Talk:House of Chikovani

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

general Chikovani raised from the dead ?[edit]

Something strange in History : "General Prince Katzo Chikovani (d. 1682)" is said to be dead in 1682 but he is still able to take over the leadership ten years later : "When Levan III died in 1692 without leaving a male heir, General Chikovani took over the leadership" ??? by the way, it seems that Levan III died in 1681, and his son Levan IV in 1691, cf Dadiani#Dukes (eristavi) and Princes (mtavari) of Mingrelia... should not the IV. be named here ? Pippobuono (talk) 16:15, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Calidum Talk To Me 04:03, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


– Match up with other titles in Category:Noble families of Georgia (country). Also consistent with the treatment for the titles of most of Russian noble families. It seems wikiepdians have a unhealthy love affair with the term "House of." Relisted Calidum Talk To Me 04:54, 7 June 2014 (UTC) --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 00:09, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for now. Some of these families were actual royal houses, with sovereigns reigning in Abkhazia and Megrelia well into the 19th century (e.g., Dadiani, Gurieli, Shervashidze, Jaqeli). Others are just noble families who held some positions at the Georgian (Kartli) royal court. It's not helpful to lump sovereign rulers and ordinary nobles into one group. The Russian precedent is hardly relevant, because there has been no single approach to these articles and the coverage of Russian aristocracy in the English Wikipedia is extremely poor. Furthermore, the Rurikid and Gediminid families forfeited their sovereign status in the 16th century, at the latest. --Ghirla-трёп- 06:48, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removing "House of" doesn't undermine their sovereign status or the status of some of these families. Wikipedians seem to believe that adding "House of" in front of every family of note is necessary when it is not. Byzantine imperial dynasty, again using Eastern European examples, those with surnames such as Komnenos, Doukas, Angelos, Palaiologos. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 08:50, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Your lack of knowledge in the Georgian feudal system is very disturbing. Houses of Jaqeli, Dadiani, Gurieli, Gelovani, Dadeshkeliani, Shervashidze were not some petty "noble" families like you want them to be but a princely ruling dynasties which ruled entire Principalities which were of a size of a kingdom. House of Jaqeli for example ruled a principality which was bigger than most other 3 Georgian kingdoms. These houses were 10 times of greater importance and stood 10 times higher in rank than some families like House of Mukhrani btw. I'd suggest you to get aware more in the Georgian titles because the rough translation of "prince" does not always means a "prince" in Georgian feudal system and is very different from the European "princes". Interestingly what do these families have to do with the Russian "nobility"? The Russian annexation of the Georgian kingdoms and principalities cannot change the status and importance of any of these princely families (again these families are not "knyaz"-like families). House of Jaqeli, Dadiani etc. are 5 times older than the Romanov dynasty is so better knowing the facts first. Jaqeli (talk) 08:42, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Russian Rurikid families are considerably older than any Georgian family, including the Bagratids, whose male line does not extend beyond David Soslan, the scion of an obscure Ossetian clan. Since most Georgian nobles joined the Russian imperial service and were subject to the Emperor of Russia, they have been regarded as part of the Russian nobility by the Almanach de Gotha and other leading authorities in the field of genealogy. No surprises here. --Ghirla-трёп- 11:26, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative support. These articles deal with the larger families, which beyond the princely houses, included several lesser branches. --KoberTalk 09:07, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. Count me as part of the Wikipedians with an unhealthy love affair for "House of", as it adds clarity to what's being discussed. SnowFire (talk) 20:12, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:House_of_Chikovani&oldid=1202810205"