Talk:Parthian Empire

Center of Trade

Was initially removed under the statement, "also unsourced the claim it was a center of "trade and commerce," which historians provide this characterization?".

However,

• " The Parthian Empire was enriched by taxing the Eurasian caravan trade in silk, the most highly priced luxury good imported by the Romans." --Garthwaite 2005, p. 78; Brosius 2006, pp. 122–123
• "Besides silk, Parthian goods purchased by Roman merchants included iron from India, spices, and fine leather." -- Kurz 1983, p. 560
• "Caravans traveling through the Parthian Empire brought West Asian and sometimes Roman luxury glasswares to China." -- Ebrey 1999, p. 70; for an archaeological survey of Roman glasswares in ancient Chinese burials, see An 2002, pp. 79–84
• "The merchants of Sogdia, speaking an Eastern Iranian language, served as the primary middlemen of this vital silk trade between Parthia and Han China." --Howard 2012, p. 133

Perhaps reading the entire article would be prudent.--Kansas Bear (talk) 18:15, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

These sentences do not imply that it was a "center of trade," only that there were existed a few trade routes that crossed the Parthian Empire and they taxed them. I am at loss how one can think they imply it was any sort of "commercial center," like Hong Kong is today. RafaelG (talk) 18:24, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Meh. Nothing in the article compares the Parthian Empire to Hong Kong, that is your strawman. I am at loss how one can think something is unsourced when there are reference(s) literally at the end of the sentence(s). Also, since this article is a Featured Article, it would be prudent to find other editors to build a consensus before changing referenced information. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:04, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Its pretty nonsensical to say an ancient central-asian state spreading over two million square kilometers of poorly populated land was a center of trade and commerce: the term CENTER refers to some individual focal point, a location like a city (for example, Renaissance Venice). Inside Parthian dominions you had Seleucia which was a major city-state (despite being under Parthian rule it existed with its laws and political system, like the Anatolian Greek cities during the Classical period) and likely a major trade-hub between the Roman Empire and the Persian Gulf until the Romans destroyed it in the 2nd century (Ctesiphon began as a suburb of Seleucia and grew large by the Sassanian period). But that doesn't mean the term "center of trade" applies to the other parts of the Parthian dominion.

What these sources state there was evidence for SOME trade that passed through SOME regions under Parthian rule, which is not the same as the conceptualization that the whole two-million square kilometers of it were a "center." It's like saying Mongolia today is a major center of trade and commerce of the 21st century because billions of dollars of trade: Mongolia (MNG) Exports, Imports, and Trade Partners | OEC - The Observatory of Economic Complexity RafaelG (talk) 23:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Other than mentioning a strawman, you have cited zero sources to counter user:Kansas Bear's sources and assertion. - LouisAragon (talk) 13:49, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Worldhistorymaps = RS?

Our (rather ugly) map (File:Rome-Seleucia-Parthia 200bc.jpg) mentions https://www.worldhistorymaps.info as its source: "The project started by Thomas Lessman, an amateur historian with over 20 years of experience in researching history"

Is this a "high-quality reliable source"? Do we have better sources to support this map? Or should we ask for a new one? a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 17:42, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Parthian Feudalism

The information block on the right of the article says that the Parthian Empire was a Feudal Monarchy and a citation is given.

But the Government section of the article does not (in my opinion) describe the feudal nature of the governmental system. Itinerantlife (talk) 21:09, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

lie

this is Ashkanian u want to change story 94.182.41.98 (talk) 20:50, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Flag of the Parthian Empire

On 11:12, 25 August 2023, User:Abolfazl13800528 made an edit adding a version of a flag of the Parthian Empire. User:HistoryofIran reverted, with the rationale, "not an improvement, and the caption should be in English".

Although I agree the caption should be in English, I would consider adding the flag of the Parthian Empire an improvement with a valuable visual for the reader. Question is whether the reverted image is indeed the historical flag. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 00:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to mention in my edit summary that the "flag" (it's just a custom made Faravahar symbol) was unsourced as well. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:06, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

I doubt the PE had any concept of a "national" flag at all. These are made up by modern enthusiasts. Johnbod (talk) 03:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Not only is it not clear that there was anything that could be called "the flag of the Parthian Empire" or that if there was, that this modern image represents it, it is questionable how such an image is a valuable visual for the reader. Indeed, the main value of retrojecting a symbol with modern significance is often political and a WP:NPOV matter. NebY (talk) 12:40, 27 August 2023 (UTC)