Talk:Sahl Smbatean

message: I have rephrased the sentence accordingly suites the article. --83.181.229.63 21:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dowsett does not say that Sahl was Albanian.Hajji Piruz 21:51, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Vartan, you're not supposed to remove dispute tags from a page. The explanation to insertion is provided, following the sock of User:Fadix, you're intentionally getting rid of CJF Dowsett reference to the fact that Khachen was Albanian principality and intentionally inserting POV that it was Armenian. The article is currently in a POV and OR condition. Hence the tags shall remain here until the successful conclusion to dispute is reached on the talk page. Now reinsert the tag back, otherwise, I will reporting your removal of tags to the attention of ArbCom. Atabek 17:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenian origin 

message: An editor should not add dispute tags without making a good faith effort to explain why he thinks they are needed.  Other editors should not remove the tags without making a good faith effort to address the issues raised (denying that an issue exists is not sufficient).  When in doubt, ask for comment or a third opinion. Thatcher131 01:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute 

message: Dowsett says that by 835, Sahl had revolted against the Arabs and was ruler of Arran.  (Apologies, this is copied from a pdf file and I have not cleaned it up)
According to the Arab historians Sahl, although he had been an ally of
Babek (Baban), was prevailed upon by Afsin to deliver up the fleeing rebel
who had taken refuge with him.6 For this service Sahl received, according to
Mas'udi, a royal robe, a crown, and a horse, and was exempted from tribute,
all of which amounts to an official investiture as ruler of Albania.8 The exemption
from tribute must have been no more than official acceptance of the status quo, 
for already in 835, when Muhammad b. Suleymiin al-'Azdi al-Samarqandi
arrived to govern Armenia, Sahl had revolted against the Arabs and made
himself master of Arran ; this fact is discreetly ignored by the caliph in 837.''
The Armenian historian Vardan speaks only of a monetary reward : ' Sahl,
son of Smbat, seizes Baban and receives from Ap'sin gifts of a thousand kiir
of silver and yet another hundred thousand '.2 hlovs&' statement that Sahl
received sovereignty over Armenia, Georgia, and Albania is, of course, a gross
exaggeration. Sahl was not even sole ruler of Albania, and T'ovma Arcruni
calls him only ' lord of Sak'B '.3 Among the prisoners captured by Bo&a
al-Kabir in 854 John Catholicos and T'ovma Arcruni mention three Albanian
princes : Atrnerseh, lord of XaCBn,6 Sahl son of Smbat, lord of Sak'~a, nd Esay
Abu Mu&, lord of K't'is in Arqax.7 After the murder of the Mihrakan prince
Varaz Trdat in 821/2,s the last vestige of political unity disappeared from
Albania ; his murderer Nerseh, son of P'ilippz, although he is said to have
stolen all the possessions of Varaz-Trdat, does not appear to have played any
subsequent role in the destiny of Albania. The Albanian princes seem to
have ruled independently, although Atrnerseh of XaCEn was probably the
most powerful ;
Comments? Thatcher131 03:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here Sahl is called an "Albanian prince". He was not the only ruler in Albania, as other rulers are mentioned too, but he was one of the most powerful (if not the most powerful) leaders in Albania. I personally see it as a reference to his ethnicity, but since there could be other opinions too, I proposed to simply mention in the article that Dowsett referred to him as an “Albanian prince”, whatever that could mean. --Grandmaster 04:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was actually trying to move on from the rather tired issue of Sahl's roots and note that the article needs expansion as some of Sahl's achievements have not been included yet. Thatcher131 05:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article in its current form says little about this person, other than Sahl was originally ruler of Shaki, captured Babek and handed him over to the Arabs. It needs expansion. Grandmaster 05:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ruler of Arran 

message: The article claims that Afshin, the Persian prince of Oshrusana, was a Turk. This is wrong. Afshin (as the name suggests) was an Iranian Muslim general who served the Abbasid caliph. He is known as the great traitor who betryed Babak and the Persian nationalist movement, by fighting Babak and freeing some 7000 Arab prisoners.
Afshin's army consisted of a large number of Turkish slave soldiers, but he himself was an Iranian. His father was among the powerful Iranian Muslim advisors of the Abasids, just like the famous Barmakid family.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.83.128.189 (talk) 18:49:32, August 19, 2007 (UTC) 
::Tajik, Afshin was a Turk, the reference at the end of that sentence says that. Atabek 02:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Atabek, there good amount of sources that Afshin was Iranian.  Besides Bosworth in Iranica, here are some:
  I am not going to get involved on the Sahl issue here, but there is no reason to bring Afshin to the debate. --alidoostzadeh 19:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ali, I don't see how Bosworth would be an expert on Afshin as well. But in general al-Istakhri, J. Saint Martin, relying on Armenian historians, as well as Britannica . Moreover, Afshin originated from Ferghana, which is modern-day Uzbekistan, homeland of Timur, and can hardly be called "Iranian" region. In future, please, discuss your edits and wait for reply before editing the article. Thanks. Atabek 19:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Atabek at the time of Afshin, Ferghana was Soghdian speaking.  Uzbeks came much later.  Bosworth is a top expert on medieval Islamic history.  I think both views should simply be presented in the Afshin article.  I brought 4 google links.  I agree some classical sources call him a Turk as well, but at the same time, many people from Central Asia were called a Turk in some Arabic sources. (this is discussed in several different JSTOR articles) even if they were not.  I think simply there is no reason to argue on Afshin in this page as Sahl ibn Smbat is enough for people who are involved (for example Ibn Hawqal says he is the ruler of Armenia and there is another source calling him ruler of Albania and there is sufficient number of discussions here without getting Afshin involved).  The case of Sahl article might have resemblence to Afshin.  But there should be a better approach than this article,  I think the comments on the origin of Afshin should be removed from here and the Afshin page modified to reflect both views.  I am not ruling out Afshin was Turkic or Iranic.  But to put one view on this page is not encyclopedic.  Thanks. --alidoostzadeh 19:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Ali, I agree that we should put multiple views. And I can put more Google links to 3 sources I provided above, claiming he was a Turk. But then I don't see why the page on Afshin claims him as only Iranian general without mentioning other references to Turkish origin. Also claiming that in 8-9th century, Ferghana, in the heart of Central Asia, had no Turks, while they suddenly appeared in 10th century as Seljuks and invaded Iran from the east, does not seem quite plausible. Atabek 20:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Seljuqs were not from Ferghana, they were from the region around the Aral sea (ca. 1000 km further north), and they did not invade Iran, they invaded the northern parts of Khorasan before being forced to accept various coalitions within Iran (see the excellent article in Encyclopaedia of Islam). "Turks invading Iran" is misleading and gives the impression that the Oghuz Turks, as an ethnic unit, invaded and conquered Iran. This is simply not true. The migration of Turkic peoples into Persia was a slow process that had not much to do with invasions, and it was quite different from the later Mongol invasion which resulted in the massacre of many millions: Iranians and Turks. Native entities never regarded the Seljuqs as invaders or enemies of Islam. It was quite the opposite: Iranian nobles supported the Seljuq cause, because for the first time after the Arab conquest, the Iranian lands were united under one political power which also incorporated native Iranians and native Iranian traditions. Khorasanian nobles were appointed to the position of veziers, military commanders, advisors, etc etc etc. Your conclusion that "Afshin was a Turk because he was from Ferghana" is wrong anyway, because we know from historical sources, especially from the works of al-Biruni, that Central Asia was predominantly Iranian. The number of Turkic tribes was very small, and many of them had been converted to Islam by the zealous jihad of the Samanids. Samanid sources claim that 200,000 Turks ("50,000 tents") were forcefully converted to Islam, and those Turks were mostly residants of what is now the southern Qazaq steppes (see Ibn Athir, volume 8, pg. 396). Later on, the Ghaznavids claimed that a total number of some 70,000 Oghuz were moving from the north into Ghaznavid territory (see Tarikh-i Masudi; Turko-Mongol influences in Central Asia, in R.L. Canfield (ed.), Turko-Persia in historical perspective, Cambridge 1991, 58 and n. 10). These are very realistic numbers, because, as Canfield puts it, "the ways of life possible in the steppes meant that there were natural and environmental limitations on the numbers of the nomads". We are talking about the 10th and 11th centuries, and the entire number of Turks recorded by Muslim historians was not more than some 250,000. Even if we double the number to 500,000 Turks in Central Asia (men, women, and children), then this is still nothing compared to the sedentary and established Central Asian cities, each of them having a population of more than 50,000 at that time (Samarqand, Bukhara, Tus, Nishapur, Balkh, Herat, etc etc etc). The Turks were not a threat to the cultural and social environment of back then, because their number was small and they resided - as nomads - outside the centers of society. That's why the Turks rapidly adopted the way of life of the settled population and not vice versa. Your entire conclusion is wrong. And keeping in mind that Afshin lived in the 9th century, it is very unlikely that he was a Turk. His name, his birthplace, the name of his father, his title, and the name of his family point to an Iranian origin. At that time, the number of Turks in Muslim armies was still small. This changed a century later, when the Samanids actively recruited Turks into their army, of whom some later became important generals and founders of dynasties. (Sebüktegin, for example, or Qutb ud-Din Aybak) 82.83.158.97 23:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay lets move the discussion of Afshin to the talk page of Afshin.  I think if some sources call him a Turk then we should mention both viewpoint although Iranian seems more natural in this case (given the letter of Afshin's brother to Kuhyar).  I am going to move this discussion of Afshin into the Afshin page.  People, please continute from there.  --alidoostzadeh 00:02, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afshin 

message: Ok, I got a pretty concrete source calling him Armenian. If a turkish book called him Armenian and we had several to start with, this is a closed and shut case.Hetoum I 19:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The contreversy 

message: The link to Balk in the following phrase goes to the infraction in baseball. I didn't find a correct link so I leave that to others.
"...committed atrocities against the revolted Armenians of Balk, Gegharkunik and Lachin (the three cantons of Syunik)..." WithGLEE (talk) 15:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Balk