The first attempts to study, scrutinize, and comparatively analyze secondary school textbooks in the social sciences—particularly history—began after the end of World War I. The main reason for this was the negative role played by social science textbooks in the horrific tragedies that occurred during the war. At the time, both politicians and schoolteachers in Western countries blamed textbooks for spreading negative stereotypes between nations, promoting hostility, and encouraging racial and national discrimination, as well as fostering nationalist bias. One of the objectives of the International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation (ICIC), established in 1922 under the League of Nations, was precisely to identify biased and flawed textbooks that incited enmity and misunderstanding between nations and to correct the information that led to misinterpretation of other states and peoples. In 1932, the ICIC adopted a resolution on the establishment of an international advisory model for textbooks.[1] However, with the outbreak of the World War II, these efforts proved fruitless. Attention to this issue was renewed with the establishment of UNESCO under the United Nations. After the end of the Cold War, new threats began to emerge in textbooks developed for the social sciences. On the one hand, this was reflected in the rise of aggressive nationalism among nations that had gained independence from the Soviet Union; on the other hand, it manifested in the attitudes of those states toward national minorities.
So, what makes textbooks so important? What functions do textbooks serve, and what goals do they seek to achieve? History textbooks are important because they speak to intellectual groups’ visions of a society’s past, culture, customs, and traditions. They have clear objectives and targets they aim to fulfill. However, these same features also represent their main shortcomings. Textbooks with clearly defined goals often act as representatives of state ideology and do not allow room for issues considered undesirable by society.[2] History textbooks, on the one hand, posit a definition of a nation’s social identity and its place in world history, and on the other hand, prescribe a nation’s relations and interactions with other nations.
The purpose of history textbooks is not limited to transmitting knowledge about the past to younger generations; they also play a key role in shaping the social and political norms of a society. In this sense, textbooks propose for individuals an understanding of both the rules of their own society and the principles of living alongside other communities.[3] An analysis of history textbooks shows that their main goal is often to praise the past and present of the nation they represent, to exaggerate its role and achievements in world history, and to diminish the historical significance of others—especially neighboring nations. Although history education is expected to promote peace among nations and mutual understanding between societies, it often contributes to the intensification of conflicts, the spread of hatred and bias, and the justification of nationalist intolerance and aggressive policies. The promotion of particular historical narratives through education is closely linked to the role played by those who control educational content in specific conflicts or processes of social reconstruction.[4]
The aim of this article is to analyze the image of neighboring Iran as portrayed in history textbooks designed for general secondary schools in modern Azerbaijan, and to use this image to support the arguments outlined above. The study draws on the History of Azerbaijan and World History textbooks (the latter published under different titles at various times) that have been approved for school instruction by the Ministry of Education (currently the Ministry of Science and Education) since 1991. The historical content in these textbooks has been examined using content analysis methodology. Scientific inaccuracies or distortions of historical facts concerning Iran are not the focus of this research. The analysis is limited to textbook authors’ representation of Iran’s image and its place in world history.
Ancient Iran
The ancient history of Azerbaijan does not begin within the territory of the present-day Republic of Azerbaijan, but rather within the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran.[5] This is because of the presence of Turkic-speaking populations in Iran’s northwestern regions, specifically in the provinces of East and West Azerbaijan (ostans), and by the appropriation of the history of the region referred to by the Republic of Azerbaijan as Southern Azerbaijan.
n the 6th-grade History of Azerbaijan textbook introduced to schoolchildren in 1994, the states of Aratta, Lullubi, and Kuti are referred to as “early Azerbaijani states” that emerged in the “western lands of Southern Azerbaijan.”[6] It is noted that, due to their geographical proximity to Mesopotamia, these states were influenced by the latter’s historical and cultural environment. The state of Manna, which arose following the disintegration of these early polities and was located around Lake Urmia, is presented as one of the ancient Azerbaijani states.[7] In the section titled “Azerbaijan during the Rule of the Median State,” Media is said to be to the southeast of Manna, and the Medes/Mada are described as being of Turkic origin.[8] The authors assert that “pro-Persian elements operated secretly in the Median court,” and that with their assistance, the Median state collapsed—paving the way for the establishment of the Achaemenid Empire, which is described as being of Persian origin.[9] It is further stated that in 323 BCE, another state—Atropatene (Aderbaygan)—emerged in the southern part of Azerbaijan.[10] In this textbook aimed at 6th-grade students, the northern region of present-day Iran is presented as Azerbaijani territory.[11]
When localizing ancient state formations, the textbooks refer to various geographical landmarks. For example, they state that the territory of Lullubi stretched from Lake Urmia to the Diyala River, while the Kuti state was located to the west of Lake Urmia. In the section titled “Ancient States in Azerbaijan,” the authors posit that the Manna state was established on Azerbaijani territory and maintained close trade relations with Mesopotamia and hostile relations with Urartu.[12] In the section titled “Azerbaijan during the Median and Achaemenid Empires,” the authors describe Media’s geographical position and refer to it as the most powerful state in Western Asia. While discussing the social structure and public life of the Achaemenid Empire, the textbook employs the term “Persian” and emphasizes that Persians held dominant positions within the empire.[13] In the section entitled “The State of Atropatene,” the authors note that Atropates was appointed as the ruler of Lesser Media. However, when describing the territory of Atropatene, they state that Lesser Media encompassed Southern Azerbaijan and several southern districts of the Republic of Azerbaijan.[14]
Unlike the “History of Azerbaijan” textbooks, those devoted to world history do not hesitate to use the term Iran. In a 1990s textbook for 6th-grade pupils titled Ancient World History, there are paragraphs headed “Media and Iran.”[15] The text states that Media arose as a state in the heart of Iran and that the Medes consisted of six tribes, although it offers no information about their ethnic origins. It notes that the Persians are first mentioned on Assyrian inscriptions of the 9th century BCE and that the Achaemenids were a Persian state. The 2021 General History textbook discusses the histories of three ancient states that existed on Iranian territory. The earliest is the “Median State.”[16] Unlike the History of Azerbaijan textbook, this volume specifies that Media lay within the borders of present-day Iran. While it does not present Media as a Persian state, it holds that the rise of pro-Persian factions at the court of Astyages hastened its downfall. In describing the second ancient polity on Iranian soil, the Achaemenid Empire, the textbook explains that the Iranian plateau was inhabited by peoples of various origins and that Aryan tribes intermingled with, and assimilated, the native Elamites.[17] Concerning the third state, Parthia, it states that the kingdom was founded by the Parni tribes but does not address their ethnic background. Finally, the textbook highlights the historical ties between Iran and Azerbaijan, noting that the “Azerbaijani polities of Atropatene and Albania” consistently stood alongside Parthia and fought against Rome together.[18]
Thus, in both the 1990s and 2020s editions of Azerbaijan’s history textbooks, the authors consistently avoided the use of the term Iran. When localizing ancient tribal confederations and state formations, they refrained from referencing Iran or the Zagros Mountains, instead orienting the narrative around Mesopotamia, Lake Urmia, and the Diyala River, which is located within the borders of present-day Iraq. Iranian-speaking tribes settled in the northern and northwestern regions of Iran were presented as having undergone Turkification. To avoid using the term of Iran, the authors portrayed the Median and Achaemenid empires as Western Asian states. Although world history textbooks do mention the term Iran and discuss ancient states that existed within the territory of present-day Iran, these references are framed within a regional context, without addressing the broader role of ancient Iranian states in world history.
Medieval Iran
The medieval period, characterized by feudal relations and spanning roughly from the 3rd to the 19th century in the Caucasus, is examined in two history textbooks— History of Azerbaijan and World History—intended for 7th and 8th grade students. In the History of Azerbaijan textbooks from the 1990s, the term Iran appears primarily in connection with the Sasanian Empire. It states that the Sasanians, upon coming to power in Iran, transformed Azerbaijan into a province, and that the Girdman state, established in Northern Azerbaijan, was founded by Mihr, a relative of Sasanian king Khosrow II, and also noted that Mihr relocated 30,000 families of his lineage to the province of Utik, effectively portraying the foundation of this state as the work of a Persian-origin ruler.[19] In the 2023 edition of the History of Azerbaijan textbook, however, the foundation of the Girdman state is attributed not to Mihr, the Sasanian relative, but to Mehran from the Sabirs—a Turkic tribe.[20] When discussing the post-Abbasid period and the states established on Azerbaijani territory, the textbooks note that the Sajid dynasty controlled “the territory of Azerbaijan from Derbent to Zanjan.”[21] In the context of the Mongol invasions, the textbook does not mention that the core territory of the state established by Hulegu Khan was in Iran; instead, it emphasizes that the center of the state was Azerbaijan.[22]
n the History of Azerbaijan textbooks developed in the 1990s, the political transformations following the decline of the Ilkhanid state and the succession of new powers in the region are described with particular emphasis on the Qara Qoyunlu, Aq Qoyunlu, and Safavid states, which are presented as Azerbaijani states. This classification is primarily justified by the claim that these states were founded on Azerbaijani territory and that the majority of their populations consisted of Azerbaijani Turks. The Qara Qoyunlu state is said to have been established in the western part of Azerbaijan, while the Aq Qoyunlu state emerged in the southern part of Azerbaijan.[23] However, the textbooks do not clarify whether the “Azerbaijan territory” being referred to corresponds to the 15th-century historical geography or to the borders of the 21st-century Republic of Azerbaijan. In the 21st-century editions of the History of Azerbaijan textbooks, the terms Baharlu and Bayandurlu state are used instead of Qara Qoyunlu and Aq Qoyunlu, respectively.[24] When discussing the Bayandurlu state, the textbooks do not acknowledge that its core territory was located within present-day Iran; instead, they assert that Iran was incorporated into the state.[25]
The history of the Safavid state is presented differently in the History of Azerbaijan textbooks published in the 1990s and 2000s. While the textbooks of both periods depict the Safavids as an Azerbaijani state, the textbooks from the 1990s emphasize that, in the 15th century, two feudal states were effectively under the influence of the Azerbaijani Qizilbash state. The first is identified as the “Aq Qoyunlu–Azerbaijan, Armenia, and the two Iraqs” (Iraq-i Ajam and Arab Iraq). The second is Khorasan, located in eastern Iran, which had been part of the Timurid Empire. These textbooks state that the ruling elite in Khorasan were of Persian origin.[26] They further argue that with the rise of Shah Abbas I to power, the Qizilbash lost their influence, and the state could no longer be considered Azerbaijani. In contrast, the 2023 edition of the textbook rejects the notion of the Safavid state’s “Persianization.” The Safavids are still portrayed as an Azerbaijani state; however, it is claimed that, as a result of peace negotiations under Shah Abbas, all Azerbaijani territories were ceded to the Ottomans. Yet the textbook does not clarify whether it refers to Northern or Southern Azerbaijani territories.[27] In this newer edition, the term Iran is used only as a geographical reference in connection with the Safavid–Portuguese struggle over the Strait of Hormuz.[28] In the section titled “Azerbaijan in International Trade Relations,” the term Iran is deliberately avoided; instead, the textbook focuses on trade relations between Russia and Azerbaijan, and claims that European countries were interested in establishing commercial ties with Azerbaijan.
In the world history textbooks intended for 7th and 8th grade students, the history of Iran is presented in a rather superficial manner. At the end of the 20th century, 7th-grade students studied world history through Soviet-era textbooks. In the textbook titled History of the Middle Ages, there is no dedicated paragraph on Iranian history; Iran is mentioned only in the context of Arab Caliphate conquests, with reference to the Arab invasions of Iran and Byzantium, both of which had weakened each other through prolonged wars.[29] In the 21st-century General History textbook, the introduction to Iranian history begins with a section titled “The Sasanian State and the Caucasus.” Unlike the History of Azerbaijan textbooks, the authors do not present the Sasanians as an empire in the context of world history. Moreover, there is no mention of the Sasanian state’s Iranian origin or its geographical placement within the territory of present-day Iran.[30] In the section “Islamic Civilization,” there is no dedicated subsection on Iranian science or culture, and the affiliation of several mentioned scholars with Iran is not made clear. In the section “Cultures of Eastern Peoples,” some Iranian scholars and poets—such as Omar Khayyam and Jalal al-Din Rumi—are discussed, but either their ethnic origins are omitted or they are identified as Turks.[31] In the chapters devoted to the Mongol invasions and the Mongol Empire, the authors do not include information about the Mongol conquest of Iran or the state of the Ilkhanids (Hulakids).
Modern and Contemporary Iran
At the beginning of the 18th century, as Russia launched its active campaigns of conquest in the Caucasus, it encountered two Eastern empires in decline: Iran and the Ottoman Empire. In the textbooks published during the 1990s, it is clearly stated that the territories seized by Russia had belonged to Iran. In the 9th-grade History of Azerbaijan textbook, the sections titled “The Russo-Iranian War of 1804–1813,” “The Treaty of Gulistan,” “The Russo-Iranian War of 1826–1828” and “The Treaty of Turkmenchay” assert that Russia formalized its occupation of the Caspian provinces and the northern part of Azerbaijan through treaties signed with Iran, thereby indirectly acknowledging Iranian control over these territories prior to the wars.[32] In contrast, the 21st-century textbooks approach the Russian conquest from a different perspective. Russia’s expansion is framed as “the occupation of the Caspian territories of Azerbaijan.” However, these textbooks do not explain why Russia signed treaties not with Azerbaijan, but with Iran—specifically the Qajar state—to legitimize its conquests. In the section titled “Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar’s Policy of Unification,” the textbook states that the Qajar ruler struggled not to unify Iran, but to restore the Safavid state.[33] In the paragraph on the “Treaty of Gulistan,” the textbook notes that the treaty was concluded between the Shah’s state and Russia. In the section on the “Treaty of Turkmenchay,” the authors mention that the treaty was signed between the Qajar court and the Russian state, deliberately avoiding the use of the term Iran.[34]
In “History of Azerbaijan” textbooks, the portrayal of Iran during Nadir Shah’s reign differs significantly across time periods. In the editions published in the 1990s, the section titled “Nadir Shah’s Rise to Power” states that Nadir’s rule marked “the restoration of Iranian control in Azerbaijan” and that his military campaigns strengthened centralized authority in Iran, thus explicitly recognizing Nadir as the Shah of Iran.[35] In contrast, the 21st-century textbooks adopt a different framing. In the section “Liberation of Azerbaijani Lands,” Nadir is presented as having reintegrated the Caspian provinces into the Safavid state and as having restored the Safavid Empire within its former borders, and consequently portrayed as a ruler of Azerbaijan.[36] In the section “The Fall of the Afshar Empire,” the authors note that khanates emerged on both sides of Azerbaijan following the collapse of the empire and that the southern khanates soon came under Qajar rule. However, the textbooks do not specify the territories over which the Qajars exercised authority.[37] Similarly, in the section “Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar’s Unification Policy,” the authors avoid saying that the Qajar ruler sought to unify Iran; instead, they claim that he aimed to restore the Safavid state within its previous borders.[38]
n describing the historical events leading up to and following the World War I, the History of Azerbaijan textbooks written in the 1990s frequently make use of the term Iran. In the section titled “Southern Azerbaijan Under Iranian Rule,” they state that Southern Azerbaijan was the most agriculturally developed region of Iran.[39] In the section “Southern Azerbaijan in the Early 20th Century,” the textbooks emphasize that during the revolutionary period, the primary demands voiced were of a democratic nature—such as the adoption of a constitution, the expulsion of foreign officials, and an end to the arbitrariness of royal administrators. During the struggle for constitutional reform, demands for freedom of speech and conscience, as well as for the inviolability of the individual and private property, are also highlighted.[40]
In the 21st-century History of Azerbaijan textbooks, developments in Iran are described under sections titled “Southern Azerbaijan,” yet the term Iran is largely avoided in these narratives and replaced with references to the Qajar state.[41] When discussing events following the World War I, including the Khiabani movement, they emphasize that the Qajar state—and specifically Southern Azerbaijan, which is described as covering the northwestern territories of the state—became a “theater of military operations” for foreign powers.[42] In the section titled “The National Liberation Movement in Southern Azerbaijan,” the textbooks note that the Qajar dynasty came to an end in 1925 and was succeeded by the Pahlavi dynasty. With the rise of the Pahlavis, the term Iran[43] begins to appear in the textbooks, and the authors state that during the 1920s–1940s, Southern Azerbaijan became one of the key economic centers of Iran.[44]
Textbooks from both periods state that the rise of the Pahlavi dynasty marked the beginning of an intense policy of Persianization and an increase in ethnic-based discrimination. In the section titled “Southern Azerbaijan During the Reza Shah Dictatorship” in the 1995 edition, it is noted that the Qajar dynasty was overthrown in 1925 and replaced by the Pahlavi family. While the reforms implemented under Pahlavi rule are acknowledged to have strengthened the state and reduced foreign dependence, the textbook emphasizes that these reforms did not contribute to the economic development of Southern Azerbaijan. On the contrary, they worsened the living conditions of the population, intensified repressive Persianization policies, and reinforced the ideology of Pan-Iranism.[45]
In the World History textbooks prepared in the 1990s, Iran is presented within the section dedicated to Asian countries. It is characterized as a backward, agrarian, and feudal country. The textbooks note that by the early 20th century, Iranian independence had been significantly weakened, the Qajars held unchecked power, and democratic movements had gained considerable momentum.[46] In the 21st-century textbooks, the section titled “The Qajar State” states that in the 19th century, Iran was ruled by the Turkic-origin Qajar dynasty, and that the Qajars lost control of the South Caucasus to Russia.[47] The challenges faced by Iran during World War I are addressed under a section explicitly titled “Iran.”[48] The textbooks note that during the war, Iranian territory was occupied by “Russia, Great Britain, and the Ottoman Empire,” and that protests emerged across the country in response to British domination. These protests are described as having taken on the character of a “democratic struggle in Southern Azerbaijan.” Although the “Culture” section addresses the cultural development of various nations and states, Iran is notably absent from this discussion.[49]
Events in Iran following World War II—particularly the Islamic Revolution—are described in the textbooks with an emphasis on the significant role played by Southern Azerbaijan in these processes. They also note that in the subsequent period, the state’s policy of ethnic discrimination contributed to increasing internal tensions within the country.[50]
Issues concerning Iran’s place in modern world history are generally limited to a brief overview of the Iranian Islamic Revolution and the related developments that followed. The policies of Persianization and ethnic discrimination emphasized in the History of Azerbaijan textbooks are echoed in the World History textbooks as well.[51] These textbooks also acknowledge Iran’s socio-economic achievements under the Pahlavi regime, noting in particular that by the 1970s, Iran ranked second in Asia—after Japan—in terms of the pace of economic development.[52]
The textbooks do not include any dedicated section on contemporary Azerbaijan–Iran relations. In the section titled “Foreign Policy of the Republic of Azerbaijan,” the relationship with neighboring countries is described in general terms, stating that Azerbaijan’s foreign relations are conducted “in accordance with international legal norms” and that a “balanced policy” is being pursued.[53]
Conclusion
All history textbooks intended for secondary schools present historical processes and events in chronological order. This sequence serves not only to trace the progressive trajectory of human history over time, but also carries an important political and ideological function. Within a given spatial framework, it enables the construction of narratives—often detached from historical reality—about the uninterrupted and continuous development of a nation’s socio-cultural identity, political consciousness, and statehood traditions. The concept of a linear and coherent historical continuity frequently relies on the distortion of the histories of others—particularly neighboring nations and states—by diminishing their historical significance and presenting their roles through a biased lens.
After the restoration of state independence in Azerbaijan, the newly constructed national historiography has served two primary purposes: 1) the antiquation of statehood traditions and the legitimation of the national statehood narrative; 2) the construction of a category of nation (or society) aligned with the ideological framework of national statehood. In the case of Azerbaijan, the greatest obstacle to the achievement of these two objectives has been its geographical proximity to Iran—one of the recognized centers of world civilizations. The long-standing tradition of statehood in ancient Iran presents a significant challenge to the narrative of modern Azerbaijani statehood. In response, Azerbaijani historiography has often attempted to bypass this issue by denying the historical presence and influence of ancient Iran. The most common strategies include avoiding the use of the term Iran, denying or downplaying the Iranian origins of societies that historically inhabited the Iranian plateau, and portraying them instead as Turkic or Turkified populations.
Within the spectrum of social institutions, schools are considered the most potent transmitters of information, and history textbooks constitute the principal instrument for crafting national narratives about the past. In the textbooks used in Azerbaijani schools, historical accounts are structured to legitimize the marginalization, erasure, or discrimination of specific ethnic groups and states. In the case of Iran, this strategy manifests in the “Azerbaijanization” of ancient polities that arose on Iranian territory, the omission or neglect of information concerning Iranian culture, and the portrayal of Iran as having been ruled for centuries by Turkic-origin dynasties. As a result, these textbooks depict Iran as a marginalized and culturally deficient space—an image designed chiefly to accommodate the national statehood narrative promoted in Azerbaijan, with which Iran’s historical presence is perceived to be incompatible.
Measuring the precise influence of history textbooks and history education on the worldview of individual pupils—let alone on society at large—is far from straightforward. Nonetheless, the marginalization of Iranian history and the prevalence of negative attitudes toward Iran on social media should not be attributed solely to irredentist sentiment; the formative role of history textbooks in shaping such perceptions is undeniable.
On the whole, there is no fundamental difference between the textbooks written in the 1990s and those produced in the twenty-first century regarding their treatment of Iran. The 1990s textbooks, however, employ the term “Iran” more frequently and, although they do not place Iranian history within a broader world-historical framework, they adopt a slightly more neutral stance toward it.
Notes and References
[1] School Text-Book Revision and International Understanding, (International Institute of Intellectual Co-Operation, 1933).
[2] [2] Falk Pingel, “Can Truth Be Negotiated? History Textbook Revision as a Means to Reconciliation,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 617, The Politics of History in Comparative Perspective (May 2008): 184.
[3] Hanna Schissler, “Limitations and Priorities for International Social Studies Textbook Re-search,” The International Journal of Social Education, 4 (1989–90): 81.
[4] Elizabeth A. Cole and Judy Barsalou, Unite or Divide? The Challenges of teaching History in Societies emerging from Violent Conflict, (US Institute of Peace, 2006), Special Report, 2.
[5] The territory of the modern Islamic Republic of Iran has been referred to by various names throughout history: Iran, Eran, Aryan. The term “Land of the Aryans” was first used as a historical concept in the Naqsh-e Rustam archaeological site, dating back to the 4th (or 3rd) century BCE. Since 1935, this territory has been officially named Iran. In this text, the term Iran is used uniformly to refer to different historical periods.
[6] History of Azerbaijan, 6th Grade (Öyrətmən, 1994), p. 32
[7] Ibid. 42.
[8] Ibid. 55.
[9] Ibid. 58.
[10] Ibid. 61.
[11] History of Azerbaijan, 6th Grade (Təhsil Nəşriyyat-Poliqrafiya. 2022), p. 49
[12] Ibid. 59-61.
[13] Ibid. 82.
[14] Ibid. 89.
[15] Ancient World History, Textbook for 6th Grade (Maarif, 1995), pp. 93, 98.
[16] General History, Textbook for 6th Grade (Azpoliqraf, 2021), p. 54.
[17] Ibid. 60.
[18] Ibid. 66-7.
[19] History of Azerbaijan, 7th Grade (Öyrətmən, 1994), pp. 8, 17.
[20] History of Azerbaijan, 7th Grade (Təhsil Nəşriyyat-Poliqrafiya. 2022), p 12.
[21] Ibid. 33.
[22] Ibid. 74-5.
[23] History of Azerbaijan, 8th Grade (Təhsil, 1999), pp. 102, 104, 112, 145.
[24] History of Azerbaijan, 7th Grade (2023), pp. 93, 98.
[25] Ibid. 99.
[26] History of Azerbaijan, 9th Grade (Təhsil, 1998), p. 5.
[27] History of Azerbaijan, 8th Grade (Təhsil Nəşriyyat-Poliqrafiya. 2023), p. 15.
[28] Ibid. 23.
[29] Medieval History, 7th Grade (Maarif, 1998), p. 72.
[30] General History, 7th Grade (Şərq-Qərb, 2022), p. 28.
[31] Ibid. 106, 128.
[32] History of Azerbaijan, 9th Grade (Təhsil, 1998), pp. 140, 143, 153.
[33] History of Azerbaijan, 8th Grade (Təhsil Nəşriyyat-Poliqrafiya, 2023), p. 128.
[34] Ibid. 166, 179.
[35] History of Azerbaijan, 9th Grade (1998), pp. 62–63.
[36] History of Azerbaijan, 8th Grade (2023), p. 64.
[37] Ibid. 89.
[38] Ibid. 128.
[39] History of Azerbaijan, 10th Grade (Maarif, 1998), pp. 41–50.
[40] History of Azerbaijan, 10th Grade (1998), pp. 211–213, 217.
[41] History of Azerbaijan, 9th Grade (Şərq-Qərb, 2024), p. 38.
[42] History of Azerbaijan, 9th Grade (2024), p. 104.
[43] The Islamic Republic of Iran, commonly known in the Western world as Persia until 1935, has historically been referred to as Iran by Azerbaijani society.
[44] History of Azerbaijan, 9th Grade (2024), p. 126.
[45] History of Azerbaijan, 11th Grade (Öyrətmən, 1995), pp. 182, 184, 191.
[46] Modern History, 9th Grade (Maarif, 1998), p. 183.
[47] General History, 9th Grade (Şərq-Qərb, 2024), p. 35.
[48] Ibid. 83.
[49] Ibid. 96.
[50] Ibid. 122-23.
[51] General History, 11th Grade (Çaşıoğlu, 2010), p. 33.
[52] Ibid. 98.
[53] History of Azerbaijan, 11th Grade (Şərq-Qərb, 2023), pp. 187–189.
