Talk:Raees dynasty

Merge Request
I am requesting a merge to the History section of Chitral. If I search for the subject in Google Scholar, there are only three hits (hardly any reliable source in Gbooks, either):
 * A document on Chitral published by International Union for Conservation of Nature covers the "family" in p. 3-4. Different aspects of the polity under Raees is mentioned throughout the book.
 * IUCN is not a reliable source for history and the extremely shallow bibliography (p. 112-114) speaks to it. That being said, most of the content is unsourced except for the occassional references to Ghufran, Mirza Muhammad. 1962. Nayi Tarikh-e-Chitral. Translated from Farsi into Urdu by Ghulam Murtaza. Peshawar: Public Art Press.
 * (Ghufran 1962) is the topic of Tarikh-i-Chitral. A primary source, it is a translated (and updated) edition of a court-history commissioned by the last significant Mehtar of Chitral. Cacopardo (2010; p. 45-51) writes,


 * One jingoist paper uploaded to SSRN by some colonel, which is not a reliable source.
 * One article in PalArch's "The Journal of Archaeology of Egypt / Egyptology" which spares a single line:
 * Siiger, 1956 is the exploits of a Danish ethnographer who travelled across S. Asia in 1940s: he collected Kalash folklores etc. and explicitly cautioned readers against uncritically assuming them to be positivist sources.
 * Cacopardo, 1991 is enlightening:

To summarize, we know nothing about this dynasty except what can be obtained from folk-lore and a questionable royal chronicle. Modern historians/ethnographers do not accept these narratives at face value and doubt the existence of any Rais dynasty. Eventually when inscriptions, coins etc. are located, they rarely corroborate these legends except in confirming the thrust of history. So far, such evidences are yet to be found for Chitral and the historical scape remains poor: TrangaBellam (talk) 07:52, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The currently-cited "History of Chitral-an Outline" is an unreliable source.
 * That being said, not everything is discardable. One "Shah Mamud" is mentioned in the Chinese chronicles of 1764 as having conquered the region with the aid of Chinese troops which can be read as a version of NTCh's eponymous Raees purging out the Kator usurpers (1630 CE) in the Battle of Danin with aid from Kashgar and Yarkand. The year is obviously wrong, since we have a royal decree from 1740 wherein Shah Mahmud, the son of Shah Nasir, exempted some subject from forced labor. These two rulers are historically corroborated but Cacopardo doubts whether they belonged to the (alleged) Raees dynasty. TrangaBellam (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 18 January 2023
Qaqlasht → Raees dynasty – Reverting yet another hijacking of an existing article. Awaiting action on this editor who has been reported at WP:ANI. David Biddulph (talk) 18:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Would have moved it back already if it wasn't for the redirect blocking it. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd have done that too if I could have done, so hence this RM. One of the particularly annoying things about this editor is his habit of repeatedly shuffling page titles to & fro and leaving redirects blocking moves. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:38, 19 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Speedy move. But that kinda goes without saying by this point.  O.N.R.  (talk) 03:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy moved. Should it happen in the future, please fill the request in the "Revert undiscussed moves" section of WP:RMTR rather than as a structured RM. Thanks. No such user (talk) 13:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)