User talk:HistoryofIran/Archive 14

Afsharids and Safavids are Turkic or Persian?

On the "Battle of Karnal" page, I see that you wrote "Persian Victory" instead of "Afsharid Victory" and that you said that the Afsharids were an Iranian state. So is it really what you think? Let's take a look.

Safavids. The native language of Ismail I, the founder of the Safavid state, was Azerbaijani Turkic. He wrote poems in this language under the nickname "Hatai". In fact, the official language of the state was Azerbaijani Turkic, and the people of the palace, as well as the military and religious men of the state, spoke this language.

There is also interesting information about the place of Azerbaijani Turkic in the Safavid palace in the memoirs of the German traveler and diplomat Adam Oleari, who met with the Safavid ruler Shah Sefi I in Isfahan in 1637. A.Oleari in his work “Detailed description of the visit of the Qoldshin embassy to Moscow and Persia” writes: “Especially, those in the service of the shah in Isfahan speak Turkic with greater enthusiasm, you rarely hear Persian words from them.”''

The French traveler Jean Sharden, who traveled to the East in the second half of the 17th century and lived in the Safavid lands as well as in Isfahan for a long time, wrote in his memoirs: “Persian language is the language of poetry and literature of the people. Palace magnates, soldiers, influential men and wives of rich people all speak Turkic (Azerbaijani) at home. Because the sultan and the members of the dynasty are from Azerbaijan, where the entire population speaks Turkic. The Arabic language is considered respectable because it is the religious language of the community."

Afsharids. Afsharid Empire (Azerbaijani: Əfşar İmperiyası) was a Turkmen state founded after the collapse of the Safavid empire. The founder of the state is Nadir Shah Afshar, a Khorasan Turk.

Please do not associate Safavids and Afshars with Iranian history. They are of Turkic (Azerbaijani) origin. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

(Talk page enjoyer)

1. Generally, people may get irritable if one uses too many exclamation points or all-caps on Wikipedia. You certainly don't need to have big, bold, underlined text to make your points, we are are literate enough on here.
2. I recommend starting to cite specific reliable sources if you want to have this sort of discussion.
3. You should be having this content discussion on Talk:History of Iran or whichever specific page you want to discuss, it's considered bad form to try and have unilateral content disputes on another user's talk page.

Remsense诉 18:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

1. This has nothing to do with the topic

2. This source is reliable because it has been archived by historians who lived in those periods. (A.Oleari and J.Sharden)

3. As you said, I am already doing this discussion in "User Talk: History of Iran". AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 12:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

@AzerbaijaniQizilbash Dont have time to respond right now, but most of what I'm going to say has already been said in your talk page - please check that. Also, I'm not sure who or what you're citing - As Remsense said, Wikipedia is based on WP:RS. Moreover, you've violated WP:3RR. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I would be happy if you respond when you have time. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 12:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Then please read what I am writing this time, I am going to repeat some stuff which was ignored. Wikipedia is based on WP:RS which are properly cited (WP:CITE). Again, no one is denying that the Afsharids are of Turkic (not Azeri, didn't exist back then) ancestry, but it's irrelevant here. A good example is that Napoleon is called a French general/emperor, not "Italian" general/emperor.

Azerbaijani was not an ethnonym back then, let alone a nation, so please stop adding it and its 20th-century Latin transliteration to random articles

"Russian sources cited in this study refer to the Turkish-speaking Muslims (Shi’a and Sunni) as “Tatars” or, when coupled with the Kurds (except the Yezidis), as “Muslims.” The vast majority of the Muslim population of the province was Shi’a. Unlike the Armenians and Georgians, the Tatars did not have their own alphabet and used the Arabo-Persian script. After 1918, and especially during the Soviet era, this group identified itself as Azerbaijani." -- Bournoutian, George (2018). Armenia and Imperial Decline: The Yerevan Province, 1900-1914. Routledge. p. 35 (note 25). "The third major nation in South Caucasia,19 the Azerbaijanis, hardly existed as an ethnic group, let alone a nation, before the twentieth century. The inhabitants of the territory now occupied by Azerbaijan defined themselves as Muslims, members of the Muslim umma; or as Turks, members of a language group spread over a vast area of Central Asia; or as Persians (the founder of Azerbaijani literature, Mirza Fath’ Ali Akhundzadä, described himself as ‘almost Persian’). ‘Azerbaijani identity remained fluid and hybrid’ comments R. G. Suny (1999–2000: 160). As late as 1900, the Azerbaijanis remained divided into six tribal groups – the Airumy, Karapapakh, Pavlari, Shakhsereny, Karadagtsy and Afshavy. The key period of the formation of the Azerbaijani nation lies between the 1905 revolution and the establishment of the independent People’s Republic of Azerbaijan in 1918 (Altstadt, 1992: 95)." -- Ben Fowkes (2002). Ethnicity and Conflict in the Post-Communist World. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 14 "As hinted earlier, the history of Azerbaijan and of the growth of an Azerbaijani ethnie is more problematic than the other two cases. The lack of a clear way of differentiating between the various Turkic languages spoken and written in medieval and early modern times is one of the difficulties. Another is the absence until the twentieth century of an Azerbaijani state." -- idem, p. 35 "In the case of the third major ethnic group of South Caucasus, the Azerbaijanis, the path towards nationhood was strewn with obstacles. First, there was uncertainty about Azerbaijani ethnic identity, which was a result of the influence of Azerbaijan’s many and varied pre-Russian conquerors, starting with the Arabs in the mid-seventh century and continuing with the Saljuq Turks, the Mongols, the Ottoman Turks and the Iranians. Hence the relatively small local intelligentsia wavered between Iranian, Ottoman, Islamic, and pan-Turkic orientations. Only a minority supported a specifically Azerbaijani identity, as advocated most prominently by Färidun bäy Köchärli." -- idem, p. 68 "Azerbaijani national identity emerged in post-Persian Russian-ruled East Caucasia at the end of the nineteenth century, and was finally forged during the early Soviet period." -- Gasimov, Zaur (2022). "Observing Iran from Baku: Iranian Studies in Soviet and Post-Soviet Azerbaijan". Iranian Studies. 55 (1): page 37 "In fact, the change in defining national identity in Azerbaijan was a result of a combination of developments in the 1930s in Turkey, Iran, Germany, and the Soviet Union. The article concludes that these developments left Soviet rulers no choice but to construct an independent Azerbaijani identity." -- Harun Yilmaz (2013). "The Soviet Union and the Construction of Azerbaijani National Identity in the 1930s". Iranian Studies. 46 (4). p. 511 "A group of Azerbaijani nationalist elites, led by M.A. Rasulzada, declared independence for the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (ADR) on 28 May 1918. After a century of Russian colonial rule, the emergent Azerbaijani nation established its first nation-state. Not only was it a new state but also it was a new nation. Because they previously had lacked a distinct national identity, the Azerbaijani Turks had been called “Caucasian Muslims” or “Tatars,” a common term used for the subject Muslim population in the Tsarist Russian empire (Мишиjeв, 1987, p. 159). The Azerbaijani identity and nation were new constructions of nationalists of the late 19th century, culminating in the establishment of the ADR." Ahmadoghlu, R. Secular nationalist revolution and the construction of the Azerbaijani identity, nation and state. Nations and Nationalism. 2021; 27. Wiley Online Library. p. 549 "Azerbaijan first tried to create a national identity in 1918 at the time of the formation of the first Azerbaijan republic. Because of linguistic factors and despite its deep and long connection with Iran, Azerbaijan constructed its identity on the basis of Turkism and even pan-Turkism." Eldar Mamedov (2017). The New Geopolitics of the South Caucasus: Prospects for Regional Cooperation and Conflict Resolution: Azerbaijan Twenty-Five Years after Independence: Accomplishments and Shortcomings. Edited by Shireen Hunter. Lexington Books. p. 29 "In the pre-national era, both north and the south of the Aras River (Shervan, Mughan, Qarabagh, and Azerbaijan) were provinces, akin to Lorestan or Khorasan of an all-Iranian imperial structure. Following the Russian conquest of the Turkic-speaking regions in the South Caucasus in the nineteenth century, a thin layer of intelligentsia emerged in Baku and began discussing the characteristics of a distinct Azerbaijani identity. The Republic of Azerbaijan was established in May 1918 by the same elite. This short experience was abruptly halted when the Red Army occupied Transcaucasia in 1920/21. Subsequently, the Bolsheviks launched their modern, state-driven nation building projects in Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia. Contemporary Azerbaijanis are Turkic-speakers and their national history could be centered on a Turkic ethno-linguistic identity. Nevertheless, for reasons discussed elsewhere, the Bolsheviks did not prefer this solution. The Azerbaijani national identity and historical narrative constructed after 1937 stressed the indigenous nature of the Azerbaijani people and was based on a territorial definition. The territorial approach found support at the highest level—from Joseph Stalin himself." -- Yilmaz, H. (2015). A Family Quarrel: Azerbaijani Historians against Soviet Iranologists. Iranian Studies, 48(5), p. 770 "Even as the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijanis continues to be a matter of academic debate, most scholars agree that Azerbaijan, as a national entity, emerged after 1918, with the declaration of the first Republic of Azerbaijan after Word War I" -- p. 585, Gippert, Jost and Dum-Tragut, Jasmine. Caucasian Albania: An International Handbook, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 2023. "At the beginning of the 20th century, the heavily used name “Turks” for the Muslims of eastern Caucasus was replaced by the term “Azerbaijani.” It has dominated since the 1930s as a result of the Soviet policy of indigenization, largely promoted by Josef Stalin" - p. 254, After the Soviet Empire. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 05 Oct. 2015. "Besides Azerbaijan, which as a historical territory in the 12th century has been illustrated in the maps of that era as an area in modern northwestern Iran and distinguished from Arrān, we should mention the term “Azerbaijani”. Prior to the late 19th century and early 20th century, the term “Azerbaijani” and “Azerbaijani Turk” had never been used as an ethnonym. Such ethnonyms did not exist. During the 19th century and early 20th century, Russian sources primarily referred to the Turcophone Muslim population as “Tatars” which was a general term that included a variety of Turkish speaker. Under the Mussavatist government, in 1918 and during the establishment of the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan, the term “Azeri people” referred to all inhabitants while the Turkish-speaking portion was called “Azeri Turk”. Thus the concept of an Azeri identity barely appears at all before 1920 and Azerbaijan before this era had been a simple geographical area." -- pp. 16-17, Lornejad, Siavash; Doostzadeh, Ali (2012). Arakelova, Victoria; Asatrian, Garnik (eds.). On the modern politicization of the Persian poet Nezami Ganjavi (PDF). Caucasian Centre for Iranian Studies. "Until the late 19th and early 20th century it would be unthinkable to refer to the Muslim inhabitants of the Caucasus as Azaris (Azeris) or Azerbaijanis, since the people and the geographical region that bore these names were located to the south of the Araxes River. Therefore, the Iranian intelligentsia raised eyebrows once the independent Republic of Azerbaijan was declared in 1918 just across the Iranian border. - pp. 176-177, Avetikian, Gevorg. "Pān-torkism va Irān [Pan-Turkism and Iran]", Iran and the Caucasus 14, 1 (2010), Brill "The ethno-genesis of the Azerbaijani nation can thus be traced, in a formal, bureaucratic manner at least, to the late 1930s. Hardly unique in the history of the Soviet or other states, the Azerbaijani case demonstrates the logic of Stalinist national-state construction, whereby the formation of a Soviet republic named Azerbaijan required the existence of an Azerbaijani nation to inhabit it." p. 229, Monuments and Identities in the Caucasus Karabagh, Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan in Contemporary Geopolitical Conflict, Brill "The South Caucasian Muslims lacked clear cultural or religious boundaries as late as the nineteenth century. Divided into Shiʿa and Sunni populations, with a vernacular language close to Turkish and a literary language still dominated by Persian and then Ottoman Turkish, with no prior experience of statehood and no overall delimitation of the historical homeland, they had to define a separate identity. That construction essentially took place under Soviet rule and on the basis of a Soviet political agenda, even though its Pan-Turkist agenda predates that period and appears to have been influenced by some of the Ottoman leaders, in particular Enver Pasha and his younger half-brother, Nuri Pasha. The latter was in fact in Elisavetpol (Gandja) just before the proclamation of independence and subsequently formed the Islamic Army of the Caucasus which captured Baku in mid-September 1918. In a way, imperialism built the nation, its historiography, and its identity. Earlier processes also contributed to these developments: the tsarist territorial subdivisions of Transcaucasia in the 19th century, the growth of Baku, Armenian-Azeri economic antagonisms, and the Armenian-Tatar War" idem, pp. 232-233

Azerbaijan was not a name in the Caucasus at that time either.

"Let us conclude with an important point. The pre-1918 maps indicate various names of regions or states north of the river Araxes, such as “Albania” or “Arran”. No map knows of “Azerbaijan” north of the Araxes. This name was applied for centuries to the northern province of Iran, originally called Atropatene, around Tabriz, i.e. south of the Araxes. The Encyclopaedia of Islam published in 1913 leaves no room for doubt: “Nowadays, under ‘Adharbaydjan’ is understood the north-western province of Persia”. The name “Azerbaijan”, which the present-day republic adopted in 1918, is, therefore, a result of later socio-political developments.In the 1930s, this name was adopted by the Soviet authorities: it suited Stalin who considered expansion to Iran" - p. 42, Monuments and Identities in the Caucasus Karabagh, Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan in Contemporary Geopolitical Conflict, Brill "The name Azarbaijan is a pre-Islamic Persian name for a pre-Islamic province south of the River Aras. “Azarbaijan” was not used in any definite or clear manner for the area north of the River Aras in the pre- modern period. In some instances, the name Azarbaijan was used in a manner that included the Aran region immediately to the north of the River Aras, but this was rather an exception. The adoption of this name for the area north of the River Aras was by the nationalist, Baku-based Mosavat government (1918–20) and was later retained by the Soviet Union." p. 16 - Behrooz, Maziar (2023). Iran at War: Interactions with the Modern World and the Struggle with Imperial Russia. I.B. Tauris "In fact, in medieval times the name ‘Azerbaijan’ was applied not to the area of present independent Azerbaijan but to the lands to the south of the Araxes river, now part of Iran. The lands to the north west of the Araxes were known as Albania; the lands to the north east, the heart of present-day post-Soviet Azerbaijan, were known as Sharvan (or Shirwan) and Derbend." p. 30, Fowkes, B. (2002). Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict in the Post-Communist World. Springer. "The adoption of the name “Azerbaijan” in 1918 by the Mussavatist government for classical Caucasian Albania (Arrān and Sharvān) was due to political reasons28. For example, the giant orientalist of the early 20th century, Vasily Barthold has stated: “… whenever it is necessary to choose a name that will encompass all regions of the republic of Azerbaijan, the name Arrān can be chosen. But the term Azerbaijan was chosen because when the Azerbaijan republic was created, it was assumed that this and the Persian Azerbaijan will be one entity, because the population of both has a big similarity. On this basis, the word Azerbaijan was chosen. Of course right now when the word Azerbaijan is used, it has two meanings as Persian Azerbaijan and as a republic, it’s confusing and a question rises as to which Azerbaijan is being talked about”. In the post-Islamic sense, Arrān and Sharvān are often distinguished while in the pre-Islamic era, Arrān or the Western Caucasian Albania roughly corresponds to the modern territory of republic of Azerbaijan. In the Soviet era, in a breathtaking manipulation, historical Azerbaijan (NW Iran) was reinterpreted as “South Azerbaijan” in order for the Soviets to lay territorial claim on historical Azerbaijan proper which is located in modern Northwestern Iran". p. 10, Lornejad, Siavash; Doostzadeh, Ali (2012). Arakelova, Victoria; Asatrian, Garnik (eds.). On the modern politicization of the Persian poet Nezami Ganjavi (PDF). Caucasian Centre for Iranian Studies. "The case of Azerbaijan is interesting in several aspects. The geographical name “Azerbaijan” for the territory where the Republic of Azerbaijan is now situated, as well as the ethnic name for the Caucasian Turks, “Azerbaijani,” were coined in the beginning of the 10th century. The name Azerbaijan, which implies the lands located north of the Aras River, is a duplicate of the historical region of Azerbaijan (it is the arabized version of the name of a historical region of Atropatena) which is the north-western region of Iran. After the proclamation of the first Republic of Azerbaijan in 1918, the Turkish army invaded the Caucasus, and the name “Azerbaijan” was offered by a young Turkish regime to the Turkish-speaking territory" p. 253, After the Soviet Empire. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 05 Oct. 2015. "The Ottoman Turks coveted Iran’s province of Azerbaijan. Therefore following the Bolshevik revolution, in 1918 installed a pro-Turkish government in Baku and named it after the Iranian province of Azerbaijan" - p. xvii, The New Geopolitics of the South Caucasus: Prospects for Regional Cooperation and Conflict Resolution (Contemporary Central Asia: Societies, Politics, and Cultures), Lexington Books, Shireen Hunter "Until 1918, when the Musavat regime decided to name the newly independent state Azerbaijan, this designation had been used exclusively to identify the Iranian province of Azerbaijan." - p. 60, Dekmejian, R. Hrair; Simonian, Hovann H. (2003). Troubled Waters: The Geopolitics of the Caspian Region. I.B. Tauris. "The region to the north of the river Araxes was not called Azerbaijan prior to 1918, unlike the region in northwestern Iran that has been called since so long ago." p. 356, Rezvani, Babak (2014). Ethno-territorial conflict and coexistence in the caucasus, Central Asia and Fereydan: academisch proefschrift. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press "The name Azerbaijan was also adopted for Arrān, historically an Iranian region, by anti-Russian separatist forces of the area when, on 26 May 1918, they declared its independence and called it the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan. To allay Iranian concerns, the Azerbaijan government used the term “Caucasian Azerbaijan” in the documents for circulation abroad." - Multiple Authors, Encyclopaedia Iranica "Originally the term Azerbaijan was the name of the Iranian historical province Adarbaigan, or Azarbaijan (from older Aturpatakan) in the north-west of the country. This term, as well as its respective derivative, Azari (or, in Turkish manner, Azeri), as “ethnonym”, was not applied to the territory north of Arax (i.e. the area of the present-day Azerbaijan Republic, former Arran and Shirvan) and its inhabitants up until the establishment of the Musavat regime in that territory (1918-1920)." - p. 85, note 1, Morozova, I. (2005). Contemporary Azerbaijani Historiography on the Problem of "Southern Azerbaijan" after World War II, Iran and the Caucasus, 9(1) "Until the late 19th and early 20th century it would be unthinkable to refer to the Muslim inhabitants of the Caucasus as Azaris (Azeris) or Azerbaijanis, since the people and the geographical region that bore these names were located to the south of the Araxes River. Therefore, the Iranian intelligentsia raised eyebrows once the independent Republic of Azerbaijan was declared in 1918 just across the Iranian border. - pp. 176-177, Avetikian, Gevorg. "Pān-torkism va Irān [Pan-Turkism and Iran]", Iran and the Caucasus 14, 1 (2010), Brill

Sources routinely refer Nader Shah as "Iranian/Persian". No, that does mean he was of Iranian stock. But clearly shows his Turkic ancestry is irrelevant in context like this. The nation he ruled was Guarded Domains of Iran, not "Azerbaijan"

Osterhammel, Jürgen (2019). Unfabling the East: The Enlightenment's Encounter with Asia. Princeton University Press. p. 68, "...that fully a third of the army of the Iranian conqueror, Nadir (Nader) Shah..." Esposito, John L., (ed) (2004). The Oxford Dictionary of Islam. Oxford University Press. p. 71, "In the conflicts following the death of the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah in 1747..." Asher, Catherine Blanshard; Asher, Catherine Ella Blanshard; Asher, Catherine B. (1992). Architecture of Mughal India. Cambridge University Press. p. 301, "...the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah invaded Delhi." Tucker, Spencer C., (ed.) (2019). Middle East Conflicts from Ancient Egypt to the 21st Century: An Encyclopedia and Document Collection. ABC-CLIO. p. 695, "...the army of Persian ruler Nadir Shah and Ottoman Empire forces under Yegen Mehmet Pasha." Alam, Muzaffar; Subrahmanyam, Sanjay (2007). Indo-Persian Travels in the Age of Discoveries, 1400-1800. Cambridge University Press. p. 245, "...invasion of North India by the Iranian conqueror, Nadir Shah Afshar." Schwartz, Schwartz Kevin L. (2020). Remapping Persian Literary History, 1700-1900. Edinburgh University Press. "...on the triumphs and heroics of the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah (r. 1736–47)." Emon, Anver M.; Ahmed, Rumee., (ed.) (2018). The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Law. Oxford University Press. p. 495, "...Iranian Afsharid ruler, Nadir Shah (r. 1736–47)..." Hofmeester, Karin; Grewe, Bernd-Stefan (2016). Luxury in Global Perspective: Objects and Practices, 1600–2000. Cambridge University Press. p. 27, "...the Persian ruler Nadir Shah (ruled 1736–47) had invaded northern India." Kaicker, Abhishek (2020). The King and the People: Sovereignty and Popular Politics in Mughal Delhi. Oxford University Press. p. 18, "Persian ruler Nadir Shah's invasion of the Mughal empire in 1739..." Hodgson, Marshall G. S. (2009). The Venture of Islam, Volume 3: The Gunpower Empires and Modern Times. University of Chicago Press. p. 146, "...Iranian ruler Nadir Shah had sacked Delhi..." Embree, Ainslie T. (2020). Frontiers into Borders: Defining South Asia States, 1757–1857. Oxford University Press, "...Central Asia fell to the great Persian conqueror, Nadir Shah..." Wink, André (2020). The Making of the Indo-Islamic World: c.700–1800 CE. Cambridge University Press. p. 15, "...the Persian conqueror Nadir Shah."

HistoryofIran (talk) 13:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

—Your mom lets you have three explanatory collapses? Remsense诉 14:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Haha yep, she's all about that efficient explanation life! HistoryofIran (talk) 22:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I understand, but Azeris are also Turkic. When you talk about Azeris, you portray them as a different nation, separate from the Turks.

But I have to say that there were Azerbaijani Turks at that time too. The first state founded by Azerbaijani Turks in history is Eldiguzids (Atabegs of Azerbaijan. It is obvious from its name.) AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 19:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

You say you understand, but unfortunately your reply doesn't show much engagement with the very generous collection of sourcing they have provided for you, in a way that is bordering on rude. Remsense诉 19:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I understand, but Azeris are also Turkic. When you talk about Azeris, you portray them as a different nation, separate from the Turks.

I mean yes, not all Turks are Azeri.

But I have to say that there were Azerbaijani Turks at that time too.

Not per WP:RS.

The first state founded by Azerbaijani Turks in history is Eldiguzids (Atabegs of Azerbaijan. It is obvious from its name.)

The Eldiguzids were Kipchaks (literally mentioned with a source in the article), not Azeris. And your point? There were also atabegs (which is basically another word for "governor" in this context) other places; Atabegs of Yazd, Atabegs of Fars and Atabegs of Maragha. "Azerbaijan" is obviously referring to the afromentioned Azerbaijan region/province in northern Iran per the second explanatory note. This call also be seen in their Iranica article [1], where "Arran" (the historical name of the present-day Azerbaijan country in the Caucasus) is used alongside Azerbaijan (the historical region/province in northern Iran). HistoryofIran (talk) 22:38, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

"But I have to say that there were Azerbaijani Turks at that time too. - Not per WP:RS."

Can you give me these reliable sources? I want to read.

"The Eldiguzids were Kipchaks"

Encyclopaedia Iranica: The Eldiguzids entry in the Encyclopaedia Iranica mentions their Turkic ethnicity and provides an overview of their history and rule. While it may not specifically mention the Oghuz Turks, it acknowledges their Turkic origins. [Source: Encyclopaedia Iranica - Eldiguzids]

Academic Works: Numerous academic works on medieval history, particularly those focusing on the Turkic peoples and the history of Azerbaijan and Iran, discuss the Eldiguzids as a Turkic dynasty. These works often analyze linguistic, cultural, and historical evidence to establish their Turkic identity.

Primary Historical Accounts: While primary historical sources from the time of the Eldiguzids may be scarce, various secondary sources and later historical accounts mention their Turkic origins. These include chronicles, travelogues, and biographies from the medieval period and later.

Turkic Cultural Influence: The cultural and linguistic influence of the Turkic peoples in the regions where the Eldiguzids ruled is well-documented. Place names, personal names, and other cultural elements reflect Turkic linguistic and cultural influence in these areas. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 11:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. I am not saying that all Turks are Azeris. I say that Azerbaijanis are also Turks. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 11:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Can you give me these reliable sources? I want to read.

No you don't, because they're literally up above, which you even replied "Ok, I understand" to.

Encyclopaedia Iranica: The Eldiguzids entry in the Encyclopaedia Iranica mentions their Turkic ethnicity and provides an overview of their history and rule. While it may not specifically mention the Oghuz Turks, it acknowledges their Turkic origins. [Source: Encyclopaedia Iranica - Eldiguzids]

Yes, and where are the Azeris mentioned? And please just cite a quote next time.

Academic Works:
Primary Historical Accounts:
Turkic Cultural Influence:

You did not read WP:CITE.

You misunderstand me. I am not saying that all Turks are Azeris. I say that Azerbaijanis are also Turks

Yes, but that doesn't mean a source mentions Turks = that they are Azeris, which you seem to be implying.

This discussion is over until you read the sources I posted and follow WP:RS and WP:CITE. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

No you don't, because they're literally up above, which you even replied "Ok, I understand" to.

You just said "Azerbaijani was not an ethnonym back then, let alone a nation, so please stop adding it and its 20th-century Latin transliteration to random articles". You didn't give a source.

Yes, but that doesn't mean a source mentions Turks = that they are Azeris, which you seem to be implying

I am trying to prove that they are Azerbaijani turks.

The Eldiguzids were founded by Turkic tribes, specifically the Oghuz Turks. The Oghuz Turks were a significant Turkic ethnic group that played a pivotal role in the history of Central Asia and the Middle East. While the concept of Azerbaijani identity as it exists today did not fully develop during the time of the Eldiguzids, the region they ruled over included territories that are now part of Azerbaijan, and their Turkic origins align with the ethnic makeup of modern Azerbaijan. Therefore, it's accurate to say that the Eldiguzids were founded by Turkic peoples who were predecessors to what we now recognize as Azerbaijani Turks. (Source is ChatGPT. If you don't believe it, ask ChatGPT "Were the Eldiguzids founded by Azerbaijani Turks?")

Azerbaijani Turks existed at that time, but their name was not "Azerbaijani Turks". AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 13:46, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, this discussion is over. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I am pleased about that! AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 14:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

What are you doing bro? We just discussed and you accepted that the Eldiguzids were founded by Azerbaijani Turks. You still keep deleting my edit on the Eldiguzids page. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 14:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

No I did not say that... please read WP:CIR. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I read the page in the link you gave. So, if you did not accept that Eldenizs is an Azerbaijani turks, why did you say "Yeah, this discussion is over."? AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 14:28, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I made a spelling mistake.

Eldenizs = Eldiguzids AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 14:28, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Will you answer? AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 14:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Please read what I posted on your talk page. Remsense诉 14:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

i read AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 15:07, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Then it should've answered all of your questions. If you have more questions, please relate them to specific claims made by specific sources, and provide sources of your own. Frankly, you are not respecting the time of other editors at this point. Remsense诉 15:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

The Afshar issue is over. We are discussing whether Eldenizs are Azerbaijani or not AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

They are not. Please read what we're telling you and especially sources. The Azeris did not exist during that time, and Eldiguzids were Kipchaks. WP:CIR is required to edit in Wikipedia. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

In history books in Azerbaijan, I learned that the Eldiguzids, Afsharids and Safavids were the great Azerbaijani empires. I'm too lazy to find sources to prove this, but I don't think the Books and the Ministry of Science and Education of the Republic of Azerbaijan would lie. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

That's unfortunate. Remsense诉 18:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Although the evidence that Safavids are Azerbaijani turks is right above. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Bro, first of all, by saying the discussion is over, you accept that the Eldiguzids are Azerbaijani Turks. Since we discussed and reached an agreement, I am editing the Eldiguzids page. However, very annoyingly, you delete my edit and say "No I did not say that". You're literally making fun of me. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:34, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but I've tried all I can. I can't help you. But know that I did not try to make fun of you. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't want help from you. All I want is to add Azerbaijani as well as Persian to the Eldiguzids page. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but that's not gonna happen. Azeris didn't exist back then, and the Eldiguzids were Kipchaks. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Eldiguzids are called Atabegs of Azerbaijan. You say with your own words that it was founded by Kipchak Turks. Even though Persians have nothing to do with it, you write your Persian name there, but for example, you do not find it appropriate to write Kipchak Turkic or Azerbaijani Turkic there. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Since the Eldiguzids are not Azerbaijani, if you do not write the name of the Eldiguzids in Azerbaijani, it should not be in Persian either. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Good grief. There's Persian because the populace of the polity spoke Persian. Remsense诉 17:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

where is your sources? AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

On your talk page, still. Remsense诉 17:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

There are only things related to Afshars on my talk page. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

The bit about the Afshars is just one part of three... the other two being Azeris not being an ethnicity let alone a nation and Azerbaijan being the name of a region/province in northern Iran. I'm sorry, but there are obvious WP:CIR issues here. You also just replaced a sourced map with a exaggerated unsourced one [2] HistoryofIran (talk) 17:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

For whatever it's worth, the map on azwiki is cited to a book by Suleyman Aliyarli. I'm going to say I would prefer Cambridge between the two sources in a vacuum. Remsense诉 18:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, they didn't even cite what book. Not to mention there are severe historical negationism/revisionism issues there due to the Soviets [3]. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:06, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. A few notches to the west but dealing with the same 19th century players—I've been reading Rival Byzantiums by Diana Mishkova, you'd probably find it pretty interesting too. Remsense诉 18:11, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Interesting, pretty new book too. I will definitely take a look at it later. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I know that Azerbaijan does not have an ethnic origin. A region cannot have an ethnic origin. I'm talking about Azerbaijani Turks. Azerbaijani Turks have existed since the first Turkic state was founded. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Not per the cited WP:RS you've been shown. Please WP:DROPTHESTICK. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

As the name suggests, Azerbaijani Turks. I think there is no need to give a reliable source to say that Azerbaijani Turks have existed since the establishment of the first Turkic state. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

In 1918, Azerbaijani Turks did not come out saying "Abrakadabra". They also have ethnic origins. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:RS still contradicts you, and we base our information on WP:RS. I am not going to answer you further in this talk section. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

1. Medieval Turkic Invasions: Turkic tribes began migrating into the Caucasus region during the medieval period. These migrations were often motivated by political instability, economic opportunities, or pressures from other nomadic groups. These Turkic tribes gradually settled in the region, contributing to the ethnolinguistic diversity of the Caucasus.

2. Seljuk Empire: The Seljuk Empire, a Turkic Sunni Muslim empire, expanded into the Caucasus during the 11th and 12th centuries. As the Seljuks expanded their territories, they brought Turkic populations into the region and exerted significant cultural and political influence.

3. Mongol Invasions: The Mongol invasions of the 13th century led to further population movements in the Caucasus. Turkic tribes migrated westward to escape Mongol rule, settling in various parts of the Caucasus, including what is now Azerbaijan.

4. Ottoman Influence: During the height of the Ottoman Empire, there were interactions between Ottoman Turks and various peoples in the Caucasus, including Azerbaijani Turks. While direct migration from Anatolia (modern-day Turkey) to the Caucasus may not have been as significant as other historical events, cultural exchanges and diplomatic relations between the Ottomans and various Caucasian peoples, including Azerbaijanis, occurred. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I did say I wasn't going to answer further.. but omg. You have not listened even the slightest bit of what you've been told, and I'm not going to repeat what again. Please don't write in this talk section any further. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:46, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

You asked me for a reliable source. So I gave it away. Moreover, you say that you will not reply any further, but this message of yours is already an answer. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

No you did not. You've been told of WP:RS and WP:CITE multiple times by now, yet you still do this. And yes, my message was already an answer, I literally stated that... HistoryofIran (talk) 18:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't need to give sources for you to understand that the Mongols, Seljuks or Ottomans occupied the Azerbaijan region in history and Turks migrated to this region. A person who knows history well enough already knows these. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 19:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Eldiguzids are called Atabegs of Azerbaijan. You say with your own words that it was founded by Kipchak Turks. Even though Persians have nothing to do with it, you write Persian name of Eldiguzids there, but for example, you do not find it appropriate to write Kipchak Turkic or Azerbaijani Turkic there. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

What has Persian to do with this conversation? And I didn't add it to the article as far as I recall. I've no problem with removing it, since the Eldiguzids article currently doesn't state that the language had any administrative importance under the Eldiguzids (though it's probably not hard to find a source that states that. I have one in mind, just too lazy to add it).

Eldiguzids are called Atabegs of Azerbaijan.

Yes they are, and we've already been through this. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

ok. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

One final shot. @AzerbaijaniQizilbash, they did not just make those statements, those are collapse boxes where they have listed many sources for each claim once you click to expand them. Remsense诉 13:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately AzerbaijaniQizilbash doesn't seem to care. They just tried to restore their edit [4]. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I didn't understand what you said. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 14:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I will directly post all of the sources they provided on your talk page. Remsense诉 14:11, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Remsense! HistoryofIran (talk) 14:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

The amount of good-faith effort you put into answering peoples' questions is an inspiration, it's the least I can do. Remsense诉 14:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	A perfect quote for you: “ Let me tell you quite bluntly that this king (user) business has given me personally nothing but headaches. ” — Mohammed Reza Pahlavi The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 18:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Haha, now that's a quote I can relate to. Thank you very much The Corvette ZR1! HistoryofIran (talk) 03:47, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Who is this guy

I wonder who is this. The editing and writing style is too POV and amateurish. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Yup, there's deffo something fishy going on. A lot of "new" users have emerged these past months with the exact same POVish writing style and editing. I even made some SPIs [5] [6] HistoryofIran (talk) 14:01, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

I suspected the same, so I opened up an SPI today, but deleted it after finding an existing case [7]. The pages they created are full of POV, blunt writing and possible SYNTH. I've come across two while checking the recent edits at Gupta Empire, in these two articles, they were treating the empire as 'Indian', but at the same time sent a vibe that Bengal wasn't part of it. There is also proven by the category 'Invasions by India' or something like that used in those articles as well in other articles dealing with regions of Indian subcontinent/South Asia, including Afghanistan. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Yup, I fail to see how they're a networth to this site. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:52, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Oh well, I've had enough of them, should have reported them long ago but was lazy, I'll make the ANI report now. If you have any diffs of their problematic edits, that would be appreciated. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:19, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Don't want this auto-archived just yet, commenting for the section to stay. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

arran

سلام. ببخشید فارسی می نویسم. انگلیسی م به قدرت شما نیست. امکانش هست مقاله اران در ویکی فارسی را با ترجمه دانشنامه اسلام ویرایش دوم (نوشته ریچارد فرای) و ویرایش سوم (نوشته الیسون واکا) و هم چنین ویرایش اول (نوشته بارتولد) و همچنین ترجمه دانشنامه ایرانیکا (نوشته کلیفورد ادموند باسورث) تکمیل کنید تا دهان پان ترک ها بسته شود ؟ الان مقاله فقط با دائرة المعارف بزرگ اسلامی سر پا مونده است. با تشکر Onusread (talk) 07:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Google Translate: با عرض پوزش، اما من خط فارسی را متوجه نمی شوم. و حتی با ترجمه پیام شما واقعاً آن را درک نمی کنم. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Rebellion when Cambyses was in Egypt

Hi, how are you?

I noticed you reverted my change in the Cambyses II article. I added what I thought was true that the rebellion was started by either Gaumata or Bardiya. You said that the my source (Encyclopedia Britannica) was not so good (which I admit I don't really know what qualifies as a good source) and that the story wasn't necessarily even true and you referred me to the article about Darius and his rise to power.

I read that part of the article, and what it appeared to me was that what I got wrong was that the rebellion wasn't started by either Gaumata or Bardiya but rather the people were rebelling on their own and then unified under Gaumata or Bardiya. Was there more that you wanted me to see in the Darius article and was there something else I was incorrect about? Because it would be a simple switch to say that a rebellion started and united under Gaumata or Bardiya rather than the way I put it which made it sound like they started the rebellion.

In addition, I heard this story on Hardcore History as well by Dan Carlin but I assume that that isn't considered a good source for Wikipedia. PotatoKugel (talk) 18:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, I'll try to reply tomorrow. I have a lot of brain fog right now and want to make a proper response to this. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Britannica is a really poor source (eg [8]), and per the sourced section in Darius the Great#Accession, the figure of Gaumata is indeed made up by Darius. And you're right, Dan Carlin is indeed not a good source - he has a bachelor in Arts. We need academic historians who also have expertise in the topic for this type of stuff. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, how are you?

Thank you for the information about Britannica. Also, I somehow missed that sentence that Gaumata is widely acknowledged as fake. Thanks for that as well.

Would you agree to the following edit

"In the spring of 522 BC, Cambyses hurriedly left Egypt to deal with a rebellion in Persia which was led by his brother, Smerdis (Bardiya) usurping the throne" or something like this? And is it okay to cite the Darius article as a source? PotatoKugel (talk) 01:20, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia can't be used a source. We can add that if we have a WP:RS (reliable source) for it. Please also be aware of WP:SYNTH. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:35, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay thank you very much. I'll see what I can find. PotatoKugel (talk) 02:01, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Talish

Hello, colleague. I half cleaned the article Talish (region) from the flood of low-quality sources or information without sources. I will continue to do this. But I would like to ask you to watch this little part - Talish_(region)#Middle_Ages. Could you suggest sources for the third and fourth sentences there? Everything else (starting with Revolt of 1629, I will look through it myself, since the sources there, if they are, are in Russian). With respect, colleague. Smpad (talk) 21:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, that's nice to hear. Sorry, but I can only think of the sources I gave you here [9]. They might have something valuable. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:01, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, colleague. How can Wikipedia give me access to this article - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/713656178?

With respect, Smpad (talk) 22:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Smpad. You can always request a source from Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request, but I found the pdf here [10]. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, colleague! With respect, Smpad (talk) 00:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Chuvash Page

برادر سلمون علیکم. در صفحه چوواش دروغ ها و اطلاعات بی اساس زیادی وجود دارد. پاناتورکس آن را اضافه کرد. آیا می توانید به بررسی و حذف دروغ ها کمک کنید؟

Chuvash people 2A02:FF0:3316:8F74:8DDF:2A42:58F:B5AF (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Central Asia

Can you review [11] (Scythian vs. Scytho-Siberian) and [12] (representing Ferdowsi and Shahnameh as historical facts)? @Kansas Bear, LouisAragon, and Wikaviani: You might be interested too. --Mann Mann (talk) 16:46, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I’ll see if I have time to check it later today. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I reverted the edit about Scytho-Siberian as well, since no sources were provided for it. The page is now protected. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, it looks like the user was cherrypicking and engaging in WP:SYNTH. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Absolutely. What's more, the user is misinterpreting the source he himself cited, as Kansas Bear said at Talk:Central Asia.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I see. I didn't get to check the source before you reverted them, but I didn't have high expectations, since they were indeed mentioning Ferdowsi behind a citation that wasn't even about him. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Yep, edit-warring to reinstate their edits while attacking Mann Mann like they did are additional evidences that this user is probably not here to build an encyclopedia.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:19, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Request

Hello, colleague. Can I ask your opinion for Talk:Forced assimilation in Azerbaijan#Merge proposal?

I created Forced assimilation in Azerbaijan article, so now I plan to reduce Talysh people#In the Soviet Union. With respect, Smpad (talk) 20:46, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Smpad. I'm currently leaning towards with what Buidhe said, but I also want to see what other users say first. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Сolleague, Aharon Erman broke the structure of the discussion. Is it possible to invite someone to lead the discussion as Felix QW made in Talk:Talyshstan_(region)#Merge_proposal. With respect, Smpad (talk) 22:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, I don’t understand why there might be a question about coerciveness or voluntariness. The article describes the specific policies of the state (falsifying censuses, creating false official narratives, the state’s refusal to record certain groups of people as they want, etc.) Where is the voluntariness on the part of these peoples here? With respect, Smpad (talk) 22:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

To be fair you both did it by keep replying to each other and kinda going a bit off-topic, thus leading to a wall of text and thus WP:TLDR. I don't think I've ever done it before (?), but WP:MERGE explains how. Also, "they" in English is used to as a non-gender substitute for "him/her". It's commonly used in the English Wikipedia.

Where is the voluntariness on the part of these peoples here?

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand. Then again, I don't know that much about the assimilation process of the Talysh in Azerbaijan. I only know as much as I added in Talysh people. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

"Also, "they" in English is used to as a non-gender substitute for "him/her"" - then I was still accused by the uzer of the thing I didn’t do.

Title of the article should come from its content. Goff and others do not describe cases of voluntary assimilation into Azerbaijani Turks.

Also, if assimilation is the entire policy of the state, which uses the practices described in the article, then it is by definition forced (and not voluntary).

"Assimilation of ethnic minorities in Azerbaijan" this is not an adequate title, since the pre-Turkic Muslim peoples were forcibly assimilated, while no such policy was carried out in relation to the Russians, Volga Tatars and many others. We already have Ethnic minorities in Azerbaijan article. With respect, Smpad (talk) 22:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

But "Assimilation of ethnic minorities in Azerbaijan" doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't any forced assimilation. It just means that there was assimilation, what kind of assimilation is then what the article goes into. HistoryofIran (talk) 02:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Then such an article should be called simply “Azerbaijanization” and it should describe known cases of voluntary assimilation to the same extent. Then there will be two articles: Azerbaijanization and Forced assimilation in Azerbaijan, the first describing a socio-cultural phenomenon, and the second describing the policies and practices of the Azerbaijani state in relation to its minorities (compare Marriage vs Forced marriage, Prostitution vs Forced prostitution, etc). I have no sources for the first article, but only for forced assimilation. With respect, Smpad (talk) 12:43, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Imo you should make that proposal in the talk page to see what others think. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I was given this Barnstar by TheEagle107 but I decided you also deserve this barnstar for your outstanding efforts in defending vulnerable articles and combating against vandalism on Wikipedia. We appreciate you as a member of this community and this Barnstar is well deserved! Ayaltimo (talk) 07:12, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much Ayaltimo - my pleasure! HistoryofIran (talk) 12:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Orontes I

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Orontes I you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Relativity -- Relativity (talk) 19:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Possible additions to Nader Shah?

Hello @HistoryofIran, once again a great pleasure to be talking to you and hope you're doing well. I was recently looking to make some improvements about Nader Shah's religious policy and couldn't help but notice that a section about his crown (the Kolah I Naderi) cites Axworthy as a source to state that the 4 peak's of the crown symbolised the first 4 Caliphs. However on page 76 of "Sword of Persia", Axworthy says that some "believe that the four points of Nader's version had a religious meaning, but it seems more likely that...they signified the four corners of the territories he aimed to conquer", do you think this can be added as an alternative interpretation about the meaning behind the crown? Looking forward for your thoughts, thanks! Salman Cooper Mapping (talk) 08:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Salman, thank you and likewise. The info at Nader Shah might be wrongly attributed. I can check in a few days when I have my own pc again. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Battle of Ghazni (1148)

Hey HistoryofIran, I saw your edit on this article and wondered if you had any more information concerning this event? I posted some information on the article talk page, but 2 of the sources are generalized and non-specialized. I would appreciate your opinion on the matter. Thanks! --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:15, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Kansas Bear. This was the best I could find;

"A poem of Sayyid Hasan's refers to the events of 543-4/1148-9 when the Ghurid Saif ad-Din Suri temporarily occupied Ghazna, and records the return of both Bahram Shah and 'the sun of the kingdom Hasan-i Ahmad'." - pp. 105-106, The Later Ghaznavids: Splendour and Decay : The Dynasty in Afghanistan and Northern India, 1040-1186

"The real reason seems to have been that Sayyid Hasan had stayed in Ghazna during the Ghurid chief Saif ad-Din Suri's occupation of" the city, and may well have been ready to accommodate himself to the new regime there, which could have appeared as a permanency. When, however, Bahram Shah regained his throne, Sayyid Hasan deemed it prudent to depart in 544/1149-50 for Nishapur, and it was from there that he addressed to the sultan poems of apology and also the long ode celebrating Bahram Shah's ultimate victory over and killing of Suri." p. 108, The Later Ghaznavids: Splendour and Decay : The Dynasty in Afghanistan and Northern India, 1040-1186

"After quarrelling with his brothers, Quṭb al-Dīn fled to the court of Bahrām Shāh, to whom, according to Ibn al-Athīr, he was related by marriage; there he was poisoned. As the paramount Ghūrid, Sayf al-Dīn Sūrī marched on Ghazna in retaliation, occupied the city in Jumāda I 543/September-October 1148, and assumed the title Sulṭān, but Bahrām Shāh gathered an army in the Panjāb and retook his capital, capturing Sūrī in flight on 2 Muḥarram 544/12 May 1149 and executing him in humiliating fashion at Ghazna. Bahāʾ al-Dīn Sām had meanwhile assumed the throne of Fīrūzkūh, where he continued construction, but he died reportedly of smallpox (bi-l-judarī) at Kīdān, on the road to Ghazna to avenge his brothers’ deaths." - EI3 HistoryofIran (talk) 19:39, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. It appears there is no reference stating "battle". --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

True that. Seems like we're possibly dealing with an article that shouldn't even be an article to begin with. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I'm beginning to think that way as well. On the article talk page there are two sources that imply there was a siege, but I don't feel that is enough to justify an article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Concerning the Hephthalites

First and foremost, sorry for mistakenly talking in the wrong place, didn’t intend. Anyway, please take back the revision, because the source I add was just echoing the previous one. Also I found your criticism about the “naming” very simple. The ethnonym Bulgar was never an umbrella term like Scythian, or Tartar. Please consider this. BulgarChanyu (talk) 20:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

When I reverted you in my talk page and said "take it to the talk page" I was referring to the talk page of the article. And I was not necessarily referring to umbrella terms. Anyways, please be mindful of WP:SYNTH, and please show me where the source says that the Hephthalites are possibly of Bulgar stock, because that is what the section is talking about - a possible Turkic origin of the Hephthalites. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)