Talk:Paytakaran/Archive 2

Bold text== Iranica ==

Quote:

Half-way through the 7th century, under the caliphate of Osman, the Arabs invaded Albanian territory and the eastern Caucasus and took possession of Paythakaran (Baylaqan), Partaw (Bardaa), Shakashen, Kabala (Kapaghak), Shervan, Shaporan (Shaberan), and Chor (Darband); Aran was to be reunited with Armenia under a single governor. Grandmaster 08:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Also please check out the second reference from Iranica. I suggest to merge this article with Beylagan. Grandmaster 08:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen where Baylagan is? Now look at where Paytakaran was. --Eupator 16:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

look at http://www.answers.com/topic/paytakaran Don't confuse vandalism with academic dispute which some users can't conduct. Regarding Paytakaran - I quote answers.com : "Paytakaran (Caspiane), was the Easternmost province (nahang) of the Armenian Kingdom[1] located in the territory of modern day Azerbaijan roughly corresponding to the rayons of Lankaran and Salyan."--Dacy69 21:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I wrote that! Paytakaran corresponds to Lankaran and Salyan NOT Beylagan. Why the hell are you two adding Beylagan then? It's not academic it's moronic.--Eupator 21:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe it is time to complain about your language. Answers.com says that Paytakaran is IN AZERBAIJAN. Further - yes, it says it roughly correspondents to Lankaran and Saylan district. But you should know a liitle about Azerbaijani history and geography. Beylagan is an administrative unit in Azerbaijan which in the Soviet time was Jdanov - (name of a Soviet communist leader). And people used to call all this region Lenkoran or Salyan. Jdanov has never been its historical name as we understand a term 'historical'. The point is Baylagan and Paytarakan is the same region. Above you can find reference to the sources. Answers.com information just confirm that this region in Azerbaijan. Let's ask third-party opinion.--Dacy69 21:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

You're referencing me to myself! Do you understand that or not? I wrote that, what you see in answers.com, it's from a previous version of this page. Beylagan and Paytarakan are not the same region, Paytarakan and parts of modern Lankaran and Salyan are the same region. You don't even know the regions of your own country.

Map of Baylagan , map of Lankaran and map of . Very close to eachother eh?--Eupator 21:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

In Russian version of Wikipedia (written by Armenian users actually) says that it is the same region: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%B9%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD How you call them? In many Armenian websites you can find claim to that region of Azerbaijan. They say that it is Armenian Paytakaran. What is you show now - maps - it is current layout of Azerbaijani regions - quite close to each other, but not historical.--Dacy69 22:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

You obviously don't speak Russian then. "в состав которой входила территория современных Сальянского и Ленкоранского районов Азербайджана". It says modern Lenjoran and Salyan correspond to Paytakaran. Then it says: "Город Пайтакаран (по мнению Сен-Мартена — Бейлаган или Байлакан". The CITY (not the province) Paytakaran according to St. Martin was Baylagan at the meeting of Kura and Araxes rivers.--Eupator 23:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Paytakaran the province was south of Arax. This is according to the historical map of 7th c. "Geography." The Iranica editor is either stupid, or talking about a different city called Paytakaran.--TigranTheGreat 02:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

O! I don't know Russian. Grandmaster identified sources which says Beylagan and Paytakaran is the same. I am saying the same. This is what I argue. Russian Wikipedia refer to Сен-Мартен, who thought the same about the city. Now about location of the city (not region as a whole) - Сен-Мартен located it at the juncture of Kura and Araks. Look at the map - it is near Sabirabad. It is not Salyan and, definitley, not Lenkaran wрich is far. Yes, currently it is also out of administrative border of Beylagan. This is about the city according Sen-Marten. We are talking about historic region. Paytarakan had connection to Araks river where Beylagan is now. I don't see any sense to dispute further with you and listen to your insults. I am not afraid of third party opinion, mediation, etc. For some reason you don't sign up for mediation (on Urartu) and continue to argue here while insulting your opponent. And for TigranTheGreat -yes, everybody except your sources is "stupid".--Dacy69 02:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Understand that this article is not about some city called Paytakaran, it's about the Armenian province. End of story. What dispute on Urartu btw? This is the first time i'm hearing about any dispute.--Eupator 04:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Baylaqan/Paytakaran was a province of Albania, along with Utik and Artsakh, which Armenia conquered during the period of its expansion. Those regions had almost no Armenian population, and Albania regained them in the 4th century A.D. The capital of Beylegan was the city of the same name, which existed also in Islamic times and was a large and prosperous city. Now I see that the modern rayon of Beylagan may have different borders than the Albanian province, but in that case we need to move this page to Baylaqan (province) and provide the information on the province and the city in both pre-Islamic and Islamic times. The historian Bosworth, whom Tigran called stupid, is actually one of the leading specialists on Persian history in the world, and he says about the city:

BAYLAQAN, Armenian form Paytakaran (cf. Marquart, Osteuropäische und ostasiatische Streifzüge, Leipzig, 1903, p. 457), a town of the medieval Islamic region of Arran (q.v.), the classical Caucasian Albania, lying in the triangle between the Kor and Aras (Araxes) rivers, in what is today the Mil steppe in Soviet Azerbaijan. In Islamic times, it lay on the highway connecting Ardabil and Bajarvan with Bardaa (qq.v); today, only ruins remain of Baylaqan, to the south-east of Shusha.

As you can see, it is neither in Salyan nor Lenkoran, so the province seems to cover much larger area. Paytakaran was not a historical Armenian land, as some of you claim. According to the book called The Armenian People From Ancient To Modern Times: The Dynastic Periods: From Antiquity to the Fourteenth Century, edited by Richard G. Hovannisian:

Paytakaran, a completely alien land, left the Armenian orbit in 387, as did Korjaik, originally the kingdom of Gordyene, a foreign state that had belonged to Armenia for only about 250 years and whose territory was completely Kurdish in population even before the deportations of 1915.

P 16, Robert. H. Hewsen. Historical Geography

It also says on p 92:

A belt of Armenian peripheral lands fell away to its neighbors: Gugark in the north to Iberia, Utik and Arcax (Artsakh) in the northeast to Caucasian Albania, Paytakaran and Parskahayk in the east to Atrpatakan (modern Azerbaijan), and Korcek and Aljnik in the south to Mesopotamia, thus leaving a considerably reduced territory.

The Armenian People From Ancient To Modern Times: The Dynastic Periods: From Antiquity to the Fourteenth Century (Armenian People from Ancient to Modern Times). ISBN 0312101694

Grandmaster 06:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Gm, you are confusing the current rayon with a city by the same name. Two very different things that have nothign to do with one another. Your attempt to connect them together is at best misleading at worst pov pushing.--Eupator 17:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Dacy, explain your revert. You're saying see discussion when on your edit comment but you wrote nothing! Blind reverts are unacceptable.--Eupator 19:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Eupator, we have a lengthy discussion on Urartu and I left a message for you and TigrantheGreat on your discussion pages to put signature for mediation. And now you say that you don't know anything. If there is no agreement on that I have to refer to other further procedure for resolving the dispute on Urartu.--Dacy69 14:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

You keep mentioning a dispute, i'm not aware of any dispute. It's you who thinks we have a dispute. I don't.--Eupator 17:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I see - you just playing around. You know perfectly what is the subject of the dispute - we have discussed that. The page Urartu is blocked, and I invited you and TigrantheGreat sign mediation agreement. You don't want - perfect. I am refering to another procedure.--Dacy69 19:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Please remain civil and don't accuse me of "playing around". For the last time, I don't consider that a dispute. Do what you wish.--Eupator 19:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)