Talk:Greater Khorasan

Afghanistan was called Khorasan up to the 18th century, when Ahmad Shah Abdali renamed it to its current name.

modern Afghanistan was considered Part of Persia up to 18th century (by afghan accounts) and officially till 19th century in which Persia recognized its independence as a political entity. So it doesn't make sense to say Afghanistan was called Khorasan up to 18th century. There was no separate entity back then. You can say that land that comprises Afghanistan was part of a territory which was called khorasan. This is already mentioned

One must differenciate between Persia (Fars) and Khorasan. "Khorasan" was mostly attributed to the western regions of Persia (Please refer to the book "Hudoodul Alam menal mashreq-e menal maghreb"). It is true that some of the regions of Afghanistan were under the ruling of Persians, so were the vice versa. Even during the reign of Ahmad Shah Abdali, Afghanistan was called Khorasan. In the official and formal documents of that period, one can clearly observe this point. The land of Afghanistan was officially named to its current name during the ruling of Abdul Rahman Khan in the 19th century. This can be perfectly observed in the assignment/ treaty between Abdul Rahman Khan and Sir Martimir Durand, in which Afghanistan lost its western and southern territories to the British India. In the other hand, you can refer to the works of great Poets and Writers who lived for example in Balkh. They have never called themselves as Persian, but in fact as Khorasanis. So this indicate that these regions were rarely attributed to Persian territory or people did not regularly call themselves as Persians.

There is difference between Persian in English and Persian in Perisan. The former means Iran, and the latter means Pars or Fars province. So of course people from Khorasan did not call themsevles Farsi. People from Rey didn't call themsevles Farsi either. Because none were from "FARS" province, which was one of many Iranian provinces.

Khorasan means East not West: خراسان را بود معنی خورایان from fakhreddin assad gorgani (vis o ramin). Since when does the Sun come from the West?

Khorasan was always considered part of Iran (where Iran in the West was called Persia (till recently) because Sassanids and Achaemenids who formed two of the greatest dynasties pre-Islamic era were from Fars province)

Farrokhi Sistani calls Soltan Mahmoud Ghaznavi" (who ruled over all of Khorasan, and only part of some other provinces of Iran) "the king of Iran" as it can be seen from all these verses: [1]

Roudaki calles Saffari Amir as the "Glory of Iran" (مفخر ایران). [2]

From Introduction to "Abu-Mansouri Shahnama" we read that Iran is the territories from Egypt to Amooy River.[3]

Also Yaghut Hamavi quotes from Abureyhan khwarazmi:

«ایران شهر هی بلاد العراق و فارس و الجبال و خراسان یجمعها»: Translation: Iran shahr (land of Iran) is the territories of Eragh, Fars, Jebal and Khurasan altogether) [4]

What you have posted is blatant Afghan POV. In fact Persia (Fars) was a province in Iran. So was Khorasan, so was Azarbaijan.

Khorasan has always been part of Iran. For Balkh specifically we read in Shahnama (Kingship of Gushtasp section پادشاهی گشتاسب) that Balkh was part of Iran. Turan (under the leadership of Arjasp) attacks Iran by attacking Balkh.

History of Khorasan does not make sense separate from other provinces.

Behaafarid 20:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

* You are trying to mix up "Persia" (Fars), "Iran (as a country name)" and "Iran (as a great Aryan civilisation)". The former which refers to the Aryan civilisation (Aryana Weejha) cannot be only attributed to Iran (as a country). Aryana was/is a vast territory containing the northern parts of Oxus river (Amu Darya) (Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan), Afghanistan and Iran (as today's country). So all these countries share the same Aryan civilisation and heritage. However, Iran (as a country, and not as a synonym for Aryana) is not but a small part of Aryana, mostly the western parts of Aryana. Today's Iranian territories were always called as Fars or Pars during ages. Almost all the poets who lived in cities like Neishapoor, Sheraz, Asfahan or other cities of Iran, called themselves as "Fars": e.g. Hafiz Sherazi, several times in his Diwan, Imam Ghazali in the preface of his book, Kimyaye Sa'aadat.

First show me one classic Persian text that uses Ariana! Aryan civilisation is something prehistoric and does not concern me.

Todays Iranian territories weren't always called Pars. Read the texts that I showed you. Some times people call a bigger geographic entity by a part of it. Like calling The Britain, "England". This does not mean that Britain IS England.

The word "Fars" (Persia) was always attributed to the current territories of Iran (as a country) by Arabs and by European Empires (whether by the Roman empires, or later by British or French empires). By changing "officially" the name of Fars or Persia to "Iran" in 19th and 20th century, it does not make it become the same Great Iran-zameen (Aryana). So today whenever they say "Iran", they all mean the Great land of Persia and not the Great Aryan civilisation.

Show me one classic Persian source that uses "Ariana". Arana is a Greek term that was used to refer to a land that was where today's Herat is. That's it. The fact that the Romans called the neighbouring empire (sassanids) to the east Persia is a classic example of calling a bigger entitity by a part of it. Sassanid empire extended from syria to India. That included khorasan too. So does it mean khorasan is part of persian. Well if you consider persia as a country yes. but not as a province.

So would you please show me a source where it says that "Ariana" was attributed for the regions of Hari (Herat)? In fact, Ariana and Iran are exact synonyms. You can even refer to the definitions of Airyanem Vaejah, Aryan and Iran in Wikipedia. Here, let me copy you the key phrases:

The name Iran is a cognate of Aryan and literally means "Land of the Aryans." The earliest Iranian reference to the word (airya/arya/aryana etc), however, predates the Iranian prophet Zoroaster (est. anywhere between 1200 to 1800 BCE, according to Plato and other Greek sources as early as 7000 BCE.) and is attested in non-Gathic Avestan; it appears as airya, meaning noble/spiritual/elevated; as airya dainhava (Yt.8.36, 52) meaning the land of the Aryans; and as airyana vaejah, the original land of the Aryans. (Iran)

The Old Persian and Sanskrit languages both pronounced the word as arya- (/ɑːrjə/) and aryan. Beyond its use as the ethnic self-designation of the Proto-Indo-Iranians, the meaning "noble/spiritual" has been attached to it in Persian and Sanskrit.The Old Persian form of *Aryāna- appears as Æryānam Väejāh "Aryan Expanse" in Avestan, in Middle Persian as Ērān, and in Modern Persian as Īrān. Similarly, Northern India was referred to by the tatpurusha Aryavarta "Arya-abode" in ancient times. (Aryan)

The term Airyanəm Vaējah or Ērānwēz is echoed in the name of the country Ērān (Modern Persian: Iran), from proto-Iranian *aryānām"(land) of Aryas/Iranians", and also in the name Ērānšhahr (Realm of Aryas/Iranians).[1] These names first appear in the reign of Ardashir I, at the beginning of the Sāsānid Empire. (Airyanem Vaejah)

So your claims are baseless, and even contradict the contents of wikipedia. Iran and Ariana are both synonyms, and Persia (Fars) was a part of Iran or Ariana. But today's Iranian territory is mostly the territories of Persia. Ariana310 16:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

1) Please read the policies. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Use third party sources. Based on what you are doing I can go and change that wikipedia article and then cite that again for my own benefit.

You are using some archaic linguistic term to denote a more modern entity. Besides your quote is against you. According to your own source Iran and Iran shahr were first used by sassanids (ie Perisan empire). So Iran means the Persian empire. (which is different from the pars province). The sassanids never used (Ariana and never used Iran vaeg) to denote the Persian empire. The name Iran may have been derived from Aryan, but the term Aryan was not used in that era.

Thus, saying "Khorasan was part of Iran" can be only basicly correct if you concieve Iran as Iran-zameen or Aryana. The same conept for saying "Persia was part of Iran". While people, especially non-Persians and non-Afghans, who refer to Wikipedia think "Iran" as today's country. I had already mentioned that Khorasan was part of Ariana, and you can further modify it by using the term "Iran-shahr".

Dude! there is no Ariana. Stop adding your POV. Iran-shahr means land of Iran. Khorasan is not part of Ariana. There is no mention of this name in any classical Perisn work. It is greek name. Iran and Iran shahr were used interchanbly! Read Shahnama!

I just showed you the key sentences from the Wikipedia, from the Airyanem Vaejah, Aryan and Iran pages, which clearly refuses your claims. And Khorasan is part of Ariana, as Iran and Ariana are synonyms, according to wikipedia. ~~ Ariana310 17:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Aryana is not synnonym with Iran. Iran and Aryana may have same linguistic roots but you can't equate them.

In addition, the examples which you gave, they all present "Iran" as "Iran-shahr or Iran-zameen or Aryana". So your examples are baseless in this context. I am sure you are agree that Khorasan was part of Aryana/Iran-shahr and not "always" part of Persia (Fars) [although Khorasan had been conquered by the Persian empires for decades and sometimes for almost a century].

Iran MEANS Iranshahr. Let's see. 450 years of Ashkani. and 425 years of Sassanids. and Shahnama

Again no Ariana. I don't know why you keep inserting this name. Stop interpreting the terms the way you like it. look at ferdowsi. It never uses Iran shahr a single time. look at karnamag ardashir papakan (http://avesta.org/mp/karname.htm) It uses Iran shahr (translated territory of Iran) and Iran interchangably. No Ariana.

* Please read carefully the text, and then present your comments. I had clearly written in the article that: "Khorasan" is a term used by Arabs for the eastern regions of Persia during their Islamic conquests. As Khorasan was considered too far from the Arabian Peninsula and was situated in the East of Arabia, thus Arabs started to use the name "Khorasan", which means Land of Sunrise. and then I further mentioned the Persian word used as a synonym for Khorasan: "Khawar-e Iran". I never said it was the Western parts. If so, then please cite me the exact sentence.

It is not a term used by Arabs. It is Pahlavi term used first used by the Sassanids. So Arabs invented a pahlavi term to refer to Iran?! Do you know any Persian or Arabic for that matter? Look at karnamag Artakhshrir papkan. It might help you in settling the matter. http://avesta.org/mp/karname.htm. It uses khorasan and Iran.

This is what you said in the comments (second paragraph) «"Khorasan" was mostly attributed to the western regions of Persia...»

Our discussion was about the real article posted in the main page. And in the real article, I always wrote Eastern parts. In this page, it was a mistake, a mis-typing.

* By commenting on ONLY two points of the article, you cannot delete and bring up the old article. You presented your comments by mixing up Persia (Fars), Iran (as a country) and Iran (as an Aryan civilisation, Iran-shahr). Creating an ambiguation among those three terms cannot give a solid authority to bring up the old article. Please present your exact objections on the article. Even by considering your current comments, the previous article did not contradict your sayings. There was NOWHERE mentioned that Khorasan was NOT part of Aryana or any contradictory points like this. Ariana310

This Ariana story has no merit as I mentioned.

Your article is blatant POV with no source! I object to every line of it.

I show you sources and you just talk

Behaafarid 00:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

More on deleted material

• There is not historical mention to the term Greater khorasan. There is only khorasan. So greater khorasan is a modern term.
• Khorasan was a term used by the Sassanids. (I showed you karnama ardashir papakan so it means it was not coined by Arabs. The word is Middle Persian itself. and is also used extensivly in Modern Persian including by Ferdowsi and others.

Where exactly in this article has it been mentioned that Khorasan was used by Sassanids? The link that you provided does not contain even a single word of Khorasan.

• Iran Vaege is only mentioned in Avesta. and probably means khwarezm. that is the land that Aryan tribes came from originally that's it. throughout written history era Iran vaeg hasn't been an entity, whatsoever.

Again, let me repeatedly copy the key sentence from wikipedia: The term Airyanəm Vaējah or Ērānwēz is echoed in the name of the country Ērān (Modern Persian: Iran), from proto-Iranian *aryānām"(land) of Aryas/Iranians", and also in the name Ērānšhahr (Realm of Aryas/Iranians).[1] These names first appear in the reign of Ardashir I, at the beginning of the Sāsānid Empire. (Airyanem Vaejah) So Airyanem Vaejah has never been referred to Khwarazm.

1) Wikipedia is not a reliable source! What you are doing is called self referecing!

2) But if you relly like wikipedia read the last section of Iran vage article it says that many scholars believe it to be somewhere in khwarezm.

3) As for distinction of Aryana and Iran (in written History era) see Iran under 1911 Britanica ("Eratosthenes limited the name of Ariana to the south-eastern part of Iran,")

• First khorasani empire being saffari is none-sense. I showed you the Ghasideh from Roudaki that he calles Saffari chief "the glory of Iran". Besides you better check the meaning of empire. not every kingdom is an empire.

Please read carefully a text and then make your comments. Would you please show me where did I wrote that the first Khorasani empire was Saffarids??? Here, let me copy you that piece of text: The first independant Khorasani empire was established by Tahir Phoshanji in 821. Other grand Khorasani dynasties were Saffarids (861-1003), Samanids (875-999), Ghaznavids (962-1187), Ghurids (1149-1212), Seljukids (1037-1194), Khwarezmids (1077-1231) and Timurids (1370-1506). I hope this time you will read it carefully. The first independant Khorasani kingdom was Tahirids or Tahiryans, check Tahir Phoshanji.

Your always going in an inverse logic. I said Khorasan was under the reign of Persian empires, during some periods (and obviously Persia is a state of Iran/Ariana, so Khorasan becomes a part of Ariana/Iran, and I had CLEARLY this point in the article) But you deny this point and say that Khorasan was not part of Persia but part of Iran. Doesn't it seem ridiculous?

If you consider Persia as empire then khorasan was a part of it. If you cosider Persian as a province then khorasan is not part of it; as simple as that.Behaafarid 19:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• Mention of Ariana through the article has no merit and is not used in any Iranology circle, only by some Afghan nationalists.

Again your claims are proved incorrect according to Wikipedia, as I already cited the key sentences from the wikipedian articles.

Wiki is not a reliable source. Behaafarid 19:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• In short what you added had no source and was blatant POV.

I am sorry I can't salvate any of the matrial that you added. I suggest you write it using classical texts and Non-afghan (and non-Iranian) sources. There was no source and no referencing.

I just proved my points authentic according to the Wikipedian articles. Even according to Wikipedia, what you say is false and incorrect. Your sources did not have any clear point to support your claims. As for supporting your claim (that Khorasan was a term used by the Sassanids), you gave me this link: karnama ardashir papakan Empty source ! ~~ Ariana310 17:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Its in the link please read it: 2) For the purpose of bringing to an end the battle with the Worm, he dispatched a person to Burjak and Burj ataro, invited them to his presence, and deliberated with them. He took with himself many dirams, dinars, and garments, dressed himself like an inhabitant of Khurasan, and arriving at the foot of the castle of Gular, with Burjak and Burj-ataro, spoke (to its inmates) thus: "I am an inhabitant of Khurasan. I crave indulgence from that glorious lord, that I may approach (him) for the worship of his threshold (babâ)." --alidoostzadeh 19:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

IRAN NATION AND IRANIANS

LISTEN UP YOU COCKSUCKIN' IRANIANS

THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS IRANIANS BEFORE EARLY 1900S YOU IRANIANS ARE ALL MIXED PEOPLE BETWEEN TURKS, ARABS, AFGHANS, HINDUS, GREEKS, AND 100S MORE YOU HAVE NO HISTORY AND YOU ARE TRYING TO PRETEND LIKE YOU ARE PURE AFGHANISTAN WAS NEVER EVER RULED BY PERSIANSFOR AGES, AFGHANISTAN'S PEOPLE HAVE VERY MUCH TIES WITH INDIA AND EVEN TO DAY, THE AFGHAN PEOPLE LOVE WATCHING INDIAN MOVIES AND INDIAN DRAMAS PLEASE DO NOT WRITE FALSE INFORMATION REGARDING AFGHANISTAN OR ITS PEOPLE RELIGION ALWAYS DIVIDED AFGHANISTAN'S PEOPLE AND FARSIBAANS FROM IRAN