User:TrangaBellam/VC

DO NOT DELETE THIS PAGE UNTIL RESOLUTION OF THIS ANI THREAD.

Misrepresentation of English and Russian sources

1. At Turkoman (ethnonym), VC wrote:

   Towards the High Middle Ages [c. 1000 to 1300 AD], the eastern part of Anatolia became known as "Turkomania" in European texts and as "Turkmeneli" in Ottoman sources.

   The source was cited that goes:

   Turkmen sources note that Turcomania — an anglicized version of ‘‘Turkmeneli’’ — appears on a map of the region published by William Guthrie in 1785, but there is no clear reference to Turkmeneli until the end of the twentieth century.
   — Anderson, Liam; Stansfield, Gareth (2011). Crisis in Kirkuk: The Ethnopolitics of Conflict and Compromise. University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 56

   Removed by me alongside the next line (see this thread).
2. At Tuqaq, Visioncurve added a citation for the following statement (this was the only citation):

   Tuqaq's father's name was Kerequchi, who was either a popular local blacksmith or a master of tent-making (yurts).

   I quote the entirety of the cited page (p. 94/95) using the default OCR of Google-Books with own corrections:

   [p. 94] В « Маждму ат - таварих » ( « Собрание историй » ) туркменыкереучи перечислены рядом с кыргызскими племенами [173, 207]. А в среденевековых трудах « Малик - наме » , « Сельджукнаме » , « Огуз - наме » и туркменских преданиях у огузов был человек по имени Керекучи - ходжа . С.А.Агаджанов склонен считать Керекучи мастером по изготовлению деревянной решетки для юрты [41« а », 168]. В кыргызском языке слово

   [p. 95 starts] кереге (в казахском кереке и в туркменском гереге) обозначает деревянную решетку цилиндрической части юрты . Стало быть , зарегистрированое в источниках имя Керекучи в кыргызской транскрипции будеть иметь форму керегечи , т.е. в буквальном смысле обозначает мастера по изготовлению решеток юрты . Отсюда етрудно объяснить значение слова кереучи в сочинении « Маждму ат - таварих » . Видимо после IX в . определенная часть туркменов называлась кереукчи , получив название от имени своего родоначальника Кереукчи - ходжи , жившего , по предположению С.Г.Агаджанова , « приблизительно между началом и второй половиной IX в., а его сын Тугшырмыш дожил до середины X в. » [41« а », 170].[p. 95 does not end but we are digressing]
   — p. 95 of Этнокультурные связи кыргызов в средневековье (trans. by Visioncurve: Ethnocultural Relations of the Kyrgyz in the Middle Ages) Молдобаев, Имел Бакиевич. Bishek: 2003

   The source notes Tugshirmysh (not Tuqaq) to be the son of Kerequchi; it does not mention Tuqaq even once. Some medieval historians have traced Seljuqid descent from Tugshirmysh/Tuqshurmish but nobody has ever held Kerequchi to be the father of Tuqaq!
   In the ANI complaint, VC claims that I "humiliated" and "embarassed" myself after disputing this source at the t/p :-)

There are indeed a handful of sources that identify Tuqaq with Tugshyrmysh as Trangbellam him/herself notes at Unfala's talk page (diff 1). However, I wouldn't be so dogmatic as to say that (Trangabellam's quote): "Some medieval historians have traced Seljuqid descent from Tugshirmysh/Tuqshurmish but nobody has ever held Kerequchi to be the father of Tuqaq". Nonetheless, the point at issue is my addition citing Soviet ethnographer, Dr. of Sciences in History Imel Moldabaev's research paper called "Этнокультурные связи кыргызов в средневековье" (Ethnocultural Relations of the Kyrgyz in the Middle Ages). For information about Kerekuchi-Khwaja, Moldabaev, in turn, referred to and cited Soviet historian and academic, Prof. Dr. Sergei Grigor'evich Agadzhanov's book Очерки истории огузов и туркмен Средней Азии IX-XIII вв pp. 168-170 (first published in 1969) (Essays on the history of the Oghuz and Turkmens of Central Asia in the IX-XIII centuries). Upon stumbling on the name Tughshyrmysh in Moldabaev’s book, it was logical to proceed to the cited pages of Agadzhanov's work to discover who that person in question was.

Prior to pages 168-170, Agadzhanov presents some materials regarding Kerekuchi-Khwaja and Tughshyrmysh from primary sources, specifically from works of Rashid al-Din Hamadani and Mosleh al-Din Lari:

"Сельджук ибн Лукман – пишет Рашид ад-Дин, - был из родственников Сельджуков и происходил из кости (остохан) кынык, из рода Тугшырмыша, сына Керекучи-ходжи, который был мастером по изготовлению кибиток у тюркских царей, он служил при Тогрул султане из племени (уруг) кынык»

The above sentence may be roughly translated as: "Seljuq ibn Luqman, writes Rashid ad-Din, was from the relatives of Seljuqs and originated from the tribe (ostokhan) of Qiniq, from the clan of Tugshyrmysh, the son of Kerekuchi-Khwaja, who was a master of making tents for Turkic kings, he served under Sultan Togrul from the tribe (urug) of Qiniq".

At the bottom of that page, Agadzhanov provides a commentary for the name Luqman, clarifying that Luqman is actually the same person with Tuqaq, and the name Luqman is a mistake of contemporary scribes (copyists), who instead of the name توقاق (Tuqaq), as was written in original works, copied لوقمان (Luqman).

Agadzhanov then provides a passage from Mosleh al-Din’s work:

"Сельджук ибн Тугаг – повествует Муслих ад-Дин, - (происходит) из потомства Тугшурмыша, сына Керекучи ходжи, который был мастером по изготовлению кибиток у царя Тогрула, упомянутого в рассказе о саманидах» (289, л. 233; 290, л. 131).... История сельджукидов, по Муслих ад-Дину, также начинается с Керекучи-ходжи, и доводиться до Сельджука, который называется не сыном Лукмана, а Тугага. Дальнейшее же повествование "Мират ал-адвар" о Тугаге и его потомках совпадает с рассказами других историков, пользовавшихся "Малик-наме". Очевидно, это может объяснить лишь тем, что Муслих ад-Дин пытался свести воедино обе рассматриваемые версии о происхождение фамилии Сельджукидов.

This may be translated as :

"Seljuq ibn Tuqaq – as Mosleh al-Din narrates - (comes) from the clan of Tugshyrmysh, the son of Kerekuchi Khwaja, who was a master of making tents for King Toghrul, mentioned in the story about the Samanids.(289, p. 233; 290, p. 131). The history of the Seljuqids, according to Mosleh al-Din, also starts with Kerekuchi Khwaja, and is brought to Seljuq, who is not called the son of Luqman, but of Tuqaq. The further narrative of "Mirat al-advar" about Tuqaq and his descendants matches the stories of other historians who used "Malik-name". Obviously, this can only be explained by the fact that Mosleh al-Din tried to bring together both versions under consideration about the origin of the Seljuq family.

As you can see here, Mosleh al-Din uses the name Tuqaq, instead of Luqman. Besides, it's a common knowledge that Arabic word "ibn" is a nasab (نسب) or a patronymic which was and continues to be used throughout the Arabic and Muslim worlds (that adopted Arabic culture) indicating the person's heritage, so ibn (ابن) means "son of". Correspondingly, Seljuq ibn Tuqaq = Seljuq, son of Tuqaq.

Summing up the above, commonly referred to primary sources indicate that Seljuq was the son of Tuqaq, from the clan or lineage of Tugshyrmysh, the son of Kerekuchi Khwaja, who was a master of making tents, either for Turkic kings or King Togrul.

Also, here one may assume that Tughshyrmysh is probably the name of the clan or sub-tribe of a larger Qiniq tribe. However, Agadzhanov later presents constructive view on the material from primary sources about early Seljuqids:

Исследуемые данные, таким образом, в целом ряде деталей и подробностей явно не сходятся между собой. Однако их критическое сопоставление позволяет выявить наиболее ранние звенья родословной фамилии сельджукидов. В «Малик-наме», как мы видим, полностью отсутствуют сведения о Керекучи-ходжи, являвшемся простым мастером изготовления кибиток. Родословная схема фамилии сельджукидов в этой источнике начинается с Сарчыга-Тугага, который изображается знатным вельможей, царским советником, могущественным военачальником (529, с. 41 и след.)… Сравнительно-исторический синтез, таким образом, дает возможность заключить, что Сарчыг-Тугаг не был основателем династии сельджукидов. В генеалогическим списке этой фамилии до Сарчыга значатся имена Керекучи-ходжи и Тугшырмыша, не имевших знатного происхождения.Родоначальником фамилии сельджукидов, как видно из труда Захир ад-Дина Нишапури, был Керекучи-ходжа. На это указывает также версии «Огуз-наме», и туркменские исторические предания. «Согласно родословной туркмен», в огуском иле жил человек по имени Керекучи-ходжа. Сыном Керекучи-ходжи был Тугшырмыш, являйшийся мастером по изготовлению юрт…

Translation:

The researched data, therefore, in a whole series of details clearly do not agree with each other. However, their critical comparison makes it possible to identify the earliest links in the family tree of the Seljuq family. In "Malik-name", as we can see, there is no information about Kerekuchi-khwaja, who was a simple master of making tents. The genealogical scheme of the Seljuq family in this source begins with Sarchiq-Tugag, who is depicted as a nobleman, royal adviser, powerful military leader (529, p. 41 and foll.) ... Comparative historical synthesis, thus, makes it possible to conclude that Sarchiq-Tuqaq was not the founder of the Seljuq dynasty. The genealogical list of this family before Sarchiq includes the names of Kerekuchi-Khwaja and Tugshyrmysh, who did not have a noble origin. This is also indicated by the versions of "Oguz-name", and Turkmen historical legends. "According to the genealogy of Turkmens," a man named Kerekuchi-Khwaja lived in the Oghuz land. The son of Kerekuchi-Khwaja was Tugshyrmysh, who was a master of making yurts…

Eventually commenting on Tughshyrmysh at the bottom of that page, Agadzhanov writes:

В родословной туркмен указывается далее, что у Тугшырмыша было три сына: старшего из которого звали Тукак…

Translation:

"The genealogy of Turkmens further indicates that Tugshyrmysh had three sons: the eldest of whom was called Tuqaq..."

So, it’s probably down to my average (poor) Russian that I added Kerekuchi khwaja as the "father" of Tuqaq, when Agadzhanov concluded that he was most probably Tuqaq's "grandfather". I believe this not to be an end-of-the-world mistake or misrepresentation as user TB attempts to bring forward, because that could've been edited by changing the word father to grandfather.Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 13:34, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

1. At Turkoman (ethnonym), a source was cited that goes:

   Selim [an Ottoman ruler] was a devout Sunni who hated the Shia as much as Ismail [a contemporary Safavid] despised the Sunni. He saw the Shia Turkman of Anatolia as a potential "fifth column".

   VC had used it to write:

   They [Turkmens] later found themselves divided into Sunni and Shia branches of Islam, which most of the time turned them into archenemies.

   An Ottoman-Safavid conflict with sectarian dimensions gets extrapolated to entire Turkmen history!
2. At Turkoman (ethnonym), VC wrote (made past the fourth GAN):

   The use of "Turkmen" as an ethnonym for the Turks living in Iranian Azerbaijan disappeared from common use after the 17th and 18th centuries.

   When a list of citations follow a paragraph, it is assumed that those citations can verify everything in the paragraph. So, I proceeded to consult the citations: Gross (1995; p. 214) offers nothing relevant. Neither does Tsutsiev (2014; p. 48-50). Nor does the encyclopedic entry (which is a very poor source) on Turks.
   A fly-by editor noted (helpfully) that it might be the case that the line was uncited; since then, the line has been removed by another editor for being unsourced. Fwiw, my belief is that the line is historically inaccurate.
3. At Tuqaq, VC wrote:

   Though Tuqaq was an important figure in Oghuz Yabgu, his relationship with other influential state leaders was complicated as he objected to their policy of raiding other Turkic tribes. Tuqaq's son, Seljuq, held similar views and this may have been a primary cause for other Turks within the Oghuz Yabgu State to join the Seljuq's tribe after it left Oghuz Yabgu for a new homeland in Transoxiana, particularly for a Merv oasis. This would later have a significant importance as Seljuqs, known as Turkomans by that time, became a formidable force in Khorasan and enabled them to challenge powerful Ghaznavids.

   Two sources were appended at the end of the paragraph. The first one is a romantic fiction novel (consult the sub-section, below - ). The second one is a very reliable source (Peacock 2010; p. 92-93) except that the cited pages did not support the content. As I noted at the t/p, Peacock actually presents contradictory evidence about the Turkmens being quite willing to raid fellow tribes but VC did not engage with me. This is, what I call, a 180° misrepresentation of sources.
4. At Turkoman (ethnonym), VC wrote:

   Turkoman literature includes the famous Book of Dede Korkut which was UNESCO's 2000 literary work of the year.

   The paragraph went in unsourced but at some point of time (atleast, as of the second GAN), a source from UNO was provided. All it said was that the book was chosen to be included in the UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists which includes a variety of art-forms, fesivities, and even cuisines among other things. There exists no evidence that UNESCO confers any honor titled "Literary Work of the Year" or equivalents thereof.
5. At Tuqaq, VC wrote (diff is of the version that passed GAN; nobody other than him had committed any major edit to the article till then):

   "Tuqaq Temur Yalig" literally means "iron bow" or "with an iron bow" in old Turkic language

   If you see the current article (I rewrote it), "Temur Yalig", a sobriquet given to Tuqaq, means "Iron Bow"; the meaning of the word Tuqaq is unknown. For anybody acquainted in Seljuq historiography, the line is bound to catch attention; I checked the cited source (in Turkish) for such an exceptional claim, and tagged the line with a failed-verification tag.
   In response, VC did not neither change the content of the line nor remove the source but cited another English source which, ofcourse, did not claim any such thing and removed the tag. I do not like edit-warring and requested of VC to quote the particular line from the new source but to no avail.
6. At Tuqaq, VC wrote:

   Oghuz Yabgu was a Turkic nomadic confederation founded by the Oghuz tribes in AD 766, located in an area between the coasts of the Caspian and Aral Seas.

   For anybody acquainted with relevant historiography, this is a stunning claim because we know almost nothing about the Oghuz polity, much less the precise year of its foundation. The source was:"Zuev Yu. A., Horse Tamgas from Vassal Princedoms (Translation of Chinese composition "Tanghuyao" of 8th–10th centuries), Kazakh SSR Academy of Sciences, Alma-Ata, I960, p. 133 (In Russian)"
   A dated Soviet-era publication, and something was off. I consulted both the Soviet original and an online translation but failed to verify the factoid. VC had no response at the t/p and I discarded the factoid as well as the source.
7. At Tuqaq, VC wrote:

   The Persian epic Maliqnameh (Book of Kings) mentions a warrior called Tuqaq who served a Khazar Khagan (ruler). It is possible that Tuqaq served the Khazars before the collapse of their state, caused by the pressure from the Cumans. He subsequently made an alliance with the Oghuz Yabgu State, with which he remained for the rest of his life..

   If you consult the current version, written by me, things are far nuanced.
   Being acquainted that such was the case, I went to consult the source (in Russian) and there's nothing relevant at the URL provided. I also wish to emphasize that the source is a translation of a chronicle from the twelfth century (!); it is a primary source and ought have been never used at the first place.
8. At Tuqaq, VC wrote:

   Historians Bosworth and Peacock, however, believe that the story about Duqaq's quarrel with the Yabghu is a back projection of a later role and was invented with the Seljuqid involvement in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries.

   Misrepresentation of the source. As shown in the current version and noted by me at t/p (without any engagement from VC), Peacock and Bosworth believes that the Islamic rendition of the story — where Tuqaq refuses to fight Muslims (rather than Turk tribes) — is a "back projection of a later role [..]". Not that the whole story is some kind of later-day-fabrication!
9. At Timur, VC wrote (emphases mine):

   British historian David Nicolle, in his "The Mongol Warlords", quotes an anonymous contemporary historian who compared Timur's army to "ants and locusts [..]".

   I consulted the source and it did use the quote; however, Nicolle did not provide any any information the anonymity or the contemporaneous nature about the author of the quote! (Inaccurate) OR on VC"s part. In reality multiple contemporary chroniclers — from Ahmad ibn Arabshah to Sharaf al-Din Ali Yazdi — had compared Timurid army to a horde of ants and locusts; this was the reason why Nicolle did not bother to provide any attribution whatsoever :)
10. At Bayandur (tribe), VC added to the first line of the lead:

    Bayundur, is one of the 24 Oghuz Turkic tribes.

    This figure is unsourced, unworthy of being a lead factoid, and inaccurate. As Peacock (2010; p. 20-21) notes, chroniclers vary on the number of subtribes of the Oghuz: Kashgari claims 22, Marvazī claims 12, and others other. Even if one relies on Kashgari, the value ought be 22 since, as Peacock notes, two (of the twenty-four) sub-tribes are explicitly discarded. This shows the necessity of reliance on high-quality sources.

Choice of Sources / NPOV violations / FRINGE

1. At Tuqaq, VC wrote:

   After what Seljuq and his followers adopted Islam, they refused to pay taxes to the Oghuz Yabgu State since the Turks of Oghuz Yabgu were not Muslims.

   What was the source? A romantic fiction novel: "Herth, William (2007). The Secret Alchemy of Mary Magdalene. Ormus Publications and Booksellers LLC.". Anyway, the claim is historically inaccurate and grossly un-nuanced. I raised the issue at t/p but to no avail.
   Why would VC find a romantic fiction (!) to be an appropriate source for Seljuqid History is unknown. Such being the case, am I wrong to request/demand that VC stops editing relevant articles?
2. At Tuqaq, VC wrote (diff is of the version that passed GAN; nobody other than him had committed any major edit to the article till then):

   It is known, however, that Tuqaq had a far-reaching feud with the ruler of the Oghuz Yabgu State when the latter assembled a formidable army against neighboring Muslims. This most probably means that at the latter stages of his life, Tuqaq adopted Islam.

   The cited source is a translation of about a century-old Soviet work. However, as the current version of the article shows, the subject's admiration for Islam was interpolated in texts, centuries since his death. Peacock (2010), a source that VC is acquainted with and has cited for other purposes, is emphatic on these "later additions". So, why did VC choose to portray the above as a statement-of-fact in wiki-voice? What explains VC's use of dated Soviet texts for pushing fringe POVs and his reticence to NPOV the content even after being pointed to Peacock and other scholars at the t/p?
3. At Tuqaq, VC wrote (diff is of the version that passed GAN; nobody other than him had committed any major edit to the article till then):

   Tuqaq's father's name was Kerequchi, who was either a popular local blacksmith or a master of tent-making (yurts).

   The line (and the paragraph) is unsourced. Peacock (2010), a source that VC is acquainted with and has cited for other purposes, writes:

   the genealogy tracing Seljuq’s descent back to one Karakuchı Khwaja, a maker of tents for the Turkish Khans, clearly does not derive from Nıshapurı as Agadzhanov thought. It is almost certainly an Ilkhanid invention, perhaps designed to denigrate the prestige of the Seljuq family.

   So, once again, we have NPOV content written in wiki-voice as a matter-of-fact. I had raised the issue at t/p but VC did not engage.