Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:16, 4 August 2007

Iran Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Azerbaijan Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Azerbaijan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Azerbaijan-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AzerbaijanWikipedia:WikiProject AzerbaijanTemplate:WikiProject AzerbaijanAzerbaijan ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Armenia Unassessed

Sahl Smbatean is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArmeniaWikipedia:WikiProject ArmeniaTemplate:WikiProject ArmeniaArmenian ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Can someone give me the rational on placing this in History of Azerbaijan? I don't get to understand why. Anatolmethanol 21:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, probably because of Shaki. Anatolmethanol 02:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I checked Dowsett, I don't find the relevent section where he says he was Albanian. Can someone quote? Anatolmethanol 03:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Any answers? Anatolmethanol 00:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

He was the ruler of Caucasus Albania.Hajji Piruz 00:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Anatolmethanol, refer to the article by C. J. F. Dowsett. "A Neglected Passage in the "History of the Caucasian Albanians"", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 19, No. 3. (1957), p.463:

"Among the prisoners captured by Bogha al-Kabir in 854, John Catholicos and Tovma Arcruni mention three Albanian princes: Atrnerseh, lord of Khachen, Sahl ibn-Sunbat, lord of Shake, Esay Abu Musa, lord of Ktish in Artsakh." Atabek 00:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sahl actually probably was Armenian. The source you are referring to simply says that he was an Albanian prince (i.e Prince of Albania), which is true.Hajji Piruz 01:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the page, but you misquoted it, which changed the entire meaning, this is the actual quote: ...three Albanian princes: Atrenerseh, lord pf Xaçen, Sahl son of Smbat, lord of Sake, and...

The source is actually claiming him to be Armenian, as Smbat was Armenian, so obviously should his son. Please next time be more careful when quoting. Do you have another source which does not claim him to be Armenian because this one actually claims him to be one. Regards. Anatolmethanol 06:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually the footnote on page 462 of Dowsett's article, referring to an Armenian author Daghbaschean, says:

Daghbaschean takes Sahl to be the son of the contemporary generalissimo of Armenia, Smbat Bagratuni; this is completely without foundation and his surprise that "Sahl is nowhere called the son of Smbat the Generalissimo but merely the son of Smbat" is wholly unjustified. Smbat is hardly an uncommon name in Armenian history

So, this basically means that Sahl was NOT the son of Smbat Bagratuni. As for Smbat not being an uncommon name in Armenian history, this name was also known in Albania and is even used in contemporary Azerbaijan, with historian Professor Sumbatzade being just one example. Similarly, many other names in Armenian history were also used or originated in other countries, not to say that many Armenian names today have clearly Turkish, Persian and/or Arabic roots, such as Kocharian, Chilingarian, Vazirian, Arzumanian, etc. and even Daghbaschean (cited above). In conclusion, nowhere does Dowsett say that Sahl was Armenian. Minorsky's reference in Caucasica IV (p. 506) completely closes the issue by saying: "Exact origin of Sahl is not explicitly stated". Minorsky also cites a Georgian chronicle, according to which Sahl's predecessors might have come from Taron in Georgia, but Dowsett also specifically dismissed this Taron reference, and added Arcruni and John Catholicos that Sahl was an Albanian prince. Atabek 13:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

No, it does not say he was Armenian. How do you know that Sunbat was Armenian? The best source on this issue is the article by Minorsky. I suggest you read it first. And the source quoted by Atabek does say that Sahl was Albanian. Grandmaster 07:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I fail to understand how this supports your point, if anything you admits that the source you have provided in the article does not claim him to be Albanian, claiming that Dowsett does not say he is Armenian does not mean he claims he is Albanian. If anything he is using the source which claims him to be Armenian. Also, I wonder why you have not bolded the rest. I mean, you have used a misquote to support it while the quote itself place it as the son of Smbat. And I am amazed that Grandmaster is questioning that Smbat was Armenian. Is he serious? (if he is, he could check Minorsky p.511, who calls him Armenian King, but I didn't know that even this was debated) I also fail to see how modern Azerbaijani uses of the term has any relevency here, neither your exemples, that's original research and is not allowed. Family name and first name are not the same thing.

Further, you are misinterpreting what Minorsky is saying, what he means is that the true lineage of Sahl is not known, the end of the short paragraph is explicit: ...and is likely to refer to the home of Sahl's ancestors. Minorsky actually concludes it by relating to what was reported on the deportation of Armenian kings, which included Sahl. Neither Dowsett neither Minorsky contradict the wide range of sources placing him as Armenian, to the contrary. Do you have another source? Anatolmethanol 14:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Dowsett clearly spelled it out saying Sahl, son of Smbat, was one of the three ALBANIAN princes, on page which is quoted in the article. And Smbat was not the first name of Sahl, hence the reference to similar usage of Turkish/Persian/Arabic names by Armenians is also quite relevant, not to say that names like Robert carried by some Armenians don't absolutely mean that Robert is an Armenian name.

So far the evidence presented, clearly shows that NEITHER Dowsett NOR Minorsky claimed that Sahl ibn Sunbat was Armenian. Both concur however, that Sahl ruled in Albania, with Dowsett further calling him Albanian prince. Hence, your referral to other sources to support your claim might be needed. Thanks. Atabek 15:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to put the caps on, I can read. Let me repeat this. The uses of Albanian princes is meant to say the princes of Albania. The source in question say the son of Smbat, who is Armenian. I doubt you will find a source which will claim that Smbat was not Armenian. When you word that that he was either Albanian or Armenian, it mislead the reader into believing that he was either ethnically Armenian or ethnically Albanian. When we say Armenian we mean ethnically, while here Albanian is used as in 'prince of Albania.' I think it makes a differences. He was one of the princes of Albania, but sources place him as Armenian. You claim that neither does Dowsett nor Minorsky claim him to be Armenian. I tend to disagree there for several reason. First, the quote you have used to claim him to be ethnically Albanian was in fact a misquote, the actual quote does place him as Armenian. Smbat being Armenian, his son would be Armenian. Dowsett on the other hand, in the footnote explicitly say that it is not because his name was Smbat that it meant that he was his son, since the name Smbat was not uncommon for an Armenian. So if anything, both do make suggestions on him being ethnically Armenian and does not contradict the rest of the sources which support the position that he was Armenian. So, having said that, I don't see how Doswett could be used to claim him to be ethnically Albanian. Please explain. Anatolmethanol 15:43, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

How do you know that Smbat was Armenian? Do you have any sources to attest to that? Armenian king Smbat mentioned on page 511 as murdered in 914 was not Sahl's father. --Grandmaster 15:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you understood my point, possible neither what Dowsett wanted to say here. I know it is not the same Smbat, I was talking about Smbat Bagraduni, I gave the exemple from Minorsky of a following rule, to show Smbat is Armenian. You have to interprete what I said in light of Dowsett point in the footnote. Let me explain, it is claimed that Sahl was the son of Smbat, which people assumed to be Smbat Bagraduni. In the footnote, Dowsett say that it is not as if Smbat was that rare a name for Armenians and for this reason it does not mean that the source is talking about the Bagraduni. Smbat is actually an Armenian name, for the Sahl to claim the trone of Albania or Georgia he had to change his name, because Smbat is Armenian but its Albanian or Georgian version when written in latin alphabet has an 'u'. The reason why the Armenian version is written Smbat is because there is another later, the 'et' in Armenian which is left out in the transliteration. In all his works Dowsett actually leave that letter out not only for Smbat. Dowsett never denies, but actually confirms the Smbat in question was Armenian, but claims that it was not necessarly the Bagraduni. Anatolmethanol 16:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

You cannot base your assertion on the name only. Vakhtang is Georgian name, and one of Albanian prinices bore it. But it does not necessarily mean that he was Georgian. Sahl is Arabic name, but again it does not mean that he was Arab. We know that Sahl ruled Shaki, and Minorsky writes:

West of Sharvan was situated Qabala, with a mixed population (including even some Khazars) but ruled by a Christian prince. In the west it bordered on Shakki, also with a Christian dynasty. The origins of the princes of Qabala and Shakki are little known, but in view of constant intermarriage we have to assume their manifold links with the princes of the right bank.

The footnote to this passage says:

It is quite possible that the Mihranids at times controlled the left bank of the Kur. One of their descendants Hamam (Grigor), son of Adernerseh (a contemporary of Muhammad Afshin, 889-901), Moses, iii, ch. 22 (trans. 278) says that he spread his sway “on to the other side”, i.e. apparently to the left bank of the Kur.

So the origin of Sahl is quite obscure, probably heavily mixed. --Grandmaster 16:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Those are not my assertions, they're taken as established fact by Dowsett and is not rejected by scholarly works. Dowsett translations all left the et down(which is understandable, because there are no latin equivalent), it is not a misplacement, because the 'et' is replaced with an u for Albanian and Georgian names. The specificity is not on the name, but the way it is written. Anatolmethanol 16:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I also don't see why you have quoted the above. The point is? Anatolmethanol 16:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

You have been provided with references above:

1. With Dowsett dismissing that Sahl ibn Sunbat (or Smbat) is the son of Smbat Bagratuni of Armenia.

2. With Dowsett attesting that he was an Albanian prince (exactly as spelled not prince of Albania but Albanian prince)

3. With Minorsky attesting to the fact that Smbat's origins are not known

Again Smbat in Albanian and Armenian was spelled the same way, not with "n". "N" is the spelling of his name in Arabic sources. In fact, even in contemporary Azeri, it's Sumbat not Sunbat.

We are yet to see your references to say that Smbat was ethnically Armenian, citing a page and a precise quote, please, aside from just saying "he was Armenian". Please, provide those sources, just like I did above, before we may proceed in further discussion. Thanks. Atabek 16:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The assertion that everyone by the name of Smbat is Armenian cannot be accepted. It is OR and simply not logical. As for the quote, Minorsky says that the origins of the princes of Shakki are little known, and we know that Sahl was prince of Shaki, and Minorsky also says that he could be related to Mihranids who were Persian. Grandmaster 17:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, the line “Smbat is hardly an uncommon name in Armenian history” does not mean that everyone by the name of Smbat was Armenian. It just means that there were more than one or two Smbats in the Armenian history, but it does not follow that every person with this name is Armenian. It is your personal interpretation. Grandmaster 17:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I feal that this discussion is going nowhere and we're turning in circle. You should have searched the matter a little bit more before asking me sources. The article arleady contain sources about him being Armenian, while the source you provided does not support your assertions.

But here few more.

Babak refused the offer and went to Armenia to settle with a certain Sahl b. Sunbat in his castle. The latter betrayed him to the agents of al-Afshin. Also betrayed was the brother of Babak, Abd Allah. With the situation in the Jibal area so well in the hands of al-Afshin's the Armenian rulers had every reason to please their new powerful neighbour. Prelude to the GeneralsA Study of Some Aspects of the Regn of the Eighth Abbasid Caliph, Al ... Osman Sayyid Ahmad Ismail Al-Bili Garnet & Ithaca Press (2001) p.77

He calls him an Armenian ruler.

More.

He was handed to Afshin's troops by Sahl b. Sunbadh, an Armenian prince in 222/836-7 The Cambridge History of Iran. Par W B Fisher, Richard Nelson Frye, J A Boyle, Ehsan Yar-Shater, Peter Jackson, Lawrence Lockhart, Cambridge University Press (1968) p.506

...Babek took to flight and fell into the hands of Sahl b. Sonbat, the Armenian Patriarch who had him arrested while hunting. E. J. Brill's First Encyclopaedia of Islam, 1913-1936 Par M. Th. Houtsma, E. van Donzel, BRILL, (1993) p.547

...an Armenian prince called Sahl b. Sanbat,... Islamic Culture by Islamic Cultural Board, Editors: -Oct. 1936, Marmaduke Pickthall; Jan. 1937- Oct. 1938, Muhammad Asad-Weiss. (1927) p. 23

Do those satisfy you? Or perhaps do you want more sources?

Comming to you three points, I don't think you read me carefully, those sources don't do what you claim. Dowsett does not dismiss him being Armenian, he actually suggest in his footnote him being Armenian. In fact, the only place in the entire paper where he relate to his ethnicity was on the footnote, where he say that Smbat is not such an uncommon name among Armenians to suggest that he was from the Bagraduni's. Your second point does not make sense, when Dowsett say he was an Albanian prince, he means the Prince of Albania not that he was Albanian by language or by ethnicity. Those years Albania was already Armenized. As for Minorsky, I have already repeated that Minorsky is talking about his lineage not his ethnicity. The end of the short paragraph makes it clear as he suggest a lineage.

To answer Grandmaster, Smbat is Armenian by any published sources. If you claim that it is not an Armenian name, then perhaps you are not that versed in the Subject. Dowsett present this as an established fact and which is not dismissed by anyone. The reason why it is the Armenian version of the name is because of the et missing in the latin transliteration while it is fully present for both Albanian and Georgian transliteration. In fact the Albanian version is Georgian influenced, because there is no et in Georgian, they rather use the u.

On your second point, you are not understand the context in which Dowsett said that, I thought it was clear. Read the text which is footnoted. Dowsett point was in relation to the claim that Smbat was not a Bagraduni, and in his footnote he claims that Smbat was not an uncommon name by Armenians. He is implicitly saying him to be Armenian. The Bagraduni's were Armenian, and he say that it is not as if Smbat is that an uncommon name among Armenians to assume that he is Bagraduni. Nowhere have you nor Atabek provided any explicit source nor anything contradicting with the claim that Sahl was Armenian. Sources which does not say explicitly the ethnicity can not be used to dismiss what scholarly works by the large claim. It is like using a source which does not say that the current president of Armenia is ethnically Armenian to be used to claim he may not be in parallel to another source which says he is. In any case, I don't see what Atabek and your problem is. I want to expend the article, but if we can't even settle on the ethnicity of the person even though both of you have provided no source to substenciate both of your positions I don't see how I can improve this article. Anatolmethanol 17:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Atabek, your new edits are misinterpreting sources even further. I don't get to understand why you are so pressed to remove any mention to Armenia or Armenians. Care to explain? Anatolmethanol 18:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Anatolmethanol, this is a summary of my new edits , please, show me item by item, where did I remove the words Armenia or Armenians? Please, assume good faith. Thanks. Atabek 18:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

You pushed the Armenian mention further down. I am still waiting any sources which does not present Albanian as in Albania but rather as an ethnic group. Anatolmethanol 19:36, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Fadix, Smbat might be an Armenian name, but again it does not follow that everyone who bears that name is Armenian. I already cited examples, Vakhtang is Georgian name, yet some Albanian princes bore it. Khosrow is Persian name, yet some Armenians had this name. You cannot make such assertions just on the basis of the name. And second, no one denies that Sahl (which is Arabic name, btw) could be Armenian, we just add that he could also be Albanian. This info is sourced, why is it such a problem to admit alternative version of his origin? --Grandmaster 19:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I am assuming nothing, Dowsett is saying just this. The footnote makes it clear that he is saying he was Armenian. Bring any third party editor he will confirm it. The footnote is used to support that he was not a Bagradid, he say that Smbat was not that uncommon a name for Armenians. And not, actually Smbat was only used by Armenians, in other languages the et is replaced by an u. The et can not be replaced in latin alphabet the silence between two consonant is used as the 'et', this is why some write S'mbat. Dowsett present this as absolute truth, in fact nowhere does he question it. He translated a large junk of materials and not once does he question this. Neither I, nor you could dismiss this. Anatolmethanol 19:36, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Everyone assume good faith. Based on the leading scholars, Sahl was Armenian. One does not make up their mind simply by picking and choosing sources that only agree with them. The majority of the sources that I checked, included the ones cited in this article, some of the biggest names in the field, say he was Armenian. The quotes are not necessary, so I took them out. Also, Minorsky states that Sahls origins are not known, not his ethnicity. Minorsky refers to Sahl as an Armenian, saying that he was part of the deportation of Armenian princes.Hajji Piruz 22:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The top Western expert on Caucasian Albania was CJF Dowsett, who translated Movses Kalankatuaci's "History of the Country Aluank" into English, and was also, by the way, a Professor Emeritus of Armenian Studies at Oxford. Bosworth was NOT an expert on Caucasian Albania at all.Atabek 07:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hajji Piruz, the claims of consensus must be referenced info. You cannot say that most of scholars stick to such and such opinion without providing a source for such claim, it would be an OR. See Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources#Claims_of_consensus. Grandmaster 09:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

So far, I have seen no sources saying that say that Sahl was Albanian other than sources that simply say he was a prince of Albania or an Albanian prince (much like they say that the Shah Abbas was a Persian King).Hajji Piruz 16:05, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I added a dubious tag because the Dowsett quote is being interpreted rather than it actually being what Dowsett wanted it to be.Hajji Piruz 19:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Dowsett claims him as an Armenian, Atabek and Grandmaster have yet to provide a source

Never does Dowsett say that he was Albanian by ethnicity. The work analyzes a translation of an Armenian text. Those works are specialized, they are not to be read by someone who ignores the subject or the historical background of the region.

By the early eighth century, most of Albania had come under the rule of the caliphate, and a process of Islamization of the population began, which continued under the regional dynasties of the Sheddadids and Maziadids. A number of potentates in the Transcaucasus — Armenian, Georgian, and Muslim — all continued to lay claim to the kingship of Albania until the twelfth century, although for all intents and purposes, Caucasus Albania had passed into history by the ninth century. (An Ethnohistorical Dictionary of the Russian and Soviet Empires by James Stuart, Olson Greenwood Press (1994) p.27

This is the background history of the period, which anyone who read Dowsett's specialized papers (translations of Armenian texts and analysis) should know, and he guesses that they do know. It is quite easy to manipulate texts with terms... It has to be understood in the light of the background history. Sahl, for instance, was an Armenian who assumed the title of ruler of Albania. The footnote is --Daghbaschean takes Sahl to be the son of the contemporary generalissimo of Armenia, Smbat Bagratuni; this is completely without foundation and his surprise that "Sahl is nowhere called the son of Smbat the Generalissimo but merely the son of Smbat" is wholly unjustified. Smbat is hardly an uncommon name in Armenian history-- assumes that the reader knows already that he is Armenian.

But the fact that you have removed in your first quotation the word son suggest that you knew that this would have made a lot of differences in the interpretation. It can not be only a misquote because you did not only remove son; you actually replaced the word.

Also, your assumption on what Minorsky is saying about his origin is wrong. As Fadix has stated, the paragraph in which Minorsky uses that word leaves no doubt that he is talking about the genealogy. Dowsett also raises it when he writes: Apart from minor details (from the linguistic point of view its support for the form patgos is welcome), it implies a reasonable date for the death of Khalid, gives us a plausible genealogy for the prince Sahl i Smbatean whose origin has hitherto been obscure,... (p.468) The quote is refreshing right? What more? He calls the prince Smbatean. He calls him by his Armenian name. The reason why he translated it to Smbatean and not Smbatian is because in Armenian, Armenian endings are not written with an i but the yetch, which is translated in historic documents as e rather than i His name's ending is Armenian. But obviously, since both of you are not editing in good faith, it is reasonable to assume that there is nothing which will prevent the distortion of the whole thing just to make the word Armenian disappear or to merely present it as an opinion. -- Davo88 22:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, you did not notice this above. Here is quote again:

C. J. F. Dowsett. "A Neglected Passage in the "History of the Caucasian Albanians"", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 19, No. 3. (1957), p.463:

"Among the prisoners captured by Bogha al-Kabir in 854, John Catholicos and Tovma Arcruni mention three Albanian princes: Atrnerseh, lord of Khachen, Sahl ibn-Sunbat, lord of Shake, Esay Abu Musa, lord of Ktish in Artsakh."

ean is not only Armenian suffix for names, many Iranians have names ending with "ian" as well. Thanks. Atabek 23:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Most(but not all) ians in Persian are traditionally Armenian. Smbat is an Armenian name; the Georgians have Sunbat, with the n inclining a little bit on the m, and the Persians do not have Smbat. You are misquoting again! ...three Albanian princes: Atrenerseh, lord pf Xaçen, Sahl son of Smbat, lord of Sake... Both Smbat and ean makes it indisputably Armenian(and Dowsett in his footnote present it as if the reader knows this). Stop distorting please, Dowsett's interest in Albanian history is taken by him as part of Armenian history. It is convenient for both you and Grandmaster to use Armenian scholars (Dowsett is Armenian), specialist in Armenian history, but dismiss them when they do not agree with your position. Albania's fall was final. In the 9th century, Armenians already managed to consolidate their power and restored the Kingdom of Armenia (Encyclopedia of Soviet Law Par Ferdinand Joseph Maria Feldbrugge BRILL (1985) p.455). Grandmaster claimed in his answer to Tigran an evidence that there was no Armenia in 9th century - one of his many distortions. Albania was only a geographic location claimed by Persians, Arabs, Georgians, Armenians at the time of Sahl. Western Albania was a satellite state of Armenia, with him as one of its rulers. So yes, he was an Albanian prince. If we claim Karabakhians, we imply in the current situation that they are Armenians. It's because we know the background history, we do not forge an ethnicity - the Karabakhians - to claim that they are not Armenian. But again, continuously replacing the word son and changing Smbat to Sunbat (Georgian equivalent) only shows that you still refuse to stop POV pushing while knowing that I am correct. -- Davo88 01:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Dowsett does not say that Sahl was Albanian Atabek, thats simply your interpretation. Yes, Sahl was an Albanian prince, but this does not mean he was Albanian himself. Albanian prince in this context means a prince of Albania. Philip the Arab was also Roman Emperor, but he was not Roman (Italian) in descent.Hajji Piruz 02:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Original research. The text says “Albanian prince”, we quote it as it is. Let the reader judge. Personal interpretations are not allowed. Grandmaster 07:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

So is your claim that he was Albanian. VartanM 07:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not, I only add sourced info. Do you agree that Dowsett calls Sahl an "Albanian prince"? Whatever he meant by that should be left to the reader to judge, we should only quote the source and keep any interpretations to ourselves. Grandmaster 07:49, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The source calls him Albanian prince not prince of Albanian descent. The current version of the article calls him Albanian not prince of Albania.VartanM 08:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The source says “Albanian prince”, not “prince of Albania”. We should quote the source exactly as it says. Grandmaster 09:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

What do you suggest about this sentence? "others believe he was Albanian". Thats OR. VartanM 14:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

How about this: Sources refer to him either as Armenian or Caucasian Albanian prince? Grandmaster 07:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

For the last time (lets not overestimate hope)

...Albania rapidly became culturally Armenized, especially after the twenty districts of the Armenian principalities... (Dictionary of the Middle Ages by Strayer, Joseph Reese, 1904-, Scribner (1983) p.123

Over time its upper classes were effectivelly Armenized. The Soviet Nationality Reader: The Disintegration in Context Westview Press, (1992) p.486

The exact origins of Sahl are not known. He is talking about his genealogy, not his ethnicity, Dowsett will be making the same comment.

Some sources state that he was an Armenian, while others believe he was Albanian is awkward, misleading, illogical, inaccurate, etc. It is like saying: Some sources state that he was an Armenian, while others believe he was Karabakhian. In the actual context, this is not a contradiction. Dowsett already claims him to be Armenian, and uses the word Albanian as someone would be using the word Karabakhian. Dowsett's Armenian in his footnote is as if those to whom he is addressing know about it already, and it leaves no doubt. Doubts that remains on what exactly he meant are answered by the rest of the scholarly works. Already, in the introduction of Dowsett's paper The Albanian Chronicale of Mxit'ar Gos, before developping his subject, he assumes you know the background, since he writes: The land of the Aluank' or Caucasian Albania, whose geography and customs already attracted the attention of Strabo and Pliny, represents the easternmost part of the Armenian sphere of influence. (p.472) He is developing it as if he is developing a part of Armenian history, because those are the first lines of the paper.

Accuracy would require that we write that he was an Armenian ruler of parts of Caucasian Albania. This is what accuracy requires, both of you have still not provided any material substantiating your claim. The wording both of you suggest doesn't even need substantiation, it's wrong no matter what... It assumes and implies a contradiction between both positions, this is what the while does. But I won't try any more, this is why I'd rather contribute in the Armenian Misplaced Pages for such articles... I refuse to be halted by users who assume article ownership and refuse to stand corrected. -- Davo88 16:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I know it says "Albanian Prince" but this does not mean that Sahl was Albanian. This means that he was simple a prince of Albania. Philip the Arab was referred to as a Roman Emperor, yet this does not mean he was of Roman descent, he was of Arab descent.Hajji Piruz 17:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Hajji Piruz lets not get the Roman's involved :), there are way to many involved nationalities already, Lets just change Philip the Arab with another Roman Emperor Leo V, Now was he Armenian? Roman? Greek? Assyrian? One thing is for sure he was a Roman Emperor just like Sahl ibn Smbat was prince of Albania. VartanM 21:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Again Davo it is your personal interpretation that Albanian prince was meant as prince of Albania. The fact is that Dowsett calls him an "Albanian prince". Therefore no one can deny that Sahl was referred to as Albanian prince and this should be reflected in the article. No personal interpretations are allowed. --Grandmaster 07:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Grandmaster, you got it all wrong, you can not use a lack of clarification as default to maintain a position. When a considerable amount of material was presented, you're still stuck on Dowsett. Editors have reasonably answered that Dowsett was misinterpreted, and citations from him were presented as evidence. This was also confirmed by providing materials from other sources. So the burden is on your side, to provide materials to support your position. I see nothing coming from you in this talkpage other than requesting a status quo on the actual wording, by sticking to on an imprecision which obviously is misleading, not to say plain wrong. Besides, knowing Dowsett as Armenian scholar, who's position was that Albania during those years was nothing more than a geographical region, who's inhabitants were Armenized. So in that context, I don't think given the amount of material presented, there can be any reasonable doubt to use Davo words, that your interpretation is not accurate. VartanM 16:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Once again, he says "Albanian prince". No interpretations here, just an accurate quote from the source. We should only write what he says, and if you believe that he means something different that's your right, but we cannot remove the source or add any personal interpretations. All we can do is to quote Dowsett as saying that Sahl was an Albanian prince. You cannot dispute that he actually used these exact words, so there's no problem here. We can add any alternative versions as well for NPOV. Grandmaster 10:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Again, he does not consider Albanians as an ethnicity for those years. He believes that native princes of Albania are Armenians. Here is a prior ancestory of the princeship lineage.

After four years, in the year when New Year's Day coincided with Easter Day, Abu Ali, the native Armenian (Haykazuni) prince of Albania was killed by his full brother Smbat, king of Armenia, son of Ashot Bagratuni( The History of the Caucasian Albanians (translated by C. F. J. Dowsett). London: (London Oriental Series, Vol. 8). Pg 220)

On the other paper, he also considers a branch of Bagradids as Albanian. This is why he questions Smbat being the Smbat in question having killed his brother and having his son replace him. If you read this sentence, it is written word by word: native Armenian prince of Albania. VartanM 18:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You are making a mistake. Haykazuni does not mean Armenian. Haykazuni/Haykazean means "descendant of Hayk". See this quote from Robert Hewsen, one of the top experts on Albania. He criticizes Armenian scholar Mnatsakanian, who claims that “Eastern Armenia, according to Movses Xorenac'i (1.121), formed the hereditary domains of the Princes of Siwnik', a house of Armenian origin”. And Hewsen says in his comment on that claim:

Actually, all Movses Xorenac'i asserts is that the House of Siwnik was of Haykid origin which, as Toumanoff has shown (Studies, 108, 216, 218, 222, 469), should be taken as meaning only that it was of immemorial origin; i.e. that it had been sovereign in Siwnik for so long that no one remembered its origin.

Hewsen, Robert H. Ethno-History and the Armenian Influence upon the Caucasian Albanians, in: Samuelian, Thomas J. (Hg.), Classical Armenian Culture. Influences and Creativity, Chico: 1982, 27-40.

So Haykid/Haykazean only means that the origin of the dynasty was very old and people connected it with legendary figures that actually did not exist. Grandmaster 05:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The point is? Those are not my words, I have quoted from Dowsett translation. He translates it as Armenian. What Hewsen think of it is irrelevant, because my answer was concerning Dowsett not questioning that the Sahl was Armenian. Which you have still to answer. VartanM 06:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

But your quote does not say Sahl was Armenian. It is about a different person. --Grandmaster 06:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Dowsett already admited that he was Armenian in the footnote, this should have been settled by now. You did not get the quote above, you jumped on Haykazuni, when it really meant Armenian. Abi Ali was the full brother of Smbat Bagratuni, so Haykazuni here means Armenian. You provided Hewsen, when Hewsen doesn't even say anything remotely reassembling to the claim that a Haykazuni is not Armenian. formed the hereditary domains of the Princes of Siwnik', a house of Armenian origin. Mnatsakanian is claiming that Haykazuni meant that it was the house of Armenian origin, because Hayk from the mythologies is considered the first Armenian. To which Hewsen answers that it means very long, not that it was from that far. The souverain of Swinik were Armenians, no one disputes that. The point is that being native of Albania doesn't mean that one is ethnically Albanian, in Dowsett translation, the full brother of Smbat is an Albanian native, but is ethnically Armenian.

I don't understand why you are reviving this. Dowsett took it as a fact, that Sahl was Armenian. What is the point of this endless discussion? VartanM 14:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

VartanM, you have been provided with Dowsett's sentence from "Neglected Passages..." article saying Sahl was one of three Albanian princes. Until you're able to deny the existence of this sentence, and until the reverts of the article by suspicious User:ArmeniaArmenia stop, I don't see how discussion can proceed in an NPOV and constructive manner. Albania was not an Armenian kingdom, it's well known that, unlike Armenian language of Indo-European family, Albanian language was of Ibero-Caucasian origin, and that Albanian Church was abolished only in 19th century by the Russian Czar. There is no name Vakhtang in Armenian historiography, that's the name of one of the princes of Khachen. Sahl is Arabic name, and Smbat is a name used even in modern Azerbaijan as Sumbat. The fact that it was not rare in Armenian history, does not mean it's Armenian name. Atabek 15:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Circular and endless discussion, Vartan, I don't think you need to reply here. By now, if he was contributing in good faith, he should've understood it. Armenian scholar, not as in Armenian scholar. I think this resumes the situation... no need to add more. I will be fixing this article in the near future. - Fedayee 00:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Dowsett never used a phrase: Sahl was Armenian. It is just your interpretation. You cannot find such a line in the text, however he clearly says that Sahl was Albanian. And Haykazuni does not necessarily mean Armenian either. See Hewsen/Toumanoff. Using socks to revert the article is not gonna help, I suspect banned user being involved here. I hope arbitrators will pay attention to what’s going on here. --Grandmaster 14:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

• Unassessed Iran articles
• Unknown-importance Iran articles
• WikiProject Iran articles
• Unassessed Azerbaijan articles
• Unknown-importance Azerbaijan articles
• WikiProject Azerbaijan articles
• Unassessed Armenian articles
• Unknown-importance Armenian articles
• WikiProject Armenia articles