Talk:Safavid dynasty

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10

flimflam.you have mentioned a very interesting thing buddy (i like this word dude).darius the great calls himself a arian.everybody accepts that the ancestors of achamenids came from Central-Asia (aka Türkistan) and were called "the arians" which means "the clear people" or "the pure people" but every body ignores that the word "Ari" or "Arik" is a pure turkic word which has exactly the same meaning.you can use al-kashagaris dictionary here (arig) [1] or this dictionary (ari/arik)[2] and a turkish-english dictionary.the word ariq was still used in some turkish dialects.so and know comes the second interesting thing.i assume that you know the achamenid history and archeologie.than you can agree if i say that the achamenids practice a "Cat-Kult".many archeologic materials have a connection to cats.pictures of lions, cups with a cat form and so on.that has a reason.every turkish tribe has a totem (ongun) and some of them called themselves after his totem.for example the Göktürks called themselves also "Grey Wolfes" after his Wolf Totem.and the achamenid-Turks ;o) called themselves also after his Totem.the generally name for Big Cats like Lions/Tigers/Panthers is Pars.The Persians called themselves after his Totem Pars wich means "Big Cat".you can look to both dictionarys.Pars is still used in turkish languages.do you think that is a accident? so many accidents?a rest of the anciant turkish tribe who was called Barsils survived in central-asia and lived there till 7th Century.Barsil means Barslander.Thats the same like Barsian/Persian.Achamenids has no Iranian Names.These all were not my claims but i believe that and everybody whom i tell that believes me.before i close that theme i show you the work of a turkish scholar who have 50 years of experience of deciphering old manuscripts[3].maybe you know that.he shows that ancient elamite was turkish.you can use my contribution against me.do you know what funny is? the name "Iran" means land of the Arians but in truth it means the turkish citizens of that country and not the fake-arians.Azeris are not Turkified Iranians, no, Persians are Iranianized Turks.the indians are classified as a part of the arian population but the indians himself calls in his ancient books the newcomers from central-asia (Türkistan) arians and not themselves.that means that indians are not related to them and they Conqueror (Arians aka Turks) were a foreign Race.Kyros the Great and Darius were Turks.bahram chopin too because he was a Parthian.the sassanid-turkish war was won by sassanids under his general Bahram Chopin.That shows that it was a turkish Victory with a turkish General and turkish mercenaries;o)

Sorry,your Questions are very Lousy.

Does the oldest manuscript on Safavid geneology describe Piruz as a Kurd? No, Kurds were not living in Turkmenistan at that Time!

Is it a pre-1501 manuscript? Yes, but what changed that?

Is a pre-1501 manuscript much important than books written in the 17th century? Why?? are the 17th century books faked from the Safavids himself?!why they do it? are they whish to be Turks?

Is there a single Turkish name in Safavid geneology? No,but they Ancestor was called a Turk!!!

Is Piruz Shah Zarin Kolah a pure Iranian name? Yes, but shows that a iranian background?? how much turkish rulers are known who has an Iranian Name???

Is Piruz Shah Zarin Kolah an Arabic Religious name? What the Hell are that meaning??

Is Piruz Shah Zarin Kolah a Turkish name? and this too.i dont know how easy it is to make someone a iranian who has a non-Turkish name.

Is it a religious name? i only read name, name, name.the last 5 questions can be comprising in one Question.

Is Shafi'ism by default followed mainly amongst Kurds? Which manuscript said he was a Shafiite??

Is ethnicity changeable? Yes, but in that fall they were changed with faking and by force!!

Does the oldest manuscript say Sanjaar? You Lie because you dont say that at began.I have often repeat that Theme but you never said that a old manuscript is there which writes Sanjaar!!That shows your desperateness!! Sorry Dude but i never think before this statement that you are a lyer.--Altai Khan (talk) 20:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Dude I referred you to here: [4] in the begining. The Sanjaar is there. Just read it. I didn't lie. I said from the begining "Sanjan/Sanjar" using both names, because Sanjaar is in the oldest extant manuscript. And per the rest of your stuff, it is not worth my time anymore. Also you were the ip that came here a while back: [[5]] and here: [[6]]. That ip also claimed Bahram Chobin was a Turk, which is false by the way: [[7]]. But it was no one else. I have your E-mail you sent me a while back from Germany, the ip traces back to Germany and makes the same claims as you do. No wonder you were banned in German Wikipedia. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 21:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Also note to other readers. I put all my responses here: [[8]]. I Archived it, since I have no interest in discussing with this user, who claims Aryans, Iranians, Perrsians, Parthians, Achaemenids, Scythians, Bahram Chobinn, languages(Avesta, Parthian, Elamite) and every living creature to be of Altaic origin. I think there will be many people like him in Wikipedia in the future, significantly degrading the project. Unfortunate. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 21:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

no, you lie.thats a new tactic.i often repeat that Sanjar and Sanjan is not the same.you never said that old manuscripts said Sanjar too. You are a Lyer.its better you change your name in AlyerDoostzadeh.you always said Sanjar and Sanjan is the same without mention that old manuscripts writes Sanjar too.Sorry Ali but it seems you have no honour.And the Guy who wrote the same things like me is not me.you can ask your admin-friends to control my e-mail adress and my IP.it seems that the other guy is a imitator of me who copy my statements somewhere else.and if somebody degrading this project than it is you.you have make your greatest mistake.your start of lying shows me that youself dont believe your own statements and for you is the only importing thing to cheating the readers.its not important if you believe it or not.you are a member of the Pan-Iranian Propaganda machine who cant accept 1000 Years of turkish Rule in Iran because you and the Guys which gave you informations about me have complexes.i know that your friends Tajik and others are members of this [9]Site.Since i have see that you even use Lies to come to your Finish shows me that i cant discuss with you seriosly.Look i show everyone what kind of cheater you are if i ask you only one question.

Was the Safavid Dynastie a Kurdish or a Persian Empire? --Altai Khan (talk) 16:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Shah Soltan Hosain

Ali, is the information regarding Soltan Hosain(the latest edit) correct? Except for the 'supposed' reference listed, I've searched and found no other information regarding his love of wine or lack of governance. Thanks. Kansas Bear (talk) 20:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

It is correct. Actually, with the exception of Shah Tahmasp I who became very observant religiously (after quitting opium and wine and Harem), most of the Safavid Kings had Harem, wine and etc. Some were effective in governance like Shah Abbas the Great. Of course the kings were very religious, but they also had their Harem and Wine. For example Shah Abbas walked from Isfahan to Mashhad on foot! to visit the shrine of Imam Reza. Sultan Hussain is seen as an ineffective ruler and is blamed for the fall of the dynasty to Mahmud the Afghan. I do not have the particular book quoted on me, but the book quoted is critically acclaimed and its author is from Harvard University. The Encyclopedia of Islam article written by the Safavid scholar PAR EXCELLANCE (Roger Savoary) also mentions the same thing: Under the last two Safavids, Shah Sulayman(1077-1105/1666-94) and Sultān Husayn (1105-35/1694-1722), the pace of decline accelerated. Both were weak and pliable rulers, products of the harem system. Sulayman, an alcoholic, had little interest in the affairs of the state. His son, Shah Sultan Husayn, was no better and his derisive nickname "Mullah Hussain" is significant. Unrestrained by the authority of the ruler, the "privy council" of the Women, the Harem, and the court eunuchs usurped power at the centre of the ruling institution.

If you are interested in Safavids (perhaps you want to improve this article), I would recommend the article from the Encyclopedia of Islam. I have the whole article and can E-mail it to you if you wish. Encyclopedia Iranica also has many articles on various Safavid rulers, specially its founder and the its greatest ruler: Shah Abbas I. Just send me an E-mail from Wikipedia and I'll sent you the Encyclopedia of Islam article if you are interested. Thanks --alidoostzadeh (talk) 22:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)