Talk:Nizami Ganjavi/Archive 5

The birthplace

The Question on the birthplace of the poet is not shined absolutely not in an article. I offer such section. In case within a week I shall not find the objections based on rules of Wikipedia, I insert it.

The birthplace of Nezami is disputed. Academics have named two Persian-speaking cities: Ganja (the basic version) or Qom in the central Iran, more precisely, small town Tafresh in region of Qom. Last version is based on verses itself Nezami in Iqbal-nameh. Verses approve, that he though " lost as a pearl in the sea of Ganja ", but occurs from mountain village near Tafresh. However, authenticity of these verses not all researchers recognize. Earlier the majority of researchers preferred a variant of Qom, nowadays - a variant of Ganja. There is an opinion, that from the Central Iran there was not itself Nezami, but his father.

Undoubtedly that Nezami has lived all or the most part of a life in the Ganja without quitting the place, there he has died and is buried.

Sfrandzi (talk) 14:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Sfrandzi, this sounds good to me. However, the English could be improved. Do you mind if I copyedit it? Khoikhoi 18:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way, although non-English sources are still allowed, it is preferred at the English Wikipedia that if we have English sources that would basically say the same thing, we use them. Information here should be verifiable and since most people here cannot read Russian it is preferred to use English references when they are available. I think Minorsky, Meysami, and Bashiri will suffice anyways for the information that you are trying to add to the article. I'll copyedit the information soon. Khoikhoi 22:58, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, many of your references are Soviet-era sources. Perhaps it would be best if we stick to more modern references as well, as some of these appear to be controversial. Khoikhoi 04:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Bertels - the unique Soviet reference. Other Russian-speaking references - postSoviet Sfrandzi (talk) 11:20, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

• I've kept the modern English sources (Meysami and Minorsky).
• I've removed the old English sources for Britannica and put it in the "External links" section
• Most importantly, I didn't cite the USSR source, but used the info to explain the ambiguity of where Nezami was born. Regarding the ethnic background of the cities, it is unnecessary to state that they were "Persian-speaking" in this article. That info can go in the Ganja and Qom articles.

Khoikhoi 22:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Region

In section "region" many important facts for the characteristic of region and the poet are missed. I suggest to insert in the beginning of section:

The area in which there was Ganja, during that epoch named Arran; its urban population spoke mainly in the Persian language

References

Sfrandzi (talk) 23:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, and Thank you for your interest. I have been the most active person on this whole article and talkpage. Of course, what you said is correct in my opinion, and so I moved your sources (except the part about Nizami since this is the article devoted to it) to Ganjeh and Arran. Those sources were helpful for those two and of course the Oghuz Turkic nomads (their number not too large but they assimilated the local population) at the time had a nomadic lifestyle and were not really urban dwellers. Beside's Nizami's father-side ancestry would go back before the Seljuqs and either Qom/Ganja had an Iranian population before the Seljuqs. Culturally, we know his works are from Shahnameh(Iranian folklore) and not Turkic folklore. Of course I have no doubt he was Iranic but there will always be people who push for other theories, so best thing is to just simply leave it unmentioned. As you can see from the archives of the talkpage, it has been discussed. My summary is here: [2] , but I think eventually any lie will desist (it might take 100 years or whatever) and no one can separate Nizami from his works/culture/language. Afterall he considered himself the inheritor of Ferdowsi. Of course I made the concensus, since it is better to have something that everyone agrees. The current version is an okay concensus (not perfect) and so we decided to leave information about Nizami's father and etc. out of it (frankly I believe I made more concessions than due, since I can understand Persian and it is very easy to dismantle the very weird arguments I have heard). But anyhow, that is the current concensus. Thanks for understanding. I might be a way for a little bit, so I urge the users to keep the concensus version. Specially new users who just created account or who just edited the article for the first time. If not, we can just mention one sentence(no more since it is endless argument) :"Some claim his father was Iranic(Kurdish,Persian) while others claim he was Turkic, Jewish (read it somewhere recently!), Arabic(I think some Armenian author suggested it)" and then put one source/article for each, which I can put my article [3][4] and others can put their view. But just one line or so, since either way, we are discussing Nizami and also he was orphaned early and biographies are very limited on him. Thanks. --Nepaheshgar 23:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That you write - not argument for the encyclopedia. You speak: there are people who think, that 2X2=7 and consequently leave unmentioned the multiplication table. Really, always be people who push for other theories. Not only in this area. One deny Darwin, others the Holocaust, the third speak, that Nezami were the Azeri poet. Human perversions are diverse. It, however, not an occasion to not mention historic facts (exclusively the facts!!!) which ascertain the academic sources. If "others" have so indisputable facts and so reliable sources - let they result them. The article from it only will win. If is not present - it is possible to create an article "Revisionist theories of ethnicity Nezami" and to send these people there. If I, within a week, shall not meet objections against my sources in essence - I insert a fragment. Sfrandzi (talk) 23:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi and thank you for your comments. I do not think the article says he was "Azeri poet". We know he wrote in Persian and the terminology "Azeri" would not have existed then (as an ethnic background or even language designation since the language was still unified Oghuz and not branched out to Azer), so to describe him as "Azeri poet" is not scientific (perhaps Azeri poet would be only due to the fact he is born in the country with that designation although Nizami uses Arran in his own poetry). But as you can see, the compromised version does not say he was "Azeri poet". The article simple leaves out speculations about Nizami's father, although Iranian background is much more likely on this. Anyhow I'll be off for a little bit, does anyone else have comments to make? --Nepaheshgar 12:01, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Unlike us, the reader can not know ethnic history of region in Middle Ages. It is not obliged its know. Moreover. It is not obliged to know and a modern ethnic situation in region. For the reader speaks, that Nezami was born in the Azerbaijan city, in region Azerbaijan and was reside under authority of princes of Azerbaijan. What should the reader think? The poet of 12 centuries who was born in Lyons and was reside under authority of kings of France - the Frenchman, even it wrote on-Latin. The poet who was born in Oxford and was reside under authority of English kings - an Englishman, even it wrote in French. Similarly: the Poet who was born in Ganja and was reside under authority of governors of Azerbaijan - Azeri Turk, even it wrote on-persian. Quite natural conclusion. The reader will specially not will investigate, that meant concepts of Azerbaijan, azeri language and azeri ethnos with reference to 12 century. Thus, article - simply tells lies. It named: "lie by means of preterition" Sfrandzi (talk) 16:09, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Looks like no one else gave you feedback. Well, as long as he is not Oghuzified, I have no problem with people of republic of Azerbaijan calling them one of their own. Since that would mean they also ackwoledge their Iranian heritage. As I said, I rather have the background of his father not be debated over. But if you insist on adding those sources, then to be fair, we should write one sentence giving the three different(Iranic, Turkic, Iranianized Arab) views (with external articles). The reason I say to be fair, is that others were involved in the past in the article and we decided not to mention this. But if we are to mention it, then it is fair I believe to mention one source for each view. So from an unbiased point of view, I guess we can mention all three views in one sentence and then let the reader judge. But it is better to simply just keep out. The current version where we mention nothing about father's background has been stable, so I rather we just keep it. --Nepaheshgar 00:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Origin of Nezami - a question not political, but scientific. It not a subject of political dispute between Persians and Turks. It at all a subject of dispute in a science. The Azerbaijan, turkish, Iranian scientists in this question are not reliable sources because reliable sources by rules should be impartial and are not connected with one party of the non-scientific conflict. I have resulted the neutral academic sources showing as the world science concerns to a question. have resulted the neutral sources showing as the world science concerns to a question. If opponents have same neutral sources, not Iranian, not turkish, not Armenian and not official Soviet (in official Soviet editions everything, concerning Azerbaijan, it was written in the Azerbaijan) - let they result them. If is not present - it is possible to create an article (or section) " Revisionist theories of origin of Nezami " or " dispute about origin of Nezami " and there to arrange a boxing ring. These are the general reasons. Particularly, I do not write: Nezami there was a Persian" or "Nezami there was a Turk ". I write, that in region the urban population spoke on-Persian. If opponents can oppose with statements of the same reliable sources - well. If is not present - I at all do not understand, in what a problem. We here result opinions of scientists or we are engaged political correctness? Really, if Germany denied the Holocaust, it too should leave unmentioned? Sfrandzi (talk) 22:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Eventually, as a last resort, nothing prevents to write: "in opinion of a world science so, however scientists of Azerbaijan consider so" Sfrandzi (talk) 22:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

P.P.S. Notice, I and have not met the objections based on rules of Wikipedia - and consequently I consider myself have the right to not accept your objections. If here there was a scientific problem - it should be not ignored, and on the contrary to shine from different directions. But you recognize, that the scientific problem is not present. And is - impudent and aggressive nationalist falsification. But presence of nationalist falsifications should not stir to that the facts admited by a world science were informed. Sfrandzi (talk) 23:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how any of the stuff you added is relevant to Nezami's life. It just appears to be information about the city of Ganja. Why can't we that info to Ganja, Azerbaijan instead? Sfrandzi, when you have the time, please check out the talk page archives. There has been much debate on whether to label Nezami a "Persian" or an "Azeri". The eventual compromise was to say that he is the "greatest romantic epic poet in Persian literature", see Britannica for example. This was at least the result of the long-standing compromise on this page. Khoikhoi 04:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

????

What is it and the reason? Rantik (talk) 09:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Read the Archives[5][6][7][8]. This is consensus version which we agreed to take out nationalists link and sites. Somehow strange that a user creates accounts and starts disrupting a two+ year old consensus version. The article you brought already has been discussed in the talkpage and lots of the sources where not correct(read archives), but mainly the link itself is not suited for Wikipedia as it brings out a battle ground mentality by is title. But anyhow, there are different views like this here: [9], but we have decided to leave the article free of the sort of links. --Nepaheshgar 12:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Ref regarding Shirin

I wanted to look up the source regaring the claim that some authors considered Shirin to be "Caucasian Albanian" but I couldn't find anything on M.Shaginyan, “Studies/sketches about Nizami”, 1955/1981. The editor who added the source has been banned so i'm wondering if anyone else can provide some information or an exact quote, page number etc.? I'm guessing it's a Soviet publication in Russian based on the date and the authors name.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 03:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Adil and I made a consensus on the article a while back, although that is a point I should have taken up more. Although at the time I was not aware that Encyclopedia of Islam, Britannica as well more than one article in Iranica[10] consider Shirin to be an Armenian. Anyhow, I'll try to contact him or another user (GM who was semi-involved) to see if they can provide page number and the pertaining info. Anyhow, just for the record on the talk page, I don't agree with Caucasian Albanian since Alisher Navai and Vahshi Bafqi (two poets imitating Nizami) also think of Shirin as Armenian and they were influenced by them. But this is wikipedia which no one owns and to keep the article calm, I agreed to incorporate the differing opinions. Although I consider Western sources superior as well as classical sources on Shirin (like Navai, Bafqi) better than USSR sources. I might bring the issue up in a few years, once hopefully there is peace. Till then, proper referencing is provided within a few months or sooner. --Nepaheshgar 13:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I got word that I will have the source sometimes next week. Thanks. --Nepaheshgar 13:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Nepaheshgar. I look forward to it.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 17:25, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I received the sources and I also did some research. It seems the new research might show the historical Shirin was different than the mythical one of poetry [11] and might not be from the Caucus but from Khuzestan. Anyhow for Nizami it was from the Caucus, so perhaps if there is an article on Shirin in the future, this can be mentioned. --Nepaheshgar 14:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Nizami Gandjavi was an Azerbaijannian. He was born in Gandja (where I am fr.) and lived all his life there, some sources say that his mother was kurdish, but it is not real. both of his parents were Azerbaijanian. He wrote in persian language but thats coz in 11th centure the main language in litruature was persian language like before it was arabic or latin languages.

Azerbaijan is independent country and free natian. We r not persians or russians or any other nation. So Nizami Gandjavi who came fr Azerbaijanian family and lived all his life in Gandja bus me considered like Azerbaijanian write.

I think several countries can be proud of Nizami and someone who wrote about love should not a tool for fighting amongst people and countries. These were the wordings agreed upon and it is compromise version which has been stable for a year and half. Since then I have found Diakonov and many other sources and have done a detailed study on Nizami and I think the current version is the best. But there was no country by the name of Azerbaijan then. That is "Azerbaijanian" was not used as a ethnic term during the time of Nizami Ganjavi (it may be used as regional designation today) and so I assume you mean he was a Oghuz Turk writer (which he was not). I politely disagree and believe there is no evidence for this. Nizami uses Aran actually and he pronounced Azerbaijan like a Persian Adharabaadegaan. Nizami's mother was Kurdish and his father's ancestry goes back to the Shaddadid era. Some sources say Qom. For example a four hundred year source mentions his father being from Qom while Nizami was born in Ganja. That is actually not the same as the two verses in some verions Eskandarnama which he claims to be from Tafresh near Qom. That is a biography of him mentions Qom as his fathers and Nizami being born in Ganja which is not exactly the same as two verses which he claims to be from Qom. This might make some sense in my opinion based on the fact that after being orphaned early, Nizami Ganjavi was raised by his Kurdish uncle and not as traditionally by his father side. So his father might have very well be an immigrant from the area.

Either way his fathers ancestry pre-dates the Seljuq take-over of Ganja. And we can see the family is urban while he points to nomadic lifestyle amongst Turks. Anyhow Nizami was orphaned early and raised with his Kurdish uncle. That is he was raised in a Iranic environment. What is important is culture. And his stories are based on Shahnameh and Haft Paykar, Sekandarnama, Khusraw o Shirin all have to do with pre-Islamic and Islamic Persian folklore and not Oghuz folklore (like Dede Qorqud). Even Lili o Majnoon which is originally an Arab based story was already popular in Persian poetry (Rudaki mentions it and so does Kashf-al-Mahjub). He not only wrote in the Persian language but he voluntarily chose Persian folklore and stories. That is the Haft Paykar and Khusraw o Shirin, unlike Lili o Majnoon were chosen voluntarily by Nizami Ganjavi. These are Sassanid based stories and give much valuable information on pre-Islamic Iran. He even took hit from a friend for rekindling the stories of Zoroastrians. So culturally he was not a Turk and after-all he was raised by a Kurdish maternal uncle.

About Kurdish mother lineage (hence his maternal uncle who raised as well while he was orphaned early from his father), here are some sources. Valadimir Minorsky writes(V. Minorsky, Studies in Caucasian history, Cambridge University Press, 1957. pg 34):

“The author of the collection of documents relating to Arran Mas’ud b. Namdar (c. 1100) claims Kurdish nationality. The mother of the poet Nizami of Ganja was Kurdish (see autobiographical digression in the introduction of Layli wa Majnun). In the 16th century there wasa group of 24 septs of Kurds in Qarabagh, see Sharaf-nama, I, 323. Even now the Kurds of the USSR are chiefly grouped south of Ganja. Many place-names composed with Kurd are found on both banks of the Kur”

Also Vladimir Minorsky writes(C. H. Darab, Mlakhzanol Asrar, 1945, pp. 55-61 (reviewed by Minorsky, BSOAS., 1948, xii/2, 441-5)):

"Whether Nizami --as born in Qom or in Ganja is not quite clear. The verse (quoted on p. 14) : " I am lost as a pearl in the sea of Ganja, yet I am from the Qohestan of the city of Qom ", does not expressly mean that he was born in Qom. On the other hand, Nizami's mother was of Kurdish origin, and this might point to Ganja where the Kurdish dynasty of Shaddad ruled down to AH. 468 ; even now Kurds are found to the south of Ganja."

Professor Julie Scott Meysami also states the same: (Nizami Ganjavi, A. The Haft Paykar: A Medieval Persian Romance. Translated with introduction and notes by Julie Scott Meisami. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.)

“His father, who had migrated to Ganja from Qom in north central Iran, may have been a civil cervant; his mother was a daughter of a Kurdish chieftain; having lost both parents early in his life, Nizâmî was brought up by an uncle. He was married three times, and in his poems laments the death of each of his wives, as well as proffering advice to his son Muhammad.“

Jan Rypka (Rypka, Jan. ‘Poets and Prose Writers of the Late Saljuq and Mongol Periods’, in The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 5, The Saljuq and Mongol Periods, ed., Published January 1968. pg 578) :

“Little is known of his life, the only source being his own works, which in many cases provided no reliable information. We can only deduce that he was born between 535 and 540 (1140-46) and this his background was urban. Modern Azarbaijan is exceedingly proud of its world famous son and insists that he was not just a native of the region, but that he came from its own Turkic stock. At all events his mother was of Iranian origin, the poet himself calling her Ra’isa and describing her as Kurdish.”

Anyhow Nizami Ganjavi defines himself by his work, he says I am nothing but these verses. And in Wikipedia this is a compromise version (for example Persian language poet can be changed to Persian poet based on google book or based on Britannica we can say Nizami is widely enjoyed in Persian speaking countries). So I think a shared approach which this compromise version has and is stable is the best. --Nepaheshgar 14:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

minor change

Just a correction. Nizami uses the form : "Atabak" rather than "Atabeg" in his poetry. Example: اتابک را بگوید کای جهانگیر Although it is hard to tell since K and G are close. Also the etymology would generally be Turkic (the term being used from Syria all the way to Persian Gulf and etc) rather than Azerbaijani since Azerbaijani-Turkish was not separate from other Oghuz related dialects when the word actually developed (Beg actually being possibly Sogdian loanword). But there is no need to put etymologies of various words (Darband, Azerbaijan(Nizami uses Adharābādegān which is how it is writen in the Shahnameh and older Persian manuscripts), Khusraw, Mahin Banu, Parviz, Hormozd, Shirin, Bahram, Shirvanshah, Ganja, Bahram Gur, and Yazdegerd etc.) unless it is a title of one of his works or something. Titles are treated in their own related articles. --Nepaheshgar 14:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

removed

I removed the repeated statement: Often referred to by the honorific Hakim "the Sage", Nezami is both a learned poet and master of a lyrical and sensuous style. His poems show that not only was he fully acquainted with Arabic and Persian literature and with oral and written popular and local traditions, but was also familiar with such diverse fields as mathematics, geometry, astronomy and astrology, alchemy, medicine, Koranic exegesis, Islamic theology and law, history, ethnics, philosophy and esoteric thought, music and the visual arts.

Since it was repeated twice and it is under the Education section. --Nepaheshgar 14:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't get

I don't get it why nobody born from azerbaijan can not be considered an azeri.f.e Shah ismail khatai somebody wrote that he has armenian mother or kurdish background samething with Nizami POEPLE HE WAS AN AZERI with AZERI background not kurdish and not armenian i don't understand why all pople hate so much azeris and can't accept that azeris could do such beautiful works SHAME. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.132.102.42 (talk) 16:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

HI, I wouldn't take these things personally. These are discussions on history. And it is obvious that people of the same civilization when divided into separate countries will think of the relics of the old civilization they all had a share in as part of their own. Firstly whoever hates Azeris or any other group in the region is an idiot! Second the Azerbaijani Turkish language has produced beautiful works and masterpieces including Fizuli, Shahriyar and Nasimi. On the Safavids, they were turcophones since 1501 but their origin is murky. I consider them a classical Iranian dynasty who combined both Turkomen tribal elements and Iranic elements. I don't think anyone wrote they had Armenian background but Kurdish background for Safavids is mentioned by good deal of scholars and I believe they were not of Oghuz origin from their paternal line [12]. Anyhow Safavids culturally were classical Azeri and of course an Iranian dynasty since they called their land Iran. You can think of it this way. Shahriyar was an Iranian Azeri and an Azeri poet. But his ancestry is actually Seyyed going back to the prophet Muhammad. So culture and origin may differ. Nizami Ganjavi on the other hand belongs to Iran, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kurdistan (areas which I consider part of the Iranian civilization). In my opinion Azeris have Iranian civilization as well and so they also share in the heritage of Nizami Ganjavi. His motherline was Kurdish for sure and about his father, I firmly believe it was Iranic while others might have a different opinion. Culturally though there is no doubt about the fact that he belongs to the civilization which encompasses the regions I mentioned. Recently, I even read someone proposed Arabic or whatever which I believe was way of the base. Anyhow, he was orphaned very early and lived with his maternal uncle. So his civilization that he belongs has to do with his own culture and language he created his masterpieces in. That is why the article is a compromised version: [13]. Outside of Wikipedia though, you are free to do your own research like I have [14][15] and that is why a compromised version works for Wikipedia. Also disagreeing about Nizami Ganjavi (I do not think his ancestors were Oghuz Turkomens but they were Iranian speaking) does not mean that he does not belong to Azerbaijan as well the countries I mentioned. Nizami in my opinion belongs to the greater Iranian civilization which the Azerbaijan republic was part of. Others may differ, so that is why this is a compromised version that has stuck. In the end he belongs to Iran, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kurdistan. Hopefully once the nationalistic fervor tones down in the republic of Azerbaijan (due to the recent war it is fairly high) and also there is change in the political climate of Iran, Iranian and Azerbaijani republic scholars will gather together and agree that Nizami Ganjavi is a shared regional heritage. Overall there is no doubt that Azerbaijani-Turkish language has also produced great poets like Fizuli, Shahriyar, Nasimi, Akhundzadeh and many others. --Nepaheshgar 14:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC) --Nepaheshgar 04:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

"I don't get it why nobody born from azerbaijan can not be considered an azeri"
As an Iranian Azeri , I think that is not good for Azerbaijan and Azeri people to consider themselves separate from the cultural entity that is named Iran.In broader sense almost any Iranian have an Azeri root somewhere in his ancestry or he/she is Azeri himself now. Then why we only consider someone like Shariyar as Azeri , and not some one like Iraj Mirza, Parvin E'tesami and many many others ?--Alborz Fallah (talk) 08:57, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Agree. --Nepaheshgar 14:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Name changes

I've tried to standardize the names of his poems in this article. It was using different spellings and transliterations:

• Haft Peykar → Haft Paykar (73 vs. 478 on Google Books)
• Eskandarname → Eskandar Nama (18 vs. (13; this one was a toss-up)
• Khusraw o Shirin, Khosrow and Shirin → Chosroes and Shirin

I'm not totally sure if any of these were the correct changes, so please feel free to correct me. We should go based on which spelling is the most common The last one I was particularly unsure about, because one will note that Chosroes redirects to Khosrau. Perhaps we should rename the article to Khosrow and Shirin, as it gets the most hits on Google Books in comparison to Khusraw o Shirin and "Chosroes and Shirin." As for Eskandarname/Eskandar Nama, perhaps the former was actually the better title. Khoikhoi 06:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Two more:

• Makhzanol - Asrar (53) → Makhzan al-Asrar (264)
• Layli o Majnun (7), "Layli and Majnun" (61) → "Layla and Majnun" (481)

Khoikhoi 06:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Although usually I would go with the Iranica, Britannica and Enyclopedia of Islam transliteration, those are good. Britannica says[16]:"Makhzan al-asrār (The Treasury of Mysteries), the second the romantic epic Khosrow o-Shīrīn (“Khosrow and Shīrīn”). The third is his rendition of a well-known story in Islāmic folklore, Leyli o-Mejnūn (The Story of Leyla and Majnun). The fourth poem, Haft paykar (The Seven Beauties), is considered his masterwork. The final poem in the pentalogy is the Sikandar or Eskandar-nāmeh (“Book of Alexander the Great”; Eng. trans. of part I, The Sikander Nama), a philosophical portrait of Alexander." --Nepaheshgar 11:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

We can go with Britannica then. I just wanted to make sure that one spelling for his works are used throughout the article, instead of a variety of different spellings, as it gets confusing. As for Chosroes and Shirin, how about someone propose a move to Khosrow and Shirin on the talk page there, and if no one objects move the page? I don't think WP:RM would be necessary in this case anyways. Khoikhoi 20:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The spelling you chose are fine for the four other works. For Chosroes and Shirin, I guess Khosrow and Shirin is better. Just be WP:BOLD. --Nepaheshgar 20:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. My only other question is whether we should use pronunciation marks such as "Eskandar-nāmeh" instead of "Eskandar-nameh." But I think for now all the spellings of his poems have been standardized. Khoikhoi 22:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Museum

I put the picture of museum with that section .--Nepaheshgar (talk) 21:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

After Baku87's edit, I removed the museum and created its own article per my comments here:[17]. Since calling Nezami's work anything other than Persian literature is wrong and he himself calls it Persial Pearl and Nazm-e-Dari (Persian Poetry), and only wrote in Persian. So any other label is simply nationalistic or usage of modern geography for 12th century Ganja of Arran. Another option is to write a sentence or two about the differing viewpoints on Nezami's father and then have external links giving the Iranian viewpoint and Turkic viewpoint (note Azerbaijani at the time of Nezami was not formed [thttp://gumilevica.kulichki.com/HE2/he2510.htm]. This will also mean minor changes about the sentence on Shirin, since she was Armenian for Nezami and other Persian poets, and Caucasian Albanian is unsound, although the historical Shirin of the Sassanids was Aramean. Britannica, Iranica, Encyclopedia of Islam also mention Persian literature, and 100% he was at least half Iranic and the other half has a lot of politicization but I believe a detail analysis also shows Iranic [18].--Nepaheshgar (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

On Musuems, they have their own articles in Wikipedia and is not related to the 12th century. I have given my explanation here:[[19]]. Please read it, if you disagree, then restore it, but I will then have to add two sentences in the article just to clarify an existing viewpoint. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 11:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes I think its also best to just move it to Nezami Ganjavi. But look friend Im not here to start a Azeri-Persian war here, I am from Iranian descent myself and I can understand you disliking the title of the museum, but the museum is just called Nizami Museum of Azerbaijan Literature I didnt make it up. And yes it is relevant, as the entire Museum is about Nizami. So I made a alternative approach here in the article I added a new headline Azerbaijan under Influence and legacy, this seems logical dont you think so? Also I changed the name into Nizami Museum of Literature as before. Baku87 (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay I knew this would happen, and I had somewhat prepared for it and I understand, I know you are not anti-Iranian, I am not anti-Turkish either. But you know there is a big problem right now with Nezami which has unfortunately created some Turk-Iranian conflicts! I am not here to have a Iranian-Turk conflict also like you said. But you see even in Russian Wikipedia, I was asked about this from two users who emailed me, but I tried to avoid it in English Wikipedia, although the users sent me some good scholarly sources and I mentioned my article. From what I was told, the moderators became involved and eventually some sources were inserted and that a dispute exists was not denied. The name of the musuem shows how there is a dispute as well and since you kept on insisting, then I had to try another approach. I kept the musuem. Actually you made me realize an important point. I am not a political person, but there seems to be a problem in Azerbaijan which even calling him a poet of Persian literature[20] and even a Talysh editor's case involved Nezami of the 12th century[21] and we should not brush this difference of opinion under the carpet.

Note how Ayna newspaper (which I believe is a fascist organ) talks about Iranians and Nezami:

("Ayna, Baku 10 Aug 04Now, let us have a brief look at Khatami's mistake. While on a trip to Ganca, he wrote down his words and wishes in the visitors' book at the world's renowned thinker Nizami Gancavi's mausoleum. There he called Nizami a poet of "Persian literature". We have always boasted our hospitality. This national value has always been a feature distinguishing Azerbaijani Turks from others. Our ills have often resulted from this feature. With his remarks Khatami proved that he was a representative of the chauvinist Persian ideology masked under the cover of democracy.")

As you see such rhetorics exists and even stating the obvious, that is Nezami a poet of Persian literature makes Iranians as Chavaunist in the eyes of some Turks in Azerbaijan! Note Nezami himself calls his verses "Persian poetry", "Persian pearl" and etc., so was he is a Persian Chavaunist? I mean how would you feel if you were Iranian and read this: [22] ?

This viewpoint I guess is due to the fact that they claim his father is Turkic, but even with such a claim, the reason for the anti-Iranianism is due to the USSR era and the fact today that some people are very nationalistic about it and which is of course wrong in my opinon and I have given my reasons why it is wrong[23]. Anyhow I mentioned the musuem with its title. But after seeing the musuem title, and the fact that you insist, I have no choice and I do not think we can further avoid mentioning there is a dispute about Nezami (specially given the news about), specially in the republic of Azerbaijan where nationalistic fervor is extremly high and the general intellectual elite is hostile to the fact of Persian/Iranian influence. Subsequently, I will have to make some points of clarifications and I think the best new approach to this article is to include source items and then have an external link on differing viewpoint about Nezami. This might be better anyhow, since there is no need to suppress these facts and the fact that there is a dispute between Azerbaijani government and many scholars who call him a Persian poet. Given this, I think it is important that government nation-building is not spread to normal users in wikipedia and hatred does not exist for having a different viewpoint on a 12th century poets background (obviously some hatred wille exist from the hot-head nationalistic types). So I tried to mention different perspective and I think this is the best way for information not be suppressed. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 23:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I have included small references (note one ref tag for many references in order not to polarize the siution) in order to clarify the differing viewpoints. Note there was a previous concensus not to mention his father's background, but it seems given the recent news (see trend news I mentioned above) as well as the name of literature musuem, as well as the fact that we cannot suppress information (it will eventually get into Wikipedia) and there is no use in denying the differences exists and brush it under the carpet, I have mentioned the differing viewpoints about his father's background (which is in my opinion unimportant given Nezami was raised by his Kurdish uncle). All the hatred though towards Iranians from the Azerbaijani press specially with this issue is rooted in Stalin and his inflammatory comments. If I wanted to be unfair I would not mention Turkic. Also given the fact that google books calls him Persian poet at least 25 times more than any other title, and there is not really a source that even mentions him as a "Turkic poet", although few sources do exist that call him Azerbaijani (which can be argued to be a regional and geographical designation for the name of the land Nezami was born into today). But since this is wikipedia, I thought it is best to mention differing viewpoints which do exists. I have included my own article under "Iranian viewpoint" (the article actually has been reviewed by 3rd parties[24] and a review will be coming in the well known Iranshenasi journal)[25] and some comments from Dr. Kamran Talatoff. After seeing titles such as "appropriation by Iranian government", "Persian fascists who call Nezami part of Persian literature", and etc., I had to give an Iranian perspective. Despite this, I have also included the article by Adil Baguirov (whom I had a long argument before). If I wanted to, of course I can use Britannica, Iranica, Encyclopedia of Islam and put Persian poet in the first line of the article. There is no need for a dispute resolution, although in case it comes up(I will seek it incase of edit warring) and will argue from the perspective of Britannica, Iranica, Encyclopedia of Islam etc and change the first line to Persian poet by simply following these standard Encyclopedias. So there is no use in arguing which Western or post-USSR scholar is good either, since both sides will not be biased and if a source is verifiable, then it is sufficient for Wikipedia. So I believe what I have put is more than a fair compromise (I can put Persian poet on the first line based on all these sources and Encyclopedias and overwhelming books in google books) that provides different perspectives while making sure there is not one more article to Iranian-Turkic contentions. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 00:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Well first I want to say thanks for not approaching me as a anti-Iranian person, and Im not disputing his work or origins, Persian is known as the language of Literature and I have nothing against Iran or Persian people. I have readed a bit of Nizami his works (translated offcourse) and they are very inspirational to say the least. Anyway I agree with your latest edit on the article. Baku87 (talk) 19:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem and I tried to be fair as I can be while stating different viewpoints. I know your not anti-Iranian and you are a good fellow. I try my best not be anti-anything either.--Nepaheshgar (talk) 23:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I have questions?

We ask: who you are by nationality?

Nizami replies:

Torkiyemra der in hebesh nekherənd.

Lajerm doghba-ye khosh nekhorend.

from 'Seven beauties')

Could you please translate this?

We ask: Were there Turks living in these lands?

Nizami replies:

Ze kuh-e Khazar ta be derya-ye Chin

Heme tork por tork binem zemin

(from 'Isgandarname')

Could you please translate this?

I mean: There is a fabricated history of the region where many many 'scholars' contributed in order to vanish Turkic - Azerbaijani presence in these lands. What happened 800 years ago nobody can say for sure. But Nobody will better know who Nizami was than him. How will you explain the presence of the following Turkic - Azerbaijani words in the Persian of Nizami:

alachiq - alaçıq (a hut), ushag – uşaq (a child), yatag – yataq (a convoy), bichag – bıçaq (a knife), gaichy – qayçı (scissors), keynek – köynək (a shirt), papakh – papaq (a headdress), jorab – corab (socks) etc, (http://www.zerbaijan.com/NizamiGanjavi.htm)

I am asking: how come Nizami knew these Turkic words which carry mostly daily importance if Turkic was not spoken in Ganja by the majority?

One More question: take today's Iran. There are more than 30 million Azeris living in Iran where education in Azerbaijani is forbidden. So Azerbaijani writers living in Iran have to still write in Persian. And their Persian is a lot different from the Persian that the Persians use. Theirs is full of Azerbaijani folk-lore and carries exclusive Azerbaijani - Turkic soul and even the Persians are fond of the Persian that Azerbaijani people write. Shall we call this literature: A Persian literature. Or. Why there is something called 'American literature' when this literature is written in English?

Waiting for your answers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teymur Shushali (talk • contribs) 20:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. Please read WP:OR and WP:synthesis. However since you asked, that has been responded to here: [[26]][27].

A) The first verse you have is translated already by scholars. The Ethiop scorns my Turkish wares, rejects the fine foods I prepare. (Haft Paykar: A Medieval Persian Romance. N Ganjavi, JS Meisami (translator) New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. page 28) Commentary by Dr. Julia Meysami: “The Ethiop scorns my Turkish wares: literally, ‘The Ethiops (of this region) reject my Turkish delicacies,’ that is, in this dark and savage region my fine words go unappreciated.” (Haft Paykar: A Medieval Persian Romance. N Ganjavi, JS Meisami (translator) New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. page 281) Wilson: This Ethiopia likes not Turkish wares hence it will have not palatable curds See also: "Misinterpretation of a verse in Haft Paykar" in here [28][29]

Nizami here is stating that his beautiful milk/food (the advices and discourses of this section) he gives are not paid attention to. The context of the section which is on discourses, advices and ethics makes it clear. Furthermore the contrast of Habash and Turk is something used extensively by Persian poets. As already demonstrated, Persian poets often make contrasts. Since the opposition of */sepid /*(Tork) (light, North) and */zangi/Habashi/* (Abyssinian/Ethiopian) (south) has a figurative meaning, it simply signifies the range of tastes and climes, cultures and complexions, specifically with the Turks representing fair skin as opposed to the dark-skinned Habashis. If we look at that section (the whole part is in the article I mentioned[[30]]), it is about spiritual advices Nizami provides and there is nothing about the Turkish language! So if Nizami wanted to write Turkish, the statement “Torkiyam raa dar in Habash Nakharand” as some writers claim is not in the context of the section. If literal (and assuming Nizami meant Turkish language by Torkiyyam! and not Turkish wares or something that “kharidani” (some that can be bought or obtained)), we would also need to take the /Habash/ part literally and the Dooghbaa part literally, and unless Nezami made a trip to Ethiopia (which he never did) or was in Ethiopia, or composed poems in honor of a dark-skinned African prince (which he never did), then /Habash/ does not have a literal meaning here. And of course Nezami’s trade was poetry and not selling (offering) Dooghbaa. So the verse is clear from the section, which simply means my bright/shining advice are not taken in this dark place.

One could for example look at Nezami's verse: Dehqan Fasih Parsi-Zad az Haal 'Arab Chenin konad Yaad

(The eloquent Persian Dehqan Recounts the situation of Arabs as such) (This verse is taken by some to refer to nezami)

Or for example his praise of Iran:

همه عالم تن است و ایران نیست گوینده زین قیاس خجل چون که ایران دل زمین باشد دل ز تن به بود یقین باشد زان ولایت که مهتران دارند بهترین جای بهتران دارند

The World’s a body, Iran its heart No shame to him who says such a word Iran, the world’s most precious heart, Excels the body, there is no doubt Among the realms the kings posses The best domain goes to the best (Translation by Professor Julia Meysami).

Incidentally, he praises the other Kings (Atabeks and Shirwanshahs) as rulers of Iran/Persia as well.

In the Khusraw o Shirin, Nizami Ganjavi, when addressing the ruler Shams al-Din Muhammad Ildigoz (the dynasty being later known as the Atabakan-e-Azerbaijan and ruling parts of Arran and Azerbaijan and extending further in Western Persia as its height), mentions:

در آن بخشش که رحمت عام کردند دو صاحب را محمد نام کردند یکی ختم نبوت گشته ذاتش یکی ختم ممالک بر حیاتش یکی برج عرب را تا ابد ماه یکی ملک عجم را جاودان شاه

In that day that they bestowed mercy upon all, Two great ones were given the name Muhammad, One who’s pure essence was the seal of prophecy, The other who is the Kingdom’s Seal, in his own days One whose house/zodiac is moon of the Arabs The other who is the everlasting Shah of Realm of Persians

In praising the rulers of Shirwan (who sometimes extended their rule beyond Shirwan), Nizami again mentions:

این نامه نغز گفته بهتر طاووس جوانه جفته بهتر خاصه ملکی چو شاه شروان شروان چه که شهریار ایران This book is better to be written A young peacock is better to have a mate Specially for a king like the Shah of Shirwan Not only Shirwan, but the Shahriyar (Prince, Ruler) of all Iran

More detail and commentary on the verse you brought here: [31][32]

Anyhow, these things are discussed in the article I mentioned[33].

B)

The second verse you have is from Eskandarnama, Alexandar states: ز کوه خزر تا به دریای چین همه ترک بر ترک بینم زمین اگر چه نشد ترک با روم خویش هم از رومشان کینه با روس بیش به پیکان ترکان این مرحله توان ریخت بر پای روس آبله بسا زهر کو در تن آرد شکست به زهری دگر بایدش باز بست

From the Mountains of Khazar till the Sea of China I see Turk upon Turk on earth Although the Turks were not allied (in friendship) with the men of Rúm, With the men of Russia their rage even greater than with the men of Rúm: By the sharp darts of the Turks of this halting-place (Sikandar‘s camp) One can scatter the blisters (of flight) on the feet of the Russians. Often, the poison which brings distress to the body, By another poison it is proper to obstruct.

It has nothing to do with the Caucasus or Iran, since Caucasus was ruled by Nushaba and Iran by Darius the Great. This is beyond the area of Khazar mountains (which is Caucasus mountains). Alexander is saying that the best way to use one poison (Turks) against another Russians to conquer the area. Of course during the time of Alexander the Great (the historical one) neither Russians nor Turks were in that area above Caucasus mountains and etc.

C) On the words you brought: "alachiq - alaçıq (a hut), ushag – uşaq (a child), yatag – yataq (a convoy), bichag – bıçaq (a knife), gaichy – qayçı (scissors), keynek – köynək (a shirt), papakh – papaq (a headdress), jorab – corab (socks) etc," Some of these are not use by Nezami (Papaq I checked couple of database) nor is Qaychi (what manuscript or verse?). However some are possibly Persian like Jorab (but where is that used anyways). Most if not all of these been used by other Persian poets before Nezami. See the section: (Incorrect argument: Nizami uses “Turkish words” so “he must be Turkish”) of here: [34][35]

For example: 1) Yotaaq/Yataaq (یتاق) which in Persian means “Paas Daashtan, Sarvari, Hefz, Mohafezat”has been used by the Seljuqid Vizier Nizam Al-Molk. We will quote the Dehkhoda dictionary here: معلوم کرده بودند که چند مرد به یتاق رفتندی و جایگاهی گروهی پایدار بودی (سیر الملوک نظام الملک) The word is also used by Sa’adi who is definitely not considered to be Turk: تو مست شراب ناز و ما را بیداری کشت در یتاقت Note that Turkish spelling of this word is یاتاق which neither Nezami nor Sa’adi nor Nezam al-Moolk use.

2) Vushaq/Oshaq is already used by Manuchehr and Attar long time before Nezami.

کی تواند داشت رندی در سپاه زهرهی گستاخی در پیش شاه گر به راه آید وشاق اعجمی هست گستاخی او از خرمی (عطار – منطق الطیر)

گرفتم عشق به آن جادو سپردم دل بدان آهو کنون آهو وشاقی گشت و جادو کرد اوشاقش (منوچهری)

If you provide correct transliteration of the rest of these terms (Perso-Arabic), then I can check it. However, you can find more Turkish words in say Bayhaqi's history or even the Siyasat nama of Nizam al-Molk has some too.

As explained in Iranica: “The Turks, on the other hand, posed a formidable threat: their penetration into Iranian lands was considerable, to such an extent that vast regions adapted their language. This process was all the more remarkable since, in spite of their almost uninterrupted political domination for nearly 1,000 years, the cultural influence of these rough nomads on Iran’s refined civilization remained extremely tenuous. This is demonstrated by the mediocre linguistic contribution, for which exhaustive statistical studies have been made (Doerfer). The number of Turkish or Mongol words that entered Persian, though not negligible, remained limited to 2,135, i.e., 3 percent of the vocabulary at the most. These new words are confined on the one hand to the military and political sector (titles, administration, etc.) and, on the other hand, to technical pastoral terms. The contrast with Arab influence is striking. While cultural pressure of the Arabs on Iran had been intense, they in no way infringed upon the entire Iranian territory, whereas with the Turks, whose contributions to Iranian civilization were modest, vast regions of Iranian lands were assimilated, notwithstanding the fact that resistance by the latter was ultimately victorious. Several reasons may be offered.”(Land of Iran, Encyclopedia Iranica)

So 3% of Persian vocabulary is Turkish (although most of these words are not used anymore), but if you do a word count of Nezami is less than 1% easily.

Just like for example Nasimi/Fizuli using much higher percentage of Persian (easily 20%) does not make them native Persian. I have not seen Qeychi being used by Nezami either, but Qeychi anyhow is used in modern Persian and its native equivalent is Do-Kaard, but Qeychi is used more.

As per the language of everyday people I think the book Nozhat al-Majales provides a clear proof. There are more than 24+ poets from Ganja, many ordinary non-court peiople. So there has been Turkic words (say Khaqan) used by Ferdowsi, Attar and etc. Turkic words entered Persian after Ghaznavids, and Seljuqids era. Just like there are many Persian words in Turkish. Most of these words are military terms or terms used by nomads or state apparatus or weapons.

D) You said: "One More question: take today's Iran. There are more than 30 million Azeris living in Iran where education in Azerbaijani is forbidden. So Azerbaijani writers living in Iran have to still write in Persian. And their Persian is a lot different from the Persian that the Persians use. Theirs is full of Azerbaijani folk-lore and carries exclusive Azerbaijani - Turkic soul and even the Persians are fond of the Persian that Azerbaijani people write. Shall we call this literature: A Persian literature. Or. Why there is something called 'American literature' when this literature is written in English?"

The number of Azerbaijani Turkic speakers is not 30 million. The most reliable estimates put it at 14 million (based on actual census) and education in Azeri is not forbidden however is not state sponsered. Also at the time of Nezami Ganjavi, there was no Azerbaijani-Turkic literature (for example there is not a single verse from anyone in Azerbaijani-Turkic), nor an Azerbaijani-Turkic ethnicity or culture. Proto-Oghuz nomads were in the area and came after Seljuqs (which by the way Nezami's ancestry that Yusuf the son of Zaki the Son of Mua'yyad goes before the Seljuq era). The name of Ganja itself is Persian (obviously original inhabitants would name the city something from their own language). You may check here: [36][37]. Also the Persians used by Azeris are not different than the Persians of other Iranians.

However, from the point of view literature, Nezami himself clearly states he is composing "Persian pearls", so that makes it automatically Persian literature. Also Nezami's folklore is Persian not Turkic for example Haft Paykar is about Sassanid prince, Khusraw and Shirin is about Sassanid love story. So if you are going by folklore, we do not see Oghuz folklore in Nezami but he has praised Ferdowsi and mentions Shahnameh in four of the five works of his (the other one uses lots of Shahnameh imagery also). Turkic folklore/mythology is very different and an example is Dede Qorqud which is very different than Shahnameh in too many respects.

Also ancestry of someone 1200+ years ago is never certain, but if we go by ancestry for example, then Isamil I is Kurdish or Nasimi/Shahriyar are Arabs (they are Seyyeds). Easily one can bring hundreds of sources with regards to Nezami being called a Persian poet (search google book for example). See WP:weight. Note I did not for example put all these sources in the intro, but one can for example just go with prestigious Encyclopedia of Islam or Iranica.

Overall, the introduction says Nezami Ganjavi is a shared heritage. His father's ancestry is debated, you can see the other viewpoint here: , but he was orphaned from his father and raised by his Kurdish uncle. All of his works are Persian, but more importantly his themes are based on Iranian culture (and many times Sassanids) and Shahnameh. Just like the link you showed, you can see the other viewpoint here: [38][39]. The current introduction though does not say as it should in the first line "Persian poet", but as you can see based on [{WP:RS]] one can bring all of these in the intro and based on WP:weight thins will easily be favorable to Persian viewpoint. However, I have let anachronism (like Azeri latin alphabet or language) and did not introduce him as Encyclopedia of Islam, Britannica and etc. What matters is culture here and just Ismail I despite Kurdish ancestry is Azerbaijani-Turkic poet, Nezami Ganjavi despite Kurdish mother and most likely Iranic father is a Persian poet and Persian literature as he states. That is culture/language is separate. And note based on Nozhat al-Majales, Persian was for all classes of people and you won't find a single verse of Turkish from anyone during Nezami's era in the Caucasus. Nezami clearly states though what literature he is composing. For example after seeing Khizr in a vision: چو در من گرفت آن نصیحت‏گری زبان برگشادم به دّر دری When all those advices were accepted by me I started composing in the Persian Pearl (Dorr-i-Dari)

Or again for example in the Sharafnama he states: نظامی که نظم دری کار اوست دری نظم کردن سزاوار اوست

Nizami whose endeavor is producing Persian poetry (Nazm-e-Dari) Versification of Persian(Dari Nazm Kardan) poetry is what suits him

I think for the culture of the area, Nozhat al-Majales is sufficient. [[40]. You can see everyday people not attached to courts, with daily mundane jobs composing in Persian and also everyday cultural items, jobs, games, music instruments and Pahlavi idioms are in Persian. Also all of the Ghazalis, quatrains, Qasida's of Nezami is in Persian (not related to the court) and not a single Turkic verse has been recorded from the area at that time by any author or writer. However 114+ poets (24 from Ganja) in Persian all from Caucasus and Iranian Azerbaijan is a clear proof of the culture of the area at that time. And in the end, DNA is mixed so much today that cultural heritage (specially with regards to poets who cannot be translated without losing meaning and being misinterpreted) is the main key. So just like no one challenges the place of Pushkin in Russian poetry or Nasimi/Ismail I/Shahriyar in Azerbaijani poetry (despite Ismail I's being Kurdish ancestry or Nasimi/Shahriyar being Seyyed (Arabic), one cannot challenge Nezami's place in Persian literature and his Persian heritage (whatever his father-line which I believe was certaintly Iranic was).--Nepaheshgar (talk) 00:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your replies.

So according to your first translation, Nizami clearly says ‘… My Turkish…’. As you see the quality of being Turkic symbolizes being ‘bright and shining’ in Nizami’s poetry. Why to use the word Turk, when he could use Rus, Rum, Greek or names of other fair skinned nations and countries. Could not this show Nizami’s love to his Turkic nation when the real Persians who wrote in Persian such as Ferdowsi do not think of the Turks this high.

Other translation you found shows that Nizami describes Turks living from (not beyond) Caspian mountains till the Chinese sea when some try to make people believe that in Nizami’s time there were no Turks living in Ganja. And Nizami takes it back to Alexander’s time. And he is right, as Strabon and Heredot also mentions the names of Turkic tribes living in this area where some claim that first Seljug Turks came. And we should also remember Sumers of ancient Babylon who are now believed to be of Turkic ethnicity. Why toponyms are in Persian: For these I guess we must ‘thank’ to Sassanids who changed all geographical names in the region they ruled.

‘Iranian’ is not equal to ‘Persian’. Iran is the name of an Empire – not a single nation. Even now, there are a lot of nations living in Iran and all of them are Iranians including Azerbaijani Turks living in Iran. Maybe the royal family of Shirwanshahs of Nizami’s time were of Persian blood or of Turkic blood that did not have what we call ‘blood-memory’ since Shirwanshah Akhsitan’s doughter’s name was in Turkic - Aychichek). But Atabeks of Azerbaijan were no doubt Turks. Calling them Persians is like calling the Scottish English.

You say 14 million Azeri-speaking people live in Iran now. No matter if you speak Azerbaijani or not, you are Turk if you are coming from a Turkic family-tree. There are Azeris living in North Azerbaijan who speak Russian. Does it make them Russian? Of course not. And even the children of mixed – Azeri-Russian families are proud to have Azerbaijani-Turkic blood thanks to the great cultural and art wealth that Azerbaijan owns. And the minimum number of Azeris living only in Azerbaijani provinces of Iran make 20 million when Azeris live in all parts of Iran including Tehran (7 million). The Persians may deny this. The main is that more than 50 million Azerbaijani Turks living in the World know this truth that their heart beat in Tebriz, Ardebil, Urmu, Zenjan - in all South Azerbaijan.

Well, I accept that Nizami wrote his Khamsa in Persian. And Nizami’s Khamsa is a great contribution to the literature in Persian. But he says ‘…my Turkish…’ being proud of it. And he gets angry when Shirwanshah Akhsitan stands to insult Turkic language in his letter to Nizami which he clearly describes in the introduction of Leili and Mejnun. In modern English it will sound approximately as follows:

“We would like, in honour of Mejnun’s great love,
Into a treasure of words, once more you dive…
When you begin to decorate this new bride,
Use Persian, or Arabian tongues to guide…
This you know that I am a good word wizard
To distinguish a new word from the standard.
Turkic tongue does not suit our shah’s family,
Turkic could win us shameful ill fame only.
Our tongue is definitely superior
As in nobility our rank is prior!”
I read it all… And my blood boiled with anger,
Inside a slave’s ring I felt with my ear.

Nizami gets so sad and angry that his blood boils – or ‘shoots his brain’ as the Azeris say. Because his language is insulted. With this letter Akhsitan proves that there was an understanding of writing in Turkic language though it was not much appreciated by the shah’s palace. Akhitan’s words here also prove Nizami’s knowledge of Turkic language. Simple logic: Why should Akhsitan ask Nizami not to write in Turkic if Nizami does not know Turkic?! The same proves that Nizami might have had also poems in Turkic – I mean he must have had the experience to write in Turkic.

Nizami writes Leili and Mejnun only thanks to his son Muhammad. And this is also described in the introduction of Leili and Mejnun. It will approximately sound as follows in modern English:

The one who is as dear to me as my heart,
My dear son Muhammad made me serve art.
Giving all his heart to this beautiful theme,
To seat as a shadow next to me he came.
He kissed my leg in a way more amicable,
He said: “You to shame the blue skies capable,
You wrote and created Khosrow and Shirin,
Thus you woke up taste in every heart loving.
Take pen again for Leili and Mejnun’s story,
Make these jewels a pair to serve their glory.”

You do not need to find Nizami’s poems in Turkic to prove his belonging to Turkic- Azerbaijani literature. The word Turk means a lot to Nizami.

Nizami says ‘Turk’ and means beautiful, courageous, hero, warrior, warlord, connoisseur, leader, and head.

Nizami says ‘Turkustan’ and means faithfulness, uprightness, meeting your darling.

Nizami says ‘Turk’ where he is supposed to say ‘dilber’: “Tork-e delsetan”, “tork-e tennaz”, “tork-e nazenin endam”.

The most beautiful eyes for Nizami are Turkic eyes: “cheshm-e torki”. To express the sweetness of a smile he calls it “a Turkic smile” which ‘makes sugar get jealous’: “Khestedel ez xende-ye torkan sheker”.

Praising a beautiful Kurdish girl Nizami says: ‘Kord-ra bud doxteri bejemal, Lobeti torkcheshm-o-hendukhal’ (…her eyes were as beautiful as those of a Turk…).

Nizami says: ‘Feres mikhast ber Shirin devaned, Be torki gharet ez torki setaned’ (He lead his horse towards Shirin and wanted to robe a Turk in a Turkic way) expressing decisiveness.

Nizami says: ‘Ze-qelb-e sepeh pish-e an tonmar, Foru raft joushandari torkvar’ (An iron-armoured one leaped in a Turkic way from the center of the army to the battle field) expressing heroism.

Describing how Darius’ and Alexander’s armies meet Nizami again remembers to praise his nation: ‘Chenan amed ez pay-e torki khorush, Ke ez nay-e torkan ber averd jush’ (Sounds of Turkic feet caused such a thunder that Turkic bugle got excited).

Addressing Alexander Darius frightens him with his ‘Turks’ saying: ‘Meger tir-e torkan-e yaghma-ye men, Nekhordi ke tondi be yaghma-ye men’ (Have not you eaten arrows of my Turks that now you are attacking me?).

This is also a proof of the fact that Turks existed in the rows of Darius’ army when now many claim that the first Turks who came to this geography were Seljugs.

The same does Alexander later boasting in front of an Indian khagan : ‘Gholaman-e torkem cho girend shest, Ze tiri resed leshgeri-ra shekest’ (If my Turks rise their hands they will destroy an entire army with each arrow’.

The Sun itself is a Turk to Nizami: ‘Deger ruz k-in torke-e soltan-shokuh, Ze derya-ye Chin kuhe ber zed be kuh’ (Turk who is as sublime as a soltan, rises from Chinese valley to illuminate the mountains).

Praising Islamic prophet Muhammed (p.b.u.h), Nizami decides that his supreme image of a Turk best suits to praise the Best Man of the mankind (how all the Muslims think):

Such a Profit that Afrudin and Jamshed,
Feel both fear and hope under His judgement.
Such a Ruler of the range of brave sages,
Untill the doomsday, the only one Who tells.
Such a commander that with His one order,
All get wiser, all the world is in order.
Such a Turk who possesses seven climates,
Directing all on the earth and in the skies.
(http://www.rasulzade.org/books/9_16.html#link21)

I would like to say my final words in verse:

You Sheikh Nizami, Yusif’s son Ilyas,
Your Ganja is in front of my eyes.
And I am now full of emotions,
My sorrow to fill all four oceans.
Why a Turk to be your ‘best of best’?
No other nation in the East or West?
Why to love this much Turkic beauty?
To be fond of sublime Turkic glory?
If the only Turk you have is Appak,
Who you call not so Turk as Kipchak.
They say you were not a Turk!
Nizami from Ganja was not a Turk?!
Who can believe this nonsense?!
Must not he be out of common sense?!
If you could only rise again,
To hear those who on lies gain.
To see those whose best meal,
Is taking pleasure as they steal.
Those who are neither half hatters,
Nor they are excellent dockers.
I am sure you would say nothing,
Saying this way everything.
You Nizami is another world
With its own skies and earth.
Your clouds cry, and winds blow
Through eight centuries now.
Shouting that you are the son
Of glorious AZERBAIJAN.

Teymur Shushali, 25 August, Baku.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Teymur Shushali (talk • contribs) 04:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

My response

Since my response was very long for the talkpage I have put it here:[41][42].

Again thanks for your reply. But in my opinion you did not read the reference I mentioned[43][44]. For the specific points you raised, I have responded to them in wikipedia here:[45][46]

Your translations have mistakes. For example Nezami does not say "Persian or Arabic languages". He says "dar zivar-i Parsi o Taazi" (In the ornaments of Persian and Arabic). And if you look at the story, it uses many Arabic anectodes and metaphors while being Persianized. You have taken the word "or" instead of "and" althogh the author does not use یا (or) but and (و). Obviously there is no such language as "Arabic and Persian" and Nezami wrote the book in Persian. As per the word "Torkaneh Sokhan" it does not mean Turkish language but rather has the two meanings I have explained here:[47][48].

Also you are making claims that are not accepted in the scholarly community (for example Sumerians are not related to Turks and you can check the wikipage. Everyone has tried to make their language related to Sumerians but if you put such an information in the Wikipedia page, it will get deleted, because that is not the opinion of linguists). I already explained to you the verse you brought. Ethiop as constrasted to Turk means Light vs Dark. The section is about advices Nezami gives and is not about ethnicity! So he says "My Turkish (bright advices) wares are not bought in this Ethiop (meaning dark place not ethiopia literally as he was never in Ethiopia either), so they do not tase fresh Dooghbaa (a type of food again not to be taken literarry that Nezami sold food and by the way the word is Doogh+baa, Doogh (white/milkly/yogurt) and Baa (soup which in modern Persian/Turkic is called aash, and although the etymology of aash is not known, but baa is Persian). Please Read it again and the comment of Professor. Meysami, nothing to do with ethnic concepts as the section makes it clear. These were translated by professional translators (Meysami and Wilson). See below as I explain better the imageries of Persian poet. Nezami was not the first nor the last to use such imagery.

The stuff with Summerians being Turks, or there were Turks in the area during the time of Strabo or the number of Azeris is not related to the topic. Note it would be good to keep the focus on the 12th century. But I will make a comment..

My friend Summerians are not Turks and neither were Turks in the area during the time of Strabo. “Turk” in the military of Darius III did not exist. Turk was used synonymous to military men/army in Persian. Also at that time of Nezami, history was not as clear as today. So there are historical mistakes for example in Eskandarnama (and that is the fault of Nezami's sources), for example some of the scientists/philogophers that Alexander speaks to were not even present in his real life nor for example Alexandar fought Russians or Qipchaq Turks. Even the term Turk did not just mean Altaic speakers in the 10th century Islamic era but included Tibetians, Alans, Sogdians and etc (by some historians not all).

See the provincial statistics of Iran here: [49] This is the most accurate and up to date census available. If we take the areas of predominantly Azerbaijani speaking population, that is East Azerbaijan, Zanjan, Ardabil and half of West Azerbaijan (although there are sources that mention majority Kurdish speakers as much as 70% and the Kurdish birthrate is actually higher than the national average), we obtain: 6.96 million. So this is rounded up to 7 million. If we assume 1.5 million in Qazvin, Hamadan (actual statistics done put Turcophone population at 28% mainly in the low populated areas of Bahar, Razan and Kabudar Ahang), Gilan (at most 10%), Arak and everywhere else in Iran except Tehran, we can safely say it is 1.5 million. This is now 8.5 million. Now in Tehran, about 95% of people speak Persian as their first language according to Hamshahri and many Azerbaijanis there have adopted Persian, have mixed with other Iranians and have become “Tehranis”. Despite this, if we assume 4 million Azerbaijani Turcophones in Tehran (which is an upperboud), we obtain 12.5 million. In reality there are Tats, Talysh, Kurds, Armenians, Assyrians and standard Parsi-Dari speakers in East Azerbaijan, Ardabil and Zanjan as well and many Azerbaijanis in Tehran have become Tehranis. And here: [50] Actual survey with 3.5% margin of error.

So 14 million seems correct in my opinion, you might disagree but that has nothing to do with the topic. Neither do Sumerians. Also ethnic Azerbaiijani-Turks did not exist at the time of Nezami, but Oghuz Turks did. One cannot say Azerbaijanis are 100% descendant of Oghuz Turks only, they are a mixture of Iranic(Persian/Tat/Kurd/Talysh) and Turkic elements in my opinion. But the formation of this group came later on and not during the time of Mua'yyad (Nezami's great grandfather).

ON the term Iranian, that is used in two contexts. Just like “Turk” means citizen of Turkey and also ethnic Turk in Turkey. Iranian in terms of the ethnic sense means native speakers of Iranians languages (Kurds (like Nezami’s mother), Persians, Ossetians, Talysh and etc.). See Iranian peoples. As far as this article and history articles from the medieval era are concented, when one speaks of Iranian people, they mean Iranian peoples and not citizens of the country of Iran (which has also Semitic and Turkic speakers as well as the majority Iranic speakers, but are all called collectively Iranian). As far as 12th century exist, nation states did not exist. So one cannot use "Azerbaijani". But one can use Turk, Iranic, Turkic, Oghuz, Iranian, Kurd, and etc. Hope that clarifies this point.

You can read in more detail here: [51][52]

But it looks like a summary version in Wikipedia is needed because the same two three repetitive things (A) false claim Nezami was forced to write Persian. B) Bad interpretation of some verses like the one verse under the section of advices in Haft Paykar C) Lack of understanding of the usage of Turk/Hindu/Rum/Zangi in Persian poetry (note Nezami says: "My nature is sweet like a Zangi (African)" (but that does not make an Africa) are repeated.

Also Wikipedia is not WP:Forum. He is considered Persian poet by Encyclopedia of Islam, Britannica, and most western sources. His mother is considered Kurdish and his father's is not 100% known but what remains is a man's culture legacy and just like Pushkin, or Esmail I or etc. who are Russian poets, Azeri-Turkic poet..Nezami is a Persian poet. And as you saw not only Nezami, but many other Persian poets have used Ethiop,Turk, Hindu, Rome as different symbols and have used these terms positively and negatively. Nezami has also praised Iran, Zoroastrianism, Shahnameh, Ferdowsi, and etc. (and he did not have any negative things like he did sometimes with say Turks), but all of that is not an indicator of any background. Greeks like Xephonon also have praised Cyrus but that does not make them Persian. There is 100 pages devoted to this topic here[53][54] and taking a modern nationalistic point of view interpertation for 12th century is not good.

Here for example Nezami praises Armenians: In one of his famous Ghazals, Nezami considers himself the dust of the feet of Believers, Armenians, Christians, Zoroastrians and Jews.

این خرابات مغان است در آن رندانند شاهد و شمع و شراب و شکر و نای و سرود هرچه در جملهی آفاق در آنجا حاضر مؤمن و ارمنی و گبر و نصارا و یهود گر تو خواهی که دم از صحبت ایشان بزنی خاک پای همه شو تا که بیابی مقصود

Translation: This is the ruin tavern of the Magians, and in it are rebels for God Witnesses, Candles, Wine, Sugar, Reed and Beautiful Music Whatever that exists in the horizon is present there Muslims, Armenians, Zoroastrians, Christrians and Jews If you want to be allowed in the ruin of the Magian (divine wisdom) Become a dust upon the feet of all of these people, so that you may reach the goal. (Zanjani, Barat. “Ahwal o Athar o Sharh Makhzan ol_Asraar Nezami Ganjavi”, Tehran University Publications, 2005, pg 18) So just because Nezami says you must become a dust upon the feet of Armenians, does not make him an Armenian either. Although one can arue that given the names Yusuf Zakki Mua'yyad (all semitic names and popular among Jews or even Christians), one can even make such arguments(endless as you) that his fatherline originally was from the Christians of area, since one reading about the verse of his father says: "Gar pedaram beh sonnat-i Jad" instead of "Gar pedaram beh nesbat-i Jad". "Sonnat" means tradition and is used in religious sense too...

But what is not questionable is that he is part of Persian literature/poetry as he calls his own verses Persian poetry. In Wikipedia we work with WP:weight. There was an attempt to even try to change Nezami in Britannica but that failed. Simply because scholarship considers him a Persian poet and of Iranian culture. I would read here: [55][56]. Just like Pushkin is a Russian poet, and Shahriyar/Nasimi/Ismail-I are Azeri-Turkic poets, Nezami is a Persian poet (his mother being a Kurd and his father ethnicity was likely Iranic as mentioned by one scholar here: [57]. Please familiarize with WP:OR, WP:synthesis and etc. Thank you. For example Nezami states in praise of Iran:

The world's a body, Iran its heart,

No shame to him who says such a word

Iran, the world's most precious heart,

excels the body, there is no doubt.

Among the realms that kings posses,

the best domain goes to the best.

(Haft Paykar, Julia Meysami..)

But I have not brought such statements in the article as we are trying to make an Encyclopedia reflecting mainstream Western scholarly articles (see Encycloppedia of Islam, Britannica and etc). These sources mention Turks settled only in the area during the Seljuqid era, and Azerbaijan and Eastern Transcaucasia was subsequently Turkified in the era's that came. You might think these sources are nonsense but a clear reflection on Nozhat al-Majales or similar sources shows what the culture of the area was before its Turkification. In wikipedia one works with WP:RS and WP:weight.

Here 20 of these were chosen:

Here is 125+ or so sources or so that use Persian poet. On purpose they cover both sources related to Nezami, but also sources that have to do with other subjects like art, science, fiction, history of literature and etc. Here are the same sources for Wikipedia formatting:

Western sources do not claim Turks in the area at the time of Strabo or Summerians were Turks and by mainstream Encyclopedias, Nezami is not called a Turk. Azeri/Azerbaijani Turk too was not formed at his time, however very small number of sources use it in a geographical sense for any author. Wikipedia is not an endless forum WP:forum. But thank you for your comments and you are certainly free to have your opinion. Even in Azeri Wikipedia, they claim Babak Khorramdin, and Zoroaster the Iranian prophets are Turks. Iranians do not need to steal anyone's heritage as you implied in your poem, Nezami was already well known to be half Kurdish (Iranian people) at least and his other half was most likely Iranic. All of his works are in Persian, which means are part of Iranian people's heritage and if he cared about ethnicity, he would say make verses in Kurdish (another Iranian language). But just like Esmail I contributed to Turkic poetry (despite Kurdish ancestry), it does not make him a Kurdish/Iranic poet. However Wikipedia works based on WP:RS, WP:weight and not WP:OR, WP:synthesis and WP:forum. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 14:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)