| Revision as of 23:42, 14 February 2011 editTajik (talk | contribs)11,859 edits →Central Asian role← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 21:06, 24 November 2024 edit undoHimeaimichu (talk | contribs)215 edits →Anacronistic naming: ReplyTag: Reply |
| (218 intermediate revisions by 51 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{GA|02:16, 11 October 2016 (UTC)|topic=history |page=1|oldid=743754250}} |
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Central Asia| ... | class=B | importance=mid | ...}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Iran|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|vital=yes|1= |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Central Asia|importance=mid |Kazakhstan=yes|Kazakhstan-importance=|category=}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Former countries}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Iran}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Tajikistan}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Kyrgyzstan}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|user=Twofingered Typist|date=9 October 2016}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Asia|10k=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Military history|Asian=y|Classical=y|Medieval=y|Muslim=y}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Sogdians are not the ancestors of Uzbeks! == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{archives | bot=MiszaBot | age=180}} |
|
Sogdians are among the ancesteral lines of modern-day ]! ], on the other hand, are a Turkic people who migrated to Central-Asia (modern Uzbekistan) in the 15th century - that means: '''more than 1000 years after Sogdiana!''' The following text is taken from the article ]: |
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|algo=old(180d) |
|
|
|archive=Talk:Sogdia/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
|counter=1 |
|
|
|maxarchivesize=100K |
|
|
|archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}} |
|
|
|minthreadsleft=1 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive=1 |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Anacronistic naming == |
|
... '''The Uzbeks began as a group of tribes affiliated with the Golden Horde'''. In 1422, a group of nomadic clans east of |
|
|
the '''Lower Volga''', including Qangli, Qunggirat, Mahnghit, seceded from the central authority of the khan at Sarai |
|
|
(near modern Volgograd). They called themselves Uzbeks, after the Horde's most famous ruler, Uzbeg Khan. Their first |
|
|
leader, Barak, ravaged the lower Volga area between Sarai and Astrakhan, but he was murdered in 1428. Barak was succeeded |
|
|
by Abul Khayr, a descendant of Batu's brother Shiban. The ruling house was therefore known as the Shibanids. In 1431, Abul Khayr |
|
|
moved to the central Kazakh steppe. In 1446, however, he changed his policy. '''The tribes moved south towards the Aral Sea and |
|
|
'''the Syr Darya to resume contacts with the sedentarists in Transoxania'''. ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can the use of the attribution, Iran and Iranian be justified when this is simply a very modern name. |
|
There is no connection between the ancient Sogdians and modern Uzbeks. Sogdians are neither linguistic ancestors nor genetical ancestors of the Uzbeks. -] 21:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Persia, and its other language equivalents, deserves a prominent place in putting this topic into historical perspective. |
|
== Sogdians are the ancestors of Uzbeks! == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
⚫ |
] (]) 23:08, 28 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Iran isn't a modern name. Persia and Iran are also not interchangeable names. ] (]) 21:06, 24 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
'''Historians Calum MacLeod and Bradley Mayhew in their “Golden Road to Samarkand” say “visitors come for a Sogdian culture that predates political boundaries and lies at the ethnic of both the Tajik and Uzbek peoples” (page 182)''' |
|
|
|
|
|
:I think it is reasonably safe to state that many (perhaps most?) modern-day ethnic Uzbeks are aslo partly descended from ] ] and ] and that the ] also left their genetic footprints in some clans/blood lines. //] 21:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: Maybe, but usually, ethnic Tajiks are distinct from ethnic Uzbeks. Tajiks are what people call ''Caucasian'' and they speak an Indo-European language (]). Uzbeks, on the other hand, are mostly Mongoloid and they speak a Turkic (Altaic) language. Those "Uzbeks" who may be descendants of ancient Sogdians and Bactrians are actually ethnic Tajiks who are being "Uzbekized" by the nationalist government in Uzbekistan. Read the following article which is a reasearch done by the Harvard University, stating that up to 40% of Uzbekistan's population is actually ethnic Tajik: http://medlem.spray.se/Samarqand/index.html |
|
|
:::-] 17:50, 16 December 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==High Middle Ages?== |
|
|
Why is a term for European history periodization being used for Central Asian history, it makes more sense to throw in some century numbers. ] 02:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Origin of word "Sogd" == |
|
|
|
|
|
Taken from http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/KushansYuezhiEn.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
Saka - aka Sak, Sk, a Türkic endoethnonym recorded in the form Sé in Indian and Chinese sources of the 2nd millennium BC and located in C. Asia. In the secondary compound ethnonyms, Sak took various dialectical forms which reached us in the form Sakar = Saka + ar = people, men, i.e. Saka People, Sagadar = Saka + Tr. pl. affix dar, i.e. Sakas, Sogdy or Sogd = Saka + Tr. possessive. affix dy, i.e. Sakian, Sakaliba (Arab) = Saka + Arab. liba, i.e. Saka White, etc. Dialectical variations for the ethnonym Saka are reflected in the toponymy, like Sakastan, Seistan. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
: There are no """"reliable"""sources for your claims. Plus 99% of modern scholar agree they were Iranians & most ancient sources tell us that that area was inhabited by Iranians. --] (]) 22:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Notable Sogdians== |
|
|
{{unresolved}} |
|
|
provides no source. I will delete that section in a month if no source is provided. --] (]) 22:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
\\added august 13 2009: |
|
|
Source appears to be in article ], w/ around 10 sources\\ <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
:There are still no sources for that section......''']'''<font color="green">----]</font> 16:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Source for conversion == |
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding this claim: ... "Sogdians and remained so until shortly after the Islamic conquest, when the Arabs made repeated efforts to forcefully suppress it. Manichaeism and Nestorian Christianity also had significant followings.." |
|
|
|
|
|
Sogdian conversion to Islam was Not shortly after Islam, this is a false statement. The conversion to Islam was gradual, albeit, the rate was faster in Central Asia than compared to Iran region,but, it was a gradual process. Secondly, whats the source to the statement that Arabs suppressed the Sogdian religion?. Under the Samanids, the conversion to Islam was at a faster rate than under the Arabs. And, Richard Bulliet curves which covers Greater Iran's conversion to Islam, also shows that rate of Conversion to Islam was gradual. -- Thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
== Battle of Sogdiana == |
|
|
|
|
|
That section seems to lack sufficient context to be of value, and it's not really about Sogdiana, is it? Besides, I have difficulties accepting as relevant any modern text suggesting that Chinese forces employed fire-breathing dragons in combat. If no one objects, I'll remove that section as irrelevant. ] (]) 15:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
:OK, the dragons apparently were just vandalism, but the section is still suspect. It's out of chronological order, we have nothing else suggesting the Parthians were relevant to the history of Sogdiana, and the Chinese military expedition seems to contradict the following section which details numerous peaceful embassies and trade relations. ] (]) 15:48, 8 November 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Request == |
|
|
Hi the image of central Asia depicted in the map is incorrect! It doesnt show India's border correctly. Please rectify it. {{unsigned|117.192.192.56|10:24, December 16, 2010}} |
|
|
:The modern borders on that map are just a help to see where Sogdiana is. Since no part of Sogdiana is in modern India, India's borders aren't that important. Also, I don't see why India's borders are incorrect - the map seems to show the actual lines of control. Showing India's claims would probably lead to protest from those whose claims conflict with India's. Or did I miss something? ] (]) 13:37, 16 December 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Central Asian role == |
|
|
|
|
|
The detailed presentation of slavery, the sex trade and intermarriage in the last two paragraphs of this section seems out of place here, or at least not presented with a larger relevance to Sogdian civilization. Could this section be: |
|
|
:- tightened up and presented so as to show the impacts that slavery/intermarriage and/or racial inter-mixture had on Sogdiana |
|
|
:- moved to other more appropriate articles, i.e ] |
|
| ⚫ |
] (]) 06:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: Good point. I totally agree. ] (]) 23:42, 14 February 2011 (UTC) |
|
Can the use of the attribution, Iran and Iranian be justified when this is simply a very modern name.
Persia, and its other language equivalents, deserves a prominent place in putting this topic into historical perspective.
level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
