Talk:Azerbaijan

I see that this has been discussed in the past, but it seems that those discussions didn't cover all the bases. The "Etymology" section of the article currently states: "Until then, the designation had been used exclusively to identify the adjacent region of contemporary northwestern Iran, while the area of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic was formerly referred to as Arran and Shirvan." While it is certainly true that a large number of WP:RS make this claim, there are also reliable sources which clearly state otherwise and refer to supporting primary sources. I recently edited Azerbaijan (Iran)#Etymology and usage in order to reflect this fact, and I think a similar solution is appropriate here. While it should be acknowledged that many sources state that Azerbaijan never referred to territories north of the Aras, the sources which state otherwise should also be mentioned. I will cite some examples which go against the current statement, of which only some need to be included in the article.

Atkin, Muriel (1980), Russia and Iran, 1780–1828, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, p. xi, ISBN 978-0-8166-0924-6:

In referring to the disputed border zone, I have used the term eastern Caucasus rather than the Russian name Transcaucasia or the Iranian names Āzerbāijān and Dāghestān. Eastern Caucasus is a politically neutral term describing the location of the kingdom of K'art'lo-Kakheti, known as Georgia, and the Muslim-ruled khanates that had been part of Iran and became part of Russia. In contrast, Transcaucasia reflects a Russian perspective, while the Iranian names, apart from presuming that country's hegemony over the region at a time when that was hotly contested, are subject to confusingly different interpretations. In Safavi times, Āzerbāijān was applied to all the Muslim-ruled khanates of the eastern Caucasus as well as to the area south of the Aras River as far as the Qezel Uzān River, the latter region being approximately the same as the modern Iranian ostāns of East and West Azerbaijan [emphasis mine]. It seemed clearer to me to use Āzerbāijān only for the southern part of the province that has remained under Iranian control.

De Planhol, Xavier (1987). "Azarbaijan i. Geography". In Yarshater, Ehsan (ed.). Encyclopædia Iranica. Vol. III/2: Awāʾel al-maqālāt–Azerbaijan IV (Online ed.). Encyclopædia Iranica Foundation. pp. 205–215. Retrieved March 3, 2026.

Thus, at the time of the early Arab geographers, Azarbaijan consisted essentially of a northwestern fragment of the high interior Iranian plateau within limits that did not differ much from the frontiers of present-day Iran and that, in any case, from the side of the lowlands of the Transcaucasia, scarcely exceeded the bed of the Araxes. The imprecise and sometimes contradictory information given by Yāqūt in the beginning of the 7th/13th century, occasionally extends Azarbaijan to the west to Erzinjan (Arzanjān). On the other hand in certain passages, he annexes to it, in addition to the steppes of Moḡān, all of the province of Arrān, bringing the frontier of the country up to Kor, indicating, however, that from this period the conception of Azarbaijan tended to be extended to the north and that its meaning was being rapidly transformed [emphasis mine].

Chobanyan, Pavel (2006), Hay-ṛus-vratsʻakan haraberutʻyunnerě ZhĚ. dari erkrord kesin Հայ-ռուս-վրացական հարաբերությունները ԺԸ դարի երկրորդ կեսին [Armenian-Russian-Georgian Relations on the Second Half of the Eighteenth Century] (in Armenian), Mayr Atoṛ S. Ējmiatsni hratarakchʻutʻyun. This source provides a number of examples of both Persian and Russian sources in the late 18th century referring to the territories north of the Aras as part of Azerbaijan. I will provide the Armenian original and translations.

Ինչպես ամբողջ Այսրկովկասի, այնպես էլ Հայաստանի ու հայ ժողովրդի ճակատագրի համար կարևոր դեր խաղացած հանգամանք էր, սակայն, նաև այն, որ Այսրկովկասի բոլոր նահանգները դեռևս ԺԶ–ԺԷ դարերում պարսկական արքունիքին ենթարկվում էին Ատրպատականի կառավարչի միջոցով, այլ խոսքով ենթարկվում էին Թավրիզում նստող Ատրպատականի կառավարչին։ Ողջ այդ տարածքը ընդգրկված էր ֆինանսա-հարկային և ռազմակամ մի համակարգի մեջ, որը մեկն էր Պարսկաստանի չորս նմանատիպ վարչա-տարածքային միավորներից: Այղ հանգամանքը իր կնիքն է թողել ինչպես նոր տերմինաբանության առաջացման, այնպես էլ էթնո-դավանական գործընթացների հետագա թյուրընկալման և ներկայացման վրա, վերածվել քաղաքական շահարկումների միջոցի ու կռվանի։ […] Եթե Նադիր շահի գահակալության ժամանակ այսրկովկասյան խաները ենթարկվում էին Թավրիզի բեկլարբեկին, ապա ԺԸ դարի երկրորդ կեսն ընդգրկող ժամանակաշրջանում ևս, արդեն Սեֆյան հարստության կործանումից ու Նադիր շահի սպանությունից հետո ստեղծված նոր պայմաններում, երր այսրկովկասյան խանությունները ձեռք էին բերել հարաբերական, իսկ մի բանէսը անգամ լիակատար անկախություն, Ատրպատական-Ադրբեջան տերմինով շարունակվում էր նշվել ողջ Արևելյան Այսրկովկասի նախկին ֆինանսա-վարչական տարածքը և այնտեղ իրենց կիսանկաիխ գոյությունը ստեղծած և մասամբ նաև շարունակող խանությունները անվանվում էին ադրբեջանական խաներ, սակայն, քանի որ այդ այլևս չուներ իր նախկին ուղղակի ենթակայության հանգամանքի ընկալումը, հետզհետե սկսեց ձեռք բերել նոր իմաստ և նոր զուտ տարածքային ընդգրկման պայմանական բովանդակություն։ (pp. 32–33)

Here is an English translation of the above passage:

However, an important factor for the fate of the entire Ciscaucasus [sic; Chobanyan is writing from the Armenian geographical perspective], as well as Armenia and the Armenian people, was the fact that all the provinces of the Ciscaucasus were still subject to the Persian court in the 16th-17th centuries through the governor of Azerbaijan; in other words, they were subject to the ruler of Azerbaijan sitting in Tabriz. The entire territory was included in a single financial-fiscal and military system, which was one of the four similar administrative-territorial units of Persia. This circumstance left its mark both on the emergence of new terminology and on the subsequent misunderstanding and presentation of ethno-confessional processes, turning them into a means and basis of political manipulations. […] If during the reign of Nadir Shah, the Ciscaucasian khans were subordinate to the Beglarbeg of Tabriz, then in the period covering the second half of the 18th century, in the new conditions created after the collapse of the Safavid dynasty and the assassination of Nadir Shah, when the Transcaucasian khanates had acquired relative, and sometimes even complete, independence, the term Atrpatakan-Azerbaijan continued to denote the entire former financial-administrative territory of the Eastern Ciscaucasus, and the khanates that created and partially continued their semi-independent existence there were called Azerbaijani khans; however, since it no longer had the perception of its former direct subordination, it gradually began to acquire a new meaning and a new conditional content of purely territorial inclusion.

Chobanyan provides examples of the term Azerbaijan being used for territories north of the Aras River in 18th-century official Russian sources, as well as one Persian example from the same period (he provides several examples besides the one I'm quoting below):

1783 թ. օգոստոսի 5-ի զեկուցագրում Պավել Պոտյոմկինը Գրիգոր Պոտյոմկինին հաղորդում էր, թե «Ի թիվս այլ Ադրբեջանական խաների, նրան [իմա՝ Իբրահիմ խանին - Պ. Չ.] ևս ուղարկեցի Ձերդ պայծառափայլության շրջաբերականը և նվերներ»։ Նշված տերմինը օգտագործվում էր ոչ միայն հայկական, ռուսական, այլև պարսկական պաշտոնական ու պետական գրագրություններում: Այսպես, 1798 թ. հունիսի 5-ի Բաբա խանի նամակում, որով կոչ էր արվում Գեորգի 12-րդին հնազանդվելու Պարսկաստանին, ասվում էր. «Քանի որ Վրաստան երկիրը լավագույնն է Ադրբեջանում և մշտապես վրացական թագավորների նկատմամբ [Պարսից] տիրակալները բարեացկամ են եղել, և նմանապես Վրաց թագավորները Պարսից տիրակալների ժամանակ եղել են գործունյա և բարի ջանադրությամբ ու ծառայություններով են վերաբերվել և դրանով իսկ իրենց բարձրացրել…»։ (pp. 35–36)

English translation:

In a report dated 5 August 1783, Pavel Potemkin reported to Grigory Potemkin that "Among other Azerbaijani khans, I also sent him [i.e. Ibrahim Khan - P. Ch.] a circular and gifts from Your Excellency." The term was used not only in Armenian, Russian, but also in Persian official and state correspondence. Thus, in Baba Khan's letter dated 5 June 1798, which called on George XII to submit to Persia, it was stated: "Since Georgia is the best country in Azerbaijan and the [Persian] rulers have always been benevolent towards the Georgian kings, and similarly the Georgian kings during the time of the Persian rulers were active and acted with good diligence and services, by which they elevated themselves…"

As Chobanyan notes, the term had no specific ethnic association at that time. Azerbaijan was not viewed as the land of the Turkic-speaking Muslims who inhabited both sides of the Aras River; but the term was clearly used to refer to refer to territories north of the Aras River, including the territories of modern-day Azerbaijan, Armenia and even Georgia.

While the sources I cited above are not all saying the same exact thing, what is clear is that they are not compatible with the claim that Azerbaijan exclusively referred to territories south of the Aras River before the Musavatists appropriated the term in 1918. (Let's leave aside for a moment the fact that the Azerbaijani republic actually does include territories on the south side of the Aras and Kura, e.g. part of the Mughan Plain, which as far as I can tell was always a part of Azerbaijan proper).

There is another statement in the "Etymology" section worth discussing. "the area of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic was formerly referred to as Arran and Shirvan." I could point out several problems with this statement, but first of all it should be made clear that the term Arran had fallen out of use by the 15th century, at least according to Richard N. Frye in the 2nd edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam (Frye, R. N. (2012) [Print original 1960]. Bearman, P.(ed.). "Arrān". Encyclopaedia of Islam New Edition Online (EI-2 English). Brill. doi:10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_0736.):

By the 15th century A.D. the name Arrān was not in common parlance, for the territory was absorbed into Ād̲h̲arbāyd̲j̲ān. […] The process of islamicisation and turkicisation was hastened after the Mongol invasion. The land between the rivers came to be called Ḳarabāg̲h̲. After the conquests of Tīmūr, who did much building and repair of canals, Arrān only appears as a memory, and its affairs are part of the history of Ād̲h̲arbāyd̲j̲ān.

C. E. Bosworth makes a similar statement in Iranica, but is more ambiguous about when the term fell out of use:

Bardaʿa had never revived fully after the Rūs sacking, and is little mentioned in the sources. It seems to have been replaced as the capital of Arrān by Baylaqān, but this was in turn sacked by the Mongols en route for Šervān and Darband in spring 1221 (Jovaynī, tr. Boyle, I, pp. 148-49); after this, Ganǰa, the later Elizavetopol and now Kirovābād, rose to prominence, the southern part of Arrān now becoming known as Qarabāḡ. The old name Arrān drops out of use, and the history and fortunes of the region now merge into those of Azarbaijan.

Without this information, the reader gets the impression that Arran was in use all the way up to 1918. Note that there are large parts of the Azerbaijani republic which were never part of Shirvan, whether that's Shirvan proper or the larger territory that at one point or another came under the control of its rulers. Vasily Bartold noted why Arran (in its broad sense) could be used to refer to the territory of the Azerbaijani republic but not Shirvan (Bartold, Vasily (1963), Sochineniia Сочинения, vol. II, part 1, Moscow: Izdatelʹstvo vostochnoi literatury, p. 703):

Ширван никогда не употреблялся в том смысле, чтобы он охватывал территорию теперешней Азербайджанской республики. Ширван - это небольшая часть с главным городом Шемахой, а такие города, как Гянджа и др., никогда в состав Ширвана не входили, и если нужно было бы придумать термин для всех областей, которые объединяет сейчас Азербайджанская республика, то скорее всего можно было бы принять название Арран, но термин Азербайджан избран потому, что, когда устанавливалась Азербайджанская республика, предполагалось, что персидский и этот Азербайджан составят одно целое, так как по составу населения они имеют очень большое сходство. На этом основании было принято название Азербайджан, но, конечно, теперь, когда слово Азербайджан употребляется в двух смыслах - в качестве персидского Азербайджана и особой республики, приходится путаться и спрашивать, какой Азербайджан имеется в виду Азербайджан персидский или этот Азербайджан; общие судьбы их сложились в средние века, в частности в то время, когда пришли монголы и когда Азербайджан персидский и этот находились под одной и той же турецкой властью.

Shirvan was never used to encompass the territory of the present-day Azerbaijani republic. Shirvan is a small part with its main city, Shamakhi, while cities such as Ganja and others were never part of Shirvan. If a term were needed to cover all the regions now united by the Azerbaijan Republic, then one would most likely adopt the name Arran. However, the term Azerbaijan was chosen because, when the Azerbaijani republic was established, it was assumed that Persian Azerbaijan and this Azerbaijan would form a single entity, since their populations are very similar. On this basis, the name Azerbaijan was adopted, but, of course, now that the word Azerbaijan is used in two senses—as Persian Azerbaijan and as a separate republic—confusion arises, and questions arise as to which Azerbaijan is meant: Persian Azerbaijan or this Azerbaijan. Their common destinies developed in the Middle Ages, in particular at the time when the Mongols arrived and when Persian Azerbaijan and this one were under the same Turkish rule.

So, to say that "the area of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic was formerly referred to as Arran and Shirvan" seems a bit imprecise. Perhaps something like "most of the territory of the Azerbaijani republic fell into the regions historically known as Arran and Shirvan (in the broad sense of the latter term)" would be more accurate; it should also be noted that Arran fell out of common use by the 15th century.

In conclusion, I suggest adopting a similar wording in the "Etymology" section of this article to that in the "Etymology and usage" section of Azerbaijan (Iran):

Some sources state that, prior to 1918, the name Azerbaijan was exclusively used to identify the Iranian province of Azerbaijan, located south of the Aras River.^[2][3][4][5] However, there are instances of the term Azerbaijan being used for the territories north of the Aras River in earlier times. In his (sometimes contradictory) references to Azerbaijan's borders, the 13th-century Muslim geographer Yaqut al-Hamawi at one point extends them to the Kura River, encompassing the region known as Arran. According to Xavier de Planhol, this indicates that "from this period the conception of Azarbaijan tended to be extended to the north and that its meaning was being rapidly transformed."^[6] In the Safavid era, Azerbaijan designated territories both north and south of the Aras River.^[7] In the late 18th century, Russian, Armenian, and Persian sources used the term Azerbaijan in reference to the territories north of the Aras—without, however, attaching a specific ethnic association to the term. For example, in his letter dated June 5, 1798, to King George XII of Georgia, Fath-Ali Shah Qajar referred to Georgia as "the best land in Azerbaijan", while in 1783 the Russian general S. D. Burnashev wrote of the "characteristic rebelliousness of the peoples of Azerbaijan" in connection with the Erivan Khanate.^[8]

Revolution Saga (talk) 18:53, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing up this topic. There are also maps supporting this; for example, a map drawn by Carl van Verden in 1719, 1720, and 1721 shows Shirvan province as part of Azerbaijan (referred to as "Medie" in Azerbaijani).

Similarly, the name Azerbaijan extends as far as Karabakh on a historical map. There is a fragment of a map published in Amsterdam in 1768 by the Dutch cartographer and globe maker Anders Ackerman. The map reflects the political situation in West Asia in the mid-18th century. Etruksian (talk) 22:32, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Ibrahim Muteferrikanin (1674-1745), in his map of Iran ("Memâlik-i İran"), which he personally made, very clearly shows the provinces and borders of Iran under Safavid rule. The map also includes the province of Azerbaijan, and Azerbaijan extended from Iranian Azerbaijan to present-day Karabakh. (The entire map is 1 and Azerbaijan province is 2) Etruksian (talk) 22:40, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I think I can also invite another experienced editor who will help us with this matter by contributing to the Azerbaijani toponymy article. @Brandmeister Etruksian (talk) 11:12, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I suppose that makes sense. Do we have any sources that were published more recently? Mellk (talk) 11:57, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I can keep looking, but I don't think that any of the sources that I cited (with the exception of Bartold) are disqualifyingly old. Chobanyan 2006 is more recent than almost all of the sources used to support the claim that "the designation had been used exclusively..." and addresses the issue at some length. Revolution Saga (talk) 13:04, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I don't think they are too old and they are definitely usable, but this is just in case we get an WP:AGE MATTERS argument due to the other sources being relatively recent. Mellk (talk) 13:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, guys, I had a relevant discussion about that some time ago and in the Azerbaijan naming controversy it was eventually agreed that the name "Azerbaijan" had also sometimes been extended to the north of Aras river. We can borrow that for this article's section too, if anything. Brandmeister ^talk 13:35, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks. Dear @HistoryofIran and @LouisAragon, tagging you as experienced editors on this topic. What do you think about adopting a wording similar to that on Azerbaijan (Iran)#Etymology and usage or Azerbaijan naming controversy. Revolution Saga (talk) 14:12, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello. WP:RS routinely agrees that the name was commonly used to refer to the historical region in northwestern Iran. Some relevant sources;

• "The Encyclopaedia of Islam published in 1913 leaves no room for doubt: “Nowadays, under ‘Adharbaydjan’ is understood the north-western province of Persia”. The name “Azerbaijan”, which the present-day republic adopted in 1918, is, therefore, a result of later socio-political developments.In the 1930s, this name was adopted by the Soviet authorities: it suited Stalin who considered expansion to Iran" - p. 42, Monuments and Identities in the Caucasus Karabagh, Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan in Contemporary Geopolitical Conflict, Brill
• "The name Azarbaijan is a pre-Islamic Persian name for a pre-Islamic province south of the River Aras. “Azarbaijan” was not used in any definite or clear manner for the area north of the River Aras in the pre- modern period. In some instances, the name Azarbaijan was used in a manner that included the Aran region immediately to the north of the River Aras, but this was rather an exception. The adoption of this name for the area north of the River Aras was by the nationalist, Baku-based Mosavat government (1918–20) and was later retained by the Soviet Union." p. 16 - Behrooz, Maziar (2023). Iran at War: Interactions with the Modern World and the Struggle with Imperial Russia. I.B. Tauris
• "In fact, in medieval times the name ‘Azerbaijan’ was applied not to the area of present independent Azerbaijan but to the lands to the south of the Araxes river, now part of Iran. The lands to the north west of the Araxes were known as Albania; the lands to the north east, the heart of present-day post-Soviet Azerbaijan, were known as Sharvan (or Shirwan) and Derbend." p. 30, Fowkes, B. (2002). Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict in the Post-Communist World. Springer.
• "The adoption of the name “Azerbaijan” in 1918 by the Mussavatist government for classical Caucasian Albania (Arrān and Sharvān) was due to political reasons28. For example, the giant orientalist of the early 20th century, Vasily Barthold has stated: “… whenever it is necessary to choose a name that will encompass all regions of the republic of Azerbaijan, the name Arrān can be chosen. But the term Azerbaijan was chosen because when the Azerbaijan republic was created, it was assumed that this and the Persian Azerbaijan will be one entity, because the population of both has a big similarity. On this basis, the word Azerbaijan was chosen. Of course right now when the word Azerbaijan is used, it has two meanings as Persian Azerbaijan and as a republic, it’s confusing and a question rises as to which Azerbaijan is being talked about”. In the post-Islamic sense, Arrān and Sharvān are often distinguished while in the pre-Islamic era, Arrān or the Western Caucasian Albania roughly corresponds to the modern territory of republic of Azerbaijan. In the Soviet era, in a breathtaking manipulation, historical Azerbaijan (NW Iran) was reinterpreted as “South Azerbaijan” in order for the Soviets to lay territorial claim on historical Azerbaijan proper which is located in modern Northwestern Iran". p. 10, Lornejad, Siavash; Doostzadeh, Ali (2012). Arakelova, Victoria; Asatrian, Garnik (eds.). On the modern politicization of the Persian poet Nezami Ganjavi (PDF). Caucasian Centre for Iranian Studies.
• "The case of Azerbaijan is interesting in several aspects. The geographical name “Azerbaijan” for the territory where the Republic of Azerbaijan is now situated, as well as the ethnic name for the Caucasian Turks, “Azerbaijani,” were coined in the beginning of the 10th century. The name Azerbaijan, which implies the lands located north of the Aras River, is a duplicate of the historical region of Azerbaijan (it is the arabized version of the name of a historical region of Atropatena) which is the north-western region of Iran. After the proclamation of the first Republic of Azerbaijan in 1918, the Turkish army invaded the Caucasus, and the name “Azerbaijan” was offered by a young Turkish regime to the Turkish-speaking territory" p. 253, After the Soviet Empire. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 05 Oct. 2015.
• "The Ottoman Turks coveted Iran’s province of Azerbaijan. Therefore following the Bolshevik revolution, in 1918 installed a pro-Turkish government in Baku and named it after the Iranian province of Azerbaijan" - p. xvii, The New Geopolitics of the South Caucasus: Prospects for Regional Cooperation and Conflict Resolution (Contemporary Central Asia: Societies, Politics, and Cultures), Lexington Books, Shireen Hunter
• "Until 1918, when the Musavat regime decided to name the newly independent state Azerbaijan, this designation had been used exclusively to identify the Iranian province of Azerbaijan." - p. 60, Dekmejian, R. Hrair; Simonian, Hovann H. (2003). Troubled Waters: The Geopolitics of the Caspian Region. I.B. Tauris.
• "The region to the north of the river Araxes was not called Azerbaijan prior to 1918, unlike the region in northwestern Iran that has been called since so long ago." p. 356, Rezvani, Babak (2014). Ethno-territorial conflict and coexistence in the caucasus, Central Asia and Fereydan: academisch proefschrift. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press
• "The name Azerbaijan was also adopted for Arrān, historically an Iranian region, by anti-Russian separatist forces of the area when, on 26 May 1918, they declared its independence and called it the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan. To allay Iranian concerns, the Azerbaijan government used the term “Caucasian Azerbaijan” in the documents for circulation abroad." - Multiple Authors, Encyclopaedia Iranica
• "Originally the term Azerbaijan was the name of the Iranian historical province Adarbaigan, or Azarbaijan (from older Aturpatakan) in the north-west of the country. This term, as well as its respective derivative, Azari (or, in Turkish manner, Azeri), as “ethnonym”, was not applied to the territory north of Arax (i.e. the area of the present-day Azerbaijan Republic, former Arran and Shirvan) and its inhabitants up until the establishment of the Musavat regime in that territory (1918-1920)." - p. 85, note 1, Morozova, I. (2005). Contemporary Azerbaijani Historiography on the Problem of "Southern Azerbaijan" after World War II, Iran and the Caucasus, 9(1)
• "Until the late 19th and early 20th century it would be unthinkable to refer to the Muslim inhabitants of the Caucasus as Azaris (Azeris) or Azerbaijanis, since the people and the geographical region that bore these names were located to the south of the Araxes River. Therefore, the Iranian intelligentsia raised eyebrows once the independent Republic of Azerbaijan was declared in 1918 just across the Iranian border. - pp. 176-177, Avetikian, Gevorg. "Pān-torkism va Irān [Pan-Turkism and Iran]", Iran and the Caucasus 14, 1 (2010), Brill
• "Although the overwhelming number of nineteenth-century Russian and Iranian, as well as present-day European historians view the Iranian province of Azarbayjan and the present-day Republic of Azerbaijan as two separate geographical and political entities, modern Azeri historians and geographers view it a single state that has been separated into “northern” and “southern” sectors and which will be united in the future. This unsubstantiated claim rests on a number of factors" -- p. xv. Bournoutian, George (2016). The 1820 Russian Survey of the Khanate of Shirvan: A Primary Source on the Demography and Economy of an Iranian Province prior to its Annexation by Russia. Gibb Memorial Trust.

HistoryofIran (talk) 15:47, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

I understand, but saying that it commonly referred to the Iranian region south of the Aras is not quite the same as saying that it exclusively referred to the region south of the Aras (which is the current wording in this article). Behrooz 2023, whom you cited, is not quite saying the same thing as some of the other sources: "In some instances, the name Azarbaijan was used in a manner that included the Aran region immediately to the north of the River Aras, but this was rather an exception." This is not really compatible with the claim of exclusive use. "Exclusively" means "without exception", not "usually". What we seem to have here are sources making 3 different claims; since synthesis is not allowed, we have to include these claims insofar as they are represented in the reliable sources:

1. Authors who state that Azerbaijan was never, ever used for territories north of the Aras River before 1918; in other words, it was exclusively used for the region of Iran located south of the Aras (Avetikian, Morozova, Rezvani, Fowkes, Monuments and Identities in the Caucasus of the sources you cited above)
2. Authors who state that Azerbaijan was normally (but not exclusively) used for the region of Iran located south of the Aras before 1918; it was applied to territories north of the Aras in certain exceptional cases (Behrooz which you cited above)
3. Authors who state that Azerbaijan was also used for territories north of Aras at certain times before 1918.
   1. Atkin 1980: "In Safavi times, Āzerbāijān was applied to all the Muslim-ruled khanates of the eastern Caucasus as well as to the area south of the Aras River..."
   2. De Planhol 1987: "from this period [13th century] the conception of Azarbaijan tended to be extended to the north and that its meaning was being rapidly transformed..."
   3. Chobanyan 2006 (paraphrasing here): Azerbaijan was used to refer to the khanates north of the Aras because of the region's historical administrative association with Azerbaijan under the Safavids.

Versions 2 and 3 are not compatible with the statement that Azerbaijan was exclusively (without exception) used for the Iranian region south of the Aras and never for the territories north of the Aras. This is why I suggested tweaking the wording along the lines of Azerbaijan (Iran)#Etymology and usage. Pavel Chobanyan's 2006 work is particularly informative here and explains that Azerbaijan was not being used in the 18th century to refer to the territory of the modern Republic of Azerbaijan but rather for the Iranian territories north of the Aras in general; otherwise it's incomprehensible why Fath-Ali Shah placed Georgia in "Azerbaijan" in his letter and why Russian sources refer to the Caucasus khans like Ibrahim Khan as "Azerbaijanian". This is not the same as the Azerbaijani nationalist claim that Iranian Azerbaijan and "Northern" Azerbaijan have always been one land or that it had an ethnic meaning of "land of the Azeri Turks" (quite the opposite, actually). Chobanyan was a specialist of the Caucasus and especially the 2nd half of the 18th century, so I think his work should be taken seriously. Best wishes, Revolution Saga (talk) 19:07, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

I feel like Azerbaijan (Iran)#Etymology and usage is missing version 2. Right now, the usage of Azerbaijan is a bit vague in that section. If that and this article can include all 3 versions, that would be good. HistoryofIran (talk) 20:39, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Good idea, thank you! I actually had Behrooz's version in my head while I was making those edits but couldn't remember where I read it. I will make the changes on Azerbaijan (Iran), and if there are no objections from other editors, here as well. Revolution Saga (talk) 20:51, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

The redirect AZERBAIJAN has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 20 § All caps country names (A-C) until a consensus is reached. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 01:05, 20 March 2026 (UTC)