Ancient Caucasian Albania in the System of International Relations, V-I centuries B.C. Goshgar Goshgarly

    The state of Caucasian Albania which sprang up as a result of the dissolution of Ahemenid and subsequently Alexander the Great Empire (1), was, in the period under consideration, actively involved in the political struggle in Front Asia and South Caucasus.

      It is generally recognized that the formation of independent Albanian state goes back to the 4-3 centuries B.C. (2). In the historical science,  formerly spread point of view on retarded social and economic development of Albanians as compared with their neighbours (3), which grew out of insufficient exploration of the monuments of material culture of Albanians in the period under consideration, « should be regarded as the difficulty already overcome in the analysis of the history of Albania», according to apt expression of J.A.Khalilov (4).

     Researchers are unanimous that it was tribes’ long-term stay on the territory of future Caucasian Albania  as a part of Ahemenid Empire that, to a not inconsiderable degree, contributed  to the consolidation and rapprochement between these tribes. That was the completion of the disintegration of tribal system, tribes’ acquaintance with elements of state administration on the territory of North Azerbaijan (5), so it is probable that originally the administration system in Caucasian Albania was similar to the that of Ahemenid  Iran (6). We are unaware of the names of the first Albanian kings. The probability remains that it was a  local satrap who founded the local dynasty, like in Atropatena, some regions-satrapies of Ahemenid state.

    Note that the researchers have insufficiently dealt with the early history of the Albanian tribe. As is known, Albanians had first ever been mentioned due to the battle of Gaugamels. Neither Herodotus, other Greek authors of the 5-4 centuries B.C., nor Ahemenid rock carvings, other texts ever referred to Albanians. Many researchers, including C.V.Trever (7), I.Babayev (8) et al. are prone to believe that earlier their history Albanians were known under the name of «Caspians», participants of Xerxes campaign in Greece (9). However, the case is somewhat different. When adjusted for «unexpected»  appearance of Albanians in the battle of Gaugamels that sealed the fate of Ahemenid Empire, their stationing in the most decisive section of Persian army to combat Alexander-led detachments, there is no doubt about unsurpassed skills of Albanians as warriors. In considering that following these events Albanians took the lead over the state formation in East Transcaucasia and even gave their tribal name to this state — Albania, it is obvious that back in the 4 century B.C. Albanians were not only a bellicose but also numerous tribe or an already consolidated union of tribes acting under the name of Albanians. Then, it’d be reasonable to ask, why are sources silent about this people prospering in the period of Ahemenid might?

Albanians were neither included in the lists of tribes used by Ahemenid kings for their numerous campains nor mentioned among tribes and peoples who paid tributes to Ahemenids and, finally, Albanians were not referred to among tribes and peoples drawn by Ahemenids into their grandiose construction operations.

          Practically all our written sources dealing with peoples and tribes of the huge Ahemenid Empire, one way or another, touched upon three aspects — wars, taxes (tribute) and construction. Thus, it may be supposed that Albanians were exempted from all these obligations and, hence, out of written sources’ sight. This was accounted for by the fact that Albanians as autochthons of southern slopes of Major Caucasian ridge (area of South Caucasus unique Yaloylutepe archaeological culture spreading with Albanians as its indisputable carriers (10) throughout the entire period of Ahemenid state existence took the part of deterrent against militant nomadic tribes of Great Northern Steppe, particularly, Scythians.

It should be noted that relations between Ahemenids and Scythian tribes had always been complicated, especially in view of disastrous for Front Asian civilizations consequences of Scythian invasion in the 7 century B.C. (11). Scythians incessantly disturbed Ahemenid possessions in Central Asia. Some researchers tend to believe that the famous — thanks to an enthralling Herodotus story — Darius I campaign against Scythians of Northern Black Sea was of preventive nature to thus forestall the enemy (12). It was particularly imperative to take control of passages of Major Caucasus during the Greek-Persian wars. In considering that an army’s greater part being stationed in Greece, Scythian break-through Caucasus into Front Asia and delivering a blow at the very center of Ahemenid Empire could lead to deplorable results for Ahemenids. To all appearances, Albanians with their numerical strength and warlike character being well known to Persians perfectly were perfectly fit for the part of deterrent  against nomads from northern steppes.

 Archaeological excavations at Albanian necropolis are indicative of numerous weapons owned by Albanian tribes of earlier period. These include well-known ground burials of Mingechaur with insignificantly twisted skeletons (13), as well as ground burials with visibly twisted skeletons of Yaloylutepe type (14). Special analysis of weapons and art of war in Caucasian Albania demonstrated high military skills of Albanian tribes (15).

The above-mentioned once again confirms well-grounded views of researchers on high level of military skills of Albanians, which, not without purpose, accounted for their stationing in the center of Ahemenid army during the battle of Gaugamel. We detailed about the subject owing to the fact that this thoroughly developed and firmly established point of view is called in question by A.A.Akopyan in his work «Albania-Aluank in Greek-Latin and Old Armenian Sources» issued in Yerevan in 1987. In paraphrasing views of previous researchers on Albanians, as referred to in not numerous written sources of the 4-3 centuries B.C., Akopyan defines absolutely clear and plain information of sources on stationing Albanian warriors in the center of  Persian troops …just as a result of visual impression of Macedonians which cannot allegedly testify to Albanian detachment’s special role» (16).

A.Akopyan misinterprets scant information on Albanians in written sources of the 4-3 centuries as an eloquent testimony to the low level  of Albanians’ development (17). An impression arises that the author entirely ignores reports of not only numerous written sources on Albania presented by many researchers but also scorns the richest material culture of Albanians.  C.V.Trever in mid-20 century compared written sources on earlier period of Albanian history with the then available archaeological data on monuments of Albanian period as noting that they deny «… primitive-idealistic definitions, as insisted upon by researchers uncritical to information on this people provided by Strabo» (18).

We have already referred to the causes of scant reports on Albanians in the sources of Ahemenid period. Even better, we are prone to note that it was the Ahemenid period tradition that considered Albanians as guardsmen protecting Caucasian passages against invasions from the north, the factor that subsequently predetermined relations between the Albanian state and Great Empires of the ancient world —  Parthia and Rome; of the early Middle Ages – Sasanid Iran and Byzantine; nomads of North Caucasus — Sarmats, Alans, Huns, Khazars, etc.

At the crucial moment of their history Ahemenids called for Albanians to join their warriors, placed them in the center of united army. Note that in the period under review  Albanians grew into a dominating ethnic unit which in terms of disintegration of Ahemenid kingdom and afterwards that of  Alexander Empire began consolidating many tribes around themselves.

 Beyond any doubts, there are three periods in the analysis of Albanian history of B.C. The first relates to the 5-4 centuries B.C., where Albanians were one of numerous tribes (one out of 26, according to Strabo) on the territory of future Caucasian Albania. Albanians of that period were referred to in the works by Patroclus, Eratosthenes and Aristabulus whom researchers sometimes improperly quote to define the development of Albanian society at later stage of its history.  The second period covers the space from later 4 to later 3 centuryB.C. This was the period of the consolidation of the tribes of eastern regions of South Caucasus around Albanians and the formation of united Albanian state. The third period embraces the 2-1 centuries B.C. and the 1-3 centuries A.D. It should be noted that in the period under consideration, owing to the rapprochement and gradual obliteration of distinctions in material and spiritual culture of tribes under the aegis of Albanians within the limits of the of Caucasian Albanians there shaped a universal Albanian nationality with its specific spiritual and material culture.

It is typical of Armenian historiography, especially in the second half of the 20 century, to take advantage of earlier ancient authors’ reports to characterize later periods of the development of Albanian society  and thus substantiate three main theses of Albanian Albanistics: 1) social, economic, political and cultural backwardness of Albanian society as compared with Armenian one; 2) poliethnicity of Albanian society throughout the entire period of its existence, lack of the notion «single Albanian people»; 3) localization of the state of Caucasian Albania solely to the north from the river of Kura.

As is known, the scope of ancient sources on the history of Albanians and their state of Caucasian Albania is rather limited; even worse, their contents is rather contradictory which has repeatedly been noted by practically all the researchers. In particular, this relates to «Geography» by Strabo. For more than three centuries, scientists worldwide are engaged in studying various aspects of this unique source (19). Parts of the book devoted to Caucasus and Caucasian Albania, in particular, have thoroughly been examined by C.V.Trever, I.G.Aliyev, as well as K.Aliyev (20), Z.I.Yampolskiy (21), other Albanists. Analysis of ancient reports on Caucasian Albania and Albanians in the interpretation of  Armenian researchers was summed up by A.A.Akopyan in his already cited work. (22). Note that the author entirely ignores the fact that essential changes and more pricise definitions were introduced in the Albanistics of the second half of the 20 century, especially in the reports of ancient authors, first of all, Strabo thanks to large-scale archaeological studies of the monuments of Albanian period. It has long been proved earnestly that some reports of ancient authors are absolutely adverse to the realities of the period under consideration.

It has to be kept in mind that the material culture of Caucasian Albania is illustrative of high level of social, economic and political culture of the country in the 3-1 centuries B.C. As far back as C.V.Trever with insignificant archaeological material at hand (mainly, not numerous excavations of Albanian monuments of the first half of the 20 century and a small part of ancient archaeological material discovered in Mingechaur) stressed incompliance of the reports of the authors of the B.C. and A.D. with the then realities (24). Subsequently, archaeological studies of tens of ancient settlements, necropolis and cult structures not only reaffirmed Trever’s assumptions but made it also possible to make appreciable corrections. For instance, while C.V.Trever admitted the existence of Albanian state in the 2 century B.C. (25), today’s Albanistics disposes of conclusive proof that the state had been formed later 3 or, perhaps, earlier 4 centuries B.C. (26).

Beneath criticism are attempts of Armenian Albanistics to substantiate their point of view by basing themselves upon archaeological monuments. Thus, A.A.Akopyan asserts that pertaining to Albans is the Yaloylutepe culture dated the 5-1 centuries B.C. and spread to the north of Kura, while there is a culture of jug interments to the south of Kura that no less than «…constitutes  a part of archaeological culture of Ancient Armenia, typical for Armenian ethnos of that epoch » (27). In an effort to develop his idea, Akopyan proceeds that borders of «the cultures of jug interments» account for borders of the settlement of Armenian ethnos with its certain cultural and domestic way of life (28). Is it an absolute ignorance of the archaeological situation in the region? The point is that the culture of jug interments was equally and widely spread in the second half of the I Millennium B.C. throughout the entire South Caucasus, Asia Minor and Front. In the given case, the ethnic identity manifests itself not in the very principle of burials inside ceramic vessels, but on the basis of numerous  concomitant ritual components of burial, characteristics of accompanying burial material (29). I have no doubt of A.A.Akopyan’s awareness of the fact but he pursues another purpose: to link jug interments to Armenian ethnos as a factor in favour of wide settling of this ethnos throughout the entire South Caucasus, Asia Minor and Front back in the second half of the I Millennium B.C.

As for jug interments and graves of  the Yaloylutepe type on the territory of Azerbaijan, it should be noted that in fact sepulchres of the 5-3 centuries B.C. are notable for certain distinctions in terms of composition and nature of grave inventory and burial ritual which, most probably, reflects their ethnic identity. As is known, the Yaloylutepe culture is often linked to Udins and Albans (30), while jug interments — to Gargars (31). But this applies to graves of earlier period only (5-3 centuries B.C.). Subsequent developments were typical for the formation of the state and consolidation of tribes as its part.  An eloquent testimony is the results of J.A.Khalilov’s analysis of vast archaeological material that demonstrated shaping of universal material culture based on earlier local traditions (32). Conclusions made by J.A.Khalilov in the 1980s were afterwards reaffirmed following the results of archaeological studies in the south-eastern regions of the Azerbaijan Republic later 20 century. Note that in the southern part of Mugan, Lenkoran lowland, and in the mountainous valleys of Talysh there were discovered tens of settlements and necropolises of Albanian period. Explored were Peshtasar necropolis with burials in stone boxes (33), Eminly burial ground with jug interments (35), Amirturb’s sepulchre with ground burials (36) demonstrated perfect coincidence and identity both of burial rituals and separate elements of material culture with sepulchres of Mingechaur, Shemakha, Kabala, Nudi, other monuments located to the north of Kura. Beyond any doubts, in the 2-1 centuries B.C. there existed a universal material culture. In the meanwhile, it is the community of material culture that constitutes a major component of the formation of single nationality.

In other words, together with the formation of the state of Caucasian Albania in the 4-3 centuries B.C. there proceeded the rapprochement between various tribes that populated the territory of the state, so the single Albanian culture had shaped at the juncture of two eras.

It’d be appropriate to note that geopolitical location of Caucasian Albania accounted for active involvement of this state into the system of international relations. In particular, Caucasian Albania maintained the closest ties with Parthia, the latter dominating in Front Asia region for more than four centuries.

In considering that the problem of nomads’ invasion form the north remained topical in the Parthian period (Sarmats and Alans were meant), relations with Albania were crucial for Parthia. It was back V.V.Barthold who stressed Parthia’s claims on Albanian lands (36). He pointed out that Parthia, like Rome, failed to turn Albania into its own territory (37). In order to strengthen its political control over Albania, Parthia sought to elevate a Parthian dynasty of Arshakids to the Albanian throne which it succeeded in the 1 century B.C. only (38). Prior to the period Parthia, as viewed by researchers, aspired to preserve and control local dynasties (39). As is known, widely spread in Albania of that period were Parthian coins, so it is no mere coincidence that elements of Parthian material culture are visibly traced in Albania. The probability remains that Parthia, in an attempt to strengthen control over Albania, resorted to the tested expedient and populated the area with own ethnos. Thus, analysis of burials in raw graves and sarcophagi discovered on the territory of Albania made us conclude that these types of burials are of no local historical origin and belong to migrants from Parthia (40).

It should be noted that commencing from the 1 century B.C. Rome showed an increased interest in Albania. It was Pompey’s campaign to the region that  marked the beginning of Roman expansion in the region and also it was this campaign that  led to contradictory views of ancient authors on Albania, their conflicting interpretations in the scientific literature. Meanwhile, common conclusions of researchers being repeatedly quoted in the scientific literature are well-known and as follows: 1) some reports drawn from earlier sources and found no real parallels in  the Albanian society of the 1 century B.C.; 2) some reports define separate groups of Albanian population only and cannot be attributed to the Albanian society as a whole. The said conclusions have long been recognized by earnest Albanists and practically cause no opposition. In concurring with researchers, we, nonetheless, would like to focus on the aspect of the matter.

It should be remembered that ancient authors being, as a whole, well aware of Asia Minor, Armenia, Kolkhida, Greek colonies along Black Sea coast, nevertheless,  display inaccuracies and contradictory reports on peoples residing on remote territories eastwards. Specifically, the question is about Albans and Ibers. Ancient authors’ knowledge about these territories and populating peoples was superficial and generalized. It was the said Pompey’s campaign that «opened» Romans’ eyes on the developments in the area, social and political level of local state formations.

When adjusted for the fact that Strabo’s main informant was Theophanus of Mitilene, Pompey’s fellow-traveller in his Caucasian campaign (44), the said contradictions, as we see them, reflect Romans’ knowledge broadening on Albania and Albanians. Note that the Pompey’s route and date of the campaign have thoroughly been studied by many authors (42). Suffice it to recall that late autumn 66 B.C., following the conclusion of peace treaty with Armenia, Pompey moved from Artashat via Dilizhan gorge to reach borders of the Albanian state near Gazakh (43). Most probably, it was here that Romans first met with Albanians. This area called Kambisena, as I.Aliyev persuasively demonstrated, was at that period largely populated with stock-breeders (44). It should be noted that late autumn was a period where shepherds-nomads finished driving cattle from summer mountainous pastures (yaylags) to winter pastures (gyshlags). At the same time, shepherds who went down to plains to spend the winter, exchanged, according to the tradition, their animal produce for agricultural one. At that time, the exchange was mainly of barter nature and Albanians leading shepherd’s mode of life, as referred to by Theophanus of Mitilene, were unaware of coins. With Romans penetrating deep into the Albanian territory as a result of offensive, their knowledge about Albanians increasingly broadened. It is no mere coincidence that Theophanus of Mitilene reported on king’s power, army, towns, developed agriculture, etc. It’d be appropriate to recall that this information is, on the face of it, at variance with the first impressions and notes of Theophanus of Mitilene. Strabo was honest in reproducing Pompey’s fellow-traveller reports thus feeding several generations of researchers of the 19-20 centuries with every possible interpretations of his contradictory reports. We think it possible to consider a part of these Strabo contradictions as a reflection of the accumulation of Romans’ knowledge about Albania and Albanians, specific conditions of the process related to the campaign date and route.

 Noteworthy is the fact that though Strabo, Plinius, their contemporaries insist on various Albanian tribes — Caspians, Utis, Gargars, etc., combat operations occurred between Pompey’s army and Albanian detachments. Sources refer to no other tribes, participants of combat operations, except for mythical Amazons. Hence, we must either admit that 60,000 strong army combatting Pompey was purely Albanian from ethnic standpoint which seems hardly probable, or we must agree with the fact that it is a generalized name denoting all leading tribes under the aegis of Albanians which came as a result of the establishment of centralized state. The second assumption seems to be more realistic. Most probably, with some ethnic distinctions of separate large tribes being typical for the Albanian society in the 1 century B.C., they appeared in the outer world under common title — Albanians which, in the period under consideration, is an eloquent testimony to the consolidation of many tribes into the single historical and ethnic community.


1. C.V.Trever. Otcherki po istorii i kulture Kavkazskoy Albanii. M-L-, 1959; I.Aliyev. K interpretatsii paragrafov 1, 3, 4 and 5 IV glavy knigi «Geografiya Strabona». Zhurnal «Vestnik drevney istorii. 1975, № 3, s.150-164; J.A.Khalilov. Materialnaya kultura Kavkazskoy Albanii. Baku, 1985; I.A.Babayev. Goroda Kavkazskoy Albanii v IV v. do n.e. Baku, 1990; F.Mamedova. Politicheskaya istoriya i istoricheskaya geografiya Kavkazskoy Albanii. Baku, 1986 et al.

2. I.A.Babayev. Goroda…, s.38-39; J.A.Khalilov. Materialnaya kultura…, s.196-197.

3. S.T.Yeremyan. Rabovladelcheskoye obtshestvo drevney Armenii. Avtor. dokt. diss. M.,1998, s.20-22; G.A. Melikishvili. K istorii drevney Gruzii.Tbilisi, 1959, s.296.

4. J.A.Khalilov.Materialnaya kultura…, s.197.

5. I.A.Babayev.Goroda…, s.46.

6. Ibid, s.46.

7. C.V.Trever. Otcherki…, s.50-52.

8. I.A.Babayev. Goroda…, s.39.

9. C.V.Trever. Otcherki…, s.50-52; B.G.Gafurov. K 2500-letiyu Iranskogo gosudarstva. Sb.»Istoriya Iranskogo gosudarstva i kultury». M,1971, s.21.

10. O.Sh.Ismizadeh. Yaloylutapinskaya kultura. Baku, 1956.

11. Vast scientific literature deals with Scythian stay in Transcaucasia and Front Asia in the 7 century B.C.: B.B.Piotrovskiy. Skify v Zakavkazye. Trudy Otdeleniya istorii kultury i iskusstva Vostoka. Gos. Ermitazh. L.1940, № 3, s. 71-90; B.B.Piotrovskiy. Skify i drevniy Vostok. Zh. Sovetskaya Arkheologiya, 1954, №19, s.141-158; G.A.Melikishvili. Voprosy istorii Mannitskogo tsarstva. Zh. Vestnik drevney istorii, 1949, №1, s.57-72; E.I.Krupnov. O pokhodakh skifov tcherez Kavkaz. Sb. «Voprosy skifo-sarmatskoy arkheologii». M, 1954, s.186-194; I.Aliyev. Istoriya Midii. Baku, 1969, s.218-232; V.A. Belyavskiy. Voyna Vavilona za nezavisimost (627-605 gg. do n.e.) i gegemoniya skifov v Peredney Azii. Sb.»Issledovaniya po istorii stran Vostoka». L., 1964, s.89-101; M.N.Pogrebova. Pamyatniki skifskoy kultury v Zakavkazye. Sb. «Kavkaz i Srednyaya Aziya v drevnosti i srednevekovye». M., 1981, s.42-58; V.B.Vinogradov. Tsentralniy i Severo-Vostochniy Kavkaz v skifskoye vremya. Grozniy, 1972; B.N.Grakov.Skify. M., 1971; A.A.Iessen. Iz istorii proshlogo Milsko-Karabakhskoy stepi. MIA, 1965, №125, s.10-35; B.V.Tekhov. Skify i Tsentralniy Kavkaz v VII-VI vv. do n.e. M., 1980; J.A.Khalilov.Arkheologicheskiye nakhodki «skifskogo oblika» i vopros o «skifskom tsarstve» na territorii Azerbaidjana.Sb.»Materialy i issledovaniya po arkheologii SSSR», 1971, №177,s.183-187; V.Yu.Murzin. Skifskaya arkhaika Severnogo Prichernomorya. Kiev, 1984; I.G.Aliyev. O skifakh i skifskom tsarstve v Azerbaidjane. Peredneaziatskiy sbornik. M., 1979, vyp.III;  G.I.Ione. Mingechaurskaya raznovidnost nakonechnikov strel «skifskogo» tipa. Sb.»Materialnaya kultura Azerbaidjana», 1953, vyp.3, s. 81-97; B.A.Rybakov. Gerodotova Skifiya. M., 1979.

12. E.V.Tchernenko.Skifo-persidskaya voina.Kiev, 1984, s.7-17.

13. S.M.Kaziyev. Albom kuvshinnikh pogrebeniy. Baku. 1960. s.19; J.A.Khalilov. Ykaz.rab., s.53-54.

14. OS.h.Ismizadeh.Ukaz.rab.

15. A.A.Aliyev.Oruzhiye drevnikh albanov.Avtor.kand.diss.Tbilisi,1978.

16. A.A.Akopyan.Albaniya-Aluank v greko-latinskikh i drevnearmyanskikh istochnikakh. Yerevan, 1987, s.10.

17. Ibid.

18. C.V.Trever.Ukaz.rab., 33.

19. L.I.Gratsianskaya. «Geografiya» Strabona i problemy istochnikovedeniya. V kn.: «Drevneyshiye gosudarstva na territorii SSSR». M., 1988. s. 6-157.

20. K.Aliyev.Kavkazskaya Albaniya.Baku, 1974.

21. Z.I.Yampolskiy.Drevnyaya Albania III-I do n.e. Baku. 1962.

22. A.A.Akopyan.Ukaz.rab., s.5-50.

23. A.A.Kudryavtsev.Drevniy Derbent.M., 1982.

24. C.V.Trever.Ukaz.rab., s.9-35.

25. Ibid, s.58-60.

26. I.A.Babayev. K voprosu o vozniknovenii gosudarstva Albanii (Kavkazskoy). Zh.Izvestiya Akademii nauk Azerb.SSR, № 4, s. 51 et al.; I.A.Babayev. Goroda…, s. 46; J.A.Khalilov.Materialnaya kultura…,s.200-201.

27. A.A.Akopyan. Ukaz.rab.,s.15-16.

28. Ibid, s.16.

29. Vast scientific literature deals with jug interments of South Caucasus. An A.I.Noneshvili work titled «Burial rituals of the peoples of Transcaucasia (jug interments of the 8 century B.C.- 8 century A.D.)». Tbilisi, 1992 presents a summarized analysis of the literature, jug interments of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

30. O.Sh.Ismizadeh.Ukaz.rab.,s.3-4;C.V.Trever.Ukaz.rab.,s.176.

31. C.V.Trever.Ukaz.rab.,s.175 et al..

32. J.A.Khalilov.Ukaz.rab.,s.203-204.

33. G.O.Goshgarly.Peshtasarskiy nekropol.Zh.Izvestiya AN Azerb.SSR, seriya Istoriya,filosofiya i pravo, 1992,#2,s.79-94.

34. G.O.Goshgarly i A.I.Alekperov. Yugo-vostochniy Azerbaidjan v antichnuyu epokhu. Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii «Arkheologiya i etnografiya Kavkaza». Baku, 2000, s.82-84.

35. J.Aliyev and G.Goshgarly.Archaeological investigations in Azerbaijan (1986-1990). Journal of Ancient Civilizations, 1,3 (1994). Leiden, p.263-272.

36. V.V.Barthold.Mesto prikaspiyskikh oblastey v istorii musulmanskogo mira.Baku, 1925, s.19.

37. Ibid, s. 19.

38. F.Mamedova.Ukaz rab., s. 169,171,186.

39. I.M.Dyakonov. Otcherk istorii drevnego Irana.M., 1961,s.195.

40. G.O.Goshgarly.K voprosu ob etnicheskoy prinadlezhnosti nekotorikh tipov pogrebalnikh pamyatnikov Kavkazskoy Albanii. Sb.»Arkheologicheskaya konferentsiya Kavkaza». Tbilisi, 1998, s.83-85.

41. S.A.Dadasheva. Klad parfyanskikh monet iz Ali Bayramlinskogo rayona. Zh. Doklady AN Azerb.SSR,1976, XXXII,#2; I.A.Babyev.Goroda…,s.152-165.

42. Y.A.Manandyan. Krugovoy put Pompeya v Zakavkazye. Zh. Vestnik drevney istorii, 1939, #4,s.70-82.

43. C.V.Trever.Ukaz.rab., s.96.

44. K.Aliyev. K voprosu ob istochnikakh Strabona v opisanii drevney Kavkazskoy Albanii. Zh. Doklady AN Azerb. SSR, XVI, 1960, № 4, s.420-421.

45. I.Aliyev. K interpretatsii…, s.163-165.


Goshgar Goshgarly    сandidate of sciences Leading researcher Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences of the Azerbaijan Republic