Talk:Bagratid dynasties/Archive 1

Archive 1

Bagratids

I have moved this page from Bagrationi to Bagratids. All the references I've looked at use the form "Bagratid", which I suspect is closer to the local name. "Bagratid dynasty" did not seem like a good title, since the article covers both Georgian and Armenian Bagratids, including the history of the family before they were kings. Isomorphic 18:42, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Levzur, I explained why I moved the page. Why didn't you explain yourself before moving it back? More importantly, why did you revert back to a much earlier version of the page? I expanded the article with material from multiple academic sources. The Bagratids were not merely a Georgian dynasty; they were originally from Armenia; only one branch of the family became a Georgian dynasty. Isomorphic 22:05, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Levzur, if I'm wrong and you're right, the only reason to blank the talk page would be to spare me embarassment. For the record, I don't mind having the page remain, so quit blanking it. Blanking talk pages is not OK. Isomorphic 05:59, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Why did you remove the interwiki link to the Russian wikipedia? Isomorphic 04:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

It is a misinformation: Bagratids (Bagratuni) were rulers of Armenia. -- Levzur 2 May 2005

You keep saying that, and I still disagree. They were two parts of the same family. I researched this subject thoroughly. Doesn't it seem odd to you that everyone else thinks they are related? Once I've double-checked my research, I intend to restore something close to my earlier version of this article. You reverted the entire thing without even looking at most of the content, and eventually I will reintegrate all the work I did. Isomorphic 23:09, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

My dear friend, you not know wery important Georgian sources. the 1st representative of this family was Georgian Bagrationi (Guaram I Kurapalate in the 6th century). Bagratids were only Armenian Bagratunis. -- Levzur 2 May 2005

I have not read the Georgian chronicles. However, it occurs to me that just maybe those chronicles are incomplete or inaccurate, as many medieval sources are. Regardless, it is not productive for me to continue this discussion until I've had a chance to do more research. Isomorphic 01:21, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

NO! Old Georgian chronicles of "Kartlis Tskhovreba", chronicle of Sumbat Davitis dze (Bagrationi), Giorgi Merchules work "Grigol Khandztelis Tskhovreba" ("Life of Grigol Khandzteli") and many other important sources are not incomplete or inaccurate. Finally, YOU ARE NOT HISTORIAN, YOU ARE NOT SPECIALIST IN THE FIELD OF SOURCE STUDIES OF THE HISTORY OF GEORGIA. You not know outstanding works of Ivane Javakhishvili, Pavle Ingorokva, Dimitri Bakradze, Simon Janashia and other famous Georgian scientists. Unfortunately, your "research" is a work of diletante. Levzur 2 May 2005

Research

OK. Finally had a chance to do a little research. Here's some results:

The principle branch came to an end when, in 1045, the Byzantines perfidiously bullied King Gagik II into abdication in favour of the Emperor Constantine IX, granting him in compensation domains in Cappadocia and a palace at Constantinople, and then had him murdered. The younger line (founded by Smbat VII's brother Vasak) passed to Iberia after the events of 772 and there acquired the State of the Guaramid line of the royal house of the Mihranids-Chosroids; in 813, it acquired, with Ashot I, the hereditary office of Presiding Prince of Iberia, to which the Imperial Court attached the dignity of Curopalate; in 888, with Adarnase IV, it restored the Iberian Monarchy dormant from 580; and in 978, it inherited the Crown of Abasgia (Colchis or West Georgia); and in 1008 (with Bagrat III) it began the unification of all the Georgian lands, having assumed in 994 the title of King of Kings

-Studies in Christian Caucasian History, Cyril Toumanoff, p.203

And here's another quote:

The extinction of the Guaramids and the near-extinction of the Chosroids, the two royal dynasties, allowed a branch of the Armenian Bagratids to gather their inheritance.

-The Making of the Georgian Nation, Ronald Grigor Suny, p.29

Do you disagree with these scholars? I have not been able to find any text stating that the Armenian and Georgian Bagratids are not related. All of them acknowledge a family connection. Isomorphic 23:55, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I (and other Georgian historians) fully disagree with these scholars! The works of Cyril Toumanoff and Ronald Grigor Suny are very tendentious. Unfortunately, they ignored data of the Georgian historiography and the Georgian sources. The first representatives of this family were Georgians (Georgian Bagrationi's are descendants of Georgian Bivritiani's and Parnavazians). Armenian Bagratuni's are descendants of Georgian Bagrationi's from the old Georgian town Speri. Your work is not "research", it is a compilation without any research. I inform you also, that I'm descendant of the Imeretian branch of Bagrationi family and I research the history of this family since 1986. -- Levzur 14 May 2005

Yes, my work is compilation, not original research. That would be because Wikipedia IS a work of compilation, not a work of original research. We even have a policy to that effect: Wikipedia:No original research. If you have a problem with that, you can always quit writing for Wikipedia and spend more time writing for scholarly journals.

Furthermore, if there is a disagreement between Georgian historians and historians in other countries, the correct thing to do according to Wikipedia's NPOV policy is to explain that there is a disagreement, not to present only one side.

If you were aware of the dispute, you should have explained yourself. It's not my fault that you disagree with all of the scholarly research published in English. Isomorphic 03:34, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Incidentally, have you ever read Toumanoff or Suny, or do you call them "tendentious" because they disagree with you? Isomorphic 03:36, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Your last reasoning completely testify that you have not any notion about the Georgian historiography and Georgian historical sources. Unfortunately, "Wikipedia" infringes all rules and standards setting for the encyclopeadias, since any user (including dilettantes) can change its articles as he likes. It is a very wrong "tradition". All articles about the history of Georgia or history of Bagrationi royal dynasty should be based on the data of primary and secondary sources. Primary sources for the history of Georgia are Georgian historical sources: Chronicles of "Kartlis Tskhovreba", the chronicle of Sumbat davitis-dze (Bagrationi), the chronicle "Moktsevay Kartlisay", the work of Giorgi Merchule "The life of Grigol Khandzteli", etc. Secondary sources are the outstanding works of distinguished Georgian scholars. If somebody writes about the history of Georgia, first of all he must know this material! As regards my competence you may look at my CV (http://lurushadze.tripod.com). I'm a professional historian and I am well acquainted with both Toumanoff's and Suny's works and the works of many other historians... Levzur May 18 2005

You are not disagreeing with me; my opinion is irrelevant because I am not a historian, as you correctly point out. However, the men I cited are historians. Their opinions do matter. And please do not assume we are just discussing just two works; every book I have checked disagrees with you. You are disagreeing with a group of scholars who are your equals. In such a disagreement, Wikipedia needs to present both sides of the issue. Wikipedia is not an academic journal; it is inappropriate for it to take sides. Isomorphic 00:36, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

The men you cited are historians but they are fully disagreeing with the Georgian historiography and history of Georgia. Historians you cited gives very wrong interpretation of the Georgian sources. Yes, "Wikipedia" is not an academic journal but it is "encyclopedia". Articles of encyclopedias in the field of history should be based on the data of primary and secondary sources. Please, see links: Georgian history by Dr. Giorgi Gabeskiria (http://www.nplg.gov.ge/ic/library_e/gabeskiria) and "Georgia" (http://tbileli.o-f.com/history.htm), the article of Professor Ekvtime Takaishvili in the English scientific journal "GEORGICA" (London, v.1, No:1, 1935), the monograph of professor Kalistrate Salia "History of the Georgian people" (Paris, 1983, in English) and the monograph of Dr. Alexandre Manvelishvili "Histoire de la Georgie" (Paris, 1951). Levzur 29 May 2005

palmistry

This is absurd. What is the source for this claim? All non-Armenian/Georgian historians state that the family originated in Armenia and eventually branched out into Georgia. This should be disputed.

Yes, origins in Georgia! Unfortunately, your assertion is absurd. Main historical sources of the history of Bagrationi family are old Georgian sources and all Georgian sources state that this family originated in Georgia (in old Georgian town Speri, now terrirory of Turkey). The sources: Chronicle of Sumbat Davitis-dze (Bagrationi) about the Bagrationi's of Tao-Klarjeti; Chronicles of the collection of the old Georgian chronicles "Kartlis Tskhovreba"; The work of Giorgi Merchule "The life of Grigol Khandzteli"; Chronicle of Vakhushti Bagrationi, etc. Levzur June 9, 2005

I will mark the article as disputed. Levzur, I'm sure you're going to remove the disputed tag, so here's a preemptive warning: DON'T. It is written entirely from the perspective of Georgian historians, and does not acknowledge that other scholars disagree. Therefore I dispute it. Isomorphic 02:17, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Levzur... are you saying that there isn't a dispute? I dispute the current state of the article, and have disputed it for months. You can say I'm wrong, but you can't say there is no dispute. Isomorphic 01:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

This is government funded POV propaganda. Isn't it against the rules to remove the tag without consensus? Contact an administrator.--Eupator 15:34, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Full ignorance of the data of Georgian historical sources

Isomorphic ignored all data of very important Georgian historical sources (old chronicles of the collection "Kartlis Tskhovreba", chronicle of Sumbat Davitis dze (Bagrationi) about the history of Bagrationi House of Tao-Klarjeti, "Moktsevai Kartlisa", "Life of Grigol Khandzteli", chronicle of Vakhushti Bagrationi, etc.) about the history of Bagrationi Royal Dynasty of Georgia and data of scientific works of outstanding Georgian historians (Dimitri Bakradze, Ivane Javakhishvili, Pavle Ingorokva, Ekvtime Takaishvili, etc.). Unfortunately all corrections (edits) of Isomorphic are writings of dilletante. -- Levzur, 7 september 2005

I don't know who you're appealing to. The people on the English Wikipedia are mostly English-speakers. All the secondary sources in English say that you are wrong, and that the Bagratid dynasty in Georgia was an offshoot of the Armenian dynasty. Anyone else who looks into this is going to come to the same conclusion I did. I suggest that you get used to talking with me, unless you are willing to have the article remain protected indefinitely.

From your discussion, am I correct in inferring that you haven't read any of the Armenian sources on that period? Perhaps that's where Western historians are getting their history? There is, after all, a substantial Armenian literature. If so, the article should reflect all sources, not only the Georgian ones. I doubt that Western historians invented the idea that the Georgian Bagratids are related to the Armenian family. Isomorphic 06:06, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Of course they are an offshoot of the Armenian family, much like the Armenian Arsacunis were an offshoot of the Parthian Arsacids. To claim otherwise is ridiculous and an utterly shameless fabrication. Bagratunis had the hereditatry title of coronation of Armenian Kings since late antiquity and acquired their power during the Arab conquest as a result of their diplomatic skills and the decline of the warrior nobility, particularly the Mamikonians. --Eupator 14:23, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Here's Robert H. Hewsen's take. Isomorphic i'm not sure if it's allowed to print copyrighted material in the discussion forum, so if it's not remove it, but I think it's a good and neutral piece.

[The House of Bagratuni

The Bagratid family was not only the most important Armenian princely house but ultimately the most important in the whole of Caucasia. Probably a branch of the Orontids originally holding Bagrewand as their share of the royal domains, the Bagratids at first claimed descent from their tutelary deity, the sun god Angl-Tork', until their conversion to Christianity. Thereafter, they claimed descent from Hayk, the mythical progenitor of the Armenian people, through whose supposed great-grandfather, Thorgoma, grandson of Noah, they, like many of the other princely houses in Armenia, attempted to link themselves to the genealogy of nations in Genesis 10. Later, encountering some tempting parallels between certain Bagratid and Jewish names in Josephus, the Bagratids claimed a Hebrew descent, and still later, after assuming the crowns of both Armenia and Iberia, a royal descent from King David himself. Bagradates, commanding general of Tigranes II (95-56 B.C.) and his viceroy in Syria, is the earliest known member of the house, which served as coronant of Armenia, possessing the exclusive right to crown the king and on ceremonial occasions to place the crown upon the king's brow. The importance of the house can be determined by the one thousand cavalrymen it could supply to the king in time of war.

Somewhere along the way, the Bagratids lost Bagrewand, and, at the time of the conversion, we find them reigning in the Sper in the far northwest of Armenia, sitting at the castle of Bayberd in the broad valley of the river Voh, inhabited, at least to a certain extent, by the Georgian Canians or Cans. The Georgian branch of the Bagratuni family may be traced back as far as the second century A.D., when we hear of them holding the duchy of Ojrxe. Later, the Armenian Bagratids acquired the principality of Kogovit in central Armenia centered at the castle of Daruink', and the lands of Mokk' and Tmorik' in the extreme south of Armenia, the first centered at the town of Moks and the latter centered at the fortress of T'man.

Under Arab rule, twelve Bagratids held the position of presiding prince of Armenia, three of whom also bore the Byzantine title of kouropalatos. Briefly set back by the failure of the Mamikonid-led revolt of the Armenian princes against the Arabs in 771-772, the Bagratids gained power steadily in Armenia as the house of Mamikonean, previously so prominent, subsequently declined. Acquiring the Mamikonid principalities of Tarawn and southern Tayk ', the house soon got control of Bzunik' and Bagrevand, and also of the great principalities of Arsarunik' and Sirak, which they purchased from the declining house of Kamsarakan. In or about 885, the Bagratids, under Asot V, revived the dormant monarchy of Armenia, and three years later Adarnase IV of the Georgian branch of the house revived that of Iberia as well. From the Armenian branch, centered at the great city of Ani, there subsequently emerged the princes of Tarawn, the kings of Kars, both annexed by the Byzantine empire, and those of Lori-Albania and Kaxet'I, both conquered by Georgia.

In 1008, the Bagratids succeeded in uniting the whole of Georgia for the first time in its history, upon which, together with the senior Armenian branch, they formed a condominium that ruled the whole of Caucasia for over two hundred years. During this time, a series of brilliant rulers, culminating in Queen T'amar the Great, brought Georgia to the height of its glory. Originally ruling from K'ut'aisi, the Bagratids moved to Tp'ilisi after seizing it from its Arab emirs in 1122. The Bagratids, whether in Armenia or Georgia, showed themselves to be great patrons of literature and the arts, producing or sponsoring distinguished historians, raising remarkable churches and other buildings, and founding monasteries that became famous centers of learning.

The Mongol invasions in the mid-thirteenth century brought this period of efflorescence to an untimely end. In the late fifteenth century, after suffering the invasions of Timur and the Turkoman chieftain Uzun Hasan, Bagratid Georgia broke into three kingdoms: K'art'li (Central Georgia), Kaxet'I (Eastern Georgia), and Imeret'I (West Georgia), each ruled by a different branch of the family K'art'li and Kaxet'i merged in 1762 only to be annexed by Russia in 1801; Imeret'I was annexed in 1810. The Bagratonis, as they were known in Georgia, however, still survive; the aunt of the present heir was married to Grand Duke Vladimir, the claimant to the Russian throne until his death in 1992. In 1991, the newly independent Georgian Republic briefly considered a restoration of the Bagratid monarchy. In Armenia the Bagratids of Lori may be traced as the princes of Norberd, east of Lake Sevan, near where, in the eighteenth century, the meliks of Barsum claimed descent from them. One sometimes encounters Armenians calling themselves Pakradooni but without proof of such descent.]

Reprinted from "Armenia: A Historical Atlas" By Robert H. Hewsen

--Eupator 15:38, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Dear friends, primary sources of the history of Bagrationi Royal Dynasty of Georgia are Georgian historical sources of the VI-XVIII centuries. The Erismtavari (Grand Duke) of Kartli in 575-590 was a grandson of Vakhtang I Gorgasali (mother's line) Guaram I Bagrationi (Kurapalate). All Georgian Bagration's are descendants of Guaram. All the secondary sources in English are works of modern historians. Many outstanding works of Georgian historians are published in English and French ( works of Professor Kalistrate Salia (France), Dr. Alexander Manvelishvili (France-USA), Dr. Andro Gugushvili (UK) and others). In his "History of Armenia" Movses Khorenatsi (one of the Greatest Armenian historians of Middle Ages) traces the family origins of his sponsor Prince Sahak Bagratuni to non-Armenian roots. One of the greatest Armenian historians of the XX century, Full Member (Academician) of the Russian and Armenian Academies, Director of Ermitage, Professor Ioseb A. Orbeli wrote (based on the data of Armenian sources), that all BAgratids originated in Georgia (Southern Georgia, Tao-Klarjeti, now territory of Turkey). Please, see the site "The Bagrationi (Bagration) Dynasty" by Christopher Buyers ( http://4dw.net/royalark/Georgia/georgia.htm ). --Levzur, 9 September 2005

Unlike Mr. Urushadze's claim primary sources on Bagratids are NOT Georgian historical sources of the VI-XVIII centuries but much earlier Armenian sources. Guaram I the Guaramid the presiding prince/kuropalate of Iberia was NOT a Bagratid, one can only guess where Mr. Urushadze got that false assumption. The first Bagratid ruler of Georgia was Ashot I Bagratuni, kuropalate for the Emperor and the Caliph in 813-830. Notice his name was Ashot. Ashot is an Armenian name, so is Bagrat. In later centuries the name was appropriated by Georgians with a local Georgian form of Shota (for example the great Georgian writer Shota Rustaveli). Again, in later centuries the now fully Georgianized bagrations all use Georgian names, unlike their predecessors. A.E. Redgate (The Armenians) & M. Chahin (The Kingdom of Armenia) provide a good genealogy of the Bagratid clan in their respective research. Moses of Khorene's account of Bagratid's exotic jewish origins were merely an attempt to make the clan seem the oldest in the world as well as being Biblical by tracing it to King David. It was just an attempt to please his lord Isaac/Sahac Bagratuni. Btw the region of Tayk (Georgians call it Tao) has been a terriotory of Armenia for a lot longer than Georgia, it was an Armenian province virtually under all Armenian dynasties from Orontids to Arsacids. In the Middle Ages when for a period of the time the region was under Goergian rule as an Eastern Roman client, the population mainly consisted of Chalcedonian Armenians of Byzantine rite (they were called Hye-Horoms by non-Chalcedonian Armenians). --Eupator 04:32, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Dear Eupator: 1. Primary sources of history of the Bagrationi Royal Dynasty of Georgia are GEORGIAN SOURCES; 2. Unfortunately, you NOT KNOW works of Georgian historians about the first representatives of this family; 3. You not know data of Georgian sources about this question also; 4. Ashot I Bagrationi (not Bagratuni!) was founder of the Royal Dynasty in 809, he was not the first representative of this family. He was a King of Tao-Klarjeti (Southern Georgia) in 809-829; 5. Georgian Bagrationi's were from Speri (now - Ispiri, Territory of Turkey). They were descendants of Laz (Georgian) feudal family. -- Levzur, 10 September 2005

Let me clarify: you don't dispute that the Georgian and Armenian Bagratids are two branches of the same family. You just say that they were Georgians, not Armenians, originally. Am I correct? Isomorphic 04:21, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Historiography of Georgia

Obviously this is a very disputed topic recently, even though only three people thus far have participated. I am a world historian with an emphasis on Early Modern Europe. Georgia is far outside my scope except in a geopolitical and genealogical sense. It would be in those two terms that I write this. I am very interested in the interrelations of Georgian kings to other local kingdoms and empires, yet this dispute just gets me mad. There are thousands of problematic dynasties in the world; even the Russian royal family is not entirely confirmed. Yet this argument is not even about dynastic relations, it is about the origin. So the Bagrationis may be Armenian in origin instead of Georgian, what does it really matter? They became rulers in Georgia, that is certain. If another family became rulers in Armenia thereafter or before, then list them as a possible cadet branch of some sort. Also, remember that no country 1300 years ago was defined as it is today and borders shifted frequently. Perhaps what is now Georgia was once Armenia, or perhaps Georgia controlled Armenia at that time; they do always claim in their title "The Most High King [...], by the will of our Lord, King of the Abkhazis, Kartvelians, Ranians, Kakhetians and the Armenians." It seems to me that they always have claimed Armenia therefore making such a place of origin possible, yet still allowing them to claim Georgian descent as well. Primary sources are not always any more accurate than secondary sources and, in this case, perhaps some research from local, but not Georgian, primary sources may be necessary. Since the Empire of Trebizond was partially founded by a Georgian monarch, why doesn't someone look into their old records. Maybe the Byzantine Empire itself has something that could be of service. I, for one, would trust old Roman records of periphery dependencies much more than local ones because local records are usually biased in favour of the country in question. I am not discounting Georgian records, but I am not discounting other sources either. Just because something originated outside of Georgia does not mean it isn't evidence in favour of alternate scenarios. On the other hand, the most direct sources should come from the country in question because it was their history. I think a compromise must be made on this page. Edit the dynasties, clean up the page, then mention the conflict. I am just as interested in Georgian history as any historian should be, and this mess of an argument is over minor matters that should not disupt the portions of this history that can be unbiased. Note conjectures on both sides, and leave the proven information alone. For those seeking a fairly certain descent of the Georgian monarchy from Ashot onward, I too would recommend Christopher Buyers's page (The Royal Ark | http://4dw.net/royalark/Georgia/georgia.htm ). KuatofKDY 11:34, 9 September 2005 (PDT)

My complaint comes because I put a lot of work into this version of this article. I got my facts through academic secondary sources in English. I didn't use primary sources since I don't read Georgian or Armenian and since Wikipedia is a work of compilation and does not permit original research. Levzur simply reverted the entire version, which I think was an accurate and unbiased article. I'm not Armenian or Georgian, and am interested in the history of both countries. I don't have a stake in either one, but I want the articles to accurately reflect academic consensus.

Every book I've checked states that the Bagratids ("Bagrationi" is not the standard form in English) were originally part of an Armenian noble class, and that a branch moved to Georgia. That seems to be the consensus of Western scholars, both those who study Armenia and those who study Georgia. Those who dispute that consensus all seem to be Georgian. I would have no problem with a wording like "blah blah blah but Georgian historians dispute this". I have a major problem with the entire article reading from a purely Georgian perspective. Isomorphic 06:16, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Bagratids, Bagratuni, Bagrationi

Levzur, Ashot I was not a king. He was a hereditary prince/kouropalates under the Byzantine authority. Georgians called this principality Kartuelta Samtavro (Principality of the Georgians), and the Byzantines knew it as the Kouropalatate of Iberia. The title of the King of the Georgians was received by his descendant, Adarnase, in 888, but nominal dependence to the Byzantine Empire continued until the reign of David the Builder (1089-1125).

Since the English-speakers are hardly familiar with the Georgian sources I tried to summarize the information given in various works.

An idea about the Biblical origins of the dynasty was championed by both Moses of Khorene and Sumbat Davitis-dze (sometimes spelled as Sumbat David in the non-Georgian literature) in Armenia and Georgia, respectively. Moses is known to write his history by the request of Sahak Bagratuni, while Sumbat is thought to be a member of the family. The Biblical theory is defended by some modern authors but without any success.

As for Guaram, there is no common idea of his biography. Sumbat never claimed Guaram was the first Georgian Bagrationi. This information is added to his text by the 18th-century revisers (this version is known as Vakhtang’s Edition after King Vakhtang VI of Kartli who chaired a commission for the revision of old Georgian manuscripts). The medieval Georgian historian Juansher (11th century) asserts Guaram’s mother was a daughter of Vakhtang I Gorgasali, who was, unlike Levzur’s claim, from the Iberian/Kartlian branch of the Chosroid house (the last Pharnavazian king Farnadjom of Iberia was dethroned in ca 93 BC). Other Georgian sources say Guaram was installed as a prince by the Georgian nobles during their struggle against the Persian Empire, and the Byzantine court, warring with the Persians at that time, granted him a title of kouropalates. A surname Guaramid mentioned by Eupator is conventional and is most probably invented by Tourmanoff.

There is no consensus about the origins of the Bagrationi even in Georgia. Most historians (not all, however) agree they descended from a powerful clan from the region of Speri (Armenians call it Sper, around the present-day town of Ispir, Turkey) whence they branched out in Armenia and Georgia. The area was not purely Armenian or Georgian, but was obviously controlled by the Armenian nobility during the reign of Artaxias (2nd century BC), a foster-son of Smbat, the son of Biwrat Bagratuni, who fought a joint invasion by the Alans and Iberians. This account provided by Thomas Artsruni and Moses of Khorene agrees with that of Leonti Mroveli, one of the authors of the Georgian Chronicles. I don’t know any argument to defend an idea of the Lazi origin of Smbat, son of Biwrat, i.e. Sumbat Bivritiani of the Georgian Chronicles.

Some historians think a Georgian branch emerged in the 5th century AD (not in the 2nd century as stated by Robert H. Hewsen), and governed the province of Odzrkhe (also known as Odzrakhe or Ojrxe). Probably, the above-mentioned Guaram was the first to be installed as a hereditary prince of Iberia/Kartli, but it is very difficult to trace his ancestry. None of the following presiding princes of Iberia are mentioned as the members of the Bagrationi house before Ashot I.

Isomorphic Ashot was not an émigré from Armenia, however. Most probably his father, Adarnase, or grandfather, Vasak (son of the Armenian prince Ashot the Blind) came to settle in Georgia. They adopted Chalcedonian faith and quickly Georgianized.

I think BAGRATIDS should be a disambiguation page with the links to BAGRATUNI and BAGRATIONI. Kober 10 September 2005

Dear Isomorphic and Kober: 1. Ashot I the Great was a Grand Duke (Erismtavari) of Kartli in 786-809, in 809-826 he was a King of Tao-Klarjeti ("Kartuelta Samepo", not "Kartuelta Samtavro"). Ashot was a Kurapalate also. He was founder of ROYAL DYNASTY OF GEORGIAN BAGRATION'S in 809; 2. Sumbat Davitis Dze (not Sumbat!) wrote, that Guaram I Kurapalate was Bagrationi and all Georgian Bagrationi's are descendants of Guaram (Sumbat Davitis Dze, "Tskhovreba da Utskebay BagrationTa", edition of Dr. Goneli Arakhamia, Publishing House "Metsniereba", Tbilisi, 1990, p. 40; Academician Ekvtime Takaishvili, "Chronicle of Sumbat Davitis Dze about the Bagration's of Tao-Klarjeti, Tbilisi, 1949); 3. Greatest part of historical Georgian province Speri and town Speri were part of the Iberian Kingdom (Pavle Ingorokva, "Giorgi Merchule", Tbilisi, 1954, pp. 87-91). Only "Zemo Speri" was a part of the Armenian Kingdom of Arshakid's in the II century BC and the III-IV centuries AD (before the 387); 4. Juansher in his chronicle wrote, that Bivritiani's were Eristavs (Dukes) of province Odzrkhe. Anonime author of the "Life of Parnavaz" also wrote, that representatives of this family were rulers of Odzrkhe; 5. Academician Ioseb Orbeli wrote, that Armenian Bagratuni's were Armenian branch of Laz family of Bagratid's (Bagrationi) (I. Orbeli, "Razvalini Ani", Sankt-Petersburg, 1911, p. 8); 6. Ashot I was not descendant of Armenian Bagratuni's and his father or grandfather were not Chalcedonians. Grandfather of Ashot (father of Adarnase Bagrationi) since 730's lived in Klarjeti and he was from Speri ("Kartlis Tskhovreba", Edited by Prof. Simon Kaukhchishvili, vol. I, p. 243). Mother of Adarnase Bagrationi was descendant of Armenian Bagratuni's (Dr. Goneli Arakhamia, "Sumbat Davitis Dze and his Chronicle".- Sumbat Davitis Dze, "Tskhovreba da Utskhebay Bagrationta", Tbilisi, 1990, p. 29). -- Levzur, 11 September 2005

Solution

I support Kober's proposal above. That is to create a disambig page for Bagratids, with a link to Bagratunis and Bagrations. Kober has proven himself to be an intelligent, neutral editor with vast knowledge of Georgian and Armenian history. I think you're the right person to settle this, if Isomoprhic and KuatofKDY help you in the process that will be great. Any suggestions? It's up to you to decide if levzurs claims deserve a paragraph or two, as they are only held by some Georgians. If i'm not wrong Wiki policy allows mentioning an opposing view held by a minority. --Eupator 20:10, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy not only allows but requires the inclusion of minority viewpoints, as long as they are held by a significant minority. Isomorphic 04:21, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea. I would love to do the list of kings since I am already in the process of listing Imereti kings on the sister page. I would use the resources from the Royal Ark, listed above, to provide this list. --KuatofKDY 17:00, 14 September 2005 (PDT)

Dear friends, maybe you know history of Armenia and Bagratuni's, but unfortunately you do not know history of Georgia and the Georgian Bagrationi Dynasty. Imeretian Kingdom was founded in 1466, after destroying of the United Georgian Kingdom. By the way, I'm descendant of David II, Imeretian King in 1784-1789. History is the Science, it is not a toy!!! -- Levzur 14 September 2005

Dear Levzur, maybe I do and maybe I don't know much about Armenia or the Bagratuni's or Georgia for that matter, but that does not mean I cannot write a kings list. I am descended from Edward III of England on my mother's side and Edward Whalley on my father's. That does not give me any more right to post an article on Edward III or Edward Whalley. I am well aware of what the relation of Georgia and Imereti are and feel there is no problem with me writing a page listing its monarchs. It is not a toy for me to play with, it is a passion in which I am consumed. Go play with your toys while we stop bickering about who has rights to post what. If you are a true intellectual, you would have compromised long ago. --KuatofKDY 13:00, 15 September 2005 (PDT)

Why do you consider your ancestry relevant to the conversation? I'm a descendant of William Brewster, but that gives me no special insight into the Plymouth Colony. I suggest you seriously consider compromise solutions rather than continuing to tell us what we don't know or trying to impress us with your lineage. Isomorphic 04:21, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I have one issue with the proposed solution above. "Bagratuni" and "Bagrationi" do not appear to be the standard forms in English. Academic texts I've looked at use "Bagratids" for both branches of the family. Does anyone know what languages the various forms of the name represent? Isomorphic 04:55, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Eupator for compliments. Levzur, I’m Georgian and looked through many books of Georgian authors, but cannot find a consensus about the issue (you can even find a similar discussion at a Georgian forum http://forum.ge). I just cannot understand why you oppose the idea of mentioning all theories. We are working on an encyclopedia with a strong policy of neutrality and we should follow its rules. At last, the ethnic backgrounds of a ruling family are not so important. The main thing is a political and cultural orientation. Throughout the history, there have been only a few nations ruled by a dynasty of a local origin. I don’t think that the Swedes feel unhappy remembering a French father of the House of Bernadotte. Kober, 15 September 2005

Bagratuni is an Armenian form, and Bagrationi a Georgian one. Kober 15 September 2005

From what language is "Bagratid"? It doesn't sound like an English form; English-speakers would probably tack "-ian" or "-an" on to a dynastic name, so we'd have called it the "Bagratian dynasty". Isomorphic 06:05, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Bagratid

The suffix -id, or idae (in its Latinized form) comes from classical Greek, and means a family-the children and family. The earliest Georgian forms of the surname are Bagratoani, or Bagratovani. Kober, 15 September 2005

Compare Sassanid and Achaemenid for something similar... -- ChrisO 22:27, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

OK. Then, for whatever reason, it appears common in English sources to use the classical Greek form. Perhaps they do this to avoid looking biased in favor if either Armenia or Georgia? I don't know. Isomorphic 01:39, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

It is not neutrality, it is a crime!

Unfortunately, "Wikipedia" is not encyclopedia. Compromise in the true history and in science, ignorance of the facts and historical sources is unpermissible. For Kober: დიდად არ გამკობთ მტკიცება სიყალბისა, რომ ბაგრატიონები სომხური წარმოშობის არიან. ეს მხოლოდ იმაზე მეტყველებს, რომ თქვენ ზერელე, ზედაპირული წარმოდგენა გაქვთ თქვენი ქვეყნის და ბაგრატიონთა საგვარეულოს ისტორიაზე, თუმცა, კარგად იცნობთ ნაპოლეონის მოღვაწეობას და მის ეპოქას... -- Levzur, 15 September 2005

I think we've had this discussion before, particularly with regard to articles like Zviad Gamsakhurdia. You wish to contribute to Wikipedia from a Georgian nationalist point of view. I can see why a committed nationalist might find it objectionable for Georgia's ruling dynasty to be given an Armenian origin. However, the other contributors are entirely right when they say that the English-language sources do say this (look at Britannica, for instance). You might not like it, but we do have to ensure that this viewpoint is represented. -- ChrisO 22:54, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

The only thing that is a crime is the fabrication and distortion of history to satisfy ones nationalist fantasies.--Eupator 03:39, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Levzur, why have you replied me in Georgian that others could not read? I’m not mystifying the history of my own nation. I’m just trying to find compromise solutions to improve the quality of the article. That’s why I think that all viewpoints should be represented.

I don’t know why you feel depressed because of the foreign roots of the dynasty which ruled Georgia for over a millennium. Do you call this patriotism? Kober 16 September 2005

Dear Kober, I,m also not mystifying the history of Georgia and Georgian People, but I,m historian, specialist in the field of Source Studies of the History of Georgia and the Caucasus. You wrote, that "the ethnic backgrounds of a ruling family are not so important..." but, my dear friend, Georgian Bagrationi's are not descendants of Armenian Bagratuni's. You and your friends in "Wikipedia" fully ignored the important data of Georgian historical sources and data of outstanding Georgian historians (Ivane Javakhishvili, Simon Janashia, Giorgi Melikishvili, David Muskhelishvili and others). Yes, Kober, I'm patriot. During 12 years I and my friends fighted against Shevardnadze's regime in Georgia but not from abroad. Objectivism and impartial approach must be main purpose of any true historian. Finally, in Georgian again: როდესაც თავს უფლებას აძლევთ ასეთ მნიშვნელოვან თემაზე საჯაროდ აზრის გამოთქმისა, ცოტა მეტი სიფრთხილე გმართებთ და ცოტა უკეთ ცოდნა თქვენი ქვეყნის და ერის ისტორიისა. ე.წ. "ქართული საბჭოთა ენციკლოპედიის" სტატიების დაზუთხვა დიდი ვერაფერი ბედენაა... ცოტა უფრო უკეთ უნდა იცნობდეთ ისეთ ბუმბერაზ ისტორიკოსთა ნააზრევს, როგორიც იყო თუნდაც სულმნათი ივანე ჯავახიშვილი. აქ თქვენ ვერ გიშველით ვერც ნაპოლეონი და ვერც მისი ეპოქა. რა თქმა უნდა, ბევრი ქვეყნის ბევრი მმართველი დინასტია არ იყო ადგილობრივი წარმოშობისა, მაგრამ ბაგრატიონებთან დაკავშირებით სულ სხვა სიტუაციაა. ხომ არ დაგისვამთ თქვენი თავისთვის კითხვა: რატომ იკლავენ თავს სომხები, რომ დაამტკიცონ ბაგრატიონთა სომხური წარმომავლობა? ამ საკითხზე შეიძლება არის აზრთა სხვადასხვაობა საქართველოს გარეთ, მაგრამ ამ აზრთა ჭიდილს ბაგრატიონთა წარმოშობაზე ადგილი არ ჰქონია ქართულ ისტორიოგრაფიაში. უცხოეთში ამგვარი ვითარება განაპირობა სომხური დიასპორის აქტიურობამ, რის საშუალებასაც მოკლებულნი ვიყავით ქართველები. გირჩევთ, მეტი ყურადღებით გაეცნოთ ილია ჭავჭავაძის პუბლიცისტიკას! -- Levzur, 17 September 2005

Kober or Alexander Mikaberidze? Hmmm… I thought my last name was Koberidze. I don’t think that your political activities during the rule of Mr Shevardnazde are relevant to this discussion. Kober 17 September 2005

I find Levzur's political activities during the rule of Shevardnazde very important. Most because they prove beyond a reason of a doubt the biased nature of any article published on the Bagrationi's by Levzur. The nationality (a very loose term indeed since this time perior is long before nations could be defined) of the Bagrationi's and/or Bagratuni's is irrelevent to this article. While it would be nice to know where they came from, it is not essential. In regard to the argument on origin establishing patriotism, remember that the United Kingdom has been ruled by Saxons, Normans, Angevins, Welsh, Scottish, and finally Germans. No where in their monarchy has their been an actual Briton king since before the Anglo-Saxon Conquest. Yet their nationalism is as strong as ever. Perhaps since Georgia has experiences more outside conquests than Britain, Levzur deems the origin of the royal family as necessary. Origin does not establish authority, the ability to conquer and rule establish authority.

Actually this isn't too unusual. Most European ruling families have had foreign origins. The Spanish and Swedish kings are of French descent, the Belgian king is of German descent (as are the former kings of Greece and Bulgaria), the Dutch royal family is of French-German descent and the king of Norway is of Danish descent. -- ChrisO 10:23, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Also, maybe this little fact has evaded everyone's minds, as well: Bagrat-ioni, comes from the name Bagrat, referring to Bagrat I, Prince of Kartli (the grandfather of Adarnase II, the first king of post-Arab Georgia), and the appendage -ioni, which means family of. This means that Bagrationi is the family of Bagrat I. I find it difficult to associate the Armenian Bagratuni family with this family due to differing linguistic, not racial, reasons. This doesn't discount a possible connection but it does discourage it.

I have cleaned up the List of the Kings of Georgia page, erased the List of Kings of Iberia page, and created a kingdom of Imereti page. To compliment the arguments of all involved, I did not establish any place of origin for the Bagrationi lines. I suggest doing a similar thing on this page or scrapping the page altogether. Creating separate pages with Bagrationi descended monarchies may prove a more effective method of avoiding this conflict while still giving people what they seek when searching in the Georgian and Armenian pages. Let's work this out!

--Whaleyland 09:34, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Levzur, please do not modify other peoples' comments. It's considered rude on Wikipedia. I've reverted your edits. Isomorphic 04:18, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Unprotecting

It's been nearly three weeks. Unprotected. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 05:43, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Please disregard the incorrect edit summary for the unprotect. Obviously there has been and still is quite a lot of discussion during the protection period. I think it's been protected for long enough, though. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 05:51, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

I think it is rediculous and unbeneficial to try and revise Georgian history.

What Georgian nationalists? What has gamsakhurdia or Shevardnadze have in common with the issue of Bagrationis?

i would probably call it more as armenian nationalism (trying to prove that everything came from armenia). None of your sources are valid. Armenians have many times manipulated historical facts in their favour. Im not sure how it will benefit armenians to change the origins of bagrationi dynasty. As for qartlis chovreba, the book is used by many historians such as David Lang, The Georgians, 1966. It corespond with what lavzur is trying to say.

I did not see any historians here or relatively knowladgable people who can present us with strong point of view with the backing of valid sources. Only oppinions were raised and by pro armenian members here.

Georgian historical sources are mostly acceptable for many non georgian historians.

lavzur

Im not sure how beneficial for you it is to hold arguments with Armenian cheuvenists or with confused wana be historians here?

Georgians have tendancy of react very negatively to armenian revised historical events, i have seen it in the past. :)

I hope none of you will claim that kings of Abkhazia were also from Armenian decent.

Astamur Achba from Sukhumi, Abkhazia.

"Armenian chauvinists"? Here's a dose of hard reality: I'm an American. Most of us couldn't find Georgia or Armenia on a map. I'm better-read than most Americans and I happen to find the Caucasus interesting. In fact I'd like to visit the region when I get the chance. But as far as I'm concerned, they're still small far-off places inhabited by foreign people. I have no personal stake in your ethnic grudges, and I find it amusing that you would think I do. I only read, and try to reconcile what I read with what's in the article. As for the Abkhaz kings, of course I wouldn't claim they're Armenian, because they aren't. I haven't read up on them but I suppose that they're probably Abkhaz, meaning they're closer-related to the Adyghe than to the Georgians or Armenians. Isomorphic 05:04, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Wow an American interested in Caucasus. That’s nice, good job. However, you knowledge of Kings in Caucasus has shown that you have not yet fully studied the history of this region. Abkhazia never had "Adigey" Kings. Adigeys never had Kingdom or Kings. They were tribe nation living in North Caucasus and not in south-Abkhazia. Abkhazia had Georgian Kings mainly. Only when Abkhazia was under Ottomans, they lost the connection with the rest of Georgia.

Abkhazia in past was Lazica or Kolchis. An ancient Georgian kingdom which later became Abkhazeti under the unified Georgian kingdom (by King Bagrat III) in 10 century. Predominately, Abkhazia was populated by Mingrelian speaking people, however in Kodori by the Svans. Abkhazeti kingdom in middle ages stretched from modern city of Sochi to Kutaisi.

Well finally mother Russia invaded North Caucasus and they started to kill, rape, destroy every living being in the Vainakh areas and Adigeo-Circassia. Two main groups in Adigey, the Shapsugs and Apsuas were ethnically cleansed by Russian Tsarist forces due to their resistance against the invader. To flee Russian killing machine, they migrated to Abkhazia (at that time named Egrisi). Local Count Shervashidze (Count of Abkhazia) has sheltered these people. He appealed to Tzar for end of the slaughter of the Shapsugs and Apsuas. Tzar somehow ended the hunt.

Apsuas and Shapsugs have settled in Abkhazia and mixed with local Mingrelians.

I just mumbled all of this just in case, so next time you don’t have to show us your poor knowledge in Caucasian history and claim that Abkhazia had Adigey Kings. Abkhazia had only one independent king from Georgia. Levon I and that was due to Byzantine policy of splitting Georgian kingdom. However, Levon was Georgian ethnically.

As for Bagrationi connection with Armenians. I hope you will study and research more about this matter, so in future you may have a solid point.

Im very happy that Americans take interest in our region

"most of us couldn't find Georgia or Armenia on a map."

Both of them existed for many centuries on the maps. It is not our problem you did not receive proper history lessons in US.

"I have no personal stake in your ethnic grudges"

This is not Bosnia or Ruwanda. There are no ethnic grudges, just despotic empires trying to divide and rule these "wild Caucasians". In fact, Armenians and Georgians are very much connected culturally and historically. And they know it very well.

Definitely visit Georgia and Armenia. You will discover many things which you may not find in books.

All the best,

Astamur Achba

Yeah, I realize I'm not an expert or anything close. I have my areas of expertise, but Caucasian history is just a hobby. I just wanted to emphasize that I'm not an "Armenian chauvinist" - I have no reason to be biased. The fact is that Western scholars believe that the Bagratids were Armenian. It makes no diference to me, but that is what all the books say. Isomorphic 03:27, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Can you please tell me which books? I have mentioned David Langs book on Georgian History. He has done great research and used hundreds of reliable sources. His first book was published in 1935 in US. He was a specialist in Armenian history and later in Georgian.

How about Lord Wardrops book on Georgian history? An English lord who has studied Georgia for 20 years. He has amazing book.

Well how about David Bagrationi himself. A prince who wrote a book on Georgian History in Paris 1900s. I have his book and i can scan it and fax it to you or email. Bagrationi himself writes about the background of his great family. I think he can claim fairly due to fact that he has more sources on his family than anybody else.

All of the book mentioned above are just few examples which have contradicted your claim. In fact your claim is not western. It is more eastern (Russian, Armenian, etc) therefore biased due to their anti-Georgian tendencies. You did not show us any reliable sources. Can you please quote any sources which are not based on Armenian bagratunis but more in study of Bagrationi dynasty?

which western scholars or historians are you referring to?

History is not a hobby but a serious study, which needs an open mind and exploration of every side of its complexities.

All the best

Astamur Achba

Dear Astamur Achba, thank you very much for your fair and objective approach! With kind regards, Levzur (Dr. Levan Z. Urushadze), Tbilisi, October 13 2005

---

---

There was an attempt on this page to modify the information which linked the Armenian Bagratuns directly to the Bagrationi Dynasty of Georgia. The attempt to link the two families is incorrect historically as well as inaccurate at best since the Bagrationi Dynasty of Georgia emerged from the Tao-Klarjeti (Speri) region of Georgia which is located in present-day Turkey and had nothing to do with Armenia. This Dynasty (also known as the "Bagratid Dynasty" in the West) were the rulers of Iberia or the various kingdoms of Eastern Georgia (including Kartli and Kakheti). Eventually, the leaders of this dynasty also spread to the kingdoms of Western Georgia (i.e. Imereti Kingdom and their bloodline reaches as far west as Abkhazia by the 11th century). In the 11th century, the Bagrationi Dynasty became the ruling family of a unified Georgian State (by the 12th century Georgia did include and had jurisdiction over the majority of the Armenian territory). Therefore, the attempt to prove that this family had a direct link with the Armenian Bagratuns is unfounded at best. On another note, it is a well-known fact (not just for scholars) that Iberian-Caucasian peoples (including Georgians or Kartvelians, Abkhazians, Chechens, Balkars, Avars, and others all belong in the same cultural family of Caucasian Peoples) have no direct cultural link with Armenia (which belongs to the Indo-European family). The Georgian royal bloodlines are therefore mixed with their Abkhazian counterparts and it would be more accurate to say that the Bagrationi Dynasty is not a relative of an Armenian family but that this dynasty is a Georgian-Abkhazian Dynasty more than anything else. The next time someone tries to argue that the two families are linked together directly, please provide relevant and direct evidence that this is the case before providing inconclusive facts on this page. --Promethe -5 Nov, 2005

---

Dear Levzur and Astamur:),

I agree with you both. This is just an attempt (for one reason or another) to make the Georgian kings out to be the descendants of some Armenian royal line (the last representative of which died in the 11th century by the way:)). It is a fact that the Bagrationi Dynasty was not of Armenian descent, and several participants of this discussion ignore the Georgian historical accounts, which either they have no idea about or simply choose to ignore. This might come from a lack of information about the subject or from just having a strongly pro-Armenian perspective which advocates for some humorous reason that Georgian kings were from Armenia:). It would be analogous for us to say that some Armenian kings came from Georgia which is simply inaccurate and not true or to claim that the Celtiberian culture, a part of which comes from Ireland and France is of Georgian descent. The information being put forth on this discussion page therefore still advocates a one-sided perspective about the Georgian kings which is incorrect and tries to make this dynasty "Armenian" which as you know is not surprising:). --Promethe 5 Nov, 2005

Don't remove dispute tags

Yawn. Levzur, you can't remove dispute tags. As if you didn't already know that. Isomorphic 02:42, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I WILL REMOVE DISPUTE TAGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Levzur, 6 November 2005

No, actually you won't. Isomorphic 02:51, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

YES! I WILL REMOVE DISPUTE TAGS! YOU ARE A MISINFORMATOR AND DILLETANTE! Levzur, 6 November 2005

Levzur, GAGIMARJOS! am gverds me vakvirdebi exla xshirad da tu es gaunatlebeli da aperisti tluebi mizandasaxulad etsdebian rom is nishani kidev miamagron am web gverds, mets movxsni. --Promethe, Nov 6 2005

Levzur, memgoni es tipi tsarmoshobit somexia radgan ik sadats es tsxovrobs bevri tsarmoshobit somexia ogond taviant tsarmoshobas didad ar amxelen. --Promethe

Please Remove the Dispute Tags

Anyone who is competent in Georgian history and sees that for some reason the disputed tags are on the Bagrationi page, remove them if you get the chance, since the information provided by several people on this page is inaccurate and biased. What this amounts to is historical forgery on their part, trying to make the royal dynasty of Georgia to be Armenian. --Promethe 6 November 2005

Gamarjobat, Promethe! amdeni kretini da brikvi ertad shekrili jer ar minaxavs! rac sheexeba vinme "Isomorphic"-s, mec vpikrob, rom somexi unda ikos. - Levzur, 7 November 2005

eg memgoni prosta morfinistitsaa:) --Promethe

exla mec mivakari magaTi egret-wodebul samefo STamomavlebis gverdze zustad igive niSani

OK, enough

This is a stupid waste of everyone's time. I am requesting page protection again. Then I suggest someone open an RFA on Levzur. I'm tired of being bullied and ridiculed. He survived his last RFA only because he left Wikipedia for a while, and the matter was allowed to drop. That won't happen a second time. Isomorphic 04:56, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I second this motion and wish only for the protection to go into effect after the page is reverted to someone's OTHER than Levzur's. I would even be fine with the dispute-removal guy over good ol' Lev.

-Whaleyland 06:38, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I've blocked Levzur for violating the 3RR (yet again; he knows the rules). Page protection will not be necessary. If he tries to use anonymous IPs to get around the block, I'll block his entire range -- ChrisO 08:15, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

He did, so I have, and I've also added another 48 hours to his block for vandalising this talk page. -- ChrisO 00:33, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

It seems more likely to me that the talk page nonsense was the work of Promethe. Isomorphic 01:37, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

No, it was clearly Levzur. The anonymous IP address corresponds to his ISP, Rustavi2. The anon user also edited Levzur's user page and used Levzur's peculiar form of words in the edit summary ("It is not neutrality, it is a crime!"). Believe me, having been through all this before I've got quite familiar with the way he works... -- ChrisO 01:46, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Indeed you have dealt with him much more than I have, a position I don't envy. I defer. Isomorphic 05:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Protected

Protected page due to vandalism. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 13:09, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Apparently not, since he was able to hit it again... Anyhow, I've blocked Levzur again, for 48 hours this time. I progress to increase the blocks if he continues: 72 hours next time, then 96 the next, and so on. -- ChrisO 23:54, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

---

I just wanted to comment, after stumbling across this page and reading the entirety of the dispute, that I simply cannot understand Levzur's objections. It is clearly and unequivocally true, as Isomorphic has demonstrated, that there is a substantial number of scholars who believe the claim (that the dynasty had Armenian origins).

It doesn't matter whether or not this claim is actually true. For it to be included it is enough to show that there is a nontrivial number of people who believe it. --Saforrest 16:48, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

There is little doubt that the Bagratids were Armenian. Their original name was Bagratuni, a typical Armenian derivation. I'm afraid that Levzur is thoroughly brainwashed by President Ssaka-shvili's crusade against the Armenians living in the Southern regions of Georgia, where a Russian military base is situated. Armenia is known as the great champion of Russian influence in the Caucasus and is always keen to remind Georgians that it was Russia who saved them from total annihilation in the hands of the rapacious 18th-century Muslim powers - Ottoman Empire and Persia. Therefore everything Armenian is perceived as a threat by Georgian nationalists. --Ghirlandajo 16:56, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately Levzur has a long history of attempting to delete mentions of any point of view but his own. If you look at the edit history for Zviad Gamsakhurdia you'll see what I mean (the anonymous from 213.157.*.* are his). He only narrowly avoided being sanctioned by the Arbitration Committee after he disappeared for some months. -- ChrisO 22:41, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I got tired of waiting, I merged Isomorphic's version that was destroyed by Levzur to Ghirlandajo's version. Bagratids should redirect to this page instead of Bagratunis. The Bagratunis page should be turned into List of Bagratuni Kings. So there will be this Bagratids page (Bagrations and Bagratunis redirecting here) and the page will have links to both Lists. Let me know what do you think and what are your objections. --Eupator 03:45, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Guys, one should not get involved in this stupid dispute. Isomorphic is clearly of Armenian origin and unfortunately it is a well-known fact that the Armenians are notoriously famous for exaggerating everything that has a slightest relation to their history. If one conducts a thorough research IT MAY BECOME CLEAR THAT D'ARTAGNAN WAS ALSO ARMENIAN! And a person who wrote before me is a Russian or (at least) half-Armenian. So naturally biased! Gaumarjos Kartvelebs!!! Niko, 28 Jan. 2006

Isomorphic's ancestors were German and English, with possibly a smattering of other northern European ethnicities. He is biased against people who jump to conclusions. Isomorphic 08:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

CHange

The name of the title of Article should be changed to Bagratid, not Bagrationi or Bagratuni. Either specifically points to Armenian or Georgian, clearly this page deals with both Armenian and georgian branches, so should be named Bagratid ...

The prevalent form of name for this family, including both Georgian and Armenian branches, is "Bagration" in English. Google shows 10,500 hits for "Bagratid" (used as both noun and adjective), 501 hits for "Bagratids", 17,000 for "Bagrationi", 16,600 for "Bagratuni", but 90,900 for "Bagration". Nor, apparently, does Bagration suffer from being more identified with Georgian than Armenian in Western usage. And current members of the family, at least in the West, seem to use "Bagration". So I think "Bagration" should be the name of the article, "Bagratid" should be used as the adjectival form, with redirects from that and the other forms to "Bagration", including careful explanations of the historical and cultural contexts of each form in the article. Lethiere 04:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

That is false. All Westerm scholars refer to Bagratids primarily. Bagrations are only the junior Georgian branch and Bagratuni is the native name. Bagration returns more results because of Operation Bagration and nothing else. Current members of the family are descendants of the Georgian branch. The Armenian branch has been extinct for a while and their blood only survives within Western Euopean royal Houses. For example in the West, Arsacid is used instead of the Armenian Arshakunis (junior banch) or the Pahlavi form (senior branch) --Eupator 04:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

When the Google search is set to exclude "Operation Bagration" the word "Bagration" occurs 73,700 times, still far more often than any of the other forms combined. With regard to "Bagratids" being preferred among scholars and "Bagratuni" being the native name, Wikipedia's Naming Conventions for articles is clear; "This policy in a nutshell: Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." I think very few scholars or others are likely to think that "Bagration" excludes Armenian family members when redirected, since the article explicitly includes the Armenian dynasts and should include an explanation of the various versions of the names. Lethiere 04:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Lets also exclude Petr Bagration (Georgian-Russian) as well then shall we. Anyhow, I still disagree. Bagration exclusively refers to the junior Georgian branch of the clan. Bagratid refers to both. Bagratuni to the original Armenian one. For example look at Brittanica: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9011759

Since I was expressing the view that no version of the dynasty's name should be excluded, I don't understand the sarcastic suggestion to exclude "Petr". Although I addressed two of the points you raised (i.e. "Operation Bagration" does not explain why "Bagration" is so much more common than all the other versions combined, and that Wikipedia policy states that the most commonly used term in English should be the main consideration in decisions to name an article), your references have convinced me that "Bagration" is usually not used to refer to the Armenian branch or its members. Therefore, I stand corrected, and now agree with you that "Bagratids" should be the article's title. Lethiere 00:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Nobody agrees with the current version of the article as soon as we start working on it to make it better a certain levzur and his numerous clones, uses sockpuppets to revert etc. We initially wanted Bagratid to be a general page directing users to either a separate Bagratuni page or a separate Bagration page.--Eupator 16:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Great :) I don't suppose you would like to work on this article? Considering that you are a neutral editor who wasn't involved in the warfare that resulted in the current mess of an article.--Eupator 01:02, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

"Bagratuni" is not a native name and Georgian "Bagrationi's" (or "Bagrations")are not representatives of the "junior branch". It is misinformation and falsification of history. Native name of this family is BAGRATIONI. Family of Armenian Bagratuni's was a junior branch. Guaram (Gurgen) I Bagrationi was the 1st Erismtavari (Grand Duke) of Kartli in 575-590. The founder of the dynasty of Armenian Bagratuni's - Ashot I was a ruler of Armenia since 885. Dr. Levan Z. Urushadze, Academician of the International Academy for the Promotion of Historical Studies (IAPHS) and part time ... 7 February 2006

WORK ON CHANGES

I would be willing to work on the Armenian section if someone prepares them and seperates them. Either side can express whatever opinion it wants in regards to this dynasties, ending all this silliness.

As for "Dr. Levan's" comments, yes coming from a non impartial source, and how do we eve know you are a Dr?

Please, see my CV: http://lurushadze.tripod.com .

Yes, Levan we heard your crazy theories before. This is an Encyclopedia not a circus.--Eupator 02:34, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

{Dr} Levan, nothing impressive about your credentianls, not to mention unprofessional and narrow minded provincial manner with you have presented yourself here. Really, a page linking Bagratids to the Georgian and Armenian branches is a fine idea. There is contreversy over the topic, and individuals who hold opinions in either direction would be able to constructively express their ideas.

I really do press for a renaming to Bagratid and seperating into Armenian and Georgian sides of the story. Again, I would be more than welcome to input for the Armenian section.

YES, THIS IS A CIRCUS, NOT AN ENCYCLOPEDIA! UNFORTUNATELY, YOU ARE DILETTANTS AND FALSIFICATORS OF HISTORY!

It is a joke ...

"Lezvo" it is a joke considering that all sources on this page are from opinionated georgian ones. I will make some decent additions to Armenian sections if I have time. Cheers!

I have absolute right to prosecute you for your immoral and insulting expressions ("crazy theory", "unprofessional and narrow minded provincial manner", "sockpuppet"...). Well, but you have not any idea on my activity and professionalism (what obviously you are missing). All my opinions are based on the data of the historical sources and scientific literature. While you roughly violate the elementary standards of civil relations, I break of any polemic with you. Dr. Levan Z. Urushadze, 9 February 2006

You just violated Wikipedia:No legal threats. Don't do it again. --Khoikhoi 00:53, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Lezvur, you have right to prosecute me? Gee, I really did not think I was on trial here, but I will get more serious if I am being accused of homocide .... I will try to address some of your points here:

immoral and insulting expressions ("crazy theory", "unprofessional and narrow minded provincial manner", "sockpuppet"...).

These expressions reflect the image of you that has been build up by your postings and deletions of any Armenian opinions posted. You really are provinical: outside your little world, there are millions who have different opinions than you, no? You may be right, and you may be wrong, but it does not mean you should force others as you have here. I think with a division of Bagratids to seperate pages, each side can express their own opinion, no matter how disagreeable it is by the other side. A simple concept of freedom of expresion of thought, no?

As for you claiming to be a "Dr." - and you spend your time trying to "prosecute" people you do not even know and argue against them online? Real doctors and reaserchers do better things then try to exert their nationalistic points on others on the internet ...

And if you are indeed basing your opinions on so called hgistorical resources, remember everything cited in the article is from Georgian sources a far cry from neutral sources, therefore, I argue them to be unreliable. Really, with use of Armenian sources, I can say anything from Tbilisi to Moscow may be considered Armenanian. Proffesionalism and reasearch lies in looking at many points of view and assesing them, not cutting and pasting what you like from where you want, not really reaserch, but spread of Georgian propaganda.

Dear "RESEARCHER"! You and all other PROARMENIAN users ignore all Georgian sources and works of Georgian historians. You posted only Armenian opinions. This is a "FREEDOM OF EXPRESION"?! You wrote about "nationalistic points" and "Georgian propaganda". Really you just are Armenian nationalist-chauvinists and falsificators of history. You roughly violate all basic principles of historism. Georgian historical sources ("Kartlis Tskhovreba", "Moktsevai Kartlisai", Chronicle of Sumbat Davitis dze, "History" of Vakhushti Bagrationi, etc.) are primary sources of history of the Royal Dynasty of Georgian Bagrationi's. Of course, my opinions are based also on the data of other (NONGEORGIAN) sources. You wrote also about my "little world" without knowledge of this world, without knowledge of the Georgian culture and history. Yes, this is not an Encyclopedia... Good bye.

This is your 1000th good bye. Stick to your word please.

Georgian sources Bagratids five centuries after Armenians, right around the time when the Armenian Bagratunis take lands in Georgia and form the Georgian branch of what's known later as Bagrationis. --Eupator 23:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Dear Eupator, you are supporter of the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh?.. On my opinion Mr. Eupator supports also restoration of so-called "GREAT ARMENIAN EMPIRE"!

That's a superb deduction levzur. Bravo! Everyone needs to buy one of those 500$ Georgian phd's.--Eupator 00:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

500$ Georgian phd's

Eupator - Roaring with Laughter !!! It reminds me of one of those pay to become a minster services! I had a Jewish classmate walk around with a reverend's card, we always enjoyed a laugh about that! Only thing I disagree with is the price of the PHD, with people like this guy, they must be a lot cheaper!

And Lezvur, you will never say goodbye, but will keep on blabbing like a little child!

::Dear "RESEARCHER"! You and all other PROARMENIAN users ignore all Georgian sources and works of Georgian historians. You posted only Armenian opinions. This is a "FREEDOM OF EXPRESION"?! You wrote about "nationalistic points" and "Georgian propaganda". Really you just are Armenian nationalist-chauvinists and falsificators of history. You roughly violate all basic principles of historism. Georgian historical sources ("Kartlis Tskhovreba", "Moktsevai Kartlisai", Chronicle of Sumbat Davitis dze, "History" of Vakhushti Bagrationi, etc.) are primary sources of history of the Royal Dynasty of Georgian Bagrationi's. Of course, my opinions are based also on the data of other (NONGEORGIAN) sources. You wrote also about my "little world" without knowledge of this world, without knowledge of the Georgian culture and history.

Lezvur, definetly not a PHD, you cannot even read what other people post. I did not disagree or argue any points of history, I simply stated the fact that they are strongly disputed, contreversy over this, and both sides should be heard. I did not even state one fact that is "falsified" because I did not state any facts in the first place. I did not state a single opinion, only that both sides should be able to express themselves equally! Once more, every source you have cited is Georgian. You can march to your own tune, but do not expect everyone else to follow you!

Anyway, Eupator, what can we do to segregate these two articles so as I can work on the an the Armenian portion? I will cite proper resources too.

You really need to register a username before you start working. I mean we need to know it's you. It's hard to tell users by ip's alone. Editors must be able to recognize you with ease. I would also like input from other users. Mainly a Georgian user Kober who is responsible for most Georgia related articles on Wikipedia and he knows history well unlike a certain professor. Isomorphic, if you're reading we need you as well. This page should not just redirect to Bagratunis and Bagrations. It should have some text as well obviously. Another problem is that Bagratunis now redirects here, that needs to be fixed and this moved to Bagratids. I'm not sure how to do that though.--Eupator 01:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Eupator, i would register, but most of my free time is spend on the zeno.ru oriental coins database, so, you know ...

eupator

hi eupator, I noticed you reverted changes. If you are fine with me wrking on the page, please make proper formatting and I will send the appropriate sources and such. best wishes

Hello, thankd for understanding. Do you mind registering a username? It's really much easier to remember editors and keep track of your work. Post your references here along with any large chnages you want to make. Thanks.--Eupator 17:26, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I am not much into registering, just annoyed at the propaganda bombs here, and wanted to do a little something.

Given the history of this article. Nothing should be added without neutral references. I have them, and I will work on it when I get home from work. Feel free to add anything by citing your sources.--Eupator 17:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thanks Eupator jan, I loved your page on Philaretos Varazhnuni!

Additions to Armenian Bagratids

Hi Eupator, COuld not resist, I made some additions ot Armenian Bagraids, and cited sources.

Please react on this

The fact is that Bagrationi is distinctly Georgian, and Bagratuni is distinctly Armenian. I think that nobody argues this.

Consequentely the only appropriate title for an article which deals both with Bagrationi and Bagratuni would be nothing but Bagratids, and by no means Bagrationi or Bagratuni. For Bagratids is a scientific term coined exactly for reference to Armenian Bagratuni and/or Georgian Bagrationi when their common origin is assumed and/or is meant to be emphesized.

However there is really little what Armenian Bagratuni and Georgian Bagrationi share except their probable common origin. Armenian Bagratuni became extinct by 12 AD, while by this time Bagrationi in Georgia only begin to gain the political importance which this dynasty has had in the country in the following centauries.

Consequentely I do not know what would the problem be with separate articles about Bagrationi and Bagratuni, and maybe also one additional article with the title Bagratids. In fact this seems to be the only logical thing. Tamokk 08:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

mistakes, POVs, claims

There are many mistakes and POVs in this article. Firstly, there should be separated article about Bagrationi and Bagratunis. They are two separate families with separate history and origins (please refer to proper sources). Bagrationi originated from Georgian the region of Tao-Klarjeti from the ancient Georgian nobility. There are many sources where this can be validated. Claiming that Ashot was from Armenia is a POV. To avoid any confusion the author should separate the article. He should also look into W.E.B. Allen’s and Lang’s works about Bagrationi dynasty and use proper sources.

You are presenting a POV, the site is full of inaccuracies but not the ones you're claiming. Ashot, Bagrat etc. are all Armenian names with Indo-European roots to start with. Later Georgians changed these names, like Ashot turned into Shota etc. Can't find anything in goofle about the authors you mention? Who's Lang? Lang Timur (Tamerlane) ?--Eupator 17:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Eupator, I would suggest you not feed the troll. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 17:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Girla im not a troll (refrain from personal attacks Andrey). Eupator, Ashot didn’t convert into Shota.Its typical Armenian bias. I heared similar ridiculous arguments, ex: Shota Rustaveli was Armenian Ashot Rustavlian. Its all Armenian Biases and POVs. You have pro Armenian POv because you are Armenian and therefore your argument is not valid in terms of NOPV. Whose Lang? Its best knows western historian of Georgia and Armenia, David Marshall Lang. Read, study, research more, not only what armenians are dreaming about and writing in their books. regards Noxchi Borz 18:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Did you hear it from a Georgian taxi driver? lol Show me just ONE Armenian source that claims Rustaveli was Armenian, you wont find any! So stop trolling. Never heard of him; therefore, he is far from best or well known.--Eupator 18:31, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

never heard of him? thats all i need to know about your education level. Thanks. Noxchi Borz 19:16, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

p.s I guess King Solomon Bagrationi and David the Builder were Jews (based on their names). Actually there are more Armenian cab drivers in Georgia than Georgian LOL Noxchi Borz 19:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

You're not very bright are you. Cease trolling and stick to the discussion, otherwise go indulge in your fantasies elsewhere.--Eupator 19:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Do not make more personal attacks. Its your last warning. Noxchi Borz 19:32, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I have the striking suspicion that you're a sockpuppet. Lets request an ipcheck shall we.--Eupator 19:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

go ahead. You got warning for personal attacks plus 3RR. I will contact administrator. Thanks Noxchi Borz 19:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Eupator, please don't be so sarcastic. I don't think that any Georgian, even a taxi driver, will say Rustaveli was Armenian, but I did hear it from Armenians (not at an official level, of course). Anyway, this is not relevant to the present discussion.

I hesitated to make any significant contribution to the article because I had no time and energy to engage in edit wars. Splitting the article is a good idea and it's high time to put an end to this fruitless discussion. Some sources say the Georgian Bagrationi were an offshoot of the Armenian Bagratuni, but some say they were a separate family (and not only Georgian authors, BTW, e.g., the above-mentioned Lang (results from google), also Brosset). As for me, it's quite possible that the Bagrationi could have Armenian origins. However, it isn't our aim and competence to judge which claim is true. I don't see what would the problem be with mentioning all existing theories.

Noxchi knows about Georgia much more than any other non-Georgian wikipedian. You cannot call him a troll. Thanks, Kober 20:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Hearsay, does not amount to fact. Anyhow, I don't mind mentioning an alternative Georgian nationalist theory.

Can you provide me with lines from Lang and Brosset and their citations? PS: The noxchi still seems like a troll to me despite your assurances. What is he a chechen or something? Edit: I do see why you like him after reviewing his edits on Abkhazia :) --Eupator 20:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

"An alternative Georgian nationalist theory" from the 10th century??? Huh...

The theory claiming that the Georgian Bagratids are a separate dynasty comes from the 10th century chronicles by Sumbat who attempted to link the reigning royal house directly to the alleged Biblical ancestors. Prince Vakhushti (18th century) also subscribed to that point of view. The info provided by Brosset and Lang are based on these records. The Georgian Bagratids might well have been derived from the Armenian dynasty, but you cannot call the alternative theory nationalistic just beacuse you don't like it. Kober 21:31, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Precisely! That's not good enough. By then there was already a well established Georgian branch for over two centuries. That's merely a Georgian pov. The Armenian Arshakunis rejected any connection to Persians in the 2nd century and beyond that doesn't mean that they weren't seeded by Parthian Arsacids. I don't like many things about Georgia which i'm not going to talk about here obviously, the fact that an alternative theory is mereley a Goergian pov is simple logic. Not to mention that the first Armenian source (Khorenatsi) is written in the 5th century.--Eupator 22:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Listen Eupator, im warning you, stop making personal attacks and calling me a troll. You will be banned for 24 hours. Kober there is no point wasting time with Armenian chauvinist who uses only personal attacks as his arguments. My Abkhazia edits are in respect with NPOV, something you don’t know about Eupator.

I will contact the admin if you will not seas to make personal attacks and call names. Noxchi Borz 22:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Be quiet chechen. Your threats are are only slightly amusing...--Eupator 22:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Im not Chechen :) Im Canadian. Its a nick name like yours Eupator. Can you communicate with people normally without calling them trolls and goblins? or you are unable to hold a civilized conversation? honestly? :) Noxchi Borz 22:42, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

p.s Noxchi Borz means Wolf in Vainakh (both Galgay and Noxcho) if you were woundering.How to say wolf in armenian? i knew it before but forgot. :( Noxchi Borz 22:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

T'es un Quebeois.. t'as habit ou la la sti?--Eupator 22:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Oui, Je suis Quebecois, J'habite a Toronto. bonne journee. Noxchi Borz 22:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Si te's Quebecios... ben moi j'suis Chinoise tabarnac. Ca ces't ben domage, j'aimerias avoir la chance de te parlez face a face, crisse de ...--Eupator 22:59, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Not only you insult but use profanities. Sure you can be Chinese and even Azerbaijani. I don’t care. I will contact admin for personal attacks and insults you are using against the people in Wiki. Noxchi Borz 23:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

So much for you being a Quebecer or a native Francophone :) Go play your games elsewhere, тут не детски сад.--Eupator 23:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Im not Francophone, I was born in Montreal. Im English Canadian. If your in Montreal let me know ill be there this summer. And i dont speak Russian. Noxchi Borz 00:15, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

You added on your userpage that you are a native Francophone wiseguy. Anyhow, you just made your 4th revert thus breaking the 3RR. BYE BYE!--Eupator 00:22, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Eh its very sad to see the true face of Armenian nationalism. Its very ugly. If you read english (which you can't) it is written that i have ancestry. My mother is French Canadian. Get lost. Bye bye Noxchi Borz 00:29, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Cet utilisateur a pour langue maternelle le français. Means that your native language is French :)--Eupator 00:35, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Eupator, I'm not interested in what you don't like about Georgia and why, and I'm not going to discuss it here as well.

As such, nationalism emerged in the early 19th century, and it's too ridiculous to consider the early medieval accounts nationalistic POV. Sumbat developed his version to please the ruling dynasty to which he purportedly belonged. Last month we had a few messages back and forth with an Armenian user Hetoum, and decided to cooperate on controversial Armenian-Georgian topics. Unfortunately, he has gone offline since then. Please be so kind to refrain from personal attacks in the future, stick to the subject and give me a clear answer to what I've suggested above, i.e.,

1. separating the articles

2. creating a disambig page about the Bagratids

3. creating a section in the article about the Georgian Bagratids which will list all versions pertaining to their genealogy.

Best wishes, Kober 11:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

kober, I already said i'm not going to discuss it here so the redundancy wasn't necessary.

Evidently using myths and fables to advance a particular pov today is nationalism.

In addition, I don't appreciate your condenscending tone and your accusations.

If you're going to pick and choose what to answer, you can kiss cooperation goodbye.

Kind regards, --Eupator 14:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not accusing anyone of anything. It's you who accuse Georgians of fascism. Please be so kind to change that xenophobic phrase at WP:AM#Noticeboard.

I guess from the previous discussion most users support the idea of splitting the article in two. So I'm actually going to do this in the near future. Hope this would be the best solution out there. Regards, Kober 15:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

When your chechen proxy made the accusation or the mentally challenged and now banned levzur you didn't seem to think it was xenophobic.

I was the one who proposed for the first time to split the articles so obviously I support it, but I don't want two articles claiming different things about the same thing like in the case with several Armenian/Georgian related articles now (granted mostly as a result of levzurs many edits).--Eupator 15:13, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Dear Kober, I made a mistake by enrolling in polemics with this user, its pointless. He made personal attacks and I contributed back at him also. These are not people who will cooperate or communicate in civilized manner. Just ignore them completely and continue your wonderful contributions to Wiki. It’s difficult to fight ultra-nationalism and in most cases it’s even futile to do so. Lets concentrate on interesting sources and documents which I mentioned to you. I will soon forward you Sir Olivers work on Kartvelian studies. You have real background in History of Caucasus region and we can work together to make our articles more informative and in accordance with academic rules, so the reader will get a fair information. All the best my friend! Luis or “Chechen” J Noxchi Borz 16:48, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

You are just a cry baby. You have personal issues with me and anyone with a half a brain can see that you started hurling insults by attacking my education (regarding some pseudo historian). Not very mature. I'd pass you some kleenex to wipe your tears but I much rather ignore your kind from now on.--Eupator 18:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Georgian Kingdoms

Eupator please before you react read my opinion. I included those Kingdoms (aphkhazeti, imereti, kakheti, kartli) which were part of United Georgia in the brackets. If you say only Georgia, you must have those regions under her. However, if you say Georgian Kingdoms (which was made up from Georgian kingdoms of Abkhazia, Tao-Klarjeti, Kakheti, Kartli and Imereti) you may separate them. Please lets communicate in friendly manner. Im open to your suggestions and learn from you. Thanks Noxchi Borz 15:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

No objection.--Eupator 15:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Eupator, lets co-operate please. I really want to learn about Armenia and as maximum as possible :) Thanks. Noxchi Borz 15:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Eupator, should we include Kars, Taron, Tayk under Armenia (like i did with Georgia)? Noxchi Borz 15:39, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I guess its wise to remain consistent however we also need to add Syunik and Lori. There was also the Kingdom of Vaspurakan but it was ruled by the Artsrunis who frequently intermarried with Bagratunis. Tayk should stay separate as parts of it were under Georgian rule and sometimes all of it.--Eupator 17:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Eupator, can you please add more Kingdoms which were controlled by Armenian Bagratids. I belive the list is not complete. Let me know. Noxchi Borz 17:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Georgian Question

Can anyone tell me please what is going on here? I am Georgian and I am completely shocked by this article. If you believe that way why don't you have a separate article for Bagratids. But, by no means Bagrations are same as Bagratids. This is unacceptable. Armenians don't even have any source for their information and they don't even have a COA of their Bagratid family. I respect Armenian peole and their history, but they should not interfere in our history. Please don't interfere in our history!!!!!! THERE SHOULD BE AN ARTICE TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT BAGRATIONIS!!!!!!!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.240.93.52 (talk • contribs)/Sosomk (talk • contribs) 03:31, 11 May 2006.

Please register and join the discussion. You may site your sources (primary and secondary) and support your claims based on them. We welcome your suggestions and would be happy if you would join us at Wikipedia. Thanks. Noxchi Borz 17:30, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Separation

If Eupator and other Armenian users will agree, I think it’s wise to separate these articles. Both families have great history and need more info on them. I don’t think it’s wise to merge them into one article. This will definitely create controversy and conflict which I think Wiki should avoid. Both great families existed separately for centuries. If we have them separate, we can add and edit freely concentrating only on one family, therefore avoiding overlapping with the other. I think there should be a vote on that. I’m sure both Armenians and Georgians will find compromise. Both are brotherly nations with very rich heritage and history. Thanks Noxchi Borz 17:30, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Again, I was the first one here to propose a separation; however, if the end result is going to be having two articles each claiming different and opposing things on the same topic than that's just a preposterous solution.

Georgian attempts to link Bagratids to Guaram I are just as ridiculous as Khorentasi attempting to connect Bagratids to Biblical roots and King David in order to appease marzpan Sahak Bagratuni in 481. So these two things should be mentioned in their proper context not as actual facts.--Eupator 18:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The Georgian Bagrationi article is actually going to have all versions represented without claiming which is true and which is false. It will (ideally) list all theories explaining which is more accepted and which is not. Only I'll need more time to better organize the article. Kober 18:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

See that's not what I had in mind in regards to separation. The idea was to have a main page with early history and background info and two links leading to the Georgian and Armenian Bagratid monarchies. a) Origin page with info until the foundation of both Kingdoms b) Armenian Bagratuni monarchy page c) Georgian Bagrationi monarchy. This way there would not be two different pages with the same information. --Eupator 19:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

What about three articles?

OK, I stumbled into this because I saw Soso's new page Bagrationi Dynasty at Special:Newpages and became surprised, as I took it for granted that an article on the Bagratids already existed. Looking at the closer, I realized that it presented an entirely Georgian POV, completely neglecting anything else. I discussed the issue with Soso and explained that articles should be separated based on topic, but not based on point of view, as the NPOV policy needs to be upheld in all articles. Wikipedia doesn't work through balancing two POVs in two different articles.

My suggestion is to do it this way. Three articles:

• Origin of the Bagratid dynasty - this article can discuss the early history and the various Armenian or Georgian medieval or later attempts to explain the origin the family and hypotheses on the relationship between the Armenian and Georgian branches etc. All well-referenced in every detail, using the cite.php (<ref></ref>) system, which makes sources easy to check.
• Bagratid dynasty (Armenia) - on the Armenian Bagratids. Keep to the better attested periods and leave anything controversial in the genealogy or origins to the "Origin" article.
• Bagratid dynasty (Georgia) - same thing for the Georgian dynasty

If the Armenian and Georgian editors and anybody else who is interested can agree to keep the controversy to the "Origin" article, we can at least avoid having controversial and contradictory explanations being introduced into the other articles. Is this a good solution?

As I pointed out to Soso, I'm Swedish and really don't have any stake in this. I would just like to see consistently well-sourced scholary historical articles here rather than various pseudohistorical articles upholding various nationalist POVs. There is far too much nationalist POV crap in various nooks and corners of Wikipedia. Try to avoid that. Just present the various views as factually as possible.

I realize that these articles are difficult to write without using sources in Armenian or Georgian, but please try to find as many secondary sources in English, French, or German (or even Russian) as possible, as it will make it easier for those of us who don't know either Georgian or Armenian to check the references. up+land 19:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

This has always been my solution. Just see above. One origin article. Two monarchy articles. --Eupator 19:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with our Swedish friend. It’s a good proposition and a fair one. But let’s avoid labelling people as nationalists and pseudo-historians just because they mentioned Georgian sources (are all Swedish sources nationalistic or pseudo-historic?). I agree, we must place greater importance on western scholars which I have mentioned before (WED Allen, David Marshall Lang, Dr. Andrew Ansersen, Sir Oliver Wardrop, etc).

How about if we all vote for the proposition by Mr Uppland? Noxchi Borz 20:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

p.s Also the name of Georgian article should be Bagrationi Dynasty. Georgians call their dynasty Bagrationi and not Bagratid. In Georgian bagrationta dinastia.

Then we would have Bagratid, Bagratuni and Bagrationi. A litle confusing for those who don't know anything about the topic. Since this is an English Encyclopedia we need to use the English term. Bagrationi Dynasty could redirect to Bagratid Dynasty (Georgia) and Bagratuni Dynasty can redirect to Bagratid Dynasty (Armenia).--Eupator 20:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes you are correct Eupator but all western scholars only mention the name of Bagrationi and i have never seen them using Bagratid Dynasty of Georgia. Examples of them are plenty, Allen, Lang, Andersen, Wardlop, Janckins, Hewitt, etc. Noxchi Borz 20:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

You have to look better. Usually the Bagrationi name is used for the post 11th century Georgian Bagratids. Not to mention that both Britannica and Encarta use Bagratids.--Eupator 20:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Eupator. I will research that. Noxchi Borz 21:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

From Soso

Hi First of all, I am sorry that I made an emotional post on the page. The reason that I created separate page for Bagrationis (Georgian dynasty) is that Bagrationis were Georgian Kings, so I think that there should be separate article about Georgian Bagrtionis and Armenian Bagrtids. So that people can find out more about the monarchs of Georgia and Armenia. Many royal families in Europe are related to one another, so since Georgia and Armenia are different countries they should have diferent articles about their monarchs. However, I am not saying that Bagrationis and Bagratids do not have connections and I have nothings against Armenian culture, because it is quite unique and they have a great history. My point is that Bagrationis and Bagratids should have different encyclopedia articles.
Sincerely
Soso

I absolutely agree with you. I myself, and many other users, have requested seperate articles many times before. And I do not know why is it that seperate pages do not yet exist. Is somebody realy against this? If yes I have not heard yet upon what reasons.

Armenian and Georgian Bagratids are distinct. That they are related by the supposed common ancestry does not mean that they do not deserve separate articles. Also this does not mean that a general article about Bagratid dynasty should not exist. But again separate articles about each of them should exist.

I am a new user and not familiar with the system yet, but cannot we make a poll about this? Tamokk 08:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with Tamokk, we should definately have poll/voting about this. Common origins does not mean they have same history. They are indeed very distinct families. Noxchi Borz 15:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi , I just wanted let you know that I have created an artcle about Georgian Bagrationis already "Bagrationi Dynasty" and I want to link "Bagrationi" link to the proper article. However, somebody keeps changing it to "Bagratid Dynasties" link. I think there should be a link "Bagratid" link, which goes to "Bagratid Dynasties" and "Bagrationi" link should go to "Bagrationi Dynasty". That's why I was blocked for 24 hours because I changed it three times in a row. I am going to change it and if somebody disagrees with that, please discuss it first before you decide to link it to improper article. Noxchi Borz, thanks for your ideas and support. I am a Georgian student in Virginia and I was very impressed by your page. It's totally awsome.
Regards
Soso

Consensus

Ok. As we actually seem to have reached some sort of consensus here, I’ll proceed to end this mess. Here’s my what-to-do list:

• Origin of the Bagratid dynasties
• Bagratid Dynasties (disambig)
• Bagratuni, redirected from Bagratid dynasty of Armenia
• Bagrationi, redirected from Bagratid dynasty of Georgia

I hope to receive positive input and co-operation from you all. Thanks, Kober 06:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I just glanced through it quickly and my first impressions are very positive. Congratulations with a job well done. Lets hope it doesn't pop up t0o often on watchlists.--Eupator 14:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good Kober, but Bagrationi should remain a dab page for now. As it stands, not all the pages that link there are about the Georgian dynasty. Someone needs to go through them all. —Khoikhoi 02:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey Khoi, Bagrationi does refers to the dynasty of Georgia, and Bagratuni to that of Armenia. These two are the native forms of their common Hellenized name Bagratids. I've checked all the pages that link to Bagrationi and all redirects are correct. What we need is to make disambiguations in the articles which link to Bagratids. But there is no problem with Bagrationi. So I'm reverting back to my version, because the curerent disambig page can cause a great confusion. Thanks, Kober 03:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks a lot for the info. As Noxchi always says, "before editing, gather more sources". Heh. —Khoikhoi 04:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys, thanks for your comments. Cheers, Kober 09:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I've just wasted a lot of time getting confused by all the redirects as I was trying to comment here (about something irrelevant caused by the confusion), so I'll list the redirects and final pages :

• Bagratid dynasty, Bagratid dynasty, Bagratid Dynasties, Bagratids, Bagratid and The Bagratid Dynasty all redirect to Bagratid dynasties, the disambiguation page.
• Bagratuni and Bagratid dynasty of Armenia redirect to Bagratuni Dynasty
• Bagrationi, Bagrationi dinasty, Bagrationi dynasty and Bagratid dynasty of Georgia redirect to Bagrationi Dynasty

Equendil Talk 17:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)