Talk:Cäğfär Taríxı
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Tagged as unsourced since February, moved from article: --91.148.159.4 12:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
It is known that the Soviet government did create spurious historical documents on several occasions[citation needed], with the intent of creating divisiveness and factionalism among its constituent peoples.
false document? - illogical[edit]
"The majority of scholars view the work as a mixture of (previously known) factual data and outright fabrications. Its critics claim that it is a forgery created in order to advance Volga Tatar nationalism and in particular to promote the notion that the Volga Tatars were an ancient, autochthonous ethnic group quite distinct from the Crimean Tatars and other groups of Tatar. Some also speculate that it was written either by or at the request of the NKVD in order to split the Turkic ethnic groups into opposing camps."
This argument is not logical, because the soviet government wanted to keep these people in peace, living together as a big family in the Soviet Union. They didn't want any nationalism among these people, because their goals were absorbing all these nations and creating a 'full-soviet' nation without ethnic minorities, as all empires usually do the same.
And anyone really thinks that would provoke a war for example between hungarians and descendants of pechenegs, if they get to know one day, they were enemies 1000 years ago? I dont think this argument is realistic. And by the way, some part of the book - in connection with other nations, f.e. with hungarians - are doesn't contradict known historical facts, and gives further details and background explanations to facts that has already been known but not fully understood in their complexity and these explanations are very logical and comprehensive.
Prof. R. Kh. Baryev, bulgarian historian says: "However, exist officially unrecognized Bulgar Chronicle “Djagfar Tarihi”, which in a tangle of historical facts shows unknown pages of the Bulgars' history, and fits fairly logically into the overall historical canvas of the Europe and Asia. In their basic outline the events described in “Djagfar Tarihi” do not contradict recognized officially sources, and even find confirmation there. The Chronicle, naturally, reflects history of the Bulgars fuller and in detail. It provides clear understanding of those records about Bulgars that are found in the official sources that can't be explaned logically."
Those people who spread this false idea, should have had the same interest that those ones who 1. destructed the original documents 2. stole the found copyies.
Since no known facts are denied in Djagfar Tarihi (except the 2 (!) khazar names that modern science hadn't known about before (who's fault is that, djagfar tarihi or science?), and the book makes a comprehensive background explanation for know facts and connects them logically, the ones who say it is fake should prove what they allege.
And by the way: this article CANNOT BE FOUND on wikipedia with the Search function, because of the türkic letters in it. This article is in english, so the title should be written in english letters, so anyone can find it, not like now, when nobody can. Xxlrutin (talk) 22:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Cäğfär Taríxı. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080317192736/http://s155239215.onlinehome.us:80/turkic/10_History/Djagfar_Tarihi/ to http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/10_History/Djagfar_Tarihi/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:32, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cäğfär Taríxı. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:25, 6 January 2018 (UTC)