scholarly journals HISTORY OF THE CASPIAN SEA BASIN EVOLUTION IN THE PLEISTOCENE AND HOLOCENE AND CURRENT LEVEL OSCILLATIONS (WITHIN RUSSIA)

Author(s):  
T.A. Volkova ◽  
Yu.O. Antiptseva ◽  
A.A. Mishchenko
Author(s):  
Ardak Kapyshev

At  the  present  stage  one  of  the  unsolved   problems in  interstate relations of  Caspian bordering countries is defining international­legal status of the Caspian Sea. It is noted in the article that this problem is not a new one at all. The history of “division” of the Caspian Sea begins in the ancient age, namely in VIII century. It is underlined that the basic stumbling block  is the position of Iran on the right to use the Caspian Sea, and also occurrence of extra regional players, such as  the USA, China, etc. First of  all, it is connected with rich oil fields and other minerals, and also with convenient geopolitical and geostrategic position. The only way to worry out the international­legal delimitation of the Caspian Sea problem is a negotiating process. By now, despite of  certain disagreements on  legal status of  the Caspian Sea, five Caspian bordering countries managed to achieve certain progress, admitting the possibility of applying the principle of sectorial sectioning on the Caspian Sea.  Clear proof  of  it is the agreements on  division of ground on the northern part of Caspian Sea signed between Kazakhstan, Russia and Azerbaijan. It is important that Kazakhstan, Russia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan clearly stated their positions and agreed to make a compromise in their official statements. More than likely, in the near future Iran will soften its position, considering its present  situation and   strained relations with the USA. It has been alleged that the constructive  dialog  already  started; everything depends on  the mobility,  concurrency and rationality of actions of all Caspian bordering countries.


2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 232-263
Author(s):  
Elena Karataeva

Abstract This article analyses new developments in the question of the Caspian Sea legal status, namely the signing of the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea on 12 August 2018 in Kazakhstan, after twenty-six years in the making. First, the article provides an overview of the history of the Caspian Sea ownership and examines the legal status question from the collapse of the USSR to the present day. Then, the text of the newly signed Convention is examined to determine whether it provides the final answers to the issues of the legal status and delimitation of the sea. It is contended that despite this seminal breakthrough, the convention does not provide a complete solution. Specifically, while it establishes Caspian Sea zones and their limits, it fails to clarify some key contentious aspects, including delimitation principles between the opposite and adjacent Caspian States, which remain to be determined bilaterally.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 2133
Author(s):  
Akmaral U. TYULYUBAYEVA ◽  
Madina M. ABISHEVA ◽  
Aikerim A. TURUNTAYEVA ◽  
Saltanat T. JAKUBAYEVA

Kazakhstan and the Islamic Republic of Iran are two states that have common sea borders through the Caspian Sea, two friendly neighbors, successfully developing both bilateral cooperation and cooperation at the regional and international level. The relevance of this study is that today it is advisable to study the foreign policy of not only world powers, but also ‘non-knowing’ countries in order to determine the scenario for the development of relations between the two countries. The purpose of the article is to analyze and evaluate the geostrategic features of the interaction of Kazakhstan and Iran in the regional and global aspects. The leading approach to the study of this problem is the analysis method, which allowed to study the history of relations between Kazakhstan and Iran at different stages. This article attempts to determine the geostrategic features of the interaction between Kazakhstan and Iran in the regional and world aspect analyze and evaluate their bilateral relations.  


2021 ◽  
pp. 41-59
Author(s):  
K. F. Ibrgaimov

The alternation of transgressions and regressions of the Caspian Sea led to the fact that these tracks were alternately found on the seabed, then on land. And, of course, these traces of the past must be looked for at those depths that at times became dry land. The identification of these monuments provides valuable material on the history of the peoples who inhabited this water basin, reflecting the life of the sea for many millennia and centuries, and sunken ships and their rigging allow shedding light on the issues of ancient navigation in the Caspian.


2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (10) ◽  
pp. 68-85
Author(s):  
Yaroslav Valentinovich Pilipchuk ◽  

This paper is dedicated to the history of Muslim statehood in Azerbaijan in IX-XIII century. The first truly strong was the Sajid dynasty, originating from the Sogdian aristocracy. Its representatives exalted themselves as ghouls in the service of the Abbasids. Having become rulers in Azerbaijan, the Sajids tried to pursue an independent and aggressive policy towards Armenia, which did not always provoke a positive reaction from the caliph. Only at the end of the Sajid rule did their interests again coincide with those of Baghdad. The Muzafarids were another Iranian dynasty, this time the Delemite. Its representatives came from Dalem during its expansion to the northwest. They took upon themselves the blows from Russia, the Ravadids and the Seljuks. The rabadids were a dynasty of Arab origin, which soon became Kurdish. Onomasticon of the dynasty in the 10th - 11th centuries generally Iranian. The era of the greatest power of the Rawwadids was the time of the reign of Mamlan I, who pursued an aggressive policy towards Christian neighbors and the threat from which the Armenians and Georgians neutralized by the conclusion of a defensive alliance. XI century was the time of the gradual fading of the Rawwadids. The Shaddadids were of Kurdish dynasty descent and ruled in Arran. Slow growth of their power was observed in the 10th century, when they began expansion in the possession of the Muzafarids. This dynasty is characterized by close ties with the Armenians. Emirs Fadl and Abu l-Asvar carried out an attack on the Armenian territories, which the Armenians could recapture only by cooperating with the Georgians. To destroy the emirate of the Shaddadids were not able and the Romaios in the middle of the XI century. Only the Seljuks in Arran were able to eliminate the power of the Shaddadids in 1093, and they survived in Shirak until 1199. Shirvan was a state inhabited by Iranian-speaking and Caucasian populations. The Mazyadid dynasty was originally Arab in origin. Shirvan maintained close ties with the state of Lizan. In the tenth century, the Shirvanshahs extended power besides Shirvan to Derbent and Arran. In the second quarter of the XI century. Mazyadids were replaced by the Qesranid dynasty, the onomasticon of which is already Iranian. This dynasty, unlike the Sheddadids in Arran and the Rawwadids in Azerbaijan, retained power in Shirvan under the Seljuks. The Caesranids, like the Mazyadids, continued to claim power over Derbent in the XII century. Shirvan became an object of expansion from Georgia. Shirvans could only resist it with the help of the Seljuks. However, this did not exclude dynastic marriages with Georgian Bagrationi. The most prominent Qesranid was the Shirvanshah Akhsitan, who, with the help of the Georgians, repelled the invasion of the Derbent Khazars and personally repelled the invasion of the Dagestan highlanders. In alliance with Queen Tamar, the Shirvanshah opposed the Atabeks of Azerbaijan. XIII century was the time of the decline of Shirvan, when he became the object of invasion of the Mongols, Kipchaks and Khorezmians. From 1070 Azerbaijan became the possession of the Seljukids, and from 1093 Arran became such. For several decades, Azerbaijan and Arran were the property of the younger Seljukids and were part of the Iraqi Seljuk Sultanate. The design of the state of the Atabeks of Azerbaijan can be dated to the middle of the XII century. Under its first rulers, Shams ad-Din Ildengiz and Jahan-Phelevane, the influence of the Ildengizids extended from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf and from Erzurum to Khorasan. The Ildengizids were those who restrained the expansion of Georgian Bagrationi against Muslim countries and were actually omnipotent workers of the Sultans under the weak Seljukids. Qizil-Arslan has already ceased to look around at the Seljukids completely and has titled itself with a magnificent title. The end of the XII century. - beginning of the XIII century were the time of the decline of the Atabeks of Azerbaijan due to the strife between the Ildengizids and the victories of the Georgians. 20-30-ies of XIII century were the time of the fall of the Atabek state of Azerbaijan. Key words: Shirvan, Azerbaijan, Arran, Sajids, Mosaferids, Shaddadids, Rawwadids, Ildengizids, Seljukids


BMC Zoology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatimat Tembotova ◽  
Ekaterina Kuchinova ◽  
Albina Amshokova ◽  
Ekaretina Kononenko

Abstract Background There are two species of Mus in the Caucasus: M. musculus and M. macedonicus. M. musculus is widespread in the Caucasus, where the species is found everywhere from the Black to the Caspian Sea. M. macedonicus is ubiquitous Transcaucasia. The most north-astern border of its distribution in the Caucasus, according to the literature, is located in the Derbent region, near the border between Dagestan and Azerbaijan. Results Cytochrome b mt-DNA of genus Mus research in this study in the Eastern Caucasus. About 70% of M. musculus haplotypes from the lowlands of Dagestan were recorded for the first time. One of these haplotypes accounts for approximately 25% of the total species diversity of haplotypes. M. macedonicus was found in only one locality, the Sarykum barchans, where this species prevails in number and accounts for 70% of the total number mice of the genus Mus. The species is characterized by low values of genetic diversity and nucleotide variability, which may indicate that the population originated from a small number of founders and may explain its relative isolation from the main range. The dating of the appearance of the ancestors of M. musculus in the east of the Russian Caucasus corresponds to 99-66 thousand years ago (at a mutation rate of 3-10% per million years). Conclusion The results obtained suggest that the history of the appearance of M. musculus in the Eastern Caucasus is more ancient and is not associated with human agricultural activities. We believe that possibly the ancestral range of M. musculus covered the eastern and western coasts of the Caspian Sea in the territory of southern Dagestan, Azerbaijan, and Iran. In this paper M. macedonicus, a Balkan-Asia Minor species, was registered for the first time in the North Caucasus. This species was registered in the center of Dagestan, where it inhabits sympatrically (on the territory) and syntopically (on the same biotope) with M. musculus. The low values of genetic diversity of M. macedonicus in the North Caucasus suggest that the population originated from a small group of founders.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 37-42
Author(s):  
Gülbəniz Hacıbaba qızı Mehdiyeva ◽  

Most of the onomastic units mentioned in the written monuments of ancient times are valuable sources in terms of studying the past, language, lifestyle, ethnogenesis, ethnography of our people today. While these monuments are important in terms of clarifying historical realities and shedding light on obscure issues, on the other hand, their study is politically important in modern times. At a time when our hated neighbors are looking at our lands and making historical distortions, the study of onomastic units in ancient monuments – toponyms, anthroponyms, oronyms, hydronyms, etc. – can be a convincing answer to baseless fabrications. It should be noted that we come across information and explanations about each of these hydronyms in scientific and historical sources written from ancient times to the present day, and the core of each of them is of Azerbaijani-Turkish origin. The monument involved in the study names countless water bodies associated with the territory of Azerbaijan. They are also very valuable in terms of studying the lexical and semantic development of our language. We come across information and explanations about each of these hydronyms in scientific and historical sources written from ancient times to the present day. One of the hydronyms directly connected with the territory of Azerbaijan in the source is the Caspian Sea. Books and articles about the Caspian Sea give it different names and etymological-linguistic analysis of the word Caspian. Another hydronym mentioned in the source is Tartar river. The article provides extensive information about the Tartar River in terms of its geographical structure. The hydronym Tartar is given in Arabic, Russian, Georgian and ancient Turkic sources with different phonetic structure. The name of the Urdun River is mentioned several times in the source. However, it should be noted that the Urdun River flows not in the Albanian country, but in the Middle East, and most of it flows in the territory of modern Jordan. Although the explanation of some of the hydronyms included in the ancient Caucasian Albanian territory in the source is convincing, the exact explanation of many ancient hydronyms still remains controversial. One example of such controversial hydronyms is the Urdun River. The last hydronym mentioned in the article is Goycha river. Extensive geographical, historical, etymological interpretations and linguistic analysis of the hydronym are given. Key words: river, morphemes, geographical names, modern areal, hydronyms, onomastic


2019 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. 100538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neda Rahimzadeh ◽  
Farhad Khormali ◽  
Natacha Gribenski ◽  
Sumiko Tsukamoto ◽  
Martin Kehl ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document