UZEYIR HAJIBEYLI’S PUBLICITY (1918-1920): PEN IN SERVICE OF NATION, INDEPENDENCE AND ENLIGHTENMENT

УДК 070.1.

Abstract

This article examines the journalistic activity of Uzeyir Hajibeyli in the Azerbaijan newspaper (1918–1920), the official press organ of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic. The object of the research is the Azerbaijan newspaper (1918–1920), and the study employs the analytical method to examine Hajibeyli’s publicistic legacy. It analyzes the main themes of his writings, including national independence and statehood, Armenia–Azerbaijan relations and territorial integrity, education and enlightenment, language policy and national identity, and cultural development.

His analytical articles defended Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity by exposing Dashnak crimes and rejecting Armenia’s territorial claims. Hajibeyli regarded education as a prerequisite for national progress while presenting the Azerbaijani Turkish language as a principal marker of national identity and statehood and promoting theatre and music as instruments for the development of professional national culture and the cultural legitimacy of the Republic. Overall, Hajibeyli’s journalism represents a coherent ideological system integrating the principles of national independence, state-building, territorial integrity, cultural development, and national identity. His journalistic legacy remains one of the principal intellectual foundations of Azerbaijani statehood and national ideology.

The publication of this article invites the reader to further discussion with the author.

Аннотация

В статье исследуется публицистическая деятельность Узеира Гаджибейли в газете «Азер­байджан» (1918-1920) – официальном печатном органе Азербай­джанской Демократи­чес­кой Республики. Объектом исследования является га­зета «Азербайджан» (1918-1920), а в качестве основного метода исследования при­меняется аналитический метод, позволяющий изучить публицистическое наследие У. Гаджибейли. Анализируются основные темати­ческие направления его публикаций, включая вопросы национальной независи­мости и государ­ствен­ности, армяно-азербайджанских отношений и территори­аль­ной целостности, образования и прос­вещения, языковой политики и национальной идентичности, а также культурного разви­тия.

В своих аналитических статьях У. Гаджибейли отстаивал территориальную целостность Азербайджана, разоблачая преступления дашнакских вооружённых формирований и отвергая территориальные притязания Армении. Он рассматривал образование как важнейшее условие национального прогресса, азербайджанский тюркский язык – как основопола­гающий элемент националь­ной идентичности и государственности, а театр и музыку – как дейс­твен­ные средс­тва развития профессиональной наци­ональ­ной культуры и укрепления культурной легитимности Республики.

В целом публицистика У. Гаджибейли представляет собой целостную идей­ную систему, объединяющую принципы национальной независимости, государственного строительства, территориальной целостности, культурного развития и национальной идентичности. Его публицистическое наследие оста­ётся одним из важнейших интеллектуальных источников азербайджанской государ­ственности и национальной идеологии.

Публикация данной статьи приглашает читателя к дальнейшей дискуссии с автором.

Keywords: Hajibeyli, Azerbaijan, journalism, national, statehood, culture.

Ключевые слова: Гаджибейли, Азербайджан, публицистика, националь­ный, государственность, культура.

Introduction

The Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, proclaimed on 28 May 1918, entered history as the first parliamentary republic in the Muslim East. Operating under complex military and political circumstances, the Republic established Azerbaijan newspaper as its official press organ. The first issue of the newspaper was published in Ganja on 15 September 1918. Its initial editors were Jeyhun bey Hajibeyli and Shafi bey Rustambeyli, who later assumed responsibility for its Azerbaijani and Russian-language editions, respectively. Uzeyir Hajibeyli (1885-1948) was among the newspaper’s most active contri­butors. Writing under the signatures “Hajibeyli Uzeyir,” “Mizrab,” and “Filan­kes,” he addressed a wide range of issues, including national independence and statehood, Ar­me­nian–Azerbaijani relations, enlightenment and education, language policy and national identity, culture, theatre and music, as well as broader socio-political prob­lems. His articles are significant not only as examples of political journalism but also as contributions to historical analysis, social criticism, and the formation of national ideology.

Materials and Methods

The journalistic legacy of U.Hajibeyli has been examined from various perspectives by scholars such as Nasiman Yagublu (7;8), Khuraman Gadimova (6), Saadat Garabaghli (5), Gulbaniz Babayeva (1), Bakir Nabiyev (4) and others. The present study analyzes Hajibeyli’s journalism in the context of the ideas of national independence and statehood, Armenian – Azerbaijani relations and territorial integrity, enlightenment and educational issues, language policy and national identity. The study employs analytical, historical-comparative, and content analysis methods. Uzeyir Hajibeyli’s journalistic articles published in the Azerbaijan newspaper (1918–1920) were systematically classified according to their thematic focus, analyzed within their historical context, and evaluated through a comparative review of the relevant scholarly literature.

1.1. The Idea of National Independence and Statehood

The central theme underlying U. Hajibeyli’s entire journalistic oeuvre is the idea of independence. In his articles “From Here and There”, “Important Issues”, “To Our Parties”, “The Parliament of Azerbaijan”, “Impressions”, “Independence and the Hope for the Future”, “The Lankaran Tragedy”, “What Was Everyone Thinking About?”, “What Should We Strive For?”, “For the Defense of Independence”, and “Public Assis­tance” Hajibeyli foregrounded the defense of Azerbaijan’s independence, the promotion of national statehood, and the development of the people’s political consciousness (1).

In Hajibeyli’s journalism, the idea of national independence is presented in close connection with the defense of the Azerbaijani people’s right to establish an independent state, the formation of state institutions, and the preservation of so­ve­reignty. In the articles “From Here and There”, “The Parliament of Azerbaijan” and “Important Issues” independence is portrayed as the fundamental principle of national statehood, while the establishment of parliament is interpreted as the political mani­festation of this principle. In “Independence and the Hope for the Future” the author emphasizes the importance of achieving international recognition of independence and regards diplomatic struggle as one of the principal means of safeguarding sovereignty. In “To Our Parties” national independence is interpreted as the liberation of Azerbaijani Turks from long-standing political, national, and religious oppression and as the restoration of their historical rights.

In the article “What Should We Strive For?”, the idea of independence is linked to ensuring state security, strengthening the national army, and resisting external interference. Similarly, in “Public Assistance” Hajibeyli highlights the necessity of unity between the government and the people during the initial stage of independent state-building. Thus, he presents national independence not merely as political so­ve­reignty but also as a fundamental principle encompassing the protection of nati­onal rights, the construction of state institutions, and the consolidation of social solidarity.

1.2. Armenian – Azerbaijani Relations and the Question of Territorial Integrity

Uzeyir Hajibeyli consistently defended the territorial integrity and sovereign rights of the Republic of Azerbaijan. From the standpoint of national statehood, he sought to substantiate that Karabakh and other disputed regions constituted inseparable parts of Azerbaijan. The issues of Armenian–Azerbaijani relations and territorial integrity were extensively addressed in his articles “Another Masquerade”, “Andranik,” “The Activities of Our Enemies”, “From Here and There at the Peace Conference”, “It Begins!”, “Let Them Leave and Not Return!”, “The Spears Are Appearing”, “31 March”, “Nak­hchi­van and Karabakh”, “On an Occasion”, “The Karabakh Events”, “Sincerity Is Ne­eded!”, “Contrast”, and “Colonel Haskell’s Pro­po­sal” (2). In these writings, Hajibeyli analyzed Armenia’s territorial claims against Azerbaijani lands, developments in Karabakh and Nakhchivan, the activities of Armenian armed groups, and the position of international political actors in the region.

Andranik Ozanian (1865-1927), who was active in Eastern Anatolia and the South Caucasus during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, was an Armenian military figure and leader of irregular armed detachments. In Azerbaijani and Türkiye historiography, he is portrayed as a military commander responsible for mass killings and ethnic cleansing against the Turkic-Muslim population with the aim of altering the ethnodemographic structure of the region. During and after the First World War (1915–1919), Ozanian operated in Eastern Anatolia (Van, Bitlis, Mush, Erzurum), the Khoy and Salmas regions of Southern Azerbaijan, as well as in Nakhchivan, Zangezur (Gorus, Gafan, Sisian, Meghri), and Karabakh (including the areas surrounding Lachin and Shusha), where he is alleged to have committed large-scale atrocities against the civilian Turkic-Muslim population.

In his article “The Andranik Question,” Hajibeyli characterizes the violence perpetrated by armed forces under Andranik’s command against the Muslim population of Karabakh, including the destruction of villages and threats to civilian security, as a serious problem. He presents Karabakh as an integral part of Azerbaijan and interprets these developments as a threat to the country’s territorial integrity. Hajibeyli further argues that Andranik’s activities were not merely local incidents but were connected to broader political objectives. Bashir Mustafayev’s research likewise argues that Andranik’s actions in 1918 were not isolated military operations but rather a continuation of the organized Armenian nationalist movement initiated in 1905 by the Hunchak and Dashnaktsutyun organizations. According to Mustafayev, Andranik had formally as­sumed the mission of incorporating Nakhchivan, Karabakh, and Zangezur into Arme­nia (3, p. 278). Hajibeyli called upon state institutions to approach the Karabakh issue with greater seriousness, to inform the public about measures being taken, and to undertake decisive actions aimed at ensuring security in the region. From this perspective, Armenian–Azerbaijani relations are presented not merely as relations between two peoples but also as a matter directly connected with the defense of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.

In the article “It Begins!”, Hajibeyli notes that Andranik’s actions created an extraordinary situation in Karabakh, prompting the Azerbaijani government to establish a special governor-generalship in the region under the leadership of Khosrov bey Sultanov. He particularly points to the Dashnak newspaper Vperyod, which allegedly called upon the Armenians of Karabakh to launch an armed uprising against Azerbaijani authority. In Hajibeyli’s view, the newspaper openly incited unrest and suggested that the Armenian government might subsequently support such an uprising.

In his article “31 March,” Hajibeyli addresses the Armenian question within the context of the March 1918 events. He describes these events as a tragedy directed against the Azerbaijani people’s aspirations for independence and freedom, empha­si­zing the destruction and loss of life in Baku. Hajibeyli also portrays the assistance provided by Ottoman forces to Azerbaijan as a significant factor in the salvation of the population. In “Nakhchivan and Karabakh,” the Armenian question is examined within the framework of a territorial and political conflict. Hajibeyli attributes the refusal of the Armenians of Karabakh to recognize Azerbaijani authority to the influence of the Dashnak Party and contrasts this situation with developments in Nakhchivan. He associates the emergence of the Karabakh problem with the activities of the Dashnaks and the intervention of external powers. Consequently, Hajibeyli interprets the Armenian question through the prism of political confrontation, territorial claims, and foreign influence.

1.3. Enlightenment and Educational Issues

In his article “The Wrong Path”, Uzeyir Hajibeyli addresses the difficult socio-economic conditions and salary problems of teachers. While he considers the demand for higher salaries to be justified, he does not regard strikes as an appropriate means of resolving such issues. In his view, teachers’ problems should be addressed through legislative measures and state reforms that take into account the specific nature of the education system. In “On the Path of Enlightenment” he evaluates the education policy of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, particularly the establishment of Baku University and the sending of students to study abroad. Hajibeyli considers these initiatives important steps for national enlightenment and state-building. He emphasizes that the university should serve the training of national cadres and that students sent abroad must be selected on the basis of knowledge and talent. Thus, he views education policy as fundamentally aimed at ensuring high-quality education and preparing national specialists for the country’s development.

1.4. Language Policy and National Identity

In the articles “Important Issues”, “Impressions”, “Nationalization”, and “Zurna” the issues of language and national identity are brought into sharp focus. The author argues that language is not merely a means of communication but also a fundamental in­dicator of national existence and social consciousness. Therefore, the preservation and development of language are presented as essential conditions of national self-awareness.

In “Important Issues” language is portrayed as one of the core components of national identity, culture, and statehood. Hajibeyli evaluates the Azerbaijani Turkic language as a common means of communication among the peoples of the Caucasus and emphasizes its importance in representing the Azerbaijani nation on an international level. In this context, language functions both as an instrument of national self-awareness and as a component of political legitimacy. In “Impressions” the language issue is considered within the framework of state-building in the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic. The author highlights the importance of the mother tongue in political expression and governance, while also noting that Azerbaijani Turkic was evolving as a system influenced by Ottoman Turkish and functioning as the language of the people and the press. Thus, language is presented as a key instrument of political consciousness and public administration. In the “Zurna” series, Hajibeyli employs a satirical style to criticize linguistic confusion, terminological ambiguity, and the lack of clarity in official language. Through the ironic etymological analysis of the word “prixod,” he exposes scientific-linguistic incompetence and artificial language constructions. The central idea of the article is the necessity of a simple, clear, and publicly comprehensible language.

1.5.Cultural Issues

At the beginning of the twentieth century, theatre and music emerged as key directions of the national awakening within Azerbaijan’s cultural environment. During this period, stage art functioned not merely as a form of entertainment but also as an important Enlightenment platform influencing the development of public thought. In particular, the activity of Huseyn Arablinski played a significant role in the professionalization of Azerbaijani theatre and the formation of a realist acting school. Uzeyir Hajibeyli addressed cultural issues in articles such as “Theatre and Music”, “Huseyn Arablinski,” “O olmasın, bu olsun,” “Arshin mal alan,” “Shah Abbas,” “Instead of Criticism”, and in writings published under the pseudonym “Mizrab.”

In his “Theatre and Music” articles, Hajibeyli analyzes cultural issues primarily in the context of theatrical professionalism, acting performance, musical culture, and directing. In the article dedicated to the performance of “Ashıg Qarib,” he evaluates actors’ performances, choral execution, and stage design, emphasizing the importance of professionalism and discipline in musical theatre. Although the work of director Huseyn Arablinski is highly praised, the author stresses the need for greater attention to actors’ dramatic training. In the article “Huseyn Arablinski,” the social and cultural significance of theatre is brought to the forefront. The author regards Arablinski’s death as a major loss for Azerbaijani theatre and presents him as a prominent figure of national culture, linking the artist’s fate to the broader role of theatre in society and the preservation of cultural values. In “Theatre and Music – Arshin mal alan,” the activities of the State Theatre, direc­ting practices, and the quality of acting performance are analyzed. The author argues that theatrical success depends not only on stage de­co­ra­tion but also on the pro­fes­sional creation of characters and the emotional impact of mu­sical performance. Thus, in these articles Hajibeyli presents the development of Azer­baijani theatre and mu­sic, professional training of personnel, and the improvement of stage culture as key cultural issues. The Türkiye writer R.N. Güntekin highly ap­pre­ci­­ated Uzeyir Hajibeyli’s plays “Arshin mal alan” and “Meshedi İbad,” staged in Is­tan­bul in 1919 in the journal Böyük məcmuə. According to B. Nabiyev, in an era wit­hout modern broadcasting techno­lo­gies, such as television or large-scale media trans­­mission, even a few touring perfor­man­ces were capable of creating a significant cul­tural impression, which further highlights the importance of such evaluations (4, p. 7).

Results and Discussion

The study demonstrates that Uzeyir Hajibeyli’s journalistic activity in the Azerbaijan newspaper is not merely a chronicle of the period’s press, but a fundamental intellectual heritage that played a crucial role in shaping the ideology of independent statehood. His analytical writings on Armenian–Azerbaijani relations, the exposure of crimes committed by Dashnak forces, and the defense of territorial integrity constitute historical foundations of national security thinking. In his language policy, he regarded the Azerbaijani Turkic language as a core marker of national identity and advocated for its clarity and accessibility. His writings on theatre and music transformed stage art into a tool of enlightenment and contributed to the cultural legitimacy of the Republic.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that Uzeyir Hajibeyli’s journalism in the Azerbaijan newspaper (1918–1920) constituted an important intellectual foundation of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic. His writings consistently promoted national inde­pen­dence, state-building, territorial integrity, and national unity while emphasizing the significance of education, language policy, and culture in strengthening the new state.

The analysis confirms that Hajibeyli’s publicistic legacy extends beyond contemporary political commentary. His defense of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty, advo­ca­cy of the Azerbaijani Turkish language as a marker of national identity, and support for theatre and music as instruments of enlightenment reveal a comprehensive vision of nation-building. Therefore, his journalism should be regarded as a significant source for studying the ideological foundations of Azerbaijani statehood and national thought.

References:

1. Babayeva G. M. Üzeyir bəy Hacıbəylinin publisistik irsinə bir baxış // 525-ci qəzet. – 2019. – 13 september. – № 124. – P. 14.
2. Hacıbəyli Ü. Azərbaycan yazıları. Transliterasiya edərək nəşrə hazırlayanlar: M. Gəncəli, A. Ağaoğlu; elmi red.: T. Kərimli. – Baku: ADA Universiteti, 2025.
3. Mustafayev B. Nahçıvan olayları ve General Andranik Ozanyan’ın Nahçıvan’daki katliamı (Arşiv belgelerinin izinden) // Atatürk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi (TAED). – 2012. – № 47. – P. 277–301.
4. Nəbiyev B. Üzeyir Hacıbəylinin ömürnaməsi. – Baku: Şərq-Qərb, 2012.
5. Qarabağlı S. Üzeyir bəy Hacıbəylinin publisistikasında musiqi məsələləri. – III nəşr. – Baku: Apostrof-A, 2018. – 284 p.
6. Qədimova X. A. Üzeyir Hacıbəyli publisistikasının poetikası: monoqrafiya. – Bakı: Optimist MMC, 2024. – 160 p.
7. Yaqublu N. Azərbaycan mətbuatı tarixində Üzeyir Hacıbəyli // Azərbaycan. – 2020.
8. Yaqublu N. Üzeyir Hacıbəyli və Azərbaycan Cümhuriyyəti // 525-ci qəzet. – 2018.