From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I have removed this thing,

<ref>The Non-Slavic peoples of the Soviet Union, Konstantin Symmons-Symonolewicz, p44</ref><ref>Encycl. Ethnography Of Middle-East And Central Asia, Vol 3, R. Khanam, p214</ref><ref>Cultures of the World, Melvin Ember, Carol R. Ember, p895</ref><ref>Encyclopedia of World Cultures: Russia and Eurasia, China, Paul Friedrich, p130</ref><ref>Encyclopædia universalis France, p378</ref><ref>Worldmark Encyclopedia of Cultures and Daily Life: Europe, Timothy L. Gall p205</ref><ref>Encyclopedia Britannica, 1987, p1077</ref><ref>Phoenix: The Peoples of the Hills: ''Ancient Ararat and Caucasus'' by Charles Burney, David Marshall Lang, Phoenix Press; New Ed edition (December 31, 2001)</ref><ref>Prince Mikasa no Miya Takahito: Essays on Ancient Anatolia in the Second Millennium B.C. p141</ref><ref>Frederic P. Miller История Грузии Год:2010 ISBN 978-6-1317-4942-1</ref><ref>C. Burney, Die Bergvölker Vorderasiens, Essen 1975, 274</ref><ref>A. G. Sagona. ''Archaeology at the North-East Anatolian Frontier'', p. 30.</ref><ref>G. L. Kavtaradze. ''An Attempt to Interpret Some Anatolian and Caucasian Ethnonyms of the Classical Sources'', p. 80f.</ref><ref>R. G. Suny. ''The Making of the Georgian Nation'', p. 6.</ref><ref>The peasant venture: Tradition, migration, and change among Georgian peasants in Turkey, Paul J. Magnarella, p11</ref><ref>Great Soviet encyclopedia, Aleksandr Mikhaylovich Prokhorov, Volume 7, p197</ref> <ref>Assyrian and Babylonian Literature: Selected Translations, D. Appleton, p19</ref><ref>Historical Knowledge, Anatoliy Ilyich Rakitov, p154</ref><ref>Annals Of The Kings Of Assyria, E. A. Wallis Budge, p90</ref><ref>Belleten, Volume 51, Issue 200, p531</ref><ref>The Kingdom of Armenia, M. Chahin, p73</ref><ref>Return of the Medes: An Analysis of Iranian History, Hamma F. Mirwaisi, p348</ref><ref>Anadolu araştırmaları, Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Eski Önasya Dilleri ve Kültürleri Kürsüsü tarafından çıkarılır, p193</ref><ref>Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies, Volumes 14-16, p47</ref><ref>Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, Volume 51, Kommissionsverlag F. Steiner, 1897, p558</ref>

Please take a good moment to look at WP:BOMBARD and then don't do this kind of thing. If there is any point you want to make, use one or two good sources, and then make the point explicitly and by explaining what you base it on exactly.

--dab (𒁳) 08:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You cannot just remove the sourced material. Diauehi was a monarchy of Georgian tribes and you may look into the sources if you want. georgianJORJADZE 10:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
please have the minimal courtesy to actually address the issue raised. --dab (𒁳) 11:04, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I've tried to look through these sources and check whether they support the text of the article (that Diauehi was a Georgian kingdom). Not all of them are available online, but from what I've found, it does not look so good.
  • First, we have some encyclopedias, such as Britannica, Universalis, and the GSE. No specific article is quoted, only a page number, without indication of the volume, except for the GSE, making it impossible to find the actual reference.
  • Also some primary sources or translations of ancient inscriptions: I looked up the Annals of the Kings of Assyria, p. 90, found this, no clue how it is connected to our subject. The "Assyrian and Babylonian literature: Selected Translations" I found here, it mentions the capture of Sien, King of Daiaeni, who I assume is indeed Sien of Diauehi, but a secondary source about it would be better.
  • Finally, the modern scholarly sources that I have managed to track down do not support what they are supposed to. Suny (p. 6) calls Diauehi an "important tribal formation of possible proto-Georgians", which we cannot in good faith take to mean "Georgian kingdom". Kavtaradze's article discusses (pp. 20-21) the location of Diauehi and its capital, but makes not attempt at proving the Georgian nature of the land, neither does it call it a "kingdom". Both sources mention "kings", but in the context of Ancient History, such vocabulary does not entail the developed statehood that we interpret in the word "kingdom".
Consequently, I would concur with DBachman regarding the inadequacy of those purported sources, support their removal and a rewriting of the article opening to match what Suny writes, as the main scholar we can rely on. I'd only support reintroduction of sources if they are better referenced (quotes, ISBNs, etc.) and if we can match their language with specific assertions in the article.Susuman77 (talk) 16:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello Susuman. Britannica says:
"Early in the 1st millennium bc, the ancestors of the Georgian nation emerge in the annals of Assyria and, later, of Urartu. Among these were the Diauhi (Diaeni) nation, ancestors of the Taokhoi, who later domiciled in the southwestern Georgian province of Tao, and the Kulkha, forerunners of the Colchians, who held sway over large territories at the eastern end of the Black Sea. The fabled wealth of Colchis became known quite early to the Greeks and found symbolic expression in the legend of Medea and the Golden Fleece." GEORGIANJORJADZE 16:13, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the quote! You'll notice that the language used by Britannica here is "ancestors of the Georgian nation", which fits well with Suny's "possible proto-Georgians". There is a difference between that and "Georgian", as much as there is, for instance, between Minoan Crete and Greeks.Susuman77 (talk) 16:22, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

user:GeorgianJorjadze, like all ethnic essentialists, takes statements to the effect that the Diauehi population may well have been remote ancestors of the modern Georgians to mean "Diauehi is Georgian" and then goes on to label everything Diauehi in modern Georgian as the supposed "native language" of the kingdom. This is of course childish and does not merit any discussion at all. I am perfectly willing to accept "possible proto-Kartvelian" as a descriptor fo Diauehi if it is properly sourced, no problem with that.

Old Georgian is the language of early Christian Georgia, 4th to 11th centuries. Before that, the language of Caucasian Iberia would have been "Proto Georgian" or "early Georgian", cite your sources, but it must be made clear that this is an unrecorded, prehistoric language. Diauehi dates to again 500 years before that. Its language is deep prehistory. It may well have been "Proto-Kartvelian", but it must be made clear that this is just a conventional name for an unattested proto-language. It was not "Georgian" by any stretch, you may as well claim that the language of the Nordic Bronze Age was "German" and insist that the Nordic Bronze Age article must give the name Nordische Bronzezeit as the culture's "native name". --dab (𒁳) 05:54, 26 August 2013 (UTC)