This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
There is a stamp that shows Tusi as an "Azerbaijani philosopher" that is inserted once in a while in this article. The whole thing is false because:
Tusi was born in Khorasan. He worked in Baghdad, Maragha, Alamut etc.. He is consequently a Khorasani
His ethnicity is Persian from Tus Khorasan..same city as Ferdowsi, Asadi Tusi, Nizam al-Molk Tusi, Ghazzali Tusi, etc.
Azerbaijani (a name adopted by people that were called Turkoman/Turks historically in the 20th century) in Wikipedia denotes an ethnic group that was not around during the time of Tusi. Rybakov: "Speaking of the Azerbaijan culture originating at that time, in the XIV-XV cc., one must bear in mind, first of all, literature and other parts of culture organically connected with the language. As for the material culture, it remained traditional even after the Turkicization of the local population. However, the presence of a massive layer of Iranians that took part in the formation of the Azerbaijani ethnos, have imposed its imprint, primarily on the lexicon of the Azerbaijani language which contains a great number of Iranian and Arabic words. The latter entered both the Azerbaijani and the Turkish language mainly through the Iranian intermediary. Having become independent, the Azerbaijani culture retained close connections with the Iranian and Arab cultures. They were reinforced by common religion and common cultural-historical traditions.”[ "“History of the East” (“Transcaucasia in XI-XV centuries” in Rostislav Borisovich Rybakov (editor), History of the East. 6 volumes. v. 2. “East during the Middle Ages: Chapter V., 2002. – ISBN 5-02-017711-3. http://gumilevica.kulichki.com/HE2/he2510.htm )". So primary definition of "Azerbaijani" is Azeri-Turk today, which Tusi was not one.
The geographical argument is flawed ..as if someone that works in France but is born in say Pakistan becomes "French". The concept of national identity and state identity did not exist in the 12th century. Hence, one uses Iranian (Iranic) for Iranian peoples, and "Turk" for Oghuz/Qypchaq speaking people, and not modern designators. Ethnic designators based on geography is flawed for 12th century and "Azerbaijan"(the historical region of NW Iran) anyhow has historically been part of Iran since Medes, Achaemenids,..and even though Iran was not a unified state, the concept of Iran as a geographical-ethno idea existed throughout the Islamic era, specially during the Ilkhanids times .
Even in the 20th century, an Armenian or Russian born in Azerbaijan would not consider himself an Azerbaijani Turk just like a Turk (Azeri-Turk) born in Armenia is not an "Armenian scientist". Tusi is not considered a Turk, so he is not an Azerbaijani. Like many great Persian Viziers (Nizam al-Molk, Hasank Vazier, Moin al-Din Parvana, Amir Kabir) of Turkish empires..he was the Vizier of a Mongol empire. This was the case for many Turco-Mongol dynasties whose Viziers were Iranians (Nishapuri, Zahir al-Din Nishapuri (2001), "The History of the Seljuq Turks from the Jami’ al-Tawarikh: An Ilkhanid Adaptation of the Saljuq-nama of Zahir al-Din Nishapuri," Partial tr. K.A. Luther, ed. C.E. Bosworth, Richmond, UK. K.A. Luther: "... the Turks were illiteratre and uncultivated when they arrived in Khurasan and had to depend on Iranian scribes, poets, jurists and theologians to man the institution of the Empire"(pg 9) )..Tusi probably also knew Uighyur or Mongolic which he likely used to communicate with the Mongol Sulans.
So please let us keep Wikipedia professional. Iranian and Turk in the 12th century is complete linguistic designators. If Tusi was born as a Persian in the republic of Azerbaijan in the 20th century, that would be a different matter. However, national identities for the 12th century is baseless,..hence ethnic identity is what takes precedence and he is an ethnic Persian (Iranian) from Khorasan..the only valid geographical designator would be Khorasani (which is not a confusing term as no ethnic group has picked it up as its name in the 20th century). Thank you. --18.104.22.168 (talk) 00:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I would like to ask that all parties involved review WP:VANDAL and stop accusing one another of vandalism. Such an accusation is never going to help resolve a dispute. Nobody, neither the users adding the stamp nor those removing it, is vandalizing. You are having a content dispute. Please engage on discussion here and stop edit warring. If needed ask for page protection and/or dispute resolution. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
It has been discussed above. To talk about an "Azerbaijani identity" or even ethnic group in the 12th century is anachronistici. The stamp is not in English but it says "Azerbaycan alimi" =Azerbaijani scientist. "Azerbaijani" means: 1) Azeri-Turkish (the ethnonym was adopted in the 20th century and so it does not apply in the 12th century). Tusi was not an Turkish and was not from Azerbaijan (province of Iran). 2)geographical use..which again would not make sense here and should be "born from Iranian Azerbaijan" to not add to the confusion. However, we was born as a Persian from Tus in Khorasan (the same city as Ferdowsi, Asadi Tusi, etc.). The stamp is irrelavant to the quality of the article but since it is controversial, it should be left out. For example the Encycloapedia of Islam article on Tusi contains no such stamps that can give readers a wrong opinion. I believe the republic of Azerbaijan is trying to claim Tusi as a Turkish scientists. The execuse that he worked in Iranian Azerbaijan is also not good one. He also worked in Alamut, Baghdad, etc. So the stamp is not WP:RS and does improve in understanding Tusi. It is just made for nationalistic reasons to deny the fact that Tusi was a Persian from Khorasan.--22.214.171.124 (talk) 15:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Has been discussed sufficiently above. I worked in France for 3 weeks, I am not French. The concept of citizenship or dual citizenship did not exist back done. So that is not a good reason. Modern geographics is not relavant. I like people from the republic of Azerbaijan but Iranian Azerbaijan is in Iran, so the stamp should mention Iran. However, there is no point to the stamp. I hope this silly dispute ends. These are 20/21th century silly disputes. As per the stamp, I do not think it contributes anything to the article. It is controversial and there is no WP:RS source that mentions that the stamp is necessary for knowing Tusi. The article mentions his observatory in Maragha. That is fine. Iranian Azarbaijan is still a diverse place (not mono-ethnic)..and it is part of Iran. Even if it was not, Tusi would still be a Khorasani Persian from Tus. So these sort of disputes are silly and counterproductive. Best wishes for the good people of the region (Iran, Azerbaijan etc.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:48, 14 September 2012 (UTC) So no need for another silly dispute..
There is a stamp from Iran in the article, which you don't object to. The one from A seems similar. Neither claims that he was one of them; they're only honouring him. Your "there is no WP:RS source that mentions that the stamp is necessary for knowing Tusi" is silly - there is no such criterion for including things in the article William M. Connolley (talk) 21:47, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Actually it does..it says "Azerbaycan Alimi" which means "Azerbaijani Scientist".. However, there was no Azerbaijani nationality back then as the republic of Azerbaijan did not exist and still , Tusi would be an Iranian national if you use modern standards.
Second, the stamp states; "Scientist of Azerbaijan" which is making a nationality claim on Iranian lands. Tusi was not from Azerbaijan nor was he Turkish (where the name Azerbaijani was adopted by Turcophones of the Caucasus in the 19th/20th century which is much after Tusi).
So it does - in writing so small you can't read it unless you look at the full-sized version. But it doesn't matter. That text is what they say; wiki isn't endorsing it by including it, and more than we endorse the Iranian claims by including their stamp William M. Connolley (talk) 07:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
The stamp from Iran makes no nationality claim. Furthermore, the English part of the stamp from the republic of Azerbaijan states: "Outstanding scientist of Azerbaijan". But that is factually wrong and absolutely false. It is making a national claim. Tusi is from Tus Khorasan.. He worked in different places in Iran including Maragha (in East Azerbaijan province), Baghdad, Alamut, Khorasan, Qom, etc. It is like Newton hypothetically working in Croatia (which did not exist as an entity then),he doesn't become a scientist of Croatia.
The stamp from Iran is there without any controversy. Because he is from Iran. He is not from the republic of Azerbaijan. Second he was not an Azerbaijani (not from the republic of Azerbaijan, not an Azerbaijani Turk, nor an Azeri from Iran), but he is Persian from Tus from Khorasan, modern Iran. All the sources state he was born in Tus, Iran (Khorasan Province). However, it is fine if people want to remove stamps as it does not really contribute to the article. --188.8.131.52 (talk) 00:01, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
You seem to have forgotten your careful stuff about how nationality now and then don't match. He isn't from "Iran" because it didn't exist then. But no-one except the nationalists really care about this stuff, for everyone else this tedious fighting is tiresome. Good bye William M. Connolley (talk) 07:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
I agree with you that modern nation-citizenship concepts did not exist...Although Iran as a state concept existed during the Sassanid times as an official name/territory. In the Islamic era, geographical-cultural Iran did exist and actually was officially used in the Ilkhanid domain. Ahmad Ashraf, "IRANIAN IDENTITY iii. MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC PERIOD" in Encyclopaedia Iranica. "The prominent historians of this period frequently referred to Iran and Irānzamin both as historical notions and as contemporaneous entities"
Anyhow these are all besides the discussion...Tusi was simply a Pesian from the city of Tus in Khorasan in modern Iran.
Khorasan, Azerbaijan etc..were definitly not national states..and a national state with the name Azerbaijan officially is from the 20th century. However, all this does not matter as Tusi is simply a Persian from Khorasan. We should note the term Iranian at least before modern states
So the article says "born 18 February 1201 in Ṭūs, Khorasan – died on 26 June 1274" and the stamps say "2001 Azerbaijani stamp for the 800th anniversary of his birth." (OK, that fits) and "1956 Iranian stamp for the 700th anniversary of his death." (no, that doesn't fit). Although the stamp does indeed say its the 700th anniversary of his death William M. Connolley (talk) 21:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
As per your second comment, the stamp from Iran is not from 1956 it is from the Iranian year 1356 which is roughly 1976. --184.108.40.206 (talk) 00:03, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
I have found a stamp from the republic of Azerbaijan that should solve our problem:
As per Iranian stamps..right now the Iranian calendar is 1391 and the Western one is 2012. So it makes for the authorities to have issued the stamp in 1355/1356 (1975/1976) period. The user that uploaded that stamp does not read Persian. It may be remotely possible that the stamp was issued
ahead of Tusi's 700th year passing away but highly doubtful. So good catch and I will ask that user to double check.--220.127.116.11 (talk) 11:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Real vandalizm is your non impartial, biased, and emotional nationalistic approach
Your action is a vandalism! ı am not offering or proving that Nasir al-Din is Azerbaijani Turk. I am giving an idea, an information that there are certain scientists and historians (with correct references to journal and monographs) about Nasir al-Din and Azerbaijan. And you have not right not include or delete opinions based on big number of publications if you do not like them (you action contradicts totally the rules of Wikipedia. So please return all sentences and references I have introduced into this article. --User:Nejati Babak
None of the sources you refer to are reliable as none of the authors are historians (and thus not authoritative on the subject), cf. WP:RS. In addition, they are not published in peer-reviewed journals. Furthermore, reputable sources such as Encyclopædia Britannica and people that lived the same time as al-Tusi claim the exact opposite of the references you added. Since the references make an extraordinary claim not backed by any reputable source, I vote to remove them (cf. WP:RS). Borek 9 (talk) 21:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
The weak and baseless claim must be removed, as they are unknown and make a ridiculous claim about Tusi being Turk without any reliable source. All reliable and authoritative references, both modern and contemporary, explicitly call him Persian. There is no base in claiming or "suggesting" (read: pushing) a Turkic background. The "information" that Nejati is offering is useless, baseless, and wrong. I second Borek9 vote to delete those sentences. BrokenMirror2 (talk) 04:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I don't see why not, but it would be good to have independent verification that the source (The House of Wisdom: How Arabic Science Saved Ancient Knowledge and Gave Us the Renaissance (2010, ISBN 978-1-60819-058-4) by Jim Al-Khalili) supports it, and to see if there are further details. Where do you think the incident should be mentioned: in the last paragraph of the Biography section, perhaps?—Odysseus1479 06:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)