Talk:Islamization of Iran

message: Since the discussion of Arabicization was taking over the Islamic conquest of Iran article, I decided to move it here. There's room to spread out, guys. Zora 10:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: ManiF, you don't seem to understand the term Arabization. It does NOT mean that everything in a society has become Arabic. It is a process, that can have great effect (as it did in Syria or Egypt) or relatively little effect (as it did in Persia). It is a term used in academic discussion of the effects of the Islamic conquests. The terms Arabization and Islamization are often used together. Very often you will have one without the other. Christian communities in Syria and Iraq have been Arabized (they use Arabic in their church services) but not Islamicized. Persia was Islamicized, but resisted Arabization. Egypt was, to a great extent, both Arabized and Islamicized. If you don't understand a word, look it up -- don't guess at the meaning and then erupt in anger based on your misunderstanding. 
If you'd like, I can put that explanation IN the article, so that other people don't make the same guesses that you have. Zora 23:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have not provided any opposing sources proving significant "Arabization" in post-Islamic Persia. A source, however, disagreeing with you has been provided. SouthernComfort 23:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I, for one, disagree with the inclusion of the term "Arabization" in the title. By the way, you yourself state that Persia resisted Arabization - I don't understand why you feel it necessary to have that term as part of the title when we are essentially in agreement. SouthernComfort 23:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Furthermore, the article should probably be moved to Islamicization in post-conquest Persia or Islamicization of Persia as per Islamic conquest of Persia, since it focuses entirely on historic issues and events. I'd like to hear what others have to say before agreeing on a new title. SouthernComfort 00:01, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, Islamicization of Persia sounds more historically accurate. --ManiF 02:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Persian has undergone many changes in the past two millennia, the most significant of which has most certainly been the influence of Arabic since the Islamic conquest of Persia in the year 650. Over the years, Persian has borrowed up to half of its vocabulary from Arabic as well as certain grammatical elements. This impact of Arabic is profound not only because of its magnitude but because the sounds and syntax of Arabic, a Semitic language, are so different than those of Persian. Since the Middle Ages, Persian has been written in a modified form of the Arabic alphabet, although in pre-Islamic times it was written in an older alphabet known as Pahlavi. 
Up to half the vocabulary? That's a profound impact. As is a change in the writing system. It's like the change from Anglo-Saxon to Middle English. Anglo-Saxon and Norman French collide -- wham! Anglo-saxon grammar stays, but a huge importation of French vocabulary. An article on "French influence on the English language" would be defensible, no matter how the English felt about the French. Arab/Persian tensions are high now, but that's no reason to deny facts. Zora 02:24, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I understand what you're trying to say, but that is only in regards to language, not the civilization as a whole.  Arabic (Iraqi Arabic, for example) and Turkish also have been immensely influenced by Persian - would you consider their peoples and civilizations to have been "Persianized" as a result? I think not. What you are discussing would be more appropriately labelled Influence of Arabic on Persian language. But I don't think there is enough material warranting a new article, as it can be very briefly covered at Persian language. However, if you are interested in this area, you may wish to also start articles on Persian influence on Arabic language and Persian influence on Turkish language. SouthernComfort 02:42, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Zora, that still doesn't justify the use of the word "Arabization" which is generally interpreted as "to become Arab" or "to make Arabic" in the title of this article or any other such articles. --ManiF 02:42, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At any rate, the present title is accurate and warranted as it only deals with the adoption of Islam by the Iranian populace. Use of the term "Arabization" is inappropriate, and Zora's source does not use the term in relation to Iran. Her source is also only discussing the influence of "Arabic language upon Persian language," an entirely different matter than "Arabization." SouthernComfort 02:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

text:  Zora, I think you're the one who is not getting it. Weather or not, there was any Arabic influence on Persian or Persia is irrelevant to this discussion. Your source does not speak of "Arabization" and the term would be misleading and inappropriate in this context,  especially for the title. --ManiF 03:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You know what, this article is actually unnecessary - the information here should be incorporated back into Islamic conquest of Persia where it belongs. Otherwise we should include a brief summary of this article in its own section in that article. I reread the "Islamic conquest" article and it definitely could use this material. SouthernComfort 03:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Don't you think it would be best to contain everything in that article and just state things as they are presented? Otherwise this article seems something like a POV fork. And I'm not sure why you are disputing that the Arab conquerors imposed their language upon the subjected peoples - I mean, this is widely accepted amongst historians, is it not? You yourself have also stated that Persians resisted the effects of Arab occupuation - why would they resist if there were no imposition on the part of the Arab rulers? SouthernComfort 05:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I moved the page back 

message: I believe the following paragraph should be added to give a clear picture of the situation in 7th-8th century.
Following the Arab conquest, tens of thousands of Arab families moved to the eastern borders of the Islamic caliphate and Khorasan region. While arab settlements were small in western Iran, there was extensive colonization of eastern Iran, in particular Khorasan region. Many Arab tribes such as Bakr bin Wael, Tamim, Abd-al-Qays and Azd moved to Khorasan. The Arabs acquired lands in villages and married local women and settled in Khorasan permanently. According to Encyclopaedia Iranica, the Arab population in Khorasan was huge in the early 8th century CE, and the number of Arab people living in Khorasan was around a quarter of million people (Encyclopaedia Iranica, under Arab settlements in Iran,p.213).
The Arabs and muslim Iranians overcame their initial differences and cooperated extensively in military expeditions against their common enemies on the Khorasan's eastern frontier. The Arab population in Khorasan, included not only soldiers, but also merchants, artisans, religious scholars, landlords and peasants. They blended well with the local host population. This in turn lead to the integration of Arabs and Iranians into a common social fabric, and assimilation of Iranian culture by the Arabs and gradual spread of the Arab culture and religion in the Iranian host population (Encyclopaedia Iranica, under Arab settlements in Iran,p.214). Heja Helweda 07:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A random piece of information on an Arab settlement in Khorasan doesn't need a section of its own on every Persia-related article. You have posted this on a dozen articles. --ManiF 07:49, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

text: That belongs in the appropriate article, in other words Khorasan. As Mani states, and as I have stated before, you shouldn't go around posting this information on every Iran-related article to prove a point. SouthernComfort 11:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

text: hey heja!i read your comment on another article in which you had said that in the time of perso-arab wars iran had a population of about 1.5 million. isnt that a bit funny? how could these 1.5 men and women control such a huge country for at least 450 years?! and beside it wars with romans for nearly all of this period? i think there were at least 30 or 40 million iranians then. (i think your anti-iranian point of view is making you blind!- by the way i live in iranian kurdistan and i and my kurd brothers and sisters have no problem with each other. i don't know why are you so anti-iranian. believe me we other iranians have no problem with kurds the problen is only the goverment) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.219.216.158 (talk) 19:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arab Migration to Khorasan 

message: Name of this article had been "Islamicization in post-conquest Iran".
User:Tigeroo had moved this article to " Post-Muslim conquest social impact in Persia" and then to "Social & Cutlural Impact of the Muslim conquest of Persia". I reverted and simplified its name. Please discuss about its name here before moving it.--Sa.vakilian 02:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving the article

message: One paragraph states that: "Persians had a great influence on their conquerors. The caliphs adopted many Sassanid administrative practices, such as coinage, the office of vizier, or minister, and the divan"
The writer of this must be confused. The words "Divan" and "Vizier" are actually an effect of Arabic influence over Persia and central Asia. Both of these words are Arabic words pronounced differently by non-Arab speakers (originally pronounced as Diwan and Wazir).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.224.169 (talk) 00:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: wrong information

message: The tone of this article makes it seem as if Iran welcomed Islam; it doesn't mention anything about Iranians being killed for not converting.--Parthian Scribe (talk) 01:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We try not to use partisan points of views . Anyway , more modern views from reliable sources such as Encyclopedia Iranica rejects the coercion as a significant factor in conversion of Iranians to Islam (Iranica page 231) . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 10:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are spreading ahistorical Islamic radical nonsense. I can provide the sources for the horrific massacres committed to the Persians by the early caliphate. 2600:4040:9012:1100:AD3F:6304:D37C:FCBB (talk) 07:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

text: Again, Whomever "Zarrinkoub" is, whatever good was he, He with no doubt did not mention such sources and he was not a witness of such things and whatever things he say, he can not be considered anykind of a reliable source.--196.205.207.249 (talk) 20:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality of this Article 

message: I don't understand the current introduction to the article, "Islamization in post-Islamic Iran", since post-Islamic means something that is after Islam. Iran may become post-Islamic in the future, but the article is about the change from pre-Islamic to Islamic. So i reverted to the former intro:  Islamization in Iran - because the intro should correspond with the title of the page. Also, I made the intro easier to read. --Sasper (talk) 05:27, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Incomprehensible intro: "Islamization in post-Islamic Iran"

message: (Similar discussion in the anti-persianism article which is similar to this section)
The following paragraph bothered me in the Anti-Persianism section of this article:
It is difficult to imagine the Arabs especially Ummayad dynasty not implementing anti-Persian policies in light of such events, writes Zarrinkoub in his famous Two centuries of silence, where he exclusively writes of this topic  }}. Reports of Persian speakers being tortured are also given in Abū al-Faraj al-Isfahāni's al-Aghānī. While no accurate references can be found.
No matter how famous Zarrinkoub is, and no matter how extensively he writes, his inability to imagine that torture did not take place is not evidence that torture or anti-persianism did take place, certainly paling in comparison to the direct citations earlier.  If he wrote so extensively on Anti-Persianism, then there must be numerous better quotes in which he says something to the effect of AntiPersianism did exist in ___ ____ ____ situations and we know because of ___ ___ ___.  
Kitab al-Aghani seems like an excellent source, but I can't tell without reading the original which I can't find in English (suggestions appreciated).  It needed a more specific reference which I copied from the main Anti-Persianism article.  But, AFAIK, ancient sources of this type should not be referenced with page numbers, but with chapter numbers and verse numbers.  Different publishers will have different page numbers. 
I don't know what to make of the fragment "While no accurate references can be found" except that it seems to highlight that no accurate references have been supplied. 
David s graff (talk) 19:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  garbled anti-persianism section 

message: The New Persian language after Islam, unlike Pahlavi, introduced a decent amount of Arabic vocabulary, which made New Persian a popular language with a famous literature which its predecessor had not been. The newly introduced Arabic words made New Persian more complete which fortified the Islamic Golden Age as well as Persian literature and poetry in the late Middle Ages.
This is ridiculous. Arabic loanwords made Persian literature famous and popular? I guess it's time to borrow English words now, surely this will make Persian literature popular and famous globally.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 03:32, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Panegyric 

message: This article doesnot mention several details like the following:
* Rate of Conversion to Islam was faster in Eastern Iran/Sogdian cities (Khorasan) than in Iran. Conversion was also faster in urbanized areas than in Rural areas. Sogdian cities (Khorasan) was a much urbanized area than main-land Iran. In the mountainous regions, conversion was even much later.
* At the time of Sassanids, the vast majority of main-land Iran's population belonged to rural areas.  The Sassanian agrarian economy was based on the 'qanat' system. 
* Some earlier scholar have speculated that taxation played a role in conversion to Islam, however, Scholars like Dennet, has shown that these concepts are not uniform, and, after the arrival of Arabs, the previous Sasanian tax was simply renamed to the new tax without any substantial changes, as in many cases treaties of submission merely stipulated a lump sum to be handed over to the Arabs without specifying how this was to be collected. Under this system, a rural convert to Islam could be taxed even more than his Zoroastrian neighbors. Bulliet has argued that social ostracism would have also pushed converts to move, so that urbanization proceeded with conversion in Iran. 
* There are many similar points that needs to be mentioned on this article.
My references are books of Richard Bulliet, Donnet, Levtzion's.. I dont have the sources or proper citation at my hand now, so i am not editing this page. Once I get my hands on the proper sources. I will modify this article to add more information. Thanks --Theotherguy1 (talk) 20:56, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article lacks major details 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Islamization of Iran. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070429144545/http://www.tau.ac.il/dayancenter/mel/lewis.html to http://www.tau.ac.il/dayancenter/mel/lewis.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified