Talk:The Lion and Sun

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Iran The Lion and Sun 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.

Invalid license removed. "non-commercial-use only" and "for wikipedia only" licenses are not valid at wikipedia. All content must be free for any commercial re-use. Everything else is a copyright violation. - Aksi_great (talk) 08:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Undo Changes

Why the date regarding the Pre-Islamic aspect of the article were removed without anuy explaination, which were supported by references? Is Islamic Fundamentalism still in force here? For god sake revolution happened nearly 30 years ago, and still you revolutioanries won't leave the Lion and Sun alon! 80.41.129.5 15:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

>> Why the date regarding the Pre-Islamic aspect of the article were removed without anuy explaination, which were supported by references?
What date? What references? The reinsertions have no references whatsoever.
>> Is Islamic Fundamentalism still in force here? For god sake revolution happened nearly 30 years ago...
Fundamentalism, of any kind, is not welcome on Wikipedia or any other source that hopes to remain useful for the world at large. Nor is WP a platform for revolutionaries of any kind, including those who'd like to see a reinstatement of a monarchy/nobility.
That said,...
  1. you apparently did not read the article from beginning to end. Otherwise you may have noted that although the Lion and Sun emblem is only attested from the 16th century onwards, the symbolism itself is much older, predating the coming of Islam in the 6th century. This was (and continues to be) expressed in detail in the Symbolism section.
  2. Given that the "Lion and Sun" emblem is not pre-Islamic, it could hardly qualify as a pre-Islamic symbol. Instead, it was the coat-of-arms of the monarchy (who were very much Muslims), which is presumably the reason why it was replaced as seal of the republic. The "new" division into "Pre-Islamic" and "Post-Islamic" (that was introduced together with the reintroduction of cruft) is thus a radicalization that was not present in the previous revision.
  3. De profundis:
  • >> the Achaemenid seal depicting king Artaxerxes II (a Mithraist), honouring Goddess Anahita who is riding on a lion and sun is rising from the lion's back.
    That Artaxerxes was a "Mithraist" is so extraordinary that it borders on the absurd. Moreover, which seal? Whose interpretation? The "seal" that was referred to (in the previous OR version depicted next to the reference, presently lower down in the "Islamic" section) is neither Iranian nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with Artaxerxes or Anahita or Mithra.
  • >> in ancient Iranian religion of Mithraism, lion was connected to the sun and to fire and was perceived as a moral cleansing and purifying force, and it was the Sun God Mithra's 'totem' animal
    There is not a single factually accurate clause or subclause in that whole sentence.
  • >> CAIS - New Archaeological Findings in Neyshabur. The source for the entire article.
    is complete and utter self-aggrandizement. Its as morally questionable as giving oneself barnstars. Notwithstanding that that page is neither the "source for the entire article" nor is it the epitomy of reliability, the reinsertions are a *copy* of that source.
Apropos your speculations on the presence of revolutionary dogma:
Although, since 1979 extensive governmental efforts and repressive actions were made to demonise the "Lion & Sun" emblem in order to minimize the feelings of nationalism amongst the Iranians, as well as have the successive generations accept the Islamic Republic's "Allah" emblem, but the Lion and Sun still considered by majority of Iranians (apart from the Islamists and the communists) as the sole symbol of the nation.
This is completely unwarranted polemic. Contrast that reinsertion with
The emblem remained the official symbol of Iran until 1979 revolution, when the "Lion & Sun" symbol was - by decree - removed from public spaces and government organisations and replaced by the present-day Coat of arms of Iran. Consequently, the emblem is today considered representative of the era prior to the foundation of the Islamic Republic and remains tied to ideas of Iranian nationalism.
Note the lack of ideological overtones in the second passage. Note also that, following your reinsertion, *BOTH* versions are in the article.
-- Fullstop 09:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation for Mardavich

As requested [1] I will explain each of my recent edits.

  1. [2] - That this is 'the' new symbol is completely unsourced POV. Says who? ParthianShot who claimed to author the work? There isn't enough agreement on these matters to call it 'the' new one. If it represents a specific notable organization it may be kept (with attribution), but knowing ParthianShot's other image uploads the sourcing is quite unreliable. The image will probably get destroyed soon on account of this.
  2. [3] - I removed the information about the Derafsh-e Kavian because it is off-topic. This article is about the Lion and the Sun, not the history of Iranian flags, so we must stick to information about Lion and Sun flags. The information was fine - Encyclopedia Iranica was the source - but simply not relevant to this article.
  3. [4] - This info originated from CAIS, which explains why it is so preposterous. In case you haven't noticed CAIS links and info are now getting removed from WP because of non-RS and copyright issues, so this goes with it. Besides, it is most definitely WP:FRINGE to tie that lion carving in here. This is about Lion and Sun flag imagery, not some obscure carving misconstrued as the Lion and Sun. I believe Fullstop already covered this above anyway so my explanation here isn't quite necessary.
  4. [5] - Basic POV removal regarding Ferdowsi and simplification of that sentence. As for Khomeini, not only is that claim unsourced but its pertinence to this topic is questionable. I think this is classic NPOV and OR removal.
  5. [6] - The first paragraph removed had a lot of POV statements that didn't even have sources (not that a source would justify POV). The 2nd paragraph seemed redundant though not nearly as harmful - under certain conditions its inclusion could be appropriate. But that first one is no good. Were these really value-added paragraphs anyway?

Well that is about it for now. Tell me what you think. I'll clarify as necessary. Thanks. The Behnam 16:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mithraic Symbol?

I've seen it suggested that the Lion and the Sun comes from a Mithraic symbol.

There's suppose to be a book called "Lion & the Sun" written by Nasser Engheta which asserts this.

I've seen it on numerous sites... but... here's one example...

http://www.daneshjoo.org/article/uploads/sun-lion.gif
http://www.daneshjoo.org/article/publish/printer_2376.shtml


--Charles Iliya Krempeaux 01:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thankfully, Wikipedia has a reliable sources policy, which allows us to keep stuff like that out.
Mithra/Sun identification is neither originally Iranian, nor is it as old as that website suggests, nor does it have anything to do with the Lion and the Sun emblem.
  1. the Iranian Lion and the Sun is not an ancient symbol. There was no direct emblematic connection between the Lion/Sun until relatively recently. The seal depicted on that website is actually Urartian, not Iranian. This sort of revisionism is actually quite typical for a certain set of people that will put an "ancient Iranian" (or worse "ancient Persian") spin on just about anything. Nothing wrong with it per-se, but ideologically about as unsound as a proposition that Canada is the 51st US state. :)
  2. Mithra==Sun identification is not as ancient as the website will have you believe either.
    Anything before 200 AD is speculative, because that is about the time we have the first hard evidence of such an association. While it may have occurred as early as 400 BC (but for sure not before), and this is certainly a long time ago (and long enough to be firmly embedded in the cultural consciousness), it is much too late for what that website is suggesting.
  3. The Mithra==Sun identification in the common era is provoked by the fact that Mihr is one of the New Persian words for "Sun." That is, the word came to have that meaning because Mithra came to be identified with the Sun, not the other way around. The Mithra==sun identification probably occurred as a secondary development of the conflation with Babylonian Shamash, which is literally the Akkadian word for "Sun". In contrast, the original and literal meaning of Mithra is "Covenant."
  4. The "glory of kingship" - which is what the "Sun" in the emblem represents - is not specifically anything to do with the Sun, but with Khvarenah, the "(royal) divine Glory" and the "Iranian Glory." The etymological root of Khvarenah is (probably) hvar "to shine," which is also evident in the propername of Hvare khshaeta who is the original Iranian divinity of the "Radiant Sun." Avestan Hvare Khshaeta is contracted in New Persian as "Khorshid", and Khorshid is in turn the word for Sun in the "Lion and Sun." Khorshid not Mihr.
While there are ways by which a connection between Mithra with the Lion and the Sun emblem could be made, its a far far leap to do so. There is certainly no sound historical basis upon which it could rest.
-- Fullstop 07:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
ps: please don't confuse "Mithraic" with Mithra. Different culture, different religion.

[edit] Lion and the Sun before the Mongols

In this article it says...

The use of the lion and sun symbol is first attested in a miniature painting dated to 1423.[1] The painting, which is of a scene from Mongol conquest (Timurid dynasty, 1370–1506), depicts several horsemen that approach the walled city of Nishapur. One of the horsemen carries a banner that bears a lion passant with a rising sun on its back. The pole is tipped with a crescent moon.

I came across this today...

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/15713/15713-h/15713-h.htm

(The paper is on Project Gutenberg.)

It's a paper from the 1800's about stamps. But in it there's a picture of a stamp with the Lion and the Sun on it. And along with that picture there is the text...

Many stamps of Persia bear the lion and the sun, the arms of the country and the insignia of its highest order of nobility. It is the lion of Iran, hold ing in its paw the sceptre of the Khorassan while behind it shines the sun of Darius. There is a legend concerning the latter symbol to the effect that Darius, hunting in the desert, threw his spear at a lion and missed. The beast crouched to spring, when the sun, shining on a talisman on Darius' breast, so overpowered it that it came fawning to his feet and followed him back to the city. And for this reason the sun became part of the arms of the kingdom. But I think we may look further than this and find in it a relic of the ancient fire worship and of oriental pretentions to power over heaven and earth.

This article should be updated with this.

--Charles Iliya Krempeaux (talk) 03:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The stamp-book quotation doesn't contradict the article, but there isn't any reason why the legend can't be added too. A minor rephrase (and not using that source on stamps of course) might read like this (since the copyright has expired we need not worry about copyvios):
An Iranian legend of unknown date or origin attributes the sun in the symbol to a hunting incident: While hunting in the desert, Darius (presumably Darius I) threw a spear at a lion and missed. The beast crouched to spring, when the sun, shining on a talisman on Darius' breast, so overpowered it that it came fawning to the king's feet and followed him back to the city. And for this reason the sun became part of the arms of the kingdom.
Could you please try to find a legitimate source for the story? Thanks. -- Fullstop (talk) 01:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)