Talk:Al-Shahrazuri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Al-Shahrazuri article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Kurdistan Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Kurdistan, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Kurdistan-related topics. Please visit the project page if you would like to participate. Happy editing!
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.

Iran existed even before the 13th century:

In fact, "Iraqi Kurdistan" is the name that never existed. Iraq came only into existence in recent history.--Zereshk 00:14, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Iran before Safavids

I meant between Arab conquest and Safavid Empire, Iran did not exist as an independent political entity. I am well aware of the ancient Iranian/Persian history, but at that moment in 13th century, the only governments which existed in ME were either the (weak) Arab caliphate or Turkish States. The notable Iranian-descent states like Samanid/Saffarid were destroyed by the rival Turkish states, by then. Also that particular area (Sharazur) is located around Kirkuk, which came under Safavid control later on, but was not part of Iranian or Persian states to the east at that time.Heja Helweda 03:09, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

• I have no problem with saying he was Kurdish (if he really was that is. Was "Rumi" from "Rum"?). We can accept and assume his Kurdishness for the time being for lack of any references, his works, etc.
• "Turkish states"? You mean Turkic. There's a big difference.
• Turks are and have always been part of Iran as well. "Iran" is not an ethnic entity for you to separate Turks and other ethnicities from. Otherwise youd have to be consistent and say that the Safavids, the Qajars, and even the Pahlavis were not Iranian as well.
• However, in the sentence you deleted, the word "Iran" was not being used as a political entity. "Iran" is not in fact a political name at all (especially before the 1920s). It is only a place name. Baghdad fell to Hulegu Khan in 1258 in fact. So Shahrazuri lived in the Ilkhanid era of Iran.--Zereshk 20:36, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, in the page for Iran, it says Iran (Persian: ايران), also called Persia, is a Middle Eastern country .... Country is a political name (from the page country:In political geography and international politics a country is a geographical territory,...). Iran as a country did not exist between Sassanid Empire and Safavids. Heja Helweda 22:27, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

There is much confusion on both the usage of "Iran" and "Persia". Reza Pahlavi decided to use the place name of "Iran" as the official name of the country in the 1920s. i.e. he borrowed the word for another usage. What you are practically saying is that "the land of the Aryan" did not exist before 1920, which is erroneous.

Your argument is like saying the Persian Gulf did not exist in 4000BC, because no Persians existed. Now how silly is that?--Zereshk 23:54, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

What is the land of Aryan? What is Aryan? Ancient Greeks like Herodot and Xenophon did not use such a term. Persians existed, and that's what Greeks have reported, but the term Aryan have not been reported by the outsiders. Also about the Persian Gulf, it was named that way in the Achaemenid period (500 BC). It did not exist in 4000 BC, simply because Persians had not settled in the northern coast of the Gulf yet. Names are neither eternal nor sacred. Heja Helweda 20:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I am just reporting what I have found from some sources. Judging their content is not my concern (and is prohibited by WP). Nevertheless, I've posted your answer here.--Zereshk 23:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Location of Sharazur

In the article it says Sharazur is in Hawraman, when Sharazur is modern Sulaymani close to Hawraman, though it is possible that during this period Sharazur was included in Hawraman since the sorani(south-kurmanji) dialect had yet not spread to this area. But can some one confirm this?