Talk:Safavid Georgia

Other points?

@Kober: considering you scanned/copy-edit a pretty significant part of the article already, would you be willing to take a look at the remaining part as well? As you know, I highly value you edits. Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 14:34, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure, I will do that. Thanks for highly valuing my edits. I think you have done a really great work in bringing so much information on Safavid rule together and what you will read below are my suggestions to improve the content and not a criticism of your contributions or "combatitive" tone on my part. But I cannot resist an impression that the article views Georgia as the country that should have naturally belonged to the Safavids and all those rebellions and eventual loss of Persian control were rather an anomaly. For example, the Kakhetian uprisings in the early 17th century were characterized as revolts by "some nobles" rather than the people's resistance to Abbas's extermination policy. That's what I meant by "slanted towards Iranian imperial perspective". My comment was not intended as an offence and did not target you as a major contributor to this entry.

Back to the content, I think a relatively minor incident such as that associated with Rostom's Mingrelian marriage creates an undue weight problem especially given the fact that such an important figure as Teimuraz I is largely ignored. Teimuraz was a unique phenomenon in the history of Georgia — the man who spent decades fighting against the Safavid encroachments, losing many members of his family to Abbas's revenge.

I will briefly outline my vision of what should be done to make the article shine:

1. Teimuraz I should be given more prominence.
2. The key events such as the Kakhetian tragedy of 1615/6 should be given more prominence.
3. The fact that the Georgian rulers continued to use their traditional royal titles of "king" and even "king of kings" should be mentioned. The structure of the Georgian kingdoms and Georgian version of feudalism was not eventually altered by the Safavid hegemony. Actually, the Persians approved or appointed rulers following the principles of Georgian hereditary monarchy. This is important and should be mentioned, obviously, with proper references.
4. Essential role of Rostom of Kartli and his successor Vakhtang V as a "peace-builders" and attempts by Vakhtang to unify all of Georgia should be more emphasized.
5. The fall of eastern Georgia to the Ottomans at the time of the Safavid collapse should be further detailed. There was an excellent article by David Marshall Lang on this period of time.
6. "Cultural influences" section is really great and I would add more on this, given Iran's huge cultural influence on Georgia. Persian poetry and arts were appreciated in Georgia as high culture. The coinage section is an absolutely excellent idea.
7. I'd tentatively suggest removing the rulers section or rather making it as a separate list entry.
8. Georgians' leading role in the Afghan campaigns should be mentioned.
9. Kakheti's changing fortunes and sometime loss of kingdom should be mentioned as well as the fact that it was at times attached to the Karabakh beylerbeylik.
10. Vakhtang VI's role in Georgia's cultural revival should be mentioned.
11. A Lesgian factor in Georgian-Safavid relations should be mentioned.

--Kober^Talk 10:07, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@Kober: Thanks much. You mentioned many great points, and I concur with you basically in all of them. The list of rulers is something I think would be worth keeping, though a separate list entry could probably work as well. As long as it doesn't create unnecessary confusion for newb readers.
I will start addressing the points in the near future. But please don't hesitate if you feel like working on it as well; the article is just as much mines as it is yours. :-) Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to always helpful colleagues at WP:REX, I've got a very helpful chapter on Georgia from Röhrborn, Klaus Michael (1966). Provinzen und Zentralgewalt Persiens im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert (in German). de Gruyter. ISBN 9783110831092.. I'll shortly try to improve the article using this source. --Kober^Talk 14:33, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

source review tips

To check as many errors as possible in the references and/or notes, I recommend using User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck in conjunction with two other scripts. You can install them as follows:

• First, copy/paste importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js'); to Special:MyPage/common.js .
• On the same page and below that script add importScript('User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck.js');. Save that page.
• Finally go to to Special:MyPage/common.css and add .citation-comment {display: inline !important;} /* show all Citation Style 1 error messages */.

When you've added all those, go to an article to check for various messages in its notes and references. (You may need to clear your browser's cache first). The output of User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck is not foolproof and can be verbose. Use common sense when interpreting output (especially with respect to sorting errors). Reading the explanatory page will help more than a little. The least urgent message of all is probably Missing archive link; archiving weblinks is good practice but lack of archiving will probably not be mentioned in any content review. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 03:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Safavid Georgia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 17:25, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Review

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass

2. Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass
(c) (original research)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass
(b) (focused)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
All edits in the past year appear to have been helpful. Most have been by the nominator.	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	All images appear to be free use.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Images are appropriately captioned.	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	Well done. Big sweeping topics like this one can be a pig to cover adequately but this article has done a fine job of it. A lot of sweat, tears and loving care has clearly gone into it. Good work. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:49, 4 July 2018 (UTC)}}

Discussion

@LouisAragon: @LouisAragon: Copy vio.

• Could you do some minor rephrasing to reduce these?

• @Gog the Mild: As far as I can see, it appears the vast majority of those are just coincidence. Let me know if you think otherwise. - LouisAragon (talk) 10:50, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

• Could you rephrase ". .. raiding expeditions into Georgia, notably in 1518. ..", ". .. a period of relative peace and prosperity. ..", ". .. two and a half centuries of. .. political dominance over eastern Georgia. ..", ". .. all of Georgia as an Ottoman possession. .." and ". .. a continuation of his predecessors’ efforts to. .."

References.

• The unreferenced lists of rulers need to either go or be referenced. I will put the review on hold for 7 days; please do one or the other during that time and let me know.

•  Done (List of governors of Safavid Georgia). Where do you think would be the best place to insert the link in this article? - LouisAragon (talk) 10:50, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

• Could references without publishers or publisher locations have them added please.

• As far as I can see, the only sources without publishers are those that are cited from the Enc. Iranica online, so I don't think its needed? I added a few publisher locations (the ones I was certain about), but similarly; I don't think its necessary/needed as long as the publisher is mentioned? Please let me know. - LouisAragon (talk) 11:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

• Publishers are now covered. Sorry, but all 12 missing publisher locations need inserting. Do you know how to find publisher locations etc using WorldCat?

• Nope never done before. I'll try to figure it out later. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:37, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• @LouisAragon: See here. The publisher location in this case is Costa Mesa, Calif. Always make sure that you have the correct edition. It also gives the publisher and other details, and if you scroll down, the ISBN and OCLC numbers. Worth playing around with a little. (I first tried Slaves of the Shah: New Elites of Safavid Iran, but couldn't find a 2004 edition; there is a 2003 and a 2005. WorldCat is not infallible, but that is worth checking.) Gog the Mild (talk) 16:59, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

•  Done Added as many locations I could with the help of WorldCat and Google search. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:12, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Prose. The lead.

• "located in the area of present-day Georgia" seems a little vague. '... within the territory of...'? '... largely within the territory of...'? '... approximately conterminous with...'? or whatever.
• "From Tahmasp I's reign onwards". This seems important, so could you give an actual date, even if prefixed with 'approximately'?
• I have copy edited a little. Revert anything you don't like.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:28, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

• Optional. There are a lot of "however"s, most not necessary. Consider losing some of them.
• "In 1712–1719 Hosayn-Qoli Khan was kept in Iran". I am not sure what "kept" means. Imprisoned?
• "Shah-Navaz, Bakar Mirza". Is that one person's name? It reads a little oddly.

More prose.

• The 3rd paragraph of 16th century has "clarify" in the middle. This seems reasonable; what "political and social institutions"? And does Hitchins explicitly address this point?

• I will address this tomorrow. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:14, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

• @Gog the Mild: Ok, well, not tomorrow, but better late than never...  Done Please don't hesitate to perform a copy-edit on the sentences I just corrected,[1] if you think it doesn't read as smoothly as it used to. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

• "In 1624/25 Manuchar III Jaqeli," Could you replace with '1624–25' or '1624 or 1625' as appropriate.
• "and had made him governor of Kartli, a post which he held for a long period of time." A long period of time is question begging. Is there not even a vague idea of how long this was?

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:29, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: It is looking pretty good. I will copy all of the outstanding issues below for ease of reference.

• Could you rephrase ". .. raiding expeditions into Georgia, notably in 1518. ..", ". .. a period of relative peace and prosperity. ..", ". .. two and a half centuries of. .. political dominance over eastern Georgia. ..", ". .. all of Georgia as an Ottoman possession. .." and ". .. a continuation of his predecessors’ efforts to. .."

• @Gog the Mild: Could you please make proposals? - LouisAragon (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: I have made amendments. Could you check them, and tweak them if needed. (I will need to check again once Earwig has refreshed.) Gog the Mild (talk) 17:27, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: Just checked, looks good. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:49, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

• "Shah-Navaz, Bakar Mirza". Is that one person's name? It reads a little oddly.

• Already replied about that a few days ago.[2] - LouisAragon (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Apologies, I overlooked it. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:27, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

No worries. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:49, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I have added the last two publisher locations, so it's just these two points in the way of a GA. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:25, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: Truer words were never spoken. :-) Thank you once again for all your effort. Cheers mate, - LouisAragon (talk) 18:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits

@Giorgi Mechurchle: I suggest you provide reliable sources for your edits and discuss them on the talk page instead of edit-warring against several editors. Thanks.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Reliable sources about what, that Georgian kings had Georgian names? :))) Here is the article about the King of Kartli https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luarsab_II_of_Kartli as you see his name was Luarsab he was Georgian and Christian, why his name is written in persian manner (Lohrasb) what is the logic? In addition, ruling Safavid dynasty was Turkic, not persian.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 14:08, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Safavids were of mixed ancestry (mainly Kurdish), not Turks. Also, instead of repeatedly exposing your POV and linking to Wiki articles (Wiki articles are not to be condered reliable, as per WP:CIRCULAR), you should know that Wikipedia goes with what reliable sources say, so yes, please provide reliable sources for your edits.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:36, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

1.Whatever ancestry Safavids had (Turkic, Kurdish, Greek or even Georgian), their state was founded and ruled by Shiite Turks (Qizilbashs). :)

2.Georgian kings had Georgian names: Luarsab, Teimuraz etc. not persians, they were/are known with these names in all academic sources. We do not write in English Wiki Tamaz I instead of Tahmasp I, however in Georgian the name of this shah was Tamaz. So why the names of Georgian kings should be written in persian manner? They were Georgians and Christians, not Persians and Muslims. What Persianised names of Georgian kings are doing in English Wikipedia? Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 15:11, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Again, stop throwing your POV around and provide reliable sources (not Wiki articles) to support your claims. That Georgian vassal rulers were Georgians is not enough to make their names Georgian too, especially when all reliable sources say that they did, indeed, not have Georgian names. Also, Qizilbashs were not all Turks either. Safavid kings had Turkic soldiers in their army so what ? Is that an evidence that the kings were Turks ? I strongly suggest you self revert and restore the last clean version of this good article.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:45, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

You wanted source? OK, here it is:

Title: Edge of Empires : A History of Georgia

Author(s): Donald Rayfield

Publisher: Reaktion Books

Year: 2013

ISBN: 9781780230306,1780230303

Kartli’s nobility asked Abbas to confirm Giorgi x’s only son, fourteenyear-old Luarsab, as king. Luarsab seemed, like Teimuraz, a malleable youth: withdrawing to Shirvan, Abbas assented. p.188.

You see - Luarsab and Teimuraz, not strange Lohrsab and Tahmuraz or something else. Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 15:58, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• "One of these was David/Dāwūd Khan II (1569-78), whose reign marked the beginning of almost two and a half centuries of Persian political dominance over eastern Georgia, with only occasional interruptions, until the advent of the Russians at the end of the 18th century. " -- Keith Hitchins. (2001). "GEORGIA ii. History of Iranian-Georgian Relations" Enc. Iranica, Vol. X, Fasc. 4, pp. 464-470

• "ʿAbbās appointed a loyalist, Simon II/Semāyūn Khan (1619-29), as wālī, or viceroy, but he kept a tight grip on Kakheti" -- Keith Hitchins. (2001). "GEORGIA ii. History of Iranian-Georgian Relations" Enc. Iranica, Vol. X, Fasc. 4, pp. 464-470

• "In this connection should be mentioned the role of Khosrow Mirza Rostom (Rostam, Rustam) Khan, the future monarch of Kartli, qollaraqasi of Iran and darugha of Esfahan, who was the illegitimate son of Da’ud Khan, the former king of Kartli and uncle of Simon Khan" -- George Sanikidze. (2021), Charles Melville ed. Safavid Persia in the Age of Empires. "SAFAVID POLICY TOWARDS EASTERN GEORGIA" p. 385
• "Constantine II. King of Kakheti in 1722–1732. The son of King Erekle I and brother of King Teimuraz II, he was born and raised as Mahmad Quli Khan in Esfahan" -- Mikaberidze, Alexander. Historical Dictionary of Georgia. p. 239
• "Their commander was Khusraw Khan’s half-brother Vakhtang VI, the vali of Georgia’s central district of Kartli, who, after a long period of resisting, in 1716 had finally agreed to convert to Islam, after which he became known as Husayn Quli Khan" -- Rudi Matthee (2012). Persia in crisis: Safavid decline and the fall of Isfahan. I.B. Tauris. p. 225
• "Although Archil converted to Islam and assumed the title Šāhnaẓar Khan (1664-75)" -- Keith Hitchins. (2001). "GEORGIA ii. History of Iranian-Georgian Relations" Enc. Iranica, Vol. X, Fasc. 4, pp. 464-470
• "In 1605 they revolted and placed Teimuraz/Ṭahmūraṯ I (1605-63) on the throne (...) -- Keith Hitchins. (2001). "GEORGIA ii. History of Iranian-Georgian Relations" Enc. Iranica, Vol. X, Fasc. 4, pp. 464-470

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, but no worries, we all know what this is about.

- LouisAragon (talk) 16:32, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I think you are totally inadequate. The names of Georgian kings were - Teimuraz, Luarsab etc. not Tahmuraz, Lohrsab and other persianised versions of their names. They were Georgians and Christians, not Persians and Muslims do you understand this, or not? :D What about your sources, they just repeat what I said. Maybe persians called him Tahmuraz, but in Georgian and in English also, his name must be written as Teimuraz - it is obvious. As well as in English we write Tahmasp I and not Tamaz I, however in georgian his name was Tamaz. One more example no one calls Iskander to Tsar Alexander III of Russia, however maybe in Persian Alexander sounds as Iskander. We are in English Wikipedia (not in Persian).

What about those kings who converted (Luarsab II and Teimuraz I never converted), they had two names, for example - Vakhtang VI and Huseyn Quli Khan. In article I have placed both, hope you mentioned it.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 16:46, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, Qizilbashs were not all Turks either. Safavid kings had Turkic soldiers in their army so what ? Is that an evidence that the kings were Turks ? I do not know what complexes you have towards turks (it is not our, Georgian cup of tea at all), but Qizilbashs were confederation of Shiite Turkic tribes. And yes, Safavids had diverse ancestry, but their state was founded and ruled by Turkic Shiite tribes. Ismail I had some Georgian ancestors too, but it does not make him and his Safavid, Qizilbash state Georgian at all. :D Persian dynasty took control over Iran only in XX c. receive history as it was.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Generally, I do not understand why you three are so aggressive and can not understand really easy and obvious things.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 16:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

One of these was David/Dāwūd Khan II (1569-78).

Exactly the same what I wrote in the article, here we have Georgian/Christian form of the name (David), after that muslim name (Dawud) too, which he received after Islamisation.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 18:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Abbās appointed a loyalist, Simon II/Semāyūn Khan (1619-29)

The same Here. We read here Georgian name (Simon II), after that muslim form of his name, which Simon II received after his Islamization.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 18:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

Several users are vandalising the article, they provide false and misleading information. I suggest - LouisAragon and HistoryofIran should be blocked.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 14:02, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry but I'm not sure you understand what 'vandalism' means. And please show proof for this 'false and misleading information', I'm eagerly waiting. Otherwise you're just violating WP:ASPERSIONS. Not to mention you've violated WP:EDIT WARRING big time [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Lol, I already gave you the proof but you do not want to understand it, lets repeat :))))

In return for his loyalty, the then-incumbent king, Safi (r. 1629–1642), had given him the title of Rostam Khan, and had made him governor of Kartli, a post which he held for more than twenty years. Kakheti however, came under direct Safavid rule.

This was written in article. In reality Kakheti did not come under direct Safavid rule during Safi, but Teimuraz I quickly re-established his rule there in 1633. Safi Died in 1642, Teimuraz I was King of Kakheti till 1648. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teimuraz_I_of_Kakheti

Is your eagerness satisfied? :D Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

You do realize you're changing sourced information, right? Linking Wikipedia articles does not strengthen your argument one bit. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:59, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Do not you realize that Wikipedia article about Teimuraz I is also sourced? You want, me to provide each source? :D So, in one article you have information that Teimuraz I re-established himself in 1633, and in another false information that Kakheti went under direct rule of Safavids during Safi - is this normal? :) Additionally, I can provide plenty of Georgian, European, Russian etc. sources that during 1630s and 1640s Teimuraz I was the king of Kakheti. But it is so obvious, that I do not understand why are you arguing. Maybe you know something about the history of Iran, but you are far from knowledge of Georgian history. Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Even if that was the case, does that justify you altering sourced info? And that in GA article out of all things? And who are you to deem what is false and what isn’t? Do you even have proof, or is this WP:JDLI? I’m not even gonna respond to the rest of your remarks. It looks like you already have been reported as well. HistoryofIran (talk)

• "Eastern Georgia remained under Persian suzerainty until the end of the 17th century. In 1648 Kakheti was put under the rule of the wāli of Kartli (q.v.). He was already titled as “the Sovereign of both Kartli and Kakheti” (Puturidze, p. 231). This rule was only nominal; the Persian officials appointed by the shah were the real governors of the region. The Persians were positioned in the main fortresses of Kakheti. Kakhetians organized a major revolt in 1659 and managed to drive away a significant part of the Turkmens. Nevertheless, Kakheti remained under full Persian control. From 1677 to 1703, the members of Georgian royal house of Bagrationi lost the Kakhetian throne and were replaced by Persian governors." -- George Sanikidze. (2000). "KAKHETI". Enc. Iranica

Looking at the structural violations of WP:WAR, WP:IDHT, WP:BATTLE and WP:VER, it is clear that you are WP:NOTHERE to build this encyclopedia. But no worries; you are already reported. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:07, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Are you normal? Your source repeats exactly the same what I said. During Safi Teimuraz I was the King of Kakheti and his Kingdom was not put under direct rule of Safavids. Safi died in 1642, Teimuraz I lost his Kingdom only in 1648.

Teimuraz returned from exile via Dagestan to Ananuri in the highlands, gathered Kakhetian supporters and rebel Kartlians such as Duke Zaal of Aragvi and Duke Iese of Ksani, but was soon expelled. Teimuraz then offered Rostom peace and Sefi a bride, Teimuraz’s daughter, Tinatin. In 1634 Sefi, though busy fighting Turkey, married Teimuraz’s daughter (but later had her strangled). As Sefi’s son-in-law, Teimuraz received 1,000 silver tumans, fine gowns, and restoration as Christian wali of Kakhetia. p.199

Title: Edge of Empires : A History of Georgia

Author(s): Donald Rayfield

Publisher: Reaktion Books

Year: 2013

ISBN: 9781780230306,1780230303 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giorgi Mechurchle (talk • contribs) 16:20, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

More WP:OR. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:39, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• "I suggest - LouisAragon and HistoryofIran should be blocked." --Giorgi Mechurchle

Judging from the personal attacks, WP:OWN, and WP:WAR, your time here will be short. Nothing you have edit warred into the article will stay. You do not have consensus and have a serious WP:BATTLEGROUND issue. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:24, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Have you got any logical argument against my editions in this article? Those 3 users try to Persianise and Islamise the names of Georgian Kings. They WERE NOT Persians and Muslims, they were Georgians and Christians, one of them is the saint of Georgian Orthodox Church. All academic society knows them with their Georgian names. BTW Can you imagine Christianisation of the names of Muslim kings in Wikipedia, will it be right?Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 22:40, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Again, all my editions are correct and logical, with plenty of sources. Names of Christian, Georgian kings must not be Persianised/Islamised it is an anti-historic absurd.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 22:30, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• "Those 3 users try to Persianise and Islamise the names of Georgian Kings."

Another WP:ASPERSION. No one "tries" anything. Numerous English WP:RS use the Islamized/Persian names in addition to their native names, especially in books and articles dealing from a Safavid point of view. As this article is about the Safavid province, those forms should be given precedence. Its dead simple.

• "They WERE NOT Persians and Muslims"

No one has said that on the talk page, nor has anyone tried to add that into the article.

• "one of them is the saint of Georgian Orthodox Church"

OK.

• "All academic society knows them with their Georgian names."

Unfortunately, I have shown on numerous occassions through English-language WP:RS that they are also known by their Persian/Islamic names.

• "BTW Can you imagine Christianisation of the names of Muslim kings in Wikipedia, will it be right?"

If those "Muslim kings" you speak of were under Christian rule or suzerainty, and English language sources make extensive mention of those names, then most certainly they can be used with precedence in articles dealing about those Muslim regions under Christian rule in the form of an administrative province.

- LouisAragon (talk) 16:14, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

You are also persistent in trying to remove sourced content from this article, a GA article, NB. So far, you have tried to do this 10 times (as thats the amount of times you have reverted). This is simply unacceptable per WP:TENDENTIOUS, and here's just one sourced passage (amongst others) which you have tried to change:

• What the passage originally says: "(...) he restored Iranian dominance in the Caucasus and made Teimuraz II vali of Kakheti, while appointing an Iranian as the governor of Kartli."
• What Giorgi Mechurchle tried to change it into: "(...) he restored Iranian dominance in the Caucasus and made Teimuraz II king of Kakheti, while appointing an Iranian as the governor of Kartli."
• Yet the cited source states: "In 1734 and 1735 he drove the Ottomans out of eastern Georgia, confirmed Teimuraz II (1729-44) as wālī of Kakheti, and appointed a Persian as governor of Kartli."[8]

- LouisAragon (talk) 15:48, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

You have no idea about Georgian History. Here you see muslim convert Rostom, even he used the title of king:

ROSTOM KHAN (ca. 1565–1658). King of Kartli in 1632–1658; although nominally a wali (viceroy) of Kartli, he used the title of king in official correspondence and ceremonies. MIKABERIDZE, ALEXANDER. HISTORICAL DICTIONARY OF GEORGIA. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. 2007. P.548

So we can use both title king (as all Georgian monarchs used this title in official ceremonies) and wali too (from Safavid vision).

Teimuraz II never converted to Islam, he bore the title of wali of Kakheti from 1709 to 1715. But during Nader Shah he received the title of king and was coronated in a Christian way:

Teimuraz’s policy of rapprochement with Persia paid off when Nadir Shah confirmed him and his son Erekle as the kings of Kartli and Kakheti and allowed them to perform Christian coronations. MIKABERIDZE, ALEXANDER. HISTORICAL DICTIONARY OF GEORGIA. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. 2007. P.617-618.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 18:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

If those "Muslim kings" you speak of were under Christian rule or suzerainty

Another absurd. :D Western Georgian political entities were under Ottoman vassalage, but no one is distorting in English Wikipedia the names of those Christian/Georgian kings and princes who ruled there. We can say the same about the rulers of other political entities (princes of Walllachia, Molodva etc.).

they are also known by their Persian/Islamic names.

They were known to Turks, Azeris and Persians by "their" Islamic names - so you can use them in Turkish/Azeri/Persian Wikipedia. But Georgians and whole English language academic society knows them by Georgian/Christian names. In all dictionaries and here in Wikipedia we have articles - Luarsab II not Lohrasb II; Teimuraz I not Tahmurat. :D :D Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 19:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Again about Georgian monarchs

I want to be clear - Georgian kings had Georgian names, academic society knows them with these names. In Persian Wikipedia you can write them in Persian manner - no problem, but in English definitely no, do not be vandals!

Some Georgian kings never converted to Islam, so their names must be written only in Georgian form (which is accepted by academic society), for example Luarsab II, Teimuraz I etc. Persianised/Islimised forms like Lohrsab and Tahmurat have nothing to do in English Wikipedia. Again, in English Wikipedia we write Tahmasp I, not Tamaz I - Georgian form of the name of this shah. Christian, Georgian kings must have Georgian names (which is accepted by whole academic society).

Some Georgian kings converted to Islam, so they bore two names - Georgian and Muslim. In this case in the article we use both of them, for example - Vakhtang VI (Hosayn-Qoli Khan).Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 22:24, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

As I did not receive any rational argument yet about the reason of Islamisation/Persianisation the names of Christian/Georgian kings, I have changed them to more appropriate, academically acknowledged forms. While the names of those kings, who did convert to Islam formally, are still given in both Georgian and Muslim forms, which is also academically received form.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 14:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no one agrees with your concerns are they are in violation of WP:OR (I will leave the numerous violations of WP:WAR and other WPs aside). In short, you have no WP:CON to make these changes. For the last time, this article is about the Safavid province (i.e. from the Safavid point of view), not the Georgian entities which have their own articles (i.e. Kingdom of Kartli, etc.). Hence the Islamized/Persian forms are given with priority. Lastly, you were also given numerous WP:RS that prove that the Persian/Islamized names are in use in English language academic literature, which disproves your allegations of not having received "rational arguments". And yes, that includes rulers who never converted (such as Teimuraz I). - LouisAragon (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

1.Islamised forms of Christian king names can not have any priority, because those kings never converted to Islam and were Christians. Most of English language academic society knows these kings by their Georgian/Christian names. If persians used different names, you can use them in Persian not in English Wikipedia. As we say Shah-Tamaz (შაჰ-თამაზი) in Georgian, but in English we call him Shah Tahmasp as it is received by English language academic society. Can you understand this or not?

2.For Islamised Kings we can use both Georgian and Muslim names because they bore both.

TEIMURAZ I (1589–1663). King of Kakheti from 1606–1648 and of Kartli-Kakheti from 1625–1632. MIKABERIDZE, ALEXANDER. HISTORICAL DICTIONARY OF GEORGIA. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. 2007. P.616

LUARSAB II. King of Kartli in 1606–1615. He ascended the throne of Kartli after the death of King Giorgi X and received his investiture from Shah Abbas I of Persia. MIKABERIDZE, ALEXANDER. HISTORICAL DICTIONARY OF GEORGIA. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. 2007. P.440

Is this enough for you? Can you stop falsification of history?Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 18:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

So, if you do not have any logical argument (except of your will to distort and Islamise the names of Christian kings and saints) I will make changes in the article.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@Giorgi Mechurchle: Speaking as an administrator, please wait for others to comment before changing the article. It's barely been an hour since you posted your comment; concerned editors, depending on time zone, may be at work, at school, or asleep. Also, please specify which sources you are using for these names; there is not a single point source for "English language academic society".

@LouisAragon: For clarity, are there sources currently in the article that support the names? It would facilitate discussion if the links were on this page. —C.Fred (talk) 19:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

please wait for others to comment before changing the article.

I am waiting. ;)

Also, please specify which sources you are using for these names

Mikaberidze, Alexander. Historical Dictionary of Georgia. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. 2007.

Rayfield, Donald. Edge of Empires: A History of Georgia. Reaktion Books. 2012.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 20:47, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Giorgi, I am one more personal attack/aspersion away from reporting you to WP:ANI. Keep it polite, don't accuse others of falsification and whatnot. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

For clarity, are there sources currently in the article that support the names?

@C.Fred:Yes, they are. Books of Mikaberidze and Rayfield are frequently used in the article. Both of them use only Georgian names of Christian/Georgian kings. In case of those kings who formally converted to Islam they use both - Georgian and after that Muslim name. However, in the article nearly all names of Georgian kings are Islamised which is anti-historic.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 21:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep it polite, don't accuse others of falsification and what not.

I am polite, that is why I am not Christianising/Georgianising the names of the Iranian Kings. In Medieval (somtimes in modern too) Georgian sources Persian Shah Hormizd was/is known as Urmizdi, Safavid Shahs Tahmasp and Safi are known as Shah Tamazi and Shah Sepi etc..... But as these Shahs in Persian, Turkish and in English too, are known as Hormizd, Tahmasp and Safi, we receive it and do not try to Georgianise their names in English Wikipedia. There must be the same attitude towards Georgian monarchs. Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 21:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

"I am polite, that is why I am not Christianising/Georgianising the names of the Iranian Kings." You seem to have missed a key point, Iranian king were never vassalized by Christian rulers thus making your rationale a bit irrelevant. Being polite is part of WP:CIVIL, not because you refrain from disruptive editing (Christianizing the names of Iranian kings would be disruptive for the least).---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:18, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

You seem to have missed a key point, Iranian king were never vassalized by Christian rulers thus making your rationale a bit irrelevant.

It does not matter, as I already mentioned Ottoman Empire had many Christian Vassals - Western Georgia, Wallachia, Moldova, Transilvanya etc. but no one distorts the names of the kings and princes of those political entities, here in English Wikipedia in Turkish manner.

I can repeat the same towards us Georgians, we are not distorting the names of those Muslim rulers who were under Georgian vassalage in XI-XIV cc.

Finally, no one is changing the name of Reza Pahlavi to more "European manner", however in 1940s Iran was virtually divided between USSR and United Kingdom (far "worse" than vassalage). ;)Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 21:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Are you seriously comparing a one year long occupation of Iran by allied troops during WWII with centuries of vassalage of Georgia under Persian rule ?? Wow, sounds like a quite a strange rationale to me.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:42, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I think you have problems with basic skills of understanding (if you write this absurd seriously). Once again, it does not matter how long eastern Georgia was under Safavid vassalage, we speak about the names of Georgian kings, that kings had Georgian names and were Christians - this is fact, so no one has right to distort their Christian/Georgian names. Others who formally converted to Islam used both Georgian and after that Muslim names too. So, in the article for Christian kings I used exclusively their Georgian names, and for those who formally converted both Georgian and Muslim.

P.S. As I see you love to lie, you were lying about Safavid State which was definitely founded by Shiite Turkic tribes (they were not just soldiers as you tried to show :D) in those lands where, till nowadays absolute majority of the population is Turkic (Azeri), their first capital was Tabriz - also center of the Turkic (Azeri) culture nowadays. Now you are lying about 1 year, my advise for you is to receive history as it was. However, I am not here to educate you and heal your complexes toward Turks/Azeris (it is not our, Georgian cup of tea). Only thing what I want is to stop Islamisation of the names of Georgian and Christian kings which is anti-historic absurd.Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 13:12, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

@C.Fred: "For clarity, are there sources currently in the article that support the names? It would facilitate discussion if the links were on this page."

Yes. This entire article is written on nothing but WP:RS lines. It has been written by a veteran user, and was reviewed by a veteran user. And no, contrary to disproven claims (once again) by user Giorgi Mechurchle, the usage of Persian/Islamic names is not limited to Persian language sources, nor to just a few "kings", nor to "just" those Georgian rulers who converted to Islam. Almost all Georgian rulers who ruled under the Persian sway, or under the Persian influence, or even those who reigned independent at times such as Teimuraz I, have their Persian names mentioned in English sources in addition to their original Georgian forms. The king Teimuraz I who was one of the kings of eastern Georgia during the long Safavid occupation, was raised in Iran and died in Iran, and vehemently opposed Safavid rule. He remained Christian all of his life, and is mainly (unlike those who converted to Islam, etc.) referred to as Teimuraz in English-language sources. But he is also known as Tahmuras in English-language sources, the Persian spelling of his name, for Georgian Teimuraz in fact derives from the Persian Tahmuras (a figure of the Shahnameh, which had a major impact on Georgian culture). This is mentioned in peer-reviewed English-language sources, which are all cited in this article. These are just "some" examples; every other form of name mentioned in the article is sourced too:

• "In 1605 they revolted and placed Teimuraz/Ṭahmūraṯ I (1605-63) on the throne (...)" -- Keith Hitchins. (2001). "GEORGIA ii. History of Iranian-Georgian Relations" Enc. Iranica, Vol. X, Fasc. 4, pp. 464-470
• "In this connection should be mentioned the role of Khosrow Mirza Rostom (Rostam, Rustam) Khan, the future monarch of Kartli, qollaraqasi of Iran and darugha of Esfahan, who was the illegitimate son of Da’ud Khan, the former king of Kartli and uncle of Simon Khan" -- George Sanikidze. (2021), Charles Melville ed. Safavid Persia in the Age of Empires. "SAFAVID POLICY TOWARDS EASTERN GEORGIA" p. 385
• "Constantine II. King of Kakheti in 1722–1732. The son of King Erekle I and brother of King Teimuraz II, he was born and raised as Mahmad Quli Khan in Esfahan" -- Mikaberidze, Alexander. Historical Dictionary of Georgia. p. 239
• "Their commander was Khusraw Khan’s half-brother Vakhtang VI, the vali of Georgia’s central district of Kartli, who, after a long period of resisting, in 1716 had finally agreed to convert to Islam, after which he became known as Husayn Quli Khan" -- Rudi Matthee (2012). Persia in crisis: Safavid decline and the fall of Isfahan. I.B. Tauris. p. 225
• "Although Archil converted to Islam and assumed the title Šāhnaẓar Khan (1664-75)" -- Keith Hitchins. (2001). "GEORGIA ii. History of Iranian-Georgian Relations" Enc. Iranica, Vol. X, Fasc. 4, pp. 464-470
• "CONSTANTINE II. King of Kakheti in 1722–1732. The son of King Erekle I and brother of King Teimuraz II, he was born and raised as Mahmad Quli Khan in Esfahan. " -- Mikaberidze, Alexander (2007). "Historical Dictionary of Georgia". p. 239
• "Simon I/(Solṭān) Maḥmud Khan then returned to Georgia, ousted his brother from power (...) " -- Rota, Giorgio (2017). "Conversion to Islam (and sometimes a return to Christianity) in Safavid Persia in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries". In Norton, Claire (ed.). Conversion and Islam in the Early Modern Mediterranean: The Lure of the Other. Routledge. p. 53

This entire article is from the perspective of the Safavids, about a Safavid province, and therefore precedence should be given to the Persian forms of their names. This is not the main article about the Kingdom of Kartli, History of Georgia (country), Teimuraz I of Kakheti (amongst others), where I personally would revert anyone who would give precedence to the Persian/Islamic forms of the names. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:27, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Everything what you posted here repeats my position. For Georgian and Christian Kings must by used their Christian/Georgian names, I am happy that finally you admitted well known fact - in English-language sources Teimuraz I is mostly (I can say 99,9%) known with his Georgian/Christian name and not by distorted Persian form which is used very rarely by Iranists and every time after his Georgian/Christian name. So now I will restore my version of article. I am not even speaking about Luarsab II, here you even do not have any rationale but just as vandal distorted the name of this Georgian King.

was raised in Iran

I can not understand why you and your friends are lying every time - what a strange hobby it is. :D Teimuraz I was not raised in Iran, he spent only 1/1,5 year there from 1604 to 1605.

Almost all Georgian rulers who ruled under the Persian sway, or under the Persian influence, or even those who reigned independent at times such as Teimuraz I, have their Persian names

Another lie, all Georgian kings did not have Islamised/Turkised/Persianised name. Such names had only that kings who formally converted to Islam, for example Vakhtang V (Shahnavaz) etc. But that kings who remained Christian never had other name, "your" Tahmurat was not second name of Teimuraz I, it is just distorted form of his name by foreigners (Muslims), he never bore such name. Persians knew Alexander the Great As Iskander, but this does not mean that Alexander had second name. :D

Finally, as you admitted that Teimuraz I and Luarsab II are known for English-language academic society with their original names, I have all right to restore my version of names.

P.S. Kings who formally converted to Islam in my version of the article too have two names (Georgian/Muslim).Giorgi Mechurchle (talk) 13:12, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Would be way better if you sticked to WP:CIVIL. Try to be calm too, accusing your colleagues of lying isn't helpful. --► Sincerely: Solavirum 16:40, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Abouth Gorjestan Vilayat and Province

When was Georgia a province of the Safavids, when Georgia did not exist at that time and several kingdoms were disintegrated, and when did the Iranian Empire call Georgia as the province of Georgia? I request a source to be written and explanations to be written. Or this whole page is a falsification of history.

And why does this page exist at all, when there are pages about the kingdoms of Kartli and Kakheti in Wikipedia? Are you writing alternative history here? CeRcVa13 (talk) 15:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

• "When was Georgia a province of the Safavids, when Georgia did not exist at that time"

Armenia did not exist as a unified territory either, yet it was still known as a distinct geo-cultural entity by contemporaneous and modern sources alike. This is a no-brainer, and referenced properly in this article.

• "(...) and when did the Iranian Empire call Georgia as the province of Georgia?"

Check the numerous cited WP:RS sources by specialists such as Willem Floor, Rudi Matthee, etc.

• "And why does this page exist at all, when there are pages about the kingdoms of Kartli and Kakheti in Wikipedia?"

Because this article is about the Safavid province, whereas those two articles are about the Georgian kingdoms. Hence, two different concepts.

• "Are you writing alternative history here?"

Are you trying to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS out of WP:JDL? - LouisAragon (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

More, for the record:

• "Different again were the relations between the Safavids and Georgia, which alone of the neighbouring states could indeed be called ‘Safavid’ Georgia as a result of the long years of warfare and occupation and, never fully successful, integration charted by George Sanikidze." -- Charles Melville (2021). "Introduction" in Charles Melville Safavid Persia in the Age of Empires . I.B. Tauris. p. 7
• "The number of jurisdictions that were governed by governor-generals or viceroys (vāli) grew from about six to fourteen and by the end of the sixteenth century included: Persian Iraq, Khorasan (Mashhad, Herat), Qandahar, Marv-e Shahijan, Azerbaijan, Shirvan, Qarabagh, Georgia, Fars, Kerman, Khuzestan, Dar al-Marz (Gilan-Mazandaran), Baghdad, ‘Arabestan, Kordestan, and Lorestan." -- Willem Floor (2021) "The Provincial Administration". in Rudi Mathee , the Safavid World. Routledge. p. 218
• "Given the fact that the Safavids regarded Eastern Georgia as an Iranian province, usage of toyul for the Georgian word mamuli appears only natural within the context of the landownership reforms carried out by the Safavids. Drawing up the Persian text of the bilingual documents in the Iranian style was prompted by political considerations. Therefore, both toyul and soyurghal remained purely technical terms and failed to express the peculiarities of landownership relationships. The bilingual documents were taken out of circulation in the late eighteenth century, when Eastern Georgia effectively slipped out of Iran’s control." -- Giorgi Sanikidze. "The Evolution of the Safavid Policy towards Eastern Georgia. in Charles Melville, Safavid Persia in the Age of Empires. I.B. Tauris. p. 388
• "J.P. de Tournefort, the French traveller who visited Georgia and Iran in 1700–1702, described Eastern Georgia as Georgia of Persia, adding that in order to be appointed the vali by the shah, the Georgian king, who is merely the governor of the country, must be a Muslim. De Tournefort also emphasized that the Georgian kings and nobility have to guarantee their loyalty to Iran." -- Giorgi Sanikidze. "The Evolution of the Safavid Policy towards Eastern Georgia. in Charles Melville, Safavid Persia in the Age of Empires. I.B. Tauris. p. 391
• "From the Iranian point of view, Eastern Georgia was the part of the Safavid state (even not fully integrated) governed by the Islamized member of the Georgian royal family, appointed by the shah and supervised by Iranian officials." -- Giorgi Sanikidze. "The Evolution of the Safavid Policy towards Eastern Georgia. in Charles Melville, Safavid Persia in the Age of Empires. I.B. Tauris. p. 393
• ""The reasons why the Safavids allowed scions of former dynasties to continue to govern under their rule (as previous dynasties also had done) were: inaccessibility of the terrain (Mazandaran, Gilan, Lorestan) unattractive climatological conditions (Mazandaran, Gilan, Makran, Sistan), religious, cultural and linguistic differences (‘Arabestan, Georgia); and nomadic lifestyle of the population (Kordestan, Makran, Lorestan, Bakhtiyari). Also, most of these areas were border regions, which served as a buffer with the Ottoman empire (Georgia, Kordestan, Lorestan, Daghestan)." -- -- Willem Floor (2021) "The Provincial Administration". in Rudi Mathee , the Safavid World. Routledge. p. 219
• "Safavid Iran was composed of roughly the same territory that constitutes modern-day Iran. In addition, the Safavid kingdom included Western Afghanistan (Herat and Qandahar), Balkh (1510–16, 1592–1600), Marv, Daghestan, Darband, the current Caucasian republics of Azerbaijan, Armenia and (the eastern part of) Georgia, as well as Bahrain as of 1602" -- -- Willem Floor (2021) "The Economy". in Rudi Mathee , the Safavid World. Routledge. p. 244
• "Not much is known about the size of Safavid Iran’s ethnically, linguistically and religiously diverse population. In the Caucasus, Georgian, Armenian, various other Caucasian languages and Azeri Turkish was spoken. In Azerbaijan, Azeri Turkish, Persian, Armenian and Syriac were spoken, while Kurdish (Kordestan), Luri (Lorestan) and Arabic (‘Arabestan) were mainly spoken in the western and south-western parts of the country. In the Caspian provinces, Taleshi, Gilaki, Mazandarani and Torkoman were spoken, and in the southeast, Baluchi was the main language. In the Persian Gulf, littoral Arabic was the main language, while in the remaining parts of Iran various Iranian dialects were spoken, as well as Pashto in Qandahar. Azeri Turkish was advancing the language frontier and slowly exerting its influence beyond its pre-1500 confines -due to the settlement of Turkmen tribes in the various parts of the country. " -- Willem Floor (2021) "The Economy". in Rudi Mathee , the Safavid World. Routledge. p. 245
• "Although the population was restricted in its movements, there was both forced migration (Kurdish and Turkic tribes to border areas, and Georgians and Armenians to the interior) from one part of the country to the other. " -- Willem Floor (2021) "The Economy". in Rudi Mathee , the Safavid World. Routledge. p. 245
• "Wine grapes were grown all over the country, and grape varieties were numerous. The production of wine was almost universal in Iran. The best wines came from Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Shiraz and Yazd, according to Chardin and Tavernier, although Shiraz wine had the best reputation." -- Willem Floor (2021) "The Economy". in Rudi Mathee , the Safavid World. Routledge. p. 251
• "Foreign trade was carried on by Iranian as well as by foreign merchants. In Isfahan, for example, there were many merchants from a variety of nations: Iranian subjects (Muslims, Jews, Armenians, Georgians) (...)" -- Willem Floor (2021) "Trade in Safavid Iran". in Rudi Mathee , the Safavid World. Routledge. p. 267
• "Along with them, numismatic studies, of the Safavid velayats of Georgia carried out by Tinatin Kutelia, and of Khuzestan by Rudi Matthee, have retained their importance" -- -- Alexander V. Akopyan (2021) "Coinage and the Monetary System". in Rudi Mathee , the Safavid World. Routledge. p. 285

- LouisAragon (talk) 17:27, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

"Armenia did not exist as a unified territory either, yet it was still known as a distinct geo-cultural entity by contemporaneous and modern sources alike. This is a no-brainer, and referenced properly in this article."

What has Armenia got to do with it? Armenia has not existed in the Caucasus as a country since the 11th century and it was a province in different periods of Georgia, the Ottoman Empire and Persia.

"Because this article is about the Safavid province, whereas those two articles are about the Georgian kingdoms. Hence, two different concepts."

are you kidding me? If you are Iranian? The Kingdom of Kartli and the Kingdom of Kakheti existed in the 16th-18th centuries, so those pages are lying, and here I find the story written by unknown historians that Georgia was a province of Safavids. And is this page about Georgia that did not exist in the 16th-18th centuries and which was divided into 3 kingdoms and 4 principalities? Which Georgia was a province that did not exist? were these kingdoms a province which had its own kings?

"Different again were the relations between the Safavids and Georgia, which alone of the neighbouring states could indeed be called ‘Safavid’ Georgia as a result of the long years of warfare and occupation and, never fully successful, integration charted by George Sanikidze"

He did not write such a thing, Safavid Georgia was from Iran's point of view. Even today Iran believes that the Caucasus belongs to it, but does not that mean it is true.

"The reasons why the Safavids allowed scions of former dynasties to continue to govern under their rule (as previous dynasties also had done) were: inaccessibility of the terrain (Mazandaran, Gilan, Lorestan) unattractive climatological conditions (Mazandaran, Gilan, Makran, Sistan), religious, cultural and linguistic differences (‘Arabestan, Georgia); and nomadic lifestyle of the population (Kordestan, Makran, Lorestan, Bakhtiyari). Also, most of these areas were border regions, which served as a buffer with the Ottoman empire (Georgia, Kordestan, Lorestan, Daghestan)."

How merciful was the Iranian Empire. One can easily verify why Georgia was not a province of Iran. Start first with the Abbasids, when they tried to ethnically cleanse the Georgians and settle the Turkomans in Georgia for the purpose of subjugating the Georgian kingdoms.

"Safavid Iran was composed of roughly the same territory that constitutes modern-day Iran. In addition, the Safavid kingdom included Western Afghanistan (Herat and Qandahar), Balkh (1510–16, 1592–1600), Marv, Daghestan, Darband, the current Caucasian republics of Azerbaijan, Armenia and (the eastern part of) Georgia, as well as Bahrain as of 1602"

And where is the source or map of this? Only this one historian writes that this is so. Do he think a vassal state means a province?

""J.P. de Tournefort, the French traveller who visited Georgia and Iran in 1700–1702, described Eastern Georgia as Georgia of Persia, adding that in order to be appointed the vali by the shah, the Georgian king, who is merely the governor of the country, must be a Muslim. De Tournefort also emphasized that the Georgian kings and nobility have to guarantee their loyalty to Iran." -- Giorgi Sanikidze."

Yes, I also wrote that there is talk of a vassal state as evidenced by this quote. The provinces have no king nor nobles to be loyal to Iran. Islam was accepted formally, in practice they were still Christians and were buried in Christian churches (e.g. King Rostom Aka Rostom Khan, etc.).

""Given the fact that the Safavids regarded Eastern Georgia as an Iranian province, usage of toyul for the Georgian word mamuli appears only natural within the context of the landownership reforms carried out by the Safavids. Drawing up the Persian text of the bilingual documents in the Iranian style was prompted by political considerations. Therefore, both toyul and soyurghal remained purely technical terms and failed to express the peculiarities of landownership relationships. The bilingual documents were taken out of circulation in the late eighteenth century, when Eastern Georgia effectively slipped out of Iran’s control." -- Giorgi Sanikidze"

The previous author's lie can be seen in exactly this quote from which I wrote before. Giorgi Sanikidze wrote that Iran considered Georgia as its territory and it is the same today. In your quotes, many lies are written by unknown unknown historians, which were not written by any authoritative historian, and some people have been creating a new history of the Georgian Safavid province since 2008.

P.S. In the quotations made by you, one historian simply wrote a lie about the quote of Giorgi Sanikidze.

The story written by Rudy Matt speaks only from Iran's point of view, that Iran considered Georgia as province, and so on. This is complete nonsense and the wars between the Iranian-Georgian kingdoms speak for themselves. None of the authoritative historians write that the Kingdom of Kakheti and the Kingdom of Kartli were provinces, because this is a lie. CeRcVa13 (talk) 19:05, 28 December 2021 (UTC)