Talk:Alans/Archive 1

Gibraltar?
"Along with the Vandals and Suevi, these Alans eventually reached the shores of Gibraltar." This is so specifically detailed, you'd think it must depend on some reference. Can anyone pull this together and return it to the article? (Cantabria, yes, but Gibraltar?) --Wetman 05:24, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

“Gallaeciam Wandali occupant et Suevi, sitam in extremitate Oceani maris occidua. Alani Lusitaniam et Carthaginiensem provincias, et Wandali cognomine Silingi Baeticam sortiuntur”

//hbar.phys.msu.su/gorm/chrons/idatchrn.htm

 www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Pagoda/7675/historia.html#tarih


 * Also, Sidonius Apollinaris, in his eulogy for Ricimer, says that when Ricimer's grandfather Wallia defeated the Vandals and Alans in 418, "their bodies covered Calpe (i.e., Gibraltar)". --Abou 21:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Eastern Alans?
There seems to be some confusion in the article between the use of the term "eastern Alans" to describe, on the one hand, those Alans remaining in the Caucasus region after the invasion of the Huns; and on the other, Alans who were settled on the middle and lower Danube in the 5th century. I think the latter should be grouped with the 'western Alans', as they likely all moved west together in the late 4th cent. While some of the Danubian Alans served under Attila, they were resettled by the Romans in Moesia after Attila's death and there's no indication that they ever returned to the Caucasus. --Abou 21:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Karachays and Balkars
The link given for the claim that the Karachays and Balkars are "descendants" of the Alans seems only to speculate that some Alans may have assimilated into these Turkic peoples at some point, not that the Alans are their primary ancestors. Could someone with a better knowledge of Russian confirm this? -- Abou 16:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I did a babelfish translation and it is not from alexeev.. it seems barefact or another person wrote it!.. Either way there should be some english material on such a subject and there seems not be.  --alidoostzadeh 02:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Karachays and Balkarians call themselves "alan" and other peoples in the region often name them this way, even ossetians (they call them "æsson" - ases). Megrelians or Svans also call them "alani". No one calls Ossetians with name like "ossete" or "alan" except georgians who call country of southern Ossetians (Ironians) "ovseti", and Chechens who call them "xiri", which comes from the name of georgian Ossetians (Iron). Karachays and Balkarians call ossetians "tegeyli" or "dügerli".

History or Story?
Actually I could not understand this "iranian nomadic group" assertion. What is the referances and where is the evidence? Although there is no evidence which verifies "iranian thesis(?)" there are unquestionable referances about Alan's Turkic origin. Spanish etnograph Manuel Thomas Tabenara and Kazan Professor M.Z. Zakiyev say that Alans were a Turkic originated society. Besides we should analyze the linguistic relations. Linguistic relations are important indicators in these etnographic uncertainities. What are the relevances between iranian and Alan language? Or there is a relation between these? However a Turkish speaking people could understand Alan language but not speak. When I read this article, i questioned "History". Where is the scientific way of history? Is this an unreal story? Ok, I'm saying firsly here: I have discovered America. I have discovered before Columbus in 1451-14 February. Is this History?--Karcha 21:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think the "neutrality" is in question. If you want to see sources and references, put citation tags on the sentences in question.  Therefore I am reverting the non-NPoV template. Hu 21:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The 'Iranian' reference is derived from the original text of the article, taken from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica. This information is also found in the current Encyclopedia Britannica and virtually every other major English-language reference work. You can argue with the accuracy of this information if you have evidence to the contrary, but you can hardly dispute its general acceptance or neutrality. —Abou 13:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Now i'm looking at "Britannica Online, Academic Edition" and I could not see anything about iranian origin there. I wonder which edition yours? Iranian edition?...--Karcha 19:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the only Neutrality in question at this point is yours, Karcha. I think it is inappropriate to slap a tag on the whole article.  You need to put a citation tag on a atatement you think is unsupported. Hu 19:36, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The modern day group most closely aligned with the Alanis of history are in Ossetia and speak languages (Ossetic language) that are clearly in the Iranian group of languages. So your language hypothesis is on shaky ground at best. The existence of some groups of Turkic peoples in the Russian Ciccaucasus that call themselves Alanic Turks is compatible with the Iranic origins of the Alani, who ultimately are related to the Scythians and Sarmatians, who moved south as well as west. There is good genetic evidence of the remnants of the Alani groups who migrated all the way to far western Europe, but just because they don't speak Iranian (or Turkish) doesn't mean that their origins in the steppes of south central Russia should be discarded. Hu 19:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

On the 18 Oct Emendation "Kabardian"
I cannot begin to fathom why "Ossetian" would have been replaced in the following {The Alans were also known over the course of their history by another group of related names including the variations "Asi", "As", and "Os" (Russian Jasy, Georgian Osi). It is this name which is the root of the modern "Kabardian".} How can "Kabardian" have its roots in "Asi", "As", and "Os" (Russian Jasy, Georgian Osi)? Doc Rock 12:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Edits by Nasz 2007-02-19
These edits by Nasz look like a strange mix of vandalism (e.g., This is liguistic Alans bounding, words move like wind but gens can't be teach) and an attempt to make a productive contribution. I don't want to just revert them, but the edits as they stand are unintelligible... —Abou 06:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Dating of Visigoths' defeat of the Alans in Iberia
Deltasigma, what's the argument for dating Attaces' death to 426? I can't find any online information in English regarding Castritius' work that you cite, but Hydatius and the Chronica Gallica both explicitly date this event to 418. Furthermore, Sidonius Apollinaris credits Wallia with defeating the Alans, but Wallia died in 419. It's true that the Goths participated in Castinus' campaign against the Vandals in 422, but there's no indication that the Alans in Iberia were still an independent kingdom at that point. And in 426, the Goths were tied up in a struggle with Aetius over Arles. —Abou 18:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello Abou. My friend... it wasn't Spain then. It was Iberia or Hispania, territories and historical realities that comprise modern Spain and Portugal! Thank you. The Ogre 17:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are right Abou, Hispania is better. The Ogre 19:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Alans and Mongols
I added some articles about their role in Mongol Empire. --Enerelt (talk) 04:05, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Recently-included map
Not sure what it really adds, since only part of the territory of the Alans seems to be shown, taking up a small area at the far right edge of the map... AnonMoos (talk) 11:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Dispute tag
please see File talk:Alania 10 12.png. --KoberTalk 04:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

inaccurate map


This is wrong. The Alans followed the Vandals and did not live on the Seine valley with the Franks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.171.239.21 (talk) 12:41, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * There were multiple tribes of Alans, some of whom are attested in Gaul through the mid-5th century (and there are individual Alans documented in Gaul at least a century after that). Histories mention groups at Orleans and Valence, and place-name evidence suggests they were settled extensively between the Loire and the Meuse. This would have been before the Frankish expansion of the late 5th century. —benadhem (talk) 14:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Zelenchuk Inscription
Look at the Zelenchuk inscription. There are very clear proofs about Ossetic (Iranian) language of Alans. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.96.136.247 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 11 November 2006.

Zelenchuk stone was found in the Karachayevo-Cherkessia republic. It is not known if ossetian-speaking people ever inhabbited the region since there is no such information from local folklore and historical sources (especially medieval ones) are not very descriptive about local population's tongues. L. Zgusta concluded that Zelenchuk inscriptions belongs to ossetian-speakers, however he did not study turkic interpretation of the inscription. V. Miller's interpretation can't be 100% accurate due to the fact that Miller didn't try to translate this text from Karachay or Kabardian languages. Plus Miller's version is quite different from Strukov's original copy, some letters were added and "corrected". Then comes the translation problem. The most dubious, in my opinion, part is the wourd "φουρτ" ("son"), it has 4 different looks in the whole inscription - ΦΟΙ, ΟΙΡΤ, ΦΟΥΡΤ and ΟΥΡ(Τ). Now the names seem strange, for example names like ΑΝΠΑΛ (Anpal or Anbal) and ΠΑΚΑΘΑΡ (Bakatar or Bakadar) have obvious turkic etymologies, and Abayev's assumptions that the latter one was "of turkic or mongolian origin" (it shows the level of Abayev's unprofessionality, because mongolic and turkic names are very different, and the only mongolic name among turkic peoples today is Genghis) look weird, because this stone was found on the territory of historical Alania region, where turkic people according to official russian history were not present until 12-13 cc. and even after that this region was dominated by "ossetian-speaking" population. But anyway, it is quite logical to assume that turkic-speaking Khazarians or Bulgarians had a heavy influence on Alanian population. Name ΛΑΓ (iron. lag - man, husband) is not used among Ossetians and it is not known if it was ever used, this name has caucasian etymology, particularly among Dagestanian populations (Laks & Lezgians). There are also many grammatical mistakes in the stone. Thus I wouldn't trust Miller's and Abayev's interpretations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iliassh (talk • contribs) 22:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

First of all... It's not true that the word "φουρτ" ("son") has 4 different looks... If you check that image out; you can see the only one misspelling: http://www.s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/27_Scythians/ZelenchukSlab_small.gif

In 7th line, there is no whole "fourt" word. But in 9-10, 14, 17-18 ones, there are clear "fourt" words for three times.

The name ANBAL sounds just like ÆMBAL, means "fellow" in Ossetic. Bakatar has Turkic origin as well as Mongolian: "Baghatur is an old Altaic term for a warrior, a military commander, or an epic hero. The word was introduced in the Middle Ages to many non-Altaic languages by conquering Turkic- and Mongol-speaking nomads" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghatur

And this is from Turskish article: Batur (Bahadır), kahraman ve yiğit savaşçı anlamına gelen, Türk ve Moğol dili kökenli onursal ünvan. http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batur

"the only mongolic name among turkic peoples today is Genghis" And this is not true completely. You can find a lot of Mongolian names in Turkey: Timuçin, Kubilay, Subutay, Berke, etc. Kubilay, for example, is most used 337th name in Turkey http://www.ismididikle.com/isim_1099_kubilay.htm

So, there is no unprofessionality about Abayev. Abayev is an esteemed scholar about Scythian works. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abaev

"Name ΛΑΓ (iron. lag - man, husband) is not used among Ossetians and it is not known if it was ever used" It's totally wrong. "Læg" is a well known, daily use word in Ossetic; and it means "man". For to see those words, "ämbal" and "läg": http://www.iranica.com/articles/ossetic

(Farnag (talk) 00:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Alans in Gaul
I have a question: does anybody knows some external source that contains a map of Alan territories in Gaul? I want to create such map for Wikipedia, but I do not have any external source on which I can base that map. show such territory in Gaul, but source for it is not specified. Can somebody, please, specify source for this map or any other external source that have map of Alans in Gaul? PANONIAN 11:22, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * In fact, what I would need is an external source with a map showing Alan state around Orleans that existed in 439 AD, according to this page: http://southosetia.chat.ru/en_histo.html#ala PANONIAN  11:31, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * No such state is shown on the "A.D. 450" map in Colin McEvedy's Penguin Atlas of Medieval History -- only a Visigothic Kingdom which falls a little short of Orleans... AnonMoos (talk) 13:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The Alan settlements did exist in Gaul (speaking of an "Alan state" would be a gross exaggeration though). Alan elements followed Ataulf's Visigoth in south Gaul, but they later defected to the Romans and were settled in the territories shown in the map here and here. --KoberTalk 13:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This atlas and A History of the Alans in the West (Gooogle books has provided only 1 map of 6).--Bouron (talk) 07:29, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

on the section "Alans and Slavs"
The Serboi are quite differently identified in the Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. They seem quite securely continuously connected to "Serbs" rather than "Slavs" Wetman 00:16, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't follow, what exactly do you mean? --Shallot 00:22, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * To elaborate further, I don't see anything quite so different in the identification of the Serboi in that document, and continuously connecting Serboi to Serbs is exactly what the newly added text in this article does, too. --Shallot 01:34, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

An average historically literate reader, meeting such novel information, reasonably needs more help, and asks the questions I've inserted in italics:


 * All these questions are valid, but only if you've never read anything about early south Slavic (before they became the /south/ Slavs) history before :) --Shallot 01:30, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

"Alan tribes living north of the Black Sea may have moved northeast into what is now Poland, merging with Slavic peoples there to become the precursors of historic Slav nations. Third-century inscriptions from Tanais, a town on the Don RiverTanais is not the Don River itself then? in modern Ukraine,


 * I believe Tanais is the name of the ancient Greek colony near Rostov on Don. --Shallot

mention a nearby Alan tribe called the Choroatus or Chorouatos.in a list or how?


 * On two tablets that are kept in the Archeological museum in Saint Petersburg, Russia. This is from the Croats article, actually. --Shallot

The historian Ptolemy''Geography? what book, where?'' identifies the 'Serboi' as a Sarmatian tribe who lived north of the Caucasus,


 * Well, maybe see in the document that you quoted? --Shallot

and other sources who in the 2nd century? indentify the Serboi as an Alan tribe in the Volga-Don steppe in the Third century.


 * That I don't know. --Shallot

Accounts of these names reappear in the fifth century, with the Serboi, or Serbs, established east of the river Elbe similar names all right: we need a hint why these are identical in what is now western Poland, and the Croats in what is now Polish Galicia.


 * Interpolating names is a pretty common theme among historians, at least from what I've seen... --Shallot

The Alan tribes likely moved northeast and settled among the Slavs, dominating and mobilizing how would we know they did that? the Slavic tribes they encountered and later assimilating into the Slav population.


 * Well, I'm not sure about this either, but probably because these Slavs later migrated to the south. Moving by virtue of being "pushed" by another people who came from the east has been a theme of the great migrations for centuries... --Shallot

In 620 the Croats and Serbs were invited into the Balkans by Eastern Roman Emperor Heraclius ''he sent messengers to Poland? a quote from the chronicler would help here''


 * I don't know exactly, but this is standard history book information. Must be in his chronicles or something. --Shallot


 * FWIW, I believe that a source for this is De Administrando Imperio, chapter 30th. There could be others, too. --Shallot 18:31, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

to drive away the Turkic Avars the Avars were Turkic?,


 * Um. What else? The article on Avars says so, too. --Shallot

and settled there among earlier Slavic migrants there were already Slavic migrants in what became Serbia then?


 * The first wave of migrations reportedly happened some 20-30 years earlier, and these were pushed by the Avars or some such, I don't recall the details exactly. Also, not just Serbia but the whole Dinaric Alps. --Shallot

to become ancestors of the modern Serbs and Croats. Some Serbs remained on the Elbe, and their descendants are the modern Sorbs.Sorbs equal Serbs then?


 * Again you question something that is pretty much already explained in the relevant articles. --Shallot

Tenth-century Byzantine and Arab accounts ''we're not very intimately familiar with this literature: history? geography? battles? describe a people called the Belochrobati (White Croats) living on the upper Vistula, an area later called Chrobatia.in Byzantine sources maybe?''


 * I understand the desire to have absolutely everything covered with exact sources, but you have to understand that not every contribution has to be incorrect just because it doesn't have all of its background diligently included as well. --Shallot 01:30, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This entire thesis (i.e., that Alan groups migrated into Poland and assimilated with various Slavic tribes) seems to be derived from the ideology of Sarmatism (the belief of late medieval Polish nobility that their families had a separate origin from that of the Polish peasantry). The only historians I've seen speculate about it are from Poland (e.g., Tadeusz Sulimirski) and the former Yugoslavia (where it also seems to be ideologically motivated). But no Alan group is historically attested anywhere near Poland, or mentioned in association with a Slavic tribe; and the migration of steppe nomads out of the steppe region towards the Baltic would run counter to the behavior of all other such groups over the course of recorded history. --Abou Ben Adhem

Croats are attested near Poland, migrations are part of the recorded history and so on... Some symbols, some words, some traditions in Croatian language and culture have roots from Midlle East but in the same time Croatian and Polish have many surprisingly identical words even languages are not the same. Also Polish accent sounds like archaic Croatian. 83.131.142.53 17:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Polish and Serbo-Croatian (Croatian as defined by the modern state of Croatia) are from different Slavic language groups, so, the relationship is tenuous at best.HammerFilmFan (talk) 02:09, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The whole thoery is plausible but cannot be proven definitively. For sure, there was extensive contacts between Slavs and Iranic nomads, both near the Black Sea and the Balkans. Hxseek (talk) 11:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

"Timeline" needs adjusting
"Forecaucasus" is not a common English term. The template should be adjusted to state "Ciscaucasia." By the way, the first letter is cut-off partially, so I guess there is something wrong with the boundaries in the template. I've contacted the creator on his user page, but it looks like he may no longer be active on Wiki. HammerFilmFan (talk) 02:36, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Alan History
http://books.google.com/books?id=8bZ4c5oZpNAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Page 269

The "russian guard" of kublai were actually alans, not slavic russians.

http://books.google.com/books?id=TQ4NAQAAMAAJ&q=+Russian+guard+existed#search_anchor

Rajmaan (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Separate article for Aorsi?
Was somewhat puzzled why Aorsi redirects to this article. They may well have merged or been subsumed by the Alans in the late 1st cent AD/ early 2nd, but there seems plenty of evidence that they were a separate group of Sarmatian peoples living far to the west of the main areas of Alan settlement prior to this. If the Roxolani and the Siraces have separate articles then so should the Aorsi.5.185.51.160 (talk) 04:22, 24 August 2013 (UTC)woofgrrr

Zulqarneyn
"A very similar story is also mentioned in Qur'an as Zulqarneyn and Yajooj-Majooj" An anonymous User inserted this. Can anyone expand this cryptic remark about an obscure figure and the giants Gog and Magog to make any relevance to historic Alans apparent? Thank you. Wetman 16:06, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * A new link made to the scarcely identifiable Zulqarneyn shows that the remark is not relevant to the Alans after all. Thank you. I'll delete it. --Wetman 22:07, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

genetics
With regard to the links of Iranian and Slavonic peoples, there are discussions at:
 * Jat (people), Talk:Jat (people)
 * Croats, Talk:Croats
 * Bosniaks, Talk:Bosniaks

--Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   11:11, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Kosta Xetagurov
Is anyone interested in information on him, I have alot of information on him I just have to translate it to english.

Aryan brothership
Defning also alans as Indo-Iranians the common ancestors of the Indo-Aryans is brilliant and common. there is just controversial claims but the Aryan brothership doing its job again and again --88.255.183.34 (talk) 09:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Not sure what that means -- the Alans spoke a language belonging to the Iranian language grouping... AnonMoos (talk) 18:52, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it means that grouping the Alans into the Iranic subgroup is inconvenient, likely in a political sense, for whatever movement the user above supports. FWIW, he is from Turkey so I'm sort of clueless as to why he would have a vested interest. --   Alyas Grey   : talk 07:50, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Altaic ancestry of the Alans
There is a small community in Western Iraq calling itself Alani, who seem to have Turkish or Iranian ancestry, and are Sunni Muslims. They use the name Alani as a surname. The name was probably adopted by these people to claim ancestry from the legendary Iranian Alan tribe; however, they are largely arabized. They do present many racial similarities with the Caucasians; it's not uncommon to find red or blond hair among them. However as intermarriage with the Arabs became common, now they have a variety of phenotypes; some show Mongolian features. This supports Altaic ancestry rather than Iranian, since Turkish tribes have large amounts of Mongolian blood. They have been linked to the ten lost tribes of Israel, the Huns, Khazars, and of course the Tatar army of Hulagu Khan (which entered Iraq in 1258). The latter theory was introduced by Shiites, who despise Alanis since they are Sunni. Extremist Shiites use derogatory terms such as "pigs" and "unclean dogs that must be exterminated" to address them. The historical connection to the Alans is based on legends and assumptions. They may have come from Siberia and Central Asia in the year 487 AD, according to their legend that states they came from the area north of the Caucasus, and eastern Tabaristan.
 * Not to mention the etymology of word "Alan" that is rather derived from turkic "alaŋ" (plain, vastness, ground). Iliassh (talk)
 * No. The origin of the name of Alan is from an Iranic root, not Turkic. The Alans were not Turks.  There is no Altaic ancestry of the Alans, they spoke a proto-language whose descendant today is spoken in the areas of Russian Georgia, historically. HammerFilmFan (talk) 07:37, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Genetics section
Can someone review and verify this content/diff? It's removed by User:Krakkos. If that content have English version, please add it to the article (Genetics section) again. --Zyma (talk) 12:34, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Help For Turanians
The Alans are mostly famous for being subjects of the Black Sea Huns. I doubt Uldin

The Avestan references are to religious ideals, not Dark Age warrior cultures. Still, the Indoeuropean etymologies of "As" and "Alan" are obvious. ("Us"...an English word in current usage, "Az"...hero in Kurdish, "As"...self in Lithuanian). It's not surprising that lots of languages feature short honorific pronouns. "Alans" was also a generic Roman term for mercenaries (from "Ala"-wing) and does not mean they were all dudes from the Black Sea. I wish academics would can the patronizing Nart I imagine certain Alans having a fair amount of contact with Turkish groups, probably dating from the Xiongnu war in China. but unless one is writing historical fiction, what honest purpose does it serve? Turks are too sensitive about this ancient history stuff. What do you guys have to prove? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.139.77.194 (talk) 16:29, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

False Etymology?
It is highly unlikely that name "Alan" was derived from termin "Arya" since Avesta mentions Yashd (As) and Airya (Arya) as two different nations or tribes. Nor is direct relationship with sarmatians (in Avesta "Sairima") seems right, as these tribes were already separate nations in the time of Avesta. Chinese named Alans "Yan-zai", and later "A-lan-liao" (probably "Alanlar" in turkic - Alans), which can't be etymologized through eastern-iranian language. It is not known if ossetian word "Iron" (means "Ossetian nation" in Ironian (southern) dialect) had form "Ar" or even "Al" before, as claimed by Abayev. We can as well make turkic etymology of this word ("er" - man) or even basque ("ar" - man) or manchurian ("nyalma" - man), and it results in nonsensical etymology, which has little to do with reality. Is there any real iranian etymology for name "As"? The only possible etymology of this name, in my opinion, is turkic ös or öz (meaning: "self"). And the absence of name "iron" or "iratta" among northern Ossetians makes it highly unlikely that they have anything to do with Alans. Iliassh (talk) 21:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not go by your "opinions" - we state scholarly opinions from Reliable Sources. HammerFilmFan (talk) 06:55, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The key word there is "reliable". Iliassh is right to question the derivation of Alan from Aryan, which does seem unlikely, and the current footnote reference is actually to a tertiary source (another encyclopedia), not a secondary source (such as a published article documenting an actual scholar's opinion), as it should be according to Wikipedia standards. And HammerFilmFan is correct that Iliassh's further speculations are not relevant here. (Wikipedia standards classify it as original research, which is also a no-no.) What the article needs is a reliable secondary source giving a documented explanation of the name's origin, and preferably further sources documenting any legitimate alternative theories. 96.239.82.80 (talk) 19:27, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

"Wikipedia does not go by your "opinions" - we state scholarly opinions from Reliable Sources" Look at that answer. No logical discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.0.184.252 (talk) 11:22, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Placenames
Names incorporating Alan are for the Gascon saint revered by the Breton people. Where is the evidence for a tribal origin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.43.106.209 (talk) 06:22, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You might want to look at the article Alan (given name). Most sources in that article treat that Alan and these Alans as false cognates.  Ian.thomson (talk) 11:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, wait, I see you're referring to content at Alans. While most sources do treat the names as distinct, there are still some reputable sources that place these Alans as the source of the western European name.  The phrasing could acknowledge the lack of consensus better, but it's not enough to actually remove the material.  Ian.thomson (talk) 11:40, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Physical Appearance
Might as well remove that section,it only contains 2 sentence and one from the fourth century. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 10:10, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alans. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160101100219/http://www.rtp.pt/index.php?article=264957&visual=16&rss=0 to http://www.rtp.pt/index.php?article=264957&visual=16&rss=0

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:24, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2018
"jn"= "in" 2605:E000:9149:8300:8C8B:FAD8:8CC4:8059 (talk) 07:15, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:42, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Removed edit: Alans? Celtic? related to the term "Atlantic"?
''The Alans left numerous toponyms in Gaul such as: Alains (Eure), Alaincourt (Eure), Les Allains (Eure), Allainville- en-Drouais (Eure-et-Loir), Allainville aux Bois (Seine et-Oise), Allainville-en-Beuce (Loiret), Courtalain (Eure-et- Loir), and Allaines (Eure-et-Loir). The major areas of settlement were Valence and their capital Orleans. It seems that the personal name Alan, which originated in Armorica, derives from these people.

There was a tribe in northern Spain (Basque Country) of Celtic (?) origin named A(t)lan(tii) or Atlanti, close to the Atlantic Ocean. Is it possible the Alans and Atlantii are related or the Alans from the Caucasus region are connected to peoples (i.e. the "Sea Peoples" in Ancient Egyptian history) of the Black Sea, Mediterranean and Iberian Peninsula coasts? Alan has more to do with the term "Aryan" than Atlan(tic) and were from the original Indo-European homeland of Southern Russia in Europe west of the Urals, Central Asia (esp. around the Caspian Sea) and the Caucasus near Persia (Iran). 12.218.47.124 (talk) 04:15, 30 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Pure nonsense, the lot of it! Cagwinn (talk)


 * Alans may have origins in Slavic peoples of southern Russia. It's possible for Slavo-Iranian peoples to traveled across the European continent from the Caucasus - the boundary with Asia to the Atlantic coasts of Portugal and Spain. Alentejo in Portugal is theoretically named for the Alans, despite a lack of other place names named for them in Iberia. 67.49.85.100 (talk) 01:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Connection to Turkmen
Hi,

please look on this edit, seems dubious to me.... Thank You(KIENGIR (talk) 11:35, 27 July 2020 (UTC))
 * I've reverted it as wp:fringe, even if the book really says that.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

''Hello,

This is not Fringe as I am citing the Dictionary of Turkmen Enthonyms is a book published by the Ylym (Science) publisher in Soviet Turkmenistan and is there on Google Books. The book was fully approved by all scientific authorities, the main editor was the famous Turkmen Academician Mr. Pygam Azimov (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2,_%D0%9F%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%BC_%D0%90%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87) who was by the way the editor of the Turkmen Soviet Encyclopedia. So I am citing reliable sources! -

Bayram A.'' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bayram A (talk • contribs) 14:22, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Sources from former soviet republics in Central Asia are well known for engaging in nationalist fantasies. The Alan’s spoke an Iranian language, they were not Turkic. And discussion belong on the article talk page, not here.—Ermenrich (talk) 14:26, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

You started the discussion here. Please look at the Wikipedia page for Turkmens which in the Origins section says: "These early Turkmens are believed to have mixed with native Sogdian peoples and lived as pastoral nomads until being conquered by the Russians in the 19th century". The article for Sogdians says: "Sogdia (/ˈsɒɡdiə/) (Sogdian: soɣd) or Sogdiana was an ancient Iranian civilization". So, there is no scientific conflict in saying that part of Iranian Alans were incorporated into the Turkmen people.

Bayram A.
 * No, you started the discussion here. Sogdia and the Alans are not related.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

You are not a scholar, why do you put your personal opininon and lack of knowledge of history before the well-established scientific facts? This is against Wikipedia rules- Bayram A.
 * , this looks like nonsense to you too, right? Who else should I involve in this discussion?--Ermenrich (talk) 14:51, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * This very much seems like nonsense, the Turkmen were decidedly Turkish; the Tajik are the only Iranian people in Central Asia. Theoretically, it is possible that some small Alam tribe mixed with them, but the Turkmenology source he provided was very much a nationalist source. I would like it if he could provide a pdf or at least a link to one of the sources so we could see if the sources actually say that. Even if they do, some small tribe in Turkmenstan might not have due weight. Zoozaz1 (talk) 15:14, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * As a guess, I presume there was a real "Alam" and "Olam" tribe, but very likely they have no descent to the ancient Alams and some nationalist journals simply made the connection to connect the Turkmen with Iran. Zoozaz1 (talk) 15:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


 * It's nonsense and WP:FRINGE plus some kind of nationalistic POV-pushing. The user did similar edits on Turkmens; e.g. stuff like this and much more. --Wario-Man (talk) 05:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)