Talk:Caucasian dragon carpets

Armenian origin

This type of carpet is classified as a Caucasus carpet; therefore, I do not see a reason to call them directly Armenian. The Caucasus region is a melting pot, and this issue constantly arises when discussing the culture of the Caucasus.

The reason for my edit can be seen here:

"Despite the important role played by Armenian weavers and clients in the carpet production of the Caucasus, theories proposing an Armenian origin for dragon carpets must be discounted. No Dragon carpet is inscribed in Armenian; the only signed piece (Washington, DC, Textile Mus.) bears the name of Husayn Beg written in Arabic script and a date readable as either 1001 or 1101 (AD 1592 or 1689). As this carpet is anomalous in so many ways, however, including the unusual colors and drawing and the central medallion imposed on the latticework, it is thought to be a freely adapted 19th-century Kurdish recreation of a Dragon carpet. Only later do designs taken from Dragon carpets appear on many carpets inscribed in Armenian. The Gohar carpet (USA, priv. col.), for example, is inscribed ‘I, the sinful Gohar, made this with my newly learned hands, may the reader pray for me’, and has a date in the form of a chronogram, which can be read as 1679-80, 1699, or 1732. In the field, vestiges of dragons in addorsed pairs surround palmettes that have become pendants to a large central medallion. The design is clearly transitional between the directional, overall latticework of Dragon carpets and the centralized format of some 19th-century carpets from the Karabagh region."

Page 195 Campbell, G. (n.d.). The Grove Encyclopedia of Decorative Arts: Two-volume Set. Oxford University Press. Göycen (talk) 12:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I was about to publish a discussion but you beat me to it, pinging 2003:EA:4F4F:C28E:A992:F8E9:EA7:33CF (talk) Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 12:59, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

In Hakobyans book. Medieval Art of Artsakh, ISBN 5-8079-0195-9. Page 84. Art historian Hravard Hakobyan notes that "Artsakh carpets occupy a special place in the history of Armenian carpet-making."Common themes and patterns found on Armenian carpets were the depiction of dragons and eagles. They were diverse in style, rich in color and ornamental motifs, and were even separated in categories depending on what sort of animals were depicted on them, such as artsvagorgs (eagle-carpets), vishapagorgs (dragon-carpets) and otsagorgs(serpent-carpets). The rug mentioned in the Kaptavan inscriptions is composed of three arches, "covered with vegatative ornaments", and bears an artistic resemblance to the illuminated manuscripts produced in Artsakh.

The oldest extant Armenian carpet from the region, referred to as Artsakh during the medieval era, is from the village of Banants (near Gandzak) and dates to the early 13th century. The first time that the Armenian word for carpet, gorg, was used in historical sources was in a 1242-1243 Armenian inscription on the wall of the Kaptavan Church in Artsakh.

The source you gave states that the arabic inscripted carpet in fact seems to be a Kurdish work of the 19th century. While the first Armenian inscriped Dargon Carpet, Gohar is from 1680 as your source states, the source you gave does say that there is not a clear origin. The article itself states that the only two inscribed dragon carpets had Arabic and on the Gohar one Armenian inscriptions. Which means that the other dragon carpets didnt ahve inscriptions at all. My source teaches that carpets from the region already been mentioned in the 13th century and that throughout medieval artsakh and more mdoern times it was one of the main motives of Armenian carpet wavers. I got the source and text from Armenian carpets. Its written there too. So the both sources kinda conflict, which is why we should make an „According to“ section or smh like that. 2003:EA:4F4F:C28E:477:FBE5:90E4:F96B (talk) 13:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Also, on top of that, none of the sources state that North Azerbaijanis engaged in making dragon carpets, or were even mentioned in any of thsoe sources, so teh azerbaijani translation you added last time is completely unreasoned. 2003:EA:4F4F:C28E:477:FBE5:90E4:F96B (talk) 13:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

The source you cited is not directly about Dragon carpets, and simply it says some armenian carpets had dragon on them. Armenian carpets(again not spesifically dragon) has long history.

My source does not undermine the contributions of Armenians, Yet I can not see an answer to my spesific source. I would be happy if you can answer direct question.

"Despite the important role played by Armenian weavers and clients in the carpet production of the Caucasus, theories proposing an Armenian origin for dragon carpets must be discounted."

here is the part that you should find a rebuttal. Göycen (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Göycen, think, what are carpets with dragons on them? DRAGON CARPETS! The source stated it as you admitted, but you dismissed it by saying that carepts with dragons on them arent dragon carpets, that doesnt make sense! The source itself stated that one of the 3 main types of carpets made in mesieval Artsakh were dragon carpets! 2003:EA:4F4F:C28E:477:FBE5:90E4:F96B (talk) 14:27, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Please reread everything what i've written. If still not clear, let's take this to dispute resolution. Göycen (talk) 14:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

The rebutal is my source, since It outright states, that in medieval artsakh, 13th century and onwards, many carpets had dragons on them and your source only names dragon carpets (the oldest described one he mentions is an Armenian one), yet my sourxe shows that even before the 17th century, dragon carpets were made by Armenians. 2003:EA:4F4F:C28E:477:FBE5:90E4:F96B (talk) 15:18, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

@Fantastic Mr. Fox

How can we apply for dispute resolution? Could you possibly help us? Göycen (talk) 15:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

This is from the same page with my source, i think it is quite clear.

"Dragon carpets are the oldest, largest and most discussed group of early-Caucasian carpets. The field of a typical Dragon carpet—tred, or less often blue ot brown—is covered with a large-scale trellis of jagged leaves, overlapped at their intersections by large palmettes. Within irregular compartments formed by the trellis appear the dragons after which the carpets are named: upright and S-shaped with vestigal crests and flaming shoulders and haunches. Older examples include such other fauna as lions battling dragon-headed stags (chi’/in) in the compartments not occupied by the dragons, and ducks and pheasants in the leafy latticework. Even in the oldest carpets of the group, the animals are so stylized as to be barely recognizable. Despite the Chinese ancestry of the animal motifs, Dragon carpets probably derived from Safavid carpets. Many Dragon carpets and other early Caucasian pieces share with the Vase carpets of 17th-century Kirman a directional trellis pattern and the structural peculiarity of the periodic addition of a heavy single weft." Göycen (talk) 15:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

My source still states something different, also is that from the same source you send earlier? 2003:EA:4F4F:C288:11FD:4E0B:4B63:747 (talk) 17:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

In conlusion, there is ongoing scholarly debate regarding the classification of this topic as Armenian. Given this discrepancy among scholars, it would be more neutral to include a section discussing these differing viewpoints without calling it Armenian, right away. Wikipedia's role in this kind of topics is not to make definitive claims but to present various perspectives. Göycen (talk) 23:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Ok, but no Azerbaijani translation, no where in these sources is stated to have a connection to azeris, also, since Its about more persoectives, the beginning „Caucasian, or Armenian dragon carpets“ makes more sense, since It gives two options.

Armenian, Persian and Kurdish translations are the only that are acceptable. 2A02:3035:E12:2045:4968:8B13:D8BD:831A (talk) 06:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Obviously you do not understand anything. I am done with discussion. Incase you start another edit war or edit this page according to your political agenda. Here is all the evidence and i have more. Stop changing Azerbaijani information in azerbaijani related pages, stop substacting information. Do not waste both of our time, in a month i will go thorough each of ip vandalisms since last december.

I have nothing against armenians, i do not change sources according to my gut feeling, as seen above.

Azerbaijani information is not scope is this discussion. Kurdish, Persion, Klingon or Gibberish translation either. This is not a zero-sum game. if you do not know how to discuss please go learn it. Göycen (talk) 07:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Bros spicy. You dont understand that my source contradicts yours to some degree and that you shouldnt be so salty that you just want to stop dicussing a resolution, prove that any edit Ive made was vandalism, afterall, you cant just revert anything when it has a source, your ignorance clearly shows this way, find a resolution, or flee and leave it to me, you already have been shown that in almost all cases I was right and you werent, you think you can just do vandalism wighout again being schooled on how not to let ur brain fill with hate? Your political agenda your trying to push is truly laughable. 93.200.101.187 (talk) 10:55, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Who are you? I am not able to see your previous edits. Göycen (talk) 11:32, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Just answer me and stop going on rampages, reverting sourxed information with no explanation given, you vandlist. 2003:EA:4F4F:C288:C446:278A:70E2:6004 (talk) 13:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

@Fantastic Mr. Fox, Göcen seemingly isnt willing to come to an agreement, instead he just rampages through my edits and starts edit wars without taking his case to the talk page, although I urged him to, even in versions that were approved and edited by administrators. He doesnt even give edit summaries at this point, can something be done against his vandalism? 2003:EA:4F4F:C288:C446:278A:70E2:6004 (talk) 13:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Again, who are you? My conditions are up there, and I already provided the information to the other user. My edits are a reversal to prior versions of IP vandalism. Azerbaijani is a macrolanguage itself, and in Arabic and Chinese pages, one cannot see this dichotomy. I have not reverted sourced content, including the Northern and Southern division, which is another topic. Göycen (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Nah, according to Ethnologue highly, but according to ISO they are two distinct languages:“ Salehi, Mohammad; Neysani, Aydin (2017). "Receptive intelligibility of Turkish to Iranian-Azerbaijani speakers". Cogent Education. 4 (1): 3. doi:10.1080/2331186X.2017.1326653. S2CID 121180361. Northern and Southern Azerbaijani are considered distinct languages by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (...)“

Also, explain how what the IP did was vandlism, since I dont see any vandlism committed by the IP, for example, on Qajar (tribe), administrators didnt see it as vandlism and even edited this version, while you were the only one to revert this.

I think you are the vandlist here. 2003:EA:4F4F:C288:C446:278A:70E2:6004 (talk) 13:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

It is, you were the one who added an azeri translation with no source in order to push his agenda, or when you called the irevan khanate azerbaijani state, or where you eagerly wanted the abbas mirza mosque to have an azeri translation. your the vandalist here. 93.200.101.187 (talk) 10:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

the sentence „Caucasian, or Armenian dragon carpets“ makes more sense, since It is one of the main motifs for Armenian carpets and therefore has a more important role for Armenians and a longer history with them than other ethnicities in the region, but If you also add different translations, other than an Armenian, only a kurdish translation would else make sense, since your source states that the only other inscribed example is of kurdish origin and kurds used to live in karabakh anyway. 2003:EA:4F4F:C28E:477:FBE5:90E4:F96B (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

@Fantastic Mr. Fox based on the exchange, can you now rewrite the article in the way you perceived this discussion or smh? 2003:EA:4F4F:C28E:477:FBE5:90E4:F96B (talk) 13:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

No. It's up to you two to find an agreement on what the article should look like. See WP:DR if you can't come to an agreement, but I don't have enough expertise on the subject to support either side here, and I am currently busy. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 13:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Ok, Imma wait for Göycen reply then 2003:EA:4F4F:C28E:477:FBE5:90E4:F96B (talk) 13:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm no carpet expert, but I'm pretty sure because a dragon is depicted on a carpet doesn't make automatically make it the type of dragon carpet this article is about (a dragon depiction is not exactly a rarity), there's probably more to it, and I wonder if Hakobyan gives more info about it, since it's a mere passing mention in that quote given by the IP. But the IP has been range blocked for block evasion, so I guess this discussion has met its conclusion. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:55, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I will try to get access to Hakobyan's book and see what other info it has. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 23:07, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Before reverting page you should respect my research. Please undo your obviously one sided revert or I will take this to admins. So called stable version is created by the blocked user. Göycen (talk) 23:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I think I mixed up some IP's. I reverted the IP unexplained changes from September [1] and restored the real stable version. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 03:31, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Dear @HistoryofIran,

Thanks for your comment. Hakobyan's book is unfortunately not the best source for this issue. It is not even cited in the literature on this issue. Yet, I have already ordered it and will certainly check and share what is exactly written on that page. The citations of Hakobyan above are simply copied and pasted from other Wikipedia pages, and the available PDFs on web do not have the mentioned page scanned. This question has a 100-year-old history.

I do not understand the last revert of @KhndzorUtogh and the text he put on my talk page. Göycen (talk) 23:38, 13 June 2024 (UTC)