Talk:Vizier

Comment

The Kingdom of the Hejaz was "merged" into Saudi Arabia????? WTF???? The Hejaz was conquered by the Wahhabis. The King of what one might say was the only legitimate Hashemite Kingdom was dethroned and sent into exile on Cyprus. Thousands of people were slaughtered. It was one of the worst British betrayals in the history of the 20th century. Why is the material about advisors to the Hunnic kings and Egyption Pharoahs here? If "Vizier" is an Arabic term, these officials would not have been called such at the time. --Jfruh 20:46, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• That's why the section title says anachronistic: the use is as real and at least as relevant as in fiction, but not contemporary with the 'rela historical' viziers. Fastifex 12:26, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Is this script in the intro (وزير) Arabic or Persian? DragonRouge 16:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

So, no one knows, or no one wants to say? Because what is the point of having the script there if we don't know what language it is? I'm going to remove it, and if and when someone deigns to tell us what language it is, please reinsert. Thank you. DragonRouge 15:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

وزير is an Arabic term

It comes from the root word وزر. It's not a Persian term...in fact, I think the change from Wazir to Vizier was basically due to the fact that the Persian language doesn't have an equivalent to the sound the letter "و" in Arabic, so they spelled it with a V. 195.229.241.182

Well, good luck in telling this to the "Persians" of Wikipedia. For them anything Middle-Eastern must be Persian, no matter what. -Ur

yes. but even 1001 more "good luck" to you if you can find a single important thing (in the sense of encyclopedia!) in the middle east which is not persian.--خنیاگر (talk) 05:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

خنیاگر, thanks for proving my point.-Ur 71.103.1.201 (talk) 22:29, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Just joining the discussion here: I notice someone had added to the silliness and called it a "muslim" rank. vizier is anon-religious political term that pre-dates islam by centuries. It is definitely Persian - so what if it is used in the Quran? That does not make it arabic, it simply means it's a borrowed word.Zenbb (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:28, 28 July 2011 (UTC).

Total nonsense. The Middle Persian origin of the word - vecir - is given in many scholarly sources, including Richard Nelson Frye's "Persia: Until the Islamic conquest" (Zürich, 1963). And of course Persian has the letter "و" ... what Persian lacks is the letter "v" ... that's why the original Persian "و" is either transliterated as a "v" or as a "w" into Latin script. Tājik 15:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I think most likely origin of this word is "vecir" of Persian. It is related to the word "vicar(ious)" of indo-european languages, meaning "in place of." The Arabic wazara (to carry burden and responsibility) also makes sense. Certainly nobody can 100% know for sure. That is why I am just irritated by what I see in wikipedia regarding the ultra-nationalistic, self-assured, unquestioning attitude of some Persians owning everything Middle-Eastern. This is a very unscholarly and abject behavior for me. I care about the truth and am ready to recognize it when presented. -Ur

Am I blind? Or are those two spellings (Persian and Arabic) completely identical? If the words look exactly the same, why the hell are they listed separately? That would be like having a wikipedia page that says "British English: [...], American English: [...]" in cases OTHER than regional differences! That just doesn't make sense! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.54.130.227 (talk) 06:55, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

recent edit

I have tried to clean up the "etymology" section. Tājik (talk) 10:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

adding persian in the top

in the top the word is given in arabic. however it is explained that the word is persian. shouldn't we change (Arabic: وزير‎ to (Persian/Arabic: وزير)? the reason is that the word still exists in today persian. although the article gives a good summary of etymology of the word, but i think it is important to get the top right. i will wait a bit and if there is no reasoning given by others that why we should keep that as it is now, i will make my change.--خنیاگر (talk) 16:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I suggest that Arabic be included. The Turkish word vazir sounds more like Arabic wazir than "vichir" or "vicira". I don't think the Arabic word wazir comes from the Persian word. First of all, there are many non-loan words that are common to many languages: vast in English, wasi'a in Arabic; crime in English, jurum in Arabic to name a few. This indicates some sort of proto-language. In such cases, it is misleading to say it is from one language or the other. We simply don't know. Furthermore, in the case of vazier, the word wazir (or its root WaZaRa) is of typical Semitic construction with three root letters. Therefore, I suggest we include Arabic alongside Persian at the beginning and remove the claim under the Etymology section that Arabic wazara is from Persian. Thanks.-Ur —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.103.1.201 (talk) 22:25, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

neutrality

There is an imbalance here, The article contains a large mistakes and I will explain this: First, we must realize that the word Vizier means a high official in certain "Muslim countries and caliphates" so we are not talking about "vicir" Which is something else entirely. Secondly, the Word appeared in the era of the Umayyad and also in the Quran (Goyṭayn, Šelomo D.. Studies in Islamic history and institutions. P.171) --Rondiar99 (talk) 17:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Etymology

In the Etymology section it is clearly mentioned, with references, that this word comes from Persian وزیر. So what is the point of having "Arabic: وزیر"?! If it is not Persian, kindly change the whole Etymology section and then include (Arabic: وزیر) at the top. Is this whole Persian/Arabic thing related to some kind of middle-eastern racism issue?! 115.133.209.99 (talk) 20:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Caption

What does 'The "winter Diwan" of a Mughal Vizier' refer to? Clicking on the link (Diwan) is not enlightening. 134.134.139.70 (talk) 23:41, 8 February 2011 (UTC)