Jump to content

User talk:Khodabandeh14

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Khodabandeh14 (talk | contribs) at 22:37, 6 August 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article contains some sources on Nezami Ganjavi which can be useful for later in the article (if necessary)(I was emailed a long page in Russian but figured out most of the English part and possibly its main message)

I am satisfied with the current English wikipedia but it can be changed to favor a more neutral point of view (for example Persian poet should be in the first sentence). That article basically tries to use Rypka (whose work is now 50 years dated and thank God there are now abudnant number of scholarly works and articles by Western Nezami scholas) and some other works to give the impression that an "Azerbaijani school of poetry" equates to "Azerbaijani literature". Also for example it quotes negative reviews of works which do not work in its favor (while ignoring the many positive reviews of the same books!). Here I am only concentrating on the Western scholars who have some weight in Persian literature (e.g. Chelkowski, Mcdonald..etc.) and have some serious contributions to Nezami studies. For example Hamid Notqi and Javad Heyat have no such weight.


Arranian, Azerbaijani, Shirvani, Tabrizi, Trans-Caucasian School of poetry=

From original works of Safa, Shafagaqzadeh, Foruzanfar who do not talk about "School of Azerbaijan" but rather poetry in the Caucasus (Arran) and Azerbaijan and its special features (Christian imagery more Arabic vocabulary). Having an "Azerbaijan school of poetry" , "Arranian school of poetry" or Trans-caucasian poetry does not define nationality, ethnicity or even regionality. Because for example someone like Saib Tabrizi and many other poets of Iran (specially in the Safavid era) followed the Indian style of poetry (Indian school) while someone of them never even set foot in India. None of them were from India or even Indian. So that is a classic example of WP:synthesis to assign a style of poetry with certain non-existent ethnicity concepts of the time. Also Qatran Tabrizi was clearly Iranian (lived before the Seljuq invasion even)(who is credited with the school) but had Western Persian (Fahlavi) language (which did not have the East Iranian words of Khorasani Persian).

Unfortunately people like Chelkowski or Rypka are even not fully quoted in that study. Although it should be mentioned Rypka lived under the USSR era and he had no access to Nozhat al-Majales which is a ground breaking book in the history of Arran, Sharwan and Azerbaijan.

From Chelkowski (Mirror of-the Invisible World)"Nizami's strong character, his social sensibility, and his poetic genius fused with his rich Persian cultural heritage to create a new standard of literary achievement. Using themes from the oral tradition and written historical records, his poems unite pre-Islamic and Islamic Iran"(pp6, Mirror of the Invsibile World(1975)) "Probably no Persian writer has inspired succeeding generation of poets more than Nizami"(pp 9, Mirror of the Invisible World) ""Khosrow and Shirin" proved to be a literary turning point not only for Nizami but for all of Persian poetry. Furthermore it was the first poem in Persian literature to achieve complete structural and artistic unity"(pp6, Mirror of the Invisible World(1975)), The Encyclopedia of Islam(Leiden one) article on Nezami is also a complete survey from a Nezami expert (Chelkowski).

To Rypka (whose work is now from almost 50 years ago and have been supplemented by much newer works Nozhat al-Majales and the book by Francois De Blois,etc.) “The centripetal tendency is evident in the unity of Persian literature from the points of view of language and content and also in the sense of civic unity. Even the Caucasian Nizami, although living on the far-flung periphery, does not manifest a different spirit and apostrophizes Iran as the Heart of the World. “(pg 76, History of Iranian literature)

Peter Chelkowski Literature in Pre-Safavid Isfahan // International Society for Iranian Studies Iranian Studies, Vol. 7, No. 1/2. — Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of International Society for Iranian Studies, 1974. — С. 112-131.


Then the following is quoted in the Russian wikipedia: "Amonth those Persian writers who recognize "Azerbaijani" as a major school with particular references are: Shafag, R., Tarikh-e Adabiyat (Tehran, 1936), 212 ff.; Safa.Z., Tarikh-e Adabiyat dar Iran (Tehran, 1957), II, 342 ff.; Shahriyar. M.H., introduction to his Divan, IV, 6; Foruzanfar, B., Sokhan va Sokhanvaran, II, part 1, 1334."(Sakina Berengian Azeri and Persian literary works in twentieth century Iranian Azerbaijan. — Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1988. — 238 с. — ISBN 3922968694) My comment However in actuality, none of these authors use the term "Azerbaijani school" or "Azerbaijani style". They simply write about the Arabic words, high symbolism and Christian phrases used by poets such as Khaqani.


My general comment: The regional styles (which still do not have a single unified name) are in reality subset of one of three major styles. This style of poetry, if we assume Rypka's text, was initiated with Qatran Tabrizi whose language was a Fahlavi dialect. Francois De Blois, Persian Literature - A Biobibliographical Survey: Volume V Poetry of the Pre-Mongol Period Volume 5 of Persian Literature, Routledge, 2004. 2nd edition. pg 187: "The point of the anectode is clear that the diwans of these poets contained Eastern Iranian (i.e. Sogdian etc.) words that were incomprehensible to a Western Persian like Qatran, who consquently took advantage of an educated visitor from the East, Nasir, to ascertain their meaning " He was not Turkish. Or for example many poets in Iran followed the Indian style. None of them were Indian or wrote Indian poetry. So an attempt to de-Iranianize(de-Persianize) these poets has no success. Specially if one wants to claim Turkish culture in the area, they have to bring an equivalent of Nozhat al-Majales. Dr. Amin Riyahi calls the style, the "Arranian style" and has done a good study upon it in the introduction of Nozhat al-Majales.

Ultimately, whatever one calls it:"Tabriz style, Sherwan style, Azerbaijani school, Arranian style, Trans-caucasian school"..none of these have to do with any particular ethnic or national identity concepts.


Chelkowski Invisible Mirror

Chelkowski is obvisouly a well known Nezami expert, but why isn't he quoted when he discusses the Persian heritage of Nezami?

From Chelkowski (Mirror of-the Invisible World) "Nizami's strong character, his social sensibility, and his poetic genius fused with his rich Persian cultural heritage to create a new standard of literary achievement. Using themes from the oral tradition and written historical records, his poems unite pre-Islamic and Islamic Iran"(pp6, Mirror of the Invsibile World(1975)) "Probably no Persian writer has inspired succeeding generation of poets more than Nizami"(pp 9, Mirror of the Invisible World) ""Khosrow and Shirin" proved to be a literary turning point not only for Nizami but for all of Persian poetry. Furthermore it was the first poem in Persian literature to achieve complete structural and artistic unity"(pp6, Mirror of the Invisible World(1975))

"The great Persian authority on Nizami, Vahid Dastgerdi, calls "Khosrow and Shirin" "the best historical fable of love and chastity, the treasture of eloquence, counsel, and wisdom." The foremost Russian specialist E. E. Bertels, believes that "Khosrow and Shirin" is "one of the greatest masterpieces, not only in Azarbaijani but in world literature. For the first time in poetry of the Near East, the personality of a human being has been shown with all its richness, with all its contradictions and ups and down". J. Rypka in his comprehensive study of Iranian literature writes of "Khosrow and Shirin": "It is the story of the love and sorrow of a princess and a women and a wife, in its sincerity unequaled by any other work in Persian literature"(pp 48, Mirror of the Invisible World(1975))

"One of the most comprehensive descriptions of Nizami's personality is given by the great English orientalist E.G. Browne: "And if his genius has few rivals amongst the poets of Persia, his character has even fewer. he was genuinely pious yet singularly devoid of fanaticism and intolerance, self-respecting and independent, yet gentle and unostentaious, a loving father and husband. In a word, he may be justly described as combining lofty genius and blameless character in a degree unequaled by any other Persian poet."(pp 5-6, Mirror of the Invisible World(1975))

The issue of Turkish words

The author claims:"Azerbaijani style of poetry means Turkish words".. however nowhere is such a sentence found in Meisami or anywhere else. He uses this to support his thesis: John Perry. Iran & the Caucasus, Vol. 5, (2001 ), pp. 193-200 . THE HISTORICAL ROLE OF TURKISH IN RELATION TO PERSIAN OF IRAN. "We should distinguish two complementary ways in which the advent of the Turks affected the language map of Iran. First, since the Turkish-speaking rulers of most Iranian polities from the Ghaznavids and Seljuks onward were already iranized and patronized Persian literature in their domains, the expansion of Turk-ruled empires served to expand the territorial domain of written Persian into the conquered areas, notably Anatolia and Central and South Asia. Secondly, the influx of massive Turkish-speaking populations (culminating with the rank and file of the Mongol armies) and their settlement in large areas of Iran (particularly in Azerbaijan and the northwest), progressively turkicized local speakers of Persian, Kurdish and other Iranian languages. Although it is mainly the results of this latter process which will be illustrated here, it should be remembered that these developments were contemporaneous and complementary. 2 . General Effects of the Safavid Accession Both these processes peaked with the accession of the Safavid Shah Esma'il in 1501 CE. He and his successors were Turkish-speakers, probably descended from turkicized Iranian inhabitants of the northwest marches. While they accepted and promoted written Persian as the established language of bureaucracy and literature, the fact that they and their tribal supporters habitually spoke Turkish in court and camp lent this vernacular an unprecedented prestige. And on this: “

"There are hundreds of loanwords from Turkish of all periods listed in Gerhard Doerfer's works (he designates about 1.200 of these "Azeri", - see Doerfer 1988, p. 246 ), and a variety of Turkish words and phrases are attested in Persian verse from pre-Mongol times onward, as identified in several articles by Tourkhan Gandjei. Both phenomena attest to the continuing symbiosis of Turks and Persians, especially in the realms of power politics and popular culture. Neither of these corpora, however, can be used to document the lasting effects of Turkish on Persian. Much, probably most, of the Turco-Mongol vocabulary in Classical Persian histories and the like is ephemeral, ie, it comprises obsolete military and administrative-terms such as daruye and soyuryal. Similarly, most Turkish words showcased in the Persian poetry of such as Nezami, Khaqani, Suzani and Rumi are less than ephemeral - they have never been incor-porated, even temporarily, into Persian; the verb forms and phrases, in particular (Eg, oltur 'sit down', qonaq gerek 'do you want a guest?'), Were not even candidates for lexical borrowing. Like Abu Nuwas in his macaronic fahlawiyyt, the poets are being cute and showing off. “

The key is: “Like Abu Nuwas in his macaronic fahlawiyyt, the poets are being cute and showing off.” However the macaronic poems apply to Rumi or Suzani. Khaqani also has some poems where Georgian and Turkish words are used.

The author is contrasting speech vs written language. That is correct, these military and administrative terms never have been part of the everyday permanent Persian vocabulary. This is like many Arabic words in Persian literary language that is not used in everyday speech. Their main domain was only for military usage, administration and history. So military administrative terms were used by historians, poets, writers and educated class. But these did not have an effect everyday Persian speech. However, virtually every single Turkish term used by Nezami (around 30 or so, which is not much) has been used by poets from Khorasan and other poets before him.

Rumi does actually have some Greek (50 verses) and Turkish poetry (200 verses). Nezami has no Turkish phrases.

As per Rumi: Annemarie Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in his verse" As per Suzani: According to his own claim, he was a scion of the family of Salman the Persian(noted by Rypka as well).

On this issue of Turkish words of Nezami, virtually all of them are found in other poets. This is detailed in a study of Nezami by Behruz Servatiyan (whose notes are considered useful and explanatory by Francois de Blois)

بهروز ثروتیان – اندیشه های نظامی گنجوی – چاپخانه آیدین- تبریز (1382) صفحه 168) ولیکن میدانیم که زبان مادری خود نظامی، کردی و زبان پدری و زبان علمی و کتابی او در واقع مانند زبان کتابی عموم ایرانیان فارسی بوده است و آثار ترکی، جز در کنایات عرفی و یا چند واژه‌ی معمول در زمان شاعر و چندین واژه‌ی دخیله از قرن‌های چهارم و پنج در خراسان اثر زبان ترکی – همانند مانند مولوی و خاقانی --- در شش دفتر پنج گنج نظامی دیده نمیشود.

Translation: We know that the mother tongue of Nezami, was Kurdish and his father tongue, as well as his scientific and written language was the general language of Iranians: Persian. Turkish words, (unlike the works of Khaqani and Rumi) are not seen in his works, except some common terms and words that were widespread in the lifetime of the poet and that had entered the Persian of Khorasan since the 10th and 11th centuries.

Note Behruz Servatiyan mentioned in these two Iranica articles: http://www.iranica.com/articles/leyli-o-majnun-narrative-poem http://www.iranica.com/articles/kosrow-o-sirin

“Sherefdin altkaya, in an an earlier study, compiled a total of 103 words of Turkic origin in Mevlana’s Persian poetry. This is infinitesimal compared with his output in Persian”( Talat. S. Halman, Rapture and Revolution, Syracuse University Press, November, 2007., pg 267) ―The Turks, on the other hand, posed a formidable threat: their penetration into Iranian lands was considerable, to such an extent that vast regions adapted their language. This process was all the more remarkable since, in spite of their almost uninterrupted political domination for nearly 1,000 years, the cultural influence of these rough nomads on Iran‘s refined civilization remained extremely tenuous. This is demonstrated by the mediocre linguistic contribution, for which exhaustive statistical studies have been made (Doerfer). The number of Turkish or Mongol words that entered Persian, though not negligible, remained limited to 2,135, i.e., 3 percent of the vocabulary at the most. These new words are confined on the one hand to the military and political sector (titles, administration, etc.) and, on the other hand, to technical pastoral terms. The contrast with Arab influence is striking. While cultural pressure of the Arabs on Iran had been intense, they in no way infringed upon the entire Iranian territory, whereas with the Turks, whose contributions to Iranian civilization were modest, vast regions of Iranian lands were assimilated, notwithstanding the fact that resistance by the latter was ultimately victorious. Several reasons may be offered.‖ (Xavier Planhol,

As Perry said: “Like Abu Nuwas in his macaronic fahlawiyyt, the poets are being cute and showing off.”

Khaqani for example has a mixed(macaronic) Georgian and Persian verse. Rumi has a mixed macaronic Turkish, Greek, Arabic and Persian verse. Suzani who claimed descent from Salman the Persian has mixed Turko-Persian verses. However, nezami has none. Nezami simply has some Turkish words (that are used by Khorasan poets as well). Assuming there are Turkish words that Nezami has used which did not exist in Persian literature before and around his time, he could have learned it from his wife who was a Kypchak. However, a detailed study shows that almost all the Turkish words used by Nezami (which is at most one third of the 103 used by Rumi) are found among Khorasanian and other Persian poets.

So this has nothing to do with ethnicity or even the Azerbaijani, Tabarizi, Arranian, Trans-Caucuasian or Sharvani style.

Rypka

We must remember Rypka lived before the Nozhat al-Majales was discovered and he lived under the USSR which attempted serious nation building. Either way, there are some quotes that were missed.

For example the author mentions these: " “Hence the Caucasian and Azerbayjanian panegyrists must be placed in a special chapter; they form a clearly defined group of three generations of teachers and pupils, one of whom, as a grand master of qasida, had a powerful influence on the development of this form of poetry. To this group belonged the most brilliant poet of Azerbayjan, the romantic Nizami. All the poets worked at court or at least within the realm of the Shirvan-Shahs, who favoured literature written in the Persian tongue with their especial patronage, for the Shirvan-Shahs traced their descent from Bahram Chobin. Yet Persian was not their native language, though it predominated in works of literature; folk-poetry of course developed in consistence with local idiom.”(pg 202, History of Iranian literature)"

However Rypka has this: Rypka: “The school which began with Qatran (d. 1072), formed a well defined group of teachers and pupils of whom two, Khaqani and Nizami, were to exert a lasting influence on the entire development of their respective genere: Khaqani being the greatest exponent of the qasida and Nizami the most brilliant writer of romantic epics. Apart from the latter poet, all the others were attached to courts, even though Persian was not the language of the princes whose praised they sang”( Rypka, Jan. ‘Poets and Prose Writers of the Late Saljuq and Mongol Periods’, in The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 5, The Saljuq and Mongol Periods, ed., Published January 1968. Pg 584, pg 569)

So Persian was not the language of Shirvanshahs? or Atabeks or whom? So language of Shirvanshah might have been Fahlavi (other Iranian languages) and not standard Persian? It sure was not Turkish. So what was it?

Then this is quoted by the author by Rypka: "But as we have no indication of his having spent any length of time outside the gates of his native Gandja, we conclude that a high standard of education must have existed among the urban Mussilman communities in the Caucasus and in Gandja in particular. The mosaic of nationalities in the Caucasus in Nizami's time was probably not very different from what it is today. And even if we concede a larger number of inhabitants Persian as their mother-tonque, they were still no doubt a minority. What wonder then that Azerbaijan is not content to name the poet a native of Azerbaijan, but claim him as a member of the Turkish race. It cannot be denied that his mother, whom the poet himself, in his epic, Laili and Majnun, designates Kurdish Raysa, was of different (Iranian) origin. The undisputed supremacy of Persian culture, in which the Turkish tribes could only participate through the Persian tongue, makes understandable that Nizami should write in Persian. His mastery of the language is as unexampled as his command of thought. Only a detailed history of the Caucasian town can clear up the question of Nizami's nationality. Not even the Persians seem to have been quite sure of their ground. Only thus can we explain their interpolation of a verse in "The Treasury of Mysteries" in which the poet's birthplace is given at Qumm, that is in Persia proper. Not was he the only native of Azerbaijan to write in Persian. Qatran of Shadiabad, not much younger than Firdawsi, the century-later panegyrist, Abu-I-Ala of Gandja, and then Falaki and Khagani, all poets of the first water, the last- named, indeed, one of the greatest masters of court poetry, are among them. "(Jan Rypka Nizami // Czechoslovak Society for Eastern Studies New Orient: Journal for the Modern and Ancient Cultures of Asia and Africa.. — Prague: 1961. — В. 2. — № 4. — С. 111-133)

All of these are interesting quotes, however: 1) Qatran Tabrizi was Iranian 2) Rypka did not have access to Nozhat al-Majales 3) to Claim the population was Caucasus was the not very different from what is it is today is wrong on many accounts (see many quotes on Turkicization of the region up to the Safavid period). 4) The Qumm quote comes way before the era of modern nationalism. 5) Nezami was from an Urban background, "so Turkish tribes" does not pretain to him.

Rypka quote: “The centripetal tendency is evident in the unity of Persian literature from the points of view of language and content and also in the sense of civic unity. Even the Caucasian Nizami, although living on the far-flung periphery, does not manifest a different spirit and apostrophizes Iran as the Heart of the World. “(pg 76, History of Iranian literature) “The Azerbayjan of today, extremely proud of its world-famous countryman, is not content with the mere fact of his being a compatriot but also considers him as belonging to its Turkish tribes. His mother, whom the poet mentions as Rasia in his Layli u Majnun and designates as a Kurdish woman, was at any rate of Iranian extraction.”(pg 210, History of Iranian literature)

“When Nasir Khusraw visited Azarbayjan in 1046, Qatran requested to him to explain some of the most difficult passages in the divan of Munjik and Daqiqi that were written in “Persian”, i.e. according Chr. Shaffer, in the Persian of Khurasan, a language that he, as a Western Persian, might not be expected to understand, in contrast to the guest from Khurasan”(pg 194) Comment: So Rypka distinguishes between “Persian of Khuasan” and Persian in the general sense. And this is made clear again by this book: Francois De Blois, Persian Literature - A Biobibliographical Survey: Volume V Poetry of the Pre-Mongol Period Volume 5 of Persian Literature, Routledge, 2004. 2nd edition. pg 187: "The point of the anectode is clear that the diwans of these poets contained Eastern Iranian (i.e. Sogdian etc.) words that were incomprehensible to a Western Persian like Qatran, who consquently took advantage of an educated visitor from the East, Nasir, to ascertain their meaning” So these are dialectical differences. Standard Persian had some east Iranian influences (i.e. Sogdian) that was not present in the mother language of Qatran (who even lived before the Seljuq era. Just like Nizami’s great ancestor lived before that era).

Rypka:“The number of imitators of Nizami’s Khamsa was exceptionally great both in Iran and in areas of sphere of Persian culture, i.e. Turkey, Central Asia and India” Rypka, Jan. ‘Poets and Prose Writers of the Late Saljuq and Mongol Periods’, in The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 5, The Saljuq and Mongol Periods, ed., Published January 1968. Pg 584) Rypka: “The subject of the third epic, written in 1188, is not taken from Persian history but is borrowed from the Arabian world: not that of the Bedouins, but one closer to the Persian conception of Arabia”(IBID, pg 580)

There is one problem with Rypka. He died in 1968 and he did not have access to Nozhat al-Majales. http://www.iranica.com/articles/nozhat-al-majales

“Nozhat al-mājales is thus a mirror of the social conditions at the time, reflecting the full spread of Persian language and the culture of Iran throughout that region, clearly evidenced by the common use of spoken idioms in poems as well as the professions of the some of the poets (see below). The influence of the northwestern Pahlavi language, for example, which had been the spoken dialect of the region, is clearly observed in the poems contained in this anthology.”(http://www.iranica.com/articles/nozhat-al-majales) “The most significant merit of Nozhat al-majāles, as regards the history of Persian literature, is that it embraces the works of some 115 poets from the northwestern Iran (Arrān, Šarvān, Azerbaijan; including 24 poets from Ganja alone), where, due to the change of language, the heritage of Persian literature in that region has almost entirely vanished”( http://www.iranica.com/articles/nozhat-al-majales) “In contrast to poets from other parts of Persia, who mostly belonged to higher echelons of society such as scholars, bureaucrats, and secretaries, a good number of poets in the northwestern areas rose from among the common people with working class backgrounds, and they frequently used colloquial expressions in their poetry. They are referred to as water carrier (saqqāʾ), sparrow dealer (ʿoṣfori), saddler (sarrāj), bodyguard (jāndār), oculist (kaḥḥāl), blanket maker (leḥāfi), etc., which illustrates the overall use of Persian in that region” ( http://www.iranica.com/articles/nozhat-al-majales) So he might mean the Shirvanshahs who probably spoke an Iranian language (not standard Khurasani Persian). According to Minorsky, the name aghsartan is Ossetian. Rypka did not have access to recently found manuscripts like Safinaye Tabriz and Nozhat al-Majales. Nozhat al-Majales is a decisive proof that the language of the area was Persian or related to Persian. Indeed while at this time there is not even a single Turkish verse from Arran/Shirvan in general, it has poems from 24 poets of Ganja alone, many of them not related to court poetry. All these languages are Iranian (Iranic)(Northwest Pahlavi, Khurasani Persian) and the mentioned people refer to themselves as Persian (in the ethnic sense). Just like German or French or Italian had many dialects and regional variety. So when we say Persian/Iranian ethnically, we are including all regional Iranian dialects. However when speak of Persian language, we usually mean the standard Khurasani Persian dialect which is the Khurasani variant of Sassanid Middle Persian. Qatran Tabrizi also differentiates between Persian (his own language) and Dari (Khorasani Persian) بلبل به سان مطرب بیدل فراز گل گه پارسی نوازد، گاهی زند دری Translation: The nightingale is on top of the flower like a minstrel who has lost her heart It bemoans sometimes in Parsi (Persian) and sometimes in Dari (Khurasani Persian) One of these Iranian languages now in Caucasus is obviously Kurdish(which in the Qajar time was called “Fors-e-Qadim”(Old Persian)). Others are Tati (which even according to 19th century sources was more widespread) and another one is Talyshi. There was languages at this time as well. However, from the point of view of standard Persian, the Nozhat al-Majales has traces of Arranian Persian language which is understandable yet it has its own peculiarities.

In conclusion: 1) Rypka is an old source (50 years old). 2) His statement on Qatran now has been rectified by Francois De Blois, Persian Literature - A Biobibliographical Survey: Volume V Poetry of the Pre-Mongol Period Volume 5 of Persian Literature, Routledge, 2004. 2nd edition. pg 187: "The point of the anectode is clear that the diwans of these poets contained Eastern Iranian (i.e. Sogdian etc.) words that were incomprehensible to a Western Persian like Qatran, who consquently took advantage of an educated visitor from the East, Nasir, to ascertain their meaning " He was not Turkish. 3) His statement on the population of the area has been rectified by

Bertels Eugene Edwardovich

He passed away in 1957..before Nozhat al-Majales in the politicized atmosphere of USSR.. there is enough quote on USSR politicization of Nizami to dissmiss many of his ideas. He did produce better editions of the Panj Ganj and Shahnameh... However the recent editions of Panj Ganj by Baraat Zanjani have rectified the many mistakes. Similarly the new edition of Shahnameh by Khaleqi Mutlaq have corrected many of the mistakes in the Shahnameh. As the author passed away in 1957, which is more than 50 years ago, one must simply concentrate on Western and living Nezami scholars for the article.

C. A. (Charles Ambrose) Storey and Franço de Blois (2004), "Persian Literature - A Biobibliographical Survey: Volume V Poetry of the Pre-Mongol Period.", RoutledgeCurzon; 2nd revised edition (June 21, 2004). Pg 363: "Nizami Ganja’i, whose personal name was Ilyas, is the most celebrated native poet of the Persians after Firdausi. His nisbah designates him as a native of Ganja (Elizavetpol, Kirovabad) in Azerbaijan, then still a country with an Iranian population, and he spent the whole of his life in Transcaucasia; the verse in some of his poetic works which makes him a native of the hinterland of Qom is a spurious interpolation."

Bertels also did not have access to Nozhat al-Majales which was published 30 years after him.

Diakonov

The Paths of history(1999) is a translation of a 1993 work. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/product-description/0521643988/ref=dp_proddesc_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books The memoirs is his last work. The memoir is also quoted by Viktor Shnirelman, making it good enough for Wikipedia.

In the memoir he explicitly states(1995 and his last work): “There were slight problems with Nizami - first of all he was not Azeri but Persian (Iranian) poet, and though he lived in presently Azerbaijani city of Ganja, which, like many cities in the region, had Iranian population in Middle Ages” In the paths of history, he says: footenote 47 on page 110 “Nizami lived in Ganja, a Turkic (Azerbaijani) speaking city, but he wrote in Persian”

It is true that Ganja is now a Turkic speaking city, but the name itself is Persian and at one time, its population was Iranic Nozhat al-majales. Which one is the correct opinion? Viktor Shnirelman (whose book in www.scholar.google.com has received excellent reviews), has chosen the memoir which is Diakonov’s last work by default. Also Diakonov is clear that he is speaking about the Middle Ages in the memoir, but he is not clear in the paths of history. Indeed it is WP:OR to assume Diakonov is contradicting himself or to pick one quote over the other. If we assume that the sentences do not contradict, it only makes sense that Diakonov is stating “although he lived in presently Azerbaijani city of Ganja”(which is a Turkic speaking city), he wrote in Persian, and Ganja was Iranian speaking in the Middle ages, and Nezami was not an Azeri, but Persian(Iranian). However, if there is confusion, both quotes can be removed or both can be inserted to support other opinion. However, in one quote, he clearly states "Was this and not that".. Probably let the mediator/moderator to decide the issue.

Once again on the Leili o Majnoon and Axsatan quotes

Since Tourkhan Gandjei was mentioned. (Tourkhan Gandjei, “Turkish in Pre-Mongol Persian Poetry” BSOAS 49, 1986, pp. 67-76), also states: "The Oghuz tribes which formed the basis of the Saljuq power, and to one which the Seljuqs belonged were culturally backward, and contrary to the opinion advanced by some scholars(he mentions a Turkish scholar), did not posses a written language. Thus the Seljuqs did not, or rather could not take steps towards the propagating the Turkish language, in a written form, much less the patronage of Turkish letters. "

Comment: That is Turkish literary tradition did not exist for a kings during Seljuq era to ask for Turkish poetry. If it did exist, please provide an example of a Turkish epic under the Seljuq domain at the time of Nezami from any poet or author. Rypka also mentions this too:"The undisputed supremacy of Persian culture, in which the Turkish tribes could only participate through the Persian tongue, makes understandable that Nizami should write in Persian." Also Nezami according to him came from an urban background (his ancestry dates prior to the Seljuq invasion). This has been covered more here: [1] 1) Shirvanshahs were not Turks.. it would only make sense that if Nezami was Turkish, he would write Turkish for Turkic patrons. 2) There is not a single Turkish poem from any poet of the Caucasus at the time. Nezami has left a good deal of lyrical poetry (quatrain, qasida, ghazal), these were not associated with the court. If he was Turkish, he would have written some Turkish ghazals. 3) Kaplaki (is the first author), Heyat, Notqi are all Turks (the last two are actually nationalistic). Heyat/Notqi are not experts in Persian literature neither is Kaplaki/Andrews. However Dastgerdi (praised by Chelkowski, his explanatory notes also certified by de Blois, quoted and used by many Nezami experts, Zaryab Khoi, Therwatiyan and host of others) have given the proper intrepretation of this poem. In case this issue becomes necessary, both intrepretations can be given.

Mccdonald

M. V. McDonald The Religious and Social Views Nizami of Ganjeh // Iran, Vol. 1 (1963), pp. 97-101. — British Institute of Persian Studies. British Institute of Persian Studies Directors' Report April 1st 1961-March 31st 1962 // Iran, Vol. 1 (1963), pp. v-x. — British Institute of Persian Studies.

Al-Muqaddasi also writes on the general region of Armenia, Arran and Azerbaijan and states: “They have big beards, their speech is not attractive. In Arminya they speak Armenian, in al-Ran, Ranian (Aranian); Their Persian is understandable, and is close to Khurasanian (Dari Persian) in sound” (Al-Muqaddasi, ‘The Best Divisions for Knowledge of the Regions’, a translation of his Ahsan al-Taqasim fi Ma’rifat al-Aqalim by B.A. Collins, Centre for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, Garnet Publishing Limited,1994. pg 334).

So they had their own peculiar Persian language(e.g. Nozhat al-Majales). It has been called Fahlavi, Old Azari and etc. All of these are mentioned Persian in classical sources. However, while they are Iranic, they are not exactly the same Khorasani Persian(mentioned already by Francois de Blois)

“Nizami then did take over the form of a mystical mathnavi in order to express his own ideas and even if he was not the only Persian poet to adopt this artifice, he might well be the first. A closer inspection of the Stifl passages in the Makhzan-ul-Asrdr tends to bear out this view.”

“In spite of the little we know of him, Nizaml's character is more real to us than that of most other Persian poets, for he never attempts to hide his feelings, as so many of his less fortunate colleagues were impelled to do. The importance of placing primary reliance on his own writings as a guide to his philosophy needs to be stressed, for it seems possible that some of them may have seemed offensive to later generations of Persian writers. There could be no question of suppressing them, for they were immensely popular, but they could be misrepresented, in the same way that Nizaml himself was made made out to be a Shl'a and a native of Qom. One should likewise be wary of the term " mystical " which tends to be used as a blanket description of all Persian religious poetry. The fact is that there is very little evidence for a mystical interpretation of Nizimt's work. To be sure, it is possible to find in it certain references, for example, the one to Hallaj, particularly in the Makhzan-ul-Asrdr; but they are all quite superficial, used illustratively, and furthermore had already become part of the stock-in-trade of the twelfth-century Persian poet” “Not everything had changed, of course. Nizami still refused to have anything to do with court life, and still reserved the right to be as rude as he liked about it. But from now on his great interest, like that of Ferdowsi, was in the past of Iran.”

“Nizami was, at this period of his life, a genuine social reformer, but his ideals were those of the twelfth century. Thus he does not reject the idea of kingship, which was an integral part of the Persian way of life, or object to the immense privileges enjoyed by the ruling classes.”

So all of these shows Nezami's with Persian/Iran and etc.

On de-Iranization and Stalin

De-Iranization does not necessarily contradict de-Turkification. USSR authorities were more interested in building an "Azerbaijani identity" separate from both Iran and Turkey. Thus their main claim was actually Nezami was "Azerbaijani" rather than "Turkish". So no need for long arguments here.

Non expert authors

Non-expert authors who do not even known Persian (Shaffer, Altsdat, Baum..) were quoted. Anyone can find sources they like in google books and google scholars. What matters is what the expert sources on the subject state. A good portion of the names quoted here are experts in Persian literature: [2]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Khodabandeh14&oldid=377556245"