Talk:Babak Khorramdin/Archive 1

Your reverts are pov. Please do not remove the passages about abu muslim. He was defenitly a very important factor in khorram-din movement's idealogy.

Al khorrami is simply the arabic version of the persian khorrami. Google hits does not prove anything. Although there is nothing wrong with mentioning different versions of the name. please don't remove other peoples inputs.

Oops, there is no POV - the passage was removed accidentally however during your reversion my linking has disappeared but it doesn't matter. I've recently read that Babek's birthday is celebrated on June 4-5. Is there any reference prooving this? Brand 23:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents [hide]

* 1 Ethnicity * 2 Name * 3 Khoramdinan * 4 Pictures * 5 copy edit * 6 Image description * 7 Why the ethnicity discussion? * 8 The debate about the name and ethnicity of Babak

Ethnicity

The ethnicity debate should be taken out of the article. Everyone knows he was Persian. What a few Turkic nationalists say should not be taken seriously. Their propoganda and lies does not belong in a encyclopedia article. That section makes the whole article seem silly. I really think it should be removed. The support and evidence that he was Persian is all there. Dariush4444 18:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, there is no need to have his name in "azari" as well. He was not "azari" and his name is PURE ancient Persian. Besides, almost all "azari" names are Persian anyways. Please remove the POV...it is just Ridiculous.Dariush4444 18:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Name

Azeri Google shows more hits on "Babək əl-Xürrəmi" rather than on "Babək Khorram-Din". Brand 21:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Your right, I corrected it, thanks Baku87 09:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)Baku87

Although, everybody knows that google hits do not prove anything, it is just for your more information. If you try Babak Khorram-Din instead of Babək Khorram-Din in Google you can see more hits than Babək əl-Xürrəmi. Also try Babak Khoramdin.--Behmod 09:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The letter ə is a combination of a+e so its only correctly written in Latin Azeri.

Khoramdinan

I would like to ask everybody who thinks Babak was a Turk. If he was a Turk, why he called his movement name "Khoramdinan", which is a Persian name. If he was really a Turk, his movement should have had a Turkic name?

that's because he wasn't a turk, he was a true azari. it wasn't untill 200 years after babak that the turks migrated/invaded azarbaijan Rugsnotbombs 15:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Being Azeri doesnt mean being a Turk. Babek was Azeri. There is a ancient Azeri language which is now extinct who's language was that then? Baku87 15:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

well, azari's are turkic speaking now, and putting azari would confuse them. since you all refuse to believe the turkification of hte region, you cannot have your cake and eat it too.Iranian Patriot 16:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Baku87! Please note that ancient Azari was just a Persian language dialect (more correct to say Pahlavi dialect). --behmod talk 19:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

There is a statue in Azerbaijan of Babek can anyone perhaps add this picture to this article? Baku87 23:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Baku87

copy edit

i corrected the article. it does not need the copy edit tag any longer. Iranian Patriot 23:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Image description

The mention of Azeri painter is getting to be reverted by pro-Iranian editors. Funny. --Brand спойт 19:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The reason I reverted the painters name is that I think the phrase "Artist's impression" should be mentioned in the text since no one knows what Babak khorramdin looked like. And also the nationality of the painter is irrelevent for this article. So I suggest this image description: "Artist's impression of Babak (by Sadiq Sherifzadeh 1944)" I also suggest that people that know more than I do, start an article about the painter and link it to this page. I do not want to enter a revert war here. So please state your objections before any changes.

Arash the Bowman 12:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Now we have a compromise, it's OK. --Brand спойт 12:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Why the ethnicity discussion?

No serious book or scholar (from whatever background except Turkish) today even mentions that silly, artificial, politically driven "dispute", which in fact is nonexistent amongst serious people. The fact that Wikipedia feels the urge to mention foreign unscientifical nationalistic "views" in almost every topic concerning Persia merely shows a weakness of this encyclopedia and the lack of its rigid seriosity.

The debate about the name and ethnicity of Babak

The article talks about the ethnicity of Babak not like it is an article in an unbiased encyclopedia but like if it is an article DEFENDING the FACT that Babak was not a Turk in any way. OK, but isn't this website an encyclopedia? That part of the artcile is just too emotional and nationalistic and does not have its place in an encyclopedia. The article should mention that "Turks also pretend that Babak was a Turk and bring this argument and that, and Persians say that he was Persian and they bring this argument and that." And leave the decision to the reader to make! Bm79 07:05, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Not really. What scholars say about the issue is important. Babak Khorramdin is a clear Persian name just like the city Balal-Abad where he was born. Plus two ancient chroniclers have directly called him Persian. The name of his master was also Javidan Poor Shahrak. Khorramdins were a Mazdakite sect (an off-shoot of Zoroastrianism). Turks enterted the area around the time of Seljuqids and their previous religion before Islam was mainly Shamanism and somtimes Judaism (Khazars). --alidoostzadeh 09:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Dear Alidoostzade, in none my edits were any mention about any Turk. Was there? Did I say that it is not a Persian name? What I added said nothing about Turks. Why do you mention the word "Turk" when removing my edits? What I has written was about being more informative according to current accepted views. You removed Azerbaijan (that I had addes). Why? Babak's ethnicity was somewhat a mixture of many ethnic groups, but he was from Azerbaijan, so writing "Persian family" is not being impartial becasue his family was from Azerbaijan, so if those who lived in Azerbaijan at that time were Iranians (known as Persian at that time as being part of the Persian empire) that does not mean they were ethnic Persians as we now know. No-one denies him being from Azerbaijan, which was a part of Persia, so let's leave it to this, and that says nothing about Turks. Please bring your argument, or let's have the changes, which have nothing to do with Turks or Turkics or alike. Bm79 17:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Babak is explicitly mentioned as being Persian in sources (Armenian and Arab). Thus this makes him a "Persian family". At that time there was some Arabs, Armenians ..in Azerbaijan. The Arabs came during the Ummayad era. Some other source even mention his family was from Mada'in. But we know he was born in Balal-Abad near Ardabil. Thus Azerbaijan is mentioned through Ardabil. --alidoostzadeh 17:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, some sources that say he was "Persian" did they mean him in an ethnic way, or being a man from Persia (Persian Empire)? I am trying to be balanced and impartial here. Why did you take out reference to Azerbaijan? That territory back then was still called Azerbaijan, or Atropetene, so it is OK to mention this. The ETHNIC background os his family may also be mentioned but then we shall write who his mother and father were so that the reader makes up his mind. Bm79 11:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Babak was both from the ancient Persian Empire and an ethnic Persian. His name - Bābak (actually Pāpak, "littel father", a reference to the founder of the Sassanid dynasty) - underlines his Persian origin. His entire biography, his rebellion, his followers, himself being a follower of Abu Muslim ... everything points toward a Persian origin. Honestly, I have never seen ANY reliable or scholarly source disputing this. Tājik 12:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, we are repeating the same thing again. Please, pay a bit attention to what I am writing please! Babak was from the land of Atropatene (as Azerbaijan was known then, or Azarabadagean), so I suggested to mention the his homeland, which was delted. I asked why, and I was responded like above. He was FROM Atropaeten or Azerbaijan, as we want to name. It is suggested that his father came from somewhwre and some sources suggest that his father war Persian. I did not disagree. His mother was a native of Azerbaijan, right? And he was born in Azerbaijan, right? It is very important to mention this. Agree? We want to inform the readers, right? Bm79 13:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It is such a pity that so many of my fellow Iranians are so much anti-Azerbaijani, which is also an Iranian region. Such a pity! Wherever is written something about Azerbaijan or Azerbaijani people come out and change Azerbaijan to Persia and Azerbaijani to Persian. Wikipedia defines Persian as an ethnicity, not the Persian Empire or the country, so we shall respect other people's heritage and history if we want to be respected. What do we gain from these wasting attempts. We will never change history but we are making fun of ourselves, of Iran, in front of the English-speaking world. Babak was from Azerbaijan (Atropatene) of the time, and I wrote Atropatene, it was removed. Babak's castle is located in Iranian Azerbaijan and every history book mentions that he was from Azerbaijan. His family was Persian? His family was from Azerbaijan. His ethnicity? Please bring me a source in which it is written that Babak was Persian in its ethnic sense! Babak's mother was native from Azerbaijan as yourselves said, and he lived in Azerbaijan. Please people, be balanced and impartial! Bm79 14:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

First of all, please do not change the text unless you have good sources. Second: whether his mother was a native of Azerbaijan or not does not change the fact that he was born to a Persian family. A "native of Azerbaijan" does NOT mean that she was not Persian. Ethnic Persian settlements in Azerbaijan and surrounding areas, most of all around Lake Urmia, is attested in many ancient sources! His father was - according to the most reliable sources - a Persian from Ctesiphon (the former capital of the Persian Empire and a "Persian land" up to the 15th century, as attested by the Arab scholar Ibn Khaldun!). If you want to mention the name "Azerbaijan", than it's fine with me. But you not only added the name, but also deleted the word "Persian" without any good reason! Tājik 14:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

To Bm79 I have no problem about writing Azerbaijan. Indeed we can Balal-Abad, near Ardabil,Azerbaijan in Iran.. Armenian sources clearly say "Of Persian Race". So does Ibn Hazm who puts him in a sect of Majus. As for sources, here are two one in Armenian and one in Arabic [1]. Note the french translation says "a man from the Persian race". Unfortunately pan-turkists in wikipedia have claimed Azerbaijanis as a Turkic speaking group. Thus Babak Khorramdin and Javidan Poor Shahrak would not fit under this description. Babak was from Azarbaijan, just like the name Atropatene is Iranian name like Azerbaijan and there are many Kurds, Talysh, Armenians, Assyrians, Tats.. etc from Azerbaijan. But at that time turkification of Azerbaijan did not start so to say he was azerbaijani (when its primary meaning in wikipedia is defined as Turkic speaker) is incorrect in that sense. But yes he was from Azerbaijan just like Rostam Farrokhzad who is mentioned in Tabari/Shahnameh. Also many sources say the language of Azarbaijan was Persian, Pahlavi, Ajami and etc but that is not all. In the case of Babak we have at least two direct referencs to his origin. Note also what the Oxford scholar says: Azerbaijan was the scene of frequent anti-caliphal and anti-Arab revolts during the eighth and ninth centuries, and Byzantine sources talk of Persian warriors seeking refuge in the 830s from the caliph's armies by taking service under the Byzantine emperor Theophilos. [...] Azerbaijan had a Persian population and was a traditional centre of the Zoroastrian religion. [...] The Khurramites were a [...] Persian sect, influenced by Shiite doctrines, but with their roots in a pre-Islamic Persian religious movement. Babak's mother name in the sources is "Mahru". His dad is called "Mardaas" (name in the Shahnameh. Note there was no persian empire at the time of Babak and Iran was under the control of Caliphates of Baghdad. But Babak Khorramdin and Maah-yazdyaar (Maaziyaar) of Tabarestan and Ali Mazdak of Esfahan and other zoroastrian/mazdakite sects tried to free Iran from caliphate rule. They were brave and belong to all Iranian people. BTW an old manuscript of Safina Tabriz is an excellent mirror of the culture of Azerbaijan in the Ilkhanid era. As can be seen from this text, even during the Ilkhanid era, Turkish did not yet take root in Tabriz. [2]. And note I am one of the biggest proponents of language replacment and not starting history from zero when a language of a region changes. But unfortunately some other users in Wikipedia have pushed some other theories and thus it may lead to confusions. --alidoostzadeh 03:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari
Hi. I've made a few additions and changes based on at Tabari's History. I've only so far drawn on at Tabari's account of the reign of al-Mu'tasim. This covers only the last few years and the death of Babak. At Tabari may not have as much about the earlier years, but he does have something. I'll check this and add what seems good later. Peace. Gallador 19:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Ancient historical figure and modern nationalistic debates
I removed this part, since I have not seen any scientific circle of debate. I do not think we can take any nationalists debate as encyclopedc if it is not sourced or mentioned. Also some sources have said Tarkhan along with Rostam and Azin was the name of one of babak's commanders, but this title has appeared in Soghdian and Persian also and languages borrow from each other. Dehkhoda also says it is a military title (like Sardar) which could make sense. Clauson (the main turkish etymology) actually mentions it is a Xiongu word that entered Turkish and there is an Ossetic/Alanic title Tarkhan unrelated etymologically to Xiongu one. For example Shirvanshah's were not turkic but they used the title Khaghan and etc. Babak, Rostam, Azin, Javid Pur Shahrak, Mahru (babak's mom), Mardas (babak's dad) are all Persian names mentioned in Shahnameh and Tarkhan is also mentioned as the title of Bijan the Soghdian ruler of Samarqand.. I do not think this section is encyclopedic so I have put it in the talkpage.

''In recent years, there has been debate on the ethnic origin of Bābak, even so trying to fit an ancient figure to a certain nationality goes against any objectiveness. Some Turkish nationalists claim that Bābak was an Azeri Turk. On the other hand, Iranian nationalists and modern scholars retain the established opinion that he was Persian and that at the time of Bābak, the Turks had not yet migrated to Azerbaijan.

From the Turkish point of view, it is said that Bābak's name cannot be shown as proof of his alleged Persian roots, because it was not his real name. Names of some of his lieutenants such as Tarkhan, who is claimed as being a Turk, and Azrak who was an Arab, show that the movement was of mixed ethnicity and was a broad regional freedom movement against the Caliphates rule. Existence of Muslims among Bābak's supporters also reinforces this assertion.

According to the Persian point of view, Bābak's (more correctly Pāpag) name is purely from Persian (Iranian) origins. Turkic peoples migrated to Azarbaijan several centuries later. Bābak was a follower of Zoroastrian Persians and Abū Muslim of Khurassan. There is no proof supporting a Turkish background. There was never any mention of Babak being Turkic in any of the literary works of the time. He has always been known as an Iranian and Zoroastrian patriot. Also, the name of the province, Āzarbāyjān, is an Arabicized form of Persian word Āzarpadgān, meaning "Place of Guardians of Holy Fire". The ancient Arab historian Ibn Hazm, in the book "Religion and People", and ancient Armenian historian Vardan, in his "World History", clearly and explicitly mentioned Bābak as being an ethnic Persian. The name of Bābak's father was Mardas and his mother, in some sources, has been called Maru. Both names are Persian and found in the Shahname. The mentor of Bābak was Javidan pur Shahrak, which is another Persian name. Also, Bābak's two most important commanders, Adhin and Rostam, were ethnic Persians.

The name Tarkhan is also mentioned as "Tarhan" (which is an Arabic word) in some sources. In addition, the name also occurs in the Shahnameh and some sources mention that the Sogdian rulers of Samarghand also went by this name, seemingly using it as a military title. Tarxan means "judge" in Ossetian (related to Alannic and Sogdian) and this meaning can be traced to Indic but the Turkic word does not have the same definition, and the appearance of the same word in both languages could be mere coincidence.

One of his comments that confirms his non-Turkic origin is his letter to the Byzantine emperor Theophilus (r. 829-42) said:

... Mo'tasem has no one else left, so he has sent his tailor and his Turkish cook to fight me ...

Finally it should be noted that there are no traces of Turkic tribes in Azarbaijan before the Ilkhanid era and all sources at that time mention that Azarbaijani's spoke Azar-Pahlavi (the local dialect of middle Persian), which continues today in the form of Talyshi, Kurdish, Tati and other north western Iranian languages. Due to the invasion of the Oghuz Turks and later Turkic tribes the region became predominantly Turkic speaking. All this was after the time of Bābak. From the Iranian point of view the claim that he was a Turk is recent and propagated mostly by Pan-Turkists.

The famous Orientalist and expert on Azerbaijan's history, Vladimir Minorsky, writes:

[... as consequence of Oghuz Turkic domination in the Caucasus, beginning the 12th century] the Iranian population of Ā dh arbāyjān and the adjacent parts of Transcaucasia became Turkophone while the characteristic features of Ā dh arbāyjānī Turkish, such as Persian intonations and disregard of the vocalic harmony, reflect the non-Turkish origin of the Turkicised population ...

In addition, Oxford Medieval historian Professor Mark Whittow has noted that: Azerbaijan was the scene of frequent anti-caliphal and anti-Arab revolts during the eighth and ninth centuries, and Byzantine sources talk of Persian warriors seeking refuge in the 830s from the caliph's armies by taking service under the Byzantine emperor Theophilos. [...] Azerbaijan had a Persian population and was a traditional centre of the Zoroastrian religion. [...] The Khurramites were a [...] Persian sect, influenced by Shiite doctrines, but with their roots in a pre-Islamic Persian religious movement.''

He was PERSIAN
The part: Ancient historical figure and modern nationalistic debates is not scientific and I do not think any journal has referred to such a debate. Indeed it is useless debate since Azerbaijanis have Persian/Iranian heritage as well. (According to Swietchowski it is harmonic symbosis of Iranian and Turkic culture and Planhol has said the ratio seems to be more Iranian but acknwoledges the other factor). Babak Khorramdin according to classical sources is called Persian (Ibn Hazm, Vardapet) and also Encyclopedia of Islam, and other scholars. I don't think that is an issue between historians. Simply the language of Azerbaijan before Turkification was mainly Middle Persian dialects and also Babak's father was from Mada'in (Sassanid capital of Iraq) according to oldest sources. Also the article should focus on the history of what babak did. So I am going to fix this article and make it more encyclopedic.--alidoostzadeh 02:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Movie
I created the article for the movie: Babek (film). Therefore, I removed the movie section of the article, as this article is about Babak the person, not the movie. I'll expand the movie article later.Azerbaijani 17:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I will put links to that article you created on this page as it is related subject.--Dacy69 19:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC) Sorry - you did already.--Dacy69 19:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Azeri or Persian?
The article says Babek was born in a Persian family, such a statement without any objective source is very POV. Most historians agree Babek was Iranian of Azeri ethnicy. So now I also ask you, what is the difference between Persian and Iranian? Arent Persians also Iranians, so why not simply refer them as so. I corrected this mistake, or else Iranians of Azeri ethnicy will also have the ability to claim everyone as Azeri rather then Persian. Baku87 (talk) 20:34, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The only source shows that he was half Persian and half Azeri, so best thing we can do is just note Iranian. This is most objective. Baku87 (talk) 20:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Classical sources use "Persian". See the introduction.  Persian means speaker of Middle Persian/Persian dialects, in the west used equivalently for Iranian  and has other meanings.  It does not necessarily limit itself to one Iranian dialect (Modern Dari-Persian) or region.  So it has a wide definition .  So context here is important.  It is the same even with the word "Azerbaijani".  Is a Zoroastrian or Tat or Talysh or Kurd from Azerbaijan an Azerbaijani?  Geographically yes, nationality yes (citizen of the republic of Azerbaijan), but in the 20th century or so, the term "Azerbaijani" as an ethnicity became associated with Turcophone people of the area.  So in order to be clear without arguing which definition applies, the issue with this regard is Babak's language/ethnicity rather than anything else.  We can't apply 19th/20th century ethnonyms here.  So perhaps you mean Babak was an Oghuz Turk?  I disagree.  At the time of Babak and even at least up to the Ilkhanid times, Persian and Iranian dialects were prevalent in Azerbaijan.  For example the name Azerbaijan itself is of Iranian origin and not Turkic (now I am speaking about language and the context should be clear).  All the cities mentioned with regards to Babak: Barzand, Khash, Daval-Rood, Ardabil, Saderasp/Saterasp, ZahrKosh, Badh have Persian names as well.  Babak was also the name of the founder of the Sassanid dynasty and is a Persian name.  One of the dialects of Persian is Khorasani Persian or Dari.  But Middle Persian languages are also called "Persian".  "Azeri" Turkic did not exist in Azerbaijan during the time of Babak and it was not spoken in Azerbaijan or Arran.  His master's name was Persian: Javidan Poor Shahrak.  His wife's name was Persian: Mah-roo.  And the language of Azerbaijan at the time of Babak was a Middle Persian dialects and Iranian languages like Talyshi or Old Azari language.  His name is Persian: Babak.  His sect is also Persian: Khoramdin which is a descendant of Mazdak movement, itself a sect of Zoroastrian.  Classical sources (Arab, Armenian) as well modern Historians have used the term Persian.  Also Greek-Byzantium documents call the Khorramdins as Persians. M. Whittow, "The Making of Byzantium: 600-1025", Berkley: University of California Press, pp. 195, 203, 215: Excerpts:Azerbaijan was the scene of frequent anti-caliphal and anti-Arab revolts during the eighth and ninth centuries, and Byzantine sources talk of Persian warriors seeking refuge in the 830s from the caliph's armies by taking service under the Byzantine emperor Theophilos. [...] Azerbaijan had a Persian population and was a traditional centre of the Zoroastrian religion. [...] The Khurramites were a [...] Persian sect, influenced by Shiite doctrines, but with their roots in a pre-Islamic Persian religious movement. " .  Indeed Khorramdini is just a continuation of Mazdakism itself a sect of Zoroastrianism.
 * In terms of Khurramites, Persian/Iranian refers to linguistic/ethnic term.  See here for example:  The term was also used specifically for those Iranians who fought the ¿Abbasid caliph Mo¿tasáem be'lla@h (r. 833-41) and enrolled in the Byzantine army of the iconoclast emperor Theophilos I (r. 829-42). .  Babak's last words were also Persian: "Zahi Aasaani"  or "Asaaniyaa".  So yes Iranians today can be of Turkic-speaking background (due to the long rule of Turkic speaking dynasty and movement of Turkish nomads, some areas of Iran became Turkic-speaking), but this did not exist during the time of Babak-e-Khorramdin.  Note the name "Azerbaijani" as ethnonym to Turkic speakers if fairly new (late 19th or early 20th century), and from a geographic point of view, at the time of Babak, Azerbaijan would strictly be identified with North-Western Iran.  For example, in terms of modern setting, historian Ighrar Aliyev is both Azerbaijani (a Talysh from the country of Azerbaijan).  But we need to use definitions that were used at the time of Babak.
 * If he was of Turkic-Oghuz origin (which is what I assume is what you mean by "Azeri" and modern Turkic speakers of the Caucus identify themselves with it seems(from the general feeling I get in Wikipedia)), classical sources and modern academic sources would have identified him as so. Actually most of Babak's enemies were rather of Turkic origin.  For example, not only the Cailph Muta'ism (himself born of a Turkic mother) and the main enemy of Babak, but also  Ashnaas, Aytaakh, Boga Kabir (Turkic gaurds of the Caliph from Khazaria or Central Asira) whom Babak fought against.  Afshin was most likely of Sogdian origin (per Encyclopedia of Islam and per the book "A thousand swords").  And Maziyar's(an ally of Babak in Mazandaran) Brother, Kuhyaar, writes to Afshin and Babak: "We have three enemies: Arabs, Berbers (the North African slaves who served as Soldiers in the army of the Caliph), and Turks".  Note I do not agree/disagree with that statement(perhaps due to its own political conditions it might have been understandable or something?), I am just bringing it to show that the Khorramdinan were not a Turcophone movement.  Rather they were a sect with roots in pre-Islamic Iran and they predate the linguistic Turkification of Azerbaijan by many centuries.   They also had a close connection with Abu Moslem Khorasani, and in some soures, Babak identifies himself as a descendant of Abu Moslem through the daughter of Abu Moslem.  Anyhow the Khorramdinan were a psuedo-Zoroastrian sect, where-as the Turkic people in Central Asia were Shamanistic and when the Seljuqs conquered the area, they were Hanafi Muslims.
 * Also let me add Babak Khorramdin was really popularized by nationalists in Iran and by the USSR in the caucus (due to the communistic nature of Mazdakism). This was all in the last century or so.  So in order to understand the Khorramdin belief (a sect based on Mazdakism and itself a reformist sect of Zoroastrianism), it should be approached with dispassionate analysis.  --alidoostzadeh (talk) 15:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The article shows clearly he was half Azerbaijani and half Persian, that makes him an Iranian. And please next time just give me decent argument rather then just copy and paste somebody else his story Baku87 (talk) 18:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Decent arguments were given, so please read them. The article doesn't show anything except what is sourced.  Azerbaijani today is defined as Turkic speaking and mainly Shi'i people.  At the time of Babak Khorramdin, this modern group was not present in Azerbaijan and this came about as a synthesis of Iranian elements and Oghuz migrants, which changed the language although probably did not have a wide genetic effect.  So if you are assuming that Babak was Turkic speaking (or any of his family for that matter) because his mother was from Azerbaijan, that is misplacing time and history.  That is a geographical argument, but from History point of view, Azerbaijan was not Turkic speaking during the time of Babak.  Just like ancient Egyptians did not speak Arabic before Islam.  That is why the article says his mother was from Azerbaijan.  She sure was not Turkic speaking since the population of Azerbaijan was not Turkic speaking during the time of Babak.  Babak's mother was Iranic speaking much like much of Azerbaijan back then.  Mahroo is the name given in classical sources which is Persian.  Babak is also an Iranic name (founder of the Sassanid dynasty was called Babak).  His master's name was also Javidan the son of Shahrak.  And his sect is Khurramite/Mazdaki (both Persian words) which is not Turkic but an off-shoot of Zoroastrianism (Iranian religion).  All classical sources have stated he was Persian (Armenian, Iranian, Arabic) and his sect was a Persian (Khorramdini) and Azerbaijan had a Iranic speaking population back then. That is why his name is not Turkic and his sect was a offshoot of Zoroastrianism, which is an Iranic not Turkic religion. We are not talking about nationalities or 19th/20th century or modern citizenship.  We are talking about background here, which today Babak would be identified as Tati.  Note Mark Whittow: M. Whittow, "The Making of Byzantium: 600-1025", Berkley: University of California Press, pp. 195, 203, 215: Excerpts:Azerbaijan was the scene of frequent anti-caliphal and anti-Arab revolts during the eighth and ninth centuries, and Byzantine sources talk of Persian warriors seeking refuge in the 830s from the caliph's armies by taking service under the Byzantine emperor Theophilos. [...] Azerbaijan had a Persian population and was a traditional centre of the Zoroastrian religion. [...] The Khurramites were a [...] Persian sect, influenced by Shiite doctrines, but with their roots in a pre-Islamic Persian religious movement..  Ethnically Babak was Iranic speaking and he came way before the Turkification of language in Azerbaijan, which started from the Seljuq era.  The Khorramdin religion is also a Iranic sect.  I would read the scholarly references in the article. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


 * To Baku. Ali gave you decent argument. Persian in the historic use had hda another meaning than the contempoaray Persian-speaking ethnic group in Iran. More or less it is the same as the contemporary Iranian (in wider use). It is equal to what Greeks and Arabs called Persian. In Arabic sources both terms Al-Furus (Fors) and Ajam is used. Arabs also used the deregoatory word Ajam to refer to Iranians (hence also to Azeris, Khorasanis, etc...) later on the Ottoman Turks and Sunni kurds used the word Ajam as well as Arabs (untill today) exclusively to refer to the Shiite Iranians (in wider use, the Fars,Talysh, Lur, Qashqai, Azeri etc...)--Babakexorramdin (talk) 13:33, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Turned in for reward
Vacio, before inserting POV OR next time, please, provide sources for the claim. Thanks. Atabəy (talk) 23:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Babak change to Papak
His true Name is Papak and not Babak.in the years of the arab invasion the change the p to a b. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RaidenFM (talk • contribs) 13:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * In the texts it is written as a B, but the Arabic based Persian Alphabet at that time was not well developed at that time and did not contain the letter P. It is now pronounced with a B. We do not know whether the sound shift had occurred at his time or not. Any way it was post-Islamic time, so it seems probable that the sound shift has already happened.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 22:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

RV
I have reverted a rather unencyclopedic edit by a user. Tajik (talk) 18:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Babak was Persian, Azeris as an ethnciity did not exist back then
Back then, there were no such thing as an "Azeri" (Ethnically atleast). Old Azerbeyjan consisted of mainly TAt Persian speaking people. Turks or Turkic speakers did not live in the midd-east back then, they were still in central asia, and were in noways close to the persian provinces.

Azeri itself is a Persian word (from old middle-Persian pahlavi) meaning fire, and Azerbeyjasn is a old Persian word that means the land of fire.

Now, Babek's name is a Persian name also. Babak did not look Turkish/Asiatic, and he even admitted that he was fighting for the persian people and zoroasterianism (A Persian religion)...

Also, it is simple fact that Azeris are turkified Persians, you can even see from their look, that they do not resemle Asiatic lookign turkics, so they obviously have foreign (Non-Turkic blood). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.25.227 (talk) 01:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

" Of course we can not use our personal visual perception as a scientific source, but most scholars agree to the fact that the majority of the Azeri's of Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan are Turkified Aryans, Aryans as in part of the Iranian plateau and Turkified as in linguistically Turkified, but ethnically and culturally still Iranian. One of the most important researchers on this field is Ahmad Kasravi, an Iranian Azeri himself. One of the main arguments that supports this fact is the fact that before the Seljuk invasion of the province Azerbaijan, the name and language already existed, though not yet Turkified. Pan Turkism has had a major impact on the global concencus concerning this issue, just as Pan Arabism has had a major impact on the global concencus of the term "Persian Gulf". "--خرمدین۸۹ (talk) 18:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The correlation between language and ethnicity is a new-world idea . The Azeris did exist in that time, but they were not distinct from other Iranians because their language was not Turkic in that time . Indeed also today , they are not still distinguishable without considering their language . In old world , language was not an important determinant in ethnic and cultural differentiation.--Alborz Fallah (talk) 07:01, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Arguments considering looks (that he doesn't looks like Asiatic Turkics of Central Asia) are irrelevant. Many Turkics don't have Asiatic looks (in fact a numerical majority); for example Oguz (modern Turks, Azeris and Turkmens), modern Tatars, etc. Asiatic looks penetrated Centarl Asian Turkic societies after Mongol period, during which many peoples migrated from East Asis to Central Asia and intermingled with local peoples.

Idolisation in Azerbaijani SSR
I think we need a part dealing with Babak's idolisation as an historically erroneous proletarian and proto-communist Turkic leader in Azerbaijan SSR. The heritage of this idolisation lives on among Azerbaijani Turkish nationalists in the Republic of Azerbaijan as well as Iran. Behemoth (talk) 19:42, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Born in Iran
User tajik has changed Babak's birthplace from Iran to greater Iran. This POV edit should be reverted, his birthplace was Iran whether he likes Iran or not, as greater Iran article itself is nothing more than a POV push of the afghan nationalists, saying Iran and greater Iran is not the same, and Iran is just a modern state of greater Iran and nothing more.

All references to Greater Iran and the article itself should be changed to "Iranian Cultural Continent" which is exactly what Encyclopædia Iranica calls it. The way these editors have made it seem for example by changing the birthplaces of national heroes and scientists is that greater Iran was a country itself which is inaccurate. Iranica is referring to the spread of Iranian culture not to a country of some sort. The same region was called Iran back then and was occupied by Iranians/Persians. Modern Iran is the same as historical Iran, its just smaller. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.209.159.184 (talk) 19:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Eccentric spelling
Tabriz is apparently the same in Arabic, Farsi and Azeri: تبريز.

This article invents the spelling Tabrēz. Why?

It is pronounced the same way as the correct spelling, Tabriz.

What is the point? Varlaam (talk) 06:53, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Standard literary Persian (Dari) - like Middle Persian (Pahlavi) - pronounces the "i" as an "ē". "Tabrēz" is the correct Middle/New Persian pronunciation. Tajik (talk) 10:35, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * As I already indicated, I read Farsi phonetically.
 * We are not talking about Farsi or Dari; we are talking about English, where Tabrēz 1) is pronounced the same as Tabriz, and 2) does not exist as a spelling so why is an encyclopedia using a spelling that does not exist?
 * You don't get to invent English language words.
 * U dohnt git tou invvnntt Inglish wwerdz in an encyclopedia.
 * Varlaam (talk) 16:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

BABAK WAS ARMENIAN !!!
BABEK WAS TRUE ARMENIAN HERO. NOT TURK AND NOT PERSIAN BUT ARMENIAN! HIS NAME MEANS LEADER IN ANCIENT ARMENIAN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.34.51.2 (talk) 12:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK just stay calm. There is enough babak for everyone!
 * His genealogy as well as the reason for his uprising are well documented, go find someone else please. And I need to say that up until 1900s many scholars believed that Armenian is an Iranian language due to the large body of parthian and persian loan words in the language, so it's possible that Babak is one of these words too.13:41, 26 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazratemahmood (talk • contribs)

National hero
This edit was reverted by a user. What is the reason? The source says "..where Babak is a cult figure and a national here. Indded, it is ironic that the Pan-Turkist ex-president of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Abulfez Elcibey, should identify as his hero Babak-e Khoram din because he resisted Arab domination." Why that edit of mine is reverted again as vandalism? If the wroding is a problem we can correct that or make a direct quote. But the fact is really undisputed. Xashaiar (talk) 18:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I was not the reverter, but I agree it is not a good insertion. "Ironic" is not an appropriate word here. It's subjective and judgmental - let the facts speak for themselves. Alternatively, find a way to put the cite on a sentence indicating there is criticism of this idolisation of Babak Khorramdin. 76.118.179.58 (talk) 21:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The above comment was listed by IP address; however, I am user Ogress, and I am actually signed in. There appears to be some software issues. Apologies for any confusion. - Ogress
 * Much more seriously, it is not what the source says. Having said that Babak is a national hero, it goes on to say that it is ironic that one particular leader, a Pan-Turkic ideologue, acclaims Babak and makes a hero of him.


 * Two assertions; one of them is exactly what needs to be sourced; the other is off-topic here, and belongs in a biographical article. Neither of them is what Xashaiar has inserted. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * But the specific person is the one who "introduced Babak as national hero". Also what I added was "..by pan-turkist fugues". Xashaiar (talk) 14:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Neither of those insertions is supported by the source. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I've moved this to a new section, within proper context. The WP:Lead is not the proper place for this kind of stuff anyways. The entry's lead should be limited to importnat facts about the subject itself. You don't see "In the the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Alexander the Great is considered a national hero" in the lead of Alexander the Great - even-though many source may say so. This is an a similar situation, not much different. Kurdo777 (talk) 16:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably reasonable; the chief question is whether the subject resembles Alexander or King Arthur; the tradition about Arthur is the proper subject of his article. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd say it's an identical situation to Alexander the Great. Iranian Azerbaijan/Azerbaijan Republic topics are in general very similar to Greek Macedonia/Macedonia Republic topics, but not as disputed/controversial, and this is just an extension of it. See History_of_the_name_Azerbaijan. Kurdo777 (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Although Babak is non-Muslim and he isn't ethnically a Turk in the Republic of Azerbaijan Babak is a national hero. Babak is an administrative divisions in the Republic of Azerbaija, there is Babak City in Azerbaijan, many statues of Babak there are in Azerbaijan, Ballet of Babak composed in Azerbaijan, Film of Babak produced by Azerbaijanfilm. If he is not a hero here who is he? It is a fact that Babak was the Persian revolutionary leader, but also it is a fact that Babak is a national hero in the Republic of Azerbaijan. In Islamic Iran he is only a Kaffir.--Melikov Memmed (talk) 10:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Youtube. The Babak Castle announcement of Azerbaijani Political activists in Iran--Melikov Memmed (talk) 10:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * First of all, this is a not forum, keep your comments limited to the subject at hand. Nobody is disputing that Babak is called a national hero in Azerbaijan, but that issue is already covered under the proper section. It doesn't belong in the lead of the article, a lead is suppose to a summary primary important facts about the subjects, read WP:LEAD. Kurdo777 (talk) 11:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

“Babak Khorramdin was proclaimed as a national hero in the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic”. The difference is that the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic was part of the Soviet Union but the Republic of Azerbaijan is an independent state. Many Soviet heros are not called a hero these days in the Republic of Azerbaijan. But Babak calls a national hero in the Republic of Azerbaijan too.--Melikov Memmed (talk) 12:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think if "Babk as a national hero of Republic" is going to be mentioned, it should be mentioned that this is ironic (per source used by Melikov Memmed). Of course Babk can be national hero of everybody (armenia too) but we have to mention all sides of story. I think that this whole issue is very minor and for this I would suggest complete removal of this. Otherwise a tiny note somewhere in the article (not the lead per wp:lead) about him being a national hero elsewhere and that this is not normal should be the way forward (kudo777 version). Xashaiar (talk) 14:05, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Why is it "ironic"? Nations are free to idolize whoever they want. "Ironic" or similar terminology are not encyclopedic, and do not belong here. Dear Melikov, your edit was fine, I just copy-edited it a bit, and provided some new sources. Cheers. Kurdo777 (talk) 14:37, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks--Melikov Memmed (talk) 05:16, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

modern nation building ?
The headline: "Babak and modern nation building" is simply incorrect. None of the sources use the term "modern nation building". And the section is not about "nation building". Its even ironic that the Soviet Union would want to create an Azerbaijani nation within the Soviet Union. I suggest this headline to be changed to "Legacy", it is not only more objective and general but the same approach is done in many other articles.Neftchi (talk) 15:01, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I made the edit to 'legacy'. Neftchi (talk) 19:17, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Babek monument.JPG Nominated for Deletion
Babek is the greatest Azerbaijani national hero was born in late 8th century AC in Balal Abad (Qaradag) region of south Azerbaijan close to the city of Ardabil. After his father’s death in his early teen, he was given the responsibility of his 2 brothers and mother during a traditional Zartosht ceremony in holy Odlaq (Fire-temple), which used to involve a glass of Azeri wine and wearing a purple ribbon around body.

By the age of 18 Babak had established himself in the city of Tabriz and was engaged in the arms trade and industry. ·               Later on, this engagement gave him the opportunity of travelling to different regions like Caucasia, Middle East and Eastern Europe and familiarised him with history, geography and language of countries and nations in these regions. ·               During all these time, Azerbaijan (the only non-Muslim country in the region) was constantly invaded by the despotic Bani Abbas  Arab dynasty (Khalifa) and defended itself by the leadership of  Javanshir, who was Azerbaijan’s ruler since late 8th century till 815 AC. ·               Witnessing all these pressure being exerted to Azeri people, forced Babak to join the Khorramdin movement in “Baz Qalasi” (Babak Castle), under the leadership of Javanshir in the sensational mountains of Qaradag. ·               His skills in the latest battle tactics accompanied by the knowledge of history and geography strengthened his position as Javanshir’s first advisor and commander during the early wars against Arabs. ·               After successive victories against the Arab invasion, Javanshir was severely injured and consequently passed away. Babak took over the power by the support and encouragement of Javanshir’s wife (later on married Babak), who introduced the spiritual Babak to the nation of Azerbaijan as the new leader. ·               Throughout the history, the role of Babak’s wife on Khorramdin movement’s success and consequently on Azerbaijan’s triumph over the Arab and Islam invasion has set an example of woman’s influence in every aspect of Azerbaijan’s society. ·               Now Azerbaijan had a new leader, someone who was elected by the people of Azerbaijan despite the chaos injected by the Bani Abbas dynasty in Azerbaijan. ·               Babak was a highly spiritual and educated person who respected the Zartosht identity of his nation. He made every possible effort to establish reasonable political and cultural relationships with the neighbouring countries; Persia and Tabarestan and also their leaders, Afshin and Maziyar respectively to construct an allied force against the Arab Khalife. One of the most epic periods of Azerbaijan’s history was set under the Babak’s leadership between 815-837 AC. ·               During these most crucial years, Azerbaijan fought against the invasion of Islam and Arab culture whilst having the constant threats of Khazar nation from north of it’s territories and without any aid from neighbouring countries such as Persia, who were already colonised by the Arab Khalife more than a century ago. ·               In fact the constant betrayal of Persian nation under the leadership of Afshin during several most important battles altered the destiny of  Azerbaijan and our region drastically and as a result the negative influences of this violation still remains unhealed. ·               Azerbaijan’s greatest movement to preserve it’s cultural identity under Babak’s leadership had caused devastating results for the Arab nation and their allies, which statistically is reckoned by the historians to be over several million casualties. Eventually Babak, his wife and his warriors were forced to leave their command degree (Baz Qalasi) under very difficult situation after 23 years of sensational campaign. ·   He was betrayed by the leader of Armenian nation and was handed over to the Bani Abbas Khalifa, whilst he had sought refugee in Qarabag mountains. ·   During Babak’s inspiring execution, first khalifa ordered to cut his leg’s and hand’s in order to see his paled and defeated face, but Babak rinsed his face by the drained blood pouring out of his cuts to show Azerbaijani nations triumph even under such circumstances. ·   Babak’s sensational and legendary campaign to defend Azerbaijan’s national identity and interest is still pursued after nearly 1200 years in Southern Azerbaijan every year on his birthday amid glorious mountains of Qaradag by over a million people of his proud compatriots under heavy pressure of Islamic regime of Iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.20.132.114 (talk) 14:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Babak Khorramdin
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Babak Khorramdin's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "IranicaOsrushana": From Osrushana: C. Edmund Bosworth (2005), "Osrušana", in Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online Accessed November 2010 Quote 1: "The region was little urbanized, and it long preserved its ancient Iranian feudal and patriarchal society". Quote 2: "At the time of the Arab incursions into Transoxania, Osrušana had its own line of Iranian princes, the Afšins (Ebn Ḵordāḏbeh, p. 40), of whom the most famous was the general of the caliph Moʿtaṣem (q.v. 833-42), the Afšin Ḵayḏar or Ḥaydar b. Kāvus (d. 841; see Afšin)", "The region was little urbanized, and it long preserved its ancient Iranian feudal and patriarchal society." From Khaydhar ibn Kawus al-Afshin: C. Edmund Bosworth(2005), "OSRUŠANA" in Encyclopædia Iranica. Accessed November 2010 "At the time of the Arab incursions into Transoxania, Osrušana had its own line of Iranian princes, the Afšins (Ebn Ḵordāḏbeh, p. 40), of whom the most famous was the general of the caliph Moʿtaṣem (q.v. 833-42), the Afšin Ḵayḏar or Ḥaydar b. Kāvus (d. 841; see AFŠIN)", "The region was little urbanized, and it long preserved its ancient Iranian feudal and patriarchal society. " 

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Babak Khorramdin. 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/20120223210936/http://www.loghatnaameh.org:80/dehkhodaworddetail-1588c2b18f8e4886a589a005d2410a14-fa.html to http://www.loghatnaameh.org/dehkhodaworddetail-1588c2b18f8e4886a589a005d2410a14-fa.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Babak was a Kurd, not a Persian
Read The Kurds: A Concise Handbook, page 41-43, Medieval History: 6th to 16th Century.

Multiple sources are given for his Kurdish ethnicity. Several arguments that are used (and backed with reliable sources in this book):

1. The place of his birth was a place of Kurdish immigration for over 3 centuries 2. The majority of commanders in his army were of Kurdish origin 3. The Savalan Mountains in that region were settled by Kurdish tribes (And these tribes still exist there), including the Belikan and Badh tribes 4. Furthermore, the governor of Azerbaijan and the Chief Military Commander of Babak is identified as a Kurd. Even better, his name was Ismah the Kurd 5. Babak was joined by Nasir the Kurd (Narseh) who joined and supported Babak in his uprising from Southern Kurdistan. Nasir was identified as a Kurd by the muslim Historian Mas'udi. 6. After the revolt was suppressed, the remainder of Babak and Narseh followers joined the Kurdish contignent of Byzantine Emperor Theopohilus

There are more arguments that HEAVILY support his Kurdish ethnicity. He lived among Kurds. He was allied with Kurds. His uprising began in a Kurdish region of Azerbaijan.

There is absolutely zero claim to support him having been a Persian. If he was Perisan, then surely his followers would've been too? But no; the majority and msot important ones were Kurds.

Once I figure out how to list sources, I will edit it. These Wikipedia wars by Persians and Azeris to change Kurdish history is quite childish.

83.82.163.173 (talk) 14:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


 * According to you everyone were Kurds haha :). --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:49, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Your book is not reliable for this topic, Babak Khorramdin is a historical figure, and only reliable academic books that are written based on the primary sources and historical facts are considered reliable, and only those kind of books should be used in the article. The book you have mentioned is a not even a historical book, it's an ethnic book. -- Kouhi (talk) 15:16, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * IP @ Although your argument shows to be weak, but we have to understand the fact that not only in the early medieval period ( the time of Babak ) , but also in almost recent centuries , there is not exact line that can separate Persians from the Kurds , as you know in many sources the term Kurd can mean an Iranic group in mountains : in some sources they called the Balouchs "Kurds of Sistan " ; or the term "Persian Kurds " in Karnamak Ardeshir Babakan . That means don't bother to find the difference between Kurds and Persians in historical texts . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 15:23, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Because it seems that everyone here is familiar with Persian, I'm going to quote a verse from Shahnameh, that confirms what Alborz Fallah has said (Shahnameh, Khaleqi Motlaq, v 6, p 166):


 * یکی لشکری کُرد بُد پارسی /	فزون‌تر ز گردانِ او یک به سی
 * There was an army of Persian Kurds [Persian nomads], that was 30 times larger than his [Ardashir I] heroes.

The term "Kurd" is of Persian origin and in ancient writings, the term simply means "nomad" and it does not refer to an ethnic group. "Kurd" as the name of an ethnic group is a later development. -- Kouhi (talk) 15:43, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Kurds didn't exist back then as an ethnic group. Regardless, Persians, Kurds, Azeris etc are all Iranians so to put an end to this ridiculous argument, he was Iranian. We are all Iranians and I don't mean nationality wise, I mean racial, cultural and historical. He was OUR hero. After thousands of years of unity this is where we are? Some idiots from our groups try claim him as theirs? Come on guys, we have always been one.Migboy123 (talk) 05:14, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Needs serious copyediting for style and NPOV
Right now, the text Iran mentions Iranian all the time Iran at every Iran possible Iranian turn Iran. It's not going to be easy to reformat that what with the citations being heavy and in-text (I tried but gave up because it was a jungle out there), but whoever wrote that: please consider the flow of the text. The reader will understand from fewer mentions that he was Iranian and that this is about a rebellion of Persians against (at least nominally) Arab rulers. Ok, it's lots of things in addition to that, but I'm addressing whoever seems to be worrying that maybe we missed the fact that the guy was an Iranian in what's now modern Iran. "Iranian" itself is a problematic term, since it's been far more prominent in only the past few centuries--when it's someone medieval I'd probably default to "Persian" as his ideas of ethnicity/nationality would've been different to ours. (And that's before we even address the conflict of interest when it's a guy more than one ethnic/cultural group wants to claim as theirs, and the poor self-esteem issues the fights over various historical figures--and whatever camps various groups want to appropriate these people into--always bring out.) In any case, the term "Iranian" doesn't need to be mentioned 40+ times in an article that, with one glance, makes it clear to the reader that this is medieval Persia being talked about. Yes, feel free to mention the fact that he was an Iranizing influence, because he did contribute to that, but it's his life story from a NPOV that should be the point of the article, and the text should flow well. Right now, the lede itself mentions "Iran" or "Persia" seven or eight times, when two or three would do to make the same points, and most of the citations center on the Iranianness of everything rather than the historical events themselves. I came here to read about a historical figure's life and what exactly it was that he did, and get someone constantly yelling "IRAN!" at me when I just want to read the story--a story I already know is about that part of the world. The rest of the article is written in a highly apologetic manner as well, clearly from the POV of someone who values him as a national hero--but that's not NPOV and needs to be changed, with more neutral sources that report the situation from the Abbasid side as well (who would've considered him a fanatic troublemaker and killer). The NPOV is somewhere between these two. Stay on topic, save the debates over the ethnicities for the end of the article.--Snowgrouse (talk) 04:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Would it make you feel better if we called him a Turco-Mongol, globalist social justice warrior that fought for the equality of all the 139 genders?Migboy123 (talk) 05:18, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Can someone explain this to me
"Babak's uprising showed the continuing strength in Azerbaijan of ancestral Iranian local feelings." My interpretation of this is that during the time of the uprising there was no Iranians living in Azerbaijan but the people living their are the descendants of Iranians. If this is true, Azerbaijan (as in Iranian Azerbaijan) has and always was Iranian, this sentence doesn't make much sense to me. I think it should be re-worded to "Babaks uprising shows today the continuing strength of ancestral Iranian feelings in The Republic of Azerbaijan" because it is the people of The Republic of Azerbaijan (which have adopted the name Azerbaijan for their country and adopted the name Azerbaijani for their ethnicity) that believe they are the descendants of Iranians but not Iranians, not the people of Iranian Azerbaijan. Migboy123 (talk) 09:28, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

I actually read the source and when it refers to "ancestral", it's referring to the brief period were Iranians became Muslim and were almost Arabized under the Abbasid caliphate. This should be included because it can confuse the reader. It also gives information that this ancestral Iranian uprising was not only prevalent in Azerbaijan but in the neighbouring regions inhabited by Kurds (at the time Kurd was a term used to refer to "Mountain-dwelling Persians") and Persians, so it was not only in Azerbaijan but the whole of Iran. Migboy123 (talk) 09:32, 10 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Wut, this didn't take place in the present day Republic of Azerbaijan, the cities mentioned during Babak's lifetime alone make this quite clear. Also, you can't add something the said source doesn't actually state. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)