Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Karnal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

references

[edit]

125.168.210.67 (talk) 12:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC) a google search given as a reference for this article, I just find that less than useful. Surely references are meant to be to something in particular rather than pointing out there in the internet somewhere.?[reply]

Besides territorial integrity, two alternative concepts of sovereignty to replace the crumbling dynastic ideal can be discerned in Nadir Shah’s negotiations with the Ottomans in the 1730s. Nadir proposed equal relations based, first, on Ottoman recognition of the legitimacy of Twelver Shiism as a fifth school of orthodox Islamic law. And second, he proposed something akin to an ethnic or national concept - equal relations based on Nadir Shah’s identity as a member of the noble Turkmen family of peoples.”

Howard, D. (2017). A History of the Ottoman Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.192 Raziel1975S (talk) 10:01, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The next effective ruler of Iran was Nadir Khan (r. 1729-47), a Redhead tribesman. Having seized power, he had a serious legitimacy problem,- he ‘tried to revive the pre-Safavid Turkman tribal principles of legitimacy’, and to justify himself on the grounds of descent from Timur and his manifest military exploits. At a Mongol-style assembly (1736), Iranian chiefs ‘elected our august majesty to kingship and sovereignty which are the hereditary prerogatives of the noble Turkman tribe’ (in Arjomand 1984: 221).

Black, Antony, The History of Islamic Political Thought: From the Prophet to the Present (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2001), pp.236 Raziel1975S (talk) 10:01, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmad’s chroniclers also adapted and reconfigured various legitimating devices from Nader’s ruling ideology. This included labeling the Afghans (and in particularly the Dorrani family) as the “il-e jalil-e Afghan” or “il-e jalil-e Dorrani” in imitation of the phrase “il-e jalil-e Torkman” used by Nader’s court historians.

Axworthy, M.. (2018). Crisis, collapse, militarism and civil war: The History And Historiography of 18th century Iran. pp. 65 Raziel1975S (talk) 10:02, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This essay examines Nader Shah Afshar’s attempts to legitimize his rule by dint of his Turkic background. Over the course of his rise to power and reign, Nader consistently argued that his Afshar and Turkman affiliations granted him the right to rule over Iranian territory as an equal to his Ottoman, Mughal, and Central Asian contemporaries. Aided by his chief secretary and court historian, Mīrzā Mahdī Astarābādī, Nader’s assertions paralleled those found in popular narratives about the history of Oghuz Turks in Islamic lands. This element of Nader’s political identity is often overlooked by historians because it did not outlive the brief Afsharid period, but it demonstrates how the Safavid collapse led to the circulation of dynamic new claims to Iranian and Islamic political power.

Karamustafa, A. (2022). The Hero of “the Noble Afshar People”: Reconsidering Nader Shah’s Claims to Lineage and Legitimacy. Iranian Studies, 1-15 Raziel1975S (talk) 10:02, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Safevi Devletinin Kuruluşunda Anadolu Türkmenlerinin çok Büyük katkısı olmuştur ve O Anadolu Türkleri İrana göçmüştür. Nadir Şahın Ailesinin de Anadoludan geldiği düşünülmekte.


Mansour Sefatgol, Şakhtar-ı Nehad ve Endişe-i Dini der Asr-ı Safevi s.72

the Afshar Tribe moved out of Turkmenistan in 1228 and settled in Anatolia

The Secret History of Iran, p.163 Raziel1975S (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nader Shah Afshar, who became Shah of Iran in 1736, was from the tribe of Afshar. Afshars in Iran remains a largely nomadic group, with tribes in central Anatolia, northern Iran, and Azerbaijan.

The History of White People: Caucasus - America, p. 70 Raziel1975S (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Persian??? =

[edit]

The scholastic sources utilised in the article, (Axworthy, Lockhart, Willem Floor to name a few), all clearly and unambiguously identify one side as Persian. POV and academic sources are not the same. The scholarship on both Nader Shah as well as the period in general talks of Nader's dynasty as a Persian one. The article therefore, should be in line with modern academic consensus on the issue. Parsa1993 (talk) 12:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Les Afsharid est une dynastie Turkoman d'où sont nom qui fait référence aux Afsharid Nader Shah n'est pas un perse l'armée Afsharid son armée est Turk et Kurd en majorité Raziel1975S (talk) 19:54, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The next effective ruler of Iran was Nadir Khan (r. 1729-47), a Redhead tribesman. Having seized power, he had a serious legitimacy problem,- he ‘tried to revive the pre-Safavid Turkman tribal principles of legitimacy’, and to justify himself on the grounds of descent from Timur and his manifest military exploits. At a Mongol-style assembly (1736), Iranian chiefs ‘elected our august majesty to kingship and sovereignty which are the hereditary prerogatives of the noble Turkman tribe’ (in Arjomand 1984: 221).

Black, Antony, The History of Islamic Political Thought: From the Prophet to the Present (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2001), pp.236 Raziel1975S (talk) 09:50, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Besides territorial integrity, two alternative concepts of sovereignty to replace the crumbling dynastic ideal can be discerned in Nadir Shah’s negotiations with the Ottomans in the 1730s. Nadir proposed equal relations based, first, on Ottoman recognition of the legitimacy of Twelver Shiism as a fifth school of orthodox Islamic law. And second, he proposed something akin to an ethnic or national concept - equal relations based on Nadir Shah’s identity as a member of the noble Turkmen family of peoples.”

Howard, D. (2017). A History of the Ottoman Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.192 Raziel1975S (talk) 09:51, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmad’s chroniclers also adapted and reconfigured various legitimating devices from Nader’s ruling ideology. This included labeling the Afghans (and in particularly the Dorrani family) as the “il-e jalil-e Afghan” or “il-e jalil-e Dorrani” in imitation of the phrase “il-e jalil-e Torkman” used by Nader’s court historians.

Axworthy, M.. (2018). Crisis, collapse, militarism and civil war: The History And Historiography of 18th century Iran. pp. 65 Raziel1975S (talk) 09:52, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This essay examines Nader Shah Afshar’s attempts to legitimize his rule by dint of his Turkic background. Over the course of his rise to power and reign, Nader consistently argued that his Afshar and Turkman affiliations granted him the right to rule over Iranian territory as an equal to his Ottoman, Mughal, and Central Asian contemporaries. Aided by his chief secretary and court historian, Mīrzā Mahdī Astarābādī, Nader’s assertions paralleled those found in popular narratives about the history of Oghuz Turks in Islamic lands. This element of Nader’s political identity is often overlooked by historians because it did not outlive the brief Afsharid period, but it demonstrates how the Safavid collapse led to the circulation of dynamic new claims to Iranian and Islamic political power.

Karamustafa, A. (2022). The Hero of “the Noble Afshar People”: Reconsidering Nader Shah’s Claims to Lineage and Legitimacy. Iranian Studies, 1-15 Raziel1975S (talk) 09:53, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Safevi Devletinin Kuruluşunda Anadolu Türkmenlerinin çok Büyük katkısı olmuştur ve O Anadolu Türkleri İrana göçmüştür. Nadir Şahın Ailesinin de Anadoludan geldiği düşünülmekte.


Mansour Sefatgol, Şakhtar-ı Nehad ve Endişe-i Dini der Asr-ı Safevi s.72

the Afshar Tribe moved out of Turkmenistan in 1228 and settled in Anatolia

The Secret History of Iran, p.163 Raziel1975S (talk) 09:54, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nader Shah Afshar, who became Shah of Iran in 1736, was from the tribe of Afshar. Afshars in Iran remains a largely nomadic group, with tribes in central Anatolia, northern Iran, and Azerbaijan.

The History of White People: Caucasus - America, p. 70 Raziel1975S (talk) 09:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With these sources I have proven from A plus B that Nader Shah is a Turkman it is not because his name is Shah of Iran that he is Persian the Afsharid army was Türkmen and Türkman and Kurds so it is the victories of Nader Shah you can't say it's a Persian victory because it's spitting on history Afsharid and Afshar history is a türk story Nader Shah is part of a noble Türkmen tribe so Nader Shah victories are not a Persian victory but Afsharid Raziel1975S (talk) 09:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article

[edit]

The contents of this article should be divided. Nader's Casus Beli needs to be in the article about the campaigns, the section about the battle of khyber pass is brief enough to be in the campaign article, and the sacking of Delhi should be it's own article. Though the sacking is an aftermath of the battle, theres alot of detail to it, and it makes half of this article. Perhaps the battle of Karnal article can briefly talk about the sacking near the end, but the great detail of the sacking of delhi should be in its own article. Persis2001 (talk) 00:51, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Karnal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:51, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mosque

[edit]

The image captioned as the Roshan od-Dowleh Mosque in Delhi is actually the Jameh Masjid in Delhi. The Roshan od Dowleh Mosque is much smaller, and is on the Chandni Chowk (street). It is often called the Sunehri Mosque. 80.17.36.33 (talk) 14:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Afsharid dynasty

[edit]

Nader Shah's Empire should be linked to the Afsharid dynasty, not to the modern nation of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Vajra Raja (talk) 02:47, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, Nader's Empire was Persia (Iran), not the Afsharid dynasty. I would suggest you to self-revert or provide a reliable source for your edit instead of edit warring. Also, the fact that you mention the Islamic Republic of Iran shows that you have just no idea of what you're talking about.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 07:02, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Vajra Raja: Just to make it clear, see this article of Encyclopedia Britannica :
  • "Nādir Shāh, also spelled Nāder Shāh, original name Nadr Qolī Beg, also called Ṭahmāsp Qolī Khan, (born Oct. 22, 1688, Kobhān, Ṣafavid Iran—died June 1747, Fatḥābād), Iranian ruler and conqueror who created an Iranian empire that stretched from the Indus River to the Caucasus Mountains."
and that one :
  • "Battle of Karnal, (Feb. 24, 1739). The Battle of Karnal in 1739 was the supreme triumph of Nadir Shah, the great Persian king and military commander. At Karnal, in northern India, the Persians comprehensively crushed the Mughal emperor Muhammad Shah’s larger army, going on to sack their capital, Delhi."
As you can see, Nader is described as being the ruler of Persia (or, Iran, since these two words can be used), not the king of the Afsharid dynasty. I would suggest you to desist from labelling as "disruptive" the edits of other contributors, especially since you clearly don't have enough knowledge about Iran and Persian history.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 07:27, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nader Shah was the first ruler of the Afsharid dynasty, this is well documented. https://books.google.com/books?id=4eJtAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA258&dq=Afsharid+dynasty&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj2wLDS3rTfAhXrYN8KHdhgD0QQ6AEILTAC#v=onepage&q=Afsharid%20dynasty&f=false

Your links lead to ambiguous pages of Iran and not to the Afsharid dynasty. All other wiki pages involving Naders Wars link to the Afsharid dynasty.

Nobody is denying that Nader was Iranian. So stop denying Iranian history by rewriting the Afsharid dynasty out of it. Nader was the Shah of Iran and Persians, so were the Safavid dynasty he succeeded and the Qajar dynasty that came after the Afsharid dynasty. For historical purposes they have to be differentiated. Vajra Raja (talk) 01:15, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nader was the Shah of Persia, not the Shah of the Afsharid dynasty (you might take a look at this article), thus the article should mention it. Your above link points to a book that is not readable. Also, i'm not rewriting Iranian history, the difference between you and me is that i know what i'm talking about and i provided you sources just above (BTW, Encyclopedia Britannica is not ambiguous pages of Iran, again, you just don't know what you're talking about ...).
You want more sources supporting that Nader ruled Persia ? fine :
  • Axworthy (the best source about Nader) : "Nader Shah, ruler of Persia from 1736 to 1747, embodied ruthless ambition, energy, military brilliance, cynicism and cruelty"

Will change it to Afsharid dynasty of Persia, i think this is a more consensual version. Think we're done here.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 09:51, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Persia (Iran) had several dynasties through history. one of them was Afsharid dynasty and Nader Shah was its first ruler. it was preceded by Safavid dynasty and succeeded by Zand dynasty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aminabzz (talk • contribs) 19:01, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Afsharid dynasty comes from the Afshar tribe from Turkestan who settled in Azerbaijan then who were moved to Khorasan by Shah Abbas is a Türkman tribe who created a great empire in İran his army was composed of Türkman and Türkmen and Kurd a l At the time the Ottomans recognized that the Afsharid was a Türk empire which dominated Iran (source:Howard,D.(2017).A History of the Ottoman Empire Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.pp.192) Raziel1975S (talk) 10:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

and I can cite several sources that Nader Shah gather the Türkman and Türkmen tribes he never proclaimed king of Persia but Iran make the difference between the two examples the first Ottoman Sultans this name Sultan i Rum is what his made of Ottomans a Greek Empire? no Nader Shah said he was from a noble Türkmen tribe so stop appropriating everything the Safavid are a Türk empire from İran which comes from the Turk Kızılbaş the Zand are a Kurdish empire from Iran the Qajars are a Türk empire from Iran coming from Turkmen tribes so they are not Persian stop lying and appropriating historical figures who were of Turk and Kurdish origin Raziel1975S (talk) 10:15, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Raziel1975S: Finally you speak English. See WP:CITE, I'm not even gonna bother try to look into that if you can't link it properly. No one is denying the Turkic origins of Nader Shah. However, WP:RS considers him and his realm Iranian/Persian (it's also named "Afsharid Iran", not "Afsharid Türk empire"), as demonstrated up above and here ;
Osterhammel, Jürgen (2019). Unfabling the East: The Enlightenment's Encounter with Asia. Princeton University Press. p. 68, "...that fully a third of the army of the Iranian conqueror, Nadir (Nader) Shah..."
Esposito, John L., (ed) (2004). The Oxford Dictionary of Islam. Oxford University Press. p. 71, "In the conflicts following the death of the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah in 1747..."
Asher, Catherine Blanshard; Asher, Catherine Ella Blanshard; Asher, Catherine B. (1992). Architecture of Mughal India. Cambridge University Press. p. 301, "...the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah invaded Delhi."
Tucker, Spencer C., (ed.) (2019). Middle East Conflicts from Ancient Egypt to the 21st Century: An Encyclopedia and Document Collection. ABC-CLIO. p. 695, "...the army of Persian ruler Nadir Shah and Ottoman Empire forces under Yegen Mehmet Pasha."
Alam, Muzaffar; Subrahmanyam, Sanjay (2007). Indo-Persian Travels in the Age of Discoveries, 1400-1800. Cambridge University Press. p. 245, "...invasion of North India by the Iranian conqueror, Nadir Shah Afshar."
Schwartz, Schwartz Kevin L. (2020). Remapping Persian Literary History, 1700-1900. Edinburgh University Press. "...on the triumphs and heroics of the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah (r. 1736–47)."
Emon, Anver M.; Ahmed, Rumee., (ed.) (2018). The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Law. Oxford University Press. p. 495, "...Iranian Afsharid ruler, Nadir Shah (r. 1736–47)..."
Hofmeester, Karin; Grewe, Bernd-Stefan (2016). Luxury in Global Perspective: Objects and Practices, 1600–2000. Cambridge University Press. p. 27, "...the Persian ruler Nadir Shah (ruled 1736–47) had invaded northern India."
Kaicker, Abhishek (2020). The King and the People: Sovereignty and Popular Politics in Mughal Delhi. Oxford University Press. p. 18, "Persian ruler Nadir Shah's invasion of the Mughal empire in 1739..."
Hodgson, Marshall G. S. (2009). The Venture of Islam, Volume 3: The Gunpower Empires and Modern Times. University of Chicago Press. p. 146, "...Iranian ruler Nadir Shah had sacked Delhi..."
Embree, Ainslie T. (2020). Frontiers into Borders: Defining South Asia States, 1757–1857. Oxford University Press, "...Central Asia fell to the great Persian conqueror, Nadir Shah..."
Wink, André (2020). The Making of the Indo-Islamic World: c.700–1800 CE. Cambridge University Press. p. 15, "...the Persian conqueror Nadir Shah."
Stop edit warring, thanks. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

several sources say that it is part of Turkish history the Afsharid Nader Shah try to be allied with the other Turkic states and even the army was Turkmans and Turkmens I can quote you several sources that it is a Turkish empire of Iran I can argue with you on discord that it is a turkish empire of iran Raziel1975S (talk) 17:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

for example the first Ottoman sultans said Sultan i Rum but yet the Ottoman empire is a Turkish empire you should know that for 800 years the Turks dominated Iran Seljuk Khwamenian Timurids Qara Qoyyunlu Aq Qoyunlu the Safavid Afsharid and Qajar Raziel1975S (talk) 17:52, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the afsharid empire are a turkish empire of iran just whether you like it or not whether it was the rulers or the commanders they were all afshar turks and the afsharid army was majority turkman and kurds Raziel1975S (talk) 17:53, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The last thing I would want to do is argue with you on discord. Stop spamming every section of this talk page with your personal opinion, this is not a forum. See WP:SOAPBOX and WP:FORUM. Next time u will be reported. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lahor or Lahore?

[edit]

Hi. Are you sure one of the cities that Nader attacked in his way to Karnal was Lahor and not Lahore? these are two separate cities and the latter was always more important than the first so i think it is just a small mistake and need to be corrected Aminabzz (talk) 12:53, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Karnal&oldid=1206171047"