Talk:Military history of Iran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Iran Military history of Iran is part of WikiProject Iran, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Iran-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale.
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

I recognize that this article is brief and shallow. I welcome help in expanding it. The text is based on the world fact book entry on Iran at [www.cia.gov]. Brainhell 22:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't care what the text is based upon, but everything related to Russia is a mess of falsehoods. Peter the Great achieved everything he wished for; Nadir Shah never "defeated" him "with great force". Zubov's expedition turned back after taking Baku because Catherine II died and her successor Paul had other plans for the army, not because of the Persians' fabulous victories (there were not any). Unlike Iran, which infamously reduced Tbilisi to a pile of ashes in 1795 and massacred all the Christian population, Russia never "invaded and annexed Georgia" as is claimed in the text. And I strongly doubt that the Persian army in 1812 was "equally capable" as the Russian army which destroyed the largest army ever assembled in human history and dethroned Napoleon, the conqueror of Europe, that very year. --Ghirla -трёп- 20:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Any help would be very much obliged. :) ...And ultimately all that matters is factual accuracy in the article- im not here to make comparisons between "Iran massacred all the Christian population" because much of the same can be said about Russias actions in Iran and the rest of the CIS for that matter. Thats another argument and another issue all together.

I grant that wording could definately be better:

"But three years later, in 1801, Tsar Paul went beyond the Treaty of Georgievsk by proclaiming the incorporation of Kartli-Kakheti into the Russian empire. His action ended both Georgia's independence and Persia's long political involvement in Georgian affairs."

  • Persian Victories
    • Soltanabad 1812

The essay points to this one victory amongst others. This will need further checking.

  • It was Nadir Shah who, with great force, drove the Ottomans and Russians out of the occupied lands...
  • Agha Mohammad Khan, with 60,000 cavalry under his command, drove the Russians back beyond Tbilisi.

I will have to read into the other points you made as I lifted them (not copying) from the main Qajar source. Yes I will change my name

While i'm at it: Turkish and Persian domination "...On July 24, 1783, he concluded with Catherine II the Great the Treaty of Georgievsk, whereby Russia guaranteed Georgia's independence and territorial integrity, while Erekle accepted Russian suzerainty. Yet Erekle and his Georgians had to face alone the fierce hordes of the Persian eunuch Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar. T'bilisi was sacked in 1795, and Erekle died in 1798. His invalid son Giorgi XII sought to hand over the kingdom unconditionally into the care of the Russian emperor Paul I, but both rulers were dead before this could be formally implemented. In 1801 Alexander I reaffirmed Paul's decision to incorporate Kartli and Kakheti into the Russian Empire. Despite the treaty of 1783, the Bagratid line was deposed and replaced by Russian military governors, who deported the surviving members of the royal house and imposed a bureaucratic order on the Georgians that soon provoked several popular uprisings. The western Georgian kingdom of Imereti was annexed in 1810, while Guria, Mingrelia, Svaneti, and Abkhazia were finally swallowed up in 1829, 1857, 1858, and 1864, respectively. The Black Sea ports of Pot'i and Bat'umi, as well as areas of southwestern Georgia long under Ottoman rule, were wrested from Turkey in successive wars, culminating in the campaigns of 1877-78." Copyright © 1994-2001 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

  • "It was Nadir Shah who, with great force, drove the Ottomans and Russians out of the occupied lands..."

This seems wrong, but I want to find a couple more sources just to cross check. While Nader Shah did drive out the ottomans, it seems that the correct refrence in the above case should have been to: Agha Mohammad Khan who took control of the caucuses again after russia had invaded the region.

"Agha Mohammad Khan (reigned 1779-97), a leader of the Turkmen Qajar tribe, set out to reunify Iran. By 1794 he had eliminated all his rivals, including Lotf 'Ali Khan, the last of the Zand dynasty, and had reasserted Iranian sovereignty over the former Iranian territories in Georgia and the Caucasus." Copyright © 1994-2001 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

Contents

[edit] Copyright issues

Per instructions at Wikipedia:Copyright problems, I have reverted this article to the revision by Travelbird on 15:55, May 26, 2006. Much or all of the information added by Surena here appears to be from the CAIS website [http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/History/hakhamaneshian/achaemenid_army.htm here], or at other pages. This site does not license its content under the GFDL, and even if it did, is not attributed. Please do not re-add this content, but feel free to rewrite it in your own words, although it may be preferable to refer to other sources, since the article from CAIS appears to be a tertiary source itself. Thank you. KWH 07:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] wip

Sorry for lack of citations (as of now) for the expanded preamble. Every statement can be supported with one or more citations from fairly well known sources.

Also note that I have mentioned Elam (although I to mention the empire of the Medes) as these are the preeminent pre-Persian kingdoms of Iran, and minimally should be considered in setting the initial context of any discussion of the (military) history of Iran.

The final sentence can considered as a brief program for the preparatory research and analysis of the topic, if not the actual structure of the article itself, though it certainly could.

To wit, the current laundry list of the successive states of Iran Zameen is fairly redundant (and certainly unimaginative) given that this is a wiki and not printed text. This linear order belongs to a summary section of the overall article, with appropriate link(s) to the dynasty's wiki page and a condensed treatment of the relevant matter.

Either the suggested dimensions of the topic (not necessarily in the given order) or major historic eras (as opposed to dynasties) with (likely) significant events forming the basis of transitional sections between the various eras, would be a significant improvement and (in my (clearly not humble <g>) personal opinion) probably provide a more engaging experience for the reader.

For major military events and topics, such as Alexander the great's conquest of the HakhA-Manesh KhShA'anKhshA and Iran Zameen, obviously a top level section will (or should) exist and exhaustively treated. This would allow for a brief recap and recording of the said event/topic in the dynasty/timeline list/graphic (<= suggestion).

For relatively minor events/topics which nevertheless feature prominently in a given dynasty (or major era, e.g. post-Islamic Iran), clearly the relevant section is the happiest of houses.

Iran's history is the history of a nomadic people's transition to settled civilized order in the immediate periphery of the definitive center of ancient civilized world. The core area has a varied and robust terrain (at times somewhat extreme in either topography or climate) which (obviously) is also a major variable influencing the emergence of a people capable of fielding armies and realizing significant innovations in the martial arts.

These facts should be highlighted in the introductory (or) overall remarks on the topic as they have directly impacted the historic referent of the subject matter.

Thus Horse, Tent, and the influence of (the then recent) nomadic heritage, may explain both the great affinity of ancient Iranian empire of HakhA'Manesh for transportation infrastructure, relay based messaging, and effective use of light cavalry.

The above could form the basis of a major partition along eras in Iran's history, in a second section (as in the following possible order):

- pre-amble - overview and summary conclusion (the gist) - eras I) pre-Aryan peoples and kingdoms of the geographic context in the historic record 1) Elam 2) Media i) Persians and Medes ii) Cyrus The Great

II) The rise of Persia and the Persians and the emergence of Arya Shahr as a political place and a national identity

(note: great place to touch on epic/mythic military history of Iran, specifically Shahnameh and personage such as Rostam) given that the mythic wars of Iranians have apparently always been of a somewhat (morally) cosmic scope ..]

1) The Great Expansion: Unification of the core Iranian tribes of Media and Persia and the establishment of the boundaries of the emerging Arya Shahr under the HakhA'Manesh Persian Empire

The rapid expansion and reordering of conquered lands, with a focus on the military aspects of these events, belongs here. If technological breakthroughs (such as better swords, swifter (protected) steeds, whatever) belongs here as well.

But definitely, the character of early Persians (who can be arguably viewed as sane and balanced Spartans) and the core ethics of moral exactitude, discipline, martial exercises, and leadership through merit, and a rare sense, given the historic era and neighboring precedents, of nobles oblige in the Persian elites, all under a very strong (effectively) monotheistic collective spiritual expression and understanding, certainly should be discussed.

The impressive military actions (and typically longstanding hold on the resultant acquisitions) are nearly inevitable given the facts mentioned. So is the resultant expression of power in victory which primarily focused on effective reordering and practical integration of culturally independent nations into an Imperial framework held together by a very sophisticated set of tools such as transportation networks, propaganda, civic works, and a tolerant (local) world order.

Historic battles and timelines should be presented here. Just who was Cyrus (the Great) and what did he accomplish as a King who marched with his armies? Both he, and distinguished successor Dariush (the Great), were supreme commanders, but they also had recourse to (named) generals who did some of the actual fighting in the rapid fire series of wars and battles by these two Iranian KhshA'anKhshA which quickly established the Perian Empire, and then crushed insurgencies which arose as the initial series of events in the career of Darish the Great, due to an ineffective succession and transfer of power and palace intrigues.

Dariush has a list of his battles and the name of the families which helped his house, all (as he repeatedly asserts in the chorus of the same declaration) due to the will and help of AhurA'Mazda (which means Al-Aziz-Al-Hakeem, btw ..). Whoever does this section, well, a great topic with wonderfully wide scope and rich characters. In a military context, of course.

i) The character and variety of the peoples and military powers engaged ii) Order, makeup, characteristics, technology, propaganda, expenditures, and effectiveness of the military

(...)

141.157.240.132 02:36, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Modern age military

It should added the outstanding military enforcement made by Sha during '70s. As example, 80 F-14, 223 F-4s, 150 or more F-5, 202 AH-1 Cobra, immense quantities of HAWK, TOW, AAMs. More stuff were 900 Chieftains, M113, BM-21, and a lot more. Plans were even more incredibles: six Spruance SAM destroyers, that actually were the Kidd, 53 F-15, 160 F-16, some E-3s, tracked Rapier SAM, 1450 tanks among them the actual Challenger tank. This was far the most impressive program for all the Area, and its remains were still enough to fight Irak in 1980-88.--Stefanomencarelli 16:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What is wrong with this page

In my most recent edit, I cut all of the lede apart from the first paragraph. The material I deleted was editorializing nationalistic crap of no value - it also looked like a copyvio, though I have no idea where from, so I don't suggest re-adding this.

As for the rest, the missing sections need filling in according to reliable sources, most importantly. Then a major cutting operation will have to be done, because when these sections are filled in the article will be morbidly obese. Is anyone actively working on completion? 81.99.113.232 (talk) 21:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)