Talk:Tomyris/Archive 1

Untitled
And "according to Jordanes" the Getae were the same as the Goths...

Herodotus, who lived practically during the time of Tomyris, was most likely correct (she was a queen of the Massagetae): Jordanes, who lived many centuries after the events, was most likely wrong. Alexander 007 00:01, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

There's a lot of confusion here, so I'm tagging this for cleanup. Tomyris is described as a queen of the Massagetae: that much seems substantiated by what I can find. But the Massagetae (an Iranian people) seem to have little relation to the Getae (a Thracian/Dacian people). If indeed Jordanes also equates the Getae to the Goths (a Germanic people) then he obviously can't quoted so directly as a source. --Saforrest 03:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yup, Jordanes did indeed conflate the Getae with the Goths. See The Origin and Deeds of the Goths. Caution with Jordanes. Alexander 007 03:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

There is no historical evidence to support the theory which states that Tomyris was the founder of the Greek colony named Tomis from Scitia Minor. [Aka. 16:52 GMT+2, 22 May 2006]

Map is inappropriate.
The map is for a couple centuries later. The date given underneath it is right, but the text equating that date with T's reign is wrong.211.225.30.91 (talk) 10:51, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

legacy
Tomyris appears in Mlle. de Scudery's romance Artamene ou le Grand Cyrus in this same context: a powerful enemy. 71.163.117.143 (talk) 13:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Did she really kill Cyrus?
I came here right after I saw the new CiV V trailer featuring her. Did she actually kill him or is it another myth? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jotaro97 (talk • contribs) 07:06, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Cyrus_the_Great and:
 * As with Cyrus's birth, his death is shrouded in obscurity. Herodotus claims that he was killed in battle by the Massagetae, a branch of the Scythians, led by their fierce warrior-queen Tomyris.  Of course, Herodotus also claimed to have seen a hippopotamus, which had "a mane like a horse," so he is not entirely reliable.  The Greek historian Xenophon, meanwhile, states that Cyrus died peacefully, at home in Pasargadae, his capital.  Most ancient histories, however, give some version of Cyrus dying while fighting nomads on the northeastern edge of his empire. --Wario-Man (talk) 12:19, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't think we know for certain. AnonMoos (talk) 12:53, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you both. Jotaro97 (talk) 13:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Massagetae was not Iranian. Tomris name is old turkic.
Herodotus, for couple times, indicated that Massagetae lived on the other side of Aras river. This suggests today's Azerbaijan territories (west of Caspian Sea). Herodotus lived only one century after Tomris killed Cyrus, he could not be wrong in this regard.

Massagetae were type of Sakas, which had numaerous turkic names. Name Tomris is made of word TEMIR (turkic word for metal, steel) and IS, which is Greek suffix added to human names. There was city called Sakasena in Azerbaijan. There is modern day city called Shaki, which was Sakas living aerials.

There is ill-intentioned Iranina progopanda trying to associate sakas, massagetaes and many other proto-turkic nations to Iran.


 * This will be the 2nd and last time I will ask you to refrain from battleground comments. Further comments regarding any editor's ethnicity or perceived ethnicity will be reported.
 * As for Massagatae;


 * Karasulas, Antony. Mounted Archers Of The Steppe 600 BC-AD 1300 (Elite). Osprey Publishing, 2004, ISBN 184176809X, p. 7.
 * Gershevitch, Ilya. The Cambridge History of Iran (Volume II). Cambridge University Press, 1985, ISBN 0-521-20091-1, p. 48.
 * Grousset, René. The Empire of the Steppes. Rutgers University Press, 1989, ISBN 0-8135-1304-9, p. 547.
 * F. Altheim und R. Stiehl, Geschichte Mittelasiens im Altertum (Berlin, 1970), pp. 127–8
 * The academics listed above, state the Massagatae are Eastern Iranian.
 * Whereas you removed reliable secondary sources and replaced them with outdated(Erman,1843) and antiquated(Herodotus) sources. This is the definition of POV pushing.
 * So, I would say, your information is unreliable as opposed to what modern sources state. Continued edit warring on your part will be seen as disruptive editing. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:44, 11 July 2017 (UTC)


 * All of your activities (edits, comments and edit summaries) are WP:BATTLEGROUND. has clarified why your edits are problematic and disruptive. Iranian is an academic term for a language family (Iranian languages) and an ethno-linguistic group (Iranian peoples). Scholars and academic experts use it in their works. It's not limited to country Iran and people of Iran just like the term "Germanic" which is not limited to Germany and Germans. And your arguments about Massagetae are invalid because:
 * Per modern scholary sources, Massagetae inhabited the steppes of Central Asia, north-east of the Caspian Sea (in modern Turkmenistan, western Uzbekistan, and southern Kazakhstan).
 * Herodotus' claims: The Massagetae are known primarily from the writings of Herodotus who described the Massagetae as living on a sizeable portion of the great plain east of the Caspian Sea. He several times refers to them as living "beyond the River Araxes", which flows through the Caucasus and into the west Caspian. Scholars have offered various explanations for this anomaly. For example, Herodotus may have confused two or more rivers, as he had limited and frequently indirect knowledge of geography.
 * Read Saka and Saka language.
 * Mixing your personal opinion with unreliable/outdated stuff = POV
 * Removing current cited sources and replacing them with your POV = disruptive edit
 * Using your main account and dynamic IPs for edit warring, comments like , attacking other editors via the talk pages and your edit summaries, and (nationalistic) POV-pushing sound like WP:NOTHERE. --Wario-Man (talk) 03:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Wario-Man Why you keep beleiving that the 'newer' sources you indicate are proper? Why so sure? Besides, it is not YOUR authority to decide whether a source is outdated or improper. Source is source.

There are new studies and researches of Eurasian historians, which are having difficulties being promoted andpublished. Many of them substantiate Sakas being rleated to Massagetae and their turkic names. I once again ask you to stop threatening with kiddish POV pushing and etc. I provide references and it is vital to include Herodotus citations of Massagetaein Tomryis page. I added them to ensure fairness of views. It is unprofessional to ignore Herodotus, sth that you do. All your referenced scholars use his works. Herodotus lived one century after Tomryis times, he couldn't be wrong for sure. It is not even proved or substantiated properly by those western scholars who beleive Herodotus allegedly make mistake by referring to Araks river. '''Can you show proper scholar explanation for this? There is none. Thats just theory.'''

If you check pages dedicated to Iranian people, there pan-Iranist edutors even include Turkic people (!) in the list of Iranian peoples, which is totally improper and shows their intention.Gunner555 (talk) 08:59, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Gunner555, above are a lot of academic sources, that confirm Massagetae were Iranian people. Please read List of policies and guidelines and stop pushing POV here. Thank you. --Jingiby


 * According to Gunner555:


 * "Why you keep beleiving that the 'newer' sources you indicate are proper? Why so sure?"
 * Actually, the Georg Adolf Erman source is written by a physicist. Erman had no academic specialization in the field of history, therefore, that source is not reliable for history.


 * "Besides, it is not YOUR authority to decide whether a source is outdated or improper. Source is source."
 * And yet, you removed references that supported a term you did not like. Appears you think you have the authority to write articles however you see fit! --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:29, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Kansas Bear Apparently, you and Wario-Man have agreement to 'press' turkic sources and most things in their favor. You are forgetting that Turkic people have been dominant power in entire history of Eurasia. Whatever you research in this territories you will face Turkic heritage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gunner555 (talk • contribs) 09:52, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Apparently when shown academic sources, you have no response but to attempt some illegible personal attack.


 * "You are forgetting that Turkic people have been dominant power in entire history of Eurasia."
 * Odd how you can not bring modern sources to prove your opinion.


 * "Whatever you research in this territories you will face Turkic heritage."
 * And still nothing but your own personal opinion. Since you are incapable of doing proper research then I would suggest taking your agenda driven POV elsewhere. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Kansas Bear Beleive me, I am not impressed by your references of 70s and 80s. Western world has limited knowledge of Eurasian history including yourselves. Go read local historians books to have alternative views instead of relying on those researchers who haven't even visited these soils for hands-on studies but claiming theories remotely. Gunner555 (talk) 10:03, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Funny that you complain so much about "outdated sources" from the 70s and 80s, yet you use Herodotus, a "source" from 2500 years ago, that is known for lying and exaggerating, this is the same guy that claimed the Achaemenid Persian army had 3 million soldiers in it. But funnily enough, if you're using Herodotus as a source, I can point out that he claimed the Scythians and the Persians would speak to each other without the use of a translator, meaning that he claimed that Scythians and Persians had similar languages. Your attempt to link "Tomyris" with "Temur" a ridiculous attempt at WP:Original Research, two words sounding vaguely similar to each other doesn't make them part of the same language. Very typical pan-turkist lies, attempting to make everything turk. You're no different than the people who claim Sumerians and Elamites were turk.
 * Qahramani44 (talk) 08 August 2018

There needs to be some sort of protection by Wikipedia of articles related to the ancient Iranian peoples because it is constantly invaded by individuals which attempt to vandalize the article to achieve what others call their "Pan-Turk agenda". I have visited so many articles from Babak Khorramdin to Nezami to even the Safavid kings having pages vandalized and called "Turkic" and "Turko-Mongol". There is without a doubt that the Eastern Iranian peoples were of the Iranian language family, culture and race. The bodies that have been uncovered from that period show genetic proof of their race. I don't believe what Herodotus said about the Scythians and Persians talking to each other without a translator because Old Persian was a Western Iranian language while the Scythian language was Eastern Iranian. This already highlights a difference due to them being apart of different branches of the same family, but, due to them being apart of the same family they might've been able to communicate with one another to a certain extent. Similar to today's Iranian peoples which can communicate with each other to a certain extent. E.g. Iraqi Kurd which speaks Sorani can communicate to an extent with a Pakistani Baloch very well. Migboy123 (talk) 02:53, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

However, Herodotus's credibility as a source should be questioned due to the very biased and basically incorrect statements he's made but unfortunately, I think, he is our only source from that era.Migboy123 (talk) 02:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Tahmirih?
The source for the name's etymology states it was Tahm-Rayiš and someone changed it to Tahmirih without providing any source for this. It needs to be corrected. 102.115.150.244 (talk) 08:32, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * It was changed by . --Wario-Man (talk) 08:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I can see that. And that new etymology added still contradicts the source linked and has no other valid source to back it up. 102.116.105.105 (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2021 (UTC)