Talk:Yazdegerd III

Inconsistency
The disambig is Yazdegerd, while the other two Yazdegerd's are spelled with the middle 'e'. For some reason this convention isn't favored here. I suggest switching this with its redirect, Yazdegerd III. The Behnam 17:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

genetic haplogroup
A link suggests Yazdgerd belonged to mitochondrial DNA haplogroup J1a, if there's a better reference it could be added to the proper Yazdgerd article. Nagelfar 18:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Persian Shah Yazdgerd III and R1b1a2*-M269, or R-Z2105 Y Chromosome. This the Y male royal lineage not J1a mtDNA, 2603:6081:4F00:C91C:2D77:EE5A:47B1:E011 (talk) 13:46, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Pahlav and Parsig
The fact that recent historians on Iran still seriously entertain the notion that, after three quarters of a millennium since the establishment of the Parthian Empire, there still was a separation between a Pahlav and a Parsig elite, as claimed by Pourshariati ea, only shows that much of the historiography of Iran is still in a pre-scientific, mythical phase, and numismatics, archaeology, historical theory, and other modern scientific approaches are only being misused to fill in the shortcomings of the literary sources. The use of the words Pahlav and Parsig in M.Persian have a geographical connotation, not an ethnic connotation, they refer to points of the compass, i.e. the North and the South, just as Firdausi's "Roman armour" does not come from the Romans, but from the Western part of the Sasanian Empire, "Indian swords" do not come from South Asia but from the Southern part of the Empire, and Tabari's "Tibetan helmets" do not come from Tibet, but from Eastern Iran, cf. Alofs Studies on Mounted Warfare in Asia III, War in History 2015 vol. 22(2) 137, 139.217.63.243.52 (talk) 07:12, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Airing your personal opinions on Talk Pages is completely useless. Do you have a Reliable Source to discuss for the improvement of the article?50.111.23.144 (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

the accuracy of death of Shahanshah Yazdegerd III...
attention to the author of this part of the article:

Arabs occupied Ctesiphon, and the young King fled into Media. Yazdgerd III then fled eastward from one district to another, until at last he was killed by a local miller for his purse at Merv in 651.

the reference to this particular line of the article is obsolete; link to the article is not available. but in the Sassanid Empire article can refer to this, with reference available.

look at the sassania chronology, then look for year 651. you will read:

651: Last Sassanid ruler Yazdegerd III was captured and beheaded by Arabian army invaders at Merv, present-day Turkmenistan, ending the dynasty. His son Pirooz and many others went into exile in China.

Xmlv (talk) 12:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

For the source of the miller's story, reference should be made to Baladhuri Futuh (Hitti 316), Firdausi Shahnama(Warner & Warner vol.9, p.108), Thaalibi (Zotenberg 747)(I have to admit I did not know there is a source claiming the unfortunate king was beheaded by the Muslims) 217.63.243.52 (talk) 19:49, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Communication between Omar and Yazdgerd
While I don't doubt that Omar and Yazdgerd might have communicated, AFAIK, the letters referred to in this article, are forgeries. If you have any proof that these letters are genuine, please post your academic references and a legible copy of the letters. I would be more than happy to read, translate and comment on these letters. I am removing this paragraph. 81.102.133.106 (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Please, if you want a paragraph on the Omar/Yazd. communication, discuss it here first. The way it stands right now, is unacceptable. The best is to re-write this article, since it has other problems too. If you don't want to rewrite, please do not vandalise. Thanks. 81.102.133.106 (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Stated British Library reply; http://sites.google.com/site/persianforgery/ Harami2000 (talk) 04:01, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Letter between Omar and Yazdgerd has been proven to be a forgery
That letter has been proved to be a forgery, so why is that letter on the wiki article?. I have kept the article and also added some texts stating that it has been proven to be a forgery. http://www.iranian.com/Rezakhani/2005/January/Letter/index.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.146.224 (talk) 15:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It hasn't been proved to be a forgery, this is one person's opinion on a blog. Please provide some reliable sources. warrior  4321  01:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Providing a personal website in its defense is no better; you have to have a reputable scholarly writing to back it up, be it from a book or a scholarly journal. As of yet, I have not seen this letter mentioned in any books or scholarly writings.  So far, it seems it has appeared only on personal websites, Jedi Master MIK (talk) 02:59, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The citation that's currently used is very unreliable & dubious, i.e. http://www.kavehsara.com/yazdgird_iii_letter_to_omar.htm (its a personal site), The source I provided, http://www.iranian.com/Rezakhani/2005/January/Letter/index.html provides detailed explanation of why its a forgery. Have you gone through the article?. The article is also written by 'Khodadad Rezakhani', who is a academic individual. You can view his resume here, http://www.iranologie.com/CV.html.

Secondly, someone already provided another article, where the British Library was contacted, and yet they dont have any reference to this letter. http://sites.google.com/site/persianforgery/. I think if that portion has to be kept, then a proper citation needs to be provided, otherwise, there's no reason to place that portion. Afterall, this is wikipedia, not a personal blog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.146.224 (talk) 02:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I have added the new section and as well kept the old one. I think that article needs to be re-worded or removed. The current citation i.e. http://www.kavehsara.com is a personal site and hence is unreliable. Although my knowledge of Persia is fairly limited, but, I do remember reading a book titled "Golden Age of Persia" by Richard Fyre, and I didn't find any mention of such letter, the book provides brief explanation of Islamic conquest of Persia, and if such a letter existed, which is of significant important, then I believe it should have been mentioned.

There are several inconsistencies with the letter, one most prominent one is that he calls Arabs as desert roaming, with basically no culture. Considering the fact that Persians had many Arabs working under them, not to mention Persian Emperor confronted with the Roman Emperor "Philip the Arab" (an Arab), such a statement by Yazdgerd would be inconsistent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.146.224 (talk) 03:20, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

There are also fake images of the claimed letters that have done rounds, taken from two YouTube videos with a woman who claimed to show the original letters.

The claim about the Persian one is here. Other anti-Islamic websites llike http://persopolis.nu also repeat these claims, amidst other unsourced myths and claims.

Unsurprisingly, the claimed letter was very unclear, still I couldn't help notice some of it looked like it was written in Arabic script rather, one looks like the Arabic letter جـ. It also looks a bit like Malayalam but it is impossible to say.

This will of course make it impossible to be a Sassanian letter.

Another video claims to be the original Arabic letter of Caliph Umar to Yazdegerd. Unlike the claimed long translation (which is fake), anyone sensible will notice that it only has much less Arabic words.

The actual translation is completely different than in the video and the image of the letter is stolen from UPenn. This is the original image (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//pcjs1206s.jpg)

Here's the actual Arabic translation from it (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak/cajs/info/inventory.html). Scroll to section 12.06 about the Arabic fragment for proof.:

''1. [??] the watering spot Khamal has dried up. So know firstly 2. [veil; contract] considered the matter of crossing the river [???] 3. [...] Auspicious to us [since][the camels] were in a state [of disrepair] 4. "Help to the one who might go astray"''

This actual translation proves beyond doubt that the above linked YouTube videos are peddling fake narratives.

It is also incredible that while a clear shot of the Arabic is provided, the woman's claimed Persian letter is extremely unclear to such a point that the text can't be surely recognized.

What debunks this story of the letters most is that the people who claim they exist, state they are not shown because of political correctness, that too when many Muslim texts containing violence have been translated by scholars openly. Their claim is without merit. 117.199.91.129 (talk) 17:17, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 09:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Yazdgerd III → Yazdegerd III — for consistency with Yazdegerd I and Yazdegerd II. Constantine  ✍  19:45, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. For the reason given. Xashaiar (talk) 21:29, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Per nom warrior  4321  22:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. الله أكبر  Mohammad Adil  10:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Yazdegerd III was almost the last living member of the House of Sasan."
Though there's nothing wrong with this line in purely a grammatical sense, I can't help but feel it could be worded better. If he was "almost" the last living member, wouldn't it be clearer and less confusing to simply state just how close to being the last living member he was? Thoughts on this? If there's no feedback after a few days I might go ahead and reword that line. Jersey John (talk) 13:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Date of birth of Yazdegard-III
The DOB of Yazdegard at his page as 624 AD and date of birth of his son Peroz III as 636 AD makes no sense. Thus necessary correction is required. Nannadeem (talk) 11:39, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Birth on statistical calculaton
No details about Shahar Yar are available, however, history provides a clue that father of Yazdegard, Shahar Yar was in hideout with the help of his mother Shirin, the beloved wife of Khosrow II. That was why he remained out of cage when Khosrow II put all his sons in confinement on account of a prophecy regarding fall of Sassanian Empire from astrologist-cum-Zoroastrian religious authority.

The American biographer Washington Irving in his two volume book "Mahomet and His Successors" at page-282 Topic Othman writes that Yazdegard was 34 years old when killed on 23-08-651 AD. Muslim Persian historian Abu Hanifa Dinawari states that Yazdegard was 16 years old when installed on throne. If we subtract 34 years from date of his killing i.e. 51 minus 34, then we get 17. This figure matches to the date of Abu Hanifa Dinawari. Thus we get the date of birth of Yazdegard as 617 AD.

We have already at our record 636 AD as the date of birth of Peroz III the son of Yazdegard. Besides, from Chinese sources teen age of Peroz is also on record which stands him at 13-15 years. Thus the date of birth should qualify the Biological criteria, the date of birth of Yazdegard must be 617 AD. Before I put the correct date of birth of Yazdegard in his page info-box, rational objections are solicited. Nannadeem (talk) 12:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Further stress on age capable to satisfy biological demand
In response to help requests by Yazdegard to different rulers/governors during his last days, al-Tabri and Ibn Khaldun cited that either in a face to face meeting of Yazdegard with Nazk Turkhan or through a designed letter to Yazdegard, both historiographers highlight about a proposal for marriage with one of daughters of Yazdegard as a reward and strengthening of mutual relationship. Through Chinese sources, it is also mentioned that after murder of Yadegard, his son Peroz III wrote a letter to his sister who was the wife of the Chinese Emperor for dispatch of troops in aid. Thus in presence of references about a married daughter and marriage proposals for his other daughter(s) during help request by Yazdegard suggest that birth date of Yazdegard was ca 620 AD or earlier, in view of biological demands.Nannadeem (talk) 18:45, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Washington Irving died in the 1850s ... the book "Mahomet and His Successors" should not be attributed to him.
Perhaps there is some other author that wrote the book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.112.11.229 (talk)


 * Clearly the book has been re-printed, even after his death. However, given that Washington Irving was not an academic historian, I would not use that book as a source. --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

This article needs a purge
This article needs a purge. Outdated sources like Washington Irving, and random websites such as  is not gonna work. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:47, 19 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Also a lot of stuff I wrote a few years ago on this article needs to be removed/rewritten. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:47, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Adding a link to Shahr Banu
Just wanted to give an extended explanation for why I added a link to Shahr Banu on the list of Yazdegerd’s children in the infobox.

According to Islamic histories, Shahr Banu was a daughter of Yazdegerd III who was captured during the Muslim conquest of Persia and married to Husayn ibn Ali, grandson of the Prophet Muhammad. While she was almost certainly a mythical figure (note that I have added “alleged” after her name), you must bear in mind that Yazdegerd is strongly connected with the Shahr Banu legend. A Google search reveals that a large majority of the results for “Yazdegerd III” have some mention of “Shahr Banu” in them (24,800 for “Yazdegerd III” vs 21,600 for "Yazdegerd III"+"Shahr Banu"). I believe such a strong association warrants at least a small acknowledgement in the article. Also note that I have heavily rewritten the Shahr Banu article to what I hope is a more professional level and that I had made it abundantly clear that there are serious doubts regarding her existence. I therefore believe that there is no risk of misinforming the average reader by including the link. Alivardi (talk) 12:08, 19 May 2019 (UTC)