (deputies of the Third State Duma) spoke. Tukayev noted Hasan Bey’s role in saving all Muslims from the domain of darkness. Ali Mardan bey expressed his gratitude to all in attendance, saying that this service mattered most for Hasan bey’s family.6 Some St. Petersburg papers published obituaries of Hasan bey, such as Segodnia (November 29, 1907) and Rech’ (December 1, 1907). For seven days Hasan bey’s family and friends received condolences from St. Petersburg’s Muslim community, including friends and classmates at Moscow University.7

Voluntary service to Russian Muslims Before the mourning ended, a special department of the St. Petersburg Judicial Court finished the Vyborg trial. On December 12–18, 1907, it rendered a verdict on the 167 former deputies of the First State Duma from Stolypin’s list, under article 129 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Empire. In addition to being sentenced to three months of confinement, all Vyborg signatories were banned from election to the State Duma and other elective bodies. Six members of the Muslim faction (Topchibashov, Akhtyamov, Alkyn, Janturin, Bukeikhanov, and Ziyadkhanov) were among those convicted, although the court did not satisfactorily establish the guilt of Akhtyamov. Topchibashov and four other faction members did not admit their guilt. Despite this, the court sentenced them to three months in jail. In addition, Topchibashov had to step down from his post as editor of Kaspii and was forbidden to run a printing office.8 Elections to the Third State Duma had ended by the date of this judgment. The number of Muslim deputies was reduced by November 1, 1907. The Caucasus, which had been represented by twenty-eight Duma deputies, was now represented by ten. Under a new election law, the Muslim population of Baku, Elizavetpol, and Erivan provinces was represented by only one deputy at the Duma, while in the past each province had three deputies. Under the law the election center of the three provinces was located in Elizavetpol. Khalil bey Khasmamedov of the People’s Freedom Party took the one deputy seat in the autumn elections of 1907.

64  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) The Muslim faction of the Third State Duma, formed on November 10, 1907, consisted of only eight members. The sharp decline in the number of deputies, from thirty-six in the First Duma and thirty-eight in the Second Duma to eight, was caused by restrictions in the new election law. The faction was officially headed by a deputy from Ufa province, Kutlug Mahammad Tevkelov, but actually led by Ali Mardan bey. Sadri Maksudov, a deputy from Kazan, and non-Duma member Ismayil Lemonov served as secretaries. The faction members of the Third State Duma were Khalil bey Khasmamedov, Gaysa Enikeev, Sadri Maksudov, Jihangir Bayburin, Ismayil Mufdizade, Sharafutdin Mahmudov, and Galiasker Syrtlanov. In 1909 Ibrahim Heydarov left the faction of social democrats and joined the Muslim faction. Ali Mardan bey took upon himself the burden of work, including drafting bills for the faction, organization of its activities outside the Duma, and coordination with the People’s Freedom Party. The Muslim faction maintained close relations with the Muslim bureau, as set forth by the decision of the Third Congress of the Union of Russian Muslims. Ali Mardan bey spent the winter in St. Petersburg, where he was engaged in drafting a proposal on religion and education. Members of the faction and bureau met to discuss urgent issues at Topchibashov’s room in the apartment of Bronislav and Luisa Stempovskii (Mokhovaia Street 25, apartment 11).9 He reviewed all previous laws of the Russian Empire regarding the Muslim community and made comments. Ali Mardan bey drafted bills on education for Muslims in their mother tongue, on establishing district institutions in the Caucasus, and on religious faiths, which were discussed in March–April 1908 at a meeting of the Muslim faction and submitted to the Duma committees.10 There was so much work to be done that Ali Mardan bey decided to give up his law practice and move to St. Petersburg, while his family remained in Baku.11 Ismayil Gasprinskii highly appreciated his services to the Muslim people of Russia and asked him to stay and lead the work. On April 11, 1908, he wrote: “First of all you must remain in St. Petersburg, especially as you are needed to begin organizational matters. . . . The time is here for psychological breakthrough and renewal of the people’s cause without any ideological confusion and disorder. Whatever happens next, your people need you, and you must remember this.”12 Gasprinskii, who had just returned from Egypt, also told him that he should attend the world Muslim congress scheduled for October 1909. Ali Mardan bey received an invitation a short time later.13 While waiting for the verdict to be carried out, Ali Mardan bey did not sit idle. He wanted to educate the Muslim peoples of Russia and obtain rights equal to those of the privileged peoples of the empire. Enlightened Muslims believed that twenty million Muslims, ranking third after “Great Russians” and “Little Russians,” should have the right of self-determination.14 Ali Mardan bey saw the Muslims’ progress in strengthening the nationalist idea among Turkic peoples and removing religious differences in Islam. Ten days before beginning to serve his sentence, he wrote to Salim Girey Janturin, stressing the necessity of removing sectarian differences and returning to the early period of Islam. He believed that

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  65

Figure 5.1  Ismail bey Gasprinskii and Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, 1908.

forces hostile to the unification and consolidation of Muslims would try to deepen their differences and thus weaken Islam. The divergence between Sunnism and Shiism, as formulated by the best minds of the country, is purely political and senseless; it is a product of the fertile imagination of Persians who introduced much from Zoroastrianism into Islam. Hence there cannot be any obstacles to the unification of the Muslims of Russia.15 To ensure the independence of the religious administration it was essential to structure it not as a state system but on a religious basis, relying on Islamic unity. Basing it on a state system would deprive it of independence in the eyes of the nation, which was likely to perceive “a priest as an official in a turban. That is the source of the evil. . . . The point is that spiritual autonomy implies absolute isolation. If Muslims disobey their moral obligations to abide by the decisions of religious institutions, they would not want to have a priesthood.”16

66  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) Ali Mardan bey’s anxiety was not unfounded. Governmental circles and Christian missionary organizations were uneasy about the establishment of a single religious administration by progressive Muslims. They viewed this as intensification of pan-Islamism and were suspicious of the concept of unity of the “Muslim nation.” To throw these plans into confusion, within the framework of struggle against “pan-Islamism,” these circles pitted weakly developed minority Muslim peoples against strongly developed European nations and stirred up separatist tendencies in Islam in the guise of protecting the interests of culturally underdeveloped peoples. An eloquent example of this policy was the separation of Tatars and the peoples of Povolzh’e and Kazakhs.17 The events of June 3, 1907, were followed by a strengthened anti-Muslim policy led by Prime Minister Stolypin, who launched an intensive campaign against socalled pan-Islamism. Russians arranged searches and arrests without cause, exiled Muslims, and closed Muslim educational institutions and press organs. Russian nationalists insisted that the empire was a state of Russians and for R ­ ussians. Muslims who had lived on this territory since the dawn of time found themselves neither citizens nor patriots.18 Persecutions of Muslim organizations and prominent figures continually increased in scope in Baku, Elizavetpol, Erivan, and Tiflis in 1908. Nationalist organizations were also persecuted, particularly Difai (Defense). Their offices were searched and their contents dismantled or destroyed. Cases were opened against Akhund Mulla Pishnamazzade, Alekber bey Rafibeyov, Alekber bey Khasmamedov, Khalil bey Khasmamedov, Mirza bey Gaziyev, Mirza Mahammad Akhundov, Hamid bey Usubov, Meshadi Ali Rafiyev, Mukhtar bey Gaziyev, Isa Shikhzamanov, Haci Miragasym Hamzayev, and others for Difai activities. They were charged with offering resistance to the Armenian terror, and their apartments were searched. A charge-sheet for 1908 says that at Alekber bey Rafibeyov’s home they found two menacing letters addressed to him; two charters of the Armenian revolutionary army, including the rights and duties of low and high ranks; a copy of The Muslim Parliamentary Faction inscribed “Dear Alekber bey Rafibeyov, from Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov”; and a booklet by S. Rusov, How Bulgarians Gained Freedom.19

“Guests of honor” at Kresty Prison While the St. Petersburg Judicial Court’s decision was about to come into force, Ali Mardan bey became the most respected political figure among Russian ­Muslims. Any initiative in the political, cultural, or spiritual life of the empire’s Muslim population was attributed to him; he gave his blessing to innovations. The twenty-fifth anniversary of the newspaper Tarjuman was marked on May 2, 1908, in Bakhchisarai. Numerous guests arrived from Crimea and other regions. At the local imam’s request, they offered up a prayer to Allah for the health and success of Ali Mardan bey and Ahmed bey Aghayev. The imam then exclaimed: “Glory to them!” All those present replied with one accord: “Long live Ali Mardan bey and Ahmed bey Aghayev!”20

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  67 On May  8, 1908, according to the decision of the St. Petersburg Judicial Court dated the previous December, Ali Mardan bey was ordered to come to the prison and serve a three-month sentence. Before this deplorable occurrence, he received an interesting letter from Mahammad bey Mahammadbeyov, the Baku police chief’s assistant, who had graduated from the Tiflis war college and served in the Baku police department since 1903. He knew Ali Mardan bey very well and valued his services to the nation. Topchibashov’s three-month sentence was depressing for the Muslims of Baku and other towns. In his letter of April  20 Mahammadbeyov wrote: First of all, I wish you good health, patience, and vital energy to complete all your undertakings. However, nobody properly appreciates your sacrifices and contribution to the common cause. I hope that time will pass and your achievements will be added to history in golden letters. Unfortunately, very unfortunately, it is unlikely that we will see that golden age. However, perhaps we might still see it, as they say: “When God is asleep, the devil is active.”21 I heard that you are going to serve your three-month term somewhere in a province. I would advise you to choose Guba [a town in northwest Azerbaijan]. First, it is a good place, summer is cool, there are gardens everywhere; second, the chief of the prison is a good man and I have good relations with him. . . . This is my sacred duty to help you anywhere, anytime.22 Despite this friendly proposal, Ali Mardan bey, accompanied by policemen, left for the Kresty Prison on May 8, 1908. On the eve of this parting, the Muslim faction of the Third State Duma held an extraordinary meeting to say goodbye to Ali Mardan bey and Zakir Ramiyev, also a prisoner and member of the Duma. At a meeting held that evening at the restaurant Volna, the representatives of the Muslim society of St. Petersburg expressed their appreciation of Ali Mardan bey as the leader of the Muslim Party. Khalil bey Khasmamedov sent a telegram to Peri khanym on May 8 about this party.23 Ali Mardan bey took notes to prison that dealt with four questions: popular schooling for Muslims, organization of religious Muslim institutions, establishment of an elective district council in the Caucasus, and resolution of the land problem in the South Caucasus. From the start of the first Russian revolution these four questions had become a pivotal part of his political and public activity, so he hoped to finish this work during his stay in prison.24 According to memoirs of the time, Ali Mardan bey paid particular attention to radical reform of the Russian-Muslim religious institutions, with an emphasis on the elective nature of higher spiritual posts.25 He drew up a list of the work done in prison, including a 25-page article titled “On the Education of Alien Peoples.” This article analyzed the schooling system drawn up by Nikolai Ilminskii, “a chief expert” in Muslim matters of Russia, and the current conditions of Muslim education in schools and madrasahs. Topchibashov also wrote “Essay on Restructuring of Muslim Spiritual Institutions” (ten pages), “Amendments on Regulations for Schools for Alien Peoples” (five pages), “A Question of Primary Education at the

68  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) Third State Duma” (three pages), and “Providing Trade and Industrial Workers with Rest and Recreation” (five pages).26 Ali Mardan bey served his sentence in solitary confinement. There he heard the happy news of the Young Turkish revolution in July 1908 in the Ottoman Empire. He valued the enactment of the constitutional system in Turkey and sympathized with the Young Turk movement.27 A bloodless revolution in the summer of 1908 carried out by the Unity and Progress Party (CUP) was a rare event. On July 24 Ottoman nationalists succeeded in restoring the constitution in Turkey while progressive Muslim deputies of the Russian State Duma were still serving their terms in various prisons.28 At the Young Turks’ request, Sultan Abdul Hamid II agreed to convene the parliament and restore the constitution of 1876. That was a dangerous precedent for Russia. News from Istanbul troubled St. Petersburg very much; because of these revolutionary changes in a neighboring Muslim country the ­Russian government was extremely apprehensive that the Turkish revolution would stir up the twenty million Muslim Turks of Russia and inspire them to become free of Russian subordination. The constitution of the Ottoman Empire was disliked by the tsarist government but welcomed by Ali Mardan bey, who believed that the Turkish developments would strongly affect Russian Muslims and encourage their national and political awakening. The prospects of his liberal reformist ideas seemed to be very promising. The Young Turks’ revolution had encouraged two of his close friends (Ali bey Huseynzahde and Ahmed bey Aghayev) to leave for Turkey, leaving a vacuum in the social and political life of Azerbaijan. Newspapers wrote that these figures were the brain of the Caucasian Turks; ears for those who could not hear; eyes for those who could not see; and tongues for those who could not speak. In addition, Ali Mardan bey was actively engaged in reading books on world history, literature, and philosophy and kept a list of them. During his three months of imprisonment he managed to read about fifty books, ranging from the history of Europe to Eastern literature, from Christian teachings to Islamic culture. Some of these books had been translated earlier in the twentieth century from European languages into Russian, reflecting many of the progressive ideas at the time. A mere enumeration of the titles of these books testifies to his broad outlook.29 Ali Mardan bey was finally released from the prison on August 6 and moved to the Metropolitan Hotel. He was lucky to escape cholera, which broke out at the prison.30 The first telegram of congratulation was from his wife, Peri khanym, and younger daughter, Sevar, from Petigorsk: “We heartily congratulate you on your release from the prison. It is your birthday today.”31 The mention of his birthday is problematic. He was born on May 4. His release from the prison actually occurred on the birthday of his daughter Sevar, who was named after his mother and whom he tenderly called “mummy.” Her father’s release from prison proved to be a great birthday present for her. After the arrest of Ali Mardan bey in May  1908, Peri khanym and all but one of her children had headed for the Northern Caucasus. Her elder daughter, Sara, stayed in Baku with her grandmother, Hanifa khanym. On August 8 Ali Mardan bey got a telegram from Mahammadrza Vekilov, congratulating him on his release.32 He received many such telegrams from Baku and

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  69 from Qusar, where Azerbaijani intellectuals were vacationing, including teacher Abdulhamid Gorchibashev, Hasan bey Aghayev, Najaf bey Vezirov, Sakina khanym Akhundova, Govher khanym Gaziyeva, Jamo bey Hajinskii, Mehti bey Hajinskii Gregorii Jinoradze (a contributor to Kaspii), Ali bey Huseynzade, and others. These telegrams used expressions like “a pioneer for the people’s cause” and “father of all Muslims.”33 Telegrams on Ali Mardan bey’s release came from all parts of Russia. Fatih Kerimov (a well-known Tatar writer and editor of Vakt) sent congratulations from Orenburg: “I wish you energy and your former strength. I insist that you go to Nizhnii Novgorod.”34 On that same day Vakt contributors expressed pride in Ali Mardan bey and wished him good health to work for Muslims. Topchibashov replied: I am touched by your attention and regret that I have sacrificed so little. I have written a few works about schools, religious institutions, and recreation for trade and industrial workers. From now on, we must double our efforts and work together. Salam.35 Kutlug Mahammad Tevkelov, chair of the Muslim faction of the Third State Duma, heard in Yalta about the release of Ali Mardan bey. He was visiting Chingiz Ahmed Girey, a son of the Crimean khan, and immediately sent a telegram of congratulation, noting that in a day or two Muslims would gather in Moscow and Nizhnii Novgorod. He asked how long Ali Mardan bey would remain in St. Petersburg. Ali Mardan bey replied that he was waiting for the release of Selim Girey Janturin (who had also been convicted for signing the Vyborg Declaration) on August  10. Then they were going to go to Moscow to meet with Kutlug Muhammad Murza.36 On August 7 telegrams came from Ismayil Lemanov in Bakhchisarai and Yusif Akchurin, who had already arrived in Moscow. After Ismayil bey Gasprinskii wrote that he would not be able to go, Ali Mardan bey wrote that he would come to Moscow on August 12 and meet with Tevkelov: they would try to persuade Gasprinskii.37 On August 8 Yusif Akchurin sent a congratulatory telegram from Moscow.38 Topchibashov’s release was a great event for his friends and companions-in-arms, who expressed their joy that he was alive, free, and active.39 Some Muslim deputies arrested for signing the Vyborg Declaration came from famous backgrounds. The magazine Russkaia Mysl’ was highly respected in St. Petersburg circles. In issue 7 (1909) G. Alisov wrote: In spring 1906 elections to the First Russian State Duma were held in Kirgizia steppe. Candidates delivered their speeches in the open air, on horseback. They frequently explained the constitutional provisions with the help of cattle-breeding phrases. Among those elected was an offspring of Chingiz khan: Ali khan Bukeykhanov. . . . Although he had never visited the Duma, he signed the Vyborg Declaration then served three months in Semipalatinsk Prison in 1908.

70  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) The article also noted that Ali Mardan bey, “the offspring of Azerbaijani field marshal Topchibashi, a deputy from Baku, and the leader of Muslims at the First State Duma, had also served his sentence.”40

Adventures in Povolzh’e, Orenburg, and Siberia After his release Ali Mardan bey intended to return to Baku. In autumn 1908 St. Petersburg was hit by cholera. Municipal authorities proved impotent in the struggle with this disease. Russian intellectuals hurriedly abandoned the capital. Scores of Duma members left the city as well. In June  1909 Ali Mardan bey and Kutlug Mahammad Tevkelov, chair of the Muslim faction of the State Duma, made a two-month trip to Ufa, Kazan, Povolzh’e, Orenburg, and other towns to consolidate Muslims residing in the region. They sought to spread the ideas of civil, religious, and political freedom and unification of Muslims around the Muslim Union to comply with the program adopted at the Third Congress.41 The voyage and related meetings were arranged by Ali Mardan bey. He recorded the trip and his meetings in a diary, which became a valuable document on an important period of the Muslim movement in Russia.42 On June 9, 1909, Ali Mardan bey left for Moscow, accompanied by Tevkelov, Khalil bey Khasmamedov, Ibrahim bey Heydarov, and Mahammad Ali Dakhadayev. They were seen off by Ismayil Lemanov, Vladimir Savitskii, Bronislav Stempovskii, and Gaysa Yenikeyev, a member of the Third State Duma. The travelers arrived in Moscow on June 10. Ali Mardan bey and Kutlug Mahammad Murza went to the Kursk railway station and sent telegrams to Said Girey Alkin and Mahammad Zakir Ramiyev (editors of Vakt) to inform them of the trip. The travelers left for Nizhnii Novgorod that same day and then traveled to Kazan on board the Emperor, owned by the Volga Society. On June 12 they stayed at the France Hotel. They met with the well-known Kumyk general Mahmud Sheikhaliyev and held consultations with Haji Mahammadjan Kerimov, Ahmedjan Saydashov, and Sadykh Galikeyev. Then they visited an agricultural exhibition.43 After Kazan Topchibashov and Tevkelov sailed to Samara on the Mariia Pavlovna. The next day they reached Samara and left for Orenburg by train that evening. They arrived in the morning and stayed at the America Hotel. They had meetings with well-known publisher, journalist, and writer Temirshah Solov’ev; Fatih Kerimov; journalist and literary critic Burkhan Sharaf; Orenburg merchant Maecenas Mahmud Khusainov; and employees of Vakt. That same day Ali Mardan bey sent a telegram home from Orenburg. On June 16 the guests met with wellknown Tatar executive and public figure Khusain Donskoy and Rizaitdin Fakhratdinov, a former kazi of Ufa and now editor of the Orenburg magazine Shura. In the evening they went to the country cottage of Khusain Donskoy, where they met well-known imam and preacher Nigmatulla Timoshev and landowner and religious leader Khayrulla Usmanov to discuss Russian attitudes toward Muslims, including religious figures. The travelers then learned about the work of a madrasah designed for 180 students built in 1902 by the famous Tatar merchant Ahmed Khusainov.

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  71 On June 18 Tevkelov fell ill. Ali Mardan bey met alone with members of the Orenburg intelligentsia, religious leaders, and representatives of business circles, such as Jigangir Abzgildinov, Mullah Khayrullah Usmanov, Temirshah Solov’ev, Fatih Kerimov, Zahidulla Kashayev, Nimatulla Timoshev, Mahmud Usmanov, Abubekir Kapkayev, and Mirza Zakir Khairov. He informed them about the decisions adopted on May 29 by the central committee of the Union of Russian Muslims, the activities of the Muslim faction at the State Duma, the situation of local committees, the material conditions of the Muslim bureau, and relations between this bureau and the faction as well as discussing topical issues.44 On June 20 Ali Mardan bey and Tevkelov headed for the estate of Mahmud bey Khusainov in Garghaly near Orenburg. There they met well-known merchants Abdul Aziz Usmanov, Omar Khalfa Dovlatyarov, and Abdullatif Minbudayev; representatives of the Muslim clergy Khayrulla Usmanov, Iskhak Ismagilov, Eyyup Ibrahimov, and Khayrulla Galikeyev; and teachers and intellectuals such as Badraddin Rafikov, Ahmed Khisyamov, and others. They had detailed talks about the activities of the Muslims of the Duma and the necessity of establishing the Muslim bureau of this faction. In another meeting with prominent Muslims of Orenburg on June 23, Tevkelov and Topchibashov told them about the Muslim faction. Fatih Kerimov and Khayrulla Usmanov backed the idea of a financial committee to provide the bureau with funds. The participants considered it their moral duty to support the Muslim faction and the bureau. The Orenburg Muslims decided to set up a financial committee to support the bureau of the Muslim faction, whose members included Mahmud bey Khusainov, Zakir Ramiyev, Fatih Kerimov, Khayrulla Usmanov, and other well-to-do merchants and publishers. They asked Tevkelov and Topchibashov to assume responsibility for organizing the bureau.45 A protocol signed by seventeen participants was drafted to establish and fund the Muslim bureau.46 A secret agent, “Boris” (real name I. Bikchurin), informed the police about the Orenburg meeting. The police carried out a search and discovered the protocol and signed documents, obtaining information about Tevkelov and Topchibashov.47 On June 25 Ali Mardan bey and Kutlug Murza left Orenburg for Ufa, where they arrived on June 26. There they visited Selim Girey Janturin, met with major merchants Mahammad Zarif Utiamyshov, Sabirzyan Shamgulov, and another nineteen representatives of commercial circles, and exchanged views on the work of the Muslim faction and its bureau. On June 28 they discussed restructuring the religious administration with Ufa mufti Muhammediar Sultanov. On June 29 they held a meeting at the home of well-known Ufa merchant and patron Khabibulla Amirov, with fourteen guests. They discussed setting up a local committee and drafted an appropriate resolution. On June  30 the travelers told the town kazi about the declaration of the Orenburg meeting and the resolution. Twenty-two prominent merchants, religious figures, and intellectuals in Ufa supported the Orenburg declaration and agreed to set up a local committee. In his diary Ali Mardan bey noted that he had drawn on the Ufa branch of the State Bank and sent money and a letter to his wife. Following talks and meetings with local rich patrons in Ufa, the parties reached an agreement on financial aid to the Muslim

72  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) bureau worth 3,000 rubles, aided by Galiasker Syrtlanov, a member of the Third State Duma; Shahaydar Syrtlanov, a former member of the First and Second State Dumas and a member of the central committee of the Union of Russian Muslims; Selim Girey Janturin; Sadri Maksudov; and others.48 On July 4 Ali Mardan bey, Tevkelov, and Galiasker Syrtlanov left Ufa for Siberia, arriving in Cheliabinsk on July  5. They continued talks on urgent Muslim problems of universal education, recreation, and work, the Union of Russian Muslims, and the Muslim bureau in Troitsk on July  6 with Abdurahman Ahmarov, Mahammadgali Yaushev, Mahammadjan Valiyev, Galiulla Urazayev, Zeynulla Rasulov, Gavril Bashkirov, and others. On July 8 the travelers went to a meeting of prominent Muslims of Troitsk at the home of Muhammedgali Yaushev. Ali Mardan bey told them about the work of the Muslim faction, his obligations to it, the Muslim bureau, and so forth. The travelers hoped to raise at least 1,500 rubles in Troitsk, but Yaushev assured them that 3,000 rubles would be transferred to the Muslim bureau.49 The delegates of the Muslim faction of the Third State Duma returned to Cheliabinsk on July  9. Then Galiasker went to Ufa, Ali Mardan bey and Tevkelov to Tiumen. While at Ekaterinburg, they met with Zeynaladdin Agafur from the Agafurov Brothers firm of Tiumen to discuss their writings. In July Iskhak Muhtarov and Fattah Kemaleddinov welcomed them to Tiumen. On July 12 delegates of the faction had a meeting at Khalilulla Gaynulin’s home with prominent representatives of the Tiumen Tatars, Uzbeks, and Kyrgyzes to discuss problems of the Muslim faction. In the village of Molchin, founded by Central Asian merchants, they drew up a document identical to the Orenburg declaration in the presence of distinguished religious leaders and merchants, which was signed by the Tiumen Muslims. Ishkhak Muhtarv and Fatih Mukhin pledged to defray all expenses related to their trip to Tiumen.50 Ali Mardan bey’s diary records that on July 15 they returned to Ekaterinburg, Zeynaddin Agafurov’s home, where they had a meeting with fourteen merchants and clergymen. A resolution was adopted to aid the Muslim bureau and join the Orenburg declaration. The Ekaterinburg meeting passed a resolution on questions set forth by the Muslim faction and the Muslim bureau and set up a committee of five members headed by Zeynaddin Agafurov. On the night of July  17 the travelers left for Perm, where they were welcomed by Ziganshah Ibatullin, chair of the Muslim charity society. A meeting was held to discuss the conditions of the local Muslim population, confrontations between youths and the elderly, the policy of the State Duma, and their attitude toward the Orenburg declaration. The participants signed a Perm declaration, specified an amount of material aid, and set up a local committee headed by Ibrahim Timkin to coordinate with the Muslim movement. At Petropavlovsk on July 20 the travelers were greeted by Yusif Devletgildiyev, leader of the town Muslim society. A meeting of thirty Muslim representatives, including eight religious leaders, was held at Devletgeldiyev’s home on July 22. The participants signed appropriate documents and set up a committee of eight members led by Yusif Usmanov. After completing organizational matters,

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  73 Ali Mardan bey and Tevkelov returned home by train via Cheliabinsk, Ekaterinburg, and Perm, discussing candidates for the Muslim bureau.51 On July 24, a day after their arrival in Perm, the Muslim leaders went to Kazan by ship. During their journey they met a Dungan and Kazakh delegation from Eastern Turkestan (Xinjiang) and discussed questions of common interest. On July 26 they arrived at Pianii Bor landing on the Kama River then traveled twentyfive versts to Sharshady. There they visited the grave of the great Tatar enlightener Shahbazgirey Ahmedov (who spread secular schools among Tatars), talked to his wife, and learned about his creative heritage. Ali Mardan bey prepared a report on the results of the trip, noting that they spent 917 rubles in visiting Povolzh’e, the Orenburg region, and Siberia. He also drew up a program of Tevkelov’s meetings in Kazan and Nizhnii Novgorod as well as questions to be discussed at a meeting in Nizhnii Novgorod. After debates with well-known representatives of the local Muslim society that lasted several days, both leaders returned to the landing pier on July 29 and continued to Kazan.52 Ali Mardan bey and Tevkelov arrived in Kazan at 3 p.m. on July  30. They bought recent issues of Tatar newspapers as well as the book Muslim Deputies of the First, Second, and Third Dumas and Their Activities by Tatar journalist Fuad Tuktarov. When he saw the two leaders, he happily cried: “Both of you are mentioned in my book.”53 Their trip ended on July  30. Tevkelov remained in Kazan, while Ali Mardan bey set out for Nizhnii Novgorod by ship. He faced unfortunate incidents during the trip: he felt unwell in the evening on the ship, and the transport gendarmerie confiscated his luggage. On July 31 he wrote in his diary: “Thoughts about my family, the future of my children, their upbringing and material well-being . . . about the Muslim faction, Caucasus, Muslims as a whole. Everything became confused in my mind and I went into a sleep.”54 Ali Mardan bey reached Nizhnii Novgorod on July 31 at 5 p.m. Despite his indisposition, he held short-term meetings with prominent Tatar intellectuals as well as merchants, including Mahamadjan Valiyev, Abdullah Buda, Mahammadjan Kerimov, Mustafa Lutfi Ismayilov, Abdurrahman Mametov, Abdullah Latifov, Fahrispam Agiyev, and well-known singer Mariam Baji Iskenderova. He also had meetings with Caucasians at Nizhnii Novgorod. He sent a telegram to Peri khanym with the welcome news he was going to leave Nizhnii Novgorod on August 2.55 After two months of constant travel by train, ship, and horse, Ali Mardan bey finally arrived in Moscow. This voyage left an indelible imprint. While traveling across the boundless spaces of the Russian Empire he became acquainted with the life, culture, and traditions of the Muslim population, their style of thinking, and their level of education. He held meetings with prominent Muslim theologians and Turkic enlighteners. In his later autobiographical notes he proudly described his travel in the Volga region, Ural Mountains, and Siberian plains. Ali Mardan bey believed that his visits with Tevkelov to Muslim populations in different locales and his talks with various figures on political, public, and cultural themes played a crucial role in consolidating the Muslim peoples around a single idea.

74  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)

Return to Baku Nearly two and a half years had passed since Topchibashov left Baku. Many developments had occurred, especially in regard to his political status. Ali Mardan bey pointed out that his position was illegal and uncertain. To improve his material conditions he rejoined the bar and acquired legal clients. At the same time, he was actively involved in organizing elective district councils (zemstvos) in the Caucasus.56 In early October 1909 he asked Maj. Peter Martynov to authorize a lecture titled “Zemstvo Reform in the Caucasus” on October 11 at the City Duma.57 It was not easy to get a positive reply. The Baku art and literature circle informed Ali Mardan bey on November 5, 1909, that the scheduled lecture was not authorized because of its subject matter.58 The tsarist police were familiar with Topchibashov’s name and collected secret information about his activities. They realized that he had been a leading figure in the Muslim world since the first Russian revolution, had urged the Muslim population of the empire to begin active political struggle, had drafted documents on the reform of religious institutions, and had led the Muslim bureau. A “top secret” gendarmerie dossier noted: According to intelligence, a lawyer named Topchibashov . . . is playing a crucial role among Baku pan-Islamists. He is famous among local Muslims. A former editor of Kaspii, he maintains friendly relations with Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev, who renders essential material aid to pan-Islamists. He was formerly a member of the First State Duma, visited Vyborg, where he took part in compiling the well-known declaration, and was sentenced to three months of imprisonment. At this time Topchibashov is continuing his active participation in the pan-Islamic movement and maintains relations with . . . members of the Muslim faction at the State Duma. He is very cautious person, enjoying great authority and trust, who carries out party work by means of personal meetings and talks: no correspondence, no documents, no illegal literature in his home library. The whole community is led by a small group of individuals. . . . All these things are done secretly, without any registration. In so doing, the word of an authorized representative is law for all groups.59 Despite this, upon his return to Baku Ali Mardan bey was eager to continue his political activities, especially in view of the stormy debates over the zemstvo project in the Caucasus. As a lawyer and political figure he had enormous experience in the subject. As far back as the first Russian revolution, he had represented Baku province at the Moscow zemstvo congress.60 On November 1, 1909, Baku governor Vladimir Alyshevskii sent Ali Mardan bey materials on the zemstvo to be applied in practice in Baku province.61 The governor invited him to attend a meeting at the Baku City Duma on November 9 to discuss zemstvo issues.62 Ali Mardan bey was elected as chair of a committee to lead zemstvo reform in Baku. He restarted his publicist activities and published newspaper articles in Baku and

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  75 Tiflis on Muslim problems.63 He also received a new invitation from Iran. Ismayil Gasprinskii wrote to him from Bakhchisarai: I am glad that Teheran is looking for competent people, realizing that salvation is in specific figures, not in diplomatic red tape. I’d like to see you in Teheran, although it’s your own business to accept or turn down the invitation. But one thing is obvious: there is much work for you to do, both in politics and in history.64 When Ali Mardan bey had received the first proposal to head the government in 1905, Gasprinskii had opposed a trip to Teheran, saying that “matters of historical significance” awaited Topchibashov in Russia. Ali Mardan bey again rejected the invitation. At the same time Ali Mardan bey received an invitation from St. Petersburg. In his letter of June 17, 1910, Tevkelov, the chair of the Muslim faction of the Third State Duma, pointed out that Khasmamedov, Maksudov, and he himself believed that the Muslim bureau of the Union of Russian Muslims would be chaired by Ali Mardan bey. However, there was no unanimity on the matter. Tevkelov informed Topchibashov of disagreements inside the faction as to the structure of the bureau. Owing to the resignation of Mahammad Shakir Tukayev and Sharafutdin Mahmudov, the majority were on the side of Galiasker Syrtlanov, Ibrahim Haydarov, and Jigangir Bayburin, while Gaysa Murza Enikeyev silently sided with them. They believed that the faction should control all the work, while all those who were invited should obey it. This group regarded the bureau as a technical body: “We do not need anyone to order us; we are in a position to address all problems ourselves.”65 Contrary to this opinion, Tevkelov, Khasmamedov, and Maksudov believed that the bureau could not be led only by the faction. The Muslim society in the form of Ittifak (Union) should be in charge of the union’s leadership. They did not mention specific names, but it was evident that Syrtlanov, Haydarov, and Bayburin opposed Topchibashov’s candidacy. This position of some Tatar deputies was the result of a promise by merchants from Ufa and Orenburg to provide funds needed for the work of the Muslim bureau. Note that Caucasian Muslims did not allocate money in this period to promote the Muslim national movement. In the meanwhile Ali Mardan bey’s money ran out. As an individual Muslim leader he had been rendering material aid for two years to members of the Muslim faction of the Third State Duma without compensation. Three weeks later, en route to Ufa, Kutlug Murza Tevkelov stopped at a Samara hotel and wrote a heart-to-heart letter to Ali Mardan bey. Recalling their days at the same hotel a year ago, he pointed out: “I have no acquaintance in the town, nowhere to go, heat and dust everywhere, and for the fun of it I have to write letters to people I have not seen for a long time, and you are one of them.”66 Tevkelov said that the draft law “On Primary School” would be put forward in autumn. This voluminous document (306 pages) was of direct concern to Muslims. Tevkelov noted that there would be a fierce struggle in autumn in the Duma.

76  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) How can you sit aside from current developments, remain indifferent to matters of our faction?! . . . I understand that you may, with good reason, object: why should I, Ali Mardan bey, bear this heavy cross alone. Yes, you are right. However, that was a different time. Now the situation has changed. We must clutch at straws. Don’t pay attention to the fact that these words are uttered by one of 20 million.67 Ali Mardan bey showed interest in Khasmamedov’s view on St. Petersburg developments regarding the Muslim bureau and informed him of Tevkelov’s two letters in July 1910. On August 2 Khasmamedov replied from Hajikend that he was aware of Tevkelov’s first letter and that no serious changes had occurred lately. The main problem, he stressed, was disorganization of the faction, which “is not an end in itself, it is just a means of attaining personal goals. That explains the absurd resolution [on the Muslim bureau]. . . . It was very difficult to oppose it, for I was in the minority in voting together with Tevkelov and Maksudov.”68 It had been emphasized that the Caucasus took no part in defraying the faction’s expenses, which was true. “Indeed, it is a crying shame from the point of view of the Caucasian Muslims, and I’m helpless to change the situation.”69 While some prominent Turkic intellectuals went abroad and others withdrew from active political struggle, Ali Mardan bey discussed serious issues of the Muslim movement with Gasprinskii. Gasprinskii had received a complete report on Topchibashov’s trip across Povolzh’e, the Ural region, and Siberia. Touching upon fund-raising in Kazan, Ufa, and Orenburg, Gasprinskii expressed displeasure with the behavior of some social circles and his anxiety about resulting rumors. The question of teaching in the mother tongue was vital for Russian Muslims, especially because a law on schools would be proposed at a regular session to send forty “people’s” deputies from various regions of Crimea to St. Petersburg. Gasprinskii believed that demands on teaching in the mother tongue would assist the Muslim faction’s tasks and serve as the “vox populi.” He asked Ali Mardan bey to send eight or nine representatives of the Caucasus to St. Petersburg before the opening of the State Duma.70 Ali Mardan bey received news from Ufa about the establishment of the Muslim bureau of the Duma faction in a letter from Selim Girey Janturin on November 17, 1910: Our [Abdullatif] Khakimov informed me that if you could go and help the faction, he and Sadfeddin Nazirov will allocate 3,000 rubles each to Tukayev and Tevkelov, bypassing the faction. Now they are awaiting an answer from you. . . . This sum of money together with the money from other towns is sufficient to ensure the bureau’s existence for a year.71 Ali Mardan bey added a remark in the margin: “A reply on three large sheets. Registered.”72 This letter was not found, so its contents are unknown. But it is obvious that Ali Mardan bey failed to go to St. Petersburg. Upon completion of the work of the zemstvo committee, he was elected chair of the Baku society

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  77 Nijat. He established an organization of parents in the municipal nonclassical secondary schools of Baku. In addition, in this period he was elected honorary chair of the Muslim madrasah Saadet.73 He also drafted regulations for the Caucasian madrasahs as a Muslim theological educational institution. Theological madrasahs would be active in provincial towns and centers; fourteen-year-old Caucasian Muslim children could study there at their own expense or with aid from the town or zemstvo treasury.74 The authorities were thoroughly scrutinizing Topchibashov’s proposals on Muslim madrasahs in the Caucasus. The Baku municipal police department reported in 1913 that he attended the opening ceremony of a theological madrasah on November 30, 1912.75

The fourth congress of Russian Muslims The activities of the Third State Duma ended in June  1912. Under an election law of 1907, elections to the Fourth Duma were held in autumn 1912. On October 20 Mamed Yusif Jafarov was elected as a representative of the Muslims of Baku, Elizavetpol, and Erivan. He was twenty-seven years old and had been a lawyer’s assistant for a few years after graduating from the law school of Moscow University. The new members of the Duma started work on November 15, 1912, including Muslim members Mahammad Yusif Jafarov from the South Caucasus; Kutlug Mahammad Tevkelov, Ibniamin Ahtiamov, and Gabdullatif Bayteriakov from Ufa; and Gaysa Yenikeyev from Orenburg and Mingazetdin Minnigaliyev from Samara. The number of Muslim deputies in the faction dropped from nine to six. The Muslim press at that time considered this figure “ridiculous and miserable,” stressing that “we Muslims are alone to blame; we slept and go on sleeping as usual.” Special services observing the election campaign said that the Muslim electorate showed no interest in Duma matters.76 Mahomet Dalbat from Daghestan later joined the faction. It was led initially by Gaysa Yenikeyev from Orenburg and then by Kutlug Mahammad Tevkelov. The opening of the Fourth Duma in 1912 coincided with the beginning of the First Balkan War. The defeat of the Ottoman Empire in 1912–1913 was followed by malicious attacks against Muslim deputies of the Duma. Right-wing nationalists saw this war as a triumph of pan-Slavism over Islam and incited anti-Islamic hysteria in the country. Provocative speeches portrayed the Muslim faction as social outcasts. The natural desire of Muslim deputies to protect their Turkish coreligionists was interpreted as a manifestation of pan-Islamism and separatism.77 Despite their small numbers, members of the Muslim faction managed to raise several important issues related to the rights of Muslims. First, they succeeded in launching public debates on the elimination of political discrimination based on religious affiliation as well as ensuring the legal equality of all nationalities regardless of their creeds. Gasprinskii, who had once led the Union of Russian Muslims, Topchibashov, and Fatih Kerimov greatly contributed to this process.78 Bills proposed by members of the faction and their appeals to various state bodies forced the government to put the Muslim questions on the agenda, especially in

78  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) regard to the restructuring of religious institutions.79 The Internal Ministry allowed the Muslim faction to hold a conference on this subject with certain reservations; it must be held in St. Petersburg and include a representative of the Internal Ministry. The range of participants would be restricted, and a list of invitees must be submitted to the ministry beforehand. The conference would be held in Russian but without the presence of the Russian-language press, yet a Turkic-language press might be present. The ministry approved a list of conference participants that included another thirty-five delegates in addition to the Muslim deputies of the Duma.80 Tevkelov informed Ali Mardan bey about the ministry’s consent to hold the conference. Another meeting held in Baku passed a resolution that the delegation to St. Petersburg would include Ali Mardan bey, Akhund Agha Alizade from Baku, and Dr. Hasan bey Aghayev from Elizavetpol. A meeting of the Transcaucasian Religious Department was held on May 14, attended by Ali Mardan bey. Sheikh-ul-Islam Mahammadali Pishnamazzade was not officially authorized by the government, so he did not attend. The meeting was run by his deputy, Haji Mahammad Hasan Movlazade. Ali Mardan bey delivered a report on the goals and tasks of the conference. It was decided to assign Movlazade and Aladdin efendi Subhangulov to St. Petersburg.81 Thus a delegation went to St. Petersburg in mid-June, including Ali Mardan bey and Akhund Agha Alizade from Baku; Hasan bey Aghayev from Elizavetpol; and Akhund Haji Mahammad Hasan Movlazade and Aladdin efendi Subhangulov from Tiflis. The conference was held on June 15–25, 1914, on the eve of World War I. In opening the first session of the conference, Tevkelov as head of the Muslim faction of the Fourth Duma proposed that this conference be considered the Fourth Congress of Muslims, which was adopted. All regions, towns, and villages of Russia populated by Muslims were represented, including Baku, Elizavetpol, Tiflis, Ufa, Belebei, Sterlibas, Kazan, Orenburg, Garghaly, Troitsk, Simbirsk, Samara, Irkutsk, Krym, Groznii, the Urals, Tashkent, Turkestan, Syr-Darya, St. Petersburg, and Pavlodar. Deputies of the Fourth Duma (Tevkelov, Akhtyamov, Yenikeyev, Jafarov, Bayteriakov, and Magomet Dalgat) served as conference organizers.82 At the first session Ali Mardan bey and Ibnyamin Akhtyamov were elected as deputy chairs and Musa Bigiyev and Sadri Magsudov as secretaries. On the first day the delegates heard a report by Ibnyamin Akhtyamov titled “Principal Laws on Muslim Spiritual Institutions” and a report by Mahammad Yusif Jafarov titled “Historical Review of the Government’s Measures to Address Spiritual Matters of Muslims in the Caucasus.” On the second day Ismayil Limanov reported on “The Situation of Religious Matters of Crimean Muslims” and Duma member Magomet Dalgat spoke about the lack of a religious department in Daghestan. The reports and speeches were followed by debates on the most urgent issues for Muslims in Russia. On June 16 Abu-s-Suud Akhtyamov (Ibnyamin Akhtyamov’s father) made a speech devoted to the government’s attitude toward Muslims.83 With tears in his eyes, Kyrgyz sultan Bakhytjan Karatayev spoke of the unfranchised status of Russian Muslims and asked Duma deputies to show mercy and care to Kyrgyzes.84

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  79 The fourth session of the congress started on June 18 under the chairmanship of Ali Mardan bey. The main issues on the agenda were the Turkestan region, which had no religious department, and the situation in the steppes of Kyrgyzia. Sahib Girey Yenikeyev, who had arrived from Tashkent, spoke about the religious situation in the region. During the Kokand khanate in Turkestan all religious titles (Sheikh-ul-Islam, rais-kolyan, gazi, imam, and mullah) had been accepted; after the occupation of the khanate, however, all these titles except for gazi were abandoned. In his view, this led to the moral degradation of the region and resulted in the revolt of 1898 headed by Ishan Mintiubinskii, directed against state bodies. He noted that 95 percent of Turkestan’s population were Muslims, while just 9 percent of local people could get education. Yenikeyev insisted on the establishment of a central religious institution in Tashkent to embrace the entire area.85 Other speakers, including Jahanshah Saydalin from Troitsk and Sultan Bakhytjan Karatayev from the Ural region, touched upon the religious situation among Kyrgyzes. Next was Ali khan Bukeykhanov, who also dealt with the Kyrgyz question. He noted that Aleksandr Alektorov had opened schools for Kyrgyzes on the model of Ilminskii’s system for assimilation of Muslims since 1902; he taught the Kyrgyz language in the Russian alphabet and thus contributed to the Russification of the population.86 After debate the participants of the conference passed a decision to raise the question of instituting a religious department in Turkestan. Another topical question was the establishment of madrasahs in Transcaucasia. Ali Mardan bey submitted a document titled “Main Provisions of the Establishment of Muslim Spiritual-Training Institutions: Madrasahs in the Caucasus” for discussion. It provided for the creation of a single system of madrasahs in the whole region for all Muslims regardless of sect.87 He updated another document: the draft program of a Muslim seminary.88 The congress adopted ten resolutions on restructuring of the religious administration, organization of religious educational institutions and seminaries, the property of vakfs, establishment of religious institutions and religious courts in some Muslim regions, and so forth. The congress devised a list of eighteen calendar holidays to be celebrated by Russian Muslims.89 It also drafted a bill for an appropriate committee of the State Duma to regulate the activities of religious bodies. However, the forty delegates failed to discuss numerous problems over the ten days of the congress.90 The leadership therefore asked the Internal Ministry to prolong the congress for two more days but was refused. It was Ali Mardan bey’s task to close the congress under strained conditions. On June 25 he made a brilliant speech that harshly criticized the government’s attitude toward Muslims.91 “We are parting today with a heavy heart. Everybody will ask us: why was the congress over? Why were press representatives not allowed attend the congress? What is the reason for the government’s humiliating attitude toward Muslims?” Ali Mardan bey emphasized that we are told that we Muslims do not know many things, and that’s true: missionaries know more about us than we ourselves do. They are making reports

80  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) and documents in place of us, looking for ways to assimilate us. We want the government to receive us and hear us out. We want the government to stop ignoring our existence. . . . We are not only ignored but mistrusted. The basic reason is that we are Muslims. He declared that it was not a sin to be a Muslim, “for we were, are, and shall be Muslims always [these words evoked a storm of applause]. Likewise, we believe that our faith Islam is a universal religion, not contrary to the state.” He submitted drafts of ten resolutions related to the life of Russian Muslims, which were loudly applauded, showing that the resolutions were approved.92 Thus the Fourth Congress of Russian Muslims ended, though it had failed to complete its work. Ismayil bey Gasprinskii, publisher and editor of Tarjuman and recognized leader of the movement of Russian Muslims, died on September 11, 1914. The Muslim peoples of Russia lost their great Turkic leader, reformer, and thinker, and Ali Mardan bey lost his staunch friend and comrade-in-arms. On September 13 the newspaper Kaspii published “To the Memory of Ismayil bey Gasprinskii” by Ali Mardan bey. The most popular person among not only Russian Muslims but far beyond, Ismayil bey, has left us. For more than half a century he firmly, without a murmur, held in his hand a lamp to show Muslims the way to knowledge, progress, and public self-consciousness. However, inexorable fate has put out the lamp and plunged Muslims into deep sorrow. Our grief is great because Muslims are so unfortunate in having few public figures devoted to the interests of the people. Nobody can take the place of the unforgettable Ismayil bey Gasprinskii!93

The Russian-Turkish front in World War I and Caucasian Muslims A month after the Fourth Congress of Russian Muslims, World War I  broke out, which visibly changed the situation in the South Caucasus. When the Ottoman Empire entered the war against the Entente, it strenghthened the pressures on Russian Muslims, especially Caucasian Turks, by stirring up mistrust and suspiciousness. Combat operations along the Russian-Turkish front prepared the ground for future shocks in the Caucasus. On September  17, 1914, Tsar Nicholas II issued “Proclamation of the Tsar to Armenians,” full of demagogical pearls: The Russian people proudly remember their glorious Armenian sons. Your century-long loyalty is a pledge of your expectations. In these days you will perform your duties with unshakable belief in the final success of our armies and our rightness. Under the scepter of the tsar, you, Armenians, will know the delights of freedom and justice.94

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  81 Russia’s declaration of war on Turkey was accompanied by openly anti-­ Muslim appeals. Calls to make short work of Muslims were heard at the Duma, in meetings of the intelligentsia, in the chauvinistic-nationalistic press, and elsewhere. Christian ministers cursed “Basurmans” from the pulpit. Ali Mardan bey’s archives contain the text of an appeal of Orenburg bishop Mefodii (Gerasimov) to Orthodox parishioners, which refers to Attila, Chingiz khan, Emir Teymur, and “Christian blood shed by the above,” saying that it was high time to take “vengeance in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” He called upon Russian Orthodox believers to set out to liberate the holy lands and proceed with this war until a cross was hoisted in the temple of St. Sophia in Constantinople and “the holy lands” in Asia fell under the control of the Russian and Greek Orthodox church.95 Inspired by the promises of the tsar and calls of spiritual leaders, Armenians began hastily organizing voluntary detachments in Transcaucasia. In the autumn of 1914 these units launched combat operations against Muslims. Secret reports said that the Dashnaktsutyun Party raised funds from Baku Armenians in early 1915 to help Turkish Armenians “fighting against Kurds.”96 The tragic consequences of this policy were debated at the Duma. The Muslim deputies were indignant at the presence of Russian troops in Kars and Batum that committed illegal actions against Muslims in December 1914 and January 1915 and drafted a special statement: “On the Situation of Muslims on the Caucasian Front.”97 Deputy Mahammad Yusif Jafarov headed for Kars and Ardahan, where he witnessed atrocities committed by the Russian army. He detailed these tragic events in his report forwarded to tsar Nicholas II.98 To clarify the true nature of events in eastern Anatolia in 1914–1915, we should examine the report to the tsar by Gen. Leonid Bolkhovitinov, the chief of the general headquarters of the Caucasian front of Russia, and reports of the Russian diplomat Vladimir Maevskii.99 The beginning of combat operations on the Caucasian front strengthened the Russian authorities’ sympathies toward the Armenians. The Elizavetpol governor personally welcomed detachments of Armenian volunteers specially organized to fight the Turks, which caused serious anxiety among the local Muslim population. Professor Jörg Baberowski wrote that some of these Armenians believed that the war against Turkey would end with measures to slaughter the Muslim population of the province.100 Ali Mardan bey noted the Caucasian Turks’ growing hatred of the Russian Empire during World War I as well as the awakening of the will for independence. After the start of the war, the Muslims appeared confident, though their hearts were full of anger and the desire to throw off their century-long yoke. He believed that future historians should be psychologists to identify the alarm and expectations in the life of the Caucasian Muslims caused by the war.101 Under these circumstances Ali Mardan bey sought to strengthen the ­Azerbaijani-Georgian friendship as a matter of great importance in regional politics. On January 26, 1915, Akakii Tsereteli, a great Georgian poet and author of the concept of the national-liberation movement of the Georgian people, died. Ali Mardan bey left for Tiflis to attend the national funeral of the poet on behalf of all Caucasian Muslims. He made a speech over the grave, laying emphasis on

82  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) Tsereteli’s role in the destiny of Georgia and the history of Caucasian peoples. In particular, he noted, “the sympathies of the Caucasian Muslims have always been on the side of the nation that sticks to the principle: ‘Live yourself and let others live as well.’ ”102 Progressive-minded Georgians long remembered his words. In the meanwhile, Armenian combat detachments in the Russian army became notorious for their massacres in Kars and Ardahan in the spring of 1915. Professor Jörg Baberowski wrote that Armenian voluntary detachments committed many bloody crimes against the Turkish population when the Russian army captured Kars, Erzurum, Trabzon, and Erzinjan.103 The massacre in Kars committed by Armenian thugs caused great anxiety in Azerbaijan. As soon as the public learned about mass murders of Muslims by Dashnak militants (including in Kars) Ali Mardan bey (as head of the delegation), Aghabala Guliyev from Baku, and prominent representatives of Ganja and Erivan provinces immediately left for Kars to find out the facts and “ask the authorities to protect Muslims against Armenians striving to annihilate Muslims.”104 The delegation intended to ask Gen. Aleksandr Myshlaevskii for permission to raise money for Tatar families who had lost loved ones “because of the bloody crimes of Armenians in the Kars region.” The general permitted them to raise money and promised to take appropriate measures.105 The complaints of the Muslim population of Ajaria in spring 1915 raised a storm of protest against the anti-Turkic policy of the empire. The Muslim faction of the State Duma made a statement that caused anxiety in Russian ruling circles. The government decided to dismiss the seventy-eight-year-old pro-Armenian Caucasian deputy Vorontsov-Dashkov, but this was not the best way out of the impasse. On August 23, 1915, he was replaced as deputy by grand prince Nikolai Nikolaevich, who was the last commander of the Caucasian front. To investigate the shooting of Ajarian Muslims, Ali Mardan bey visited Tiflis, Kutaisi, and Batum in 1915 and collected documents.106 He became confident that the unfortunate Ajarians had fallen prey to the anti-Turkic policy of Russia. Ali Mardan bey pointed out that thousands of Ajarians who had been imprisoned and charged with betrayal had been denounced by their neighbors, who were Armenians. Hundreds of villages were destroyed, and thousands of old men, women, and children became refugees in the Batum region. He sent a report on this tragedy to the Caucasian deputy. The facts were so tragic and terrible that the prince had to establish a special committee to investigate. The inquiry reaffirmed the atrocities of the Russian army, especially Cossacks, against Ajarians. It became evident that false information and Armenians’ slanders against Muslims had led to the atrocities.107 Ali Mardan bey’s efforts to protect the rights of the Caucasian Muslims attracted the attention of the ruling bodies. A secret report of the Baku mayor on May 4, 1916, said that according to secret agents Ali Mardan bey had been known since 1911 as the most prominent pan-Islamist.108 Following Ali Mardan bey’s refusal to return to the Muslim bureau, members of the Duma faction maintained correspondence with him in 1915–1916. Since that time Baku had become the chief propaganda center of the Muslim faction. The newspaper Achig Söz had been published since autumn 1915 under the

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  83 leadership of Rasulzade. This newspaper would play a crucial role in the activity of the Duma faction and the Muslim bureau.109 Ali Mardan bey also learned about faction developments in letters from his eldest son, Alekber bey, who was studying at the Polytechnic Institute in Petrograd (the new name of St. Petersburg since August 31, 1914). The children of Ali Mardan bey had grown: twenty-year-old Alekber was a student; elder daughter Sara was seventeen; Rashid was fifteen; Sevar was thirteen; and Enver was five. In May  1916 Ali Mardan bey received a collective letter from bureau members of the Muslim faction of the Fourth Duma, signed by Najib Kurbangaliyev, Ahmed Tsalikov, Shakir Muhamedyarov, and Ismayil Lemanov, which informed him of the creation of the bureau and the law-making activities of the faction and reminded him that the whole burden of the work at the Second and Third Dumas had fallen on him. From now on they needed his assistance. They asked Ali Mardan bey to send documents and materials to the bureau that you are keeping as former chair of the first bureau. No data on the activity of previous factions and the

Figure 5.2 Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov with family members and relatives. Sitting second from the right: Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, third Peri khanym Topchibashova, on hands Peri khanym Enver bey, standing second from the left Alekber bey, third Sara khanym, sitting in front from the left Rashid bey and Sever khanym, 1912.

84  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) bureau or documents and materials are available for today’s faction. Yet these materials are very important for the work to come.110 The February revolution of 1917 finally put an end to the tsarist autocracy. The 300-year old Romanov family was consigned to oblivion. The revolution opened up a new stage in the life of Ali Mardan bey. It should be noted that he spent the entire month of March 1917 on the squares of Baku, where meetings were incessantly held. He often spoke to audiences and undertook several important organizational activities to send Muslims into the streets and political arena. During the first stage of the Russian revolution the Russian Muslims faced the challenge of choosing between cultural autonomy and a federative state. Many severe trials lay ahead.

Notes 1 Imanov, Ali Merdan Topçubaşi (1865–1934), 55–57; Кrupnyi diplomat i vidnyi politicheskii deiatel’; Fourniau, Deux Langues, Trois Pays, Pour Quelle Societe Plurielle?; Safarova, Politiko-diplomaticheskaia deiatel’nost Ali Mardan beka Topchibasheva. 2 Irshad, November 29, 1907. 3 Kaspii, December 1, 1907. 4 Bakinets, December 7, 1907. 5 Irshad, December 8, 1907. 6 Vilaiat Guliyev, Proshanie s velikim seiatelem ili zapazdalye vskhody budushego, Zerkalo, December 31, 2009. 7 Ibid. 8 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 13. 9 See: Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 111. 10 See: Seidzade, Azerbaidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoi Dume Rossii, 77–79. 11 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 13. 12 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 66. 13 Ibid., 67. 14 Alisov, Musul’manskii vopros v Rossii, 30. 15 Letter from Topchibashev to Janturin, April 26, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 6, p. 27. 16 Ibid., 27–28. 17 Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiiskom parlamente, 194. 18 See: Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 16. 19 Gendarme Information on the case of “Difai,” 1908, SHARA, f. 524, оп. 1,д. 20.л. 4. 20 Ismayil Kerimov, “Zhivaia” istoria Gasprinskogo. Po materialam gazety “Tardjuman” 1883–1914 gg. Simferopol’: Tarpan, 1999, 180. 21 Letter from Mammedbeyov to Topchibashev, April 20, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 6. 22 Ibid., 7. 23 Telegram from Khasmamedov to Peri khanym Topchibasheva, May 8, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 14–15. 24 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey. Biography, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 10. 25 Alisov, Musul’manskii vopros v Rossii, 55. 26 The list of books Topchibashev read in “Kresty” from May 8 to August 8, 1908. MayAugust 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 7, p. 2.

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  85 27 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 13. 28 Alisov, Musul’manskii vopros v Rossii, 34–35. 29 See: The List of Books Topchibashev read in “Kresty” from May 8 to August 8, 1908. May–August 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 7, pp. 1–2. 30 See: Letter from Savitskii to A.M. Topchibashev. 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 8. 31 Telegram from Peri khanym and Sevar Topchibashevs to Topchibashev, August  6, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 13. 32 Telegram from Vekilov to Topchibashev, August 7, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 16. 33 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 101–105. 34 Telegram from Kerimov to Topchibashev, August 7, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 17. 35 Telegram from “Vakt” ’s staff to Topchibashev and his response, August  7, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 18. 36 Telegram from Tevkelov to Topchibashev and his response, August 7, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 19. 37 Telegram from Lemanov to Topchibashev and his response, August 7, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 12. 38 Telegram from Akchurin to Topchibashev, August 8, 1908, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 7. 39 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 13. 40 Alisov, Musul’manskii vopros v Rossii, 34. 41 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bek Ali Akbar bek oglou, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 3. 42 Topchibashev’s diary of his trip to the Volga area, Orenburg and Siberia, June 9, 1909– August 1, 1909, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1. v. 9, pp. 1–8; Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 117–132. 43 Topchibashev’s diary of his trip to the Volga area, Orenburg and Siberia, June 9, 1909– August 1, 1909, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1. v. 9, p. 1. 44 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 118–119. 45 Meeting of Muslims of Orenburg with the participation of Tevkelev and Topchibashev, June 23, 1909, SARF, f. 102, r. 1909, v. 291, pp. 8–9. 46 Topchibashev’s Diary of His Trip to the Volga Area, Orenburg and Siberia, June  9, 1909–August 1, 1909, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1. v. 9, pp. 2–3. 47 See: Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v Rossiiskom parlamente, 494. 48 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 121. 49 Topchibashev’s Diary of His Trip to the Volga Area, Orenburg and Siberia, June  9, 1909–August 1, 1909, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1. v. 9, pp. 4–5. 50 Ibid., 5–6. 51 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 127–129. 52 Ibid., 130–131. 53 Topchibashev’s diary of his trip to the Volga area, Orenburg and Siberia, June 9, 1909– August 1, 1909, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1. v. 9, p. 8. 54 Ibid. 55 Ibid. 56 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 15. 57 The Statement from Topchibashev to Martynov, October, 1909, SALAAR, f. 648, r. 6, v. 5, pp. 1–2. 58 Letter by the Leadership of Baku Literary and Artistic Section to Topchibashev, November 5, 1909, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 29. 59 Information of Colonel Pastriulin to Head of the Gendarme Administration of the Kutaisi Gubernia. Strictly Confidential, June 22, 1911, APDPARA, f. 276, r. 8, v. 394, pp. 24–25.

86  Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917) 60 Alisov, Musul’manskii vopros v Rossii, 45. 61 Letter from Alyshevski to Topchibashev, November 1, 1909, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 64. 62 Notification Alyshevski to Topchibashev, November 4, 1909, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 10, p. 6. 63 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 15. 64 Letter from Gasprinskii to Topchibashev, March 14, 1910, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 42. 65 Letter from Tevkelov to Topchibashev, June 17, 1910, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 68. 66 Letter from Tevkelov to Topchibashev, July 9, 1910, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 65. 67 Ibid., 66. 68 Letter from Khasmamedov to Topchibashev, August 2, 1910, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 15–16. 69 Ibid., 16. 70 Letter from Gasprinskii to Topchibashev, August 8, 1910, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 48–49. 71 Letter from Janturin to Topchibashev, November 17, 1910, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, p. 71. 72 Ibid., 71. 73 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 15. 74 Provision for the Establishment of Muslim Religious Schools  – Madrasah in the ­Caucasus, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 22, pp. 1–4. 75 Information Supplied by the Baku Police Department about Topchibashev, 1913, SARA, f. 102, r. 276, v. 609, p. 48. 76 Seniutkina, Tiurkizm kak istoricheskoe iavlenie, 418. 77 See: Gosudarstvennaia duma. Chetvertyi sozyv. Stenograficheskie otchety. Sessiia vtoraya. Chast’ IV. Sankt-Peterburg: Gosudarstvennaia tipografiia, 1914, 466–470. 78 Arsharuni and Gabidullin, Ocherki panislamizma i pantiurkizma v Rossii, 42. 79 Letter from Tevkelov to Topchibashev, March 27, 1914, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1–2. 80 Topchibashev, Muslim Congresses in Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 24. 81 Protocoles of the Meeting of the Caucasian Muslims Office in Tiflis, June 14, 1914, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1–2. 82 List of Participants of the IV Congress of Muslim in St. Petersburg. June 15–25, 1914, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1. 83 See: Tagirdzhanova, Kniga o Muse-efendi, ego vremeni i sovremennikakh, 84–94. 84 Seniutkina, Tiurkizm kak istoricheskoe iavlenie, 456. 85 Protocoles of the Fourth Meeting of the IV Congress of Muslims of Russia, June 18, 1914, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1–4. 86 Ibid., 19. 87 Topchibashev, Main Provisions of the Establishment of Muslim Religious Schools– Madrassah, 1914, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1–2. 88 See: Approximate Program of the Muslim Theological Seminary, 1914, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1–31. 89 Tagirdzhanova, Kniga o Muse-efendi, ego vremeni i sovremennikakh, 92–93. 90 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey. Biography, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 11. 91 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), Archives d’Ali Mardan-bey Toptchibachi, carton no 6/2, 17–18. 92 Concluding Speech of Topchibashev at the Fourth Congress of the Muslim of Russia, June 25, 1914, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1–5. 93 Kaspii, September 13, 1914. 94 Proclamation Tsar to the Armenians, September 17, 1914, APDPARA, f. 276, r. 8, v. 463, p. 18.

Two Russian revolutions (1907–1917)  87 95 Orenburg Bishop Matthew appeal to Orthodox Christians, 1914, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 1–2. 96 See: Announcement of Baku City Governor, 1915, APDPARA, f. 276, r. 8, v. 498, p. 19. 97 Musul’manskie deputaty Goudarstvennoi dumy Rossii, 206. 98 Memorandum Jafarov to Nicholas II, January 1915, RSHA, f. 1276, r. 11, v. 1459, pp. 102–104. 99 See: The Report by the General Bolkhovitinov to Assistant Military Governor of the Caucasus, December 11, 1915, RSMHA, f. 2100, r. 1. v. 646, pp. 44–75. 100 Baberovski, Vrag est’ vezde. Stalinizm na Kavkaze, 88–89. 101 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 18. 102 Ibid. 103 Baberovski, Vrag est’ vezde. Stalinizm na Kavkaze, 90. 104 Letter Head of the Yelizavetpol province Gendarmerie to Caucasian vicegerent ­Gendarme Administration, February 1915, APDPARA, f. 276, r. 8, v. 463, p. 23. 105 Ibid. 106 See: Documents sur 1915: Adjars, Sarykamis, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–5. 107 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 19–20. 108 Inquiry of the Baku City Governor about Topchibashev, May 4, 1916, SARF, f. 102, r. 236, v. 609, p. 48. 109 Bagirova, Politicheskie partii i organizatsii Azerbaidzhana v nachale XX veka, 276–277. 110 Letter Members of the Bureau of the Muslim faction in the Fourth State Duma to Topchibashev, May 30, 1916, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 74–75.

6 A heavy burden on the eve of independence

World War I brought innumerable misfortunes to the people of Russia and aggravated social and political tensions. The February revolution of 1917 not only overthrew the monarchy but also shook the imperial foundations of the country. Having fostered the national-liberation movement in the Russian Empire, the “prison of nations,” the revolution accelerated political processes in the South Caucasus and spurred further developments.1 One of the first steps of the Provisional Government in the post-February period was establishing a special committee on March  9 to administer the South Caucasus region. Headed by Constitutionalist Vasilii Kharlamov, its members were Georgian Menshevik Akakii Chkhenkeli, social-federalist Kita Abashidze, Azerbaijani Constitutionalist Mahammad Yusif Jafarov (minister of foreign affairs of the fourth cabinet of the Republic of Azerbaijan), and Armenian Constitutionalist Mikhail Papajanov. The special committee was subordinated to the Provisional Government to deal with civil cases, not legislation, and had jurisdiction over one region. However, it proved to be weaker and less authoritative than the tsarist government in times of turbulence.

The Russian revolution and the situation in the South Caucasus Azerbaijanis hoped for improvement after collapse of the monarchy and the February revolution. On March  16 a joint meeting of Muslim societies and organizations established a Muslim National Council. The progressive intelligentsia, actively involved in political processes and the nationalist movement, welcomed the Russian revolution. Various national groups of Baku, including the Union of Oil Industrialists, set up an Executive Committee of United Organizations to rule the city, headed by right-wing Menshevik Luka Bich. Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii and Mahammad Emin Rasulzade represented the Azerbaijani population. On March  20 the Provisional Government canceled religious and national minority restrictions that Ali Mardan bey had been opposing for many years, in elections, the army, civil administration, court bodies, and educational institutions. On March  27 an Interim Executive Committee of the Muslim National

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  89 Council was set up under the leadership of Mahammad Hasan Hajinski, whose members included Ali Mardan bey, Fatali khan Khoiskii, Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev, Mirza Asadullayev, Behbud bey Javanshir, Nariman Narimanov, and Abdulali bey Amirjanov. Committee members openly declared that from now on their political goals were associated with the interests of the Muslim population, not with the destiny of Russian democracy. The Muslim National Committee was intended to promote national and political ideals.2 After the victorious February revolution, the Bolsheviks succeeded in legalizing their activity in Baku. Their social base among the population was rather weak, however, and they were in the minority in a newly formed Baku Council. The first session of the council was chaired by Menshevik Grigorii Aiola. Stepan Shaumian, who returned from exile on March 8, was elected chair of the council in absentia but shortly afterward was replaced by the leader of the Socialist Revolutionaries, Sako Saakian.3 Ali Mardan bey correctly assessed the situation as a decisive moment for Muslims, especially for Caucasian Turks. From the first days of the revolution he was actively involved in the political life of Baku, attending and arranging meetings to awaken Muslims. On March 23 he drafted a document with eight sections titled “Major Questions of Developing and Managing the Religious Affairs of the Muslim Population of the South Caucasus.” It stated that religious, educational, and managerial bodies should be put in order and transformed into collegial elective bodies; vakf property should be transferred to the Muslim populations of provinces and towns; and commissions of twelve local Muslims should be established to manage the property. To gain the trust of the people, Ali Mardan bey offered to establish an official hierarchy of religious posts, beginning with the head of the religious department and its majlis, including the sheikh-ulIslam, muftis, kazis, mullahs, efendis, and others. All religious persons appointed by the old government should be dismissed from their posts, regardless of their moral qualities and educational level.4 To consolidate national forces, Ali Mardan bey traveled to Ganja and Tiflis, arranging large meetings of Muslims. The resolutions passed by these meetings stressed their sympathy with the new power and support for new bodies.5 Ali Mardan bey was invited to attend a meeting of the special conference to be held on April  11 at the palace of Sardar to discuss issues of the Caucasian region, including local self-government.6 By decision of the Transcaucasian Committee, it included Georgians Noe Zhordania and Georgii Gvazava, Armenians Sergei Arutiunov and Arshak Jamalian, and Azerbaijanis Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov and Khosrov bey Sultanov.7 Ali Mardan bey supported the principle of election to the bodies of local government, saying that provincial and uyezd executive committees should be formed based on the national-ethnic composition of the local population. Representatives of the 150,000 Muslims residing in Tiflis province should take part in local government. Elected by universal, equal, free, and secret balloting, the Transcaucasian executive committee should hold elections in situ and set up provincial, uyezd, regional, and rural committees headed by commissars.8

90  A heavy burden on the eve of independence

The Baku congress of Caucasian Muslims Upon his return from Ganja and Tiflis, Ali Mardan bey headed the Baku Congress of Caucasian Muslims in mid-1917. A day before the opening of the congress the newspaper Açıg Söz wrote: A congress of Caucasian Muslims is now opening. Those interested in the history of the Turkic-Tatar people, who represent nearly all the Russian Muslims, are aware that a meeting of Turks was always called kurultay, like Russian veche, in olden times.9 The congress was held from April 15 to 20 in the Ismayilliye building, demonstrating the leading role of the Turkic Party of Federalists headed by Nasib bey Usubbeyov and the Musavat Party active in Baku in the national democratic processes. The congress was opened by the chair of the executive committee of Muslim organizations of Baku, Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii. The presidium consisted of Ali Mardan bey, Nariman bey Narimanov, Ibrahim bey Heydarov, Nasib bey Usubbeyov, Fatali khan Khoiskii, and Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii. The secretariat included Mahammad Emin Rasulzade, Islam bey Kabulov, Murtuza Akhundov, Mustafa bey Mahmudov, Hasan bey Aghayev, and Mir Yagub Mehdiyev. Ali Mardan bey was elected chair at the first session and led the congress to the end. At his suggestion, the delegates rose in memory of those who had lost their lives in the struggle for freedom. The congress sent a telegram of congratulation to the chair of the State Duma, Mikhail Rodzianko. Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev gave 50,000 rubles to the congress to set up a national fund. All urban authorities and social-political organizations congratulated the Congress of Caucasian Muslims.10 Ali Mardan bey reported on issues on the agenda. Speaking of the traditional Russian policy of “divide and rule,” he stressed the necessity of establishing peace among peoples of the Caucasus. This congress of Muslims, the first people’s congress in the past hundred years, “should revive the previous historical grandeur of the Caucasus.” He reminded participants of the imperial policy of the preceding Russian government in respect to non-Russian peoples. This was a policy of disunity, a policy of setting nationalities against each other. The recent confrontation between Azerbaijanis and Armenians could be explained by this pernicious policy of misanthropy. If Muslims and other nationalities of the Caucasus are really willing to embark upon the path of reform and liberation, they must attend the constitutive assembly as a unified, consolidated entity.11 Interestingly, two women, Shafiga khanym Efendizade and Adila khanym Shahtakhtinskaia, greeted the delegates at the first session of the Congress of Caucasian Muslims on April 15. However, religious figures categorically disapproved of this. Thus Baku kazi and chair of the urban majlis of Shiites Agha Mir Mahammad Kerim Mir Jafarov stressed that the appearance of women bareheaded and open-faced before men was contrary to the canons of Islam. This

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  91 caused stormy protests. Despite Ali Mardan bey’s attempts to pacify the session, protesters, mainly young, did not let the speaker finish his speech. Ali Mardan bey had to announce a ten-minute break, during which the kazi’s adherents asked the presidium to ensure an open attitude toward opposing speeches. Ali Mardan bey then reopened the meeting and gave the floor back to Mir Mahammad Kerim Agha to finish his speech. However, Rasulzade on behalf of the press; acting Transcaucasia mufti Mustafa Efendi Efendizade; resigned sheikh-ul-Islam Mahammadali Pishnamazzade;12 Akhund Molla Farajullazade; Akhund Molla Agha Alizade; journalist Safar Ibrahimov; Hadi Efendi on behalf the of Muslims of Daghestan; Hasan bey Aghayev; and others refused to let the speech to continue. Professor Rashid khan Kaplanov of the faculty of Oriental languages of Daghestan University congratulated the Baku congress on behalf of Ossetians, Kabardins, Chechens, Balkars, Kumiks, and other peoples residing in the Northern Caucasus and along the river Terek. After his speech Ali Mardan bey noted: “Through their heroism, courage, and love of freedom Daghestanis have won a primary place in the hearts of Turks worldwide, so Transcaucasian Turks will share their destiny with the Muslim tribes of the Northern Caucasus and Daghestan.”13 Congratulatory speeches were followed by the establishment of commissions. The political commission was headed by Rasulzade; the commission on organizing the masses by Topchibashov; the religious commission by Alekber bey Rafibeyov; the education commission by Firudin bey Kocharli; the national fund commission by Abdulali bey Amirjanov; and the labor and agrarian commission by Khosrov bey Sultanov. Rasulzade reported on the political structure of Russia, with an additional report by Ibrahim bey Heydarov. Rasulzade stressed that Muslims suffered most from Russia, which is why Muslims tended toward another form of rule: a People’s Republic. They were aware that even constitutionally the tsar would be pressured by special classes who opposed the popular masses, so the tsars would perpetually be poisoning the life of Russia. . . . Hence the republican form of rule suited the popular masses.14 However, followers of the concept of Islamic union from different parts of the Caucasus tried to show that the principle of Russian federalism would split Muslim peoples. They contended that the Muslims of Russia were not ready for selfgovernment. In response, Nasib bey Usubbeyov, the leader of the Party of Turkic Federalists, asked rhetorically: “Who dares to insist that we as a nation are in no position to rule ourselves?”15 Following heated debates, the congress resolved that “a democratic republic based on territorial-federative principles is the form of rule to ensure the interests of the Muslim republics.”16 The Baku congress emphasized the necessity of state-run national schools; opening a university with teaching in the mother tongue; adopting resolutions on religious questions and vakfs; and the necessity of a Russian Democratic Republic based on federative principles.17 On April 17, during a session chaired by Ali Mardan bey, in an attempt to end sectarian division in Azerbaijan, Mir Mahammad Kerim Mir Jafarov and Akhund Molla Farajullazade as representatives of the sheikh-ul-Islam and mufti services embraced each other and promised to end

92  A heavy burden on the eve of independence the enmity between Shiites and Sunnites. This scene of fraternization touched all the attendees to their innermost heart.18 On April 18 the congress heard reports of the commissions of religion and education. The commission of religion suggested closing the Ali and Omar schools in Tiflis and replacing them with new reformed schools.19 Abdulali bey Amirjanov reported on the national fund, saying that 250,000 rubles had been raised during the congress. The last session, April 20, discussed attitudes toward the Provisional Government, other peoples of Russia, and the war. Appropriate decisions were adopted: if the Provisional Government was loyal to the principles declared on March 6, the Caucasian Muslims would back its policy, join the Russian democracy’s demands for peace without annexations and reparations, and seek implementation of the national-political views of the peoples of Russia, including the Caucasian peoples. Despite protests from some religious leaders, the congress passed a resolution that recognized the political and economic rights of women equally with men.20 At this last session Ali Mardan bey announced that some congress participants had given him an anonymous letter on his attitude toward the People’s Freedom Party. He conceded that ten or eleven years ago in the First State Duma Muslims had collaborated with the Constitutionalists but had warned that they would not back their imperial slogans in respect to Muslims.21 Professor Jörg Baberowski wrote that Muslim leaders like Topchibashov and Khoiskii were disappointed in the Constitutionalists and split from them to act within the framework of “Islamism” and “Turkism.”22 On April  20 Ali Mardan bey made a concluding speech on behalf of the presidium. On May 1, 1917, the congress of Russian Muslims would start its work in Moscow. He asked to be entrusted with the task of greeting the Moscow congress on behalf of Caucasian Muslims and reporting the decisions of the Baku congress. His proposal was adopted unanimously. Ali Mardan bey was guided by Muslim traditions and asked clergymen to close the congress. The mufti and sheikh-ul-Islam gave the final speech. On the night of April 20 the Ismayilliye building hosted grand festivities. With stormy applause, the delegates of the congress hoisted Ali Mardan bey, Mahammad Emin bey, Nasib bey, Fatali khan Khoiskii, Mahammad Hasan bey, and Mirza Asadullayev on their shoulders. The festivities ended at 2 a.m. The youths carried Ali Mardan bey and the mufti home.23 This euphoria proved to be a momentous point in the historical transition from an Islamic community to Turkic nationalism, with Ali Mardan bey as the central figure. The Baku congress was an important event, particularly because Caucasian Muslims had been identified with their national audiences until the Moscow Congress of Russian Muslims. Some important provisions adopted at the Baku congress, especially the concept of a territorial-federative structure for Russia in the form of a democratic republic, were of vital importance for the Caucasian Turks.

The Moscow congress of Russian Muslims and the concept of a federative state Immediately after the Baku congress ended, Ali Mardan bey left for Tiflis. He intended to head a conference on ethnic issues organized by OZAKOM

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  93 (the  Special Transcaucasian Committee, the Russian Provisional Government’s body to govern the region), which had replaced the former Caucasian department ruled by the governor-general. However, the conference did not take place, although the All-Russian Congress of Muslims was going to begin its work in Moscow on May 1. On April 25 the Azerbaijani delegation led by Topchibashov left for Moscow. The delegates (Rasulzade, Samad bey Ajalov, Safar Ibrahimov, and Omar Teregulov) represented various Muslim societies and organizations. Mirza Asadullayev was elected as a delegate from the Moscow Muslim society.24 A women’s delegation composed of writer Shafiga-khanym Efendizade, Salima khanym Yagubova (headmistress of the Alexandria school), and Rauza khanym Sultangaliyeva (a teacher at the fourth girls’ gymnasium) left for Moscow on April 19.25 Ali Mardan bey went to the congress with a special assignment from the National Committee of Muslims of the South Caucasus, which he chaired. The idea of ethnic-territorial autonomy put forward by Rasulzade at the Baku congress was backed by Russian Muslims by the spring of 1917. Among Turkic peoples, the idea was advocated by Azerbaijanis Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov and Bashkir Ahmet Zaki Validov, Kazakhs Mahammadjan Tynyshpayev and Ali khan Bukeykhanov, Uzbek Usman Khojayev, and others. The support of these prominent enlighteners showed the good prospects of the project.26 On April 29 the Azerbaijani delegation led by Ali Mardan bey arrived in Moscow and was welcomed at the Kursk railway station by youths with armbands labeled “Muslim Congress.” The simultaneous arrival of approximately a thousand guests caused accommodation problems. The provisional bureau planned for five hundred delegates, but the real number reached nine hundred. The apartment of Shamsi Asadullayev, which was intended to receive guests, could not accommodate them all.27 One hundred women delegates came from Povolzh’e, Crimea, the Caucasus, Kirghizia, Siberia, and other places. Three-fourths of them had attended or completed higher educational institutions.28 Asadullayev’s apartment in the center of Moscow was full of guests from all parts of Russia. A well-known millionaire, he had built a beautiful building in a Tatar neighborhood in 1913, which housed a Muslim school and a philanthropic society. When guests arrived, they were immediately given the necessary documents. Admission ticket 711, signed by Ismail Lemenov, was handed over to Ali Mardan bey. It states that the congress initially was planned for May 1–8.29 The All-Russian Muslim Congress opened in Moscow on May  1, 1917, at 2 p.m. with an opening address by distinguished Muslim theologian Musa Efendi Bigiyev and a Quran reading by Ibrahim Hazrat. The congress was attended by representatives of all the Muslim peoples of Russia. Ali Mardan bey wrote that the participants were filled with enthusiasm after the arrival of representatives of six regiments of the Caucasian cavalry division headed by Araz khan Haji Murad, who brought greetings from Muslim front-line soldiers. The congress voiced its confidence that all the problems of Russian Muslims would be settled.30 The first session elected members of the presidium and secretariat. The presidium included representatives of all political factions (including women). Among them were Salima Yagubova, Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, Ahmed Tsalikov,

94  A heavy burden on the eve of independence Gayaz Iskhakov, Fatih Kerimov, Ubeydulla Khojayev, Ilyas Alkin, and Ibniamin Akhtiamov, Musa Efendi Bigiyev, Seid Ahmed Jafarov, Khalil Dostmuhammadov, Gabdulla Khazret Apanayev, and Hasan Gabyashov. Among the delegates of the congress were State Duma delegates Tevkelov, Topchibashov, Alkin, Janturin, Tukayev, Akhtyamov, Yenikeyev, and others.31 The congress agenda included development of a state structure; national-cultural self-determination; the attitude toward war; the constituent assembly; women’s, workers’, and agrarian questions; the formation of armed forces; tactics of the pre-election campaign; aid to war victims; elections to the All-Russian Muslim Council; and other questions. They set up separate commissions to resolve these issues and also set the time limit of the congress.32 After organizational matters had been resolved, Ahmed Tsalikov welcomed the delegates on behalf of the provisional bureau of Russian Muslims and gave the floor to Professor Sergei Kotliarevskii, the commissar for citizens of nonSlav nationality and adherents of different faiths, who was one of the founders of the Constitutionalist Party and an active member of the faction in the First State Duma. On behalf of the Provisional Government, he congratulated the first free meeting of Muslims and pointed out that his commissariat had prepared a number of reforms to be announced within two to three weeks. Kotliarevskii stressed that new horizons were opening up before the Russian peoples. The very term “adherents of different faiths” was changing. From now on Muslims would face no obstacles in their faith, and problems of their national languages and schools would be addressed. At the same time, Kotliarevskii asked the congress to provide the government with qualified people. He emphasized that questions of federation and autonomy were a prerogative of the constituent assembly, but the Provisional Government would take into account Muslim demands. He ended with the slogan “Long live the free peoples of the great, free Russia!”33 Topchibashov thanked Kotliarevskii in Russian for his congratulations, saying that the Muslims hoped to achieve freedom for their countries through the Provisional Government. He appreciated the government promises but stressed that people were well aware of the dubious activities of the “administration for different faiths”: Millions of Russian Muslims from the Altaic mountains to the Black Sea, Iran, and Turkestan, whose sacred sentiments were suppressed and humiliated by the tsarist government, reverently cherished freedom of conscience. . . . When we learned about the end of this administration, we welcomed this decision. The tsarist secret police’s black book explains why millions of Muslims of Russia have been persecuted for six centuries. . . . Illuminated by the rays of spiritual and moral upbringing granted to us by our great Prophet, we are ready to follow the predestined path, arm in arm with neighboring peoples. What scares us now is our unawareness. The government’s efforts should rely on confidence in us. In that case we shall hold the government in respect and our voice will be heard.34

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  95 To the thunderous applause of the audience, Ali Mardan bey continued: Subordinated to Russia for six centuries, Muslims have never heard a kind word or received affectionate treatment from the government. I am afraid that the Provisional Government will make the past error again. Until recently, the rule has been that Muslims are satisfied with only mullahs and mosques. However, times are changing. Despite the religious meaning of “Muslimism,” it also has the meaning “peoples.” The demands of Muslims may actually be interpreted as national demands. Although it is the Constituent Assembly’s mission to decide on autonomy, the government must realize that Muslims could seal their fate through autonomy when resolving religious and national problems. The government must return vakf lands so that Muslims can provide for national schools. We are ready to wait until the constituent assembly, yet we shall demand autonomy.35 Topchibashov was followed by Gayaz Iskhakov on behalf of Moscow Muslims; Attis Kenin on behalf of various peoples residing in Moscow; Paul Dalege on behalf of Russian Latvians; Petr Liyunas on behalf of Lithuanians; Polish writer Tadeusz Miciński; and Zahida khanym Burnashova on behalf of Kazan Muslim women. In addition, greetings were sent to state bodies and some organizations.36 That same evening Ali Mardan bey congratulated the delegates on behalf of Caucasian Muslims and noted that the First Congress of Caucasian Muslims held in Baku had sent congratulations to the All-Russian Congress of Muslims: It is my duty to greet you as chair of the Baku congress. On behalf of your Caucasian kin, I  cordially congratulate you on the holiday of your freedom. . . . An auspicious event took place on April 17. Our spiritual leaders, the mufti and sheikh-ul-Islam, shook hands at the Baku congress and abandoned enmity, saying that further confrontation would do harm. They vowed to be at one before Allah. Letters of congratulation came from everywhere and spread across the Caucasus. I share my joy with you. From now on there are no differences between Muslims.37 The second session of the congress was held on May 2 under the leadership of Ibnyamin Akhtyamov and Fatih Kerimov. Muslim delegates from all over Russia as well as guests from Poland and Lithuania spoke. Sergei Kotliarevskii commented on all claims addressed to the Provisional Government. He wished the congress success, saying that all decisions would be taken into account. “I’m happy to see here our Muslim heroes, women-delegates. You have succeeded in destroying a wall that separated the East and the West.”38 The third sitting of the congress on May  3 was chaired by Ilyas Alkin. The main item on the agenda was how to manage the country. Heated debates began. Ali Mardan bey wrote that “this question was imperative for all participants of the congress, especially these representing outlying districts of the empire: the

96  A heavy burden on the eve of independence Caucasus, Turkestan, the steppe province, and Siberia.”39 Ahmed Tsalikov was the first to take the floor: The reform is of two kinds: (1) cultural and (2) political. The Russian revolution offers Muslims great challenges, and we Russian Muslims must rise to the occasion. At the same time, we are at the confluence of two cultures: western and eastern. Enlightened by Islamic culture, we are nevertheless under the influence of great concepts of the West. Muslims needed a strong center to attain their goals by creating an independent government. “There is one way only: to attain our goals through influencing the Russian government.” In his mind, the division of Russia into various governments is death for the Russian state. We Russian Muslims cannot allow Russian ruin. Transition of our political and cultural desires from a dream into reality does not presuppose Russia’s destruction. The integrity of the Russian state is a precondition for our cultural revival as well as for awakening of the Islamic world. That’s why we reject the principle of confederation. Tsalikov believed that under federalism the various Muslim nationalities would create their own autonomies; hence a common culture would not be possible. . . . Besides, if autonomy was attached to a specific territory, Muslims scattered about Russia and not in any one locality would be deprived of autonomy. There is only one way to guard the national interests of Muslims: to provide Russian Muslims with a common cultural autonomy.40 The idea of cultural autonomy was advocated by Tsalikov and Gayaz Iskhakov together with broader circles of Islamists and socialists. They explained their protest against regional autonomy: it would eliminate all-revolutionary achievements, while, in contrast, the central Russian government would guarantee the rights of Muslims. In their opinion territorial-national autonomy was contrary to the interests of Muslims from both the central provinces and outlying districts.41 In Tsalikov’s view, the historical path led from federalism to a unitary state, so calling Russian Muslims toward federalism was a step backward.42 Thanks to the support of Topchibashov, Ahmed Zaki Validov, and Hasan Lordkipanidze (a delegate from Ajaria), Rasulzade succeeded in reversing the situation in favor of territorial autonomy. Rasulzade made a keynote address at the congress on May  3 that called for territorial autonomy. “The question that we are going to resolve now is rather complex. The issue of governance must be considered both from a culturalcivilization standpoint and from the standpoint of national interests.  .  .  . With that end in view the government must apply efforts to ensure the independence of peoples.” When asked for definitions, Rasulzade replied: “A federation is an

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  97 assembly of separate autonomies that have established a union state by mutual consent.” He also defined a nation: “I’m confident that the nation is based on integrity of language, historical ties, customs, and traditions.” He reminded those who emphasized the Islamic factor that many peoples had realized that they are Turks first and Muslims second. “Sometimes a Turk asks a Tatar what nationality he is and hears in reply: I’m Muslim. It is a misstatement. There is no Christian nation or Muslim nation. In other words, Turks, Persians, and Arabs should have separate apartments in the large international home of Muslims.”43 He noted: “Islam should bring nations into a state of cultural federation, because this is the natural way to unite. Of all the nations that are a part of international Islamism the nation of Turks is the largest, strongest, and most independent.” Noting that twenty-one million out of thirty million Russian Muslims were Turks, Rasulzade added: “We are the children of Turk-Tatars. We are Turks, sons of Turks, and we are proud of it . . . yet each of us has our own distinctive features.” He added: “None of the Turkic peoples will ever reject their originality. . . . This is why we are seeking to provide such regional and specific Turkic areas as Azerbaijan and Daghestan, Turkestan, and Kirgizia with independent autonomy to comply with the principle of national-territorial autonomy. That’s the only way for us to get Turkicized, Islamized, and modernized.”44 In the end of his report, Rasulzade read out the decision of the Baku congress in favor of territorial autonomy. The fourth session of May 4 was chaired by Khalil Dostmuhamedov and Jafar Seyid Ahmedov. Telegrams from various parts of the country were read out, then the agenda was announced. Omar Teregulov reported on culture and education dissemination among Muslims. Tsalikov’s report on attitudes to the war was applauded.45 The fifth session of the congress was on May 6, under the leadership of Ali Mardan bey. The congress heard Ahmed Zaki Validov’s report on the number and location of clans and tribes of Russian Muslims; Seyid Girey Alkin’s report on the religious and spiritual affairs of Russian Muslims; and Kashaf hazrat Tarjumanova’s report on religious and spiritual organizations.46 Fatih Kerimov, who helped Ali Mardan bey to run the fifth and sixth sessions, backed the idea of a “federative people’s republic” and strengthened the autonomists’ hand. The sixth session on May 7 was again chaired by Ali Mardan bey. The main agenda item was the form of state structure of Russia. The session that day was strained. The newspaper Açıg Söz wrote: “The hall was fuller than usual. Delegates were standing even in the doorway to decide a question that disturbed everybody: how to govern the country.” The session received numerous proposals on governing Russia, the commissions read out their recommendations, and the delegates scrutinized the views of the main speakers, Tsalikov and Rasulzade. Representing the People’s Freedom Party, Prince Paul Dolgorukov congratulated the congress. However, his statement aroused protest from the left wing. Topchibashov said: Though we are free people, we must know the views of both friends and enemies. One of the leaders of the Constitutionalists is seeking to capture Istanbul and the Straits [referring to Pavel Miliukov, the foreign minister in the

98  A heavy burden on the eve of independence Provisional Government]. Do not forget that our thoughts and affairs must be one. In some questions we can side with Constitutionalists. The Straits and Istanbul conquered by Sultan Fatih cannot be surrendered so easily.47 His words brought the house down. Then an argument flared up between supporters of a unitary democratic republic and supporters of a federative democratic republic. Ali Mardan bey had to interfere frequently and remind the speakers to stick to the time limit. Two main speakers took the floor. In his agitated speech, Tsalikov accused the federalists of backwardness, a bourgeois worldview, and unwillingness to uphold the interests of the people. Then Rasulzade spoke: “Everyone who mounts the podium realizes his responsibility before his own conscience and dares not say anything contrary to his own thoughts and the interests of the people. . . . Because the right to speak is not a monopoly to be bought.” He criticized Tsalikov’s arguments, proving their theoretical and practical inconsistency and noting that there was no danger in a people’s republic based on federalism. Addressing those who insisted that Muslim peoples were unprepared for autonomy, Rasulzade stressed that “a nation that is not sure of its strength and expects favors from others cannot exist as a nation.” He again emphasized: There is no nation called Islam. The fortune of the nation is in itself, in its government. Before Russia is divided into autonomies on a national-­territorial basis, it will be split into several Turkic-Tatar, Turkestan, Kazakhstan, Bashkiria, and Azerbaijan-Daghestan autonomies, which will be responsible for resolution of their own national-cultural questions.48 At the end of the session, when the question of Russia’s state structure was put to a vote, Rasulzade’s idea of a federative people’s republic based on national and territorial autonomies carried the day, despite strenuous opposition. At 4 a.m. Ali Mardan bey as chair of the session gave the result: 446 votes for, 271 against, and 21 abstained. Rasulzade’s project prevailed. Tsalikov’s project got 271 votes, with 422 votes against it.49 This was a great victory for supporters of the territorial autonomy of Caucasian Turks, the delegation of Baku representatives, and most of all Rasulzade, who entered the Russian political arena as a mature politician. As chair, Ali Mardan bey greatly contributed to this victory.

Alarming news from the Caucasus and the shock of the Russian revolution By the end of the Moscow congress on May 7 the Caucasian delegates received telegrams from Kars and Erivan that the skirmish between the Russian army and locals had reached its height.50 Provocative rumors were afloat among Russian soldiers on the Caucasian front that the local population was being armed to fight Russians and Armenians.51 On May 8 the chair of the eighth session, Abdullah Khojayev, declared: “Muslim brothers! Last night and today we have received

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  99 terrifying telegrams from the Caucasus. We are very upset and cannot continue our congress quietly.” Ali Mardan bey read the telegrams and gave an account of the situation in the Caucasus. He reminded the audience of the national massacre of 1905–1906, noting that the mobilization of Armenians and Georgians and simultaneous exemption of Azerbaijanis from military service in the Russian Empire was now yielding bitter fruits. The telegrams tell of attacks by Christian soldiers against unarmed peaceful Muslims. To put an end to these outrages, some Duma members have arrived in the region. In their statements, the delegates have reaffirmed that the Muslims were provoked and were not going to attack anybody. However, Christians do not believe this, especially as all their actions have been planned beforehand.  .  .  . Rumors are afloat everywhere that Muslims are allegedly going to oppose the empire and Christians. We cannot keep silent in the face of these provocations. Our delegation is heading for Petrograd to advocate our interests and unmask these intrigues.52 The members of the delegation sent to Petrograd were Topchibashov, Colonel Araz khan Haji Murad, Kheyranisa khanym Akhundova, Mirza Asadullayev (a member of the Petrograd Council of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies), Sultan bey Mamlyev, and Selim Girey Janturin (a member of the provisional central bureau). At the same time telegrams on behalf of the congress were sent to the Provisional Government and the Council of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies. On May 9 the delegation left for Petrograd to meet with the head of the Provisional Government, Prince Georgii L’vov, and the leaders of the Petrograd Council of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies, which had an essential influence on the Russian army. At one time Prince L’vov had been a member of the First State Duma from the Constitutionalist Party and a close intimate of Ali Mardan bey. After talks involving the Muslim delegation, members of the Provisional Government, and the leaders of the Petrograd Council, a special war committee was established, largely composed of Muslim officers, soldiers, and sailors. The committee members headed for the Caucasus to convince Russian soldiers that Muslims had no aggressive intentions against them and thus set the army at rest.53 Upon completion of the talks, Ali Mardan bey returned to Baku then to Tiflis to participate in the conference on national questions. In June 1917 he returned home to head the National Committee of Muslims of the South Caucasus and the Baku Committee of Muslim Public Organizations. To get the Muslim population involved in political processes, a Muslim national committee was set up in June 1917 in Baku with Topchibashov as its chair. From now on, he was at the center of all national processes in the region and headed the organization and political movement of Caucasian Muslims until the end of 1917.54 The national crisis in Russia became increasingly aggravated in summer 1917. Bolshevik-staged demonstrations against the Provisional Government became widespread in July. The Bolsheviks intended to capture power before a planned July  6 congress. However, changes took place in the Provisional Government,

100  A heavy burden on the eve of independence which was now headed by socialist Aleksandr Kerenskii. Aleksei Brusilov replaced Lavr Kornilov (who enjoyed great authority among officers and soldiers) as commander-in-chief of the Russian army. To stabilize the situation, Kerenskii’s Provisional Government held a state conference in Moscow on August 12, 1917, attended by 2,414 participants, including 488 deputies of the State Duma of all four convocations and representatives of fifty-eight national organizations. Ali Mardan bey as head of the Baku Committee of Muslim Public Organizations, which was acting as the National Committee of Muslims of the South Caucasus, also took part.55 He attended the opening ceremony on August  12 at 3 p.m. in the building of the Bolshoi Theater. Chaired by Kerenskii, the conference was also attended by thirty-four delegates from the Caucasus, Crimea, Povolzh’e, and Turkestan. On August 13 they discussed and approved a report by Topchibashov on behalf of all Muslims.56 The conference lasted until August 15. First to speak were Kerenskii and Kornilov. On August 14 Topchibashov took the floor as the leader of the Russian Muslims, representing the All-Russian Muslim Council, All-Russian Muslim Council of War, Baku Committee of Muslim Public Organizations acting as the National Committee of the South Caucasus, Central Committee of Daghestan and North Caucasus Highland Peoples Association, and Turkestan Regional Council. He noted that thirty million Muslims from all parts of Russia were now integrated into these Muslim democratic organizations and considered it their duty to deal with the challenges in regard to all the peoples of free Russia, the Provisional Government, and the revolutionary democracy. Ali Mardan bey pointed out that the traditionally taciturn, millions-strong Muslims of Russia now considered it necessary to discuss problems of the social and political life of the country instead of whining about their centuries-long difficulties. Muslims were raising their voices to answer his call. When asked “Where are you?” they replied: “We were and remain Muslims, in our role as representatives of multimillions of people of the Russian state. Having cast off the hateful chains of despotism, the Muslim peoples, filled with hope, have joined the ardent followers of the new state, deciding to defend the Provisional Government and follow the path of revolutionary democracy.” Ali Mardan bey also touched upon injustice in respect to Muslim peoples: the brutal treatment of 83,000 Kirghizes who had decided to return home from China; infringement of Muslim rights when distributing foodstuffs in Turkestan and Crimea; and the disgraceful persecutions in the Caucasus. In regard to the coalition, Ali Mardan bey stressed that Muslims considered this approach to be correct for Russia. A government of this sort could put things in order under the ideological control of all political forces of the country. He contended that Muslims were supportive of the principle of granting the widest autonomy to local authorities. The Constituent Assembly should be convened without any further delay on November 27 to resolve issues of state building and agrarian and labor reform. Ali Mardan bey voiced his hope that ideas of equality and comradeship would triumph in free and democratic Russia, as in European countries. He wanted the Muslim subjects of England and France to be entitled to free political life and self-determination. In that case, “We shall be able to say ‘Ex Oriente

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  101 lux’: ‘The sun rises in the east.’ ”57 After the conference was over, Ali Mardan bey returned to Baku on August 21 and reported to the Muslim Committee.58 Major unaffiliated Azerbaijani intellectuals supported preservation of the achievements of the February revolution. In late August 1917, in the course of the Kornilov mutiny aimed at overthrowing the Provisional Government, leaflets signed by Topchibashov were spread across Transcaucasia, reflecting support of the Russian revolution by Muslims of the South Caucasus. On September 4 he held a meeting of the Muslim Committee and suggested adding new members to the presidium. Haji Ibrahim Gasymov, Mir Asadulla Mirgasymov, and Mir Yagub Mehdiyev were nominated. On September 22 voting took place on a secret ballot that elected Mehdiyev.59 At a meeting of the Muslim Committee on September  18 Ali Mardan bey reported that the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Provisional Government was discussing questions that concerned the peoples of Russia, including Muslims. The Muslim Committee was invited to send its representative.60 At Ali Mardan bey’s suggestion, Fatali khan Khoiskii was sent to Petrograd by the Muslim Committee in autumn 1917 to attend debates at the Ministry of Internal Affairs and participate in a special meeting regarding elections to the Constituent Assembly. He was to represent Caucasian Muslims at the All-Russian Council of Muslims. On Ali Mardan bey’s initiative, Akper agha Sheikhulislamov, Mustafa bey Vekilov, and Khoiskii would represent the Muslims of Baku, Ganja, Erivan, and Tiflis. Ali Mardan bey warned that it would be hard to work at the committee. Indeed, the All-Russian Muslim Committee and the Muslim Committee were consolidated at the Moscow Congress. However, it was very difficult to live in half-destroyed Petrograd. Mustafa bey Vekilov, Topchibashov’s relative on his mother’s side, in his letter of October 4 asked for his help to get out of this “damned Petrograd.”61 In the midst of the political crisis in September 1917, Ali Mardan bey, Behbud bey Javanshir, and Mirza Asadullayev as representatives of the Muslim Committee left for the Second Congress of the Mountain Peoples of the North Caucasus. Set up in May 1917 in Vladikavkaz in the course of the First Congress of North Caucasian Muslims, the Union of Mountain Peoples was part of the Baku Society of Caucasian Muslims. The Second Congress was opened on September 21 by the chair of the Central Committee, Abdul Majid (Tapa) Chermeyev. The congress was attended by sixty-six delegates and more than two hundred guests. Ali Mardan bey made a successful speech calling for the unity of all Caucasian Muslims.62 On his return from Vladikavkaz, Ali Mardan bey delivered a lecture to the Muslim students on October 1.

The Bolshevik revolt in Russia and collapse of the concept of the constituent assembly The October 1917 revolt put an end to liberal reforms. Major Bolshevik decrees in the first days of the revolution (“Decree of Peace,” “Declaration of Rights of Russia’s Peoples,” “Appeal to the Muslims of Russia and the East”) laid the legal foundation for self-determination of peoples of the Russian Empire. However, it

102  A heavy burden on the eve of independence soon became clear that these documents were far from reality and were propaganda. As a result, all governing bodies of the former empire declared that they did not recognize the Bolshevik government in Petrograd. The First Congress of Musavat, held in Baku, mapped out the tactical and strategic tasks of granting national-territorial autonomy to Azerbaijan.63 Rasulzade was elected chair of the Central Committee of the Musavat Party. Following the overthrow of the Provisional Government, a meeting of political organizations of the South Caucasus was held in Tiflis on November 15. In addition, the Transcaucasian commissariat was formed there under the chairmanship of Evgenii Gegechkori to represent the three main nationalities of Transcaucasia. Akakii Chkhenkeli was appointed internal minister; Dmitrii Donskoi war minister; Fatali khan Khoiskii education minister; Shalva Alekseyev-Meskhiyev justice minister; Mahammad Yusif Jafarov trade and industry minister; Khudadat bey Melikaslanov communication minister; Khalil bey Khasmamedov minister for the implementation of laws; Anatolii Neruchev minister of agriculture, state property, and religion; Khachatur Korchikian finance minister; Hamazasp Ohanjanian trusteeship minister; Ter-Gazarov food minister; and Evgenii Gegechkori labor and foreign minister.64 The new commissariat was a serious step toward independence. However, the executive bodies were weak and failed to restore stability. The commissariat was composed of representatives of the three main nationalities of Transcaucasia together with their political parties, so it was natural that their national councils were also set up. The Azerbaijani national council was instituted in November under the leadership of Rasulzade. Decisions of the government were considered at the council meetings and took effect soon thereafter. The provisional commissariat set itself the task of securing the territorial integrity of Transcaucasia. The Congress of the National Council of Georgia started its work on November  19, immediately after the formation of the local government. The Central Committee of Muslims of the South Caucasus headed by Topchibashov left for Tiflis to attend the congress. Noe Zhordania, the leader of the Georgian Mensheviks, spoke the congress. He pointed out that over the past hundred years the South Caucasus had sided with Russia and considered itself an integral part of the Russian state. “But now we are in trouble. The links with Russia are broken, and the South Caucasus remains alone. We must go on or die in the vortex of anarchy.” He ended his speech by suggesting the establishment of a government. It was decided to set up a commissariat for the South Caucasus to rule the region until the resolution of the issue by the Constituent Assembly.65 Topchibashov spoke at the congress on November 23 on behalf of the Muslim Committee. He informed the audience of Muslims’ expectations, touched on the tasks and political future of the new government, and invited the Georgians to collaborate on a good course for all Caucasian peoples.66 After the October 1917 revolt, the situation in Baku became increasingly aggravated. Regardless of their political orientation, the non-Muslim parties operating in the city demonstrated solidarity with the local population and attempted to regulate chaotic events. As early as the summer of 1917, they had begun discussing

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  103 the question of annexing the oil field districts to the city; in autumn the discussions became urgent. A  meeting of the Baku Duma was held on November  18 under the leadership of Fatali khan Khoiskii. Right-wing and left-wing parties expressed particular solidarity in this matter. On behalf of the Muslim Committee, Topchibashov charged the Bolsheviks with wishing to revive autocracy. He stressed that Muslims would not allow the annexation of an inch of oil field lands or an attempt to pass any decisions on the issue. When Ali Mardan bey pointed out that “we have the power to prevent this,” the Bolsheviks began yelling: “That’s what you rich Muslims say.” Muslims wanted to the oil field districts to have a separate zemstvo, while Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, socialist revolutionaries, and Dashnaks united to adopt their decision against a separate zemstovo by forty-four votes. Ali Mardan bey and the Muslim deputies walked out.67 In autumn 1917 Muslims of the South Caucasus led by Ali Mardan bey started their preparations for elections to the Constituent Assembly. After the Tiflis congress, the Azerbaijani delegates returned to Ganja. Another congress was held there to elect candidates from the Muslim Committee and the Musavat Party. Debates chaired by Topchibashov developed a bloc of the Muslim National Committee and Musavat that included Mahammad Yusif Jafarov, Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, Mahammad Emin Rasulzade, Nasib bey Usubbeyov, Fatali khan Khoiskii, Hasan bey Aghayev, Khosrovpasha bey Sultanov, Gazi Ahmed Mamedbeyov, Mustafa bey Mahmudov, Mir Hidayat Seyidov, Aslan bey Gardashov, Shafi bey Rustambeyov, and others.68 Ali Mardan bey was nominated from Syr Darya province; Rasulzade from the Fergana region; and Usubbeyov from Amu Darya province.69 Elections to the Constituent Assembly were held on November 26 through 28. The vast majority of Muslims voted for candidates from the Ganja list. The Musavat Party headed by Rasulzade and the Muslim National Committee led by Topchibashov and Khoiskii received 63 percent of the votes of Caucasian Muslims.70 This great victory showed that the national forces of the Caucasus had turned into a strong political organization. Consequently, the national bloc received ten seats; the bloc of Muslim socialists two seats; and the Ittihadists (Unity of Islam) one seat.71 Bolsheviks received just 4.4 percent of the votes, which vividly demonstrates that they lacked a social base.72 The elections showed that most Muslims from Baku, Ganja, Erivan, and Tiflis provinces supported Azerbaijani political leaders in their struggle for territorial autonomy. In December 1917 Ali Mardan bey resigned from his post as chair of the Muslim Committee of the South Caucasus, for he was elected to the Constituent Assembly. At the end of 1917 the Baku Committee acted as an interparty organ. However, due to heart disease Ali Mardan bey failed to take part in the work of the Baku City Committee of Muslim Organizations and Seim.73 The idea of the Constituent Assembly failed, of course, and on January 6, 1918, the Bolshevik government dissolved it. Expectations for the national question sank into oblivion. The disbanding of the Constituent Assembly became a crucial moment in separating national outlying areas, including the South Caucasus, from Russia. On January 22, 1918, all delegates to the Constituent Assembly from the South Caucasus

104  A heavy burden on the eve of independence gathered in Tiflis. Two days of debate ended with a decision to double the seats of the Constituent Assembly and set up a regional legislative body: the Transcaucasian Seim. On February 23, 1918, the first session was held. The members of the Muslim faction in the Seim from the National Committee and the Musavat Party were Topchibashov, Rasulzade, Usubbeyov, Fatali khan Khoiskii, Mahammad Yusif Jafarov, Hasan bey Aghayev, Khosrovpasha bey Sultanov, Mahammad Hasan bey Hajinskii, Mir Hidayat Seyidov, Khalil bey Khasmamedov, Gazi Ahmed Mahammadbeyov, Aslan bey Gardashov, Shafi bey Rustambeyov, Javad bey Melik-Yeganov, Mustafa bey Mahmudov, Mehdi bey Hajibabayev, Haji Mulla Salim Akhundzade, Mehdi bey Hajinskii, Khudadat bey Melik-Aslanov, Museyib bey Kocharli, Ibrahim agha Vekilov, Hamid bey Shahtakhtinskii, Rahim bey Vekilov, Alesker bey Mahmudbeyov, Yusif bey Efendizade, Mirza Jamal Yusifzade, Mahammadrza bey Vekilov, and Islam bey Kabulov; from the bloc of Muslim socialists Ibrahim bey Heydarov, Ali khan Kantemir, Aslan bey Safikurdskii, Ahmed Jovdat Pepinov, Baghyr bey Rzayev, Jamo bey Hajinskii, Mahammad bey Maharramov; from the Ittihad Party Soltan Majid Ganizade, Mir Yagub Mehdiyev, Heydarguli Mahammadbeyov; from the Hummet (Energy) Party Jafar Akhundov, Ibrahim bey Abilov, Akper agha Sheikhulislamov, and Samadagha Agamalyogly.74 These figures played a crucial role in the destiny of Azerbaijan and shouldered the burden of political processes. Representatives of German organizations in the South Caucasus gave reports on all Seim members. They characterized Ali Mardan bey as the most prominent and most ardent anti-Armenian Muslim member.75 Ali Mardan bey had a heart attack in Tiflis and returned to Baku to undergo treatment. He began attending meetings of various parties, committees, and national societies and took part in debates, including meetings on Armenian-­Muslim issues where Armenian, Georgian, and Azerbaijani participants discussed the future destiny of the Caucasus; he also took part in the meetings of the National Committee to discuss the formation of Muslim regiments and other matters.

March 1918: a bloody Baku tragedy Bloody events stirred up by Armenians and Bolsheviks in March 1918 in Baku were not foreseen by Ali Mardan bey. The Baku Council and Dashnaks slaughtered Muslims in March 1918 in their attempt to seize power in Azerbaijan. This appalling crime clearly demonstrated the true attitudes of Bolsheviks and Soviet Russia as a whole toward Azerbaijanis who proclaimed nations’ right to selfdetermination, as further developments reaffirmed. Giving the Armenian carnage their blessing, the Bolsheviks tried to undermine social base of national forces. Stepan Shaumian came out into the open when he wrote about the slaughter of Muslims: Should they gain the upper hand in Baku, the city would be proclaimed the capital of Azerbaijan and all non-Muslim elements would be disarmed. . . . It is obvious that the Muslims’ victory in Baku would lead to the loss of Transcaucasia for Russia.76

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  105 It should be noted the Russian Bolshevist government and the Baku Council disagreed about the idea of autonomy widely backed by broad masses of the Azerbaijani population. On the eve of March events the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party sent an instructive letter to Shaumian and Prokofii (Alyosha) Japaridze, advising them to grant autonomy to Muslims if they asked for it.77 However, Shaumian viewed the Azerbaijani aspiration for autonomy as a Musavatist desire to turn Baku into the capital of the “Azerbaijani khanate.”78 On the eve of the tragic events, “the Armenian nationalistic Dashnak Party invited Muslims to fight jointly against the Bolsheviks; however, overnight they changed their mind and turned into Bolsheviks,” which strongly shocked Ali Mardan bey. One day before the putsch, Muslims (including Ali Mardan bey) were invited by Dashnakists to carve out a joint plan of struggle against the Bolsheviks.79 Events became bloody after the Dashnak betrayal: 12,000 Muslims were killed in the course of the three-day tragedy that started on March 30.80 In addition, the editorial office of Kaspii, where Ali Mardan bey had worked for most of his life, was burned to the ground. The same thing happened to the Ismayilliye building, the printing office of the newspaper Açıg Söz, the Teze Pir mosque, Muslim charities, and other educational and religious institutions. Armenians razed to the ground everything related to Turkism or Muslimism. Ali Mardan bey witnessed these developments: “Armed Armenians attacked Muslim homes, killed old people, women, children. . . . Armenians killed Muslims despite their left-wing party affiliation.”81 The Bolshevik Revolutionary Committee delivered an ultimatum on April 1 to the Muslims of the city: the war would go on unless the power of the Baku Council was recognized by 3 p.m. To resolve the standoff, Ali Mardan bey, despite his illness, together with Agha Ashurov, Mulla Haji Mirmovsum, Haji Huseyn Taghiyev, and Abdul Kazimzade, went to the hotel Astoria, where the Revolutionary Committee was based. “Peace talks” began an hour later between them and the Bolsheviks and members of the Armenian National Council. Iranian consul Habibullah khan participated. The hour talks ended with the signing of a document recognizing the Bolshevik power in Baku and disbanding armed Muslim units.82 In the course of the talks the Armenians demanded that Ali Mardan bey and Haji Zeynalabdin Taghiyev should go to the station of Khyrdalan on April 3 and prevent the Daghestan regiment (composed of Lezghin soldiers) from entering Baku. Despite this, Armenian soldiers executed a search of Topchibashov’s home on April 2 and arrested him on April 3. Iakov Nikolaievich Smirnov, a lawyer from Baku, testified on November 13, 1918, to the Extraordinary Investigation Commission of the Azerbaijani Government: After the March pogroms I learned that Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov had been arrested. He was kept together with a colonel named Baron von der Osten Sacken in a small room of a city school under the surveillance of Armenian soldiers. The latter behaved outrageously, constantly clicked their rifle bolts, and drank heavily, shouting all day long. I appealed to Alyosha Japaridze [chair of the executive committee of the Council of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies] and Dmitrii Kozhemiak [chair of the Extraordinary Committee] and succeeded in getting bail for Topchibashov.83

106  A heavy burden on the eve of independence Thus after a month of imprisonment Ali Mardan bey was released on bail to the Muslim Social-Democratic Party Hummet. However, he was soon rearrested by Armenian demand and jailed at the Bailov Prison.84 In his testimony Smirnov wrote of his visit to the prison: I found him depressed and unhealthy. He told me that he had no meals in the first days; he was hungry now, as were the other prisoners, thirty in number. In his words, he was kept under unbearable conditions: . . . in a small ward together with Ibrahim bey Heydarov; the ward was locked from 6 p.m. to 7 a.m.; a toilet bucket was placed here, which exuded a nasty smell. Smirnov finally succeeded in having Topchibashov and Heydarov examined by physicians, who found that they were sick. At my request, they were hospitalized at Doctor Larionov’s clinic. The prisoners were under the surveillance of an escort composed solely of impertinent Armenians. I had to plead for the guard to be replaced. Next came the guard composed of Georgians, but several days later Armenians came back.85 Ali Mardan bey’s life was in jeopardy in March. After a while Ali Mardan bey was discharged from the clinic and released on bail. His illegal imprisonment lasted two and half months. While he was in Bolshevist-Armenian captivity, the Azerbaijan Republic was declared in Tiflis on May 28, and the national government moved to Ganja. In deep sorrow and low spirits, Ali Mardan bey noted: “I failed to please the government of Nicholas II and the government of Bolsheviks, who jailed me. I wonder what the new government will do with me.”86 Overwhelmed by this dismal mood, he sought to get out of Baku, currently under alien occupation.

Notes 1 Aleksandr Vdovin, Vladimir Zorin, and Aleksandr Nikonov, Russkii narod v natsional’noi politike: XX vek. Moscow: Russkii mir, 1998, p. 4. 2 Baberovski, Vrag est’ vezde. Stalinizm na Kavkaze, 100. 3 Suren Shaumian, Bakinskaya kommuna 1918 goda. Proletarskaia Revoliutsia, 1926, # 12, 71. 4 Critical Issues in the Construction and Management of Religious Affairs of the Muslim Population of the South Caucasus, March 23, 1917, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1–3. 5 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 19. 6 An Invitation of Topchibashev to a Meeting of the Special Conference in Tiflis, April 11, 1917, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1. v. 10, p. 7. 7 On Organizing Local Administrations, 1917, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1. v. 21, p. 5. 8 Position of Local Executive Bodies on the Edge of the Transcaucasia, 1917, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 21, pp. 1–3. 9 Açıg söz, April 14, 1917. 10 Kaspii, April 16, 1917. 11 Kaspii, April 18, 1917. 12 See: Kaspii, April 13, 1917.

A heavy burden on the eve of independence  107 13 Kaspii, April 20, 1917. 14 Açıq söz, April 25, 1917. 15 Nağı bəy Şeyxzamanlı (Keykurun), Azərbaycan istiqlal mücadiləsi xatirələri. Baku: Azerbaycan nəşriyyatı, 1997, 237. 16 Resolution of the Congress of the Caucasian Muslims. April, 1917, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 18, p. 3. 17 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 19. 18 Kaspii, April 21, 1917. 19 Kaspii, April 22, 1917. 20 Kaspii, April 19, 1917. 21 Kaspii, April 23, 1917. 22 Baberovski, Vrag est’ vezde. Stalinizm na Kavkaze, 102. 23 Kaspii, April 23, 1917. 24 Kaspii, April 28, 1917. 25 Kaspii, April 21, 1917. 26 Larisa Yamaieva, Musul’manskii liberalizm nachala XX veka kak obschestvenno-­ politicheskoe dvizhenie (po materialam Ufumskoi i Orenburgskoi gubernii). Ufa: Kitap, 2002, 231. 27 Açıq söz, May 21, 1917. 28 See: Bulletin No. 1 of the Editorial Board of the Congress of the Muslims of Russia in Moscow, May 1917, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 6. 29 The Entrance Ticket, Handed Topchibashev by Temporary Central Bureau, 1917, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 1. 30 See: Topchibashevç Muslim Congresses in Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 29. 31 Bulletin No. 1 of the Editorial Board of the Congress of the Muslims of Russia in Moscow, May, 1917, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 2. 32 Agenda, the Commissions Structure and Regulations of the Moscow All-Russian Congress of Muslims, May 2, 1917, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1–3. 33 See: Ihsan Ilgar, Rusiya’da Birinci müslüman Kongresi tutanakları. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1990, 48–57. 34 Ibid., 57–58. 35 Açıq söz, May 23, 1917. 36 See: Bulletin No. 1 of the Editorial Board of the Congress of the Muslims of Russia in Moscow, May, 1917, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 3–4. 37 Ilgar, Rusiya’da Birinci müslüman Kongresi tutanakları, 73–74. 38 Açıq söz. May 26, 1917. 39 Topchibashev, Muslim Congresses in Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 33. 40 Açıq söz, May 28, 1917. 41 See: Rule of Public Administration. Draft of Resolution, May, 1917, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1. 42 Akhmed Tsalikov, Musul’mane Rosii i federatsiia. Rechi, proiznesiennyie na Vserossiiskom musul’manskom s’ezde v Moskve. 1–11 maia 1917 g. Petrograd: Zaria Vostoka, 1917, 15. 43 Açıq söz, May 29, 1917. 44 Ibid. 45 See: Ilgar, Rusiya’da Birinci müslüman Kongresi tutanakları, 170–202. 46 Açıq söz, May 31, 1917. 47 Ilgar, Rusiya’da Birinci müslüman Kongresi tutanakları, 238–239. 48 Açıq söz, June 6, 1917. 49 Topchibashev, Muslim Congresses in Russia, AAMT, carton no 7, 35. 50 See: Imanov, Ali Merdan Topçubaşi, 74. 51 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 20. 52 Ilgar, Rusiya’da Birinci müslüman Kongresi tutanakları, 328–334.

108  A heavy burden on the eve of independence 53 See: Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey. Biography, December  16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 13. 54 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 20. 55 Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bek Ali Akbar bek oglu, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 4. 56 Kaspii, August 24, 1917. 57 Gosudarstvennoe soveshchanie (Stenografichekii otchet) s predisloviem Ia.A. Iakovleva. Moscow-Leningrad: Gos. Izdatel’stvo, 1930, 185–188. 58 Kaspii, August 24, 1917. 59 Kaspii, September 22, 1917. 60 Kaspii, September 20, 1917. 61 Letter from Vekilov to Topchibashev, October  4, 1917, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 2, pp. 80–83. 62 See: Kaspii, September 30, 1917. 63 Programmnyie dokumenty musul’manskikh politicheskikh partii. 1917–1920 gg. Oxford: Society for Central Asian Studies, Reprint séries n. 2, 1985, 13–15. 64 Dokumenty i materialy po vneshneii politike Zakavkaz’ia i Gruzii. Tiflis: Tipografіia Pravitel’stva Gruzinskoi Respubliki, 1919, 7. 65 Ibid. 66 See: Kaspii, November 28, 1917. 67 Kaspii, November 21, 1917. 68 Kurtuluş, December, 1934, # 2, 49. 69 Açıq söz, November 1, 1917. 70 Serge Zenkovsky, Pan-Turkism and Islam in Russia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960, 257. 71 S. Belen’kii and A. Manvelov, Revoliutsiia 1917 goda v Azerbaidzhane. Baku: Azguz, 1927, 219. 72 Leonid Spirin, Itogi vyborov vo Vserossiiskoie Uchreditel’noie Sobraniie v 1917 g. Istoriia SSSR, 1988, # 2, 96. 73 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 21–22. 74 A.M. Stavrovskii. ed. Adres-kalendar’ Azerbaidzhanskoii Respubliki na 1920 god. Baku: Azerbaycan, 1920, 8–9. 75 Liste der Mitglieder des Transkaukasischen Seim, 1918, PA-AA, R 11054, l, 13. 76 Stepan Shaumian, Izbrannyie proizvedeniia v dvukh tomakh. Vol. 2, 1915–1918 gg. Moscow: Politizdat, 1978, 245–246. 77 Iakov Ratgauzer, Revoliutsiia i grazhdanskaia voiina v Baku. Ch. 1. 1917–1918. Baku: AzGNII, 1927, 140. 78 Shaumian, Izbrannyie proizvedeniia, 257. 79 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 22. 80 Report of Aleksandr Kluge to Alekber bey Khasmamedov. July, 1919, APDPAAR, f. 277, r. 2, v. 27, p. 18. 81 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 22. 82 Biulleten’ KRO g. Baku i iego raiionov, April 4, 1918. 83 Protocol of Interrogation of the Witness Yakov Nikolayevich Smirnoff by Extraordinary Commission, November 13, 1918, APDPAAR, f. 277, r. 2, v. 13, pp. 154–155. 84 Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey. Biography, December  16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 14. 85 Protocol of Interrogation of the Witness Yakov Nikolayevich Smirnoff by Extraordinary Commission, November 13, 1918, APDPAAR, f. 277, r. 2, v. 13, pp. 155–156. 86 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 22.

7 The Istanbul mission of the extraordinary and plenipotentiary minister

Members of the Azerbaijani faction gathered on May  27 to discuss the crisis caused by the dissolution of the Seim. In view of the complex situation, they decided to assume responsibility and proclaimed themselves the Azerbaijani National Interim Council. A  vote by secret ballot elected Rasulzade as chair. His candidacy was backed by all parties except Ittihad. Hasan bey Aghayev and Mir Hidayat Seidov were elected as his deputies and Mustafa bey Mahmudov and Rahim bey Vekilov as secretaries. Then the delegates elected the executive body, composed of nine members in charge of various spheres of life. Fatali khan Khoiskii was unanimously elected as its chair.

Establishment of the Azerbaijani Republic and the beginning of the struggle for liberation of Baku The main item on the agenda was dissolution of the Seim and the situation in Azerbaijan due to Georgia’s declaration of Independence. Khalil bey Khasmamedov made a report on the necessity of immediate declaration of the Azerbaijan Republic. He was backed by other members of the National Council, including Nasib bey Usubbeyov, Akber agha Sheikhulislamov, and Mir Hidayet Seidov. The National Council passed a decision (twenty-four votes in favor, with two abstentions: Soltan Majid Ganizade and Javad Akhundov) immediately to declare the independence of Azerbaijan through the “Act of Azerbaijan’s Independence.”1 Members of the National Council heard the text then entrusted Khoiskii to form the Azerbaijani government. An hour later they heard Khoiskii’s report on formation of the government, naming himself as chair of the Cabinet of Ministers and internal minister; Khosrovpasha bey Sultanov as war minister; Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii as foreign minister; Nasib bey Usubbeyov as minister of finance and people’s education; Khalil bey Khasmamedov as minister of justice; Mahammad Yusif Jafarov as minister of trade and industry; Akber agha Sheikhulislamov as minister of agriculture and labor; Khudadat bey Melikaslanov as minister of communication, post, and telegraph; and Jamo Hajinskii as state controller.2 Ali Mardan bey was not included in the first Azerbaijani government. On May 30 Khoiskii sent a telegraph announcing the establishment of the Azerbaijani Republic to the foreign ministers of Constantinople, Berlin, Vienna, Paris,

110  The Istanbul mission London, Rome, Washington, Sofia, Bucharest, Teheran, Madrid, the Hague, Moscow, Stockholm, Kiev, Christiania, and Copenhagen: “As the Federative Transcaucasian Republic was dissolved due to the separation of Georgia, the National Council of Azerbaijan announced on May  28 the independence of Azerbaijan, consisting of Eastern and Southern Transcaucasia.” The new government would temporarily be headquartered in Elizavetpol.3 The “Treaty of Friendship between the Imperial Ottoman Government and the Azerbaijani Republic” was signed on June  4 (following the Batum talks of May 11) by justice minister Khalil bey Menteshe and commander-in-chief of the Caucasian Front Ferik Mehmet Vehib pasha for Turkey and by Hajinskii as foreign minister and Rasulzade as chair of the National Council for Azerbaijan. That was the first treaty signed by the Azerbaijani Republic with a foreign state. Article 4 said that the Ottoman government would render military aid to the government of Azerbaijan if necessary for order and security in the country.4 Following the Batum conference, Turkey signed a treaty with Georgia and Armenia on June 4, recognizing their independence. Under the treaty with Georgia, Turkey received Kars, Batum, and Ardahan as well as Akhaltsikh and Akhalkalaki.5 Under the treaty with Turkey, Armenia had to recognize the provisions of the Brest-Lithuanian treaty stipulating that Echmiadzin and Alexandropol were transferred to Turkey, which had the right to operate a route from Alexandropol to Julfa. The border with Armenia passed close to Erivan, which had only six kilometers of railway.6 After operating for three weeks in Tiflis, the Azerbaijani government and the National Council moved to Ganja on June 16. At that time the first Turkish subdivisions headed by Nuru pasha came to Ganja. On June 17 confrontations took place among supporters of Azerbaijan’s joining Turkey, the Turkish command, and advocates of independence. Azerbaijan’s independence was preserved, and that same day a government headed by Fatali khan Khoiskii was formed. The new cabinet members were Khoiskii as prime minister and minister of justice; Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii as foreign minister; Behbud bey Javanshir as internal minister; Khudadat bey Melikaslanov as communication minister; Abdulali bey Amirjanov as finance minister; Khosrovpasha bey Sultanov as minister of agriculture; Nasib bey Usubbeyov as minister of people’s education; and Khudadat bey Rafibeyli as minister of public health. Ali Mardan bey was appointed a minister without portfolio.7 The report stressed that he was a lawyer, a former member of the State Duma, an active ally of the Constitutionalists, and an authoritative member of the government.8 When the second cabinet was being formed, Ali Mardan bey was being held prisoner in Baku by the Bolsheviks, which is why he had no post in the government.9 As soon as the crisis was over, the government declared martial law on June 23 throughout the republic. Composed of Turkish regulars and Azerbaijani volunteers, the Caucasian Islamic Army aimed to liberate Baku as a historical, political, economic, and cultural center from the Bolshevik-Armenian aggressors and return the city to its true owners: Muslims. In the summer of 1918 both the internal and external situation of Azerbaijan made it necessary to liberate Baku as soon as possible. In the final stages of World

The Istanbul mission  111 War I Baku had become a chief object of struggle among Germany, England, the Ottoman Empire, and Soviet Russia. The activities of the Baku Council of People’s Commissars and its campaign against Ganja increasingly aggravated the situation in Transcaucasia. In fact the Bolsheviks intended to capture not only Ganja but Tiflis as well. With that end in view, they planned an uprising of the soldiers of the Caucasian front in order to bring the Red Army into Tiflis.10 This offensive of the Communist troops near Goichai was defeated in late June. In addition, the rate of desertion intensified. On July 20 Shamakhy, an important strategic object in the direction of Baku, was liberated. By late July the Islamic Army controlled the environs of Baku. Apprehensive about the Turks, the German General Staff began openly interfering in the military process.11 While German-Russian talks were underway in Berlin and Moscow, the situation in Baku went from bad to worse. One item on the agenda was how to defend the city or to whom it should surrender. In the end, they chose tsarist colonel Lazar Bicherakhov, whose Cossack regiment was stationed in Iran, to defend Baku. In early July Bicherakhov’s detachment moved from Enzeli toward the city.12 He landed in Alat on July 5 and took command of Baku’s defense on July 7. When he realized that the situation was very bad, the famed colonel did not fight and left for the north. Apprehensive about new persecutions, Ali Mardan bey abandoned the city and took shelter in an Apsheron village. He knew very well that the brutal Armenian-Bolshevik coalition was sure to kill him, especially as his life had repeatedly been threatened. He could do nothing but wait until the Islamic Army came.13 The Baku Council of People’s Commissars failed to withstand the assault by the Islamic Army and was overthrown on July 31, 1918. The newly formed government of the Tsentrokaspii (Central Committee of the Caspian Fleet) was composed of five officers of the Caspian fleet; socialist revolutionaries Lev Umanskii and Abram Veluns; Mensheviks Grigorii Aiolla and Mikhail Sadovskii; and Dashnaks Alexander Arakelian and Sergei Melik Elchian. As before, this government was not related to Azerbaijan and was a puppet regime composed of outsiders. Power in the Tsentrokaspii was formally vested in officers and sailors of the Caspian navy, but the real power was in the hands of the Armenian National Council, Dashnaktsutyun, and other Armenian parties and organizations. The first step of the Tsentrokaspii government was an invitation to the British in Enzeli to enter Baku. On August 4 the first British detachment headed by Col. Claude Stokes arrived in the city. A British regiment with 1,000 men, under the command of Gen. Lionel Dunsterville, entered the city between August  9 and 11.14 However, their arrival did not improve the situation on the Baku front. In the first days of August the Turkish-Azerbaijani army succeeded in narrowing the encirclement of the city. On August 10 the Turkic-Muslim villages of Apsheron rose up against the dictatorship of the Tsentrokaspii. The village of Mashtagha was liberated by the Caucasian Islamic Army.15 The city administration was told to surrender. However, the Tsentrokaspii government still hoped that Russia and Germany would help it out of the impasse, so it rejected Mursel pasha’s ultimatum. When the Islamic Army reached the Baku suburbs in late July, Ali Mardan bey left his shelter and went to the army

112  The Istanbul mission headquarters at the Khyrdalan station. Note that the Islamic Army and the Azerbaijani government were stationed in Baku, while Ali Mardan bey sought to be in Ganja. When Topchibashov finally reached Ganja, he had to act as prime minister and foreign minister because Khoiskii and Hajinskii were following the Islamic Army on its approach to Baku.16 In a letter of August 13, Khoiskii personally asked Ali Mardan bey to replace him temporarily as prime minister and run the Foreign Ministry.17 They all reached Ganja soon,18 but Ali Mardan bey left for Istanbul.

The Istanbul talks of Ali Mardan bey During the battle for Baku, the Azerbaijani government sent Topchibashov as a prominent political figure and minister without portfolio to Istanbul on August 18 to take part in important meetings. With the full powers and rights of an extraordinary and plenipotentiary minister, Ali Mardan bey attended an Istanbul conference together with delegates from Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Bulgaria as well as Georgia and Armenia.19 A letter sent to Rasulzade, the chair of the Azerbaijani peace delegation (consisting of Rasulzade, Khasmamedov, and Aslan bey Safikurdskii) said that Topchibashov would act as a plenipotentiary member of the Azerbaijani delegation if an international conference took place in Istanbul.20 On August 23 Ali Mardan bey left Ganja and spent several days in Tiflis, where he had meetings with members of the Georgian government and with Ottoman representative Abdul Kerim pasha. That was Ali Mardan bey’s farewell to Azerbaijan. On September 7 he arrived in Batum and spent two weeks there, awaiting a steamer. There he received word of Baku’s liberation. On September  16 the commandant of Batum congratulated him.21 Owing to the changing Russian-German relations Topchibashov decided to visit the capitals of the great powers. On September 15 he sent a letter to Khoiskii asking for a backdated mandate giving him emergency powers to negotiate not only in Turkey but in Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania as well. “Send me the mandate by special courier. If he fails to see me here, . . . then send it to me in Istanbul, at the Foreign Ministry.”22 The mandate was urgently needed. According to Turkish official circles, Mehmet Talaat pasha, the head of the Turkish government, was going to visit Berlin. Topchibashov intended to go with him. On September 28 he reached Istanbul with great difficulty. Two days later came a message about Bulgaria’s defeat.23 During this period, the Azerbaijani representatives in Istanbul had taken several important diplomatic steps. After returning from Berlin on October 2 Talaat pasha told Topchibashov that he was doing his best to champion the interests of Azerbaijan. He pointed out that neither Austria-Hungary nor Germany wished to recognize Azerbaijan’s independence. The Russian ambassador, Adolph Ioffe, declared that “the Caucasian Muslims succeeded in creating their independent state through Turkey’s pressure.” Ioffe stressed that the Russian proletariat “would not allow Muslim peasants to suffer under the oppression of beys and rich people.” He asked Talaat pasha: “Do you have something in common with the Caucasian Muslims? They are Shiites,

The Istanbul mission  113 while you Turks are Sunnites.” Talaat pasha rejected this absurd argument, saying: “I’m a Turk, but I’m a Shiite.” When Ali Mardan bey heard about this, he added: “If I had been with you in Berlin, I’d say to Mr. Ioffe that I’m a Caucasian Muslim, but I’m a Sunnite.” Topchibashov reminded him that it was a traditional Russian practice to pit religious sects against each other. By repeating these tsarist methods, the Bolsheviks once again demonstrated that they were the enemies of Muslims.24 Talaat pasha informed Ali Mardan bey that he had defended the interests of Azerbaijan in Berlin but now the situation had deteriorated. He emphasized that “one of our hopes has come true: tsarist Russia has collapsed. . . . To profit from this, you Georgians and Armenians must make an effort to establish good neighborly relations and settle your domestic border disputes independently.” He advised: “In addressing these issues, we should ignore the problems of five or six border villages. . . . In so doing, we shall be able to attend the peace congress jointly with delegates of the Caucasian peoples.”25 Talaat pasha added that Turkey had long dreamed of having an independent Azerbaijani state in the Caucasus. Topchibashov thanked Talaat pasha for active personal participation in the destiny of Azerbaijan at the Berlin talks as well as for the heroism of Turkish soldiers during Baku’s liberation. He emphasized that “in its relations with neighbors Azerbaijan has followed a principle of being good neighbors, yet it faced certain difficulties. Peace relations were possible with Georgians, not with Armenians. Azerbaijanis have long lost faith in their sincerity.” Therefore, he had come to represent the Azerbaijani government as extraordinary and plenipotentiary minister.26 On September 29, however, Bulgaria signed an instrument of surrender, and the international situation changed for the worse. Ali Mardan bey could not go to Vienna and Berlin.27 On October 2 he was received by Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Nesimı Sayman bey. Topchibashov handed his mandate to the Ottoman minister and informed him about the situation in the Azerbaijani Republic. Ahmed Nasim bey noted that he had recently spoken with the prime minister about Azerbaijan and Ali Mardan bey’s mission: “From now on you Azerbaijanis face a period of better days, so you may get down to building your independent state.”28 On October 3 Topchibashov was received by the Turkish minister of war, Ismaıl Enver pasha. Ali Mardan bey thanked him for his participation in the organization of the Azerbaijani army and the liberation of Baku. Enver Pasha’s brother, Nuri pasha, was commander-in-chief of the Islamic Army. They discussed supplying the young army with officers, weapons, and ammunition. Enver pasha attached great importance to sending Azerbaijani delegations on a mission to European capitals, not only to Berlin and Vienna but to the capitals of Switzerland and Holland as well. This would be widely covered in newspapers and would demonstrate the real independence of Azerbaijan. Enver pasha stated: “Much time is needed to visit Switzerland, Berlin, and other centers. If you cannot stay long, other members of your delegation could replace you. It would be excellent if an entire Azerbaijani delegation would act in Geneva or Lausanne.”29 After arriving in Baku on October 6, 1918, the Azerbaijani government passed a resolution setting up a special commission in charge of dispatching delegations to European capitals and disseminating information about Azerbaijan there. To

114  The Istanbul mission give the mission higher status, Ali Mardan bey was designated as the foreign minister and entrusted with the task of forming the mission.30 The Azerbaijani representatives in Istanbul and Topchibashov personally attached great importance to the mission. The Azerbaijani government had spent four months engaged in liberating Baku and thus had not had an opportunity to address the issue. Ali Mardan bey established a small group led by Ali bey Huseynzade to be sent to neutral Switzerland to hold meetings there with diplomatic representatives of foreign states and to visit Holland, Italy, and France. However, the Entente countries did not grant the delegation a visa to visit these countries. When preparing to go to Berlin and Vienna, Topchibashov met with prominent Turkish political figures in October. Further developments in the war aggravated the governmental crisis in Turkey. The change of government in Germany in early October had an effect on Turkey as well. On October 8, 1918, the cabinet of Talaat pasha resigned. On October 10 at a session of the parliament held for the oath ceremony of the new sultan, attitudes toward the resignations varied. According to Ali Mardan bey, “the government was nearing collapse.”31 Nevertheless, the resignations were accepted. On October  11–12 Ahmet Tevfik pasha tried to form a new cabinet but failed. By mid-October Anglophile sentiments prevailed in the political circles of Turkey. Attempts were secretly made from October 4 to 10 to establish relations with the Entente.32 Finally, on October 13, Ahmet Izzet pasha formed a cabinet to bring the Turkish policy into conformity with American president Woodrow Wilson’s “14 points.” On October 21 Izzet pasha received Topchibashov, who congratulated him on his appointment and told him about his visits to Istanbul and the current situation. Izzet pasha noted the crisis: “Yes, time does fly, and everything changes quickly. Yesterday we felt fine, today we are lost. We must work jointly to champion our interests. It is no secret that we are fond of our Azerbaijan and that we have done our best to remedy the situation.”33 When Ali Mardan bey expressed hope that the new government would continue to support Azerbaijan, Izzet pasha reaffirmed that the elder brother should help the younger one: “You see that the situation has changed, so did our allies. Now it’s up to Wilson and his supporters to decide on the issue.”34 After long debates they decided that Topchibashov would inform the Azerbaijani government that Turkey’s policy in respect to Azerbaijan would not change. On October 24 Izzet pasha withdrew the Turkish troops from the Caucasus and stationed them beyond a line set forth in the Brest-Litovsk Treaty. This was eloquent testimony to the defeatist sentiments in the Turkish leadership. On October 27 Topchibashov met with the new foreign minister, Mehmet Nabi bey, to discuss the main developments in Azerbaijan-Turkish relations. The new minister reaffirmed that Turkish foreign policy would remain the same. Topchibashov expressed his hope that the young Azerbaijani army would be supplied with Ottoman ammunition. In turn, the Turkish minister noted that the Ottoman army would have to leave Azerbaijan under pressure from the Allies, although Turkish soldiers and officers could stay in Azerbaijan and continue their military service there. The Turks also intended to open their diplomatic mission in Baku.35

The Istanbul mission  115 On October 28 Topchibashov had a meeting with the newly elected sheikh-ulIslam, Ömer Hulusi efendi, who came from the village of Inakh near Gunib in the Caucasus. He had gone to Turkey to get an education and remained there. The sheikh showed an interest in the Caucasian developments, the relations between Azerbaijan and Daghestan, Azerbaijani youth’s attitude toward religion, and so forth. Ali Mardan bey informed him of the hardships sustained by Azerbaijan during a hundred years of occupation and the activities of priests in the Caucasus as instruments of the Russian imperial policy. The sheikh rejoiced that Azerbaijan opposed division of Muslims into Sunnites and Shiites. “I’m happy to know about it. There cannot be a division between Muslims who recognize the Quran and the One God. Allah blesses the Caucasus for realizing that this is wrong.” Topchibashov reminded him that the crisis resulted from the traditional Russian policy set forth in Peter the Great’s testament: “let Turks and Persians fall out with each other as Sunnites and Shiites. For this to happen, he advised Russian officials to bribe muftis and sheikhs-ul-Islam. Even the Bolshevik government is eager to stir up hatred between Muslims.” Then they discussed the development of the national language, criticizing the view of some influential religious figures that “all Muslims should speak Arabic.” Those leaders believed that the Ottomans collapsed when they proclaimed Turkish to be the state language. The sheikhul-Islam pointed out that “every people is found of its native language. Not only Turks but other peoples will never renounce their native language.”36 Uttered in 1918, these words are topical today. On October 19 and 25, Allied aircraft bombed Istanbul. Turkey faced capitulation. The changing personnel of three cabinets made it impossible to maintain relations between the Azerbaijan Republic and the Ottoman government. On November 14 Ali Mardan bey reported to his government: This is the third cabinet since I came here. Talaat pasha’s cabinet was followed by Izzet pasha’s cabinet, which has also been dissolved. A few days ago the experienced diplomat Tevfik pasha together with foreign minister Mustafa Reshad pasha formed a new cabinet.37

Defeat of the German-Turkish alliance in World War I  and Azerbaijan In late October the Azerbaijani delegation at the Istanbul conference relinquished the hope that the great powers would ever recognize Azerbaijan’s sovereignty. The crisis made the conference impossible, so the delegation returned to Baku. Ali Mardan bey stayed in Istanbul to continue his diplomatic activity. Azerbaijan faced new difficulties after the end of World War I. Under the Mudros Armistice, the Allies were entitled to occupy Baku. The Azerbaijani government and its diplomatic representatives in the Ottoman Empire did not stand by idly. The armistice was signed by Rauf Orbay bey, the former head of the Turkish delegation at the Trabzon talks and currently a navy minister in the cabinet of Izzet pasha. On November 3 the conditions of the Mudros Armistice

116  The Istanbul mission were officially announced. Ali Mardan bey wrote that he visited Rauf bey that evening to protest against provisions that stipulated the transfer of Baku and the Azerbaijani railway to the Allies without preliminary discussions.38 Rauf bey said that the Allies had objected to the presence of the Turkish troops in Azerbaijan and compelled the Turks to accept these discriminatory provisions. “It can’t be helped, they are the winners, and we are the losers.” He advised Topchibashov to seek recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence by the Entente. In a day or two a delegation of the Allies would arrive in Istanbul for consultations.39 On November  4 Topchibashov submitted his written protest to Reshad Hikmet bey, the deputy foreign minister of Turkey. He pointed out that the Ottoman government recognized Azerbaijan’s independence but at the same time signed a treaty that violated international regulations and laws and thus made it easier for the British to capture Azerbaijan. “I do not believe that this was the premeditated intention of the imperial Ottoman government, yet I consider it my duty to protest.”40 He also said that it would be desirable to acquaint Azerbaijan with some provisions of the armistice regarding the Caucasus, especially Azerbaijan. In response Hikmet bey declared that the government of Turkey could not cede to the Entente a city that it did not own. As for the Mudros Armistice, it stipulated that Turkey would not interfere with the occupation of Baku by the British. Topchibashov interpreted this as “go and seize Baku.”41 In conclusion the protest stressed the necessity for Azerbaijani representatives to participate directly or via the Turkish government in debates arising from its own interests. “We hereby respectfully ask the Ottoman government to convey my point of view to the government and pave the way for political talks.”42 On November 5 Topchibashov was received by the Turkish foreign minister, Nabi bey. He tried to make excuses, saying that Turkey had no alternative but to sign the Mudros Armistice. He believed that a delay of fifteen days would end with occupation of Istanbul. Besides, he warned that the British were going to occupy not only Baku but also Batum and all of Transcaucasia.43 In his letter to the Azerbaijani government dated November  5 Topchibashov appraised the developments: “Under terms and conditions of the armistice Turkey committed to: (1) not impede Entente troops from occupying Baku; (2) grant them control over the Transcaucasian railways; (3) withdraw the Turkish troops at the demand of the Entente.”44 In response to this diplomatic note, the Turkish foreign minister commented on some provisions of the Mudros Armistice concerning Azerbaijan. He emphasized that Baku had never belonged to the Ottomans; hence Turkey could not cede it to the Entente. To avoid conflict, Turkey had to withdraw its troops from the city: “thus this act is not an infringement of the Azerbaijan Republic’s sovereign rights to Baku.” In accordance with the Mudros Armistice, Turkey withdrew all its troops from Transcaucasia, including Azerbaijan. The foreign minister pointed out that Turkey did not concede all Azerbaijani railways to the Entente but only the right to control some sections. “As for your request to establish relations between the British and your governments, the Ottoman government will do so at the earliest convenience.”45

The Istanbul mission  117 On November 10, 1918, the Turkish troops left Baku. That same day Azerbaijan’s prime minister Khoiskii and acting foreign minister Adil khan Ziyadkhanly sent a telegram to Woodrow Wilson asking him as the most authoritative postwar politician to support the recognition of the Azerbaijan Republic by the world powers. “Before addressing the great powers of Europe, the Azerbaijan people and the government set their hopes on you as a prominent humanist and defender of the interests of oppressed peoples to help us be recognized.”46 In his October 31 letter Ali Mardan bey urged Khoiskii to start talks with the British quartered in Resht and Enzeli.47 In early November 1918 an Azerbaijani delegation composed of Nasib bey Usubbeyov, Ahmed bey Aghayev, and Musa bey Rafiyev went to Enzeli and began negotiating with the British command in Northern Iran,48 headed by Gen. William Thomson. The talks were difficult. At first the general denied the very notion of a state called “Azerbaijan.” After long debates he declared: “According to our information, there is not a Republic established at the will of the whole Azerbaijani people. There is a government formed thanks to the intrigues of the Turkish command. But if you insist, we’ll check that everything is in place and pass an appropriate decision.”49 General Thomson assured them that the Allies “have come to create, not to destroy.”50 At the end of the talks, Thomson announced that by 10 a.m. on November 17 Baku must be free of Turkish and Azerbaijani troops and that the city and its oil fields would fall under British control. The rest of the country would remain under the control of the Azerbaijani government and army.51

Head of the Azerbaijani parliament As Topchibashov’s letters from Istanbul show, he considered convocation of the National Council a top priority. Dissolved in June, it was reconvened on November 16. The first session made a statement addressed to all countries worldwide, asking them to recognize Azerbaijan. According to the decision of the National Council, the chair appealed to General Thomson in a telegram: “The Azerbaijani government does not object to the Allied troops entering Baku on November 17 under Your Excellency’s command. The government is confident that this entry of the troops will not violate the independence and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.”52 On November 17, according to the Mudros Armistice provisions, the British troops (an Indian contingent) entered Baku.53 Interior minister Behbud bey Javanshir, acting foreign minister Adil khan Ziyadkhanly, and a group of officials and representatives of various national organizations attended an official reception in honor of the British.54 On November 18 the Azerbaijani government made an official statement on the British army’s entry into Baku in the name of the Entente. It noted that the Allied forces would enter Baku on a temporary basis to concentrate military power in their hands and that these forces did not intend to interfere with domestic affairs of the country and the capital. The statement pointed out that the final decision of the Azerbaijani constituent assembly about the political destiny of the country remained unclear, while the current situation made it necessary to ensure order

118  The Istanbul mission and tranquility in the country. It expressed confidence that the Allied troops would not infringe on the sovereign rights of the Azerbaijani people.55 After spending several days in Baku and familiarizing himself with current developments, General Thomson realized that the Russian assurances that “Azerbaijan as a state is an invention of some hundreds of political adventurers” were far from reality. He announced that the British command highly respected the Azerbaijani government and Khoiskii, who was “one of the ablest men in Baku” to rule the country until a new coalition government was formed.56 In the darkest days for the Republic, the National Council took drastic steps to ease the crisis. Some institution of the parliamentary form of government was needed to establish ties with the European democracies. A day before the arrival of the British in Baku, November 16, the National Council considered this issue. An election law was enacted on November 19. The election and education laws played an important role in Azerbaijan’s destiny, giving the political leaders of the country a chance to find a way out of the crisis. The decision of the National Council provided for representation of all nationalities and political parties in the parliament.57 The Azerbaijani parliament was composed of 120 deputies along national lines: eighty seats for Azerbaijanis; twenty-one seats for Armenians; ten seats for Russians; one seat each for Jews, Germans, Georgians, and Poles; and three seats each for trade unions and the association of oil industrialists.58 In addition, an equal franchise was provided for both sexes and all nationalities residing in the country’s territory. The parliament started its work on December 7. The first session was attended by 96 out of 120 deputies. Rasulzade, chair of the National Council, opened the session, focusing on election of the speaker. Following heated debates, Ali Mardan bey, the extraordinary and plenipotentiary representative of Azerbaijan and foreign minister since October 6, 1918, was elected as speaker of the parliament. Hasan bey Aghayev was his first deputy, and Rahim bey Vekilov was secretary. Topchibashov’s election was viewed favorably: he was a member of no party and was an experienced diplomat, intellectual, and democrat by nature. American historian Firuz Kazimzadeh called him “a well educated lawyer, tolerant in his views, and not a narrow nationalist.”59 One of the major tasks facing the parliament was the formation of a new government. Khoiskii made a summary report on the government’s domestic and foreign policy. The parliament accepted the resignation of the cabinet members and began to form a new government. Khoiskii was entrusted with this mission. On December 26 the composition of the new government was announced. The British demanded a coalition government, so it included three Russians and two Armenians as well as eleven Azerbaijanis. However, the Armenians declined to serve. In his letter to Khoiskii dated October 31 Topchibashov recommended that he establish a delegation to the peace conference, which he considered to be a matter of paramount importance. He warned: Current history calls for intensive and rational work, preparedness for strokes of misfortune. The main thing is to distribute the forces properly and believe

The Istanbul mission  119 in success. There is no place for personal ambitions when it comes to the fortunes of the nation.60 In mid-November Topchibashov prepared a memorandum on behalf of the Azerbaijan Republic to be translated into English and French and delivered to diplomatic representatives of France, England, America, Italy, Greece, and Japan in Istanbul. It touched upon the history of Azerbaijan, the Azerbaijanis’ struggle against the Bolsheviks, and their willingness to establish a Swiss-type confederation.61 The memorandum pointed out that the Azerbaijani Republic considered it possible to set up a confederation with Georgia and Armenia, with which the Azerbaijani people had been neighbors for centuries.62 Copies were sent to Stockholm, Paris, Geneva, London, and New York and submitted to the Turkish Foreign Ministry. A French variant was submitted to the foreign press in Istanbul. In addition, 750 copies of the text in Turkish were printed and distributed in Istanbul.63 Topchibashov informed his government that he was going to Baku to prepare for the Paris peace conference and form an Azerbaijani delegation. In December 1918 he wrote a letter to grand vizier Ahmed Tevfik pasha, asking him to assist in delivering the documents needed for the delegation’s return to Baku. The group was composed of Foreign Ministry official Selim bey Behbudov and Ali Mardan bey’s two secretaries: Mustafa bey Vekilov and Rashid bey Topchibashov (his son).64 However, the letter was never sent, for the date of the peace conference was announced: January 1919. Communications with the government and related consultations were maintained through diplomatic couriers. In mid-December Topchibashov dispatched his secretary Mustafa bey Vekilov to Baku to obtain a program of action.65 Ali Mardan bey had decided to return to Baku even earlier. After defeat in the world war Turkey found itself in hard conditions: all spheres of political, economic, and social life were paralyzed; Istanbul, the capital of an enormous empire, was occupied; the city’s connection with the surrounding world was cut off. After the Entente seized control over Istanbul, no telegraphic communication with Baku or transportation was maintained. Therefore, Ali Mardan bey had to wait in Istanbul until the situation became clearer.66 Meetings with diplomats who were visiting Istanbul kept Topchibashov in the city. In November and December he held effective talks with Turkish political leaders and representatives of the Allies, including Rauf bey, a participant in the Mudros process, on November 3; Reshad Hikmet bey, the deputy foreign minister, on November 4; Nabi bey, the foreign minister, on November 5; Mehmed Javid bey, the minister of finance, on November 8; Sukovchin, the representative of the Ukraine, on November 15; Mustafa Reshad pasha, the new Turkish foreign minister; Tefvik pasha and Mirza Mahmud khan, the diplomatic representative of Iran in Istanbul, on November 16 and 18; Mr. Tumple, the British representative, on November 19; Abdurrahman Vefik Sayın bey, the minister of finance, and Kölemen Abdullah pasha, the war minister, on November  25; Pavel Miliukov, the Russian representative, on December 7; Arthur J. Brown, the US diplomatic representative, on December 23; and Carlo Sforza, the representative of the Italian king.67 These talks discussed the issues of postwar development of the world and Azerbaijan’s place in the new system.

120  The Istanbul mission On December  28 the third cabinet was asked to approve a peace delegation headed by Topchibashov and his deputy, Hajinskii. The delegation also included two members of parliament, Ahmed bey Aghayev and Akber agha Sheikulislamov, and consultants Mir Yagub Mehdiyev, Jeyhun bey Hajibeyli (editor of Azerbaijan newspaper), and Mahammad Maharramov. Members of the peace delegation represented various parties and parliamentary factions.68 As head of the government and foreign minister Fatali khan Khoiskii signed a mandate conferring the right to take part in the work of the peace conference, negotiate with various states, and sign political, economic, and financial agreements on behalf of Azerbaijan. In the absence of Ali Mardan bey in Baku, the government entrusted Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii with heading the delegation in Istanbul. Iranian foreign minister Ali Qoli khan Ansari while in Istanbul in transit to Paris informed Topchibashov about the formation of the government and the delegation. “You’ve been elected the chair of the delegation in Paris. Your government has resigned. Fatali khan Khoiskii was confirmed as prime minister. As far as I know, the British are behaving correctly and decline to interfere in the affairs of your government.”69 The government confirmed Ali Mardan bey as chair of the peace delegation with a new mandate entitling him to conduct talks with world leaders, including Woodrow Wilson, Georges Clemenceau, David Lloyd George, Francesco Nitti, French marshal Ferdinand Foch, British field marshal Henry Wilson, and George Lord Curzon.70 Thus the establishment of the parliamentary republic in December 1918 elevated Azerbaijan to the ranks of politically advanced nations and became an important milestone in its subsequent diplomatic de facto recognition by the world powers. The central figure in this historic process was Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, first head of the Azerbaijani parliament and head of the young republic’s peace delegation sent to Europe.

Notes 1 Act on the Azerbaijani Independence, May 28, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 4, pp. 1–2. 2 Azerbaycan Cümhuriyyəti Hökumətinin qanun və binagüzarlıqları məcmuəsi. Baku: Azerbaycan qəzeti mətbəsi, 1919, No. 1, 6. 3 Radiogram on Declaration of the Azerbaijani Independence, May  30, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 4, pp. 9–10. 4 Friendship Agreement Between the Government of the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Azerbaijan, June 4, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 2, v. 88, pp. 1–3. 5 Dokumenti i materiali po vneshney politike Zakavkazya i Gruzii. Tiflis: Tipografіia Pravitel’stva Gruzinskoi Respubliki, 1919, 343–349. 6 See: Richard G. Hovanuisian, Armenia on the Road to Independence, 1918. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1967, 190–194. 7 Zusammensetzung der Regierung der Aserbeidjan’s Republik, August  26, 1918, PA-AA, R 11059, 1. 8 An Herrn General von Kress. Deutsche Delegation Tiflis. Baku, September 21, 1918, PA-AA, R 11061, 7. 9 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 22.

The Istanbul mission  121 10 Kavkazskii listok, April 3, 1918. 11 Tadeusz Swietochowski, Russian Azerbaijan, 1905–1920: The Shaping of National Identity in a Muslim Community. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985, 134. 12 Letter from Sheboldayev to Trotskii, June  23, 1918, APDPARA, fund record, doc. No. 371, pp. 1–4. 13 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 22. 14 See: Archives du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères de France (hereafter referred to as AMAÉF). Correspondanse politique et commerciale, 1914–1940 Série  “Z” Europe 1918–1940 Sous-Serie USSR Europe – Russie service russe d’information et d’edudes (S.R.I.E.) XLI Caucase – Azerbaidjan (1918–1920). Vol. 832, folio 2. 15 Brief Chronicle of Events from the End of the Baku Commune to Tragic Death of “the 26s.” Dateless, APDPARA, f. 303, r. 1a, v. 14, p. 3. 16 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 22. 17 Letter from Khoyskii to Topchibashev, August 13, 1918, AAMT, carton no 9, 1. 18 See: Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey. Biography, December  16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 15. 19 The Mandate of the Topchibasheff, August 23, 1918, AAMT, carton no 8, 8. 20 Information from Khoyskii to Rasulzade, August 23, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 138, p. 2. 21 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoyskii, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 34, p. 5. 22 Ibid., 4. 23 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoyskii, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 1. 24 The Written Notes of Conversation Held Between Topchibashov and Talaat Pasha, October 2, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 150, pp. 1–2. 25 Ibid., 2–3. 26 Ibid., 3. 27 Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 23. 28 The Written Notes of Conversation held Between Topchibashov and Talaat Pasha, October 2, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 150, p. 4. 29 The Written Notes of Conversation held Between Topchibashov and Enver pasha, October 3, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 150, p. 8. 30 Azerbaidzhanskaya Demokraticheskaya Respublika. Zakonodatelniye akti (1918– 1920). Dokumenty i materialy. Baku: Azerbaycan, 1998, 240. 31 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoyskii, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 2. 32 Ibid., 2. 33 Conversation of Topchibashov with the Turkish New Appointed Chairman, October 21, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 150, p. 8. 34 Ibid., 9. 35 Conversation of Topchibashov with Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkey Nabi bey, October 27, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 150, p. 12. 36 Conversation of Topchibashov with the New Turkish Sheikhulislam, October  28, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 150, pp. 17–18. 37 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoyskii, November 14, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 34, p. 18. 38 Ibid., p. 18. 39 Conversation of Topchibashov with Minister of Navigation of Turkey Rauf bey, November 3, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, pp. 1–2. 40 Note of Protest of Topchibashov to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkey in Relation to the Articles of Mudros Armistice concerning Azerbaijan, November 4, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 68, p. 2. 41 Conversation of Topchibashov with Rishad Hikmet bey, October 4, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 4.

122  The Istanbul mission 42 Note of Protest of Topchibashov to the Ministry of Foreign affairs of Turkey in relation to the articles of Mudros Armistice concerning Azerbaijan, November 4, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 68, p. 2. 43 Conversation of Topchibashov with Nabi bey, November 5, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 8. 44 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoyskii, November ’5, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 68, p. 20. 45 Letter from Turkish Foreign Minister to Topchibashov, November, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 68, p. 14. 46 Azerbaycan Cümhuriyyəti istiqlalının birinci səneyi-dövriyyəsi. 28 May 1919. Baku: Azerbaycan qəzeti mətbəsi, 1919, 12. 47 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoyskii. October 31, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 34, p. 17. 48 Adil khan Ziyadkhanlı, Azerbaycan: tarixi, ədəbiyyatı və siyasəti. Baku: Azerbaycan qəzeti mətbəsi, 1919, 59. 49 Mirza Bala Mehmetzade, Milli Azerbaycan hareketi. Berlin and Charlottenburg: Firka Divanı Tarafınden Neşrolunmuşdur, 1938, 99. 50 Azerbaycan, November 12, 1918. 51 AMAÉF, vol. 832, folio 15. 52 Azerbajdzhanskaya Demokraticheskaya Respublika (1918–1920 gg.). Vneshnyaya politika. Dokumenty i materialy. Baku: Azerbaycan, 1998, 105. 53 Les troupes anglo-russes sont à Bakou, AMAÉF, vol. 832, folio 14. 54 Azerbaycan, November 18, 1918. 55 Azerbaycan, November 19, 1918. 56 Swietochowski, Russian Azerbaijan, 142. 57 Law on Establishment of the Azerbaijani Parliament, November  19, 1918, SARA, f. 895, r. 10, v. 2, p. 23. 58 National Composition of the Azerbaijani Parliament, Brief Biographies of Deputies, Which Are County or Organization, 1918, AAMT, carton no 8/23, 1–12. 59 Firuz Kazemzade, The Struggle for Transcaucasia (1917–1921). New York: Philosophical Library, 1951, 166. 60 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoyskii, October 31, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 34, pp. 15–17. 61 See: Report Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Minister of Azerbaijan Topchibashev, 1919, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 2. 62 Letter of Topchibashov to Diplomatic Delegations of France, England, America, Italy, Greece and Japan in Istanbul, December, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, p. 25. 63 Diplomaticheskiie besedi A.M.Topchubasheva Stambule (zapisi chrezvychaynogo poslannikai i polnomochnogo ministra Azerbaidzhanskoy respubliki). 1918–1919 gg. Baku: Ėrgiun, 1994, 143. 64 Letter from Topchibashov to Ahmed Tevfik pasha, the Turkish Prime-Minister, December, 1918, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 68, p. 25. 65 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoyskii, November 20, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 66, p. 3. 66 See: Report Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Minister of Azerbaijan Topchibashev, 1919, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 1–2. 67 Diplomaticheskiie besedi A.M.Topchubasheva Stambule, 33–88. 68 Report Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Minister of Azerbaijan Topchibashev, 1919, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 3. 69 Conversation of Topchibashov with Ali Qoli khan Ansari, January  9, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 58. 70 See: Toptchibachy Ali Mardan bek Ali Akbar bek oglou, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 4.

8 Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul (January–April 1919)

An Azerbaijani delegation was formed in late December 1918 and received diplomatic passports in early January 1919. On January 6 the government issued certificates to attend the Paris Peace Conference. On January 7 foreign minister Fatali khan Khoiskii gave Topchibashov a mandate entitling him to represent the Azerbaijani Republic at the conference.1 Gen. William Tompson, commander of the Allied forces in Baku, gave the delegates a letter of recommendation to the British ambassador in France on January 3, noting that “they want to have their say on behalf of the Azerbaijani government, of the future Caucasian government.”2 A January 8 document signed by deputy foreign minister Adil khan Ziyadkhanov asked Ali Mardan bey to protect the interests of the endangered Muslim population of Erivan province and seek preservation of the current status quo until the destiny of the Caucasus was decided by the conference. The chair and members of the Azerbaijani delegation were also entrusted with the task of protecting the interests of Muslims in Batum, Kars, and Akhaltsykh.3 By decision of the Foreign Ministry, Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii was given 150,000 manats and the delegation received 2.5 million manats to go to Europe and America.4 The peace delegates headed by Hajinskii left for Tiflis in January.5 After their arrival, it became clear that no single delegation could be formed, because each delegate would try to act independently. Despite this, the parties concerned agreed with Gegechkori that the Azerbaijani and Georgian delegations would coordinate their work. Armenia, supposedly a member of the Entente, was not going to collaborate with its neighbors. The Azerbaijani and Georgian and North Caucasian delegates left together for Batum on January 14.6

Diplomatic talks in Istanbul On January 18, 1919, these delegations left Batum for Istanbul. Topchibashov had done much work there. On January 6 he asked Lewis Heck, the US diplomatic representative, to assist in applying Wilson’s “14 points” to Azerbaijan and for the United States to recognize the country’s independence.7 On January  10 he held talks with Holland’s diplomatic representative Van der Does de Willebois, who noted that Topchibashov’s memorandum submitted had provided interesting information about Azerbaijan. “I paid attention to the fact that your country

124  Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul is rich, so you may live at your own expense. You have a lot of oil and cotton but few railways.” At the end of the talks Willebois admitted that great changes were expected to take place on Europe’s map,8 based on the viability of the new states that emerged on the ruins of the Russian Empire in terms of ever-changing postwar Europe. On January  5–6 Topchibashov met with Sergei Sazonov at the Pera Palace hotel. As a representative of the White Guard governments of Aleksandr Kolchak and Anton Denikin, Sazonov was going to Paris. A well-known Russian diplomat since 1883, he had led the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Empire from 1909 to 1916 and rendered great services in the formation of the Entente.9 However, he could not accept the loss of Russia and the formation of new states. A month earlier, Ali Mardan bey had held a similar conversation with the former Russian foreign minister, Pavel Miliukov. Miliukov, whom Ali Mardan bey had known well since the first Russian revolution, avoided answering the question of his attitude toward non-Russian peoples by saying that the most important question now was how to save Russia: “If the Bolsheviks quit the stage, Russia will be rescued.” When Ali Mardan bey asked for Miliukov’s view of the three South Caucasian Republics with their own governments and armies, he replied: “I understand that your peoples had to save themselves and with that end in view created their own republics. On the other hand, it was the doing of the Germans, who put their hands on this business.” Topchibashov parried Miliukov’s attack: “I think that the former peoples of Russia have decided their destiny, including us, the Azerbaijanis.”10 These first talks demonstrated that Miliukov and Sazonov would fight for a “unified and indivisible Russia.” Ali Mardan bey assured them that the establishment of a sovereign republic would not interfere with Russian domestic affairs: We Azerbaijanis are not enemies of Russians; we wish you prosperity in your own country, whether on the basis of Bolshevism, socialism, or monarchism. At the same time, I declare that Azerbaijanis can no longer live together with Russians. All Caucasians are of the same view, except, perhaps, for the Cossacks of Terskaia and Kubanskaia provinces. . . . In this connection, there is a great difference and striking discrepancy. It was overlooked by the previous regime, which was a fatal flaw for Russia. This made us unhappy and limited our development. . . . The Azerbaijanis are far from the extreme socialism of Russia, which has presently degenerated into the form of Bolshevism. We shall always be resented in such a country and doomed to a wretched life. Azerbaijanis number 5 to 6 million and enjoy every opportunity to comply with Wilson’s principles. . . . And we shall always be seeking to preserve our independence and coexist with our nearest neighbors.11 After learning of Azerbaijan’s intention to set up a Caucasian Confederation, Sazonov said: “From your words it follows that Caucasian Tatars [Muslims] have already buried Russia.”12 Ali Mardan bey protested: Azerbaijanis are attempting to follow our own path and live in compliance with our views and thus facilitate the tasks of a future Russia with purely

Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul  125 Russian provinces and with a purely Russian population. Also, Azerbaijanis want to live in peace and tranquillity with our neighbors  – Georgians and Armenians  – and intend to establish a unified federative republic like the Swiss union.13 Sazonov objected: That’s hardly probable: there is too great a difference among peoples of the Caucasus, especially Armenians: they will not go along with you. There have been too many bloody clashes with Tatars in the Caucasus, such as the massacre in Baku when Armenians slaughtered Azerbaijanis and in September when Azerbaijanis did the same to Armenians. As far as I know, Caucasian Muslims are rather well disposed to Russians and do not want to separate from Russia. Ali Mardan bey replied that Russia first abandoned Azerbaijan, not the other way around.14 Sazonov promised that the new Russia “will be governed properly to ensure favorable conditions for all the nations to live.” Sazonov emphasized that Bolshevism was “not an idea but a mercenary aspiration to profit by a self-serving desire to take advantage and then destroy. A handful of madmen and traitors cannot capture Russia.” As for the peoples of the collapsed Russian Empire, Sazonov adhered to the rather long history of Great Russian chauvinism. He supported granting independence to the peoples of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires but also supported preservation of the colonial regime in the Russian Empire.15 On January 7, Topchibashov met with Viacheslav Savitskii, who clarified Sazonov’s standpoint on Wilson’s principles. It turned out that the peace conference was not inclined to recognize the independence of newly formed republics. Savitskii explained that the Entente was influenced by its desire to be repaid debts from Russia worth 65–68 billion rubles: “Hence it was more interested in being repaid by unified, united Russia than by tens of new states, one poorer than another.”16 From that time on, delegations of Azerbaijan and the other newly established republics had to wage a struggle against the diplomats of White Guard governments who upheld the principle of “united, indivisible Russia.”

Reception by the Ottoman sultan and a meeting with the Iranian foreign minister On January 11, 1919, Sultan Mehmet VI Vahideddin received Topchibashov as extraordinary and plenipotentiary representative. Ali Mardan bey recalled the sultan’s statement that “Azerbaijani Turks are my beloved children” and said that Azerbaijanis remembered it “with great pleasure and respect.” Azerbaijanis had a great number of enemies but had never been afraid of them, because they had always a great friend. “Not a friend, but a brother,” the sultan corrected him. He stressed that all Turks were brothers to the Azerbaijanis and their fellowship was

126  Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul eternal. “You must not collapse. This is a time of transition. I believe that the Muslim world, especially Ottoman and Azerbaijani Turks, will witness improvement of their conditions . . . so you Azerbaijanis must try for the future, and Ottoman Turks will not deny you assistance.”17 This meeting proved to be an important event in the life of the newly formed Azerbaijani state and had a positive effect on the growth of its political prestige. The Istanbul press kept its readers informed. On January 12 the newspaper Zaman reported that Ali Mardan bey and the delegation would protect the interests of Azerbaijan at the Paris Peace Conference. It detailed Topchibashov’s biography and four-month mission to Istanbul, noting that he had been advocating for the political rights of Russian Turks against tsarist persecution for about thirty years. Despite unfavorable political conditions, Ali Mardan bey worked hard for his people during his stay in Istanbul.18 Of great importance was Topchibashov’s conversation with Iranian foreign minister Mushavir-ul Mamalek (Ali Qoli khan Ansari). It should be noted that news of the establishment of the Azerbaijan Republic was received negatively. Still, Topchibashov was successful in easing tensions. He eventually set up a meeting with the foreign minister. “I came to see him and found the poet Danesh bey there, who came from Persian Azerbaijan. The minister cordially greeted me: I met you donkey’s years back: I was your guest in Baku. . . . Thus I remember a pleasant company of Muslim intellectuals.”19 On January 11 and 15 Ali Mardan bey had two more meetings with the Iranian foreign minister. Ali Qoli khan again confirmed recognition of the Caucasian republics by Iran, saying that they could provide certain guarantees against the future Russia. Topchibashov expressed his gratitude and added that an Iranian representative had noted earlier that the state of Azerbaijan had been established under pressure from Turkey, which allegedly tried to separate Iranian Azerbaijan from Iran. Ali Qoli khan associated this misunderstanding with the name “Azerbaijan”: Until recently our territory with Tabriz as its center has been called “Azerbaijan.” The problem is how are you going to preserve your independence? Your neighbors are Armenians, Georgians, and all of them are your enemies. Entente members are unlikely to sympathize with you because of Turkey.20 He was doubtful about a possible confederation with Georgians and especially with Armenians, who now had powerful patrons and were unlikely to agree to a federation, being concerned about their former kingdom. Ali Mardan bey said that Armenians wanted much but were unlikely to gain anything. When the foreign minister hinted that Iran also had a claim on Azerbaijan based on “its historical rights,” Topchibashov rejected this, saying that Azerbaijan had even more powerful historical rights. In the end the Iranian minister conceded some historical realities, such as the sufferings of Muslims: All are outraged against us. Look at what is happening with Turkey. . . . If we fail to be at one with each other, we shall be doomed to death and extinction.

Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul  127 First Russians in the Caucasus then Georgians and Armenians (all of whom are Christians but are nonetheless hostile to each other) are sure to eat us up. Therefore we must restore trust between us. We have not achieved it so far.21 On January 16 Ali Mardan bey was visited by Avetis Agharonian, chair of the Armenian National Council and head of the Armenian delegation at the Paris Peace Conference. Agharonian told him of the latest developments in the South Caucasus, the Armenian-Georgian war, and Azerbaijani-Armenian relations, stressing that the Georgians were intolerable. He pointed out that the Armenians were being victimized in Tiflis because of war in Lori, Georgia. Agharonian denied the Georgians’ suspicion that the Armenians were laying claims on Tiflis: “Armenians will leave it, and in that case the city will turn into an ordinary Georgian hamlet and become desolate.” As for relations with Azerbaijanis, there were many unsolved questions. Armenians were afraid of coming to Baku because of clashes between Armenians and Muslims. Agharonian favored peaceful resolution of the relations between the two peoples. The Caucasian federation was a complex issue. Georgian leader Akakii Chkhenkeli noted that it would be premature to think about the federation until the republics were well established and strong. Ali Mardan bey was disappointed by this statement and by news about the clashes between the Caucasian peoples.22

The Versailles conference and obstacles in the path of the Azerbaijani delegates On January  20 the Azerbaijani delegation arrived in Istanbul. Topchibashov would now head the delegation instead of Hajinskii. At the first meeting of the delegation on January  22 new members were chosen: Topchibashov as head; Hajinskii, Aghayev, and Sheikhulislamov as members; Maharramov, Mehdiyev, and Hajibeyli as advisors; Ali bey Huseynzade and Marchevskii as staff members; Saffat bey Melikov and Alekber bey Topchibashov as secretaries; Ali Kafarov (French), Govhar Kafarova (English), and Hashym bey Mahammadov (French and Turkish) as interpreters; and Rashid bey Topchibashov as private secretary to Ali Mardan bey.23 The meeting established three sectors: (1) political and national (Topchibashov, Aghayev, Huseynzade, Maharramov, Melikov, and Mahammadov); (2) economic and commercial (Hajinskii, Marchevskii, Sheikhulislamov, Mehdiyev, Topchibashov, and Kafarov); (3) propaganda and information (Topchibashov, Aghayev, Hajibeyli, Kafarova, and Huseynzade). Each delegate was responsible for certain duties. For instance, Topchibashov, along with general management, wrote the text for the memorandum. Hajinskii dealt with economic and financial materials; Huseynzade with historical-­ ethnographic issues; Sheikhulislamov with statistics, borders, and maps; Maharramov with the national economy and agriculture; Mehdiyev with trade and industry; Aghayev with political journalism; and Hajibeyli with information issues.24 When they arrived in Istanbul, Hajinskii handed over the public funds and reported on traveling expenses. Maharramov’s report to Topchibashov shows

128  Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul that 8,000 rubles were granted to delegation members for diplomatic protocol and 5,000 to advisors. In addition, 86,850 Baku cheques (fifty cheques were equal to one British pound) were allocated for the delegation’s expenses for three months.25 Hajinskii recorded thirty-six names of documents and materials: an agreement between the Azerbaijani government and the Ottoman Empire for materials on disputed Georgian-Azerbaijani and Armenian-Azerbaijani borders, an appeal to President Woodrow Wilson, an ethnographic map of the Caucasus, materials on the Bolshevik-Dashnak aggression of 1918 in Baku, Shamakhy, Goichai, Javad, and Quba uyezds against the Muslim population, and sixty-seven photographs of Shamakhy uyezd, uncounted photographs of Goichai and Kurdamir uyezds, and fourteen photographs of Baku uyezd, totaling about one hundred photographs.26 Ali Mardan bey analyzed the issues brought up in the diplomatic talks, largely of a political nature, focusing on whether Caucasian Azerbaijan wanted to live an independent political life and was ready to do so. If so, what strata of the population were opposed? Was Azerbaijan prepared for a republican form of government? What was the country’s attitude to the Caucasian or Transcaucasian Confederation? What was Azerbaijanis’ attitude to the Russian affiliation? Did they agree to remain part of the Russian Federative Republic or to be a protectorate of another state? Was it possible now to declare the neutrality of Azerbaijan?27 These issues were discussed at a meeting of the delegation on February 10. The practice of recent months led Ali Mardan bey to believe that every member of the delegation should be prepared to answer these decisive questions. He summed up the issues: The questions were brought up clearly, and there are no two ways about one of them: Azerbaijan must be independent and maintain its sovereignty. If you are asked, what do you want? The reply is that we want to be free and independent in our own territory. These words are to be engraved on our banner, and we must proceed fearlessly. If we give in on this, we shall lose everything and gain nothing. In my view, Azerbaijan should be independent in every sense of the word. It is incumbent upon us to do our utmost and gain the maximum possible.28 Topchibashov stated that the republican form of government was the best. The people had a constitutional right to establish a federation with neighboring states, to be subjects of a federation following the example of Switzerland. He wanted independence for the Caucasus, foremost for Azerbaijan. He opposed any foreign affiliation: “any protectorate is a peculiar form of dependence. I oppose any protectorate; if no other option is possible, I would choose a weak state like Iran, not a strong one. In so doing, we must declare that we want to be neutral. Thus we declare that we treat everybody without bias.”29 To sum up the debates, Topchibashov noted that the first question had an irrefutable answer, while the question of affiliation would have to be addressed again. On February 12 the debates continued. Topchibashov summed up: “The situation I referred to four months ago now has changed. . . . We had two approaches

Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul  129 to Azerbaijan: unification and autonomy. As for us, our situation also becomes different as the political conjuncture changes.” It was very difficult to be independent in a hostile environment. The effort to achieve the independent existence of Azerbaijan necessitated “the creation of the federation and confederation of Caucasian peoples.”30 Ali Mardan bey’s statements sounded timely and opportune in light of the future independence of Azerbaijan. The enemy referred to by Ali Mardan bey was quite near. The morning after the arrival of the Azerbaijanis in Istanbul, most French-language newspapers, especially the Armenian newspaper Renaissance, presented Ahmed bey Aghayev as a journalist who had opposed the Allies and fought against the Entente in the Turkish parliament. This campaign against raised doubts about him among the Allies in Istanbul that were not dispelled, despite countermeasures by Topchibashov and Hajinskii, Aghayev’s Karabagh origin, the necessity of his joining the Azerbaijani parliamentary delegation, and the letter of guarantee from Gen. William Thomson. British and French representatives in Istanbul openly declared: “We do not advise collaboration with him. He is persona non grata.”31 All errors of the Party of Union and Progress and the cabinet of Talaat and Enver were imputed to Aghayev. Renaissance announced that the Azerbaijani and Georgian delegations were “undesirable.”32 The Paris Peace Conference opened on January 18, 1919, at the Versailles palace. Poincaré, the president of France, made a brief speech, and French prime ministry Georges Clemenceau was elected president of the conference. Robert Lansing (United States), David Lloyd George (Great Britain), Vittorio Orlando (Italy), and Saionji Kimmochi (Japan) were elected vice-presidents of the conference and a “tripartite organization” was established, consisting of Clemenceau, Lloyd George, and Wilson. At first, Wilson’s “14 points” were adopted as the basis of forthcoming debates. Most of the conference work would be done by the Council of Ten, which included Wilson and Robert Lansing, British prime minister Lloyd George and foreign minister Arthur James Balfour, Clemenceau and Stéphen Pichon from France, Vittorio Orlando and Sidney Sonnino from Italy, and Nobuaki Makino and Chinda Sutemi from Japan. On February  13 the delegations of the Southern Caucasus republics were informed that two Georgian representatives, Nikolai Tckheidze and Iraklii Tsereteli, were allowed to come to Paris. Istanbul interpreted this differently. On February 14 Topchibashov protested to the French mission in Istanbul over this glaring discrimination, which replied that someday two members of the Azerbaijani delegation would be allowed into Paris. On February 18 an enlarged meeting of the Azerbaijani peace delegation was held. Topchibashov informed the delegates of obstacles on the road to Paris and the French representative’s announcement that only two delegates would go. Some members suggested dividing the delegation: one member for Paris, the others to stay in Istanbul. Others opposed this division. Hajinskii stated that there was no need to disband the delegation to please the occupation authorities of Istanbul. Sheikhulislamov suggested sending a telegram to the British government to ask for help. However, Ali Mardan

130  Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul bey said that the occupation authorities did not accept telegrams of this sort, so it would be necessary to choose two authorized persons to go to Paris or wait there indefinitely.33 On February 19 he telegraphed the Azerbaijani government: “Regretfully, I failed to leave for Paris and am waiting for permission.”34 At the next session on February 28 the delegation decided to act jointly with delegations from other countries who had not been allowed to go to Paris.35 However, it later became clear that the denial of visas had a political background. On March 5 Ali Mardan bey wrote that going to Paris at first seemed to be the easiest way to resolve the problem. The most difficult technical issue was embarking on a steamer for Marseilles. However, his talks with the British and French missions, analysis of the situation in British headquarters, and other personal visits showed that the problem was political.36 Professor Tadeusz Swietochowski wrote: “Unlike their neighbors, they [Azerbaijanis] lacked support comparable to the Armenophile movement in the West or Georgian Mensheviks’ connections with international socialism.”37 In view of the French protectorate over Armenians, relations with the British gave Azerbaijanis hopes of success. The British Empire showed great interest. When he met Admiral Richard Webb in Istanbul, Topchibashov emphasized that Great Britain must be interested in Azerbaijan’s independence. Azerbaijan protected British interests in Iran against threats from the north. Its geographical position was the best reason to recognize its independence. Many Azerbaijanis were confident that the interests of this small country and Great Britain coincided. The admiral advised Ali Mardan bey to maintain peace in the Caucasus and wait for the decision of the Paris Peace Conference. The Azerbaijan Republic had not yet been recognized officially, so all talks would be of a private nature. Nevertheless, the admiral promised to help the Azerbaijani delegates.38 Further meetings with British representatives brought no essential results. On March 6 the British government said that it had no objections to the Azerbaijani delegation’s participation in the Paris Peace Conference. It would be necessary to obtain visas from the French government.39 However, France kept silent. Besides the Azerbaijani delegates, the Don region, Kuban, the North Caucasus Union, and parts of Ukraine and Georgia had delegations in Istanbul. These delegations naturally began collaborating, especially over visas to Paris. The commission chaired by Topchibashov drew up a joint memorandum, noting that “Peoples inhabiting Ukraine, the Don region, Kuban, the Northern Caucasus, and Azerbaijan as parts of the former Russian Empire, after the capture of the central power in Russia by Bolsheviks on October 25, 1917, have declared their independence and formed independent governments, which have been registered with all powers.” The governments of these countries had formed delegations, registered them with all necessary powers, and sent them to the Paris Peace Conference. “To our greatest regret, we are still in Constantinople, some delegations more than one month . . . we are respectfully addressing the representatives of the Entente with our collective request to be afforded an opportunity for all members of the delegations to leave Constantinople for Paris.”40

Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul  131 In early March the memorandum was handed to Admiral Webb, who promised to negotiate with the French commissar, Admiral Jean François Charles Amet. On March 5 a mixed delegation visited the Italian and American commissariats. The unprecedented stubbornness of French political circles in not recognizing the newly formed independent states obviously resulted from the political influence of chauvinist Russian émigrés. With a heavy heart, Ali Mardan bey wrote: “Our delegation not only was not allowed to attend the conference but was not even let into Paris, as if we are Germans, Austrians, Hungarians, Bulgarians, and Turks.”41 On March 6 the British commissariat of Istanbul informed Ali Mardan bey that it might be possible to arrange for the Azerbaijani delegation to travel to Paris and discuss the issue only with the French.42 British representative M. Holler asked: “Why don’t you get on with Armenians?” Ali Mardan bey cited the March events. When Holler replied that Armenians claimed the opposite, Topchibashov stressed that the Azerbaijani delegation needed to present its explanations at the conference.43 This was illustrative of the behind-the-scene deals in regard to Paris visas. Meanwhile a special commission of thirty experts on the conference’s decision to explore the political and economic situation in the south of Russia was established. The commission, led by American colonel Benjamin Moore, headed for the Caucasus. On March 3 Topchibashov and Hajinskii visited Moore in Istanbul to discuss the current situation. He showed interest in the following questions: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Is it safe to say that Caucasian Azerbaijan sincerely wishes to live an independent economic and political life? If so, do strata of the population support or oppose this idea? Can a republican form of government be established? Can the Transcaucasian or Caucasian Federation be established? Is a Russian affiliation possible, such as becoming a part or a protectorate of the Russian Federative Republic? Could Azerbaijan become a protectorate of another state? At what price? Is it possible to raise the question of Azerbaijan’s temporary or permanent neutrality?44

These questions were discussed on February 10 by the Azerbaijani delegates, who formulated an integrated platform. In fact, Topchibashov had already answered the first two questions in the affirmative in the memorandum drafted for the peace conference. Under current circumstances it would be unrealistic to form a federation or confederation in Transcaucasia. The problem was that the contracting parties, ignoring objective reality, were supportive of the exorbitant aspirations of Armenians to establish “Great Armenia” at the expense of Turkey and Azerbaijan. Topchibashov made it clear that whoever was in power in Russia, Azerbaijan had declared its independence, formed its own parliament and government, and would never become part of Russia. Azerbaijan did not object to a US protectorate provided that it was based on Wilson’s 14 points.45 Azerbaijan’s neutrality was directly related to

132  Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul stability in Transcaucasia. Permanent neutrality was possible if no external danger threatened Azerbaijan and its independence was recognized by the great powers. The diplomatic mission led by Moore was going to Baku, so Topchibashov and Hajinskii submitted a report about this meeting to the government.46 As matters stood, the Azerbaijani delegation decided on March 15 to appeal to the chair of the Paris Peace Conference. The French representative wrote to Ali Mardan bey that the situation now had changed, so it was necessary to appeal to the French government. The Azerbaijani delegates linked this change to pressure from French general Franchet d’Espèrey. On March 21 this letter was sent again to Paris under the signature of Topchibashov and Mahammad Maharramov as secretary of the delegation.47 It explained that the Azerbaijan Republic had proclaimed its sovereignty on May 28, 1918, with a population of four million and a territory of 100,000 square kilometers. The government of fourteen ministers was active under the leadership of the parliament. To defend the country’s interests, a special commission composed of members of parliament and government leaders had been set up to attend the peace conference. As the delegation was leaving Baku for Paris, it obtained guarantees from General Thomson and a letter of recommendation. On January 20 the delegates arrived in Istanbul and remained there, despite all efforts, awaiting their visas for France. Representatives of the Northern Caucasian peoples had already received visas and were involved in the work of various commissions. However, Caucasus-related economic, territorial, and border disputes could not be resolved without the participation of Azerbaijani representatives. After their half-year heroic struggle with Bolshevik aggression and believing in the great principles of President Wilson, the Azerbaijanis believed that they would be heard. The letter asked the chair of the Paris Peace Conference to help the Azerbaijani delegation in Istanbul to attend the conference. Copies of the appeal were distributed among the leaders of the United States, England, France, and Italy.48

Arrival of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Paris The French government had not objected to some delegates in mid-March: first Hajinski then Sheikhulislamov and Hajibeyli.49 However, Topchibashov’s name was not included in the list. The delegation initially refused to go without him, but all its efforts were in vain. The delegates had to address the Allies in Istanbul. On March 27 American commissar Lewis Heck declared that the American mission saw no obstacles in obtaining visas for France.50 On March 29 Italian commissar Serezoline wrote that the high commissioner of Italy also had no objection to the Azerbaijani delegation’s going to Paris.51 Everything depended on the French. While high commissioner Colonel Foulon allowed some members of the Azerbaijani delegation to go to Paris on March 15,52 deputy high commissioner Seon on March 25 referred to the French Foreign Ministry’s refusal to allow the delegation to go to Paris and offered no further comments.53 On March 29 Ali Mardan bey reported that after this refusal Hajinskii, Hajibeyli, and Maharramov had asked British representatives to assist them in getting visas

Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul  133 to Paris or at least London. Holler, a British representative, promised to discuss the matter with Duparé, a French representative, and pledged to send the delegation to London or if possible to Paris.54 On March  28 Topchibashov visited French general Franchet d’Espèrey, ­commander-in-chief of the Allied forces in the East and former head of combat operations during the war. The general promised to assist and fulfilled his promise.55 “Upon d’Espèrey’s recommendation, I visited Duparé on March 31. It turned out that three of us would be allowed to visit Paris.” When the French gave permission to Hajinskii, Maharramov, and Hajibeyli to visit Paris, the Azerbaijani delegation protested against denial of permission for several of its members to visit Paris.56 The new situation in regard to the visa problem was thoroughly discussed on March  29. At this time all delegations going to Paris had already left Istanbul except for the Azerbaijanis. Documents clearly demonstrated that the purpose of the French procrastination was to keep Topchibashov out of Paris.57 Hajinskii wrote a letter to Mahammad Yusif Jafarov, permanent representative of Azerbaijan in Tiflis, noting that certain circles had done their best to besmirch Aghayev’s reputation and now were seeking to cast slurs upon Topchibashov by openly saying that he could not be admitted to Paris. “All these are French dirty tricks. Both the British and the Americans have nothing against our trip to Paris and participation in the conference in a body.” Owing to these late March developments, the question of replacing Topchibashov as chair arose. Hajinski said that no delegate in Istanbul was ready to replace Ali Mardan bey. Jafarov and Khalil bey Khasmamedov, as former diplomats, should be included in the delegation: “I would not recommend Fatali khan Khoiskii, for Paris will charge him with organizing the Armenian slaughter as head of the government.”58 Mahammad bey Efendiyev, the Azerbaijani consul to Batum, informed his government that Ali Mardan bey was not allowed in Paris because of an Armenian smear campaign: “The Allied forces’ mass media, especially the French, in Istanbul are full of malicious attacks on Ahmed bey and our respected Ali Mardan bey.”59 The campaign against Aghayev and Topchibashov was not random. These leaders were famed for their broad outlook, natural democratism, and ability to analyze the national question in the Caucasus in contrast to narrow-minded Armenian nationalism. Both Aghayev and Ali Mardan bey were participants in the peace talks in Tiflis in 1906 that dealt with the Armenian-Muslim massacre in 1905. Owing to the furor incited by the Armenian and Russian pro-Armenian press in 1915 over events in the eastern provinces of Turkey, Topchibashov personally visited those areas and informed the world about the true goals of the Armenian propaganda. Hence Armenians resorted to dirty tricks in an effort to destroy him, weaken the Azerbaijani delegation intellectually, and damage it morally. Hajinskii telegraphed Baku that the French Embassy was not going to let the full Azerbaijani delegation into Paris. Khoiskii sent a telegram dated March 30 to Istanbul. He asked for information about the current situation and gave the delegation the tasks of gaining independence for the so-called Southwestern Caucasian Republic in the provinces of Kars and Batum and getting General Denikin

134  Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul expelled from the North Caucasus Republic: “We ask you to defend Garabagh, Nakhchivan, and Surmeli from Armenia and Akhaltsikh, Akhalkalaki, and Borchaly from Georgia.”60 Early in April the delegation agreed to send three members to Paris: Hajinskii, Hajibeyli, and Maharramov.61 Ali Mardan bey wired Baku on April 7: “The delegation cannot leave. Only Hajinskii, Jeyhun, and Maharramov have been authorized. I have to stay here. Other delegates are seeking to go to London.”62 Hopeful of upholding the rights of Azerbaijan, the delegates did their best to attain their country’s political goals. They appealed to the chair of the peace conference and leaders of the United States, Great Britain, France, and Italy. On April 8 the text of a telegram had been prepared and circulated: “The Azerbaijani delegation . . . is still here without visas to enter Paris.” It pointed out that the Armenian, Georgian, and North Caucasian delegations were already in Paris. The telegram asked for assistance in receiving visas for Paris to attend the peace conference.63 That same day Ali Mardan bey sent a letter to the extraordinary representative of the French Republic in Paris, with the same request. He rejected the absurd excuse of supposed technical reasons for the delay and stressed the illegality of the obstacles put in the way of the Azerbaijani delegation, which had appropriate mandates from the parliament and government. The technical office of the French Foreign Ministry reported that this delay was not caused by technical complications. The three delegates allowed by Gen. Franchet d’Espèrey also faced numerous difficulties. The choice of three candidates by the French authorities, not by the delegation, was seen as a sign of disrespect for the Azerbaijani parliament and government. The delegation insisted on its independent right to decide which members would go to the Paris Peace Conference.64 It turned out that the British did not want to let Topchibashov into London and accepted only Sheikhulislamov and Mehdiyev. On April 12 the French office replied to the April 8 letter, saying that only the three delegates were allowed to go to Paris. After discussing the situation, the delegation decided to divide into several groups. Hajinskii, Maharramov, and Hajibeyli would go to Paris; Sheikhulislamov and Mehdiyev would go to London; Topchibashov and other personnel as well as the technical staff would stay in Istanbul. Wherever they were, they had to act on the delegation’s behalf. Upon arrival in Paris, the three delegates would attempt to obtain visas for the whole delegation.65 After discussing Topchibashov’s telegrams and a report by special courier A. Aliyev, the Azerbaijani government passed a resolution appointing Hajinskii as head of the peace delegation and sent a radiogram to Istanbul on April 17: The government suggests that members of the delegation who have a visa should not linger and should reach Paris as soon as possible. If you cannot go to the Paris conference, the government offers to assign the chairmanship to Hajinskii. New people will come in a day or two to strengthen the delegation.66

Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul  135 However, the radiogram proved to be unnecessary. The Azerbaijani delegation was urgently called to Paris in connection with President Wilson’s intention to raise the Azerbaijani question in Versailles.67 On April 14, 1919, US secretary of state Robert Lansing had been handed a brief survey on Baku oil that indicated American interest in the Caucasus.68 Based on Topchibashov’s appeal to President Wilson, Lansing sent a letter to French foreign minister Pichon asking him to issue a visa to the Azerbaijani delegation.69 All members of the delegation except for technical personnel were at last provided with visas. Notes in Topchibashov’s diplomatic passport indicate that a joint Allied control bureau in Istanbul gave him a visa on April 15. The Azerbaijani delegation left Istanbul on April  22,70 while the technical personnel headed by Alekber bey returned home. On May  2 a ship plying the Istanbul-Salonika-Piraeus-Messina-Naples route arrived in Italy. Following a four-day wait, the Azerbaijani delegation left Rome on May 7 and arrived in Paris on May 9. Ali Mardan bey’s passport indicates that he crossed the French border on May  8.71 The Azerbaijani delegation’s arrival in Paris to discuss the aggravated Caucasian relations showed the government’s wish to be part of the free world. The Azerbaijani delegates were accommodated first at the Terminus-Saint Lazarus, then at the Claridge Hotel, and got down to active work on May 12. Ali Mardan bey sent a report to the French Foreign Ministry about the composition of the delegation and its exact address.72 Thus, the three-month struggle of the Azerbaijani delegation in Istanbul achieved results. The delegation, led by Topchibashov, was allowed to take part in the Versailles Peace Conference as the result of effective steps aimed at removing artificial obstacles. The delegates reached the French capital at the height of stormy debates at the conference over the political results of military achievements in World War I. As head of the Azerbaijani delegation, Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov had one major goal: to seek recognition of his country’s independence by the international community.

Notes 1 Diplomatic Passport, the Foreign Ministry Handed Topchibashev, January  7, 1919, AAMT, carton no 3, 20. 2 From Commanding British Troops in Baku, Major General Thomson to the Military Attache of the British Embassy in Paris. Letter of Recommendation to Azerbaijani Peace Delegation, January 3, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 19. 3 Letter from Ziyadkhanov to Topchibashev, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 1. 4 Resolution of the Council of Ministers on Allocation of Funds for the Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Relation to Sending Extraordinary Delegation to Europe and America, November, 1918. SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 147, p. 34. 5 See: Topchibashi Ali Maradan bey. Biography, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 16. 6 Letter from Jeyhun Hajibeyli to Uzeyir Hajibeyli, 1919, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 1, v. 65, p. 5. 7 Conversation of Topchibashev with Diplomatic Representative of America Mr. Heck, January 6, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 45.

136  Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul 8 Conversation of Topchibashev with van der Does de Willebois, Holland Representative in Turkey, January 10, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, pp. 52–53. 9 Diplomaticheskii slovar. Vol. 3. Moscow: Nauka, 1986, 6–7. 10 Conversation of Topchibashev with Paul Miliukov, December 7, 1918, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 34. 11 Conversation of Topchibashev with Sergei Sazonov, January 6, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 42. 12 Conversation of Topchibashev with Sergei Sazonov, January 5, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 39. 13 Ibid., p. 40. 14 Ibid., pp. 39–41. 15 Conversation of Topchibashev with Sergei Sazonov, January 6, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, pp. 42–44. 16 Conversation of Topchibashev with Savitskii, January 7, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 44. 17 Notes of Topchibashev about the Content of Conversation with the Turkish Sultan, January 10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 158, p. 1. 18 Information Newspaper Zaman Admission Topchibashev of the Turkish Sultan, January 12, 1919, SARA, f. 970, f. 1, v. 158, p. 3. 19 Conversation of Topchibashev with Ali Qoli khan Ansari, January  9, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, pp. 50–51. 20 Conversation of Topchibashev with Ali Qoli khan Ansari, January 11, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, p. 55. 21 Conversation of Topchibashev with Ali Qoli khan Ansari, January 15, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, pp. 58–59. 22 Conversation of Topchibashev with Agharonian, January  16, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 151, pp. 60–62. 23 Minutes of the meeting held by the Azerbaijani Delegation leaving for the Paris Peace Conference, January 22, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8/1, 1–2. 24 Ibid., 3–4. 25 Financial Report Prepared Maharramov, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 1–3. 26 Inventory of Materials for Peace Delegation Leaving for the Peace Conference of the Peoples in 1919, January, 1919, SARA, f. 3172, r. 1, v. 14, p. 2. 27 Questions about the Political Life of Azerbaijan Prepared by Topchibashev, February 10, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 1–2. 28 Minutes of the Meeting Held by the Azerbaijani Delegation, February  10, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 5–6. 29 Ibid., 6–7. 30 Minutes of the Meeting Held by the Azerbaijani Delegation, February  12, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 3–4. 31 Letter of Hajinskii to Khan Khoyskii, January 27, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 147, p. 3. 32 Alexander Raievskii, Musavatskoie pravitelstvo na Versalskoy konferensii. Donesenia predsedatelia azerbaidzhanskoi musavatskoi delegatsii. Baku: AzGNII, 1930, 26. 33 Minutes of the Meeting Held by the Azerbaijan Delegation, February 18, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–3. 34 Telegram from Topchibashev to Khan Khoyskii, February 19, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 1. 35 Minutes of the Meeting Held by the Azerbaijan Delegation, February 28, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–4. 36 Raievskii, Musavatskoie pravitelstvo na Versalskoi konferensii, 25. 37 Swietochowski, Russian Azerbaijan, 154. 38 Letter from Topchibashev to Khan Khoyskii, March 29, 1919, SARA, ф. 894, оп. 10, д. 66, л. 9.

Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul  137 39 From Lieutenant Colonel General Staff “I,” British Saloniki Force to Topchibasheff, March 6, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 25. 40 Memorandum of the Delegations from the Ukraine, Don, Kuban, Northern Caucasus and Azerbaijan to Paris Peace Conference and the Representatives of the Allies in Istanbul, March, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 1–5. 41 Information from Topchibashev to Khan Khoyskii, March 5, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 152, p. 16. 42 Minutes of the Meeting Held by the Azerbaijan Delegation, March 6, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 1. 43 Minutes of the Meeting Held by the Azerbaijan Delegation, March 7, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 3. 44 Letter from Benjamin B. Moore to the Chairman of the Azerbaijani Peace Delegation, March 3, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 68, p. 21. 45 Raievskii, Musavatskoie pravitelstvo na Versalskoi konferensii, 29. 46 Report from Topchibashev and Hajinskii to Khan Khoyskii, March, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 68, p. 21. 47 Président de la Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan Ali Mardan Toptchibacheff, Secrétaire Mahomed Maheramoff – Monsieur le Président de la Conférence de la Paix. Constantinople, le 21 mars 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 9. 48 See: Président de la Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan Ali Mardan Toptchibacheff, Secrétaire Mahomed Maheramoff – Monsieur le Président des EtatsUnis d’Amérique. (La même lettre a été envoyé à M. Clemenceau). Constantinople, le 21 mars 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 832, folio 40. 49 Information from Topchibashev to Khan Khoyskii, March  17, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r.  10, v. 66, p. 11. 50 Letter from American Commissar Lewis Heck to Topchibashev, March  27, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 29. 51 Letter from Serezoline, Representative of the Italian Commissariat to Topchibashev, March 29, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 30. 52 Letter from Colonel Foulon to Topchibashev, March 15, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 27. 53 Letter from Seon, Deputy Chairman of the High Commissioner High Commissioner to Topchibashev, March 25, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 28. 54 Information from Topchibashev to Khan Khoyskii, March  29, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 66, p. 11. 55 Letter from Topchbasheff to General Franchet d’Esperey, March  29, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 67–68. 56 Letter from Topchibashev to Khan Khoyskii, April, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 4. 57 See: Minutes of the Meeting held by the Azerbaijan Delegation, March  29, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–3. 58 Letter from Hajinskii to Jafarov, March 30, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 141, p. 6. 59 Letter from Mahammad bey Efendiyev to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, April  3, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 141, p. 6. 60 Telegram from Khan Khoyskii to Topchibashev, March 30, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 141, p. 10. 61 Minutes of the Meeting Held by the Azerbaijan Delegation, April  6, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–3. 62 Telegram from Topchibashev to Khan Khoyskii, April 7, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 1. 63 Telegram from Topchibashev to heads of the Governments of the USA, Great Britain, France and Italy, April 8, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 140, p. 11. 64 Letter from Topchibashev to Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Minister of France in Istanbul, April 8, 1919, AAMT, carton no 8, 1–4. 65 Minutes of the Meeting held by the Azerbaijan Delegation, April 12, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 5.

138  Dark days of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Istanbul 66 Radiogram from Topchibashev to Khan Khoyskii, April 17, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 70, p. 1. 67 Trudy Instituta istorii AN Az.SSR. Vol. 13. Baku: Elm, 1958, 345. 68 Lettre du 14 avril 1919 à M. Lansing Ministre des Affaires Etrangères des Etats-Unis d’Amérique, AMAÉF, vol. 832, folio 52. 69 Letter of Lansing to M. Pichon, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 24. 70 Visa in the Diplomatic Passport Topchibashev, April 15, 1919, AAMT, carton no 3, 2. 71 See: Report Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Minister of the Azerbaijan Republic Topchibashev, 1919, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 3. 72 Président de la Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan Toptchibacheff – Ministère des Affaires Etrangères Service des Affaires Russes, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 27–28.

9 The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris

When they arrived in Paris, the Azerbaijani delegates focused on researching the political climate there. The victorious countries laid down rigid conditions for the peace treaty because some European countries were obviously dissatisfied with the Entente policy. In spring 1919 a wave of strikes broke out in England, France, Italy, Germany, and other countries. Socialist leaders protested against the exorbitant demands of the Entente and voiced their discontent with the conference. This deepening political crisis meant that the Entente members were not focused on the interests of newly formed countries such as Azerbaijan.1 The great powers were initially interested in resolving the Russian question. After that, they could consider the mutual claims of the newly formed republics. Paris was full of Russian emigrants. White Guardists and others formed various political parties. All the former ambassadors of the Russian Empire abroad gathered in Paris, as Ali Mardan bey reported to the republican government: Despite radical differences in their political views and directions, all Russians are adherents of a “united and indivisible Russia.” Their slogan was reviewed by the Russian federative democratic republic and the Constituent Assembly, which decided the destiny of the separate parts of the former empire and their relations with future Russia, which was thought of as a great power with its fitting place in the world.2 France’s stance on Russia was not coincidental. Restoration of the Russian Empire was directly linked with France’s desire to recover the bonds of the tsarist government. Some 1,500,000 French rentiers wanted to be paid back. In addition, the return of Russia as France’s traditional ally would enable French political circles to restrain “warlike” Germany in the center of Europe.

An unpremeditated encounter with President Wilson The Azerbaijani delegation started to work on May 12. The first task was to complete the “Memorandum of the Republic of Caucasian Azerbaijan to the Paris Peace Conference” begun in Istanbul, so visits to other delegations and other minor matters were “temporarily postponed.”3 The document was translated into

140  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris the conference’s languages, including French and English, then published as a booklet, which included a colored map. The delegates also worked on “Ethnic and Anthropological Composition of Caucasian Azerbaijan” and “Economic and Financial Status of Caucasian Azerbaijan” for Western readers.4 A rough copy of each document was ready on June 1, 1919, to be sent to participants in the peace conference and later published as booklets. Ali Mardan bey met with delegations of Poland, Georgia, the North Caucasus Republic, Armenia, and Iran in May. Following the talks, they decided to set up an economic council of Caucasian republics. The Georgians and other mountain peoples agreed to unite with Azerbaijan, but the Armenians refused, saying that they would join only after the integration of Turkish and Caucasian Armenians and the establishment of a united Armenia. On May 19 the British ambassador to Paris, Lord Derby (Edward George Villiers Stanley), received the Azerbaijani delegates, who had sent him a copy of the memorandum.5 On May 23 the delegates met with Sir Louis Mallet of the British delegation and exchanged views on the political, military, and economic situation and the status of Allied troops in Azerbaijan. Starting in 1919, the Azerbaijani government struggled to end the British ­general-governorship in Baku, as Topchibashov had been instructed. The government also asked the British command not to interfere in the financial affairs of the republic and thus avoid dual rule, which made it impossible to govern. The Foreign Ministry protested to the European countries and the United States about violations of the rights of the Azerbaijani Republic and published materials in the European press regarding interference in the internal affairs of Azerbaijan.6 Mallet promised to assist the Azerbaijanis in every possible way. It later became known that Great Britain had already held secret consultations with the Allies about the withdrawal of British troops from the Caucasus, although the Azerbaijani delegation was not informed of this. However, this decision was not final: England was going to stay in Azerbaijan for some time and keep control over the Baku-Batum railway. The question of an American mandate in Transcaucasia had been discussed as far back as April by various commissions at the peace conference. On May 2, 1919, on the initiative of President Wilson, the United States, Great Britain, France, and Italy held the first hearing on the Caucasus question.7 On May 5 a meeting of the Council of Four suggested sending troops to Armenia. Wilson had no objection. On May 14 a resolution was adopted to provide America with a mandate to rule Armenia and Istanbul. Discussions over mandates for the Straits and the Caucasus intensified US interest in talks with the Caucasian republics. The American delegation in Versailles inquired about the views of the newly formed Caucasian states. President Wilson received the Azerbaijani delegation on May  28, the first anniversary of Azerbaijan’s independence. Topchibashov was received by American diplomat Henry Morgenthau, former US ambassador to the Ottoman Empire and acting deputy chair of US aid in the Middle East, to discuss the forthcoming negotiations between Wilson and the Azerbaijani delegation.8 Topchibashov noted: “The most momentous event was the reception of our

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  141 delegation by President Wilson, for he, like other heads of the Entente states, does not receive delegations personally.”9 Topchibashov told Wilson that Azerbaijanis were happy to welcome the president of America, the promoter of principles of peaceful coexistence and the right of nations, including smaller peoples, to self-determination. The delegates had made the long trip to express their gratitude to Wilson for Azerbaijan’s independence and explain the true situation, as “European and American newspapers often provide false, perverted, and distorted information about our country.” He hoped that Azerbaijan would be admitted to the League of Nations. “We are confident that like other peoples we shall be assisted based on your great principles.” Ali Mardan bey vowed that they would never recognize “Kolchak and Denikin or any other pretender to power in the territory of the old Russian Empire. We recognize and shall recognize our Azerbaijani parliament and our own government.”10 He told Wilson about the possibility of establishing a confederation of Azerbaijanis, Armenians, Georgians, and other mountain peoples and gave him the delegation’s memorandum, which set for their demands.11 As the memorandum pointed out, even though the Azerbaijanis of tsarist Russia were exempt from military service they nevertheless fought on the side of the Russian Empire, led by Gen. Khan Nakhichivanskii: that is, on the side of the Allies. Generals Mehmandarov, Shikhlinskii, and Usubov and another two hundred officers became famous for their heroism. Azerbaijan was also actively involved in satisfying the medical needs of the Allies by providing their armies with hospitals and medical institutions. The Azerbaijanis would never welcome the invasion of Bolshevik troops and had already suffered numerous losses in fighting them. The memorandum noted the lack of geographical and ethnographic ties: Azerbaijan was separated from Russia by the Caucasus Mountains; “in much the same way our people have nothing in common with Moscow and the Slav people of Russia.”12 The Azerbaijanis were confident that their national needs would be met by the conference and by President Wilson as a guarantor of peace and security worldwide. The delegation had six demands: (1) recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence; (2) extension of “Wilson’s principles” to Azerbaijan; (3) admission of the Azerbaijani delegates to the peace conference; (4) accepting Azerbaijan into the League of Nations; (5) military aid to Azerbaijan from the United States; (6) establishment of diplomatic relations between the Azerbaijani Republic and the United States.13 If these demands were satisfied, Topchibashov even promised to pay off Azerbaijan’s share of tsarist Russia’s external debt. Wilson expressed his satisfaction with meeting the Azerbaijani delegates and learning about the country. However, the question of the recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence remained unresolved: (1) Americans did not want the world to be split into small pieces; (2) It would be appropriate for Azerbaijan to join a Caucasian confederation; (3) The confederation might, if the League of Nations so wished, be patronized by a great power; (4) The Azerbaijani question could not be resolved before the Russian question.14 As a result of these talks, a special American mission sent to the Caucasus to analyze the local situation reached Baku in October 1919.

142  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris Several factors account for Wilson’s cautious attitude. First, scholars are unanimous that Wilson supported the Armenian delegation’s position and received a lot of false information from Armenian missionaries.15 Second, the meeting fell on May  28, the anniversary of Azerbaijan’s independence, but the timing as a whole was not propitious. The Allied leaders, including Wilson, were confused by intensification of the activities of the White Guard generals – Kolchak, Denikin, and Nikolai Yudenich – in spring 1919. Third, two days before the meeting, a session of the Council of Four had approved recognition of Kolchak’s government and sent him a note to that effect signed by Wilson, Lloyd George, Clemenceau, Orlando, and Saionji Kimmochi. Despite these complications, talks between Wilson and the Azerbaijani delegates were of great political importance. Leaders of other Allied powers were expected to follow Wilson. Topchibashov reported: We have made some progress and we are hopeful that our delegation will be received by the chair of the peace conference [Clemenceau] as well as by the premiers of England, Italy, and Japan. Now I have been informed that [British prime minister] Arthur Balfour and [Italian prime minister] Vittorio Orlando will do so.16

Azerbaijan’s demands at the peace conference Wilson’s reception of the Azerbaijani delegation was broadcast by radio on May  30, according to the French newspapers in Batum. At that time Azerbaijan was celebrating the first anniversary of its independence. During the talks on May 28 Wilson had recommended that the Azerbaijanis convey their demands to the secretariat of the peace conference. A 50-page booklet in English and French was presented to the secretariat in manuscript then published in June. The text provides historical, ethnographic, economic, and political information, indicating that the conference participants knew little or nothing of Azerbaijan. The delegation was attempting to show that the national interests of Azerbaijan were involved in each of the fourteen sections of “Claims of the Peace Delegation of the Republic of Caucasian Azerbaijan Presented to the Peace Conference in Paris.”17 The oil-bearing areas around Baku had become the fountain of life for the republic. The government of Azerbaijan had an unlimited right to the production and sale of oil. The level of oil production clearly exceeded the country’s needs, so the government was ready to sell oil on a contractual basis to countries in need of fuel. But it would never agree to cede the country’s oil fields to other countries under pressure, which might mean suicide for the republic.18 The memorandum submitted to the Versailles Peace Conference related the struggle of the Azerbaijani people against Bolshevik and Dashnak raids and their joint crimes against Muslims in Baku, Shamakhy, and other regions: More than 12,000 Muslims were victims of the bloodthirsty deeds of March  18–21 [i.e., March  30  – April  1]. Arson destroyed intellectual and

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  143 political centers of great importance from a moral point of view, such as the People’s House, the House of the Muslim Benevolent Society, the seats of all political parties, and the offices of the Muslim newspapers: Kaspii published in Russian and Achig Söz in Azerbaijanian. The most eminent Muslim political leaders were arrested and imprisoned. But the most fatal result was the rise of Bolshevist power in Baku and in the country.19 The most significant sections were descriptions of the country and its population. Azerbaijan’s indisputable territories made up 39 percent of the entire territory of the Caucasus.20 The fourteenth section made the following demands: The Peace Conference must approve of the separation of Caucasian Azerbaijan from the late Russian Empire. Azerbaijan shall form an independent state under the name Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan, within the limits shown in the accompanying map. The representatives of the delegation of the Republic of Azerbaijan shall participate in the Peace Conference and Commission; the Republic of Azerbaijan shall be admitted as a member of the League of Nations.21 The memorandum included detailed maps as well as economic, financial, ethnographical, and statistical information.22 In their first months in Paris, the Azerbaijani delegates analyzed the political processes in Versailles in expectation of an opportunity to get involved in the conference. “We have arrived here later than others. . . . We don’t know when it will be our turn to speak, but we’re hopeful of upholding the interests of our Azerbaijan.”23 Their Paris successes were not in vain. The Azerbaijani delegation made the Western public aware of the past and present of Azerbaijan as well as its dreams of independence and aspiration to join the League of Nations.

Paris anxiety over general Denikin On May  28, 1919, Azerbaijan celebrated the first anniversary of its independence. The republican press published numerous materials, stressing the role of independence in the destiny of the people. The parliament held an extraordinary session. Azerbaijan’s independence euphoria was accompanied by growing fear of the danger from Denikin, especially as Petrovsk and Derbent reportedly had been captured. Azerbaijan was facing danger from the north. During the debates on May 26, Rasulzade had reminded people that “Daghestan is the gate to Azerbaijan.”24 The threat posed by Denikin and Kolchak contributed to the concept of “united, indivisible Russia” and inspired various Russian forces to seek diplomatic support at the Versailles sessions. On May 26 leaders of the Entente states and the prime minister of Japan sent a note to Admiral Kolchak that recognized his Omsk government as the single authorized government of Russia. The Azerbaijani delegation opposed such an approach. Though sessions of the Council of Four were closed, the Paris press

144  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris caught wind of the change and began trumpeting about the impending recognition of the White Guard governments by the Allies. Тopchibashov made a statement on behalf of the delegation on May 31 that the expected recognition of Kolchak’s government as successor to the Russian Empire seriously affected the interests of the newly formed republics, including Azerbaijan. The people of Azerbaijan with their thousands of victims did not recognize any Russian government. The territory of Azerbaijan could not be part of the Russian state.25 The delegation lodged a note of protest to the chair of the peace conference and prime ministers of Entente powers against recognition of Kolchak as ruler of the former empire’s territory. The Azerbaijani government had been struggling for half a year against the Bolsheviks and had rid its territory of them, incurring great human losses.26 Ali Mardan bey stressed that for a century Azerbaijan had been under the yoke of an alien Russian regime: “regardless of the current power in Russia, Azerbaijan cannot become a part of Russia, for it recognizes the power only of its own parliament and government.”27 The recognition of Kolchak’s government roused the indignation of most delegations of the new republics, which drafted a joint note of protest, signed by Topchibashov (Azerbaijan), Jaan Poska (Estonia), Nikolai Chkheidze (Georgia), Abdul Mejid Chermoyev (the Northern Caucasus), Zigfrids Meierovics (Latvia), Anton Lushkevich (Belarus), and Grigorii Sidorenko (Ukraine). “Decisions of the state bodies of Russia cannot be applied to the independent states . . . and mutual relations between these states and Russia may be regulated only as between independent and legally qualified states.” The correspondence between the Allies and Kolchak “may be interpreted as a negation of this right. These republics respectfully ask the great power participants of the peace conference to recognize their political independence immediately.”28 The note was submitted on June  18 to President Wilson by Meierovics. Representatives of the Caucasus in Paris discussed the situation at the Claridge Hotel twice, on June 15 and 18. The first meeting was attended by representatives of Azerbaijan, Georgia, and the North Caucasus; the second by representatives of Azerbaijan and the North Caucasus.29 Both meetings noted that Denikin, like Kolchak, posed a threat to the Caucasian republics, so it was necessary to restore the status quo before the collapse of the North Caucasus Republic. “Note of the Seven Republics” and a note of protest were submitted to the peace conference on June 23. Unlike the notes of June 5 and 17, this note protested not only against Kolchak but against Denikin as well.30 Article 6 was directed against Denikin’s offensive: life in the Caucasian republics was “impeded by the military actions and menacing behavior of the Volunteer Army. Note that this army has already occupied a substantial part of the republics of the Northern Caucasus; it poses a threat to Transcaucasia as a whole.” This Volunteer Army was not supported or encouraged by the Allies, who should demand that it “withdraw from the occupied territory and respect the rights of the Caucasian Republics.”31 The representatives of the Caucasian republics asked the secretariat of the conference to establish a commission for Caucasian affairs like the Baltic commission.

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  145 On June 28 the delegations of Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Georgia, the Northern Caucasus, Azerbaijan, and Poland sent another message to the peace conference: “Today’s occupation of the territory of the Northern Caucasus by General Denikin’s army and the resulting threat to the Republics of Georgia and Azerbaijan show that the Russian reactionary forces are seeking to recolonize the newly independent states in the territory of the former Russian Empire.” They noted that the Allies had aided Denikin’s offensive though financial and military aid and protested against such interference. The delegates wanted to unite “all freedomloving peoples” and saw “a threat against one people as a threat against all.” Their right to self-determination must be decided “not by the Russian Assembly but by the peace conference: it is essential to preserve the territorial integrity of all Caucasian states and take into consideration the will of the peoples as declared by their parliaments.”32 Regrettably, this protest had no effect. It got no response from the conference or the Allies, who backed Kolchak and the Volunteer Army. As “victories” were gained over the Bolsheviks, the Allies felt growing confidence in reconstituting a unified Russia. In so doing, they ignored that the freedom and independence of minority peoples were destroyed. Suffice it to mention the indifference of the Allies to the defeat of the North Caucasus Republic.33 The real threat and alarming news from the Caucasus called for the consolidation of the Caucasus delegations. At the same time, there was no unity among the Allies in respect to Russia. Ali Mardan bey wrote that Italy and France wanted to create a united Russia, while Great Britain and the United States pretended to back this idea.34 Even while recognizing the Omsk government, they made no final decision in respect to the newly formed republics. Although the Allies refused to raise the question of recognizing their independence, individual members of the Western delegations spoke in favor of it. “The same is true of representatives of the press, deputies, economic groups, and other organizations.”35 The Azerbaijani and Georgian delegations were extremely anxious about the defeat of the North Caucasus Republic by Denikin’s army. The spring 1919 developments could have an unexpected effect on the fate of Transcaucasia. The Azerbaijani delegates told Sir Louis Mallet that “the Volunteer Army, instead of fighting against Bolsheviks, is engaged in exterminating the peaceful native population and this army, after occupation of the lands of the North Caucasian Republic, is sure to attack us [Azerbaijan].”36 In late May the Azerbaijani, Georgian, and North Caucasus delegations started talks on forming a political and economic alliance. On May 30 a joint meeting of the Azerbaijani and North Caucasus delegates was held at Chermoyev’s apartment.37 They discussed a proposal to establish a Caucasian confederation. In regard to the Georgians’ desire to discuss border issues through international arbitrage, they agreed that these differences were not deep and could be solved locally. Ali Mardan bey believed that each republic must

146  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris preserve its political independence even within the confederation. The same issue was discussed on June 15. Although no complete agreement was reached, a decision was adopted for all three governments to follow a common political course. Everybody agreed that Denikin’s advance toward Transcaucasia might have grave consequences. Hence they decided to take joint steps. The Georgian representative, Zurab Avalov, noted that this army was armed and equipped by the Entente, so it would be absurd to demand its withdrawal from the Northern Caucasus: the Caucasian republics must independently seek ways out of the impasse.38 On June  16 Azerbaijan and Georgia made a defensive anti-Denikin pact: a three-year agreement to fight jointly against any enemy that encroached on the independence of either of them.39 A telegram from the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry to the Paris Peace Conference stated that the British command considered the pact to be a key condition for the unity of Transcaucasia. Topchibashov was informed that Azerbaijan and Georgia had agreed on united actions. Upon his arrival in Istanbul, Aziz Tahirbeyov told Ali Mardan bey in Paris about the capture of Daghestan by Denikin and his army’s advance to the south.40 The Azerbaijan government’s firm political line in respect to the North Caucasian Republic, Denikin’s Volunteer Army, and cooperation with Georgia was favorably received by the delegation at Versailles. Azerbaijani politicians in Baku and Vienna acted synchronously. Topchibashov wrote: We’d like to follow this firm, resolute, and patriotic policy in everything and everywhere. We are confident that the government will stick to this line, for no middle course can be adhered to in respect to the former Russia and especially the Volunteer Army: no tempting proposals, promises, or half-hearted negotiations will help us if we are seeking to clear out all of Daghestan and farther north.41 In early July the Georgian delegates met with Col. Edward House, advisor to the US president, who agreed that it was necessary to put an end to Denikin’s advance.42 Topchibashov informed Mallet that the Volunteer Army, instead of fighting against Bolsheviks, had attacked the peaceful local population and, after seizing the territory of the North Caucasus, was going to enter Azerbaijan. Mallet replied that Denikin would not cross a demarcation line, so Georgia and Azerbaijan were not in any danger. As for the North Caucasian Republic, he advised Ali Mardan bey to meet with Professor Simpson (an expert on the East and the Caucasus), which he did that same day. Topchibashov told Simpson about Azerbaijan’s political system, its population and territory, the government and parliament, and its attitude toward Armenia and various Russian groups. He was inconsolable about the destiny of the North Caucasian Republic: North Caucasians were “in no position to form a state, for they do not constitute a single nation but split into numerous tribes.” Simpson assured him that “Daghestan is yours” and that Denikin wouldn’t come to Azerbaijan. “It is Oliver Wardrop’s mission to go there and bring instructions for the Volunteer Army and our representatives.”43

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  147

Attempts to restore an ancient patrimony on the banks of the Seine Rumors were afloat in summer 1919 that in a short while the Allied (primarily British) troops would be withdrawn from the Caucasus. The news disturbed the governments of Azerbaijan and Georgia as well as their representatives in Paris. The withdrawal of these troops would be seen by the Volunteer Army, the Russian White Guard, and members of the Russian Conference in Paris as an opportunity to reunite Russia. Following the recognition of the Omsk government by the Entente, members of the Russian Conference set up a Russian delegation representing Kolchak in the French capital. Relations between the Russian delegation and representatives of the newly independent republics were quite hostile. According to Topchibashov, their delegations maintained no relations with Russians residing here. They are indignant at our aspirations to gain independence. The worst affected are the Georgians. As for us, the Russians say that only Azerbaijani intellectuals are pushing for an independent Azerbaijan, while ordinary Azerbaijanis do not want to separate from Russia, for they allegedly love Russians. At any rate, these people firmly insist on the irksome concept of “united, indivisible Russia,” saying that they will not cede an inch of primordial Russian domains except Poland.44 Intensification of Russian political emigration and this reactionary position increased the activities of the Azerbaijani delegation. On August 19 and 24 written statements were forwarded to the chair of the peace conference and British foreign minister Arthur Balfour and again to the chair of the conference. A note of protest dated August  24 pointed out that Denikin, ignoring the demarcation line, had seized Derbent and all of Daghestan. Besides, the Caspian fleet granted to Denikin by the Entente posed a threat to the coast of Azerbaijan.45 Topchibashov raised this question in his note to Balfour: “The Volunteer Army has an opportunity to threaten the Azerbaijani Republic from the sea: it has seized part of the Caspian fleet and is now transporting troops, so tomorrow the same army may land troops on the Azerbaijani shore of the Caspian and attack coastal towns and even Baku.”46 The note asked for a meeting with Lloyd George and Balfour to clarify the situation. An identical note was sent to the French leaders, Georges Clemenceau and Stéphen Jean Marie Pichon. However, neither the French nor the British responded: “Their main representatives are abstaining from direct contacts with us . . . [but] they are still awaiting something and accepting representatives of minority, yet-unrecognized peoples.”47 On September 3 the Azerbaijani delegation in Paris received a telegram from foreign minister Mahammad Yusif Jafarov about the Volunteer Army’s activities. Denikin was ignoring the demarcation line and was unwilling to cede Derbent and Daghestan to Azerbaijan. Even worse, his troops were moving closer to the Azerbaijani borders by using the Caspian navy.48 In response to this threat, the

148  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris Azerbaijani delegation appealed to the conference leaders on August 29.49 Topchibashov sent a letter to the chair of the peace conference on September 9, which described the current situation and made three key demands: (1) the Volunteer Army cannot violate the demarcation line as set forth by the Allied command in Daghestan; (2) the Volunteer Army should immediately leave Derbent; (3) the Volunteer Army should return the Caspian fleet to Azerbaijan.50 In summer 1919 differences between the great powers reached a peak in Versailles. The economic crisis in Europe, inflation, elections in France and ­England, and the dissatisfaction of European countries and Japan with the United States all reduced interest in the peace conference. However, Clemenceau as one of the major players succeeded in preserving his position. Wilson, Lloyd George, Vittorio Orlando, Tomamaso Tittoni, Robert Lansing, Nobuaki Makino, and others abandoned Paris, leaving second-rate politicians behind them. Under these circumstances, the Entente did not want to start debates over the controversial “Russian issue.” The Paris newspapers wrote that the Russian and Turkish issues were to be addressed by the League of Nations. In reviewing these rumors, Тopchibashov pointed out: “This conference may plausibly be called far from ‘peaceful,’ ”51 as indicated by the clear position of its leaders: indifference to the destinies of minority peoples. They focused on questions of a general nature and gave general answers to specific questions; . . . They seemed to have made an appropriate decision, which has not yet been made public. Even worse, the political situation has become so much worse that the Allies are unlikely to make a definite decision over the future prospects of Russia and the areas that have split from it.52 The League of Nations, on which minority peoples set their hopes, at first failed to fulfill these expectations. The Wilson-sponsored league encountered strong resistance from England and France as well as protests from the US Senate. The League of Nations was Wilson’s pet project to observe order in the new world, yet it was not included in the US delegation’s “maximum-program.” The League of Nations as set forth in Wilson’s “14 points” was established, with some amendments by England and France. Topchibashov wrote: At any rate, this institution that should be favorable for minority peoples – the League of Nations – looks like a stillborn baby, so it is difficult to say who, how, and when it will be revived. Those in France, Italy, and England must have forgotten about it.53 The Azerbaijani delegates focused on recognition of an independent Azerbaijani state. On August 19, at the height of intensity of the “Russian conference,” they again asked to put the issue on the agenda, demanding that the organizers allow them to present their views, recognize the independence of Azerbaijan, and impartially assess the Azerbaijanis’ struggle for independence. Azerbaijan hoped to be recognized under the name “Azerbaijani Republic.” Ali Mardan bey wrote:

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  149 “All of the Azerbaijani people believe in its future, which depends on material and moral support from the League of Nations, whose patronage could enable us to live in peace and concord with neighboring countries.”54 However, in summer 1919 the Allied powers were not yet ready to recognize the newly formed states on the territory of tsarist Russia.

The mandate system and Azerbaijan From mid-1919 the government of Azerbaijan and its Paris representatives were engaged in searching for allies and patrons. On the one hand, they desired to become closer to the free world; on the other, old Russia and new Russia took formally varied and yet essentially identical approaches to Azerbaijan. After World War I, when both the victors and the vanquished were exhausted, the Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan faced an important issue: on whom can we rely? Topchibashov wrote: “We’re enduring and waiting. So are the peace delegations of the republics newly formed on Russia’s territory. Where can we find support, who can help us? Our people’s right to independent existence is beyond doubt.” He noted that the issue was discussed everywhere, but “mere assertions are not enough, for organized and independent peoples are seeking not only allies but also patrons and mandatories as well to rely on a stronger power.”55 French patronage of the Caucasian states proved not to be realistic. Although French business circles showed interest in the Caucasus, Clemenceau’s confidence in the concept of a “united and indivisible Russia” turned out to be strong. Of all the great powers at the peace conference, only France opposed the recognition of the newly established post-Russian republics. In mid-1919 France sent its representatives to the Caucasus. One of the French representatives, Jean Loris-Melikov, was an ethnic Armenian and the nephew of Count Loris-Melikov, a member of the Armenian delegation and representative of the Armenian Republic in Paris. Jean Loris-Melikov had once studied with Topchibashov in the same classical school. In 1905–1906 he worked at the St. Petersburg newspaper Strana together with Russian publicist Maksim Kovalevskii then left for Paris and became a French citizen. He later became friends with Clemenceau. Before going to the Caucasus, Loris-Melikov had two meetings with Topchibashov, making it clear that France was feeling its way toward establishing the Federative Republic of Caucasian Peoples. Topchibashov described Loris-Melikov: He regards everything from the stance of a Frenchman and at heart is a follower of “united and indivisible” [Russia]. He holds that he is not nationalist, so he disapproves of the steps of the Armenian delegation here. . . . In general he does not seem to be a man of practical policy. Yet he is confident of success but disbelieves in the independent existence of the Caucasian republics, laying an emphasis on restoring great Russia.56 It remains unclear why Loris-Melikov had to make an exhausting voyage (Istanbul to cities in the Caucasus) if the contents of his report to the French government were already known.

150  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris French foreign minister Stéphen Jean Marie Pichon said that the French government did not legally recognize the Caucasian republics because of the unstable situation there but assured Ali Mardan bey that he respected the peoples of the Caucasus: their representatives were admitted to the conference and French emissaries were visiting Baku, Batum, and Tiflis. Pichon pointed out that the French government was facing difficulties in signing an agreement with the Caucasian governments because of destroyed roads and the ruined financial system. France was also going to establish mail and telegraph communication with Azerbaijan and Georgia and develop trade relations with these countries.57 The question of a mandate for Azerbaijan was to be considered in parallel by Great Britain and Italy, for the interests of the two countries coincided. The Italians desired to establish themselves in the Caucasus, while the British wanted to abandon the region. Talks between the British and Italians ended on March 24 with the signing of a preliminary secret treaty between their general staffs: British positions in Transcaucasia would be transferred to the Italians. Initially there was no unanimity on the subject. As an expert on the Caucasus, Lord Curzon noted in his letter to foreign minister Balfour on March 25 that seizure of Transcaucasia was not in the “national interests” of Italy, for the Italians were in no position to deal with the Russians there. Besides, Italians had no authority among the Caucasian peoples and probably could not retain control after the British withdrawal.58 However, Curzon’s view was ignored: on April  9 the British Council of War approved the agreement.59 On May 10 the British command informed the governments of Azerbaijan and Georgia of the council’s decision to leave Transcaucasia. On June 28 the government of Great Britain officially informed the peace conference about the withdrawal of its troops from the Caucasus and the entire territory of the former Russian Empire. The Allies agreed to replace the British troops with Italian troops. The question of granting Italy a mandate in Transcaucasia was brought up. Having received reassuring comments from the Caucasus, the Orlando government gladly accepted this proposal. The Italians established ties with the Azerbaijani and Georgian delegations in Paris. On June 13 military representative Valerie told Ali Mardan bey on behalf of Col. Melchiorre Gabba: “If we send troops to you, it will not be for occupation or gendarmerie purposes but for cultural and economic ones, but the point is that today we face difficulties in performing this difficult mission, so I’ve come to learn your view on the subject.”60 Further talks made it clear that the Italians would like the Azerbaijanis to invite them to come. In all probability, that was necessary for the Italian government to make the situation acceptable to the Italian people. The situation remained uncertain, however; two weeks remained until England’s decision, so Topchibashov gave no promises to Valerie. On June 15 the Azerbaijani, Georgian, and North Caucasian representatives held a meeting to discuss the question of British withdrawal from the Caucasus and their replacement by the Italians. The Americans said that this question had not yet been discussed at the Military Council.61 In late June Topchibashov and Tsereteli met with Mallet, who reaffirmed the withdrawal of British troops, which needed to be stationed in other countries, noting that “the arrival of the

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  151 Italians will change nothing, for the Italians are expected to do the same as the British did.” As for the threat from Denikin, “he is unlikely to march against Azerbaijan and Georgia. Also, he has instructions from British plenipotentiary Wardrop, who in a day or two will set out for the Caucasus.”62 The Azerbaijani delegates and Professor Simpson, an advisor to the British delegation, discussed this topic. After Great Britain informed the peace conference on June 28 of its desire to leave the Caucasus, the Azerbaijani, Georgian, and North Caucasian delegations considered it possible to get closer to the Italians. The problem was that a change of cabinet had occurred in Italy: Orlando’s government, which had shown interest in the Caucasus and was ready to dispatch troops there, had lost power. The new government of Francesco Nitti suspended the process as the first step of the new cabinet. On June 28 Valerie met with Topchibashov again and reaffirmed his government’s doubt about the Caucasian question. Yet Italy retained its economic interest in the Caucasus. On July  7 representatives of Azerbaijan, Georgia, and the North Caucasus Republic met with Count Sadino, attaché of the Italian Embassy in Paris. Their exchanges revealed the intentions of the Italian government in the Caucasus: (1) Italy would pursue only economic goals in the Caucasus, not political ones; (2) Italy would receive a mandate from the League of Nations to govern the Caucasus, but this right would be exercised with the approval of the region’s population; (3) Italy would stay in the Caucasus for not more than three to five years; (4) during that period the Caucasian republics could set up a confederation and then decide on their destiny independently. If the Russian Federative Republic was established during this time, the Caucasian confederation could join it. In that case Italy would abandon the Caucasus; (5) Italy would not fight Denikin or anyone else; (6) the Caucasus could have its own army and Italy would assist in this.63 While these issues were being discussed, Aziz bey Tahirbeyov, a special envoy of the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry under the Allied command in Paris, arrived in Rome and had talks with the Italian Embassy. Tahirbeyov asked Maioni whether Italian troops would be sent to Azerbaijan. In reply, Maioni showed him several diplomatic papers reporting that Topchibashov had made a statement to Italian representatives in Paris about the undesirability of sending the Italian troops. Maioni asked whether that was Topchibashov’s personal view or whether the people and government of Azerbaijan were really opposed to stationing Italian troops in Azerbaijan.64 Ali Mardan bey’s statement had been made at the first discussions, when the British troops were still in Azerbaijan, so at that time there was no reason to send the Italian troops. When the Azerbaijani and Georgian representatives discussed this topic, there had been no official notification about the withdrawal of British troops from the Caucasus. After the British government officially informed the peace conference of its intention to leave the Caucasus, the political situation in the South Caucasian republics changed. Aziz bey Tahirbeyov told Maioni that he could judge the Azerbaijanis’ attitude toward Italy by the way they received the Italian mission led by Colonel Gabba.

152  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris In summer 1919 Italy declined to bring troops into the Caucasus, so the young republics faced great danger from Russia. On August 1 the British Embassy in Rome was informed that Nitti’s government refused to send troops to the Caucasus, and Italy made an official statement on August 5. The British statement about withdrawal of troops put Azerbaijan and Georgia at a disadvantage. Unbiased analysis of the sociopolitical and economic situation in Italy indicates that a Caucasian military expedition would have driven the country into a desperate situation. Unlike his predecessor Orlando, new prime minister Francesco Nitti treated things in a new fashion. The refusal of Nitti’s government to send an expedition to the Caucasus exacerbated the mandate question. As chair of an August  6 general meeting of the Azerbaijani, Georgian, and North Caucasus delegations, Topchibashov pointed out that the new republics would need external aid despite their desire for independence. A number of proposals were put forward. First, Azerbaijan and Georgia could appeal to the League of Nations and let it determine who would receive the mandate. Then Hajinskii suggested asking Great Britain to adopt the mandate. He tried to show that the Caucasian Republics, including Azerbaijan, could not have any alliance except with England.65 Despite all these efforts, however, the British left the Caucasus in late August. Ali Mardan bey received a report from the Foreign Ministry about the international situation in the republic, which confirmed that the last British detachments had left the territory of Azerbaijan.66 Withdrawal of the Allied troops from the Caucasus came unexpectedly. Meetings between Ali Mardan bey and British representatives indicated that the withdrawal was final. We became firmly convinced that British troops would remain in Baku forever. However, we were mistaken. . . . After that we Azerbaijanis, Georgians, and Armenians decided to appeal to the peace conference and all Allies, asking them to station Allied troops [in Transcaucasia] until the conference resolves the destinies of our republics.67 That appeal on August 28 was signed by representatives of all three republics. The British government sent a political mission headed by Oliver Wardrop to the region. The Versailles delegation learned about this on July 25 from British delegate Sir Eyre Crowe: “Mr. Wardrop will inform the government about the situation in Transcaucasia; however, this cannot be considered as recognition of the Azerbaijani government by the British government.”68 Before going to the Caucasus Wardrop met in Paris with the delegations of Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia. Topchibashov wrote to Usubbeyov: Mr. Wardrop visited us together with his secretaries, of whom Mr. White, a former consul in Tabriz, speaks our language and Russian well. He impressed us favorably and asked us to make efforts for all Caucasian peoples to live in peace and tranquillity. He had meetings with Georgians (he speaks Georgian) and Armenians. The same day he left for the Caucasus.69

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  153

Increased US interest in the Caucasus In autumn 1919 Ali Mardan bey started establishing ties with the United States, which had an enhanced role in world politics. “We are maintaining relations with American Jews, who advise us to send a delegation to America in an effort to allay the impressions caused by the Armenian ballyhoo against Azerbaijanis due to the alleged mass killings of Armenians in September.”70 Unlike Great Britain, France, and Italy, the United States expressed willingness to accept a mandate to control the Black Sea straits, Istanbul, and the Caucasian region. It became apparent from Ali Mardan bey’s talks with President Wilson, US representatives at the Peace Conference, undersecretary Frank Polk, and Henry Morgenthau, who had long worked in the Middle East, that the Azerbaijani Republic gave its consent to be patronized by the United States, provided it did not interfere with the internal affairs of the republic and complied with Wilson’s “14 points,” demanding nothing in return.71 Similar talks were held between Americans and Georgians. On June 11 the Georgian delegation led by Nikolai Chkheidze had a meeting with Wilson’s advisor, Col. Edward House. The talks ended with Georgia’s consent to the American mandate.72 In late June the Americans brought up the issue at the Council of Ten. On July 5 the council approved Col. William Haskell as the high commissioner of Armenia on behalf of the United States, England, France, and Italy. He was also responsible for all kinds of aid to Armenia. Representatives of the governments of the United States, England, France, and Italy in Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia, and Istanbul were to start collaborating with Haskell immediately.73 Gen. James Harbord would go to Erivan and draw up a report on repatriation as well as general military and economic questions. Lansing informed Washington about this decision the same day. In summer 1919 Haskell arrived in the Caucasus. His residence was in Erivan. At the first meeting with the Armenian government, he stated that his mission was to defend Armenia and Armenians regardless of their place of residence (Georgia, Azerbaijan, or Turkey), which was why his post was titled “High Commissioner of the Allies.”74 As a first step, under the cover of a general-governorship, he tried to take Nakhchivan and Sharur-Daralayaz out of Azerbaijan’s control and give them to Armenia. However, in accordance with the Azerbaijani government’s decision, Topchibashov sent a note of protest on August 19 to the chair of the peace conference.75 The Azerbaijani delegation was anticipating recognition of the country’s independence, while attempts were being made to interfere with the peace conference’s powers and forcibly redraw the borders of Caucasian Azerbaijan, whose residents were becoming refugees in their homeland. According to rumors, the Kars region, Erivan guberniia, the uyezds of Nakhchivan, Sharur-Daralayaz, and part of Erivan uyezd were being annexed to the Armenian Republic. The government of Azerbaijan had never agreed to the transfer of Nakhchivan, Sharur-Daralayaz, Surmali, and part of Erivan uyezd to Armenia. In view of the recent bloody events, the note made two demands to the Allied command: (1) withdraw all military units from Kars province, except for the Allied troops; administer the province through the will of the population until the peace conference reached a decision; (2) authorize the Azerbaijani

154  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris Republic to manage Nakhchivan, Sharur-Daralayaz, and Surmali uyezds and part of Erivan uyezd.76 This note of protest was submitted to the peace conference and to all representatives of the Allies in Paris. In November 1919 Haskell arrived in Paris to report on the situation in Transcaucasia. He met with Topchibashov but did not bring up the question of a ­general-governorship in Nakhchivan, realizing that this was not viable.77 From that point on, he adhered to the view that all of Transcaucasia should be regarded as the mandated territory of some world power. Topchibashov described his meeting with Haskell: “He was much pleased with his reception in Baku; he liked our ordinary people very much: they are a peaceful people and not an enemy of the Armenian people. The latter would live in peace and tranquillity if not for politicians.” The colonel expressed his confidence that the Transcaucasian peoples could coexist peacefully. They were closely related economically, but a world power must help them at first and improve their financial conditions. Then each of the peoples concerned could live independently “and be released from the mandate, especially ‘your Azerbaijan,’ Haskell noted, indicating Azerbaijan on the map.”78 Before going to the Caucasus, Colonel Haskell had been instructed to help the Armenians. However, the three months that he spent in the Caucasus changed his stand on the issue. He witnessed a great deal and came to understand that the Armenians were far from the image of a “long-suffering” people trumpeted in the Western press. During his talks with Topchibashov and Maharramov, Haskell pointed out that until recently Americans have spoken of Armenians as the only ones suffering. Dispatching our missions to Turkey and the Caucasus, along with the presence of many Americans in the region, proved to be very useful. Now we are sure that “not all Armenians are good and not all Turks are bad.” There are good and bad among Americans as well. These countries might be united under a generic mandate [he pointed to Turkey and the Caucasus on the map], but America is not going to act as such a mandatory.79 Colonel Haskell was not mistaken. The debates of November 1919 in Versailles firmly rejected the inclusion of Azerbaijan and Georgia in his mandate. Americans did not insist on the Caucasian mandate because of the mission in Asia Minor and the Caucasus of James G. Harbord, who submitted a report on the situation in the region to President Wilson, opposing an American mandate for the Caucasus. In 1919 US interest in the Caucasus increased. As political circles began debating a mandate on the Caucasus, President Wilson decided to send a special mission to explore the political, military, geographical, economic, and administrative questions in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Asia Minor.80 Research into the protocol of a general meeting of Azerbaijani, Georgian, and North Caucasus Republic delegates on June 12, 1919, makes it clear that in early June the United States was going to send such a mission.81 In mid-August the head of the US delegation to Versailles, Frank Polk, sent a special letter to the delegations of the Caucasian republics about the Harbord

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  155 mission.82 US brigadier general James Harbord and twelve officers were going to visit the Caucasus. The letter asked the delegates to inform their respective governments about his arrival and assist him, emphasizing that the Azerbaijani government should not take this mission as recognition of the Azerbaijani Republic.83 Then the Azerbaijani delegates met with Col. James Rhea, an authorized agent of the Harbord mission in Azerbaijan. Topchibashov informed Rhea of the latest developments: The confederation and particularly the United States will voice their view on the entire Caucasus and us after three months, when the mission’s activity ends. Hajinskii and I met with Col. Thomas Logan . . . [who said] that he would do his best to include at least one of our representatives in the mission. You’d better take advantage of it.84 In September–October  1919 the Harbord mission visited Turkey, Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan. During talks in Baku in early October Harbord stressed the necessity of ending the conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia. He was pleased with the discipline and training in Azerbaijan, particularly of Azerbaijani soldiers. In his view, all this testified to Azerbaijan’s preparedness for independent life. Harbord expressed hope that the peace conference would take into account all the expectations and aspirations of the Azerbaijanis and emphasized the peaceful foreign policy of Azerbaijan. Before leaving Batum, he sent a letter of appreciation to Premier Nasib bey Usubbeyov. “I and officers of my mission have fond memories of your people and country, and we are hopeful that squabbles of your neighbors won’t hamper your country’s progress.”85 On October 16 Harbord arrived in Paris and submitted his report first to undersecretary Polk and then to the US State Department and Senate. Topchibashov tried to meet with Harbord: “Regrettably, I failed to see him again. Discussing Harbord’s arrival, some newspapers (Le Temps) noted that he will report back only to President Wilson and that he opposes a US mandate over Armenia and receives nobody, being very busy.”86 From the first days in Paris Ali Mardan bey clearly found himself in a whirlwind of political developments. His delegation arrived at the Versailles conference with a four-month delay, yet his meeting with Woodrow Wilson, an architect of the new postwar world, put Azerbaijan at the center of international discussions. Ali Mardan bey’s demands to the Paris Peace Conference, his opposition to the plans of the Kolchak and Denikin governments for Russia’s restoration within the 1914 boundaries, his struggle for Azerbaijan’s right to join the free world and embark upon the path of integration with the West, and his talks with prominent political figures in Paris led him onto the stage of history.

Notes 1 Letter from Topchibashov to Chairman of the Council of Ministers, June 8–10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 143, p. 3. 2 Ibid., 4–5.

156  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris 3 Ibid., 9. 4 See: Délégation Azerbaïdjanienne à la Conférence de la Paix, Composition Anthropologique et Ethnique de la Population de l’Azerbaïdjan du Caucase. Classé 1er juin 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 44–52; and Délégation Azerbaïdjanienne à la Conférence de la Paix, Situation économique et financière de la République de l’Azerbaïdjan du Caucase. Classé 1er juin 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 29–43. 5 Letter from Topchibashev to the British Ambassador in Paris Lord Derby, October 24, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9/13, 1. 6 Letter from the Minister of Foreign Affairs to Topchibashov, March 14, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 141, pp. 9–12. 7 Boris Shtein, “Russkii vopros” na parizhskoi mirnoi konferensii. Moscow: Gospolitizdat, 1949, 346. 8 Who Was Who in America, vol. 2, 383. 9 Information from Topchibashov to Ussubeyov, on Reception the Delegation by Woodrow Wilson, May 28, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 143, p. 7. 10 Conversation of Topchibashov with Wilson, May  28, 1919, AAMT, carton no 4/1, 29–30. 11 Memoire adresse par la Delegation a la Conference de la Paix de Republque de l’Azerbaidjan du Caucase Toptchibacheff le President Wilson. Paris, Le 28 mai 1919, Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Septembre 1, 1919, # 1, 6–7. 12 Memoire adresse par la Delegation a la Conference de la Paix de Republque de l’Azerbaidjan du Caucase Toptchibacheff le President Wilson. Paris, Le 28 mai 1919, AAMT, carton no 4/1, 21. 13 Speech du President Woodrow Wilson. Le 28 mai 1919, AAMT, carton no 4/1, 32–33. 14 Topchibashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 38. 15 See.: Ronald Grigor Suny, Looking Toward Ararat: Armenia in Modern History. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1993, 128–129. 16 Topchibashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 38–39. 17 See: La Republique de l’Azerbaidjan du Caucase. Paris, 1919, 1–52; Claims of the Peace Delegation of the Republic of Caucasian Azerbaijan Presented to the Peace Conference in Paris. Paris: Imp. Robinet – Houtain, 1919, 1–52; AAMT, carton no 2/1, 1–54. 18 Ibid., 15–16. 19 Ibid., 22. 20 Ibid., 30–31. 21 Ibid., 51. 22 See: Biographical Information about Ali Mardan bey Topchibashev. Part I (in concise form), AAMT, carton no 6/2, 24. 23 Topchibashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 40. 24 Azerbaycan Khalq Cümhuriyyəti (1918–1920). Parlament (Stenoqrafik hesabatlar). Vol. I. 614. 25 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Peace Conference, May 31, 1919, AAMT, carton no 4/1, 36–38. 26 Président de la Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan Ali Mardan Toptchibacheff – Monsieur le Président de la Conférence de la Paix. Le 5 juin 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 832, folio 72. 27 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Peace Conference, June  5, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 143, p. 47. 28 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. Russia, 1919, 380–381. 29 Minutes of Joint Meetings of the Azerbaijani, Georgian and Northern Caucasus Delegations in Paris, June 15–18, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 181–186. 30 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Allied and Friend Countries’ Council of Four, June 20–23, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 143, pp. 64–66.

The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris  157 31 Appeal of the Azerbaijani, Georgian and North Caucasus Mountaineers Republic Delegations to the Head of the Paris Peace Conference, June 23, 1919, AAMT, carton no 4/1, 67–69. 32 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. Russia, 1919, 766–767. 33 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, September 22–25, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 11. 34 Ibid., 10. 35 Ibid. 36 Ibid., 11. 37 Minutes of Joint Meeting Held by the Azerbaijani and North Caucasus Republic Delegations in Paris, May 30, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 165. 38 Minutes of Joint Meetings of the Azerbaijani, Georgian and Northern Caucasus Delegations in Paris, June 15–18, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 181–183. 39 Military-Defence Treaty Between the Republic of Georgia and the Republic of Azerbaijan, June 16, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 64, p. 15. 40 Telegram from Aziz bey Tahirbeyov to Topchibashev, 1919, SARA, f. 2905, r. 1, v. 13, pp. 55. 41 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, September 22–25, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 70, p. 5. 42 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 199. 43 Topchubashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 55. 44 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, September 22–25, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 21–22. 45 La Délégation de Paix de l’Azerbaïdjan – Monsieur le Président de la Conférence de la Paix, le 24 août 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 832, folio 95. 46 Letter from Topchibashov to Balfour, September 10, 1919, SARA f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 92. 47 Topchubashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 59. 48 Telegram from Jafarov to Topchibashov, September 26, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 3, v. 4, p. 99. 49 La Délégation de Paix de l’Azerbaïdjan – Monsieur le Président de la Conférence de la Paix. Le 29 Août 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 71–72. 50 Protestation présenté par la Délégation Azerbaïdjanienne à Monsieur le Président de la Conférence de la Paix. Le 12 septembre 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 832, folio 103–106. 51 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, September 22–25, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 22. 52 Ibid., 12. 53 Ibid., 13. 54 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Versailles Conference, September 16, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 49. 55 Topchubashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 61. 56 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, September 22–25, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 31. 57 Ibid., p. 45. 58 Garol’d Nikolson, Kak delilsya mir v 1919 godu. Moscow: Gospolitizdat, 1945, 268. 59 Document on British Foreign Policy 1919–1939, 1919–1939. First Series. Vol. 1. ­London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1947, Vol. III, 229. 60 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, July 8–9, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 17. 61 Minutes of Joint Meetings of the Azerbaijani, Georgian and North Caucasus Mountaineers Republic Delegations, June  15, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 181–184. 62 Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Octobre 13, 1919, # 3, 7.

158  The struggle for Azerbaijan in Paris 63 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, July 8–9, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 21–22. 64 Letter from Tahirbeyov to Hajinskii, November 11, 1919, Archives d’Ali Mardan-bey Toptchibachi, carton no 8, 2. 65 See: Minutes of Joint Meetings of the Azerbaijani, Georgian and North Caucasus Mountaineers Republic Delegations, August  16, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 205–212. 66 See: Letter from Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan to Topchibashev, 1919, SARA, f. 2905, r. 1, v. 20, p. 2. 67 Topchubashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 59–60. 68 Letter from the British delegate Crowe to Topchibashev, July 25, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 46. 69 Topchubashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 68–69. 70 Ibid., 50–51. 71 For more information see: Hasanli (Hasanov), Azerbaijani-American Relations from 1918–1920, 1–9. 72 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 226. 73 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference, Vol. VII, 28. 74 Givi Gambashidze, Iz istorii politiki SShA v otnoshenii Gruzii. Tbilisi: Isd-vo TsK KP Gruzii, 1960, 38. 75 Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Septembre 8, 1919, # 2, 1–4. 76 Note of Protest Submitted by Topchibashov to the Representatives of the Peace Conference of Allies, August  19, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp.  60–61; Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Septembre 8, 1919, # 2, 3–4. 77 Correspondance du colonel Haskell sur le Nakhitchevan, 1919, AAMT, carton no 2, 1–2. 78 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 146, pp. 11–12. 79 Ibid., 13. 80 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 228. 81 Minutes of Joint Meetings of the Azerbaijani, Georgian and North Caucasus Republic Delegations, June 12, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 176–177. 82 Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Octobre 13, 1919, # 3, 7. 83 Letter from Frank Polk to Topchibashov, August 13, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 46. 84 Topchubashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 69. 85 Azerbaycan, October 21, 1919. 86 Letter from Topchibashov to Khoiskii, November 6–10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 146, p. 11.

10 Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence by the Versailles Supreme Council

The Azerbaijan Republic and its Paris representatives made efforts to establish economic and political links with the United States, in particular to make it recognize Azerbaijan. The United States had become much stronger because of World War I and was now one of the states that determined global politics. It had become a global banker: as US secretary of state Robert Lansing used to say, it ruled the global economy and tried to rule global politics. In addition, President Woodrow Wilson was considered the chief architect of the postwar global system, the defender of newly established states, and the friend of minority nations.

Attempts to create a lobby in the United States However, both the US government and the American public had a rather vague idea of the Caucasian republics. So Ali Mardan bey began a propaganda campaign for Azerbaijan and Georgia in the United States. With the help of lawyer Walter Chandler, a member of the House of Representatives from New York City, he sent informational materials to President Wilson on September 26, reminding him of the meeting held on May 28: the first anniversary of Azerbaijan’s independence: We consider you a contemporary apostle who has proclaimed the great gospel of peace, liberty, and friendly relations between nations, especially small nations brought to life through your principles of national and political selfdetermination. As representatives of one such people, the Azerbaijanis, your attention to our words has given us the certainty that our nation will find in great America and in you, Mr. President, defenders and supporters in the sacred cause of defending its liberty and independence.1 He attached this letter to the memorandum on Azerbaijan’s independence, an economic map showing the republic’s boundaries, diagrams illustrating its economic and financial situation, an ethnographic map, and a memorandum on Azerbaijan’s ethnic-national composition.2 One more factor made it necessary to expand these links to America. The Armenian community in the United States had established an American Committee of Independent Armenia, which not only fought for recognition of Armenia’s

160  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence independence but also besmirched the reputation of Azerbaijan and Georgia. Thus, it was necessary to tell America the truth about Azerbaijan. For this purpose, representatives of the Baltic republics, Azerbaijan, and Georgia concluded two contracts with Chandler,3 which Ali Mardan bey signed in September 1919. The first contract stipulated that Chandler would be a member of the Azerbaijani delegation as a legal consultant in charge of propaganda issues for three months and would defend the independence and interests of Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijanis would pay him US$5,000 for these efforts, half immediately after the contract was signed and the rest no later than December  1, 1919. The contract entered into force on the date of signing; the Azerbaijanis guaranteed that it would be approved by the parliament. The more long-term contract stipulated that Chandler would launch a strong campaign in the United States to defend Azerbaijan, starting on October 4.4 The preamble stated that Ali Mardan bey was authorized by the government of Azerbaijan to conclude this contract with Chandler, who would receive US$50,000 for his work as soon as the United States gave de facto recognition to Azerbaijan. Otherwise he would receive no compensation. After the parliament of Azerbaijan approved this contract it would enter into the force of law.5 After Chandler left for the United States, Topchibashov asked Henry Morgenthau Jr. to help. Like Chandler, Morgenthau recommended that Azerbaijanis should have their own representation in the United States: “We are friends of all minority nations; however, we are not alone in making decisions in international politics though we’re glad to help all of you. . . . I see that Azerbaijan is a rich country that can live independently.  .  .  . In America you’ll find a good reception and, maybe, financing.”6 Naturally, this remark did not go unnoticed by the Azerbaijani delegation, which contracted with Max Rabinov, a representative of American business circles, to become the delegation’s financial advisor. Rabinov took responsibility for organizing the sale of Azerbaijani oil at international prices, receiving US loans, and purchasing US-manufactured goods for Azerbaijan.7 He would receive 3 percent of the expected revenue. Joint meetings of the Azerbaijani and Georgian delegations on August 23 and September 18 discussed his activities.8 The contract with Rabinov was for a period of six months but could be prolonged if both sides wished. Chandler and Rabinov, who had worked jointly in the United States, insisted that Mahammad Maharramov, a member of the Azerbaijani delegation, be sent to America to resolve emerging political, economic, and legal issues.9 However, foreign minister Mahammad Yusif Jafarov instead sent socialist member of parliament Abbas bey Atamalybeyov to Versailles to substitute for Maharramov, a member of the same faction.10 Topchibashov opposed mechanical substitutions of this sort. In the end the members of the Socialist Party settled this problem: Atamalybeyov was included in the delegation as a secretary, while Maharramov remained a member. On October 18 Walter Chandler sent Topchibashov his first report from America. He wrote that it was hard to propagandize in favor of countries such as Georgia and Azerbaijan that were unknown in America and had no representatives there, unlike Estonia, Ukraine, Latvia, Armenia, and others. He asked that one or

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  161

Figure 10.1 The delegation of the Republic of Azerbaijan at the Paris Peace Conference (Hotel Claridge). From left to right: Abbas bey Atamalybeyov, Mahammad Maharramov, Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, Akber agha Sheikhulislamov, Jeyhun bey Hajibeyli, and Mir Yagub Mirmehtiev. Paris 1919.

two Azerbaijani representatives be sent to America; otherwise he and his friends would have to do everything. The president’s lengthy illness had become the key obstacle. Recognition of another state depended on the president. Chandler promised that as soon as Wilson recovered he would personally give him Topchibashov’s letter and materials on Azerbaijan. In the meantime, he would disseminate these materials among the senators.11 Chandler was trying to arrange for Topchibashov and Georgian representative Zurab Avalov to come to the United States. At a meeting of the delegation on November 22 Ali Mardan bey reported on his talks with Chandler and Rabinov.12 Topchibashov sent Chandler a report on events at the conference on the Caucasus, including its attitude to Azerbaijan, Denikin, and so forth. He also met with William Buckler, who had been recommended by Morgenthau. Buckler asked him at length about the Caucasus and relations among Transcaucasian nations. The information about the Armenians turned out to be new to him. At the end of the conversation Buckler said: “I’d like to assure you that we learned about some of your neighbors whom we do not regard as angels at all.”13 James Gerard, chair of the American Committee of Independent Armenia and former US ambassador

162  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence in Berlin, did his best to glorify “long-suffering Christian-Armenians,” the saviors of “Christian churches.” On September 28 an appeal signed by him was spread throughout American cities. Chandler sent Topchibashov an example, noting that “exactly such committees and such appeals are needed to propagate the independence of Azerbaijan and Georgia.”14 In his letter of November 1 Chandler noted that Christian solidarity in favor of the Armenians was growing in the United States: “all the senators and deputies keep a unanimous opinion: Azerbaijanis should not be paid a lot of attention because they are Turks, Tatars, and Muslims.” Chandler countered that Azerbaijanis perfectly coexisted with Christian Georgia, that the two sides had even concluded a defensive alliance and maintained political solidarity, and that Azerbaijanis and Georgians invited Armenians to join this pact.15 The Azerbaijani and Georgian delegations asked Chandler to “establish a special Committee of Propaganda and to avoid arguing against Armenians.”16 On November 3 a letter from Rabinov reported that goods worth US$15 million were ready to be sent to Azerbaijan. However, the United States did not extend credit to unrecognized states. Thus, Rabinov tried to accomplish this through a third country. He would arrive in Paris on December 6 with a large group of businesspeople going to Baku.17 Rabinov quickly organized the American-Caucasian Chamber of Commerce, which would play a decisive role in trade and economic links with Azerbaijan. Chandler’s letter of November 10 illustrated the US attitude to young republics in the territory of the former Russian Empire. When he asked the US Department of State whether it would officially recognize Azerbaijan’s independence, it became clear that America would wait until it knew what the fate of Aleksandr Kolchak, Anton Denikin, and Nikolai Yudenich would be. Defeat of the White Guard generals would turn the State Department’s interest toward the newly created republics. It ultimately would not object to recognition of their independence. But that was not currently possible, because the US government had not yet settled the matter of the League of Nations and would give Kolchak one last chance to show his advantage over the Bolsheviks. The former states of Russia, including Azerbaijan, would be provided aid in accordance with the president’s project in the very near future. Chandler noted optimistically that minority nations had to keep their patience for several months at most until Kolchak and Denikin were finally defeated.18 He reported that newspapers were severely criticizing Wilson’s foreign policy and that serious discords were arising between the president and the Senate.19

The strengthening of the propaganda campaign in Europe The defeat of the White Guard generals became evident in autumn 1919, substantially increasing the interest of US, British, French, and Italian political and business circles in the Caucasus, including Azerbaijan. The French telegraph and telephone company intended to raise the level of the Azerbaijani postal service to meet international standards and connect the Ganja radio station to the Eiffel Tower’s European radio station, sending its equipment and engineers to

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  163 Azerbaijan. In November 1919 Topchibashov sent the first telegram through this station, to the head of the Azerbaijani government: “I’d like to congratulate you on the startup of the Azerbaijani radio station, which will play a great role in the economic and cultural development of our homeland.”20 After signing a post and telegraph agreement with France, Topchibashov submitted an application to the Switzerland-based International Bureau of the Global Postal Union. In autumn 1919 Georgian and Azerbaijani delegates began demanding that the chair of the conference and members of the Council of the Five accelerate consideration of the Caucasian issue. Both delegations insisted on establishing a special commission in charge of Caucasian affairs and submitted appeals to the chair of the conference on September 17 and to representatives of the Entente on September 20,21 stating that the Transcaucasian issue was an important and independent international matter that should be settled immediately regardless of the Russian situation. Linking its strong raw material base with Europe’s and America’s economies would require development of the post, telegraph, commercial, railway, and financial spheres. Thus, the peace conference established a special commission for Caucasian issues.22 The Georgian and Azerbaijani delegations submitted a note drafted by Ali Mardan bey to the Entente Supreme Council. Representatives of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belorussia, Ukraine, Kuban, the Northern Caucasus, Georgia, and Azerbaijan took part in the discussion. The Armenian delegation, as always, and the Belorussian delegation refused to sign this note. Dr. Hamazasp Ohanjanian noted that Armenia had long ago been recognized by the Versailles Treaty. If a choice had to be made between the Turks and Denikin, the Armenians would prefer Denikin.23 On October 8 representatives of the eight other republics signed a note to the conference’s chair, Georges Clemenceau. This was their second collective appeal, following the June note of protest against recognition of Kolchak. The note stressed the young republics’ urgent need for financial and moral assistance, primarily military aid. Hence the republics had to be recognized as a subject of international law. The Bolsheviks within the Russian Empire wanted to create a proletarian dictatorship, while the reactionary forces led by the White Guard generals planned to establish a military dictatorship in an effort to restore the old Russia.24 In October  1919 the Azerbaijani delegates took two important steps. First, they met with Agha Khan, the leader of Indian Muslims and head of the Central Muslim Society, established in London in 1886.25 Second, they met with Iranian foreign minister Firuz Mirza, who was accompanying the shah on his way to London. At a breakfast in early October, Topchibashov detailed Azerbaijan’s struggle for independence and gave Agha Khan a copy of the Azerbaijan Republic’s demands to the peace conference. Agha Khan promised to speak to Lloyd George and to pass Azerbaijan’s demands on to him.26 On October  25 a joint Iranian-Azerbaijani meeting with the Iranian foreign minister was held. Firuz Mirza supported the existence of an independent Azerbaijan in the Caucasus and the need to provide assistance to the young state. This desire to help the Caucausus was not based on mercantile interests. “Our

164  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence delegations should act together. . . . We only need to discuss the form of such an alliance and, for this purpose, create a mixed commission representing both of us on an equal basis.”27 Following several days of discussions, a joint commission was established on November 1 that drafted a four-clause treaty of Iranian-­ Azerbaijani Union. Ali Mardan bey reported to Baku: Of course, we take into consideration the modern position of Persia, particularly the August treaty that it concluded with Britain, which we studied in detail; in our opinion, if this step comes to pass, it will be have great consequences. You can see from the contents of the clauses that we firmly secure the principle of independence.28 Starting in autumn 1919, when the international climate was changing in favor of the newly established republics, the Azerbaijani delegates in Paris were also conducting a broad propaganda campaign. The Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan submitted “The Issue of Newspapers Defending Azerbaijan’s Interests and Sending an Extraordinary Mission to Switzerland” to the parliament for approval. It was decided to send an extraordinary mission to Switzerland and to establish an Azerbaijani newspaper in Geneva or, if that was not possible, to use the Swiss press to promote the interests of Azerbaijan.29 Ali Mardan bey backed the concept of establishing a propaganda center in Switzerland. The League of Nations would conduct its work in Geneva, so the Azerbaijani delegation established cooperation with L’Europe Orientale (published in English and French). Azerbaijan agreed to subscribe to 20,000 copies of the journal, which would be obliged to publish materials about Azerbaijan frequently. On November 10, 1919, Topchibashov wrote that “the press now speaks of and mentions Azerbaijan more often than at the beginning of our stay here. At least we currently have the printed press sympathizing with us.”30 Little by little, the journals L’Europe Orientale, L’Image, and Les Peuples Libres and the newspapers Revue du Monde Muslim, Revue Contemporaine, Le Temps, L’Humanité, La Dépêche Coloniale, Les Dernières Nouvelles de Midi, and Le Croire began publishing articles about Azerbaijan in the summer and autumn of 1919. On November  25 a meeting chaired by Ali Mardan bey discussed press-related problems and the need to hold talks with the Georgian delegation on the plan for Le Temps to send its own reporter to the Caucasus.31 On November 28 Ali Mardan bey met with the famous Paris journalist Félix de Géronde to discuss propagandizing Azerbaijan.32 He tried to maintain good relations with French journalists. At a meeting of the delegation on December 5, he suggested assigning 3,000 francs from the budget for the purchase of Christmas gifts for Georges Bienaimé, Paul Bourdarie, Georges Brocher, and Gaston Gaillard, who wrote favorably about Azerbaijan.33 Topchibashov even made an agreement with the editor of L’Image that one of the journal’s issues would be entirely devoted to Azerbaijan. It was originally planned for November but was postponed because more photographs were needed: “We have no photograph of General Mehmandarov, among others. The issue is full of photographs of a military nature as a tribute to the times we live in and at the same time as

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  165 an indicator of the military strength of a country capable of defending itself.”34 He asked Baku to send illustrated materials immediately and delayed issuing the journal until January 1920. Later in 1919 Professor Georges Brocher published two articles about Azerbaijan in Journal de Genève and two more articles in Les Peuples Libres. He sent several more stories to British and American newspapers. His articles in Les Peuples Libres gave European readers a clear and detailed understanding of Azerbaijan.35 Brocher’s article titled “Nations’ Right to Self-Determination and the Republic of Azerbaijan” in Journal de Genève was even more effective. The introduction noted that the principles of nations’ self-determination declared by Wilson had been violated.36 He ended his article with the maxim “every nation has the right to freedom. Azerbaijan has already proved that it wants to be independent and that it can defend its independence and handle its freedom. Thus, Azerbaijan, as a Democratic Republic, must be recognized by the Peace Conference.”37 Apart from the propaganda in the mass media of European countries, Azerbaijani delegates in September  1919 started issuing an eight-page Information Bulletin of Azerbaijan in French, containing official materials, diplomatic correspondence, refutations of falsifications about Azerbaijan, and news of the political and economic life of the republic. The bulletin’s editor was Lucien Buvet, a famous French Orientalist and friend of the Azerbaijani people. Four issues were published in 1919 and another seven by April 1920, distributed in France as well as Britain and America. Topchibashov wrote in November 1919: “Simultaneously, we send around our memorandum in French and English, together with economic and ethnographic brochures and a map and diagrams of the population.”38 On the eve of recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence by the Supreme Council of Versailles, these bulletins provided detailed reports on Azerbaijan to political circles, public figures, and a broad readership in the West.

De facto recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence In November remarks by Lloyd George and other events caused a sensation in the European press.39 The White Russian émigré press was especially strident, as Topchibashov reported to Baku: An outstanding event is the speech of British premier Lloyd George to the House of Commons on November  17, in which the British premier twice mentioned Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Russian Armenia, which do not want to be part of Russia again. This speech produced a big reaction and lots of comments. . . . Russian elements and left-wing representatives are particularly displeased.40 The European press openly defended the new republics, especially the Caucasian ones. Topchibashov attributed this unexpected and pleasant change in the press and ruling circles to the defeat of Yudenich and Kolchak, Denikin’s weakness, the Allies’ refusal to continue to give them aid, Germany’s plans to get closer

166  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence to Russia, the Baltic states’ wish to make peace with the Bolsheviks, and the negative attitude of the majority of US senators toward the peace conference, particularly the Versailles Peace Treaty. All this, taken together, is a great plus for minority nations, encouraging them and giving them hope. It is no coincidence that Lloyd Georgia spoke in such conditions. Beyond any doubt, the favorable change that I spoke of regarding the press and public opinion is related to him.41 In November–December 1919, realizing that the political climate had changed in favor of the newly established republics, Ali Mardan bey submitted a memorandum on joining the League of Nations to the league’s secretariat. A  special commission led by Chilean delegate Antonio Gunets examined it and submitted the applications of Azerbaijan as well as Georgia, Armenia, Ukraine, and Costa Rica to the league’s Third Committee. Mahammad Maharramov and Abbas bey Atamalybeyov took part in the first discussion of the matter on January 8, 1920.42 In early January 1920 high commissar Wardrope almost daily telegraphed to the Allies and the British government that the Denikin army was retreating southward and that the Bolsheviks were pursuing him. Wardrope suggested immediately strengthening the positions of the Transcaucasian republics as well as the Mountainous Republic. For this to happen, it was necessary to recognize them. “If Britain does not become more active, the Caucasian republics will be forced to negotiate with the Bolsheviks.”43 The growth of the Bolshevik threat in the Caucasus made the Entente states think seriously about the situation and take decisive steps. Everyone understood that the appearance of the Red Army in Transcaucasia would mean that Bolshevism was penetrating the Middle East, Iran, and Turkey. The majority of European politicians believed that the defensive capabilities of Azerbaijan and Georgia had to be strengthened in order to help them withstand the threat. However, providing aid to nonrecognized countries could cause a conflict in the developing system of postwar international relations. But the concept of a “united, indivisible Russia,” which had previously hindered recognition of the young republics, had lost its viability. The issue of recognition of Azerbaijan and Georgia became urgent. A session of the Supreme Council of the Paris Peace Conference on January 10 was attended by the heads of governments and foreign ministers of Great Britain, France, and Italy, representatives of the United States and Japan at the peace conference, and ambassadors in France. The situation in Transcaucasia was discussed extensively. The British prime minister warned that the Bolsheviks were advancing along the Caspian and would probably unite with the Turks if they defeated Denikin and seized the Caspian Sea. The Caucasian states would then be in a hopeless situation. Thus, Lloyd George suggested finding a reasonable way of supplying them with weapons and military hardware.44 The Supreme Council instructed military experts to make proposals on strengthening the defense of Transcaucasia. Georges Clemenceau agreed with Lloyd George and suggested

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  167 that British specialists, who were the most experienced in Caucasian affairs, should draft a memorandum, “About Aid to the Transcaucasian Republics.” In the afternoon the foreign ministers met. The political aspect was addressed by a proposal from Lord Curzon, who noted that Lloyd George planned to raise the question of recognition of the independence of Azerbaijan and Georgia. In turn, the Armenian issue would be settled jointly with the Turkish one. Everyone agreed that Azerbaijan and Georgia were endangered on three sides: Bolshevik Russia’s troops were moving southward; Denikin’s soldiers, who were retreating, might invade Transcaucasia; and Kemalists might also invade. The situation had turned critical for Azerbaijan and Georgia, which asked the Entente states for help.45 Lord Curzon suggested immediately recognizing Azerbaijan and Georgia de facto.46 Based on Curzon’s proposal, the Allies’ Supreme Council decided that “Allied and Associated Powers should together recognize the Governments of Georgia and Azerbaijan as ‘de facto’ governments.”47 Thus, the independence of Azerbaijan received de facto recognition from the Paris Peace Conference on January 11, 1920. On January 12 the united military committee of Allies submitted a report on the Caucasian issue to the Versailles Supreme Council, signed by the president of the united military committee, Marshal Ferdinand Foch; the British representative in the committee, Gen. Charles John Sackville-West; and the Italian representative, Uco Cavallero. In the experts’ opinion, it was possible to continue to supply ammunition to the Caucasus before a defense line was created in certain conditions, while control of the Caspian Sea was the responsibility of the Allied fleet.48 On January 15 the representatives of Azerbaijan and Georgia were invited to the Foreign Ministry of France. Topchibashov and Mahammad Maharramov as well as Iraklii Tsereteli and Zurab Avalov were received by Jules Cambon, secretary general of the ministry; the British representative, Philip Kerr; and the Italian representative, Marquis Tomasi della Torreta. Cambon solemnly handed the text of the decision about de facto recognition of Azerbaijan to Topchibashov,49 reminding him that Azerbaijan and Georgia, as recognized independent countries, would henceforth have the right to officially appeal to the peace conference on every important matter. Topchibashov thanked the Great Powers for their help and added that the Azerbaijan Republic now expected de jure recognition. The French Foreign Ministry telegraphed its diplomatic representations in several countries and its high commissioners that the Supreme Council had decided to recognize Azerbaijan.50 Military aid for Azerbaijan and Georgia was discussed on January 15 and 16 at a meeting of British war minister Winston Churchill; the chief of the Imperial Headquarters, Field Marshal Henry Wilson; First Lord of the Admiralty William Lang; Admiral Lord David Bitty; and other military experts.51 Georges Clemenceau, who chaired the meeting, asked Jules Cambon to provide the latest information. Cambon reported serious financial, military, and other hardships and said that the delegates of Azerbaijan and Georgia had been informed of the Supreme

168  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence Council’s decision on the recognition of their independence. Tsereteli and Avalov on behalf of the Georgian delegation and Topchibashov and Maharramov on behalf of the Azerbaijani delegation had asked for political, military, and financial aid to the Transcaucasian republics. They had previously feared Denikin, but his army was now weak. Philip Kerr asked both delegations questions about the military situation, but their answers did not please him. It became clear that Georgia could provide 50,000 armed soldiers and Azerbaijan approximately 100,000. Cambon added that the armies of the two republics had been created with officers of the former tsarist army and national guards. Both republics had enough soldiers to hold the front line. They lacked only weapons, ammunition, and hardware, which they were asking the Allies to provide. The Transcaucasian republics asked the Supreme Council to recognize the independence of the Mountainous Republic de facto, which would help create a buffer zone between Russia and the Transcaucasian republics. Cambon stressed that Baku would find itself in great jeopardy if the Bolsheviks pursuing Denikin’s men reached Derbent. In turn, the occupation of Baku would be a threat to the whole Caspian Sea basin. Lloyd George considered it quite reasonable to recognize Daghestan de facto, which could prevent the Bolsheviks from penetrating the Caucasus. He noted that the Allies had enough arms and ammunition: the only problem was how to deliver them.52 On January 17 Field Marshal Wilson, Admiral Bitty, Robert Vansittart (of the British Foreign Office), and the delegations of Azerbaijan and Georgia gathered at the Claridge Hotel to calculate the amount of military aid needed if the Bolsheviks attacked Azerbaijan and Georgia. Sending troops to the Caucasus was not mentioned, only the provision of food. Admiral Bitty asked Topchibashov: “Is Azerbaijan capable of organizing its naval defense without anyone else’s help?” Ali Mardan bey replied directly that Azerbaijan would not be able to do so.53 On January 19 the Supreme Council, with the heads of governments in attendance, again discussed the Transcaucasian republics. The conference was attended by the great politicians of the time, including Lloyd George, Clemenceau, Nitti, Hugh Wallace, Cambon, Keishiro Matsui, Curzon, Churchill, Foch, Bitty, and Wilson.54 Marshal Foch presented a report composed by the military experts. Most of the dispute was about how and in what form assistance to the Southern Caucasian republics should be provided. Foch believed that several divisions should be sent to the Caucasus. Field Marshal Wilson backed him but added that it would not be possible to keep Transcaucasia if the British Fleet did not take the initiative on the Caspian Sea. Churchill agreed that, if the Entente did not dominate in the Caspian, “any grant of arms to the Caucasian states will not be deducted from the final ‘packet’ of supplies to be sent to General Denikin.”55 Lloyd George categorically disagreed with the military experts’ proposals. Lord Curzon reported that the representatives of the Caucasian countries were currently in the waiting room: “They have told me already that the Bolsheviks will attack them; they are anxious to defend themselves, provided we supply them with food, arms, and munitions. . . . I suggest we take no decision upon the matter without first of all hearing them.”56 Clemenceau approved the suggestion.

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  169 The representatives of Azerbaijan and Georgia were invited into the meeting room, where Clemenceau addressed them: We are told that you can give us information about an intended Bolshevik attack upon your people and of the means at your disposal for defence. . . . We are disposed to do something effective, but we want to know the present state of your country, and whether aid would be effectively used against Bolsheviks, or whether it is more likely to happen, as it did with Denikin, wherein the Bolsheviks would be strong enough simple to capture from you the materiel sent and thus to make matters worse.57 By mutual agreement, Tsereteli spoke on behalf of both republics, stressing the great need for the Allies’ aid.58 Lloyd George began asking detailed questions about the Azerbaijani armed forces, including the number of soldiers. Maharramov noted that a bill on the army had already been discussed in the parliament and that it was possible to create an army of 100,000 men within a short period if given the necessary arms and ammunition. Lloyd George asked: “Have you the troops at the moment?” Maharramov replied: “We have a small army, under the command of a native Azerbaijani general, about 50,000 strong, perhaps more, disciplined; but only 10,000 to 12,000 of these men have arms.”59 Lord Curzon asked about the reliability of the Turkish officers in the Azerbaijani military in a fight against the Bolsheviks. Maharramov replied that the Azerbaijanis had asked Turkey for help after the Russian occupation. When the Turkish Army left the Caucasus, “some 50 preferred to remain in Azerbaijan, but they are native Caucasians, and we can be certain that they, like all our populations, will use all of their energy in fighting the Bolsheviks for the defense of our independence.”60 Topchibashov noted that the Azerbaijan Republic had no claims against the Bolsheviks or Denikin and did not plan to interfere with Russia’s internal affairs. But to defend themselves against the threat from Russian forces, they must make effective use of their opportunities, primarily aid from the Allies. Baku’s defensive capability could be made much stronger by using the British fleet located in Enzeli. He also proposed that the Allies recognize Daghestan, “which would then form a buffer state against Bolshevik attacks. These Highlanders are indeed a very brave people.”61 Lloyd George asked what had caused Denikin’s attack on Daghestan and whether it would be possible to defend Baku if weapons arrived there. How many people could be mobilized? Maharramov replied that Baku already had a strong garrison: “two months ago there were perhaps 7,000 men in Baku, all natives of Azerbaijan.”62 The Supreme Council adopted a four-point resolution on the Caucasus: 1. That the Government of the Armenian State should be recognized as a de facto Government on condition that this recognition in no way prejudiced the question of the eventual frontiers of that State; 2. That the Allied Governments

170  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence are not prepared to send to the Transcaucasian States the three divisions contemplated by the Inter-Allied Military Council; 3. To accept the principle of sending to the Transcaucasian states arms, munitions, and if possible, food; 4. That Marshal Foch and Field Marshal Wilson are requested to consider of what these supplies should consist, and the means for their dispatch.63 This meeting marked the end of the work at the Paris Peace Conference. French premier Georges Clemenceau, who chaired the last meeting, ended his political career. When he died in 1929, Ali Mardan bey, as the head of the delegation, sent condolences to the French government: “The death of one of the great political figures of France, Georges Clemenceau, saddened us very much. We Azerbaijanis will always remember that the independence of Azerbaijan was recognized under Clemenceau’s chairmanship.”64 Thus, the successful diplomatic work of the Azerbaijani delegates, led by Ali Mardan bey, achieved political recognition of the Azerbaijan Republic in January 1920: An epoch is beginning when our hopes for a free independent existence are growing and trying to acquire a certain real form. We never lose hope and we did not lose hope even in the days that were most unfavorable for all the nations of the former Russia when we were told that our work was in vain. . . . The price of such a dear happiness has never and will never make us retreat, for we know nothing equivalent to this happiness.65 Oliver Wardrope was the first person to report the happy news of the recognition of Azerbaijan by the Supreme Council. On January  12 he sent a telegram from Tiflis, stating that Lord Curzon in Paris “took the initiative in recommending immediate de facto recognition of the Republics of Azerbaijan and Georgia. The Supreme Council of the Allies accepted this unanimously.”66 Ali Mardan bey sent a telegram from Paris to Premier Usubbeyov that same day, informing him of the de facto recognition and asking about current conditions.67 On January 14 Ali Mardan bey telegraphed Rasulzade about the happy news, noting that this great event in the political life of the young republic would contribute to its development and strength. The second conference of the Musavat Party was opening at that time, so Rasulzade congratulated Topchibashov in a return telegram, which was published in Paris newspapers,68 Ali Mardan bey congratulated the nation and the leaders of the ruling party.69 On January 16 Premier Usubbeyov sent a congratulatory letter to Topchibashov as head of the delegation, thanking them for their work. He added: “I understood from a conversation with your wife that your family is not yet prepared to leave for Paris, so this matter will be settled after she gives a clear answer.”70 Gen. Ibrahim agha Usubov, who was in Italy discussing the issue of arms purchase, telegraphed Ali Mardan bey: A historic event has occurred; Azerbaijan has received the right to be an independent state from this moment. The country owes you for this great

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  171 achievement. Your crystal pure name . . . will always stand in the first place in the chronicle of Azerbaijan.71

Caucasian discussions in London, Paris, and San Remo After their independence was recognized at Versailles, Azerbaijan and Georgia held discussions to organize a joint defense against Bolshevik aggression. Both Chkheidze and Topchibashov assured everyone (at a meeting of the Supreme Council and then in Paris newspapers) that their countries were not going to interfere in Russia’s internal affairs, attack Russia, or provide arms for such an attack.72 Topchibashov noted both Azerbaijan and Georgia thought only of the threat of Bolshevism.73 After Azerbaijan’s independence was recognized, the actions of its representatives in Versailles were expanded. Though the peace conference officially ended its work on January 21, the delegation stayed in Europe a bit longer. A conference of young republics was expected to take place in Switzerland in the spring of 1920. The Azerbaijani delegation took an active part in the London conference in February–March 1920 and planned to take part in a San Remo conference in April. Ali Mardan bey and Mir Yagub Mehdiyev arrived in London on February 24.74 Topchibashov carried a mandate authorizing him to speak on behalf of the Azerbaijan Republic.75 Both Azerbaijan and Georgia hoped for aid or support only from Britain to combat the influence of Bolshevism. The rest of the states could not perform this mission. Khoiskii wrote to Topchibashov about the impending threat from the north, which “forces us to clarify the situation in regard to military aid from the British.” Talks were underway with Wardrope through Col. Claude Stokes. “However, Wardrope is waiting for instructions from London. So you should also take measures in this direction.”76 A forthcoming peace treaty with Turkey  – a matter of vital importance for Azerbaijan – was discussed at the London Conference as well, once again raising interest in the Transcaucasian republics. At the time, all three of the republics did not border upon Russia but were adjacent to the territory of Turkey. When Armenian claims against Turkey were discussed at the London conference, the Azerbaijani representatives in Europe published an alarming telegram from Agha Zeynalov (chair of the Kars national council) in the Paris news bulletin about atrocities committed by Armenians in Kars.77 Khoiskii also informed Major de Nonancourt, the head of the French military mission in the Caucasus, about the unlawful, inhuman actions committed by Armenians in Kars, Zangezur, and Erivan.78 Ali Mardan bey submitted a memorandum on the Kars issue to the Supreme Council of the Allies on March 21, demanding that the interests of 370,000 Muslims be considered in settling the Kars situation.79 Batum was another serious problem. Arriving in London on February 29, the Azerbaijani and Georgian delegates submitted memoranda on Batum and Kars to the Allies. One memorandum, jointly signed by Ali Mardan bey and Chkheidze, asked the president of the Supreme Council to help resolve the Batum issue, which was of vital importance for the Southern Caucasian republics.80 On March 15 a Foreign Office official informed Topchibashov that the memorandum

172  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence had been submitted to Curzon, who would notify the Supreme Council of talks held between the British diplomats and the representatives of Azerbaijan and Georgia.81 On March 21 Ali Mardan bey submitted to the Allies a memorandum containing Azerbaijan’s claims, indicating that Batum represented the only way for the Azerbaijan Republic to get access to the markets of Europe and America. It was the terminal station of the Southern Caucasian railway, and Baku’s petroleum products and Azerbaijan’s trade and industrial goods could only reach the Black Sea through it.82 The Azerbaijani and Georgian delegates reached a consensus that it was not expedient to dismember the Batum region; Azerbaijan agreed that the region (including the town of Batum) would become part of the Georgian Republic, while Georgia pledged to consider all Azerbaijan’s interests in Batum.83 The two sides drafted a mutual appeal to the Supreme Council. The Georgian representatives appreciated the significance of this treaty. However, after a dispute involving Kars at the very last moment, the two sides failed to submit a joint project on Batum to the Supreme Council. At the London conference the Entente foreign ministers suggested transferring the Kars region to Armenia. Because of Armenia’s unfounded claims, the London Conference did not confirm the status quo in Transcaucasia. Avetis Agharonian, head of the Armenian delegation, suggested settling the matter of borders at the Allies’ discretion if the three neighboring republics could not settle it themselves. He noted that the Armenian-Azerbaijani conference had ended without result in December 1919.84 Neither Topchibashov nor Chkheidze agreed with this proposal. Ali Mardan bey noted that the Dashnak government was complicating the situation on purpose to convince Europeans that this situation could not be resolved. Armenians understood that the conference’s sympathies were on their side. Georgia and Azerbaijan understood this as well. Thus, they agreed to resolve the border conflict not in London or Paris but only locally. The Georgians suggested (and everyone agreed) sending telegrams to the capitals of the Caucasian republics to ask them to create arbitration boards to settle the frontier issue. Only if they failed could this matter be submitted to Europe for consideration.85 Transcaucasian issues were not completely resolved at the London conference and were considered at the next conference in San Remo. While in London, Ali Mardan bey met with Lord Charles Harding, deputy chief of the British Foreign Office; Admiral Bitty, the naval minister; Gen. William Thwaites, director of the War Ministry Intelligence Division; and other officials. On March 30, 1920, in connection with the defeat of the Denikin troops, he submitted a written appeal to Harding, noting that part of the Caspian Fleet had been transferred to the Volunteer Army in August 1919 by a decision of the British. After Denikin’s defeat this fleet had been moved to Enzeli, under British control. Now Ali Mardan bey asked to put these Enzeli-based ships at the disposal of the Azerbaijani government in order to fortify Baku’s coastline, reminding Harding that he had discussed this matter with Field Marshal Wilson and Admiral Bitty in Paris.86 After returning to Paris, the Azerbaijani delegation published a detailed report in the news bulletin.

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  173 The Allies gathered in San Remo on April 19–26. France’s Alexandre Milierand, Britain’s Lloyd George, Italy’s Nitti, and Japan’s Matsui attended. US representatives were present as observers, while representatives of Greece and Belgium took part only in the discussions of matters involving their interests. Many questions of interest to Azerbaijan, particularly Batum, oil, the draft of a peace treaty with Turkey, the Turkish-Armenian border, the internal border among Transcaucasian republics, the Russian problem, and aid to the Transcaucasian republics, had to be discussed in San Remo. Robert Vansittart of the British Foreign Office was sent to Paris on the eve of the conference to help the representatives of the Caucasian republics reach agreement on a series of issues. Chkheidze, Topchibashov, Boghos Nubar pasha, and Agharonian gathered at the Campbell Hotel on April 13. According to Vansittart, many believe that the Transcaucasian republics have no future because they cannot unite efforts. . . . For instance, it is known that all three republics have different opinions regarding the Batum issue. There are other disputed issues as well. The memorandum by Topchibashov presented in London contains a concept that is worthy of a wise statesman.87 On April  15 representatives of all three republics discussed the Batum issue again. On April  16 they were joined by the British representative, who openly announced that the discord among the three republics was the key reason why they did not receive arms: the Allies feared that they would use these arms against each another.88 Despite serious efforts by Vansittart, the Caucasian republics failed to agree upon any of the disputed matters. The question of formation of a “Great Armenia” between Turkey and other Muslim countries was raised in San Remo again. President Wilson addressed the conference’s chairman, Francesco Nitti, with this proposal, which had initially been viewed favorably but finally failed to be accepted. Nitti wrote: To restore the Armenia that President Wilson desired to see, it would be necessary to oust Turks and Russians. Who will bear responsibility for this task?. . . . Everyone praised Wilson’s intentions; however, Britain, France, and Italy would not agree to take responsibility for such a hard task as taking Armenia under its protectorate, for this would have meant direct war against Turks and, beyond any doubt, against Russians a bit later.89 Discussions of the Batum issue continued in San Remo as well. On April 23 the Azerbaijani and Georgian delegates submitted a joint memorandum. On April 24 all three Caucasian delegations, as well as British representatives, held a meeting at the Raul Hotel. Lord Curzon tried to promote the Armenians’ interest in Batum. Ali Mardan bey and Chkheidze jointly appealed to him on April 23, asking him to receive them to clarify the Batum situation. A day earlier Topchibashov had sent the chair of the Supreme Council a letter asking him to discuss issues pertaining

174  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence to Azerbaijan only in the presence of the Azerbaijani delegation.90 The Armenian delegation demanded to take control of part of the Batum Port, to make Georgians agree to build a railway from Armenia to Batum, and to consider this railway a constituent part of the Armenian Republic.91 The British insisted that the Armenians should have access to the sea and that this was a personal request from Lord Curzon, but Chkheidze remained adamant. He noted that Lord Curzon had very high authority in the Supreme Council but that public opinion and the will of the Georgian people were higher. Topchibashov added that the desires of the Muslim population of Batum had to be taken into account as well.92 On April 24 the representatives of Azerbaijan and Georgia submitted a joint project to the Supreme Council, offering to resolve the Batum problem through arbitration.93 The Allies declared Batum a free port. One French regiment and one Italian regiment were sent there at the request of Lloyd George. The Azerbaijan Republic maintained its right to use the Port of Batum. The Allies reported on the conference’s last day that the Transcaucasian republics would be given aid only if they established lasting peace and mutual understanding. Azerbaijan became the first victim of this decision in San Remo.

Notes

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Letter from Topchibashov to Wilson, September 26, 1919, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 14. See: Ibid., 15. See: Third Session of the Sixty-Fifth Congress of the USA, Vol. 57, part 5, 39. See: The Contract (# 1) Between Topchibashev and Chandler, September, 1919, SARA, f. 970, s. 1, i. 142, v. 131–132. See: Hasanli (Hasanov), Azerbaijani-American Relations from 1918–1920, 7. Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 6–10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 146, p. 10. See: Letter from Max Rabinov to Topchibashov, September 22, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 116–117. See: Minutes of Joint Meeting Held by the Azerbaijan and Georgian Peace Delegations, August 28, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 228–229; Minutes of Joint Meeting Held by the Azerbaijan and Georgian Peace Delegations, August 18, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, pp. 235–236. Letter from Max Rabinov to Topchibashov, November 1, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 146, p. 57. AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 89. Letter from Walter Chandler to Topchibashov, October 18, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v.  146, pp. 53–54. Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, November  22, 1919, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 1–3. Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 6–10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 146, p. 11. Letter from Walter Chandler to Topchibashov, November 1, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 145, p. 59. Ibid., 56. SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 145, p. 10. Letter from Max Rabinov to Topchibashov, November 3, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 145, pp. 79–80. Letter from Walter Chandler to Topchibashov, November 10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 145, p. 80.

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  175 19 Letter from Walter Chandler to Topchibashov, November  10, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–2. 20 Telegram Transmitted by Topchibashov to the Council of Ministers of the Azerbaijan Republic from the Radio Station at the Eiffel Tower, Noyabr, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 145, p. 109. 21 Président de la Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan Ali Mardan Toptchibacheff – Monsieur le Président de la Conférence de la Paix. Le 17 septembre 1919, AMAÉF, vol. 832, folio 107–108. 22 Letter from Topchibashov and Chkheidze to the Chairman of the Peace Conference, September 17, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 102. 23 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 6–10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 146, p. 2. 24 Note of Topchibashov (Azerbaijan), Chermoyev (the North Caucasus republic), Pusta (Estonia), Chkheidze (Georgia), Bych (Kuban), Seskis (Latvia), Narushevich (Lithuania) to George Clemenceau, chairman of the Peace Conference, October  8, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 13, pp. 8–9. 25 Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Janvier 17, 1920, # 7, 3. 26 Topchubashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 93. 27 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 6–10, 1919, SARA, f. 894, r. 10, v. 94, p. 21. 28 Topchubashev, Pisma iz Parizha, 95–96. 29 Letter from Foreign Ministry Azerbaijan to Topchibashov, 1919, SARA, f. 2905, r. 1, v. 21, pp. 8–10. 30 Letter of Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 6–10, 1919, SARA f. 894, r. 10, v. 94, p. 17. 31 Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, November  25, 1919, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 1–3. 32 Reminder Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, November 28, 1919, SALAAR, f. 648, r. 6, v. 6, p. 1. 33 Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, December 5, 1919, AAMT, carton no 9, 6. 34 Letter of Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 6–10, 1919, SARA f. 970, r. 1, v. 146, pp. 16–17. 35 Georges Brocher, L’Azerbidjan, “Les Peuples Libres” Journal, Juin 1919, Numero 6, 226–229. 36 Georges Brocher, Le Droit D’Auto-Disposition et la Republique de l’Azerbaidjan du Caucase, 1920, AAMT, carton no 1, 298–299. 37 Ibid., 306. 38 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 29, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 142, p. 7. 39 Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Decembre 15, 1919, # 5, 3. 40 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 29– December 2, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 145, pp. 8–9. 41 Ibid., 16–17. 42 Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Fevrier 1, 1920, # 8, 1. 43 Richard H. Ullman, Anglo-Soviet Relations 1917–1921. Volume II. Britain and the Russian Civil War. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968, 322. 44 See: Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. Paris Peace Conference, vol. IX, 851. 45 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 240. 46 See: Copie de la resolution du Conseil Suprema en date du 10 Janvier 1920, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 1. 47 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference, Vol. IX, 959; Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan. Janvier 17, 1920, # 7, 1.

176  Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence 48 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, Vol. IX, 902–903. 49 Audition des Delegues de l’Azerbeidjan et de la Georgie. Proces – Verbal. Séance du jeudi 15 janvier 1920, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 17–18. 50 Reconnaissance des Gouvernements de Géorgie et d’Azerbaïdjan Le 22 janvier 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 183. 51 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 243–244. 52 See: Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference, vol. IX, 866. 53 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 245. 54 Bulletin d’Information de l’Azerbaidjan, Fevrier 1, 1920, # 8, 1–2. 55 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference, vol. IX, 900. 56 Ibid., 891. 57 Copie d’un extrait du Proces Verbal de la Séance du Conseil Suprema du 19 Janvier 1920, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 5–6. 58 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference, vol. IX, 892–893. 59 Copie d’un extrait du Proces Verbal de la Séance du Conseil Suprema du 19 Janvier 1920, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 8. 60 Ibid., 9. 61 Ibid., 9–10. 62 Ibid., 13. 63 Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference, vol. IX, 901–902. 64 Président de la Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan A.M. Toptchibacheff – Le Cabinet a envoyé carte 29 novembre 1929, AMAÉF, (Correspondance politique et commerciale, 1914–1940 Série “Z” Europe 1918–1940 Sous-Série URSS Russie-Caucase (Azerbaïdjan) Direction des Affaires Politiques et Commerciales 1 avril 1920–31 décembre 1929), vol. 639, folio 307. 65 Letter from Topchibashov to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, November 6–10, 1919, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 146, 27–28. 66 Information of Wardrop to Fariz bey Vekilov, January 12, 1920, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 447. 67 Urgent Diplomatic Information of Topchibashov to Usubbeyov, January  12, 1920, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 1; SARA, f. 897, r. 1, v. 69, p. 18. 68 L’Entente, January 11, 1919. 69 Congratulatory Telegram from Topchibashev to Rasulzade, January 14, 1920, SARA, f. 970, r. 1, v. 157, p. 45. 70 Letter from Usubbeyov to Topchibashov, January  16, 1920, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 852–853. 71 Telegram from General Usubov from Italy to Topchibasheff, February 3, 1920, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 854–855. 72 Bulletin D’informations de l’Azerbaidjan, Fevrier 1, 1920, # 8, 2–3. 73 Azerbaycan, April 3, 1920. 74 Visa in the diplomatic passport of Topchibashev, February 23, 1920, AAMT, carton no 3, 2. 75 Mandate of Topchibashev to negotiate with the British Government, January 16, 1920, AAMT, carton no 8, 1. 76 Raievskii, Angliyskaia intervensiia i musavatskoie pravitelstvo, 169. 77 Bulletin D’informations de l’Azerbaidjan, Avril 1, 1920, # 12, 1–4. 78 Le Ministre des Affaires Etrangères Khoisky – Copie d’un télégramme de Bakou au Commandant de Nonancourt. Le 30 mars 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 233.

Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence  177 79 Memorandum of Topchibasheva for Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Allies, March 21–27, 1920, AAMT, carton no 9, 2. 80 Memorandum of Azerbaijan and Georgian Representatives for the Supreme Council of the Allies, February 29, 1920, AAMT, carton no 9, 1. 81 Information from Foreign Office to Topchibashev, March 15, 1920, AAMT, carton no 9, 1. 82 Le Ministre des Affaires Etrangères Khoisky – Copie d’un télégramme de Bakou au Commandant de Nonancourt. Le 30 mars 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 638, folio 262. 83 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 262. 84 See: Conference Armeno-Azerbaidjanienne, December  14–21, 1919, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 786–827. 85 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 263. 86 Appeal from Topchibashev to Lord Harding, March  30, 1920, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–2. 87 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 265–266. 88 Ibid., 268. 89 Francesco Nitti, Vyrozhdenie Evropy. Moscow and Petrograd: Izd-vo L.D.Frenkel, 1923, 107. 90 San-Remo # 371/417. Aprel 1920, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1. 91 Mir-Yacoub, Le probleme du Caucase. Paris: G.P. Maisonneuve, 1933, 134. 92 Avalov, Nezavisimost Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoy politike, 279. 93 San-Remo # 371/417. Aprel 1920, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1.

11 The active struggle for restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence (1920–1923)

When the Azerbaijani delegates returned to France from San Remo they found out that the Bolsheviks had occupied Baku. Topchibashov immediately asked the French government for permission to send a radiogram to the Council of Ministers of Azerbaijan.1 On May 3, with the help of the French Foreign Ministry, he sent this radiogram: For two consecutive days now, newspapers have been reporting important news from Azerbaijan. Members of the Azerbaijani delegation who have returned from San Remo are not aware of anything. We sincerely request that you inform members of the delegation about what’s going on.2 At the same time he submitted notes to the Supreme Council of the Allies, to the governments of France, Britain, the United States, and Italy, and to the embassies of foreign countries headquartered in Paris, protesting against the occupation of the sovereign Azerbaijani state by Soviet Russia’s armed forces. The Azerbaijani delegates hoped that the peace conference would help Azerbaijan to restore its independence.3 Similar notes and appeals were repeatedly submitted to the League of Nations and countries that determined global policy.4

Initial diplomatic steps against the Bolshevik occupation Contradictory rumors about Azerbaijan’s occupation spread in Europe. Azerbaijan’s representative in Tehran, Adil khan Ziyadkhanov, sent news in late April  1920 to Topchibashov through the British mission in Iran that the Bolsheviks had seized Baku.5 During the April occupation, Mir Yagub Mehdiyev, who was in Great Britain at the time, wrote to Topchibashov that the British and Russians were holding secret talks over Azerbaijan. The Bolsheviks agreed to recognize Azerbaijan’s independence in exchange for taking over 80 percent of Baku’s oil. However, the British objected to this and other countries were also displaying interest in the Baku oil.6 The stories in European newspapers on the occupation of Azerbaijan varied widely. The Azerbaijani peace delegation led by Ali Mardan bey analyzed this information in an effort to answer the unresolved questions through Ganja and Tiflis. A nineteen-item questionnaire contained the

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  179 following questions: the population and parliament’s attitudes to the occupation; the reasons for the absence of the Azerbaijani Army in Baku when it surrendered and was occupied; whether the Armenian and Russian population supported the Bolsheviks; the presence of foreign troops in Baku; who ruled the city (Azerbaijanis or Moscow Bolsheviks); the situation in the rest of Azerbaijan; whether the population was ruled by the government in Ganja (where some members of the government and army units had gathered); the state of Azerbaijani and Georgian relations with Armenia; whether European newspaper reports that a war between Azerbaijan and Georgia had begun were true; the contents of a treaty concluded between Georgia and Russia on June 12; participation of Azerbaijanis in the seizure of Enzeli by Bolsheviks; the influence of these events on the separatist movement in Iranian Azerbaijan; which parties in Azerbaijan advocated the April 28 coup; how much oil the Bolsheviks exported from Baku; and so forth. They also asked whether people in Azerbaijan knew that “our representatives have agreed to recognize Georgia’s sovereignty over Batum if Azerbaijan is given access to the sea via the port of Batum?”7 On June 8, 1920, Topchibashov appealed to the Supreme Council of the peace conference on behalf of the whole delegation in Europe, expressing hope that the Supreme Council and Entente states in general would defend the Azerbaijani government and its peace delegation in Europe, which had been subjected to aggression by Russian Bolsheviks. He reminded the council that the issue of defending Azerbaijan against the Bolshevik threat had already been considered on January 17 and January 19, 1920, at plenary meetings of the Supreme Council of the Versailles Conference and at meetings chaired by Field Marshal Wilson. The Azerbaijani government and its representatives in Paris and London were still waiting for the promised arms needed to defend Baku. Moreover, the republic was ready to pay for the weapons and ammunition with oil (a reserve of more than two hundred million poods had been accumulated). Topchibashov assured the council that the Azerbaijani people would never reconcile with the Bolshevik occupation, would defend its independence and freedom in every way, and had great hope that the Versailles Supreme Council would aid them in this struggle.8 On June 30, 1920, Topchibashov once again strongly protested to the Versailles Supreme Council against a promise by Leonid Krasin (the Soviet commissar in charge of trade) to pay off Russia’s debts to the Western countries by issuing concessions for Baku oil.9 A day later he gave the same note to the Supreme Economic Council of the Versailles Conference, insisting that Krasin was neither authorized nor empowered to promise Azerbaijan’s natural riches to anyone.10 A conference in Spa (July 6–16, 1920) received the same appeal. On July 6 Topchibashov drew attention to the seizure of Azerbaijan: “The de facto recognition of Azerbaijan by the Supreme Council of Versailles has inspired the Azerbaijani people. This recognition gave the people hope that a new period in the life of the young state was about to begin. . . . However, our country almost at once fell victim to Bolshevik aggression.”11 Copies of this appeal were passed to the heads of all delegations represented in Spa. Topchibashov told the French delegation that this was an issue of vital importance for Azerbaijan and that he was making this statement with a

180  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence firm belief in justice.12 On July 15, 1920, he wrote to Jeyhun bey Hajibeli about these efforts: “Today we submitted the second note, a copy of which I’m sending to you.” He told him that they asked Ignacy Jan Paderewski “if he could place a note by Georges Brocher in his newspaper.”13 Upon his return to Paris, Ali Mardan bey asked the French Foreign Ministry to discuss the Bolshevik occupation. He proposed a meeting with the secretary general but was told that he could meet with an assistant on October 10.14 Despite all his efforts, Ali Mardan bey failed to break the plot of silence of the Western countries. The United States and countries like it tried to use Soviet Russia’s seizure of Azerbaijan to defend the concept of an indivisible Russia and Armenia’s independence. On August 16, 1920, Topchibashov protested to the US ambassador in Paris, Hugh Campbell Wallace, about a note that the US State Department had sent to the Italian government: Given that the Azerbaijani people have separated from the Russian state no matter what its future form will be and on May 28, 1918, made the decision to establish the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, the Azerbaijani delegation can no way agree with the concept of the note regarding Russia’s future.15 Other Western countries had a similar attitude toward Russia’s restoration within the 1914 boundaries. The arrest of foreign diplomats in Baku in April caused a serious international scandal. The Bolsheviks “took into custody” Major Daly, the British military mission’s envoy in Baku. The British ambassador in Paris was instructed to demand that the French Foreign Ministry not issue visas to the Azerbaijani delegation in Paris until the matter of the British military mission in Baku was settled.16 However, the French believed that it was impossible to comply with this request, pointing out that the Azerbaijani delegation in Paris represented the state that was recognized by the Allies and had nothing in common with the Bolsheviks.17 This issue was aggravated in October of the same year, so a crisis emerged between Soviet Russia and Great Britain. Georgii Chicherin told British officials that the release of the captives was completely dependent on the government of Azerbaijan. Thus, the British Foreign Office asked the Azerbaijani delegation in Paris for help. In a letter on October  10, Topchibashov told Curzon that Azerbaijan was no longer independent after the Bolshevik occupation and that Chicherin’s words were nothing but traditional Bolshevik fiction. He described the atrocities committed by the Bolsheviks in Azerbaijan and explained that the slogan “Independent Soviet Azerbaijan” was only used as a mask for Russian colonial policy. Topchibashov considered it his moral obligation to contribute to the release of the British diplomats and had already sent several telegrams to the Commissariat of Foreign Affairs of the Azerbaijani government.18 The British Foreign Office thanked him for this help and described the negotiations with the Soviet government on the detained British citizens.19 In November  1920 Moscow gave in to international pressure and released the British diplomats. However, anti-Soviet sentiments in the West had become much stronger by that time.

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  181

The attempt to join the League of Nations On September  8 the Azerbaijani delegation asked the Geneva-headquartered League of Nations for help in opposing the Bolshevik occupation of Azerbaijan.20 To receive such aid, the peace delegation decided to join the League of Nations on October 28, 1920. Topchibashov submitted their written appeal to Sir Eric Drummond, the secretary general, on November 1, 1920: We do not doubt that we will receive guarantees of the inviolability of the rights of our people from such an honest, fair international organization as the League of Nations. . . . Our nation possesses all the necessary material and human reserves for development and free political self-expression in a family of nations established on the basis of the genius principles of Wilson. Azerbaijan’s acceptance into the League of Nations would allow it to live freely and independently under that organization’s protection.21 The League of Nations carefully examined the Azerbaijani delegation’s appeal on November  15. Drummond released a “Memorandum on the Occasion of the Azerbaijan Republic’s Appeal for Acceptance into the League of Nations” on November  24, explaining that the delegation aspiring to membership in the League of Nations had been authorized by the government that had been in power in Azerbaijan before April 1920. He briefly outlined information about the independent republic over the past two years and noted that the Versailles Supreme Council had recognized Azerbaijan de facto in January 1920 and the republic had fallen in April 1920. Drummond raised the question of whether the current conditions of the Azerbaijani state conformed to the rules regulating acceptance of new members into the league: “Will the delegation that has submitted the appeal be authorized to represent the legitimate government of its country, and will the government take the commitment in such a situation and will it provide guarantees regarding the country’s membership in the League of Nations?”22 He gave one copy of the memorandum to the Azerbaijani delegation. The Azerbaijani representatives submitted another letter to Drummond on November  26, pointing out mistakes in the memorandum, including the name of the country and its population and territory, which was “not 40,000 square miles . . . but 94,137 square miles.” Topchibashov recounted the struggle of the Azerbaijani people: In June 15,000 people were killed in the town of Ganja alone, mostly innocent old people, women, and children. Despite the victories of the Bolsheviks and the murders, the Azerbaijani people rose up against the new Russian occupation and struggled without receiving any aid. Owing to this struggle, Bolsheviks have managed to keep only Baku and its outskirts under control. These corrections should be included in the memorandum.23

182  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence

Figure 11.1  Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov in his office in Paris, 1920.

Despite all these efforts, the Fifth Committee established by the League of Nations Assembly decided on December  1, 1920, that it was not possible to accept the Azerbaijan Republic into the league because it was not possible to determine the boundaries of the jurisdiction of the government of the Azerbaijani state (meaning the Republic of Azerbaijan) because of disputes with the neighboring states.24 At the Turing-Balance Hotel in Geneva members of the Azerbaijani delegation discussed this decision. Topchibashov sent a letter of protest to the assembly’s president, Paul Hymans, on December 7, 1920. On defining the boundaries, he wrote that “the difficulties to which the committee refers are only temporary and conditional, so they cannot and must not be regarded as decisive for this issue.” He noted that “it is almost impossible to find any new state whose borders have been indisputable. On the contrary, we see that not only new states but also states that have existed for centuries have had territorial and border disputes; however, these disputes do not deprive them of the right to their own territory.” On behalf of a country that had twice suffered because a Bolshevik Russian attack, the delegates believed that “acceptance of the Azerbaijan Republic into the League of Nations would give the country the moral support that our people so much need in fighting Bolsheviks: people who have been struggling alone for the sake of saving Azerbaijan’s independence for more than six months, without any outside help.”25

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  183 Despite all this, the decision was not reconsidered. On December  20, 1920, Drummond reported to Topchibashov that it was impossible to accept the Azerbaijan Republic as a member of the League of Nations in present conditions.26 Thus, their hopes for the league’s moral and political backing to fight Bolshevism were not fulfilled.

Talks with French officials Armenia and Georgia were seized by Bolsheviks in November 1920 and February 1921 respectively, so all the Caucasian representations in Paris found themselves in a difficult situation. On August 11, 1921, the delegations of Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, and the Northern Caucasus asked French premier Aristide Briand for financial aid. On August 28 Briand wrote to Akakii Chkhenkeli that the French government was interested in the economic development of the Caucasian republics, but it would be more appropriate to solve this problem through banks and industrial organs. He recommended that the Caucasian representatives obtain guarantees from their respective governments and begin talks with French financial and industrial circles on economic development of the region. The French government would render any possible assistance.27 The occupation of Georgia and Armenia by Russia gradually forced the Caucasian representatives in Europe to become closer. After Georgia was seized, the Azerbaijani delegation in Paris arranged a meeting on May 8, 1921, which discussed the necessity of a joint struggle for independence of the Caucasian republics, introducing the concept of a confederation of Caucasian republics. This idea was very popular in French political circles. The issue was discussed in detail with Turkish foreign minister Bekir Sami bey. During his talks with Lloyd George in London in March–April 1921, Bekir Sami bey had considered it necessary to create a Caucasian confederation friendly to Turkey, in order to counteract the Bolsheviks. Except for the Armenians, the other Caucasian representatives, including the Azerbaijani delegation, discussed the issue with Bekir Sami bey, saying that cooperation of the Caucasian nations with Turkey was possible under the condition that Turkey not make any political or territorial claims to the Caucasus and that the Kemalist government recognize the Turkish-Georgian border. Bekir Sami bey noted that Turkey had no such territorial claims but was interested in a strong defense line between Russia and Anatolia and that the Caucasian confederation could perform this function. He believed that Turkey would not be able to provide assistance to the Caucasian confederation until the war against the Greeks was over. Then Turkey would be eager to sign a treaty of friendship and alliance with the Caucasian confederation.28 The first meeting of plenipotentiary representatives of the Caucasian republics was held in Paris on June 10, 1921. They established a political and economic alliance of the Caucasian republics and signed a joint declaration. Putting aside their disputes, the representatives of Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia, and the North Caucasus Republic in Europe entered into close cooperation to protect the independence of the Caucasian peoples, restore democratic rule in these countries,

184  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence and achieve prosperity in the region.29 The ten-article Paris declaration was signed by Ali Mardan bey, Republic of Azerbaijan; Avetis Agharonian, Republic of Armenia; Abdul Mejid Chermoyev, Republic of the North Caucasus; and Akakii Chkhenkeli, Georgian Republic. The participation of the Armenians (who in many cases opposed Caucasian solidarity) in this event was due to the great powers’ interest in a political alliance of the Caucasian republics. After the Paris Declaration was completed, representatives of the Caucasian governments in exile attempted to enter into talks with Russian emigrants residing in Paris. French official circles wanted the Caucasian and Russian emigrants to unite into a common anti-Bolshevik front. On July  4, 1921, Paris hosted a joint meeting of representatives of the Caucasian and Russian exiles, attended by Topchibashov, Azerbaijan; Evgenii Gegechkori and Konstantin Sabakhtarashvili, Georgia; Abdul Mejid Chermoyev, the Northern Caucasus; Avetis Agharonian, Armenia; and Vasilli Maklakov, the Russian Provisional Government’s former ambassador in France, and Andrei Mandelshtam, the first dragoman of the Russian Embassy in Istanbul (1898–1914). France was represented by Abel Chevalley, the former supreme commissar in the Caucasus, and Professor Larnaud of the Sorbonne. At the meeting, chaired by Larnaud, Ali Mardan bey noted that Azerbaijan was one of the most ardent supporters of establishing the Caucasian confederation. Turkey also favored the idea. He urged Anglo-French allies to recognize the rights of Turkey and provide aid to it as the guarantor of stability in the East. “The accord between Turkey and Bolsheviks is only temporary because the concepts of Bolshevism contradict Islamic morals and traditions.”30 Chevalley was displeased with Topchibashov’s attitude to Turkey and paid particular attention to the cultural development of Armenia and Georgia. He was surprised that these republics continued to exist near a huge state like Turkey, “by the way, a sworn enemy of the Allies.”31 Chevalley also wanted Gegechkori to speak against Topchibashov, but the Georgian representative did not dare to do so. Sabakhtarashvili, the other Georgian, mainly criticized the aggressive policy of Russian Bolsheviks, stressing that “according to a treaty concluded between Georgia and Russia 100 years ago, Georgia received the right to self-government.”32 The accusations of imperialism directed at Russia angered Maklakov, who recalled its “paternal care” of Armenians, threatening that “tomorrow Russia will stand firmly on its feet again” and that Georgia could settle the matter of its self-determination “only with Russia’s permission.”33 The stormy discussions produced no meaningful results. On July 19, 1921, the Paris Declaration was officially presented to the League of Nations. On behalf of the Caucasian governments in exile, Chkhenkeli told Philippe Berthelot, secretary general of the French Foreign Ministry, that the delegations of Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, and the North Caucasus Republic rested great hopes on France in regard to the Caucasian confederation and that such talks were expected to take place during Bekir Sami bey’s forthcoming visit to Paris. Topchibashov, Chkhenkeli, Chermoyev, and Agharonian met with French premier Aristide Briand on August 3 and gave him a copy of the Paris Declaration signed on June 10.34 Briand indicated that hope for restoration of the independence of

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  185 the Caucasian republics was increasing in French political circles as the crisis of Bolshevism in Russia grew worse: “I considered it necessary to meet you in order to find out your attitudes to overthrowing the Bolshevist regime in Russia in the very near future. I’d like to know, to what extent are you ready to rule your countries?”35 The Caucasian representatives assured him that the 1918 mistakes would never be repeated. Speaking for all those present, Agharonian noted: We hope that the lessons of the past will help us avoid new disputes, and we will seek relations on stronger foundations. In planning restructuring and integration processes, we especially hope for moral and financial aid from France. You are well aware of all the sufferings of our population. The arbitrariness of the Bolsheviks has caused many of the nation’s hardships.36 Briand replied: “We are ready to help you; however, out of the four Caucasian republics, only Georgia was recognized de jure. . . . Now we have the opportunity to carry out all interactions with you through this state; when the other states are recognized in the future, then their turn will come as well.” He asked them to give him a list of what they needed, especially weapons and ammunition. “As for bread, it’s not so difficult to get it.”37 Abdul Mejid Chermoyev and Akakii Chkhenkeli asked Briand to help obtain France’s de jure recognition of the North Caucasus Republic, like the other Caucasian republics. The events of autumn 1921 (the Kemalists’ victory on the Greek-Turkish front, the Kars Treaty between Turkey and the Caucasian Soviet republics, and the Ankara Treaty between France and Turkey) changed the political situation substantially. Henry Franklin-Bouillon, the chief initiator of the Ankara Treaty, and the Turkish envoy in Paris told Ali Mardan bey that “your business is now fine” and that the Caucasus would be freed from Bolsheviks in the very near future.38 The Caucasian representatives again met with Briand on October  23, 1921, to discuss the situation. They noted that the Franco-Turkish Treaty signed in Ankara several days earlier would make Kemalists maintain a distance from Bolsheviks, weakening the Bolsheviks in the region and forcing Russia to withdraw from the territory of the Caucasian republics. The governments in exile considered it necessary to attract French capital to the Caucasus. They told the French premier that the success of the expected nationwide revolt against Bolshevism would depend to a considerable extent on the neutrality of the Turks. All the Caucasians except Agharonian asked Briand to help them reach an agreement with the Turks on this matter. Briand assured them that the “Turks themselves desire to have such a treaty. This is required by their interests. A Turkish-Bolshevik alliance or links between Turks and Russians cannot be serious.”39 These discussions did not reflect the true situation, but Briand wanted to help the Caucasian governments in exile. Thus, they decided to establish a mixed commission representing the French government and all the Caucasian governments, in order to provide real assistance to the Caucasian peoples. Briand entrusted this work to Louis Lucher, the minister in charge of liberated territories, who met the representatives of the Caucasian republics on November 7. When asked

186  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence what aid France must provide most of all, the representatives of all four republics unanimously said financial aid.40 Chkhenkeli noted that the Bolshevik rule over the Caucasian republics was temporary. With aid from France and the Allies the national governments would take control in the very near future. Chkenkeli also assured him that the Caucasian republics were ready to recognize foreigners’ rights to private property and to pay off their share of debts to Russia, which was important to France. Chermoyev said that Baku and Groznyi had met 95 percent of tsarist Russia’s demand for oil. Compared with the industrial regions of central Russia, the oil industry of the Caucasus suffered less from the meddling of the Bolsheviks; for example, just 100,000 francs would be sufficient to restore the Baku-Batum oil pipeline within three months. As a result of these talks it was decided to emphasize the issues of financing, oil, and railways. Lucher promised that French experts would help.41 These talks, especially the promise of financial aid, seriously alarmed the Soviets, who were attentively tracking this process. A secret report of the Azerbaijani Embassy in Turkey reported that “Topchibashov sold 30 dessyatins of oil territory to the French for 1 million francs, of which he received 100,000 francs as a prepayment.”42 The talks did indeed allow the Caucasian emigrants to receive minor financial aid, but not for long.

The decreasing interest in the governments in exile During this period Ali Mardan bey suffered great moral stress but never lost hope. The most important problem was to continue the activity of the Azerbaijani delegation in Europe and extend the visas of Azerbaijani high school students. He asked the French Foreign Ministry to issue certificates for a period of one year, but citizens of Azerbaijan should be labeled “Azerbaijani” not “Russian” in the “nationality” column. On May 3, 1920, the ministry agreed to issue such documents.43 On June 5 Topchibashov sent a letter to the Versailles Conference Secretariat naming the members of the Azerbaijani delegation: Topchibashov as head of the delegation and of parliament, Sheikhulislamov, Mehdiyev, and Maharramov as members of both, Hajibeyli as an advisor, and Abbas bey Atamalybeyov as a member of parliament and secretary of the delegation.44 In September 1920 Topchibashov again asked the French Foreign Ministry to prolong the delegation’s stay in Paris. The ministry recommended that he contact General Stéphen Pichon, one of the leaders of the Army Headquarters of France. Pichon was familiar with the Caucasian issue, so he could help the Azerbaijani delegation.45 After great hardships, the police agreed to prolong the visa of the Azerbaijani peace delegation in Paris.46 With support from the Azerbaijani government, 82 young Azerbaijanis were studying in various universities of Western Europe. They received a three-month allowance in March 1920, but the new government refused to finance their study after this money ran out. The Azerbaijani peace delegation itself was short of money, so the Azerbaijani students were in a difficult situation. To save them, Topchibashov appealed to Chermoyev as the head of the North Caucasus Republic’s

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  187 delegation on August 3, 1920. He reminded him that the Azerbaijani government had assigned a credit of 50 million manats to the North Caucasian government and that the Azerbaijani delegation in Paris had lent 50,000 francs to that delegation. Now Topchibashov asked Chermoyev to repay 200,000 francs. He suggested paying this money in two portions, each equivalent to 100,000 francs, and even indicated that he would pay this money back to the North Caucasus as soon as the financial position of the Azerbaijani delegation improved.47 In his reply dated August 7, 1920, Abdul Mejid Chermoyev confirmed that the delegation had received a large sum of money from the Azerbaijani government and its representatives in Paris. However, the North Caucasus Republic’s accounts in French banks were currently empty. Nevertheless, he wrote, as a Caucasian highlander, I share your heartache when I see the sad situation of the Azerbaijani people. We cannot remain indifferent to the temporary hardships facing the youths and delegates in a strange land. I consider it my duty to do all that I can . . . currently I can lend you only 75,000 francs, and the same sum a month later. This money comes from my personal savings.48 Chermoyev asked for a written commitment on receipt of the money. The Azerbaijani delegation authorized Topchibashov to hold talks with the representatives of the Caucasian republics to sign economic, trade, and financial documents. Abdul Mejid Chermoyev was informed about this in a letter on August 9, 1920.49 The money received from the head of the North Caucasus delegation temporarily got the Azerbaijani delegation and students out of a serious financial crisis. This sum was paid back to Chermoyev through Lloyd’s Bank in February 1921.50 Suffering financial hardships, Ali Mardan bey and Chkhenkeli appealed to their old American friend Walter Chandler on July 23, 1923. In his respectful letter dated August 9, Chandler noted that it would be hard to find sponsors in America as long as the Caucasian countries remained under occupation.51 The true financial situation becomes evident from a letter that Atamalybeyov, secretary of the Azerbaijani delegation, sent to the French Foreign Ministry on July 7, 1922, telling him that the tax inspector had demanded that the head of the delegation provide a report on revenues for the past three years. The Foreign Ministry was well aware that the money brought from Baku had run out long ago and that “as a result of the temporary Bolshevik occupation, financial assistance to the delegation from Baku has been terminated.” Atamalybeyov stressed that no revenues had been obtained in recent years and asked the Foreign Ministry to inform the Finance Ministry and Tax Inspectorate of this.52 Similar letters were sent to the Finance Ministry’s Tax Inspectorate on September 19, 1922, and to the director of the Department of Commerce on March 26, 1923. However, on April 12, the Finance Ministry officially notified the delegation that the Azerbaijan Republic de facto recognized by the Paris Peace Conference did not exist; therefore, the Azerbaijani delegation no longer enjoyed diplomatic tax privileges.53 A detailed letter was delivered to Topchibashov on April 16. Since the delegates had no diplomatic immunity, it was impossible to make them tax-free: “The existing legal provisions

188  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence do not permit this, since no government in Azerbaijan was recognized by the Paris Peace Conference.”54 Disputes over the tax issue had barely quieted down when the problem of prolonging the Azerbaijani delegation’s visa emerged at the end of 1922. Topchibashov appealed to the Foreign Ministry on December  20, 1922. Unlike the tax affairs, this matter was settled rather smoothly. In January 1923 Count Peretti de La Rocca decided to prolong the visa. Topchibashov thanked the French Foreign Ministry on January 29.55 Immediately after the visa was received, on February 1, 1923, Topchibashov sent a detailed analysis of the situation in Azerbaijan to Eric Drummond, secretary general of the League of Nations. In his appeal to the league on September 15, 1922, he had described the sad results of the Bolshevik policy in Azerbaijan. The Bolshevik regime, alien to the Azerbaijani nation, continued to strangle the country by force of red bayonets. On behalf of his delegation, he assured the whole world and the League of Nations that the Azerbaijani people would not accept forcefully annexing Azerbaijan to Soviet Russia.56 On February 9 Topchibashov gave a copy of this letter to French premier Raymond Poincaré. The letter noted that it had been submitted to the League of Nations as political and spiritual guarantor of justice in the world, to protest against the occupation of Azerbaijan by Russian Bolsheviks.57 On August 23, 1923, Topchibashov sent a similar letter to Poincaré, detailing the violence and repression by Bolsheviks and their surrogates. The repressive Extraordinary Commission (EC) ensured the existence of the Soviet regime, carrying out unlawful searches, confiscations, and exiles, as mass shootings became common. “The policy of Russification was already pursued in the tsarist era and now Bolsheviks are persecuting the language, the literature, and the press of the local population.”58 After this letter was sent, Ali Mardan bey received a letter from Rasulzade, indicating that 3,000 people had been arrested in Baku. On their behalf, Ali Mardan bey appealed to the League of Nations, to representatives of the Allied and neutral states in Paris, and to London and Paris journalists. Owing to his efforts, on August  22 Gazette de Lausanne published information about these arrests. Rasulzade sent Ali Mardan bey the appeals of the Musavat Party’s Central Committee issued on April 28 and May 28, 1923, which were translated into European languages to be published in newspapers.59 To strengthen the propaganda in favor of Azerbaijan, the Paris Sociological Society, at Ali Mardan bey’s suggestion, on May 9, 1923, arranged a large conference that lasted in stages until June 13, with speeches on Azerbaijan’s history, culture, ethnography, natural riches, and economy. The speakers were Fernand Maurette, Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov, René Worms, André Levy, Aleksandr Kulisher, Abel Chevalley, Jeyhun Hajibeyli, Yves Guyot, Jean Loris-Melikov, Henry Michel, Haydar Bammat, Gaston Gaillard, Abbas bey Atamalybeyov, Mahammad bey Maharramov, and others.60 Professor Fernand Maurette reported on Azerbaijan’s history and political and economic position. In order to develop the economy, the oil industry should use advanced technologies and be closely allied with Georgia to export oil products to international markets.61 Ali Mardan

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  189 bey delivered a brilliant report titled “Azerbaijan: Its History and Modern State,” singling out typical features of the stages of Azerbaijan’s history. The concept of independence was the starting point.62 Ali Mardan bey outlined the Azerbaijani government’s resettlement in Baku in September 1918, relations with the British military, and the joint struggle with Georgia against Denikin’s Volunteer Army.63 This report remains important for Azerbaijan’s history to the present day. When Maurette asked how Baku’s oil could be exported and how to handle the problem of Batum, Ali Mardan bey replied: “Only free Azerbaijan can supply oil, cotton, etc., to Europe. If you are really interested in our oil and Batum, then help us get rid of the Russian Bolsheviks.”64 Professor Aleksandr Kulisher, a Russian émigré employee of the newspaper Poslednie Novosti, claimed in his speech at the conference that Azerbaijan’s independence had been dictated by Germany and Turkey.65 The other Russian political emigrants, except for the socialist Viktor Chernov (a member of the Second International) opposed the independence of the Caucasian republics.66 Abel Chevalley, as a diplomat who had worked in the Caucasus, spoke of the decisive moments of Azerbaijan’s life in the period of independence and later Bolshevik occupation.67 Jeyhun bey Hajibeyli also gave an interesting report.68 Loris-Melikov devoted his speech to Armenian-Turkish relations.69 Ali Mardan bey’s closing speech at the conference refuted the attacks of Professor Kulisher, citing historical facts. He revealed the chauvinist nature of the statements by Kulisher, who had no idea of the 1917–1918 events in the Caucasus. The memoirs of Gen. Erich Ludendorff made clear Germany’s actual attitude toward Azerbaijan’s independence. Ali Mardan bey noted that the Turkish military had been invited to free Baku from Bolshevik and Armenian-Dashnak marauders only after the first Azerbaijani government had been formed. That was the coalition that committed such bloody acts. “More than 10,000 Azerbaijanis were killed in four days (March  18–22, 1918, according to the old calendar).”70 Despite a number of disputes, this conference was very significant in propagandizing in favor of Azerbaijan.

The Genoa Conference and Baku oil From the first days of 1922 Azerbaijani emigrants and all the Caucasian representatives in Europe were active at the Cannes meeting and at the Genoa Conference and Hague Conference, which focused largely on Baku oil. The lack of results from these conferences was a result of the strict position of the Caucasian governments in exile (especially the Azerbaijanis) in regard to Baku oil. This scared Western countries, which tended to cooperate with Soviet Russia. On April 6, 1922, the Soviet delegation arrived in Genoa and faced the Caucasian issue. Practically all of the Caucasian émigrés in Europe came to Italy, which was quite a disadvantage for the Soviets. Nariman Narimanov said that the Caucasian emigrant circles were very active in Genoa. The Soviet delegation immediately reported to Moscow its anxiety about the former leadership of the Caucasian republics. Georgii Chicherin demanded that the People’s Commissariat of Foreign Affairs submit materials regarding the Caucasian governments in exile.

190  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence The Soviet delegation suspected that the speeches of the Caucasian emigrants had been organized by the British. The anti-Soviet propaganda campaign of the Caucasian emigrant governments in European countries was far-reaching, so the Soviet delegates took active countermeasures. Narimanov submitted an open letter to Topchibashov, Aleksandr Khatisov, and Iraklii Tsereteli, who introduced themselves as the legal leaders of the Southern Caucasian republics in Europe. The letter was typical of Soviet ideology and propaganda, questioning their legitimacy: Who do you mean by saying “people/population”? If by the word “population” you mean several hundred beys, khans, dukes, and several thousand merchants and traders, then what happened to the millions in the working masses of peasants and workers, who definitely hate you for your past actions? They follow us, the Bolsheviks, and bless Soviet construction in Transcaucasia. . . . We still hope that you will come to your senses, understand the demands of the moment, learn the true reason for the troubles of [our] nations, return to the homeland, and provide what it currently needs: knowledge.71 The Genoa Conference of European countries opened under the chairmanship of Italian premier Luigi Facta on April 10, 1922. One of the first issues discussed was the participation of Paris-based representatives of the national republics of the Southern Caucasus. On the opening day the national governments of Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia submitted a memorandum to the conference’s secretariat through the French delegation. A mixed group of Southern Caucasian representatives led by Evgenii Gegechkori arrived in Genoa, including representatives of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (ADR) at the Paris Peace Conference: Mir Yagub Mehdiyev and Mahammad Maharramov. The conference also planned to discuss the issue of Baku oil.72 Before the conference began, on March 31, French premier Poincaré, speaking at the parliament, had stressed the significance of Azerbaijan for France. The Caucasian republics, which were considered Asiatic, had not been invited to Genoa, but Russia, which had seized them by force of arms, also was not authorized to speak on their behalf. Poincaré planned to continue the successful oil policy in Baku. “We will not recognize any actions violating the sovereign rights of the Azerbaijani government. America’s position regarding this issue absolutely coincides with ours.”73 The main topic of the conference was Baku oil, so the Azerbaijani delegates were in the spotlight. Panicky news reports that Bolsheviks had sold part of the Baku oil to Royal Dutch Shell very much alarmed French ruling circles, which had planned to obtain influence over the oil through the Caucasian exile governments.74 Although the Soviet delegation claimed that Western interests were linked to a concession for Siberian natural resources, one of the main topics was Baku oil. In the opinion of European newspapers, “no one region of the world can

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  191 replace Baku oil. . . . The oil reserves of this region are unlimited. Thus, Baku should be the core aim of our activity.”75 After arriving in Genoa on April, Ali Mardan bey announced that Soviet Russia was not authorized to grant a Baku oil concession. The broad propaganda campaign pursued by the Azerbaijani representatives had some effect. Press statements, protests, and widely disseminated notes not only made Soviet Russia’s delegates nervous but also made Western political circles act carefully and were successful in forcing the large companies of Europe and America to step back. The Times of London wrote, “The press is full of oil these days.”76 Oil-related disputes influenced political relations as well. Soviet attitudes toward the political-legal status of the Soviet republics differed. Chicherin represented Azerbaijan and the other Soviet republics as being Russia’s allies, which caused an objection from Lloyd George. The British premier viewed these republics not as “allies” of Russia but as “Soviet republics” occupied by Bolsheviks. The emigrants in Paris backed Lloyd George.77 The representatives of the Caucasian exile governments intensified their efforts in Europe in early May. Before he left Genoa, Narimanov was interviewed by newspapers about the situation in the Southern Caucasus. He said that the most important event was the formation of the federation of republics of the Southern Caucasus. He stressed that the concept of federation had long been widespread in the region: “The Transcaucasian Republics had to do major work to remove the traces of the chauvinist policy of Georgian Mensheviks, Armenian Dashnaks, and Azerbaijani Musavatists. The Soviet power gradually achieved this unification of the peoples of Transcaucasia at a very high price.”78 However, these views did not substantially influence the political climate in Genoa. Narimanov and Topchibashov both left Genoa on May 6.79 The conference ended on May 19 without any results.

Meetings in Paris and observations in Lausanne After returning from Genoa, the Azerbaijani delegation held a gathering on May 31, including Mustafa bey Vekilov, who had arrived from Istanbul. The whole delegation attended this meeting, chaired by Topchibashov, who announced that a letter had been sent to Istanbul suggesting further joint work with the Azerbaijani emigrants there. Mustafa bey Vekilov was in Paris for that purpose. He described the activities of Azerbaijani emigrant groups in Turkey and the situation in Azerbaijan. They were not sufficiently strong to complete this very difficult task, so all the forces should be united and all disputes should be put aside. A common program of actions should be drafted, to assign duties and settle financial matters. Turkey’s share in the diplomatic activity of the emigrants should increase substantially. Ali Mardan bey had a working plan that was known to Istanbul, specifically to Khalil bey Khasmamedov. If this plan had shortcomings, the delegation should correct them. The Paris center and the Istanbul center had no serious differences on this point. Akper agha Sheikhulislamov said that the basis of

192  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence unity of the two centers had been established on May 28, 1918: all the emigrants should unite around the concept of independence in order to save the country. There was no discord on this issue among the delegates in Paris, only in Istanbul. It should be ended. Sheikhulislamov suggested drafting a common platform to restore independence and return indigenous rights to the nation. The delegation’s main political task was to gain recognition for Azerbaijan, in Ali Mardan bey’s view, and the Azerbaijani delegation had partially completed this task. If the Bolshevik occupation had not occurred, it would have been possible to achieve full recognition of the republic. “Following these events, our position became very difficult; however, we’re continuing this affair in the name of our motherland.”80 Ali Mardan bey declared that no one had taken their side and that the Paris delegation had worked by itself. Some of the delegates had left for Turkey and were prepared to collaborate, including on financial matters. But the people who went to Istanbul did not represent the Azerbaijani government, so the delegation must not follow their instructions. The next meeting chaired by Ali Mardan bey was held on June 11. In his opening address, emphasizing Vekilov’s declaration, he stressed that it was necessary to expand links with the Azerbaijani emigrants in Istanbul, draft a joint program of action, and implement it, but this should not mean disbanding a delegation that already had three years of experience in the struggle in Europe. He also suggested calling a congress in order to reach consensus on the most important matters. The work had so far been carried out along two lines: foreign policy and domestic organizational issues. In Ali Mardan bey’s view, after the Genoa conference it became essential to expand the circle of foreign policy by including links with Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, and the North Caucasus Republic. In terms of domestic policy, it was necessary to intensify secret links with organizations inside Azerbaijan, but this would be inefficient without mutual links with neighboring countries. The delegation and Istanbul had no serious disagreements; disputes, if any, concerned only minor details. “If the Turkish state does not give us a hand and understand that it is necessary to create a Caucasian buffer between Turkey and Russia, we will not accomplish our goal no matter how grandiose our work is. Ankara statesmen regard us, emigrants, . . . with suspicion and mistrust.”81 These suspicions should be eliminated first. The next meeting on June  12 was primarily concerned with organizational work, its political significance and practical hardships, and technical aspects. Hajibeyli, Sheikhulislamov, Mehdiyev, Vekilov, and others spoke. Topchibashov noted that this work should be concentrated in the hands of the Istanbul emigrants, while the members of the delegation about to leave for Turkey should take an active part and the Paris emigrant center should be regularly notified of the course of this process. He gave a detailed report on the alliance treaty that had been signed in June 1921 with delegates of Georgia, Armenia, and the North Caucasus Republic, noting that Azerbaijan and Georgia should be the nucleus of this treaty, due to their geographical location and economic opportunities.82 The June 10 Declaration should constitute the formal basis for relations with neighbors. Specific work with the Georgians should be discussed jointly. An Azerbaijani-Georgian

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  193 commission was established on June  13 (consisting of Sheikhulislamov and Vekilov from Azerbaijan and two representatives from Georgia) to develop forms of secret work.83 This commission drafted an economic agreement between Azerbaijan and Georgia, which was discussed by the Paris delegations of both countries in August 1922. The document dealt with formation of a common customs area; free transit through the territories of both republics; intensive work on the Baku-Batum transport corridor linking the Caspian Sea to the Black Sea to gain access to Europe and America; consolidation of the two countries’ efforts to expel Bolsheviks from their territories; and restoration of independence, among other things. In accordance with the June  10, 1921, Declaration, section  4 suggested that Armenia and the North Caucasus Republic should join this agreement.84 It was designed to draw Western countries’ attention to Azerbaijan and Georgia and receive their aid to fight Bolshevism. Another meeting chaired by Ali Mardan bey on June  14 discussed relations with Turkey. In its activities our delegation has never forgotten about the special closeness of our people to the Turkish people. After gaining independence, Azerbaijanis have appealed to Turkey, and in 1918 Turks rendered us an invaluable service that we will never forget. However, our policy should be built not on feelings but on deep comprehension of the interests of the nation and country. He recalled the history of Azerbaijan’s relations with Turkey in 1918–1921, which “included many pleasant moments, but also, regrettably, steps that served neither our interests nor Turkish interests.” When the first Turkish mission had arrived in 1921, relations were initially cold but soon became cordial. Bekir Sami bey became interested in the concept of revival of the Caucasus. He was still working on it, as the delegates witnessed when they met him in Genoa. Ali Mardan bey stressed that the key barrier between Turkey and the Caucasian countries was the Armenian issue: “our neighbors always try to find out what our relations with Turkey are, because they cannot imagine their life without resolution of the Turkish issue.”85 He emphasized the necessity of closer relations with Turkey. At a meeting on June  20, Ali Mardan bey reported on talks with the Georgians in the framework of the joint commission and key directions in the work being done in Europe. The most significant task was to acquaint Europe with the Azerbaijani issue, make actual recognition of Azerbaijan by the Allies a matter of primary importance, and mobilize the European community’s support for the restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence.86 The same issues were discussed at a June  23 meeting chaired by Ali Mardan bey. To increase the effectiveness of Turkey’s links with the Caucasian alliance, the heads of the Azerbaijani and Georgian delegations should go to Rome to hold talks with Bekir Sami bey or invite him to Paris. Ali Mardan bey announced that his health had deteriorated: he had to go to the hospital on June  26 to undergo surgery.87 The meetings on June 24 and June 26, which Topchibashov again chaired, discussed the domestic

194  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence and international position of Azerbaijan, the necessity of keeping of the Azerbaijani delegation in Europe, and other topics.88 On July 11, 1922, the Azerbaijani delegates discussed a note of protest against Soviet Russia’s move to put the issue of Baku oil on the agenda of the Hague Conference, drafted by Hajibeyli.89 On July  7, speaking at the Hague Conference’s property commission, Maksim Litvinov announced the terms under which the Soviet government could offer private property owners benefits. The document submitted by Litvinov contained a map of territories to be given on concession and a list of enterprises in the existing and future oil regions of Azerbaijan, the Northern Caucasus, and Turkestan. “The applications of foreigners who have never dealt with oil affairs in the Northern Caucasus, especially in Azerbaijan, who want to receive concessions will be examined, and a share will be provided to them from a number of territories indicated in the list.”90 The Azerbaijani emigrant organizations in Europe intensified their actions after Litvinov’s statement. While the Hague Conference was underway, a representative of the Azerbaijani government in exile gave an interview with Reuters in London. He warned all governments that the Azerbaijani national government would not allow the country’s national riches to be plundered in such a manner when it regained its rights. The July 11 protest note submitted to the Hague by the Azerbaijani delegation made political and business circles of the West more circumspect. At the end of July 1922, at the initiative of the French government, an oil conference was convened. Its key objective was to bring together oil companies with interests in the Caucasus to make them act as one against Soviet Russia. This included the largest companies, such as Standard Oil, Royal Dutch Shell, and Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, as well as numerous companies that had previously been operating in the territory of tsarist Russia. Ali Asadullayev, the former trade and industry minister in the Republic of Azerbaijan, represented the Azerbaijani government at the conference. Meetings chaired by Henry Deterding sought ways of fighting the Bolsheviks in order to make them surrender. The conference decided that political leaders, companies, and individual property owners should not conclude contracts with the Soviets and that “everyone should observe the common interest and the interest of each individual.”91 This looked like a declaration of a blockade against the Soviets. It marked the end of the first stage of the European countries’ persistent struggle for Azerbaijani oil. The governments of the Southern Caucasus (including Azerbaijani representatives), with France’s help, expressed the desire to attend the Lausanne Conference that opened on November 20, 1922. But the British government opposed this. The Georgian delegation considered Georgia a direct Black Sea state, while the representatives of Azerbaijan and Armenia believed that their countries were linked with Western Europe through the Black Sea and Turkish Straits. However, British premier Lloyd George and Lord Curzon, the foreign minister, refused to invite representatives of governments that did not control their own territories. Despite this harsh British stance, Topchibashov managed to receive a visa at the Swiss embassy and arrived in Lausanne on December  24 to inform the conference’s

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  195 delegates about the situation in Azerbaijan. He returned to Paris on February 24, 1923.92 Meanwhile, the Western allies frustrated Soviet Russia’s attempts to sign the Lausanne Treaty on behalf of the Soviet republics. Thus, only Soviet Russia itself signed the Lausanne Treaty on July 24, 1923. Overall, this treaty made the position of Turkey stronger. In September  1923 the Turks ousted the Greeks from Izmir, considerably increasing Turkey’s authority in Europe. This victory gladdened Ali Mardan bey. On September 9, after receiving news of this event, he congratulated the Turkish ambassador in Paris, who told him that an Izmir-Baku railway would be built in the near future. Ali Mardan bey also congratulated Jeyhun bey Hajibeyli: In the 1,000-year history of Turkey, its people have known and seen many magnificent moments of triumph over others. Now there is one more triumph, whose meaning, under current circumstances, is extremely important and remarkable. Tell our next generation about this as often and as impressively as possible.93 After the Turks defeated the Greeks, the Allies recognized the rule of Kemalists over Eastern Frakia and Anatolia, including Izmir. The terms of the October  11, 1922, Mudanya Treaty were recognized in Lausanne. Ali Mardan bey believed that Ismet pasha had displayed the will and firmness typical of the Turkish people, which was brilliantly reflected at the Mudanya Conference, so the Allies had to soften their attitude toward the Turkish issue.94 Western politicians began recommending that the Caucasian political emigrants cooperate with Kemalist Turkey. On December 20, 1923, Topchibashov and Chkhenkeli submitted a joint appeal to the head of the Turkish government and foreign minister İsmet İnönü. If Kemalists treated the national-liberation movement of Caucasian peoples with respect, the exile governments of Azerbaijan and Georgia could accept the terms of the Kars Treaty.95 Thus ended the period of active political struggle by the Caucasian governments in exile, including the Azerbaijani delegates led by Ali Mardan bey. In the mid-1920s the process of recognition of the Soviet Union by Western countries began, which decreased their interest in the Caucasian governments in exile. After February 1923 Ali Mardan bey could no longer obtain a diplomatic visa. Little by little, his diplomatic immunity as the head of the Azerbaijani delegation was eliminated.

Notes 1 DeToptchibacheff à Monsieur le Président du Conseil des Ministres et Ministre des Affaires Etrangères de la République Française. Le 3 mai 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 20. 2 De Président Délégation Topchibacheff à Président Conseil des Ministres République Azerbaïdjanienne. Le 3 mai 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 21. 3 See: Kazemzade, The Struggle for Transcaucasia, 286. 4 League of Nations from the President of the Peace Delegation of the Azerbaijan Republic, Bibliotheque de Documentation International Contemproraine (hereafter referred to as BDIC), 1–2.

196  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence 5 From Servant to Mektieff, July 2, 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1. 6 From Mektieff to Toptchibacheff, May 8, 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1. 7 See: Questions, the Answers to Which the Azerbaijani Delegation to Paris Awaits, June, 1920, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 1–3. 8 De Toptchibacheff à Monsieur le Président du Conseil Suprême de la Conférence de la Paix. Le 8 juin 1920, AAMT, carton no 3, 1–2. 9 De Toptchibacheff à Monsieur le Président du Conseil Suprême de la Conférence de la Paix. Le 30 juin 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 135. 10 De Toptchibacheff à Monsieur le Président du Conseil Economique Suprême de la Conférence de la Paix. Le 1 juillet 1920, AAMT, carton no 1, 1–3. 11 See: Monsieur le Président de la Conférence de la Paix à Spa. Le 4 juillet 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 124–132. 12 De Président de la Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan à le Président de la Délégation de la République française à la Conférence de Spa. Le 7 juillet 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 133. 13 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, July 15, 1920, SALAAR, f. 648, r. 6, v. 2, p. 2. 14 De Le Secretaire general du Ministre des Affaires Estrangeres Republique Francaise à Toptchibacheff. Le 9 Octobre 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1–2. 15 De Toptchibacheff à L’Ambassadeur des etates Unis D’Amerique a Paris. Le 16 Août 1920, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–4. 16 De Ambassade d’Angleterre à Ministère des Affaires Etrangère de France. Le 7 mai 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 29. 17 Ministère des Affaires Etrangère de France, Note pour la Direction administrative (Surveillance des Etrangers). Le 11 mai 1920, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 37. 18 Letter from Topchibashev to Lord Curzon, October 10, 1920, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–5. 19 From Foreign Office to Toptchibasheff, November 1, 1920, AAMT, carton no 9, 1. 20 See: Khaleddin Ibrahimli, Azerbaycan siyasi mühacirəti (1920–1991). Baku: Elm, 1996, 103. 21 Admission of the Azerbaijan Republic to the League of Nations, November 1, 1920, National Archives, Public Records Office, Foreign Office (hereafter referred to as NA PRO FO) 371/4948 28562. 22 Memorandum on the Application for the Admission of the Azerbaijan Republic to the League of Nations, November 24, 1920, NA PRO FO 371/4948 28562. 23 Azerbaycan Khalq Cümhuriyyətinin Kharici Siyasəti: Sənədlər məcmuəsi. Baku: GARISMA MMC, 2009, 131–134. 24 Azerbaijan Democratic Republic: Archival Documents of Great Britain. Drafted by N. A. Maxwell. Baku: Çaşıoğlu, 2008, 563. 25 Letter from the President of the Peace Delegation of the Republic of Azerbaijan, December 7, 1920, NA PRO FO 371/4949 28562. 26 Azerbaycan Khalq Cümhuriyyətinin Kharici Siyasəti: Sənədlər məcmuəsi, 135. 27 De Ministre des Affaires Estrangeres Republique Francaise Briand à Ministre de Georgie a Paris Tchenkeli. Le Août 28, 1921, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1–2. 28 Résumé de la conférence tenue au Claridge Hotel. Le 25 mars 1921, BDIC, microfilms des archives du gouvernement Géorgien, mfm 881, Bobine 136. 29 Ibid., 207–209. 30 See: Le Caucase, Le Bolchevisme et La Turquie. Conference de Topchibacheff. Séance du Lundi 4 Juillet 1921, AAMT, carton no 9, 1–10. 31 Le Caucase, Le Bolchevisme et La Turquie. Conference de Topchibacheff. Séance du Lundi 4 Juillet 1921, AAMT, carton no 9, 11. 32 Ibid., 35–36. 33 Ibid.; SARA, f. 28, r. 1, v. 146, p. 25. 34 Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 48.

The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence  197 35 Procès-verbal de l’entrevue avec Monsieur Briand des représentants des républiques du Caucase le 3 août 1921, AMAÉF, CPC 1918–1940, Z, Dossier Russie (Caucase), vol. 653, folio 116. 36 Ibid., folio 117–118. 37 Ibid., 118–119. 38 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, October 19, 1922, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 43, p. 1. 39 Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 54. 40 Ibrahimli, Azərbaycan siyasi mühacirəti, 104–105. 41 Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 55. 42 Khaleddin Ibrahimli, Azərbaycan siyasi mühacirəti. Baku: Elm, 1996, 105; APDPARA, f. 1, r. 88, d. 5, p. 13. 43 De Ministre des Affaires Estrangeres Republique Francaise à Toptchibacheff. Le mai 3, 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1. 44 De Toptchibacheff à le Secretariat du Conseil Suprême de la Conférence de la Paix. Le 5 juin 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1. 45 De Ministre des Affaires Estrangeres Republique Francaise à Toptchibacheff. Le septembre 9, 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1–2. 46 Ministre des Affaires Estrangeres Republique Francaise  – Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan. Le Novembre 2, 1921, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1. 47 De Toptchibacheff à Abdoul Medjid bey Tchermoeff. Le aout 3, 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1–2. 48 De Tchermoeff à Toptchibacheff. Le aout 7, 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1. 49 De Toptchibacheff à Abdoul Medjid bey Tchermoeff. Le aout 9, 1920, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1. 50 De Toptchibacheff à Abdoul Medjid bey Tchermoeff. Le février 15, 1921, AAMT, carton no 7/2, 1. 51 See: From Walter Chandler to Toptchibacheff and Chhenkeli, August 9, 1923, AAMT, carton no 9/13, 1–2. 52 De Ministère des Affaires Etrangères de la République Française à. Le juillet 7, 1922, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 257. 53 Le Ministre des Finances à Monsieur le Président du Conseil, Ministre des Affaires Etrangères. Privilèges diplomatiques: Délégation de Paix de la République d’Azerbaïdjan. Le avril 12, 1923, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 283. 54 De Peretti à Toptchibacheff. Le avril 16, 1923, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 284. 55 De Peretti à Toptchibacheff. Le janvier 29, 1923, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 278. 56 De Eric Drummond à Toptchibacheff. Le février 1, 1923, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 279–282. 57 De Raymond Poincaré à Ali Mardan bey Toptchibachef. Le février 9, 1923, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1. 58 De Raymond Poincaré à Toptchibachef. Le août 23, 1923, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 287–288. 59 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, August 31, 1923, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 45, p. 1. 60 See: Conference on Azerbaijan, initiated by Sociological Society. Revue İnternationale de Sosiologie, 1923, vol. 31, 367–411. 61 Ibid., 369–370. 62 See: Ibid., 371–377. 63 Topchibashev, The Republic of Azerbaijan and the Caucasus, May 9, 1923, AAMT, carton no 9/13, 7–8. 64 By the Results of the Conference on Azerbaijan Held at the Initiative of the Sociological Society, June 13, 1923, AAMT, carton no 9/13, 3.

198  The restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence 65 Revue Internationale de Sosiologie, 1923, vol. 31, 383–391. 66 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, August 20, 1928, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 64, pp. 1–2. 67 Revue İnternationale de Sosiologie, 1923, vol. 31, 393–395. 68 Ibid., 395–397. 69 Ibid., 400–405. 70 By the Results of the Conference on Azerbaijan Held at the Initiative of the Sociological Society, June 13, 1923, AAMT, carton no 9/13, 5. 71 Open Letter from Narimanov to Topchubashov, Khatisov and Tsereteli, 1922, APDPARA, f. 609, r. 1, v. 31, pp. 81–82. 72 Visa Document in the Diplomatic Passport Topchibashev, April 7, 1922, AAMT, carton no 3, 3; See: Rossiyskoe zarubezhi’e vo Fransii 1919–2000. Vol. 3, 323. 73 Le Figaro, Mai 16, 1922. 74 Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 64. 75 Le Fiqaro, Mai 6, 1922. 76 Times, May 7, 1922. 77 Les Aspirations de L’Azerbaidjan. Notre entrevue avec Toptchibacheff. Le mai 18–19, 1922, AAMT, carton no 1, 292. 78 Trud, May 17, 1922. 79 Pravda Zakavkaz’ya, May 16, 1922; Visa document in the diplomatic passport Topchibashev, May 6, 1922, AAMT, carton no 3, 3. 80 Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, May 31, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 2. 81 Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, June 11, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 3. 82 Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, June 12, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 3. 83 Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, June 14, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1. 84 Draft economic Agreement Between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Georgian Republic, August 20, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/13, 1–4. 85 Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, June 14, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 2. 86 See: Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, June  20, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–3. 87 See: Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, June  23, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–4. 88 See: Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, June  26, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–5. 89 Minutes of the Meeting of the Azerbaijan Delegation, July 11, 1922, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 2. 90 Mir-Yagub Mehdiyev, Beynəlmiləl siyasətdə petrol. Baku: Azerneşr, 1994, 35–36. 91 Ibid., 49–50. 92 Visa Document in the Diplomatic Passport Topchibashev, November 27, 1922, AAMT, carton no 3, 3. 93 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, September 14, 1922, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 41, pp. 1–2. 94 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, October 8, 1922, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 44, p. 1. 95 Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 76–77.

12 The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)

In 1924 socialists were coming to power in France and Labourites in Britain, which established conditions for the softening of relations with the Soviet Union. Britain led a movement for recognition of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). In January 1924 the Labour Cabinet led by Ramsey McDonald was formed, which favored recognition of the USSR. On January 31, 1924, two days before the official recognition, Topchibashov sent a memorandum to Robert Offley Ashburton Crewe-Milnes (1st Marquess of Crewe), the British ambassador in Paris. He outlined the history of the Azerbaijan Republic and reminded the ambassador that the British government and the rest of the Allied states had recognized the independence of Azerbaijan on January 12, 1920, while Soviet Russia had occupied a territory by force that had already been recognized by the Versailles Peace Conference’s Supreme Council. After Azerbaijan was invaded, the Bolshevik regime established a dictatorship of the proletariat there. The Bolsheviks, who did not recognize the idea of statehood and depended only on the Red Army’s bayonets, misappropriated all private property. Using the concept of nationalization as a cover, Russian Bolsheviks took over the Baku oil industry.

Expansion of the concept of recognizing the Soviet Union Ali Mardan bey told the British ambassador that the Extraordinary Commission sent from Moscow had conducted mass arrests and sent hundreds of members of the intelligentsia to exile in Siberia. Such an occupation regime, which deprives nations of freedom, could not be recognized by a state with a classical legal system like Great Britain. The Bolsheviks quite recently had failed to force Western countries to recognize Soviet Russia and had created a Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, including the occupied territory. De facto and de jure recognition of this by the Allies would mean international confirmation of this occupation policy. Ali Mardan bey asked the British government not to recognize the Soviet Union, to use its influence and authority to get Russian troops removed from Azerbaijan, to restore the young Azerbaijan Republic within its boundaries, and to help conserve the sovereign rights of the Azerbaijani people.1 Interest in recognition of the USSR was growing, so he sent copies of this note to French government officials and to twenty-nine diplomatic representations in Paris. However, despite all the

200  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) efforts by Russian émigrés and representatives of national states formed in the territory of former tsarist Russia, the British Labour government recognized the Soviet Union on February 2, 1924. Ali Mardan bey sent a note of protest to the British government on February 15 through the Marquess of Crewe. It pointed out that Azerbaijan had been forcibly occupied by Soviet Russia and included in the state recognized as the USSR; the Bolshevik power in Azerbaijan was based on systematic terror and violence by the Red Army; including Azerbaijan in the Soviet Union was artificial and against the country’s vital interests; the Azerbaijani people continued to wage an unequal struggle against the foreign invaders; and they had never recognized and would never recognize either the Soviet government or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Ali Mardan bey reminded the British that the Azerbaijani people had determined their fate on May 28, 1918, and that the issue of Azerbaijan being a part of any state could now be settled through a nationwide referendum to let the people freely express their will. To hold a referendum, it was necessary to remove Russian troops from the republic.2 On March 26 Ali Mardan bey sent a similar letter to the leader of the House of Lords, George Curzon.3 On February 18 the British ambassador passed a letter from the Foreign Office chief on Britain’s recognition of the USSR to Topchibashov and Tsereteli. His Majesty’s government understood Azerbaijan and Georgia’s concerns, but the current situation did not permit acting as they suggested. Thus, the British government confirmed the recognition of Soviet Union at the level of the prime minister and Foreign Office.4 On February 28 the British ambassador in France submitted shorthand records of the discussions in the House of Commons on the issue of recognizing the USSR at meetings on February 13 and February 18, especially the parts that concerned the Caucasus.5 Archibald Sinclair (a Liberal MP) asked how the government, after having de facto recognized Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia in January  1920 and de jure recognized Georgia on January 27, 1922, could now recognize Georgia as part of the Soviet Union again. Recognition of these republics as part of the USSR meant making them fall into the clutches of Bolshevik tyranny. In his reply the prime minister justified the decision by saying that the independence of these republics had lasted a very short period and that the correct approach to them required special information.6 Joseph Kenworthy, George Lansbury, William Pringle, and other members of the House of Commons also took an active part in the debates.7 Ali Mardan bey sent a second note of protest on February 29 to the British Foreign Office. When the Labourites came to power again in 1929, they tried to restore their 1924 policy of trying to improve relations with Moscow.8 The wave of recognition of the USSR beginning in 1924 meant hard times for emigrants from the former tsarist empire. Pressured by financial hardships, Topchibashov resettled in the Paris suburb of Saint-Clois. In mid-April 1924 he wrote to Rasulzade: “If we were treated with benevolence and respect during the [Paris] Peace Conference, and then simply tolerated, after Lausanne this tolerance turned to meaningful silence . . . if France recognizes the Soviets tomorrow, the situation will worsen.”9

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  201 One of the initial steps of the cabinet of French prime minister and foreign minister Edward Errio formed on June 14, 1924, was to submit the issue of establishing diplomatic relations with Soviet Union to public discussion. Topchibashov was one of the first people who appealed to Errio after he came to power. In a letter dated June 17, he drew Errio’s attention to a series of urgent problems relating to Azerbaijan, stressing that recognition of the Soviet Union within its present-day boundaries meant the massacre of the peoples who were forcibly including in it. If Errio’s government was going to recognize Soviet Russia, it should demand that the USSR withdraw its troops from the occupied countries, including Azerbaijan.10 Despite all the protests from the Caucasian governments in exile, the Errio cabinet recognized the USSR on October  28, 1924 (with certain provisos) and established diplomatic relations. Topchibashov sent “On the Occasion of Recognition of the Soviets by France” to the Istanbul-based magazine Yeni Kafkasiya for publication.11

Conflict between the Paris and Istanbul centers of Azerbaijani emigration Mahammad Emin Rasulzade’s arrival in Istanbul from Moscow via Finland in October 1922 became an important event in the consolidation of Azerbaijani emigrants who had resettled in Turkey. While Rasulzade remained in Helsinki, Sadri Maksudov on September 13 reported that he had fled Soviet Russia. Rasulzade sent Topchibashov copies of the secret notes that he had obtained from Baku, so Ali Mardan bey issued a special note on arrests in the city.12 The Turkish embassy in Paris issued a passport to Rasulzade, which helped him leave Finland.13 In Istanbul, Rasulzade gathered around him Musavatists who had emigrated to Turkey after Georgia’s Sovietization. At the end of 1922 he established a Foreign Bureau of the Musavat Party and became its leader.14 The Musavat Party’s local committees were established in various towns of Turkey and in Iran within a short period. To organize the work of the Foreign Bureau and expand anti-Soviet propaganda, Rasulzade established the magazine Yeni Kafkasiya in 1923, devoted to Azerbaijani affairs and to revealing the true essence of Bolshevik colonialism. Rasulzade joined an active political struggle in Turkey that gave new hopes to Ali Mardan bey, as he told Zaki Validi Toghan, who arrived in Paris in December 1923. In his memoirs Toghan wrote: “Ali Mardan bey was like a father to me, and his wife like a mother to me. . . . Ali Mardan bey cried: ‘I’ve been become old and it seems that I will die without seeing the homeland. I will leave the affairs of Russian Muslims to Emin Rasulzade and you.’ ”15 When Toghan said that he planned to become involved in scientific activity, Ali Mardan bey objected: “We’ve come from a country that is one of the main supports of the Turkic and Muslim world, a country where there is such a cruel battle, so we must now think first of all of this.”16 Secret information from Azerbaijan disclosed the essence of the policy of Russification. In 1926 Fuat Köprülü and Ali bey Huseynzade, before leaving for Baku to attend the first Turkologic congress, discussed the situation in Azerbaijan with

202  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) Rasulzade. He reported to Topchibashov that Russian Bolsheviks had taken the initiative in issues of Turkic culture as well. “Köprülü suggests convening the second congress in Constantinople.”17 The Soviet leaders strongly feared that Huseynzade, an authority in the Turkic world, might oppose transition to the Latin script at the congress. His views could be decisive in the voting procedure. Thus, during the ride from Tiflis to Baku, intelligence agents tried to discover Huseynzade’s and Köprülu’s opinion about transition to the Latin script and Soviet policy in the Turkic-Muslim republics in general. Communist delegates at the congress were instructed not to vote for Huseynzade if his name was submitted to the congress’s presidium.18 The concept of a Caucasian confederation occupied a special place in the political activities of Rasulzade, who realized that the unity of Caucasian nations could be important in fighting the Soviet government. He held secret consultations with the Polish ambassador in Ankara as well as Georgian and North Caucasian emigrants and considered the Paris Declaration signed on June 10, 1921, an important step in this direction. However, he wanted the Caucasian confederation to function under Turkey’s control. Initially, Turkish political circles displayed interest. In November 1924 Turkish ambassador and former foreign minister Ahmed Mukhtar bey told Rasulzade that the days of the Bolsheviks were numbered and that their total production did not bring a profit. Russia’s imminent fall was unavoidable. Rasulzade reported this to Topchibashov, who replied that other information also confirmed this: “Who knows, maybe we are on the brink of great events.”19 Such information probably forced the Turkish authorities to support the establishment of the Committee of Caucasian Confederalists in October 1924 at the initiative of the Polish ambassador in Turkey, Roman Knoll. The committee, headed by Khosrov bey Sultanov (Azerbaijan), David Vachnadze (Georgia), and Vassan Guirey Jabagiyev (the Northern Caucasus), included Abdulali bey Amirjanov and Akper agha Sheikhulislamov (Azerbaijan); Alexander Asatiani and Mikhail Tsereteli (Georgia); and Ali khan Kantemir and Aytek Namitokov (the Northern Caucasus). While in Paris in October–November 1924, the Caucasian representatives concluded a protocol establishing such an organization on July 26, 1925, signed by Topchibashov, Haydar Bammatov, Noe Ramishvili, and Viacheslav Prokopovich, the education minister of the Ukrainian People’s Republic. The three republics established a political and economic alliance in the form of a confederation and would coordinate their anti-Bolshevik organizations.20 Their cooperation would continue after Bolshevik rule was ended.21 The Caucasian Committee established in Paris in 1925 asked to join the Istanbul organization. On July 15, 1926, through the mediation of Tadeusz Hołówko and Tadeusz Schaetzel, Poland’s military attaché in Turkey, the two organizations merged and created the Istanbul-based Committee for Independence of the Caucasus.22 Turkey’s self-affirmation at the Lausanne Conference led emigrant circles to think that Turkey could now help them get rid of the Bolsheviks. In December  1924 Rasulzade wrote to Topchibashov: “given the critical position of the Soviets, of which the Turks are also aware, Turkey’s more decisive actions on

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  203 our issue are possible.”23 Henry Franklin-Bouillon, chair of the French parliament’s commission on foreign policy, consulted with Ali Mardan bey early in 1925 before leaving for Ankara.24 The emigrant organizations of the Caucasus, Ukraine, and Turkestan were heartened by the international conference held in Locarno, Switzerland, in October 1925 and the Rhine Guarantee Pact directed against the USSR. The Locarno Pact guaranteed the inviolability of Germany’s borders with Western countries, but Germany’s eastern borders remained open. Politicians viewed this as a threat to the Soviet Union. When the text of the pact became known, Topchibashov drafted an extensive memorandum in Russian in December  1925 on behalf of the governments in exile, which was translated into French and given to all the countries that had signed the pact. The memorandum noted that the principle of not using force in conflict situations and submission of disputes to a court of arbitration were the most important elements of the Locarno-Rhine Guarantee Pact, which began a new stage in the history of international relations. Providing security for the small states brought hope to nations that had been independent in the recent past and were now the victims of foreign invaders. The areas seized by the Soviet Union constituted the majority of the territory of the USSR and half of its population.25 Ali Mardan bey stressed that the geographical separation of the struggling nations and Moscow’s “divide and rule” policy weakened the opposition force. But the nations of the Caucasus, Ukraine, and Turkestan would consolidate their efforts and regain their lost freedom by ending Russian oppression.26 On August  27, 1928, fifteen states signed the Briand-Kellogg Pact, which affirmed the unacceptability of resolving disputes by means of war, The pact was initiated by French foreign minister Aristide Briand in April 1927. On the tenth anniversary of the United States’ entry into World War I, Briand proposed a bilateral treaty to reject war as an instrument of national policy to US secretary of state Frank Kellogg.27 This proposal soon won global popularity and became the most important event in international relations. The Briand-Kellogg Pact was also politically important for emigrant organizations in Europe. Ali Mardan bey suggested that the delegations of Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Northern Caucasus, and Ukraine draft a joint note signed by their leaders, which was submitted to Kellogg and Briand later at the ninth session of the League of Nations. It emphasized the noble aims of the Briand-Kellogg Pact but regretted that the nations occupied by Bolsheviks and oppressed by Russia would not be able to make use of this noble concept. The Soviet Union could not represent nations that had been forced to join it by Bolshevik troops. The very existence of such an aggressive country as the USSR contradicted the spirit and meaning of the Briand-Kellogg Pact.28 The magazine Prométhée, the organ of the Committee for Independence of the Caucasus, was first issued in Paris in 1926. It consolidated the interests of all the emigrant organizations of the Caucasus, Ukraine, and Central Asia, whose leaders and activists often published articles. The rise to power of Józef Piłsudski, known in Poland for his openly anti-Soviet stance, augured well for the Prométhée movement. Piłsudski personally led this movement in the initial stages and in the early

204  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) 1920s suggested consolidating all the anti-Soviet forces first against Soviet Russia and then against the USSR.29 As a safeguard against the Soviet Union, Poland paid great attention to the non-Russian emigrant organizations and provided support and financial aid to help them build their respective national governments on the ruins of the Soviet Empire.30 Polish political circles and military intelligence organs established particularly close links with the Paris-based Georgian government as well as emigrants who had gathered in Turkey after Georgia was occupied by Soviet Russia. Representatives of Azerbaijan and other Turkic-Muslim organizations in exile became involved in this cooperation in 1924.31 In developing the Prométhée movement Piłsudski sent a Baku friend, famous publicist and diplomat Tadeusz Hołówko, in 1925 on a mission first to Paris, where he met Topchibashov, and then to Istanbul to meet Rasulzade. Hołówko was the director of the Warsaw Institute of National Problems in 1926–1927, so meetings of this sort intensified over this period.32 Initial links with Polish political circles were established through right-wing parties. The protocol of cooperation was signed by Noe Ramishvili, Haydar Bammatov, and Jeyhun Hajibeyli. Azerbaijani Musavatists and Georgian Mensheviks reportedly did not support the confederation and therefore were not represented in the protocol. The second wave of emigrants intensified in the mid-1920s. The Musavatists and Georgian Mensheviks had already established a broader network in other countries than the Paris-based governments in exile. To take advantage of this, the leadership of the Committee for an Independent Caucasus decided that Topchibashov, Akakii Chkhenkeli, and Abdul Mejid (Tapa) Chermoyev as diplomatic representatives of their Paris-based governments in exile should work under the guidance of three consultants appointed by the Paris center. The Polish side agreed.33 The Paris center attempted to control links with Poland, while the Committee for Independence of the Caucasus tried to lessen the authority of the Paris leaders, which created conflict. Mahammad Hasan Hajinskii’s son arrived from Baku in the summer of 1926, bringing rumors that Ali Mardan bey had expressed his desire to return to Soviet Azerbaijan and had already submitted such a request to Georgii Chicherin (people’s commissar of foreign affairs of the USSR). The authorities in Baku supposedly had accepted this request. Hajinski’s son reported this rumor to Rasulzade, who wrote to Topchibashov on July  19, 1926.34 Ali Mardan bey replied on August 30, 1926: The rumors regarding my appeal to Chicherin that were reported to you from Berlin are a complete lie and nonsense: I state categorically that no appeal has ever been submitted to Chicherin by me personally or through someone else. . . . Having served the nation for thirty years, I have no reason to hide my obvious anti-Bolshevik orientation, which I have no reason to change.35 However, the rumors caused at least temporary mistrust, making emigrant circles doubt that Ali Mardan bey was determined to fight Bolshevism to the end. These rumors and the death of his twenty-five-year-old son Rashid in 1926 caused

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  205 serious moral damage to Topchibashov.36 According to Muslim tradition, he arranged a funeral repast for Rashid bey every Thursday for forty days until January 27, 1927. Ten days after Rashid bey’s death he wrote to Hajibeyli: “I don’t want my personal grief to delay our common affairs. Thus, despite all the hardships of the mourning days that I’m experiencing, I consider it my duty to lead the affairs of the delegation.”37 The news of Rashid bey’s death was received in emigrant circles with deep regret. Rasulzade wrote to Hajibeyli: “It will be hard for Ali Mardan bey. May Allah help him.”38 On January 12, 1927, Azerbaijan and the Mountainous Republic established a provisional united center, with Topchibashov as president. But this step did not eliminate the crisis among Azerbaijanis in exile.39 Ali Mardan bey treated the representatives of the North Caucasus nations with respect and advocated their interests on all issues. At the end of the 1920s, however, some North Caucasus organizations wanted former tsarist colonel Lazar Bicherakhov, who had taken part in the occupation of Baku in 1918, to enter the political arena. Ali Mardan bey strongly opposed this. On June 17, 1929, he submitted an appeal to the chair of the Party of Federalists of the Northern Caucasian Republic, reminding him that Bicherakhov’s involvement in Caucasian affairs was unacceptable and against the interests of the Caucasus nations. No Azerbaijani political organization would even dare to cooperate with Bicherakhov and his company or take a favorable view of their actions.40 Ali Mardan bey’s tough stance resulted in ousting Bicherakhov from the pan-Caucasian emigrant movement. The memory of his reactionary actions in Iran in World War I and his cruelty as an occupier of Azerbaijan in 1918 remained fresh. From 1926 to 1928 the emigrant centers argued about who had the right to represent the Azerbaijan Republic.41 Critical remarks about the Paris center and Topchibashov himself in Yeni Kafkasiya added fuel to the fire. Disputes flared up with new strength. Dr. Khosrov bey Sultanov and Alekber bey Shamkhorskii, as heads of a group of nonaligned emigrants, arranged a meeting on October 5–6 where they spoke in support of Topchibashov. Ali Mardan bey thanked them, reminded them that he himself had once belonged to a group of nonaligned persons, and promised his help in the future.42 When Sultanov wrote to Paris that he planned to promote the Azerbaijani delegation in Istanbul newspapers, Ali Mardan bey replied that there was no need. If necessary, he himself could respond to “the attempts of Musavatists to overthrow the delegation and take control of everything.”43 After this information was released, Rasulzade received a letter from Mirza Asadullayev from Paris, saying that the criticism of Topchibashov and the Azerbaijani delegation faced a hostile reception in Paris.44 The Azerbaijani national center, in March 1927, instructed Mustafa bey Vekilov, a member of the Musavat Party’s Foreign Office, to hold talks in Paris and in Warsaw. Vekilov should persuade the Paris center to subordinate itself to the Azerbaijani national center; otherwise, he should declare the dissolution of the Azerbaijani delegation and the provisional united center and become the diplomatic representative in Paris. At the Paris talks, the parties at first reached accord on some issues but then engaged in a harsh confrontation.45

206  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) Ali Mardan bey spent the summer of 1927 in shock, engulfed by these hardships. He wrote to Hajibeyli that his situation was impossible and he could not bear any extra expenses. His debts were growing. The problem of where to live tormented him, so he probably could not send the children anywhere. “The situation is tragicomic: every time I run up large debts, but the poverty remains.”46 He wrote: “That’s the end of August and vacations. I wouldn’t wish even my enemy such vacations full of moral sufferings.”47 Mustafa Vekilov reported the results of the Paris talks at a meeting of the Foreign Bureau in Istanbul on October 10, 1927. He was extremely critical of the work of the Paris-based Azerbaijani delegation: the delegates did nothing serious, were not interested in anything, had no serious links. They were all concerned only with their own family affairs, while Topchibashov was unfit for this work.48 In fact, only a few people supported Ali Mardan bey by the middle of the 1920s. In his letter to Rasulzade in November 1924, he admitted that Sheikhulislamov and Mehdiyev actually did not take part in the work of the delegation. Sheikhulislamov had returned to Istanbul because of his financial problems, while Mehdiyev had health problems.49 Vekilov reported that the opposition movement needed to be revived at a time when the Paris center had become passive; besides, the Paris center and the Foreign Bureau had disagreements over finances. It was decided to instruct Yeni Kafkasiya to launch a campaign against the Paris center, remove its representative on the editorial staff of Prométhée, and replace him with a Foreign Bureau representative. Velikov made a similar report at a meeting of the Azerbaijani national center on October 12.50 After establishing diplomatic relations with the USSR, French ruling circles began losing interest in the Azerbaijani delegation. They were now well aware that Moscow played the decisive role in France’s trade and economic links with the republics that had joined the Soviet Union. Correspondence between the Foreign Ministry and Cabinet of Ministers makes it clear that French officials viewed the Azerbaijani delegation as a charitable society and responded to its inquiries only for ethical reasons. They recommended treating Topchibashov with all possible respect.51

Easing of the conflict between the emigrant centers As relations between the Azerbaijani national center and the Azerbaijani delegation deteriorated, the Union of Oil Industrialists, on November 11, 1927, convened an urgent meeting with Mirza Asadullayev as chair and Mir Taghi Mirbabayev, Ahmed bey Hajinskii, Mutallib Melikov, Movsum Salimov, and Agahusein Salimov as members. They sent Rasulzade a warning that the delegation of the Azerbaijan Republic led by Ali Mardan bey was the only legal organ. The delegation had a mandate from the national government and was widely defended, while the union viewed the Istanbul-based Azerbaijani national center as an illegal organ that had usurped these powers.52 On November 19 Topchibashov wrote to Sultanov and Shamkhorskii that the Union of Oil Industrialists had recognized the delegation and him as the legal representative of Azerbaijan. He attached

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  207 appropriate documents confirming his right and described the disputes between the Istanbul and Paris centers beginning in 1926, including his correspondence with Rasulzade.53 Topchibashov’s position was strengthened by backing from the Azerbaijani nonaligned emigrants and the Union of Oil Industrialists. In January  1928 he wrote to Istanbul-based emigrant organizations, strongly criticizing Rasulzade and his associates: in this time of trouble for the motherland, they had created a provisional national center in Istanbul, instead of standing before the court of the people. The only legal organ – the peace delegation of the Azerbaijan Republic – bad been promoting the interests of the nation for nine years, despite hardships and losses. The delegation invited all Azerbaijani societies and organizations to merge at any cost, in order to oust foreign invaders from their land. Ali Mardan bey believed that the Azerbaijani national center should have nine members: three from the delegation, three from the Istanbul-based provisional national center, and three from other Azerbaijani delegations in Istanbul and Paris.54 For Rasulzade this suggestion was unexpected. Despite ideological disputes, no one had yet blamed the Musavat Party for the country’s troubles.55 Because of this letter Topchibashov lost his membership in the Azerbaijani national center. In the spring of 1928 he concluded a secret accord with Georgian democrat Alexander Asatiani and Haydar Bammatov, establishing a Caucasian national center. In May 1928 the Committee of Caucasian Confederalists – Khosrov bey Sultanov, David Vachnadze, and Ali khan Kantemir – left the Committee for Independence of the Caucasus and joined the Caucasian national center. Having severed relations with Prométhée, they established a magazine called Nezavisimyi Kavkaz.56 Rasulzade, believing that such confrontation among the Azerbaijani emigrant centers was unacceptable, arrived in Paris in July 1928 to discuss with Topchibashov the matters that had been causing debates within emigrant circles. On July 14 the sides signed a four-point declaration indicating that all disputes between the delegation and the national center were now settled: the national center would act as the legal organ on the issue of unification of national forces, the Paris delegation would henceforth act jointly with the national center, and all emigrants were invited to unite under the national center’s guidance to free the motherland from Bolsheviks. According to the declaration, all responsibility for political and diplomatic steps was given to the Azerbaijani national center.57 Ali Mardan bey agreed to take an indefinite leave of absence, keeping his title “chair of the delegation” and corresponding high status. His political activity ceased due to his bad health. A member of the delegation had to keep him informed about the policy being pursued, listen to his recommendations, and in no way underestimate his role. For the time being the composition of the delegation would not change; Ali Mardan bey’s son would continue to head the delegation’s office if he desired. The delegation’s links with the national center and the other groups of emigrants should continue to develop.58 When Ali Mardan bey’s political activities intensified after this agreement, the national center immediately urged him to observe “discipline.”59 However, sometimes he could not restrain himself from reacting to what was happening in the national center and the

208  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) emigrant milieu. In November 1928 the national center made personnel changes without consulting the Paris center. Ali Mardan bey, Mehdiyev, and Sheikhulislamov sent a protest to Rasulzade and Khalil bey Khasmamedov on December 4. They asked the national center to continue to work with its previous members until the matter was resolved by all members of the Paris center.60 On December 9 Rasulzade gave a written explanation of the personnel changes, stressing that the increase in the number of Musavat Party members was not intentional. In a letter dated December 16, however, Ali Mardan bey and the other members of the Paris center disagreed with these changes.61 These quarrels lasted so long that he wrote a personal letter to Rasulzade on December 18, noting that as the eldest member of the Azerbaijani opposition he had concluded that it was appropriate not to submit some questions to public discussion but to ask Rasulzade directly about what was going on. If these discords concerned only the Musavat Party, Ali Mardan bey would not interfere. However, the national center was a nationwide Azerbaijani organization, beyond the boundaries of the Musavat Party. The replacement of two members of the national center with two members of the Musavat Party had split the national center into two fronts. It was not possible to gather all emigrants around one party or one person. Such things could happen only in the USSR, where all people were forced to unite around the Communist Party by bayonets. Groups struggling for freedom could unite only on the basis of mutual respect and trust. Ali Mardan bey warned that an attempt to dominate others might greatly damage the movement and split national forces. Selfless service to a common task could create unity and strengthen it. This was not the unity of groups or parties but the unity of active pro-Azerbaijani forces struggling for their highest ideals. “If I find such Azerbaijani unity anywhere, I will be ready to join it personally and not only cooperate with it but also serve it as long as I’m able to do so. . . . I will never subordinate to separate persons or parties in any form, no matter who they are. This will never happen!”62 Mentioning his poverty, he asked Rasulzade to send the promised 1,500 francs from the national center’s cash-desk as well as ten copies of the almanac Istiqlal Ugrunda, one Turkish calendar for 1929, and two copies of the Latin-script new Turkish alphabet.63 Though some documents had been signed jointly, latent displeasure split the Azerbaijani peace delegation into two camps. Especially after a noisy meeting on December 18, 1928, Topchibashov and Hajibeyli maintained one point of view, while Mehdiyev and Maharramov took the contrary one. Atamalybeyov backed the latter camp, while Sheikhulislamov tended to favor now one side now the other. It was rumored that Ali Mardan bey had been dismissed from the post of chair of the peace delegation. But in reality his health had worsened considerably due to these exhausting troubles, so he took a leave to undergo a cure and was replaced by Mehdiyev. Yet, while Rasulzade was in Paris, Mir Yagub bey in his presence asked Ali Mardan bey to forgive him for his participation in the confrontation. Ali Mardan bey magnanimously forgave him. Thus, the conflict gradually was settled, little by little.64 Ali Mardan bey continued his political-diplomatic activity as the leader of the Azerbaijani delegation and congratulated Aristide Briand on July 29, 1929, when

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  209 he returned to power and formed the ninety-sixth governmental cabinet of France. He asked Briand, as one of the main guarantors of peace and international security, to create conditions to make the voice of little Azerbaijan audible in a choir of nations.65 When Georges Clemenceau died in 1929, Topchibashov sent the French government a telegram of condolence: “We are deeply saddened by the death of Georges Clemenceau, one of the greatest statesmen of France. We Azerbaijanis will always remember that Azerbaijan’s independence was recognized under Clemenceau’s leadership.”66 On March 9, 1932, Ali Mardan bey offered similar condolences on the death of Aristide Briand. He signed the mourning book at the Foreign Ministry.67 Briand had treated him with respect.

Bitter episodes of life in exile The Topchibashov family gathered in Paris in October 1920 after a passport was issued to Alekber bey by the Georgian government, containing the names and photographs of Ali Mardan bey’s wife, Peri khanym; his younger daughter, Sevar; eight-year-old Enver; and Leila khanym, a housemaid. The border service’s mark indicates that they left Istanbul for Paris on October 16. Ali Mardan bey’s elder daughter, Sara khanum, served as deputy trade and industry minister in the last Cabinet of Ministers of the Azerbaijan Republic. After the government was overthrown, she married Ali Ashraf bey Sultanov and they immigrated to France. They gave Ali Mardan bey two granddaughters: Zarifa (born on November 24, 1921) and Gulnar (born on March 27, 1923).68 From his correspondence with friends, it is obvious that these two granddaughters were very dear to him and gave him “meaning in his life.” On April 28, 1925, he wrote to his old friend Ali bey Huseynzade, who resided in Istanbul, enclosing a letter to his son-in-law, who was going to settle there with his wife and daughters. He trusted that Huseynzade and his wife would be attentive to them: They both will tell you in detail about the life of my family here as well as about my current position and future plans. If the latter come true, my whole family will leave for there [Istanbul] after three to four months. As for me, my arrival probably will be delayed a bit due to my situation.69 Following a short stay in Istanbul, however, his daughter’s family returned to Paris. Ali Mardan bey’s health problems emerged again in the mid-1920s. One of the causes was an injustice committed against Hasan bey Zardabi’s son, Safvet bey Melikov, who was studying abroad. The Azerbaijan Council of People’s Commissars declined to issue an allowance to him in the summer of 1922 because he was a relative of Topchibashov. Despite Hanifa khanum’s numerous appeals to Gazanfar Musabeyov, the chair of the Council of People’s Commissars, and other officials, he was denied an allowance.70 Topchibashov complained about headache, heart failure, liver pains, and rheumatism in his fingers, especially in his right hand. He wrote with a chemical pen. His desire to leave for Istanbul

210  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) was caused by a number of squabbles in Paris. On June 26, 1922, he underwent serious surgery that forced him to halt political activity; however, he gradually regained his strength and rejoined the active struggle for freedom. In June 1926 Nikolai Chkheidze, chair of the Georgian delegation to the Paris Peace Conference, could no longer stand the burden of life in exile and committed suicide. Ali Mardan bey wrote to Hajibeyli: “I’ve just come back from the Georgians. Everyone is very sad. In my presence, Chkhenkeli, Gegechkori, and others really cried. I’m too upset.”71 Despite all these hardships, however, he wrote: “No matter what extraordinary and tough circumstances block my way toward regular and viable service to my nation, I consider it my right to hope for moral support from the same people who know me, from the same friends of mine.” He called his old friends Ahmed bey Aghayev and Ali bey Huseynzade, who were residing in Istanbul. Rasulzade had also resettled there as well as Sadri Maksudov and Yusif Achkurin, who had gained authority in the Tatar political movement. All these individuals attracted him to Istanbul like a magnet. He wrote that he was glad for Maksudov, who was his pupil in political affairs.72 Ali Mardan bey removed the ending “ev” from his surname at that time and started signing his name generally as “Topchibashi” in letters, newspapers, and official appeals. He was a member of many influential societies and organizations of France. Owing to his intellect, broad outlook, and more than forty years of experience in practical work and his unwavering political position, he won great respect everywhere. Sometimes he gave lectures at these groups, which were well received. The public paid great attention to his articles on Azerbaijan’s ethnography, history, and political life and the struggle for independence. In August 1928 Fuat Köprülü, rector of the University of Istanbul, and Professor Zaki Validi Toghan, who were on their way to the Oxford congress of Orientalists, consulted with Ali Mardan bey in Paris.73 Ali Mardan bey became more nostalgic near the end of the 1920s, as shown by a letter that he wrote on July 24, 1929, in response to a letter from Anushiravan bey, the son of his old friend and associate Allahyar bey Zulgadarov. He appreciated a phrase from the letter on respect for elders and stressed that this was rooted in folk traditions, which Azerbaijani youth must maintain and observe. He was very glad to find these qualities in his friend’s son: My late friend knew my father well and called me “Amioglu” [uncle’s son], while the late Hamid bey called me “our leader.” As a relative, I’m very pleased by your friendship with Alekber bey. It strengthens the friendship and cordiality between our families.74 Ali Mardan bey was an island of hope for indigent emigrants. Despite his own sad financial position, he tried to help everyone who asked. Salima khanum thanked him in a letter for his cordial reception and admitted: “If your wife did not give me ten francs while seeing me off, I would have needed to return from Saint-Clois on foot.”75 Jeyhun Hajibeyli’s financial problems made it impossible to pay for the studies of his son Temuchin, so the boy was excluded from the Richelieu College. On February 26, 1932, Ali Mardan bey submitted an appeal to

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  211 the college’s director, stressing that the boy was a very good student with skills in French, English, and Latin and gave Azerbaijanis hope that they would have a skilled compatriot educated in Europe, for which they would be grateful to his parents and to the college. He guaranteed that the boy’s parents would pay the whole sum at the first opportunity.76 However, the financial position of Ali Mardan bey himself was even sadder. A letter dated June 12, 1929, contains an answer to Hajibeyli’s request to lend him 300 francs to solve housing problems: “All I can do is to send you ten dollars, which are designated as Enver’s summer expenses, and I’m sending them to you. . . . I’m very sorry that I cannot send you the whole 300 francs. I hope that this will be enough for you.”77 He wrote other touching letters. “I  appealed to my personal debtors: not a word from them. . . . I’m praying for fate to give me another opportunity to help you. Let’s not lose hope.”78 The whole Topchibashov family lived in extreme poverty in the second half of the 1920s. Sometimes they had no money to pay the rent. Ali Mardan bey had once rented apartments in downtown Paris in the sixteenth arrondissement (Rue Decamps, 37; and Rue Spontini, 59). In the mid-1920s he moved to the Paris suburb of Saint-Clois. On August 6, 1929, Ali Mardan bey wrote to Hajibeyli that a physician recommended that he spend three weeks in Royat (near Vichy) to get treatment for his arteriosclerosis: Alas! I  cannot move anywhere now, for I  have again found myself in the position in which I was three years ago: I’m expecting officers of the law to appear any day now for my back rent since May. . . . I nevertheless am making every effort to remain patient and cool.79 The director of the Warsaw Institute of National Problems, which had been providing aid of US$80 monthly to Ali Mardan bey since September 1926, stopped the payments in May 1929.80 Khanifa khanum Melikova had also sent as much as she could from her pension to her grandsons and granddaughters, but she died in March  1929. On April  13, the fortieth day after her death, Ali Mardan bey arranged a funeral repast for her. No one from the Azerbaijani delegation except Hajibeyli attended. But representatives of the North Caucasus, Georgia, Armenia, and various Paris-based emigrant organizations came to the ceremony in SaintClois at 3 p.m. From around the world, Azerbaijani emigrants sent telegrams and letters of condolence for the death of the great female enlightener, who had laid the foundations of female education in Azerbaijan. Naturally, Ali Mardan bey was deeply upset over the absence of his friends, with whom he had been struggling shoulder to shoulder for the freedom of his homeland for ten years. He was prescribed therapy due to a severe deterioration of his health.81 After the sudden death of Rashid, Ali Mardan bey started watching over the health of his children very carefully, but the family was constrained by financial hardships. He told Hajibeyli in a letter dated September 1, 1928, that at the end of July a doctor had examined Sevar khanym and recommended sending her to the mountains: “How can we do that if we have no money for this ‘luxury’ and when

212  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) everywhere is so expensive? Our Sefvet, to whom my wife appealed, helped us!” On August 23 Sevar khanym and Enver left for the mountains, but their parents could not afford to go: “I could send only them alone no matter how risky and hard this was.  .  .  . I can find consolation only in work, labor, and serving the nation.”82 Ali Mardan bey was very much upset by the desire of some members of the delegation to remove him from everyday affairs. Aided by Mustafa Vekilov, Mir Yagub Mehdiyev and Akper agha Sheikhulislamov sent him an ultimatum, which caused gossip within the delegation. Hajibeyli wrote to Rasulzade: Maybe Ali Mardan bey himself will decide to resign due to his old age and disease . . . this man devoted forty years of his life to public and political work and now, in his declining years, is forced to stay out of all this; it seems to me that this is unethical from the viewpoint of national interests.83 Despite his age and ill-health Ali Mardan bey tried to keep track of all processes within the national emigrant movement by reading the publications of various emigrant groups. The Finland-based newspaper Yeni Turan led his thoughts back to the distant past, when he had led the movement of Russian Muslims. These recollections appear in a letter that he sent on June 23, 1933, to Mahammad Sadyg bey Akhundzade, one of the contributors to Yeni Turan, asking that all issues of the newspaper be sent to his current address in Saint-Clois: I’d like to thank you and the newspaper’s owner, Ibrahim Arifulla bey efendi, very much. This is an unforgettable virtue: to struggle for the freedom of Turkic nations while living in the far north of Europe. . . . Once I had my friends among the Finns. I met them in St. Petersburg (in the First Duma). Is any one of them alive? Who are your associates in such a good country? Are they our brothers from the eternally dear Itil-Ural? . . . ­Anyway, I’d like to send my regards to all. It is very hard to spend my declining years in such a situation. I’ve been fighting disease for more than a year; our organization is split; affairs are not good, etc. But I’m still hoping that I will be useful to my nation, either in Azerbaijan or in Itil-Ural, Turkestan, or other Turkic lands.84 This cordial letter from a Muslim activist whose whole life now lay in recollections once again shows us the warmth and charisma of Ali Mardan bey.

The Pact of Caucasian Confederation In 1933 the National Socialists came to power in Germany, which forced France into rapprochement with the Soviet Union. The leaders of the Caucasian emigrants who played an active role in the Prométhée movement had a negative attitude toward Adolf Hitler. As Noe Jordania (one of its leaders) noted, Germany, which occupied European countries one after another, could not restore the independence of Georgia. He made it clear that the fate of the Caucasian emigrants was linked with the democratic forces of the world.85 Jordania’s views were shared by

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  213 Rasulzade. After the fascists came to power in Germany, he expressed his opposition to Hitler, accusing him of ignoring democratic principles and establishing a dictatorship.86 The May 16, 1933, ratification of the Franco-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact had a great impact on the activity of the Caucasian emigrants. The pact ended the official diplomatic representation of the national government of Georgia in Paris, through which Caucasian emigrants had been solving many of their problems. The Soviet Union’s entry into the League of Nations in 1934 created additional hardships for the emigrant organizations. They protested against the acceptance of the USSR as a state-aggressor in notes to the leaders of the European countries, demanding that they force the Soviet Union to leave the occupied territories of the national republics. On January 27, 1934, emigrants from the former Russian Empire gathered at Paris’s club Société Savante: Georgians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, North Caucasians, Ukrainians, Turkestanis, and Russians. Ukraine’s representative, Aleksandr Shulgin, chaired the gathering. Mir Yagub Mehdiyev gave a report on “The International Situation and the National Problem in the USSR.” The Russian monarchists were hostile to the report, while the delegates of the national republics reacted very positively. Mehdiyev noted that the German foreign policy of Rapallo ended after the fascists came to power.87 In an effort to strengthen the Prométhée movement and consolidate Parisbased emigrant organizations, Poland’s official circles established a Committee of Friendship of the Nations of the Caucasus, Turkestan, and Ukraine in May 1934. The core objective was to unify the actions of Paris-based emigrant organizations that shared the Prométhée line. Shulgin was appointed as chair and Atamalybeyov as secretary of the provisional office, whose members were Mehdiyev and Atamalybeyov (Azerbaijan), Chkhenkeli (Georgia), Chulik (the North Caucasus Republic), Chokayev (Turkestan), and Shulgin and Kosenko (Ukraine).88 On July  14, 1934, after long debates, all the Caucasian republics except for Armenia signed the Pact of Caucasian Confederation. Each nation can be developed only on the basis of its independence; if leading Caucasian states do not merge into a commonwealth on a common territory, it will be extremely difficult to accomplish this goal; the foreign policies and national appeals of Caucasian nations should be implemented jointly; the Confederation of Caucasian states is a political body developed out of the necessity of political and economic unity of these states. With this in mind, the national centers of Azerbaijan, Georgia, and the Northern Caucasus are establishing the Caucasian Confederation.89 The confederation was based on six points: 1 2

The Caucasian Confederation shall act on behalf of member republics abroad and have a common customs area; The foreign policy of the member republics shall be governed by the Confederation’s plenipotentiary representatives;

214  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) 3 4 5 6

The boundaries of the Confederation shall be secured by the Confederation’s army, composed of the troops of its member republics under common command; All matters of dispute within the Confederation shall be passed to the Confederation’s Supreme Court; With these principles in mind, a commission of experts shall begin drafting a constitution of the Caucasian Confederation as soon as possible; This pact reserves a place for the Armenians.90

The Pact of Caucasian Confederation was signed by Topchibashov and Mahammad Emin Rasulzade (Azerbaijan); Mahammad Girey Sunsh, Ibrahim Chulik, and Tausultan Shakmanov (the Northern Caucasus); and Noe Jordania and Akakii Chkhenkeli (Georgia). The Committee for Independence of the Caucasus then made an appeal to the Caucasian nations: with the adoption of the pact on July 14, the national centers were ending the first stage of their activity. All political and revolutionary affairs would henceforth be the responsibility of the Pact of Caucasian Confederation. A scheduled conference would accept the resignations of the members of the Committee for Independence of the Caucasus and establish a Caucasian Council.91 On August 6 Mehdiyev, Chkhenkeli, and Magomet Girey Sunsh sent French foreign minister Louis Barthou a note on behalf of the national committees of the republics that had signed the pact. It explained that the Caucasian nations that were struggling for restoration of their independence had united their efforts and reserved a place for Armenia in the pact. Unification of the Caucasian nations in the form of a confederation undoubtedly would become an important factor in the peace and stability in the Middle East.92 The Pact of Caucasian Confederation remained the focus of attention for Moscow leaders. Soviet foreign intelligence bodies were instructed to collect agents’ reports about the aims and tasks of the pact as well as the confederation’s key leaders. Soviet intelligence indicated that the pact was generally directed against the USSR and had totally anti-Soviet aims. Agents’ reports noted that Jordania and Chkhenkeli had substantially lost their authority within emigrant circles and probably would not be able to act as coordinators in the future. The agents concluded that emigrants from the Mountainous Republic were too divided to allow Chulik, Sunsh, and Shakmanov to carry out the tasks set by the Caucasian Federation. The worsening of Topchibashov’s health forced him to avoid active work and lose his position among Azerbaijani emigrants. In their view, Rasulzade was the only one of the leaders who had signed the Brussels Pact who might be able to play an influential role.93

The last stop in Saint-Clois: funeral of an emigrant After the Pact of Caucasian Confederation was signed, Ali Mardan bey felt fairly well and looked to the future with optimism, dreaming of uniting all Azerbaijanis and neighboring nations under the flag of the confederation. His doctor gave him confidence in his strength. But that was not his fate. Severe paralysis interrupted

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  215 his life on Monday, November 5, 1934, during a midday rest.94 The entire Caucasian population in exile suffered a heavy loss: Topchibashov, who had devoted all his life to the struggle for the freedom and independence of Azerbaijan and the Caucasian nations, died in Saint-Clois. His death caused grief not only for those who struggled for the independence of Azerbaijan in exile but for all Azerbaijanis. On November 7 members of the family published the following announcement in Poslenie Novosti: “Peri khanum Topchibashi, her children, son-in-law, grandchildren, and relatives inform friends and associates of the untimely death of Ali Mardan bey Topchibashi, head of the national parliament and Azerbaijani delegation.” On November 8 the imam of the Paris Muslim mosque read a memorial prayer; then the catafalque with the body of Ali Mardan bey passed under the triumphal arch, which was the last tribute to this prominent political leader of the Azerbaijan Republic. The funeral of Ali Mardan bey turned into a rally of solidarity of Caucasian, Central Asian, and Russian emigrants. Rasulzade, the leader of the Azerbaijani national center, who spoke at the burial ceremony in the presence of the heads of all emigrant organizations, recounted Topchibashov’s life and his role in the national life of Azerbaijan and Caucasus as well as the political life of the Russian Empire. Today we are seeing off the great struggler for the happiness of his nation. The glorious head of the Azerbaijani parliament and prominent leader of the ­Azerbaijani delegation became an unwilling emigrant in France. Head of the parliament, head of the peace delegation, member of the National Center – the official posts and titles of the deceased – cannot cover all aspects of the meaning of the name Ali Mardan bey . . . he worked for the wealth of his people for at least fifty years nonstop. Fifty years of life, half a century! A long time! But with the death of Ali Mardan bey we’re losing a man who embodied an important stage of our national life, for the name of Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov is a synonym for a whole generation and a certain period of life.95 Summing up Topchibashov’s life, Rasulzade noted: He entered this world as a fighter. In those years Russian Turks, especially Azerbaijanis, began a new stage in the construction of their national life. Mirza Fatali Akhundov, Hasan bey Zardabi, and Ismayil bey Gasprinskii advanced the national-cultural movement that they created, which was about to enter the stage of struggle for political rights at the time.96 Akakii Chkhenkeli spoke on behalf of Georgian emigrants: We know Ali Mardan bey as the first Caucasian patriot, who from his youth spent his strength and energy for the sake of friendship and unity of the Caucasian nations in the struggle for their rights and independence. His last public act, which evoked delight, was the signing of the Pact of Caucasian Confederations.97

216  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)

Figure 12.1 Mahammad Emin Rasulzade utters farewell speech at the funeral of Ali Mardan Topchibashov in the cemetery of the Western Paris suburb of SaintCloud. November 1934.

Former Ukrainian premier Viacheslav Prokopovich expressed his sorrow at the loss: A great patriot, a prominent statesman, and a cordial friend of Ukraine has left us. He has died, but his main concept – the independence of his motherland

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  217 and commonwealth with its all neighbors, including Ukraine – will live forever . . . let me express a tribute of deep respect for our unforgettable ally and true friend.98 The former Armenian premier Alexander Khatisov also voiced his respect. Topchibashov  – the main advocate of the Caucasian Confederation  – in 1921 united all Caucasian representatives to sign the treaty of the four republics. In the history of your republic, of which he was one of the builders, Ali Mardan bey undoubtedly will occupy a worthy place that will not be forgotten for many years. . . . One day, his thoughts, concepts, and political actions will no doubt emerge, so we who have gathered in the free Caucasus will warmly commemorate this man, a great citizen who gave his whole life on the altar of unity of neighbors.99 The Berlin-based magazine Kurtuluş devoted an entire issue (number 2) to the career of Topchibashov and his funeral ceremony and published Rasulzade’s interesting article “The Place of Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov in the Azerbaijani Movement.” Rasulzade wrote: At a period when the generation of Ali Mardan bey was developing, national anxiety subconsciously attracted them to Russian liberalism, so they expected tsarist rule to make great changes for their nation. However, the bounds of Russian liberalism were too narrow for the political program of Ali Mardan bey and his generation. . . . The national program was based upon the principles of comprehensive freedom. He ended with the words: “If a man who occupies such an important place in the history of his nation is reported dead, don’t believe it!”100 The same issue published an article by Mir Yagub Mehdiyev, who had worked shoulder to shoulder with Ali Mardan bey for fifteen years: Not only Azerbaijanis but also the whole Muslim world of the Middle East have lost a great statesman. . . . Describing the life of this man means recounting the history of Azerbaijan’s interrelations with the Caucasian nations over the past fifty years. With his love, will, and ardent patriotism, Ali Mardan bey pointed out the right direction for the national movement. Current generations struggling for the nationalist concept follow his example.101 After learning this sad news, Caucasian emigrants everywhere sent telegrams of condolence to the family of the deceased and to Rasulzade. Ukrainian emigrant Andrei Levitskii assured Peri khanym that Ali Mardan bey’s memory would live not only in the history of his nation but also in the memory of all nations struggling for their independence in Eastern Europe. Professor Gotthard Jeschke said in a telegram to Rasulzade that Topchibashov “represented, apart from his

218  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) country, the interests of all Turkestan, which resulted in trust and respect for him and made him famous throughout the Turkic world.”102 Muslim memorial ceremonies in honor of Ali Mardan bey were arranged in towns with a substantial Azerbaijani population. The death of Ali Mardan bey turned another interesting page in the history of Azerbaijan. His high morality and rich experience, prominent role in the history of the national movement, fifty years of constant struggle, and dramatic life divided among three countries created a fascinating chronicle of the struggle of Azerbaijanis, Muslims, and Turks of the Russian Empire to form a nation, achieve statehood, and enter modernity. Ali Mardan bey added a nationalist content to Mirza Fatali Akhundov, Hasan bey Zardabi, and Ismayil bey Gasprinskii’s cultural awakening and became one of the builders of the new Azerbaijan.

Notes 1 Monsieur Marquis de Crewe à Toptchibachef. Le Janvier 31, 1924, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–5. 2 Monsieur Marquis de Crewe à Toptchibachef. Le Février 15, 1924, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–3. 3 Extrait D’ut Discours Frononce Par Lord Curzon a La Chambre Des Lords. La Mars 26, 1924, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1. 4 Letter of Marquess of Crewe Tsereteli and Topchibashev, February 18, 1924. AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1. 5 See: Parliamentary Debates House of Common, vol. 169, # 11, February  13, 1924, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1; Parliamentary Debates House of Common, vol. 169, # 14, February 18, 1924, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–7. 6 Parliamentary Debates House of Common, vol. 169, # 14, February 18, 1924, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1. 7 Ibid., 3–4. 8 See: Letter from Ckhenkeli to Topchibashev, October  13, 1929, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–2. 9 Letter from Topchibashev to Rasulzade, April 14–15, 1924, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 2. 10 Monsieur Edouard Herriot à Toptchibacheff. Le Juin 17, 1924, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 291–295. 11 Letter from Topchibashev to Rasulzade, November  27–30, 1924, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 5. 12 Iz istorii azerbaidzhanskoi emigratsii, 250. 13 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajybeyli, September 14, 1922, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 9, v. 41, p. 2. 14 Mirza Bala Məmmədzadə, Azerbaycan milli hərəkatı. Berlin and Charlottenburg: Firka Divanı Tarafınden Neşrolunmuşdur, 1938, 177. 15 Togan, Vospominania, 432–433. 16 Ibid., 433. 17 See: Letter from Rasulzade to Topchibashev, February 23, 1926, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 5. 18 For more on this, see: Jamil Hasanlı, Birinci Türkoloji Kurultaya Kısa Tarihi Bakış, 1926. Bakü Türkoloji Konqresinin 70 yıl dönümü toplantısı: (29–30 Kasım, 1996). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları, 1999, 7–12. 19 Letter from Topchibashev to Rasulzade, November  27–30, 1924, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 4.

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  219 20 For the full text of this document, see: Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 371–372. 21 A.M. Topchibashi i M.E. Rasulzade: Perepiska. 1923–1926 gg. Moscow: Sotsial’noPoliticheskaia MYSL’, 2012, 109. 22 Letter from Rasulzade to Topchibashev, July 19, 1925, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 1–2. 23 Letter from Rasulzade to Topchibashev, December 25, 1924, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 2. 24 Letter from Topchibashev to Rasulzade, March 27–April 7, 1925, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 3. 25 Memorandum Delegations Caucasus, Ukraine and Turkestan to States Which Have Signed the Locarno Pact, December, 1925, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–2. 26 Ibid., 11. 27 See: Vladimir Pechatnov and Alexander Manykin, Istoria vneshnei politiki SShA. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnoe Otnosheniia, 2012, 187–188. 28 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, September  1, 1928, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 65, p. 1. 29 Bylinin, Zdanovich, Korotaiev, Organizatsia “Prometei” i “Prometeiskoie” dvizhenie v planakh pol’skoi razvedki po razvalu Rossii (SSSR), 318–319. 30 See: Aidin Balaiev, Mamed Amin Rasulzade (1884–1955). Politicheskii Portret. Moscow: Flinta, 2014, 232–233. 31 For More Information See: Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 55–58, 91–98. 32 Topchibashi i Rasulzade: Perepiska, 103. 33 Letter from Rasulzade to Topchibashev, July 19, 1926, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 1. 34 Ibid., 2. 35 Letter from Topchibashev to Rasulzade, August 30, 1926, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 2. 36 For Interesting Information about the Life of the Azerbaijan Immigrants in Paris, see: Abutalybov, Gody i vstrechi v Parizhe, 2006. 37 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, December  28, 1926, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 49, p. 1. 38 Iz istorii azerbaidzhanskoi emigratsii, 304. 39 See: Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 115. 40 Letter from Topchibashev to the Chairman of the Federalist Party North Caucasian Republic, June 17, 1929, AAMT, carton no 6/2, 1–2. 41 On the Substance of the dispute, see: Imanov, Ali Merdan Topçibaşı, 215–219; Ramiz Abutalybov, Mamed Emin Rasulzade i Kavkazskaia konfederatsia. Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2011, 33–35. 42 Information Transcaucasian State Political Administration of the group Khosrov bey Sultanov, October  13, 1927, Archive of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia (hereafter referred to as AMIAG), f. 13, r. 5, v. 170, p. 88. 43 Information of Transcaucasian State Political Administration about the activities of Ittihadists in Istanbul, November 13, 1927, AMIAG, f. 13, r. 5, v. 170, p. 158. 44 Information of Transcaucasian State Political Administration about the activities of Musavatists in Istanbul, November 13, 1927, AMIAG, f. 13, r. 5, v. 170, p. 105. 45 Information of Transcaucasian State Political Administration about Khosrov bey Sultanov’s group, December 1, 1927, AMIAG, f. 13, r. 5, v. 170, p. 219. 46 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, July 25, 1927, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 53, p. 4. 47 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, August 27, 1927, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 53, p. 1. 48 Information of Transcaucasian State Political Administration about the activities of Musavatists in Istanbul, October 13, 1927, AMIAG, f. 13, r. 5, v. 170, p. 93. 49 Letter from Topchubashov to Rasulzade, November 27–30, 1924, AAMT, carton no 4/3, 3.

220  The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934) 50 Information of Transcaucasian State Political Administration about the activities of Musavatists in Istanbul, October 13, 1927, AMIAG, f. 13, r. 5, v. 170, p. 94. 51 Ministère des Affaires Etrangères République Française. Direction des Affaires Politiques et Commerciales. Note pour le Cabinet du Ministre. Le Mai 3, 1927, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 304. 52 Abutalybov, Mamed Emin Rasulzade i Kavkazskaia konfederatsia, 34. 53 Information of Transcaucasian State Political Administration about the activities of independent groups in Turkey, December  1, 1927, AMIAG, f. 13, r. 5, v. 170, pp. 219–220. 54 Suggestions of Topchibashev the Formation of the Azerbaijan National Center, April, 1928, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 59, p. 2. 55 Safarova, Ideia Kavkazskoi Konfederatsii v emigrantskii period politicheskoi deiatel’nosti Topchibasheva, 48. 56 See: Mamoulia, Les Combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentals, 129. 57 Imanov, Ali Merdan Topçibaşı, 217–218. 58 The Agreement Reached Between the National Center and Topchibashev, 1928, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 105, p. 1. 59 See: Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 225–226. 60 Letter from Topchibashev, Mehtiev and Sheykhulislamov to Rasulzade and Khasmamedov, December 4, 1928, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–2. 61 Letter from Topchibashev, Mehtiev and Sheykhulislamov to Rasulzade and Khasmamedov, December 16, 1928, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–3. 62 Letter from Topchibashev to Rasulzade, December 18, 1928, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 6. 63 Ibid., 8. 64 See: Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 219–221. 65 Télégramme Monsieur de Briand à M. Toptchibachy Ali Mardan. Le Juillet 29, 1929, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 305–306. 66 De Toptchibacheff à Le Cabinet a envoyé carte. Le Novembre 29, 1929, AMAÉF, vol. 639, folio 307. 67 See: Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 247. 68 See: Notes of Topchibashev on dates of birth of his family members, AAMT, carton no 9/17, 2. 69 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 188. 70 See: Private file number 16 of scholarship Melikov Safvet (Melik-Zardabi), December 14, 1926, SARA, f. 57, r. 6, v. 237, pp. 1–15. 71 Note from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, June 14, 1926, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 105, p. 4. 72 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 189. 73 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, September  1, 1928, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v.  65, p. 1. 74 Letter from Topchibashev to Anushiravan bey Zulgadarov, July 24, 1929, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 1–2. 75 Letter from Salima khanym to Topchibashev, 1924, AAMT, carton no 6/1, 1–2. 76 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 245. 77 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, June 12, 1929, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 70, p. 1. 78 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, August 10, 1928, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 63, p. 1. 79 See: Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, August 6, 1929, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v. 71, p. 1. 80 Topchibashi: dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov, 26. 81 Ibid., 230.

The hard years of life in exile (1924–1934)  221 82 Letter from Topchibashev to Hajibeyli, September 1, 1928, SALAAR, f. 649, r. 3, v.  65, pp. 1–2. 83 Iz istorii azerbaidzhanskoi emigratsii, 342. 84 Letter from Topchibashev to Mahammad Sadyg Akhundzade, June 23, 1933, AAMT, carton no 9/19, 1–2. 85 Patrik von zur Mühlen, Camali Haç ile Kızıl Yıldız Arasında. Ankara: Mavi Yayınlar, 1984, 37. 86 For more details see: Nesiman Iagublu, Azerbaycan Milli İstiqlal Mübarizəsi və Məhəmməd Əmin Rəsulzadə. Baku: BDU, 2001, 98. 87 Mir Iakub, Mezhdunaronoie polozhenie i natsional’naia problema v SSSR. Paris: Izdanie “Prometei,” 1934, 14–15. 88 Severnyi Kavkaz, 1934, # 1, 27. 89 Prométhée, 1934, # 92, 3. 90 Ibid., 4. 91 Kurtuluş, 1935, # 5, 3–4. 92 Kavkazskaia Konfederatsia v ofitsial’nykh deklaratsiiakh, tainoi perepiske i sekretnykh dokumentakh dvizheniia “Prometei,” 100. 93 Lev Sotskov, Neizvestnyi separatism. Na sluzhbe SD I Abvera. Iz sekretnykh dos’e razvedki. Moscow: Ripol klassik, 2003, 130. 94 See: Topchibashi Ali-Maradan bey. Biography, December 16, 1951, AAMT, carton no 3, 19. 95 Kurtuluş, December, 1934, # 2, 35. 96 Ibid., 35. 97 Ibid., 54. 98 Prométhée, 1934, # 96, 14. 99 Ibid., # 96, 13. 100 Kurtuluş, December, 1934, # 2, 11. 101 Ibid., 14. 102 Gasanly, Ali Mardan-bek Topchibashov: Zhizn’ za ideiu, 582.

Conclusion In the memory of descendants

Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov devoted more than half his life to his nation and national movement. His fifty-year career started in Tiflis and ended in Saint-Clois. Those years were not simply the story of a single man; they were the history of Azerbaijan’s transition to nationalism, statehood, and modernity. When Ali Mardan bey entered public life at the end of the nineteenth century, only a small number of people devoted themselves to serving the nation. Inspired by the ideas of Mirza Fatali Akhundov and Hasan bey Zardabi, they played a significant role in propelling history toward a turning point. Ali Mardan bey was the first among them. Thanks to him, Muslim nations of the Russian Empire, which had thought of themselves as Asiatic communities for a millennium, entered the historical arena and adopted nationalist values. Ali Mardan bey added the stamp of nationality in the passports of Russian Turks. In the late nineteenth century, the Muslim society of the Caucasus was not very active. The heroic labor of Hasan bey Zardabi in the 1870s glowed like a lone lamp in the dark. The spiritual state of Azerbaijan was reflected in the closing of the newspaper Ekinchi and Zardabi’s forced exile to a provincial village. Azerbaijan had no schools teaching in the native language or spiritual schools capable of training literate clergy or newspapers or cultural centers, as reflected in fiction by Najaf bey Vezirov, Abdurrahman bey Hagverdiyev, and Mirza Jalil. The arrival of Ali Mardan bey, Ahmed bey Aghayev, and a bit later Ali bey Huseynzade and dozens of talented youths offered an escape from the growing crisis. They became the observers and voice of the Muslim society they represented, from the Russianlanguage Kaspii to the Turkic language, nationally oriented newspapers Hayat, Irshad, and Fiyuzat. Baku oil, capable of lighting and warming the whole world in the early twentieth century, undoubtedly contributed to this awakening. The first Russian revolution in 1905 opened a new path in the life of Ali Mardan bey, connecting him with the popular movement that he served with honor until his last days. In 1905 he presented the national demands of Caucasian Muslims to the Russian government. He was the leading thinker and heart of the Union of Muslims of Russia, established in 1905, and the leader of all five Muslim congresses, from 1905 to 1917. He also led the Muslim faction of the First State Duma and was influential in the other Dumas. Ismayil bey Gasprinskii wrote that the eyes of the whole Muslim world were watching him.

Conclusion  223 This study sheds light on this little-known period in Ali Mardan bey’s life from 1907 to 1917, when he was at the center of history. At a time when the liberal movement was defeated and political activists sought asylum in foreign countries, he took on the responsibility of leading Russian Muslims from darkness to light. He served three months in Kresty Prison for signing the Vyborg Declaration, organized the Union of Muslims in St. Petersburg and Moscow, and toured many cities in Turkic regions. His travel notes became a valuable guide to the national, ethnic, and religious panorama of Russian Turks at the time. Ali Mardan bey was recognized and welcomed wherever he went. People accepted his ideas. His brilliant speech at the Fourth Congress of Muslims on June 25, 1914, is a manifesto of the nations enslaved by Russia. His unprecedented activities and inexhaustible energy made him the voice for Russia’s “stepsons.” Ali Mardan bey was authorized to speak on behalf of Muslims at all significant gatherings arranged by the Russian government until 1917. Topchibashov was undoubtedly one of the creators of the independent Azerbaijani state. He received news of the proclamation of the Declaration of Independence on May 28, 1918, in Baku, which had been seized by Armenian-Bolshevik forces. He was a hostage and prisoner, but his heart was in Ganja. The tsarist government deprived him of his political rights, the Soviet government arrested him, and Armenian-Bolshevik insurgents threatened his life. At the end of World War I, all of the warring powers coveted Baku. The Islamic Party government of Azerbaijan was moving toward the capital, while Ali Mardan bey tried to reach Ganja. He did not know yet that he would never again see Baku, the city that had determined his fate for twenty years. In August 1918 the Azerbaijani government sent Topchibashov as an extraordinary and plenipotentiary minister and diplomatic representative to Istanbul, which was experiencing the last sad days of war. He did all that he could to gain recognition of the newly born republic. In December 1918 he was elected head of the parliament of Azerbaijan. Although he soon went abroad, his activities in support of Russian parliamentarianism inspired the work of the parliament. Ali Mardan bey was the first representative of Azerbaijan in Europe. His delegation achieved recognition of Azerbaijan by the modern world and acceptance in the family of nations. The Azerbaijan Republic became integrated in the free world as the first Turkic and first Muslim country. It issued the first secular newspaper, created the first national theater and the first modern opera, and established the first democratic republic in the region. The successes of the national government and the diplomatic skills of Ali Mardan bey were recognized internationally. He laid the foundations of a propaganda campaign in Europe that published books, brochures, magazines, and bulletins in 1919–1920, which kept the memory of Azerbaijan alive for seventy years during the Soviet system. Ali Mardan bey was also the first representative of Azerbaijani political exiles. He spent sixteen years abroad, including eight months in Turkey and more than fifteen years in France. After Azerbaijan was occupied in April 1920, he entered a difficult period. The Azerbaijani delegation gradually resettled from downtown Paris to the city’s outskirts, dealing with the complications of life in exile. As its

224  Conclusion head Ali Mardan bey had to bear most of the responsibility for financial and moral problems. In his declining years and in poor health, he remained the central figure of the Azerbaijani movement for independence until his last days. Ali Mardan bey was the first Azerbaijani who collected a family archive reflecting his daily struggles, including documents related to the Topchibashov family. At the St. Petersburg Imperial University, he learned not only law but office work. He catalogued and stored thousands of documents in his home archive. Though Ali Mardan bey had no will, he left instructions regarding his archive: it should never fall into the hands of Communists. Now communism itself has passed into the archive of history. The shining image of Ali Mardan bey, his name, and his actions as well as his archive are now the national treasure of independent Azerbaijan. Ali Mardan bey was buried in the suburb of Saint-Clois in 1934 in the cemetery where his son Rashid bey (1901–1926) was already buried. Ali Mardan bey himself died eight years later. Peri khanum died in 1947, and Alekber bey in 1978. In Paris Alekber bey used to meet composer Rauf Hajiyev (the minister of culture of Azerbaijan and a people’s artist of the USSR), who had been adopted by Hasan bey Zardabi’s daughter, Garib-Soltan Melikova. When Alekber bey and Hajiyev visited the graves of Ali Mardan bey and Peri khanym in Saint-Clois, Hajiyev took a handful of earth from the grave and later scattered it over the graves of Hasan bey and Hanifa khanym at Baku’s Honored Burial Cemetery. He named one of his granddaughters after his stepmother. The children of Hasan bey Zardabi scattered all over the world: Midhat and Garib-Soltan remained in Baku, Peri khanym left for Paris, while Sevfet bey settled in Istanbul. Hajiyev last heard from Sevfet bey in 1970. Midhat had a daughter, Fatma Melikova, who had a son, Mahammadali Safarov, and a grandson, Hajiaga Safarov. Except for Sara khanym, the children of Ali Mardan bey did not have offspring. Alekber bey married but had no children. No information is available on Sevar and Enver. Sara khanym had two daughters with Ali Ashraf Sultanov: Zarifa and Gulnar. They lived in Istanbul for a long time and respected the memory of their grandfather. Though all the children of Ali Mardan bey lived abroad, their souls were linked to their homeland, as shown in a letter that Alekber bey sent to maestro Niyazi Taghyzade-Hajibeyov. He wrote that he would never forget their conversations. Now you know what I  think about my Motherland and that I  have not forgotten anything after all these forty-seven years of emigration; on the contrary, I have always been interested in anything that happened in Azerbaijan. Regretfully, all my information was obtained from books or magazines. . . . Azerbaijan has achieved what we all here always wished for, and we do not doubt that it will develop further. Alekber bey sought materials such as a statistical almanac, maps of all kinds, a three-volume History of Azerbaijan, a university grammar for use in his lectures on Turkic languages, and a thesaurus. He planned to contribute Azerbeijani tales for an upcoming Collection of Folk Tales.

Conclusion  225 Azerbaijan regained its independence in 1991. The great name of Ali Mardan bey, stigmatized by all Soviet publications as the chief ideologist of the national bourgeoisie, returned to his homeland with honor again. His useful deeds started being mentioned on the pages of scientific research works. A Baku street is named after him. People are proud of him as one of the recognized leaders of the independent state of Azerbaijan. His grave at Saint-Clois has been honored by many Azerbaijani patriots. Ramiz Abutalibov, an official of the Foreign Ministry of Azerbaijan, initiated talks with Henry Vignal, head of international relations in the Paris Mayor’s Office, on the erection of a memorial plaque at one of six houses where Ali Mardan bey lived in the period from 1919 to 1934. The first memorial plaque in his honor was placed on a house located at Paris-16, Rue Decamps, 37, in May 1998: “Ali Mardan Topchibashi, who occupied the post of president of the Azerbaijani Parliament in 1918–1920, lived in this house in 1920.” Under the auspices of the Azerbaijani state, a tombstone was placed on his grave in Saint-Clois in May 2006. The old gravestone was delivered to Baku, to the Nizami Museum of Literature. A monument now rises over his grave: Ali Mardan bey proudly watches his house at Rue Ernest Tissaud 28, where he lived in desperate poverty. Here rests the great fighter, who protected our national existence for fifty years of Azerbaijan’s history. His dream was to see Azerbaijan independent. Ali Mardan bey has achieved this day at last: his Azerbaijan is now free and independent.

Abbreviations

AFPRF Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation AGLN Assembly General of the League of Nations AIOC Anglo-Iranian Oil Company AMIAG Archive of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia AMNS Archive of the Ministry of National Security of the Azerbaijan Republic APDPARA Archive of Political Documents of the Presidential Administration of the Republic of Azerbaijan ARC Azerbaijan Revolutionary Committee AREC All-Russian Extraordinary Commission ARMC All-Russian Muslim Council Armenian SSR Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic ASSR Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic AUCP(B) All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik) Azrevkom Azerbaijan Revolutionary Committee BC CPA (B) Baku Committee of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan CA Constituent Assembly Cadets Constitutional Democrats (Party of People’s Freedom) CARG Caucasian Administration of the Russian Government CB CC RCP (B) Caucasus Bureau of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik) CC Central Committee CC CPA Central Committee of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan CC CPSU Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union CC RCP (B) Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik) CDP Constitutional Democratic Party CEC Central Executive Committee CERCEC Centre d’Études des Mondes Russe, Caucasien et Centre-Européen CIC Committee for Independence of the Caucasus CM Council of Ministers

Abbreviations  227 CP Communist Party CPC Council of People’s Commissars CPG Communist Party of Georgia CPSU Communist Party of the Soviet Union CRM Congress of Russian Muslims Dashnaksutyun Armenian Revolutionary Federation Difai Secret Muslim Organization Counter-Terrorism DRA Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan DRG Democratic Republic of Georgia DVP Dokumenty Vneshnei Politiki SSSR EC Extraordinary Commission EHESS École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales EICAG Extraordinary Investigation Commission of the Azerbaijani Government FCRF Foreign Commissariat of the Russian Federation FPARF Foreign Policy Archive of the Russian Federation FRUS Foreign Relations of the United States GNAT Grand National Assembly of Turkey GSHA Georgian State History Archive GSSR Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic HSE Higher Soviet of Economy ICP Iranian Communist Party LN League of Nations MAEF Ministère des Affaires Étrangères de France MFA Ministry of Foreign Affairs MNC Muslim National Committee MRC Military Revolutionary Council Musavat National Political Party in Azerbaijan Nakhchivan ASSR Nakhchivan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic NARA National Archives and Records Administration, USA Narkom People’s Commissar Narkomnats People’s Commissar of Nationalities NART National Archives of the Republic of Tatarstan NAUK National Archives of the United Kingdom NCA National Council of Azerbaijan NKVD Commissariat of Internal Affairs of the RSFSR and USSR NSA National Security Archive at the George Washington University. Orgburo Organizational Bureau PAAA Politisches Archiv des Auswärtigen Amts PCC Pact of Caucasian Confederation PCFA People’s Commissariat for Foreign Affairs PPC Paris Peace Conference PG Provisional Government Politburo Political Bureau

228  Abbreviations PPF Party of People’s Freedom (Cadets) PRO Public Records Office RAC Royal Asian Society RCP (B) Russian Communist Party (Bolshevik) RCSHA Russian Central State Historical Archive RFR Russian Federative Republic RFSFR Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic RG Record Group RNC Republic of North Caucasus RSASPH Russian State Archive of Social-Political History RSD Russian State Duma RSMHA Russian State Military Historical Archive SAAR State Archive of the Azerbaijan Republic SALAAR  State Archive of Literature and Art of the Azerbaijan Republic SARF State Archive of the Russian Federation Sovnarkom (SPC) Council of People’s Commissars SPIU St. Petersburg Imperial University SRT Supreme Revolutionary Tribunal TS Transcaucasian Seim TSFSR Transcaucasus Soviet Federative Socialist Republic UK United Kingdom UOIA Union of Oil Industrialists of Azerbaijan UM Union of Muslims (Ittifak al-Muslimin) URM Union of Russian Muslims USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics WWI World War I

Bibliography

Archival sources Archive of Political Documents of the Presidential Administration of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Baku Archive of the Ministry of National Security of the Azerbaijan Republic, Baku Archive of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia, Tbilisi Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation, Moscow Archives d’Ali Mardan-bey Toptchibachi, Le Centre d’Études des Mondes Russe, Caucasien et Centre-Européen (CERCEC), l’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS), Paris Georgian State History Archive, Tbilisi Ministère des Affaires Étrangères de France, Archives Diplomatiques, Paris National Archives and Records Administration USA, College Park, Maryland National Archives of the Republic of Tatarstan, Kazan National Archives of the United Kingdom, Public Records Office, London National Security Archive, George Washington University, Washington, DC Politisches Archiv des Auswärtigen Amts, Berlin Russian Central State Historical Archive, St. Petersburg Russian State Archive of Social-Political History, Moscow Russian State Military Historical Archive, Moscow State Archive of the Azerbaijan Republic, Baku State Archive of Literature and Art of the Azerbaijan Republic, Baku, Azerbaijan State Archive of the Russian Federation, Moscow

Published diplomatic documents American Military Mission to Armenia. Report on Conditions in the Near East. U.S. Senate. 66th Congress, 2nd Session, Document 266, Washington, DC: GPO, 1920. Arbitral Award of the President of the United States of America Woodrow Wilson. Full Report of the Committee upon the Arbitration of the Boundary between Turkey and Armenia. Washington, DC, November 22nd, 1920. Prepared with an introduction by Ara Papian. Yerevan: “Asoghik” Publishing House, 2011. Armeniia v dokumentakh mezhdunarodnoi diplomatii i sovetskoi vneshnei politiki. Edited by Dzhon Kirakosian. Yerevan: Ayastan, 1972.

230  Bibliography Azerbaidzhanskaia Demokraticheskaia Respublika (1918–1920 gg.). Vneshniaia politika. Dokumenty i materialy. Baku: Azerbaycan, 1998. Azerbaijan Democratic Republic: Archival Documents of Great Britain. Drafted by N.A. Maxwell. Baku: Çaşıoğlu, 2008. Azerbaycan Cümhuriyyəti hökumətinin qanun və binagüzarlıq məcmui. Baku, 1919, № 1–2. Azerbaycan Khalq Cümhuriyyəti (1918–1920). Parlament (Stenoqrafik hesabatlar). Vol. I. Baku: Azerbaycan, 1998. Azerbaycan Khalq Cümhuriyyəti (1918–1920). Parlament (Stenoqrafik hesabatlar). Vol. II. Baku: Azerbaycan, 1998. Azerbaycan Khalq Cümhuriyyətinin Kharici Siyasəti: Sənədlər məcmuəsi. Baku: GARISMA MMC, 2009. Azerbaycan tarikhi sənədlər və nəşrlər üzrə. Baku: BDU, 1990. Azerbaycan Cümhuriyyəti istiqlalının birinci səneyi-dövriyyəsi. 28 May 1919-cu il. Baku: Azerbaycan qəzeti mətbəsi, 1919. Bol’shevistskoe rukovodstvo: Perepiska 1912–1927: Sbornik dokumentov. Moscow: Rossiiskaia Politicheskaia Éntsiklopediia (ROSSPÉN), 1996. British and Foreign State Papers, 1923. Part 2, Vol. 118. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1926. Conditions in the Near East: Report of the American military mission to Armenian. By the U.S. Senate. Senate Document 266, 66th Congress, 2nd Session, Washington, DC, 1920. Diplomaticheskiie besedi A.M. Topchubasheva Stambule (zapisi chrezvychaynogo poslannikai i polnomochnogo ministra Azerbaidzhanskoy respubliki). 1918–1919 gg. Baku: Ėrgiun, 1994. Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919–1939. First Series. Vol. 1. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1947. Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919–1939. First Series. Vol. 2. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1948. Dokumenty i materialy po vneshneii politike Zakavkaz’ia i Gruzii. Tiflis: Tipografіia Pravitel’stva Gruzinskoi Respubliki, 1919. Fatali khan Khoiskii Heyat ve fealiyyeti (sened ve materiallar). Baku: Azerbaycan, 1998. Gaagskaia konferentsiia iiun’ – iiul’ 1922 g.: Polnyi stenograficheskii otchet. Moscow: NKID, 1922. General Records of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace 1918–1931: The J. Harbord Military Mission to Armenia. Washington, DC: National Archives, Archives and Records Service, General Service Administration, 1970. Gosudarstvennoe soveshchanie (Stenografichekii otchet) s predisloviem Ia.A. Iakovleva. Moscow-Leningrad: Gos. Izdatel’stvo, 1930. House Documents. Vol. 1, part 3. 66th Congress, 3rd Session, December 6, 1920–March 4, 1921. US Government Printing Office. Washington, DC, 1936. Internatsional’naia pomoshch’ XI armii v bor’be za pobedu sovetskoii vlasti v Azerbaidzhane: Dokumenty i materialy, 1920–1921. Baku: Azerneşr, 1989. Iz istorii azerbaidzhanskoi emigratsii. Sbornik dokumentov, proizvedenii i pisem. Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2011. Kavkazskaia Konfederatsia v ofitsial’nykh deklaratsiiakh, tainoi perepiske i sekretnykh dokumentakh dvizheniia “Prometei.” Sbornik dokumentov. Sost., pred., per., prim. G.G. Mamulia. Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2012. Materialy Genuézskoi konferentsii, Podgotovka: Otchety zasedanii, raboty komissii, diplomaticheskaia perepiska i dr. Moscow: NKID, 1922.

Bibliography  231 Musul’manskie deputaty gosudarstvennoi Dumy Rossii. 1906–1917 gg. Sbornik dokumentov i materialov. Sost. L.A. Iamaeva. Ufa: Kitap, 1998. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. 1918, Russia, Vol. II, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1932. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. 1918, Russia, Vol. VII, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1932. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference. 1919, Vol. IV, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1946. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference. 1919, Vol. VI, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1946. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference. 1919, Vol. VII, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1946. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference. 1919, Vol. IX. US Government Printing Office. Washington, DC, 1946. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference. 1919, Vol. X. US Government Printing Office. Washington, DC, 1946. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. The Paris Peace Conference. 1919, (the King-Grane Report), Vol. XII. US Government Printing Office. Washington, DC, 1947. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. 1919, Russia, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1937. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States. 1922. In 2 Vols. Vol. 2. US Government Printing Office. Washington, DC, 1938. Persidskii front mirovoii revoliutsii: Dokumenty o sovetskom vtorzhenii v Gilian (1920– 1921). Moscow: Kvadriga, 2009. Pervyi s”ezd narodov vostoka: Stenograficheskii otchet, Baku, 1–7 sentiabria 1920 g. Petrograd: Kommunisticheskii Internatsional, 1920. Topchibashi, Ali Mardan-bek. Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 1. 1919–1921.  Compiled, translated, and introduced by Georgii Mamoulia and Ramiz Abutalybov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 2016. ———. Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 2. 1921–1923.  Compiled, translated, and introduced by Georgii Mamoulia and Ramiz Abutalybov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 2016. ———. Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 3. 1924–1930.  Compiled, translated, and introduced by Georgii Mamoulia and Ramiz Abutalybov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 2017. ———. Parizhskii arkhiv 1919–1940. Book 4. 1931–1940.  Compiled, translated, and introduced by Georgii Mamoulia and Ramiz butalybov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 2018. Tretii Vserossiiskii musul’manskii s’ezd: Postanovlenia III Vserossiiskogo musul’manskogo s’ezda v Nizhnem Novgorode. 16–21 avgusta 1906 g. Kazan’, Tang ioldyzy, 1906.

Secondary literature Abutalybov, Ramiz. Gody i vstrechi v Parizhe. Moscow: SJS Media, 2006. ———. Mamed Emin Rasulzade i Kavkazskaia konfederatsia. Moscow: Sotsial’no-­ Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2011. Adile, Aida. Sadri Maksudi Arsal. Per. s tur. V.V. Feonovoi. Nauch.red., prim., posleslovie Salavat Iskhakova. Moscow: B.I., 1996.

232  Bibliography Agamalieva, Nigar and Rauf Khudiev. Azerbaidzhanskaia Respublika. Stranitsy paliticheskoi istorii. 1918–1920 gg. Baku: Sabakh, 1994. Ağaoğlu (Ağayev), Əhməd bəy. Seçilmiş əsərləri. Tərtib edənlər: Əziz Mirəhmədov, Vilayət Quliyev. Baku: Şərq Qərb, 2007. ———. Zhenschina po islamu i v islame. Tiflis: Skoropechatnia M. Martirosiantsa, 1901. Ağazadə, Fərhad. Həsən bəy Məlikov “Zərdabi”nin Tərcümeyi-Halı. Əkinçi. Baku: “Xalq qəzeti”nin nəşri, 2008. Ahmedova, Firdovsie. Nariman Narimanov: ideal və gerçeklik. Baku: Elm ve Heyat, 1998. Akhmedov, Akhmed. Natsional’noe dvizhenie, partii i obschestvennye deiateli Azerbaidzhana v 1918–1925 godakh glazami ochevidtsa. Baku: Nurlan, 2006. Akçura, Yusuf. Yeni Türk Devletlerinin Öncüleri. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1981. Alektorov, Alexander. Inorodtsy v Rosii. St. Petersburg: Tipografiia I. V. Leont’eva, 1906. Alisov, G. Musul’manskii vopros v Rossii. Russkaia mysl’, Vol. 7, 1909, 28–61. Allen, William Edward David and Paul Muratoff. Caucasian Battlefields: A History of the Wars on the Turco – Caucasian Border (1828–1921). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953. Alpoud, Aziz. Heyatımın hekayeleri. Baku: Azerbaycan, 2011. Altstadt, Audrey. The Azerbaijani Turks: Power and Identity under Russian Rule. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1992. ———. The Politics of Culture in Soviet Azerbaijan, 1920–1940. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2016. The Armenian Question Before the Peace Conference. Paris, 1919. Arsharuni, Arshaluis and Khadji Gabidullin. Ocherki panislamizma i patiurkizma v Rossii. Riazan’: Izdatel’stvo “Bezbozhnik,” 1931. Aslan, Yavuz. Birinci Doğu Halkları Kurultayı (1–7 Eylül 1920, Bakü). Istanbul: Kaynak Yayınları, 2007. Atamian, Sarkis. The Armenian Community. New York: Philosophical Library, 1955. Avalov, Zurab. Nezavisimost’ Gruzii v mezhdunarodnoi politike, 1918–1921. Paris: Impr. de Navarre, 1924. Aydemir, Şevket Süreyya. Enver Paşa. Vol. 3. Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1978. ———. Suyu Arayan Adam. Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 2006. Azerbaycan belgelerinde ermeni sorunu. 1918–1920. Ankara: T.C. Başbakanlık, Devlet Arşivleri Genel Müdürlüğü, 2001. Azerbaycan Cümhuriyyəti (1918–1920). Baku: Elm, 1998. Azerbaycan Khalq Cümhuriyyəti Ensiklopediyası. II cild. Baku: Lider, 2005. Azerbaycan tarikhi. Vol. 5. 7 Vols. Baku: Elm, 2001. Azerbaycan tarikhine dair materiallar: Azerbaycan tarikhi muzeyinin eserleri. Vol. 2. Baku: Azerb. SSR EA, 1957. Baberovskii, Iorg. Vrag est’ vezde: Stalinizm na Kavkaze. Moscow: Rossiiskaia Politicheskaia Éntsiklopediia (ROSSPÉN), 2010. ———. Tsivilizatorskaia missiia i natsionalizm v Zakavkaz’e: 1828–1914 gg., Novaia imperskaia istoriia postsovetskogo prostranstva. Sbornik statei. Kazan: B.I., 2004. Bagirova, Irada. Politicheskie partii I organizatsii Azerbaidzhana v nachale XX veka. 1900–1917. Baku: Ėlm, 1997. Baku po perepisi 22 oktiabria 1903 goda. Baku: Bak. Gor. Obshchev. Upr., 1908. Baikov, Boris. Vospominaniia o revoliutsii v Zakavkaz’e (1917–1920 gg.). Берлин: Архив русской революции, 1922.

Bibliography  233 Balaev, Aidyn. Azerbaidzhanskoe natsional’noe dvizhenie. 1917–1918 gg. Baku: Elm, 1998. ———. Fevral’skaia revoliutsia i natsional’nye okrainy. Martovskie sobytie 1918 goda v Azerbaidzhane. Moscow: Flinta, 2008. ———. Mamed Emin Rasulzade (1884–1955): Politicheskii Portret. Moscow: Flinta, 2014. Bammate, Haydar. Le Caucase et la revolution russe. Paris: l’Union Nationale des Émigrés de la République du Caucase du Nord, 1929. Baykara, Hüseyin. Azerbaycan İstiklal Mücadelesi Tarihi. Istanbul: Azerbaycan Halk Yayınları, 1975. Bechhofer, Carl Eric. In Denikin’s Russia and the Caucase, 1919–1920. London: Methuen, 1921. Bennigsen, Alexander and S. Enders Wimbush. Muslim National Communism in the Soviet Union: A Revolutionary Strategy for the Colonial World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979. Bigiev (Bigi), Мusa. Osnovy Reform. Petrograd: Tipografiia M.A. Maksudova, 1917. ———. 1906 sene  16–21  avqustta ijtimaq itmeş Rusiya Muselmannarının nedevesi. Kazan: Bratii Kerimovı, 1906. Böyük diplomat və görkəmli dövlət xadimi. Ə.B.Topçubaşovun anadan olmasının 135 illiyinə həsr edilmiş elmi-nəzəri konfransın materialları. Baku: ADK, 1998. Bylinin, Viktor, Alexander Zdanovich and Valerii Korotaiev. Organizatsia “Prometei” i “Prometeiskoie” dvizhenie v planakh pol’skoi razvedki po razvalu Rossii (SSSR). In Trudy Obschestva izuchenia istorii otechestvennykh spetssluzhb. Vol. III. Moscow: Kuchkovo pole, 2007. Cabbarov, Fərhad H. Z. A. Tağıyevin qız məktəbinin tarixindən. Baku: Azərbaycan Nəşriyyat, “MTMuzeyi,” 2011. Caferoğlu, Ahmet. Kafkasya Türkleri. Ankara: TDEK, 1976. Çağlayan, Kaya Tuncer. British Policy towards Transcaucasia, 1917–1921. Istanbul: İsis, 2004. Cebesoy, Ali Fuat. Moskova Hatıraları. Istanbul: Vatan Neşriyatı, 1955. Child, Richard. A Diplomat Looks at Europe. New York: Duffield and Company, 1925. Chubar’ian, Alexander. XX vek: Vzgliad istorika. Moscow: Nauka, 2009. Cohen, Stephen. Bolshevism and Stalinism. In R. G. Tucker, ed., Stalinism: Essays in Historical Interpretation, 3–29. New York: W. W. Norton, 1977. Claims of the Peace Delegation of the Republic of Caucasian Azerbaijan presented to the Peace Conference in Paris. Paris: Imp. Robinet – Houtain, 1919. Claims of Persia before the Conference of the Preliminaries of Peace at Paris. Paris: Imp. Cadet, 1919. Composition antropologique et ethnique de la population de l’Azerbaidjan du Caucase. Paris: Imp. Robinet – Houtain, 1919. Devlet, Nadir. Rusiya Türklerinin Milli Mücadele Tarihi (1905–1917). Ankara: T. K. A. Enstitüsü, 1985. Diplomaticheskii slovar. Vol. 3. Moscow: Nauka, 1986. Dumbadze, Vasili. The Caucasian Republics. Washington, DC: F. Hubner  & Company, 1925. Dunsterville, Lionel. The Adventures of the Dunsterforce. London: Edward Arnold, 1920. ———. Britanskii imperializm v Baku i Persii v 1917–1918 gg. Tiflis: Sovetskii Kavkaz, 1925.

234  Bibliography Dzhabbarov, Farkhad. Bakinskaia neft’ v politike sovetskoi Rossii (1917–1922). Baku: Baku Universiteti, 2009. Economic and Financial Situation of Caucasian Azerbaijan. Paris: Imp. Robinet – Houtain, 1919. Ekinçi 1875–1877 (Tam mətni). Transliterasiya və tərtib edəni Turan Həsənzadə. Ön sözün müəllifi və redaktoru Əziz Mirəhmədov. Baku: Azerneşr, 2005. Erdaş, (Akgül) Nilgün. Milli Mücadile Döneminde Kafkas Cümhuriyyetleri ile İlişkiler (1917–1921). Ankara: Genelkurmay Basımevi, 1994. Forumy rossiiskikh musul’man: Na poroge novogo tysiacheletiia. Edited by D. V. Mukhetdinov. Nizhnii Novgorod: Makhnur, 2006. Fourniau, Vincent. Deux Langues, Trois Pays, Pour Quelle Société Plurielle. Journal of Azerbaijani Studies, Vol. 2, 1998, 157–164. Gaida, Fedor. Evoliutsiia vnutripoliticheskogo kursa P.A. Stolypina i Dumskoe bol’shinstvo v 1910–1911 godakh. Rossiiskaya istoria, Issue 2, 2012, 76–90. Gasanly, Dzhamil’. Ali Mardan-bek Topchibashov: Zhizn’ za ideiu. Moscow: Flinta i Nauka, 2014. ———. Russkaia revoliutsiia i Azerbaidzhan: Trudnyi put’ k nezavisimosti, 1917–1920. Moscow: Flinta, 2011. General, G. I. Kvinitadze. Moi vospominaniia v gody nezavisimosti Gruzii 1917–1921. Paris: YMCA-PRESS, 1985. Godzishevskii, Eduard. Russkaia neft’ na mirovom rynke. Moscow: VSNKH, 1924. Gofman, Karl. Neftianaia politika i anglo-saksonskii imperializm. Moscow: Neftianoe Izdvo NTU VSNKH SSSR, 1930. Gosudarstvennaia duma. Chetvertyi sozyv. Stenograficheskie otchety. Sessiia vtoraya. Chast’ IV. Sankt-Peterburg: Gosudarstvennaia tipografiia, 1914. Göyüşov, Altay. 1917–1920-ci illərdə Şimali Qafqaz dağlılarının azadlıq uğrunda mübarizəsi. Baku: Araz, 2000. Göyüşov, Ziyəddin. Həsən bəy Məlikov Zərdabi. Həsən bəy Zərdabi və “Əkinçi” (Bioqrafiq məqalələr, məktublar, xatirələr, tətdiqatlar). Baku, 2010. Grigorev, Vasilii. Imperatorskii St.Peterburgskii Universitet v techenie pervykh piatidesiati let ego suschestvovaniia. Istoricheskie zapiski. St. Peterburg: Tipografiia V. Bezobrazova and Komp., 1870. ———. Mirza Dzhafar Topchibashov (nekrolog), Izvestiia Imperatorskogo russkogo arkheologicheskogo obschestva. Tom VII. St. Peterburg, 1872. Hacı Zeynalabdin Tağıyev. Editor by Araz Abbasov. Istanbul: MAS Matbaacılık, 2010. Hadjibeyli, Djeyhoun Bey. La premiera Republique musulmane: l’Azerbaidjan. Vol.  XXXVI, Paris: Editions Ernest Leroux, 1919. Harbord, James G. Conditions in the Near East: Report of the American Military Mission to Armenia by Maj. Gen. James G. Harbord. U.S. Army. International Conciliation 151. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1920. Hasanli, Jamil. Ali Mardan bek Topchubashev: Life, Epoch, Comrades-in- Arms. Caucasus & Globalization, Vol. 7, Issue 1–2, 2013. ———. Armenian volunteers on the Caucasian Front (1914–1916). Caucasus & Globalization, Vol. 9, Issue 3–4, 2014, 183–201. ———. Armenian volunteer squads on the Caucasian Front (1914–1916). Armenian Research, Special Issue, Issue 50, 2015, Ankara. ———. Azerbaijani – American Relations from 1918–1920: A page in Their History. Caspian Crossroads, Vol. 2, Issue 1, Spring–Sumer 1996, 1–9. ———. Azerbaijan at the Crossroads of Epochs: The First Attempt to Join the Free World (1917–1920). Caucasus & Globalization, Vol. 4, Issue 1, 2010.

Bibliography  235 ———. Azerbaycan tarihi 1918–1920. Türkiye’nin yardımından Rusiyanın işğalına kadar. Ankara: Azerbaycan Kültür Derneği yayınları, 1998. ———. Birinci Türkoloji Kurultaya Kısa Tarihi Bakış, 1926. Bakü Türkoloji Konqresinin 70 yıl dönümü toplantısı: (29–30 Kasım, 1996). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları, 1999. ———. Foreign Policy of the Republic of Azerbaijan, 1918–1920: The Difficult Road to Western Integration. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2016. ———. Rusiya Turklerinin Lideri A.M. Topçubaşi. Turk Dunyası Araştırmaları, 2000, № 127, 139–155. ———. The Sovietization of Azerbaijan: The South Caucasus in the Triangle of Russia, Turkey, and Iran, 1920–1922. Salt Lake Sity: The University of Utah Press, 2017. ———. Tarixi şəxsiyyətin tarixi: Əlimərdan bəy Topçubaşov. Baku: Azerbaycan Diplomatik Akademiyası, 2013. ———. Vneshniaia politika Azerbaidzhanskoi Respubliki: Pervaia popytka dvizheniia k nezavisimosti. In Rossiia i Pervaia mirovaia voina: ėkonomicheskie problem, obshchestvennye nastroeniia, mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia. Collection of articles. Contributing Editor Iu. Petrov. Moscow: IRI, 2014, 361–382. Hikmet, Yusuf Bayur. Türk İnkilabı Tarihi, cilt III. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, 1983. Hopkirk, Peter. On Secret Service East of Constantinople: The Plot to Bring Down the British Empire. London: Oxford University Press, 1994. Hovannisian, Richard G. The Republic of Armenia. Vol. 1: The First Year, 1918–1919. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971. ———. The Republic of Armenia, Vol. 4: Between Crescent and Sickle: Partition and Sovietization. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996. Iamaeva, Larisa. Musul’manskii liberalism nachala XX veka kak obschestvenno-­politicheskoe dvizhenie (Po materialam Ufimskoi i Orenburgskoi gubernii). Ufa: Gilem, 2002. Ibragimov, Galimdzhan. Tatary v revoliutsii 1905 goda. Translated from Tatar by G. Mukhamedovoi. Edited by G. F. Linstser. Kazan: Gosizdat TSSR, 1926. Ibrahimli, Khaleddin. Azerbaijan siyasi mühacirati (1920–1991). Baku: Elm, 1996. Ilgar, Ihsan. Rusiya’da Birinci müslüman Kongresi tutanakları. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1990. Imanov, Vüqar. Ali Merdan Topçubaşı: Lider Bir Aydın ve Bağımsız Azerbaycan Cümhuriyeti’nin Temsili. Istanbul: Boğaziçi Universitesi Yayınevi, 2003. Iskəndərov, Anar. Azerbaycanda türk-müsəlman soyqırımı probleminin tarikhşünaslığı. Baku: Adiloğlu, 2006. Iskhakov, Salavat. Akhmed-Zakki Validov: Noveishaia literatura i fakty ego politicheskoi biografii. Voprosy Istorii, Issue 10, 2003, 147–159. ———. comp. A.M. Topchibashi: Dokumenty iz lichnykh arkhivov. 1903–1934 gg. Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2012. ———. comp. (with foreword and notes). A.M. Topchibashi i M.E. Rasulzade: Perepiska 1923–1926 gg. Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2012. ———. Rossiiskie musul’mane i revoliutsiia (vesna 1917 g.– leto 1918 g.). Moscow: Sotsial’no-Politicheskaia MYSL’, 2004. Ismayil-zade, Dina. Illarion Ivanovich Vorontsov-Dashkov. Istoricheskie siluety. Moscow: Nauka, 1991. Israilova-Khar’ekhauzen, Chinara and Tat’iana Kotiukova. Deiatel’nost’ “Komiteta v zashchitu prav magometanskikh tiurko-tatarskikh narodov Rossii” kak popytka politicheskoi destabilizatsii situatsii v Rossiiskoi imperii v gody Pervoi mirovoi voinny. “Vosstaniia 1916 g. v Aziatskoi Rossii: Neizvestnoe ob izvestnom.” Edited by T. V. Kotiukova. Moscow: Russkii impul’s, 2017, 58–88.

236  Bibliography Jaeschke, Gotthard. Die Republik Aserbeidschan. Die Welt des Islams, Vol. XXIII, 1941, 55–69. Karabekir, Kazım. İstiklal Harbimiz. Vol. 1. Istanbul: Merk Yayıncılık AS, 1988. ———. İstiklal Harbimiz. Vol. 2. Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2006. Karaca, Ahmet. Azerbaycan’ın Yakın Tarihine Kısa Bir Bakış. Ankara: Azerbaycan Kültür Derneği Yayınları, 1982. Kaspiiskii transit. In 2 Vols. Vol. 2. Moscow: DIDIK, 1996. Kazemzade, Firuz. The Struggle for Transcaucasia (1917–1921). New York: Philosophical Library, 1951. Kendi kaleminden Ismayil Bey Qaspıralı. Idealları, Işleri, Tavsiyeleri ve Haberleri. II Cilt. Hazırlayan: Sabri Arıkan. Istanbul: Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Vakfı, 2011. Kerimov, Ismayil. “Zhivaia” istoria Gasprinskogo. Po materialam gazety “Tardjuman” 1883–1914 gg. Simferopol’: Tarpan, 1999. King, Charles. The Ghost of Freedom: A History of Caucasus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Klimovich, Liutsian. Islam v Tsarskoi Rossii. Moscow: GAIz, 1936. Kliuchnikov, Iu. V. and A. V. Sabanin. Mezhdunarodnaia politika noveishego vremeni v dog-ovorakh, notakh i deklaratsiiakh. Vol. 2. Moscow: Litizdat NIKD, 1926. Landa, Robert. Rossiia i mir rossiiskogo islama. Moscow: Izdatel’skii dom “Medina,” 2011. La Republique de l’Azerbaidjan du Caucase. Paris: Imp. Robinet – Houtain, 1919. L’Azerbaidjan en chiffres. Paris: Imp. Robinet – Houtain, 1919. Leeuw, Charles van der. Azerbaijan: A Quest for Identity. New York: St. Martin’s, 1998. Le 28 Mai 1919. Paris: Imp. Robinet – Houtain, 1919. Leeuw Van der, Charles. Azerbaijan: A Quest for Identity (Caucasus World). London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. Loris-Melikof, Jean. La Revolution Russe et less Nouvelles Republiques Transcaucasiennes. Paris: Felix Alcan, 1920. Luke, Harry. Cities and Men. London: Bles, 1953. MacDonell, Ronald. And Nothings Long. London: Constable & Co Ltd, 1938. Maevskii, Vladimir. Armiano-tatarskaia smuta na Kavkaze kak odin iz fazisov armianskogo voprosa. Tiflis: Tipografiia Shtaba Kavkazskogo Voennogo Okruga, 1915. Mammadov, Khagani. Azərbaycan milli hərəkatı (1875–1918-ci illər). Baku: Sabah, 1996. Mammadova, Şalala. Azerbaycan SSR-de inzibati-amirlik sistemi: 1920–1930-cu iller. Ph.D. dissertation. Baku, Baku Dövlet Universiteti, 2014. Mamoulia, George. Bor’ba za svobodu i nezavisimost’ Kavkaza (1921–1945). Tbilisi: Meridiani, 2012. ———. Kavkazskaia Konfederatsia v ofitsial’nykh deklaratsiiakh, tainoi perepiske i sekretnykh dokumentakh dvizheniia “Prometei.” Select documents. Compiled with a foreword and notes by George Mamoulia. Moscow, 2012. ———. Les combats independantistes des Caucasiens entre URSS et puissances occidentales: Le cas de la Géorgie (1921–1945). Paris: L’Harmattan, 2009. Mandelstam, Andrei. La Societe des Naions et les puissances devant le probleme armenien. Paris, France: Librarie de la Cour D’Appel et de L’Ordre des Avocats, 1926. McCarthy Justin. The Report of Niles and Sutherland an American Investigation of Eastern Anatolia after World War I. XI. Türk Tarih Kongresi, Cilt V, Ankara, 1994. Mehdiyev, Mir-Yagub. Beynelmilel siyasetde petrol. Baku: Azerneşr, 1994. Mehmetzade, Mirza Bala. Azerbaycan Milli Нarekаti. Berlin and Charlottenburg: Firka Divanı Tarafınden Neşrolunmuşdur, 1938.

Bibliography  237 Miliukov, Pavel. Istoriia vtoroi russkoi revoliutsii. Moscow: Rossiiskaia Politicheskaia Éntsiklopediia (ROSSPÉN), 2001. ———. Vospominania. Moscow: Politizdat, 1991. Mir, Celal. Azerbaycanda edebi mektebler (1905–1917). Baku: Ziya-Nurlan, 2004. Mir-Yacoub. Le problème du Caucase. Paris: G.P. Maisonneuve, 1933. Mir Iakub. Mezhdunarodnoe polozhenie i natsional’naia problema v SSSR. Paris: Izdanie “Prometei,” 1934. Monopolisticheskii kapital v neftianoi promyshlennosti Rossii (1883–1914): Dokumenty i materialy. Moscow: Nauka, 1961. Mühlen, Patrik von zur. Camali Haç ile Kızıl Yıldız Arasında. Ankara: Mavi Yayınlar, 1984. Musayev, Ismayil. Azerbaycanın Nakhçıvan ve Zangezur bölgelerinde siyasi veziyyet ve kharici dövletlerin siyaseti (1917–1921-ci iller). Baku: Baku Dövlet Universiteti, 1996. Mustafa-zade, Rakhman. Dve respubliki: Azerbaiidzhano-rossiiskie otnosheniia v 1918– 1922 gg. Moscow: MIK, 2006. Musul’manskie deputaty gosudarstvennoi dumy Rossii, 1906–1917 gg. Sbornik dokumentov i materialov. Compiled by L. A. Iamaeva. Ufa: Kitap, 1998. Musul’manskaia pechat’ Rossii. Oksford: Society for Central Asian Studies. Reprint series, Issue 12, 1987. Nasibzade, Nasib. Azerbaycanın kharici siyasəti. Baku: Ay-ulduz, 1996. Nitti, Francesco. La decadenza dell’Europa: le vie della ricostruzione. Firenze: R. Bemporad, 1922. ———. Vyrozhdenie Evropy. Moscow and Petrograd: Izd-vo L.D.Frenkel’, 1923. Omel’ianchuk, Igor’. Pravye partii i P.A. Stolypin. Rossiiskaia istoria, Issue 2, 2012, 62–76. Ordubadi, Mahammad Said. Qanlı illər. Baku: Gənclik, 1991. Paşayev, Atakhan. Açılmamış səhifələrin izi ilə. Baku: Azerbaycan nəşriyyatı, 2001. Pechatnov, Vladimir and Alexander Manykin. Istoria vneshnei politiki SShA. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnoe Otnosheniia, 2012. Politicheskie deiateli Rossii 1917 goda. Biograficheskii slovar’. Moscow: Bol’shaia rossiiskaia ėnsiklopediia, 993. Potto, Vasilii. Kavkazskaia voina 1826–1828 gg. Vol. 3. СПб.: Tipografiia Trenke and Fiusno, 1888. Programmnyie dokumenty musul’manskikh politicheskikh partii. 1917–1920 gg. Oxford: Society for Central Asian Studies, reprint séries n. 2, 1985. Programma Musul’manskoi gruppy vo 2-oi Gosudarstvennoi Dume. St. Peterburg: Tipografiia N. Avizhanskogo, 907. Qafarov, Vasif. Turkiye-Rusiya münasibetlerinde Azerbaycan meselesi (1917–1922). Baku: Azerneşr, 2011. Qasımlı, Musa, and Elmira Hüseynova. Azerbaycanın kharici işler nazirleri. Baku: Adiloğlu, 2003. Quliyev, Vilayət. Azerbaycan filoloji fikri və rus ədəbi-ictimai mühiti (XIX əsrin birinci yarısı). Baku: Ozan, 2000. Raevskii, Alexander. Angliiskaia interventsia i musavatskoe pravitel’stvo. K istorii interventsii i kontrrevoliutsii v Zakavkaz’e. Baku: Azguz, 1927. ———. Musavatskoe pravitel’stvo na Versal’skoi konferentsii. Donesenia predsedatelia azerbaidzhanskoi musavatskoi delegatsii. Baku: AzGNII, 1930. Ratgauzer, Iakov. Bor’ba za Sovetskii Azerbaidzhan. Baku: AzGNII, 1929. ———. Revoliutsia i grazhdanskaia voina v Baku. Ch.1. 1917–1918. Baku: AzGNII, 1927.

238  Bibliography Rasulzade, Mahammad Emin. Azerbaycan cümhuriyyeti (keyfiyyəti – təşəkkülü və şimdiki vəziyyəti). Istanbul: Evkaf-ı İslamiye Matbaası, 1923. ———. Azerbaycan cümhuriyyeti. Baku: Elm, 1990. ———. Bolşeviklerin Şerq siyaseti. Baku: Sabah, 1994. ———. O panturanizme (V sviazi s Kavkazskoi prblemoi).Predisl. N. Zhordaniia. Paris: Izdadel’skii dom “Kavkaz,” 1930. ———. Əsərləri. 1903–1909. Vol. 1. Compiled with a foreword and notes by Shirmammad Huseynov. Baku: Azerneşr, 1992. ———. Əsərləri. 1909–1914. Vol. 2. Compiled with a foreword and notes by Shirmammad Huseynov. Baku: Şir vannəşr, 2001. ———. Sbornik proizvedenii i pisem. Compiled with a foreword and notes by Salavat Iskhakov. Moscow: Flinta, 2010. ———. Əsərləri. 1915–1916. Vol. 3. Compiled with a foreword and notes by Shirmammad Huseynov. Baku: Elm, 2012. ———. Əsərləri. 1917–1918. Vol. 4. Compiled with a foreword and notes by Shirmammad Huseynov. Baku: Qanun Nəşriyyatı, 2013. ———. Əsərləri. 1918-aprel 1920. Vol. 5. Compiled with a foreword and notes by Shirmammad Huseynov. Baku: Qanun Nəşriyyatı, 2014. ———. Yeni Kafkasiya yazıları (1923–1927). Compiled with a foreword and notes by Yavuz Akpinar, Selçuk Türkyılmaz, Yılmaz Özkaya. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2017. Rossiia i Pervvaia mirovaia voina: ėkonomicheskie problemy, obshchestvennye nastroeniia, mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia. Collected papers. Executive editor Iu. A. Petrov. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo “Institut rossiiskoi istorii RAN,” 2014. Rossiiskoe zarubezh’e vo Frantsii 1919–2000. Vol. 3. Moscow: Nauka, 2010. Safarova, Afet. Ideia Kavkazskoi Konfederatsii v emigrantskii period politicheskoi deiatel’nosti A.M. Topchibashova. Izvestia National’noi Akademii nauk Azerbaidzhana: Seria istorii, philosphii i prava. 2001, 3. ———. Politiko-diplomaticheskaia deiatel’nost’ Ali Mardan beka Topchibashova. Dissertatsia na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni kandidata politicheskikh nauk. Baku, 2007. Şahtaxtlı (Shakhtakhtinskii), Məhəmmədağa. Seçilmiş əsərləri. Toplayanı, tərtib edəni və ön sözün müəllifi Isa Həbibbəyli. Çaşıoğlu, 2006. Salimov, Şirkhan. Azerbaycan nefti beynalkhalq münasibetlerde (1920–1922-ci iller). Baku: Baku Dövlet Universiteti, 2005. Saray, Mehmet. Azerbaycan Türklerinin Tarihi. Istanbul: Nesil Yayınları, 1993. Seidzade, Diliara. Azerbaiidzhanskie deputaty v Gosudarstvennoii Dume Rossii. Baku: Azerneşr, 1991. ———. Azərbaycan XX əsrin əvvəllərində: müstəqilliyə gedən yollar. Baku: OKA Ofset, 2004. ———. Iz istorii azerbaidzhanskoi burzhuazii v nachale XX veka. Baku: Ėlm, 1978. Seniutkina, Ol’ga. Tiurkizm kak istoricheskoe iavlenie (na materialakh istorii Rossiiskoi imperii 1905–1916 gg.). Nizhnii Novgorod: Medina, 2007. Şeyxzamanlı (Keykurun), Nağı bəy. Azerbaycan İstiklal Mücadilesi Hatıraları. İstanbul: Ekspres Yay, 1964. ———. Azerbaycan İstiklal mücadilesinden hatireler (1905–1920). Ankara: İlke Kitabevi Yayınları, 1998. ———. Azərbaycan İstiqlal mücadiləsi xatirələri. Baku: Azerbaycan nəşriyyatı, 1997. Shaumian, Stepan. Izbrannye proizvedeniia v dvukh tomakh. Vol. 2, 1915–1918 gg. Moscow: Politizdat, 1978.

Bibliography  239 Shaumian, Suren. Bakinskaya kommuna 1918 goda. Proletarskaia Revoliutsia, 1926, № 12. Shavrov, N. Novaia ugroza russkomu delu v Zakavkaz’e: predstoiashchaia rasprodazha Mugani inorodtsami. St. Peterburg: Rus. sobranie, 1911. Shissler, A. Holly. Between Two Empires: Ahmet Ağaoğlu and the New Turkey. London: I. B. Tauris Co Ltd, 2003. ———. İki İmparatorluk Arasında: Ahmet Ağaoğlu ve Yeni Türkiye. Istanbul: Bilgi Universitesi Yayınları, 2005. Shtein, Boris. “Russkii vopros” na parizhskoi mirnoy konferensii. Moscow: Gospolitizdat, 1949. Şimşir, Bilal. Azerbaycan: Azerbaycan’ın Yeniden Doğuş Sürecinde Türkiye – Azerbaycan İlişkileri. Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi, 2011. ———. Malta Sürgünleri. Istambul: Kaynak, 1976. Şimşir, Sebahettin. Azerbaycanın İstiqlal mücadilesi. Istanbul: IQ Kültür-Sanat Yayıncılık, 2002. Solov’ev, Kirill. Zakonotvorcheskii protsess i predstavitel’nii stroi v 1906–1911 godakh. Rossiiskaya istoria, Issue 2, 2012, 37–51. Spirin, Leonid. Itogi vyborov vo Vserossiiskoie Uchreditel’noie Sobraniie v 1917 g. Istoriia SSSR, 1988, # 2. Stavrovskii, A. M., ed. Adres-Kalendar’ Azerbaidzanskoi Respubliki. Baku: Azerbaycan, 1920. Süleymanov, Mehman. Azerbaycan ordusu (1918–1920). Baku: Hərbi Nəşriyyat, 1998. ———. Qafqaz İslam Ordusu və Azərbaycan. Baku: Hərbi Nəşriyyat, 1999. Süleymanova, Sevda. Azerbaycanda ictimai-siyasi herekat (XIX yüzilliyin sonu-XX yüzilliyin evvelleri). Baku: Azerbaycan Dövlet Kitab Palatası, 1999. Suny, Ronald Grigor. The Baku Commune, 1917–1918: Class and Nationality in the Russian Revolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972. ———. Looking Toward Ararat: Armenia in Modern History. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1993. Swietochowski, Tadeusz. Russian Azerbaijan, 1905–1920: The Shaping of National Identity in a Muslim Community. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. ———. Russia and Azerbaijan: A Borderland in Transition. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995. Swietochowski, Tadeusz and Brian C. Collins. Historical Dictionary of Azerbaijan. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 1999. Tagirdzhanova, Al’mira. Kniga o Muse-efendi, iego vremeni i sovremennikakh. Kazan’: B.I., 2010. Tetradi po istorii rabochego i revoliutsionnogo dvizheniia. Moscow: Geodeziia, 2006. Togan, Zaki Validi. Vospominaniia. Moscow: Moskovskaia Tipografiya no 12, 1997. Topchibashov, Ali Mardan-bek [Ali Mardan bey Topchibashov]. Maiak Azerbaidzhana. Compiled, translated, and introduced by V. Guliev. Baku: Mütercim, 2010. ———. Azerbaycanın təşəkkülü. Baku: Azerbaycan SSR Elmlər Akademiyasının xəbərləri. Tarix, fəlsəfə, hüquq seriyası. 1990. # 3. ———. Diplomaticheskie besedy v Stambule. 1918–1919 gg. Baku: Ėrgiun, 1994. ———. Musul’manskaia parlamentskaia fraktsiia. Baku: Kaspii, 1907. ———. Pis’ma iz Parizha. Baku: Azerneşr, 1998. Trudy Instituta istorii AN Az.SSR. Vol. 13. Baku: Elm, 1958. Trudy Obschestva izuchenia istorii otechestvennykh spetssluzhb. Vol. III. Moscow: Kuchkovo pole, 2007.

240  Bibliography Tsalikov, Akhmed. Musul’mane Rosii i federatsiia. Rechi, proiznesiennyie na Vserossiiskom musul’manskom s’ezde v Moskve. 1–11 maia 1917 g. Petrograd: Zaria Vostoka, 1917. Usmanova, Diliara. Musul’manskie predstaviteli v rossiiskom parlamente. 1906–1916. Kazan’: Fen AN RT, 2005. Ünüvar, Veysel. İstiklal Harbinde Bolşeviklerle Sekiz Ay, 1920–1921. Istanbul: Şirket-i Mürettebiye Basımevi, 1948. Veliev, Tofig. Novye materialy o M.D.Topchibashove, Izvestiia AN Azerbaidzhanskoi SSR. Seriia istorii, filosofii i prava. 1983, # 3. Veselovskii, Nikolai. Svedeniia ob ofitsial’nom prepodavanii vostochnykh iazykov v Rossii. St. Peterburg: Tipografiia br. Panteleevykh, 1879. Volkhonskii, Мikhail and Vadim Mukhanov. Po sledam Azerbaidzhanskoi Demokraticheskoi Respubliki. Moscow: Evropa, 2007. Vosstaniia 1916 g. v Aziatckoi Rossii: neizvestnoe ob izvestnom. Collected papers. Executive Editor by T. V. Kotiukova. Moscow: Russkii impul’s, 2017. Vsepoddanneishaia zapiska. Po upravleniiu Kavkazskim Kraem. General-adiutanta grafa Vorontsova-Dashkova. St. Peterburg: Gosudarstvennai︠a︡ tip., 1907. Vsepoddanneishii otchet o proizvedennoi v 1905 godu po vysochaishemu poveleniiu, senatorom Kuz’minskim revizii goroda Baku i Bakinskoi gubernii. St. Peterburg: B.M., 1906. Vserossiiskie musul’manskie s’ezdy 1905–1906 gg. Nizhnii Novgorod: NIM “Makhinur,” 2005. Who Was Who in America, Vol. 2 (1943–1950), Chicago: A.N Marquis Company, 1963. Yaqublu, Nesiman. Müsavat partiyasının tarikhi. Baku: Ay-Ulduz, 1997. Yılmaz, İskender. Gümrü Antlaşması. Ankara: Atatürk Arashtırma Merkezi, 2001. Yüceer, Nasir. Birinci dünya savaşında Osmanlı Ordusunun Azerbaycan ve Dağıstan Herekatı. Ankara: Genelkurmay Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı Yayınları, 1996. Zardabi, Gasan bek. Izbrannye stat’i i pis’ma. Compiled with n foreword and notes by Ziyeddin Geyushov. Baku: Azerneşr, 1962. Zenkovsky, Serge. Pan-Turkism and Islam in Russia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960. Zhordaniia, Noe [Noe Nikolaevich Zhordania]. My Life. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1968. ———. Nashi raznoglasiia. Paris: n.p., 1928. Ziyadkhanlı, Adil khan. Azərbaycan: tarixi, n khan. 28.nstitution. Red. Vasif Quliyev. Baku: Azərbaycan, 1993.

Index

Abayeva (Melikova), Hanifa khanym 14, 24 – 25, 63, 68, 209, 211, 224; Honored Burial Cemetery 224; Irshad newspaper 62 – 63; Muslim school for girls 23 – 25; St. Nina’s school 14 Abdul Hamid II, Sultan 68 Abutalybov, Ramiz 5, 6n9, 7n12, 219n36, 220n52, 225 Achig Söz newspaper 82, 143 Agafurov, Zeynaladdin 72 Agamalyogly, Samadagha 104 Agharonian, Avetis 127, 172 – 173, 184 – 185; Armenian-Azerbaijani conference 172; London Conference 172; Paris Peace Conference 127 Aghayev (Agaoglu), Ahmed bey 1, 12, 21 – 22, 26, 31 – 40, 43, 46 – 47, 62, 66, 68, 117, 120, 127, 129, 133, 210, 222; Azerbaijani national idea 21; British command 117; burial of Hasan bey 62; City Duma 31 – 32, 34, 36, 43; Hayat newspaper 37; Kaspii newspaper 22; Renaissance newspaper 129; Sankt Petersburgskie Vedomosti 35; Statement on the Needs of Muslims 36 Aghayev, Hasan bey 62, 69, 78, 90 – 91, 103 – 104, 109, 118; Congress of Caucasian Muslims 90; Constituent Assembly 103 Ahmed Girey, Chingiz 69 Ahmet Izzet pasha, Furgaç 114 – 115 Ahmet Nesimi, Sayman bey 113 Aiolla, Grigorii 89, 111; Tsentrokaspii government 111 Akchura (Akchurin), Yusuf 39, 46 – 47, 53 – 66, 69; congress of Muslims 39; Moscow conference 56 Akhtyamov, Abu-s-Suud 39 – 40, 49, 78; Congress of Russian Muslims (Muslim congress) 49; Muslim faction 49

Akhtyamov, Ibnyamin 26, 52, 63, 77 – 78, 94 – 95; Muslim faction 52, 63; Vyborg Declaration 52 Akhundov, Mirza Fatali 1, 28, 215, 218; national-cultural movement 215 Akhverdiyev, Abdurrahim bey 49 Alexander II 12 Alexander III 12 Alekseyev-Meskhiyev, Shalva 102 Alektorov, Aleksandr 43n5, 44n13, 79 Aliyev, Mahammad Taghy 49 Alizade, Akhund Agha 78, 91 Alkyn, Sayid-Girey 39, 47, 49, 52 – 53, 56, 63; Muslim congress 47; Nizhnii Novgorod 53; Vyborg signatories 63 Altstadt, Audrey ii, ix, 48, 59n12 Alyshevskii, Vladimir 74 Amet, Jean François Charles 131 Amirjanov, Abdulali bey 89, 91 – 92, 110, 202 Apanay (Apanayev), Gabdulla 39 – 40, 54, 56, 94; Union of Russian Muslims 56 Arakelian, Alexander 111 Armenia vii, 2, 110, 112, 119, 134, 140, 146, 152 – 155, 160 – 161, 163, 166, 172 – 174, 183 – 184, 190, 192 – 194, 208, 211, 214; Armenian Church 33; Armenian Dashnaks 35, 189, 191; Armenian deputies 20, 34, 36; Armenian-Muslim (Tatar) confrontation 33, 35, 38; Armenian National Council 105, 111, 127; Armenian-Turkish relations 189; Dashnaktsutyun 33, 81; Republik of Armenia 149, 153, 174 Russian Armenia 165; RussianArmenian relations 32 Asadullayev, Ali 194 Asadullayev, Mirza 89, 92 – 93, 99, 101, 205 – 206 Asadullayev, Shamsi 21, 39, 93

242 Index Asatiani, Alexander 202, 207 Atamalybeyov, Abbas bey 160 – 161, 166, 186 – 188, 208, 213 Atamalybeyov, Asef bey 37 Avalov (Avalishvili), Zurab 7n11, 146, 157n42, 158n72, 161, 167 – 168, 175n45, 176n51, 177n83 Azerbaijan vii, viii, 1 – 3, 20 – 23, 26 – 27, 31 – 32, 49, 53, 55, 62, 67 – 68, 82, 88, 91, 97, 102, 104, 106, 109 – 120, 123, 126, 128 – 132, 134, 139 – 155, 159 – 174, 178 – 180, 183 – 184,186, 188 – 190, 192 – 195, 199 – 202, 204 – 206, 208, 211, 213 – 215, 218, 222 – 225; Azerbaijan’s independence 109, 112, 116 – 117, 140 – 143, 159, 162, 165, 189, 193, 209, 225; Azerbaijani Parliament 118, 120, 134, 141, 215, 225; Azerbaijani oil 160, 194; Azerbaijan-Turkish relations 114; Paris Peace Conference 126, 132, 139, 190; peace delegation vii, viii, 3, 120, 129, 134, 142, 149, 178 – 179, 181, 186, 207 – 208, 215; Republic of Azerbaijan (Azerbaijan Republic) viii – ix, 4 – 5, 110, 113, 115, 119, 123, 126, 130, 132, 140, 147, 153, 155, 163, 167, 169 – 172, 174, 181 – 184, 187, 199, 205 – 207, 209, 215, 223; Soviet Azerbaijan 180 Azerbaijan newspaper 120 Baberowski, Jörg 30n49, 44n11, 45n52, 81 – 82, 87n100, 92, 106n2, 107n22 Baku City Duma 19, 20, 25 – 28, 31 – 32, 34, 36 – 38, 43 Baku congress 3, 90 – 93, 95, 97 Baku oil viii, 21, 135, 178 – 179, 190 – 191,194, 199, 222; Genoa Conference 189; Hague Conference 194; Royal Dutch Shell 190; Supreme Economic Council 179 Balfour, Arthur 129, 142, 147, 150 Bammatov, Haydar 4, 202, 204, 207 Barudi (Galiyev), Galimjan 54 – 56 Bayburin, Jihangir 54, 64, 75 Bayteriakov, Gabdullatif 77 – 78 Benkendorf, Aleksandr 25 Bicherakhov, Lazar 111, 205 Bigiyev (Jarullahi), Musa 6n6, 39 – 40, 44n46, 45n50, 46, 53, 56 – 57, 60n45, 61n59, 78, 93 – 94; Muslim congress 46, 57, 78; Nizhnii Novgorod 39, 53; River Oka 39 Bikbov, Yulbas 54

Bitty, David 167 – 168, 172 Bolkhovitinov, Gen. Leonid 81 Bolsheviks/Bolshevism i, vii, viii, ix, 3, 48, 89, 99, 101 – 106, 110 – 111, 113, 115, 119, 124, 128, 130, 132, 141 – 142, 144 – 146, 162 – 163, 166 – 169, 171, 178 – 194, 199 – 204, 207, 223 Bourdarie, Paul 164 Brest-Litovsk Treaty vii, 114 Briand, Aristide 183 – 185, 203, 208 – 209 Brocher, Georges 164 – 165, 180 Brown, Arthur 119 Brusilov, Aleksei 100 Bubi, Gabdulla 54, 56 Buckler, William 161 Bukeikhanov, Ali khan 4, 63 Buligin, Aleksandr 35 – 37 Cambon, Jules 167 – 168 Caucasian Islamic Army 110 – 113 Cavallero, Uco 167 Chandler, Walter 159 – 162, 187 Chermoyev, Abdul Mejid (Tapa) 4, 101, 144 – 145, 175n24, 184 – 187, 204; North Caucasian Muslims 101; Union of Mountain Peoples 101 Chevalley, Abel 184, 188 – 189 Chicherin, Georgii 180, 189, 191, 204 Chinda, Sutemi 129 Chingizkhan, Sultan Haji Gubaydulla 46 Chkhenkeli, Akakii 88, 102, 127, 183 – 187, 195, 204, 210, 213 – 215 Chokayev, Mustafa 4, 213 Christian missionaries 54 – 55 Chulik, Ibrahim 213 – 214 Churchill, Winston 167 – 168 Ckheidze, Nikolai 129 Clemenceau, Georges 120, 129, 142, 147 – 149, 163, 166 – 170, 209; Council of Four 142; Paris Peace Conference 129 Constituent Assembly 94 – 95, 100 – 104, 117, 139 Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP) 47 – 48; Constitutionalists 48, 50, 56 – 57, 92, 97 – 98, 110; Kadets 48; party of “professor” 48; “people’s freedom” party 48 – 49, 55 – 57, 63 – 64, 92, 97 Crimean Tatars 63 Crowe, Eyre 152 Curzon, George (Lord Curzon) 120, 150, 167 – 170, 172 – 174, 180, 194, 200

Index  243 d’Esperey, Franchet 132 – 134 Daghestan 77 – 78, 91, 97 – 98, 100, 105, 115, 143, 146 – 148, 168 – 169 Dakhadayev, Mahammad Ali 70 Dalgat, Magomet 77 – 78 Dashnak Party (Dashnaksutyun) 33, 35, 81, 103, 105, 111; Armenian Revolutionary Federation 33 Davidovich, Mustafa 53 – 54, 56 della Torreta, Marquis Tomasi 167 Denikin, General Anton 124, 133, 141 – 147, 151, 155, 161 – 163, 165 – 169, 172, 189 Derby, Lord (Edward George Villiers Stanley) 140 Difai (Defense) 66 Donskoi, Dmitrii 102 Donskoy, Khusain 70 Dostmuhammadov, Khalil 94 Droshakists (Droshak newspaper) 33 Drummond, Eric 181, 183; League of Nations 183 Dunsterville, Gen. Lionel 111 Durnovo, Petr 47 Efendiyev, Mahammad bey 133 Efendizade, Mustafa Efendi 91 Efendizade, Shafiga khanym 90, 93 Ekinchi newspaper 14, 21, 222 Eldarkhanov, Tashtemir 50 Elizavetpol (Ganja) 1, 8, 26 – 27, 35 – 36, 38, 41, 50 – 51, 56, 58, 63, 66, 77 – 78, 81 – 82, 89 – 90, 101, 103, 106, 110 – 112, 162, 178 – 179, 181, 223; Azerbaijan Republic 106; Difai (Defense) 66; Duma elections 49; First State Duma 49; Ganja khanate 9; Islamic Army 112; National Council 110 Enikeev, Gaysa 64 Entente countries (states) vii, 80, 114, 116 – 117, 119, 123 – 125, 129 – 130, 141, 143 – 144, 146, 148, 166 – 167, 179; Entente Supreme Council 163; London conference 172 Enver pasha, Ismail 113 Enzeli 111, 117, 169, 172, 179 Erivan province 33, 49, 56, 58, 63, 66, 77, 82, 98, 101, 103, 123, 153 Erivanskii, Agha khan 49 Errio, Edward 201 Facta, Luigi 190 Fakhratdinov, Rizaitdin 70

Farajullazade, Akhund Molla 91 First World War (World War I) i, 2, 119, 135, 149, 159, 203, 205, 223; Ajarian Muslims 82; Armenian voluntary 82, Caucasian Muslims 80; Russia Empire and World War I 4,81; Russian-Turkish front 80; World War I and Azerbaijan 115 Firuz Mirza, (Nosrat od-Dowleh) 163 Foch, Marshal Ferdinand 120, 167 – 168, 170 Fourniau, Vincent 6n11, 16n1, 50, 60n24, 84n1 Fourteen Points (14 points) 114, 123, 129, 131, 148, 153 Franklin-Bouillon, Henry 185, 203; Franco-Turkish Treaty 185 Gabba, Col. Melchiorre 150 – 151 Gasprinskii, Ismayil bey 3, 15, 22, 26, 28, 31, 37, 39 – 41, 47, 50, 54, 56, 64, 69, 75 – 77, 215, 218; Krimskii Vestnik 50; Muslim congress 39; Nizhnii Novgorod 41, 53; Tarjuman 15, 80; Union of Russian Muslims 47, 57 Gegechkori, Evgenii 102, 123, 184, 190, 210; Paris Declaration 184 Genoa conference 189 – 190, 192 Georgia i, vii, 2 – 3, 5, 82, 102, 110, 112, 119, 134, 140, 144 – 147, 150 – 154, 159 – 162, 165 – 174, 179, 183, 185, 188, 190, 192 – 195, 200, 202 – 203, 211 – 214; Declaration of Independence 109; Georgian Mensheviks 88, 102, 130, 191, 204; Georgian Republic 172, 184; Volunteer Army 189 Georgian Republic (Georgian government) 112, 172, 184, 204, 209 Gessen, Iosif 48 Golitsyn,Gregorii 32 – 33 Gvazava, Georgii 89 Hague conference 189, 194 Haji Murad, Araz khan 93, 99 Hajibeyli, Jeyhun 120, 127, 132 – 134, 186, 188 – 189, 192, 194 – 195, 204 – 206, 208, 210 – 212; Paris Peace Conference 127 Hajinskii, Mahammad Hasan 49, 88, 90, 104, 109, 112, 120, 123, 127 – 129, 131 – 134, 152, 155, 204; Batum conference 110; National Council 109; Paris Peace Conference 123 Harbord, Gen. James 153 – 155

244 Index Haskell, Col. William 153 – 154 Hayat newspaper 37, 49, 56, 222 Heydarov, Ibrahim bey 4, 64, 70, 90 – 91, 104, 106 Hopkirk, Peter 21, 29n15 Hummet (Energy) party 104, 106 Huseynzade, Ali bey 1, 8, 12, 22 – 23, 33, 37, 47, 62, 69, 114, 127, 201 – 202, 209 – 210; Fiyuzat 222; Hayat 37; Irshad 222; Statement on the Needs of Muslims 36 Ibrahimov, Gabdrashid 26, 37, 39 – 41, 46 – 47, 53 – 54, 56 – 57, 59; Ittifak al-Muslimin 37; Moscow conference 56; Muslim congress 39; Nizhnii Novgorod 39 Iran vii, 9, 20, 28, 39, 42, 75, 94, 111, 117, 119, 128, 130, 140, 166, 178, 201, 205; Ali Qoli khan Ansari 120, 126; AngloIranian Oil Company 194; Firuz Mirza 163; Habibullah khan 105; Iranian Azerbaijan 179; Mozaffar ad-Din Shah Qajar 28 Iretskii, Konstantin 32, 34, 36 Iskhakov, Gaiaz 4, 94 – 96 Iskhakov, Lutfulla 54, 63 Iskhakov, Salavat 3, 6n10, 7n15 Islamic army 110 – 113 Ittifak al-Muslimin (Union of Muslims) i, 1, 37, 50, 75, 222 – 223 Ittihad party (Unity of Islam) 103 – 104, 109 Jabagiyev, Vassan Guirey 202 Jadidism (Muslim modernist reform) 20, 27 Jafarov, Mamed Yusif 77 – 78, 81, 88, 102 – 104, 109, 133, 147, 160 Jamalian, Arshak 89 Janturin, Selim Girey 39, 49, 52, 56, 64, 69, 71, 76, 94, 99; Muslim congress 53; Nizhnii Novgorod 53; State Duma 72; Vyborg trial 63 Japaridze, Prokofii (Alyosha) 105 Javanshir, Behbud bey 89, 101, 110, 117 Kantemir, Ali khan 104, 202, 207 Kaplanov, Rashid khan 91 Karatayev, Bakhytjan 78 – 79

Kaspii newspaper 15, 20 – 26, 28, 31 – 32, 34 – 36, 47, 49, 54, 57 – 58, 62 – 63, 69, 74, 80, 105, 143, 222 Kemalists 167, 183, 185, 195 Kenworthy, Joseph 200 Kerenskii, Aleksandr 100; Provisional Government 88, 92 – 95, 98 – 102, 104 Kerimi (Kerimov), Fatih 39 – 40, 56, 59, 69, 71 Kerimov, Haji Mahammadjan 70, 73 Kerr, Philip 167 – 168 Khasmamedov, Khalil bey 38, 58, 63 – 64, 66 – 67, 70, 75 – 76, 102, 104, 109, 112, 133, 191, 208 Khatisov, Alexander 190, 217 Khoiskii, Fatali khan 58, 89 – 90, 92, 101, 103, 110, 113, 117 – 118, 123, 133, 171; Cabinet of Ministers 109; Foreign Ministry 120; Moscow Congress 92; Muslim National Committee 104; Second State Duma 59; Transcaucasian commissariat 102 Khojayev, Ubeydulla 94, 98 Khojayev, Usman 93 Khuramshin, Jamaleddin 54 Khusainov, Mahmud 70 – 71 Kimmochi, Saionji 129, 142 Kocharli, Firudin bey 22, 91 Kokovtsev, Vladimir 43 Kolchak, Aleksandr 124, 141 – 145, 147, 155, 162 – 163, 165 Kornilov, Lavr 100 – 101; Provisional Government 100 Koshchegulov, Shahmardan 54 Kotliarevskii, Sergei 94 – 95 Kresty Prison 2, 66 – 67, 223 Kurbangaliyev, Najib 83 Kuzminskii, Aleksandri 23, 38 L’vov, Georgii 99 Lang, William 16 Lansbury, George 200 Lansing, Robert129, 135, 148, 153, 159; Council of Ten 129; Paris Peace Conference 129; secretary of state 135 Lausanne Conference 113, 191, 194 – 195, 200, 202; Ismet pasha, Kemalist Turkey 195; Lausanne Treaty 195; Turkish Straits 194 League of Nations vii, 141, 143, 148 – 149, 151 – 152, 162, 164, 166, 178, 181 – 184, 188, 203, 213 Lemonov, Ismayil 64

Index  245 Lenin, Vladimir vii Litvinov, Maksim 194; Hague Conference 193 – 195 Lloyd George, David 120, 142, 147, 163, 165 – 169, 173 – 174, 183, 191, 194; Council of Ten 129; Kolchak’s government 142; Paris Peace Conference 129; recognition of independence 165 – 170; Russian issue 148; Transcaucasian republics 167 London conference 171 – 172 Loris-Melikov, Jean 149, 188 – 189 Lushkevich, Anton 144 Maevskii, Vladimir 35, 81 Maharramov, Mahammad bey 104, 120, 127, 132 – 134, 154, 166, 168 – 169, 186, 188, 190, 208; Paris Peace Conference 170; Recognize of Azerbaijan 167; United States 160; Versailles Supreme Council 167 Mahmudov, Mustafa 58, 90, 103 – 104, 109 Mahmudov, Sharafutdin 64, 75 Makino, Nobuaki 129, 148 Maklakov, Vasilli 184 Maksudov, Hadi 54 Maksudov, Sadri 4, 37, 54, 58, 64, 72, 75 – 76, 201, 210 Mallet, Louis 140, 145 – 146, 150 Mandelshtam, Andrei 184 March events (1918) 104, 131; Armenian National Council, Bolsheviks 106; Daghestan regiment 105; Dashnaks 105; Extraordinary Investigation Commission 105 Matsui, Keishiro 168, 173 McDonald, Ramsey 199 Mehdiyev, Mir Yagub 90, 101, 104, 120, 127, 134, 178, 186, 190, 192, 198n90, 208, 212, 214, 217; London Conference 171; Prométhée movement 213 Meierovics, Zigfrids 141, 144 Melik-Aslanov, Khudadat bey 102, 104, 109 – 110 Menshevik party 88 – 89, 103, 111; Georgian Menshevik 88, 102, 130, 191, 204 Menteshe, Khalil bey 110 Miliukov, Pavel 2, 5n2, 50, 52, 59n10, 60n37, 97, 119, 124 Minnigaliyev, Mingazetdin 77 Mintiubinskii, Ishan 79

Mir Jafarov, Mir Mahammad Kerim agha 62, 90 – 91 Moore, Benjamin 131 – 132 Morgenthau, Henry 140, 153, 160 – 161 Moscow congress of Russian Muslims 3, 92, 98, 101 Mountainous Republic of the North Caucasus 166, 168, 205, 214 Movlazade, Haji Mahammad Hasan 78 Mozaffar ad-Din Shah Qajar 28, 39 Mudros armistice 115 – 117, 119 Mufdizade, Ismayil 64 Mufti 37, 54, 71, 89, 91 – 92, 95, 115 Muhamedyarov, Shakir 83 Mukhtarov, Murtuza 21 Muradkhanov, Asadulla bey 49 Muromtsev, Sergei 58 Musavat (Equality) party 90, 102 – 105, 170, 188, 191, 201, 204 – 205, 207 – 208; Turkic Party of Federalists 90 Mushavir-ul Mamalek (Ali Qoli khan Ansari) 120, 126 Mushir-ul-Mulk, (Mirza Hasan khan) 28, 39 Muslim National Council 88, 102, 109 – 110, 117 – 118 Muslim Women’s School 24, 28 Mustafa Reshad pasha 115, 119 Myshlaevskii, Gen. Aleksandr 82 Nabi, Mehmed bey 114, 116, 119 Naghiyev, Musa 21 Nakashidze, Mikhail 33 Nakhchivan 35, 134, 153 – 154; Sharur-Daralayaz 153 – 154; Surmali 153 – 154 Namitokov, Aytek 202 Narimanov, Nariman 26, 189 – 190; Genoa conference 189 – 191 Nashri-Maarif societie 38, 62 Nasimi, Ahmad bey 113 Nicholas II 28, 32 – 33, 46, 52, 59, 80 – 81, 106; Romanov family 84; Tsar 27, 34 – 35, 48, 81, 91; Tsarskoe Selo 52 Nijat societie 20, 62, 77 Nikolaevich, Nikolai 82 Nitti, Francesco 120, 151 – 152, 168, 173, 177n89 Nubar pasha, Boghos 173 Nuri pasha, Killigil 113 Ohanjanian, Hamazasp 102, 163 Orlando, Vittorio 129, 142, 148, 150 – 152

246 Index Ottoman Empire vii, 2, 23, 68, 77, 80, 110 – 111, 115 – 116, 125, 128, 140 OZAKOM (Special Transcaucasian Committee) 89, 92, 93 Pact of Caucasian Confederation 212 – 215; Brussels Pact 214; French-Soviet rapprochement viii Papajanov, Mikhail 88 Paris declaration 184, 202 Paris Peace Conference vii – viii, 4, 118 – 120, 123, 125 – 127, 129 – 132, 134 – 135, 139, 143 – 154, 165, 170 – 171, 187 – 188, 200, 210; Entente Supreme Council 163,165,167, 179, 181; Versailles Conference 3,135, 140, 142, 155, 179, 186, 199; Versailles Peace Treaty 166 Pichon, Stéphen 129, 135, 147, 150, 186 Piłsudski, Józef 203 – 204 Pishnamazzade, Akhund Mulla 66, 78, 91 Poincaré, Raymond 129, 188, 190 Polk, Frank 153 – 155 Poska, Jaan 144 Pringle, William 200 Prokopovich, Viacheslav 202, 216 Prométhée, magazine 203, 206 – 207; movement 203 – 204, 212 – 213 Provisional Government 88, 92 – 95, 98 – 102, 184 Rafibeyov (Rafibeyli), Alekber bey 38, 66, 91 Rafibeyov (Rafibeyli), Khudadat bey 110 Rafiyev, Musa bey 117 Rahmangul, Shakir Sadyg efendi 39 Ramishvili, Noe 202, 204 Ramiyev, Mahammad-Zakir 40, 67, 70 – 71 Rasulzade, Mahammad Emin 1, 28, 62, 83, 88, 90 – 91, 96, 103, 112, 143, 170, 188, 200 – 202, 204 – 208, 210, 212 – 213, 215, 217; Achig Söz newspaper 97; Baku congress of Caucasian Muslims 90 – 92; Caucasian Confederation 214; Constituent Assembly 103; Moscow congress of Russian Muslims 93, 97 – 98; Musavat (Equality) party 102; National Council for Azerbaijan 109 – 110, 118 Red (Russian) Army viii, 111, 166, 199, 200

Republic of Azerbaijan (Azerbaijan Republic) vii – ix, 4 – 5, 88, 106, 109, 115, 116 – 117, 119, 126, 130, 132, 143, 159, 163, 165, 167, 169 – 172, 174, 181 – 183, 184, 187, 194, 199, 205 – 207, 209, 215, 223 Reshad Hikmet bey 116, 119 Rhea, Col. James 155 Royal Dutch Shell 190 Russian Communist Party 105 Russian revolution (1905–1907, 1917) 1 – 2, 26 – 28, 48, 53, 67, 74, 84, 88, 96, 124, 222; Appeal to the Muslims of Russia and the East 101; Decree of Peace 101; South Caucasus 101 Russian State Duma 4, 46, 48 – 50, 52 – 59, 62 – 64, 67 – 72, 74 – 77, 79, 90, 94, 99 – 100, 110, 222; Duma committee 1, 4, 52, 64; Muslim bureau 59, 64, 71 – 73, 75 – 76, 82 – 83; Muslim faction 1 – 2, 4, 49 – 50, 52, 56, 58 – 59, 63 – 64, 67, 69 – 78, 82 – 83, 104, 222 Russkaia Mysl’ magazine 3, 6n6, 69 Russkoe Slovo newspaper 42, 52 Russo-Japanese War 31 Rustambeyov, Shafi bey 103 – 104 Saadet (Muslim madrasah) 77 Saakian, Sako (Socialist Revolutionaries) 89 Sabakhtarashvili, Konstantin 184 Sackville-West, Gen. Charles John 167 Sadovskii, Mikhail 111 Safaraliyev, Kamil bey 31, 34, 48 Sami bey, Bekir 183 – 184, 193 San Remo conference 171 – 174, 178 Savitskii, Viacheslav 70, 125 Saydashov, Ahmedjan 54, 70 Sazonov, Sergei 124 – 125 Seim (Parliament) 103 – 104, 109 Seyidov, Mir Hidayat 103 – 104 Sforza, Carlo 119 Shahtakhtinskaia, Adila khanym 90 Shahtakhtinskii, Mahammad agha 58, 104 Shakmanov, Tausultan 214 Shamkhorskii, Alekber bey 205 – 206 Shaumian, Stepan 89, 104 – 105, 108n76 Sheikhaliyev, Mahmud 70 Sheikh-ul-Islam 8, 78 – 79, 89, 91 – 92, 95, 115 Sheikhulislamov, Akper agha 101, 104, 109, 127, 129, 132, 134, 186, 191 – 193, 202, 206, 208, 212

Index  247 Shirvanskii, Mustafa 53 Shulgin, Aleksandr 213 Sidorenko, Grigorii 144 Social-Democratic Party 48, 106 Sonnino, Sidney 129 South (Iranian) Azerbaijan 20, 179 St. Petersburg Imperial University 1, 8, 10 – 13, 26, 224 Standard Oil 194 Stokes, Col. Claude 111, 171 Stolypin, Petr 52 – 55, 59, 63, 66 Subhangulov, Aladdin efendi 78 Sulkevich, Meriam khanym 24 Sultangaliyeva, Rauza khanym 93 Sultanov, Ali Ashraf bey 209, 214 Sultanov, Khosrov (Khosrovpasha) bey 89, 91, 103 – 104, 109 – 110, 202, 205, 207 Sultanov, Muhammediar 71 Sunsh, Mahammad Girey 214 Swietochowski, Tadeusz 29n9, 121n11, 122n56, 130, 136n37 Syrtlanov, Galiasker 40, 54, 64, 72, 75 Syrtlanov, Shahaydar 49, 53 – 54, 56 Taghiyev, Haji Zeinalabdin 19, 22 – 25, 27 – 28, 36, 38, 56, 58, 74, 89 – 90, 105; philanthropist 19; oil millionaire 21, 47 Taghiyev, Ismayil 58 Tahirbeyov, Aziz 146, 151 Talaat pasha, Mehmet 112 – 115 Tarjuman newspaper 15, 22, 37, 80; Bakhchisarai 39, 66 Tevkelov, Kutlug Mahammad 40, 64, 71 – 73, 74, 77 – 78, 94; Muslim faction 70, 75; Third State Duma 69 Thomson, Gen. William 117 – 118, 129, 132 Timoshev, Nigmatulla 70 – 71 Tittoni, Tomamaso 148 Toghan, Ahmet Zaki Validi (Validov) 201, 210 Topchibashov (Topchibashi), Ali Mardan bey vii – viii, 1 – 5, 5n4, 6n5, 8, 12, 15, 27, 36, 45, 55, 61, 83, 89, 91, 97, 100, 103, 119, 129, 140, 160, 165, 178 – 184, 186 – 188, 190 – 195, 199 – 209, 211, 214 – 217, 222 – 224; Ajaria events 2, 82, 96, 101; anti-Denikin pact 143 – 147, 151, 155; Azerbaijani parliament 117 – 118, 120; Baku City Duma 19 – 21, 25 – 28, 31 – 32, 34, 36 – 38, 43;

Baku Committee 99 – 100, 103; Baku events 32 – 35; Career in Tifl is 13 – 16; Claridge Hotel 135, 144, 161, 168; Constituent Assembly 102 – 104, 117, 139; Istanbul talks; 112 – 116, 130 – 131; Ittifak al-Muslimin 1, 37, 50, 75, 222 – 223; liberation of Baku 109 – 113; March events 1918 105 – 106; Moscow congress 93 – 95; Muslim faction 1 – 2, 4, 49 – 50, 52, 56, 58 – 59, 63 – 64, 67, 69 – 78, 82 – 83, 104, 222; Muslim congress 39 – 41, 46 – 53; newspaper Kaspii 21 – 26, 28, 31 – 32, 34 – 36, 47, 49, 54, 57 – 58, 62 – 63, 69, 74, 80, 105, 143, 222; Nizhnii Novgorod 3, 37, 39, 41, 53 – 57, 69 – 70, 73; Paris Peace Conference 118 – 120, 123, 125 – 127, 129 – 132, 134 – 135, 139, 143 – 154, 165, 170 – 171, 187 – 188, 200, 210; peace delegation 120, 123 – 128, 132 – 135, 141; Provisional Government 88, 92 – 95, 98 – 102, 184; Recognition of Azerbaijan’s independence 165 – 174; Russian State Duma 48 – 53; Saint-Clois 8, 200, 210 – 212, 215, 222, 224 – 225; St. Petersburg Imperial University 10 – 13; Statement on the Needs of Muslims 36 – 37; Tavricheskii palace 52; Topchibashov’s family 8 – 10; Turkestan 39, 47, 50, 56, 73, 73, 79, 94, 96 – 97, 100, 194, 203, 212 – 213, 218 Topchibashov (Topchibashi), Alekber bey 83, 127, 135, 209 – 210, 224 Topchibashov, Enver bey 83, 209, 211 – 212, 224 Topchibashov, Mirza Jafar 8 – 11 Topchibashov, Rashid bey 83, 119, 127, 204 – 205, 211, 224 Topchibashova, Peri khanym 13 – 14, 67 – 68, 73, 209, 215, 217, 224 Tsalikov, Ahmed 83, 93 – 94, 96 – 98, 107n42 Tsentrokaspii (Central Committee of the Caspian Fleet) 111 Tsereteli, Akakii 81 Tsereteli, Iraklii 129, 190 Tukayev, Mahammad Shakir 63, 75 – 76, 94 Tuktarov, Fuad 73 Turkey 2, 4, 23, 26, 33, 68, 81, 110, 112 – 116, 119, 126, 131, 133, 153 – 155, 166, 169, 171, 173, 184 – 186, 189, 191 – 193, 195, 201 – 202, 204, 223;

248 Index Kemalist Turkey 167, 183, 185, 195; Middle East vii – viii, 21, 42, 140, 153, 166, 214, 217; Turkish-Armenian border 173; Turkey and Russia 192; see also Ottoman Empire Tynyshpayev, Mahammadjan 4, 93 Umanskii, Lev 111 Union of Oil Industrialists 34, 88, 206 – 207 Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 199 – 201, 203 – 204, 206, 208, 213 – 214, 224 Unity and Progress Party 68 Usmanov, Khayrulla 70 – 71 Usubbeyov, Nasib bey 90 – 91, 103 – 104, 109 – 110, 117, 152, 155, 170 Usubov, General Ibrahim agha 141, 170 Vachnadze, David 202, 207 Vahideddin (Sultan), Mehmet VI 125 Vakfs 79, 89, 91, 95 Vakt newspaper 69 – 70 Vansittart, Robert 168, 173 Vehib pasha, Ferik Mehmet 110 Vekilov, Ibrahim agha 104 Vekilov, Mahammad Hasan bey 8 Vekilov, Mahammadrza bey 27, 68, 104 Vekilov, Mustafa bey 101, 119, 191 – 193, 205 – 206, 212 Vekilov, Rahim bey 104, 109, 118 Vezirov, Farrukh bey 19 – 20, 33, 37 Vezirov, Hashym bey 22, 62 Vezirov, Najaf bey 28, 39, 69, 222 Volunteer Army (Denikin) 144 – 148, 172, 189

Vorontsov-Dashkov, Illarion 33, 35, 37 – 38, 42, 82 Vyborg Declaration 53, 57, 62 – 63, 69, 223; Belvedere hotel 52 Wallace, Hugh Campbell 168, 180 Wardrop, Oliver 146, 151 – 152, 166, 170 – 171 Webb, Admiral Richard 130 – 131 White Guard 124 – 125, 139, 142, 144, 147, 162 – 163 Willebois, Van der Does de 123 – 124 Wilson, Henry 120, 167 – 168, 170, 179 Wilson, Woodrow vii, 3, 114, 117, 120, 123 – 124, 128 – 129, 131 – 132, 135, 140 – 142, 144, 148, 153 – 155, 159, 161 – 162, 165, 173, 181 Witte, Sergei 42, 48 Yagubova Salima khanym 93 Yaushev, Mahammadgali 72 Yaushev, Mullah Ali 39 – 40 Yudenich, General Nikolai 142, 162, 165 Zardabi (Melikov), Hasan bey 1, 14, 19, 21 – 23, 25, 28, 31, 33 – 34, 36, 54, 62, 209, 215, 218, 222, 224 Zemstvo 2, 32, 74, 76 – 77, 103 Zeynalov, Zeynal 58 Zhordania, Noe 89, 102 Ziyadkhanli (Ziyadkhanov), Adil khan 27, 117, 122n48, 123, 178 Ziyadkhanli (Ziyadkhanov), Ismayil khan 38, 49, 51 – 53, 63 Zulgadarov, Allahyar bey 210