Talk:Surena

Folk etymology

R.z (talk · contribs) has twice now added "In Middle Persian, it [i.e. "Surena"] means 'Strong'." Prior to that he/she stated that it meant 'strong' in Old Persian.

Besides the fact that "Surena" is a Parthian name, and not a Persian one, the name "Surena" is not attested in either Old Persian, or Middle Persian. It's probably not even attested in Parthian. It also does not mean "strong" in any of those languages. As I had already noted on the user's talk page, while a derivation from Old Iranian *sura "mighty" is morphologically possible, we need a reliable source for such an assertion. As far as we know, its a professional title. And there the story ends until such time as a reliable source says otherwise. -- Fullstop (talk) 19:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Fullstop (talk · contribs) is constantly deleting a fact ! If you ask Iranians(Persians) the meaning of 'Surena' which refers to General Surena ofcourse, The answer is 'Strong' or 'Powerful'.

About the language, everyone knows that 'Middle Persian' is the evolution of 'Old Persian'. The actual word has been found in an script which is in 'Pahlavi Script'. As any educated person knows 'Pahlavi Script' is a part of Middle Persian. I don't know his or her nationality, But I respectfully advise him or her not to interfere with other nation's history and culture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by R.z (talk • contribs) 04:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

1. "Facts" are items found in reliable sources. Your theory about "Surena" being the Middle/Old Persian word for 'strong' is not a "fact".
2. Even if it were a "fact", it is not related to the subject under discussion, and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collector of information.
3. You don't have any education whatsoever in the domain under discussion, and folk etymology is by definition uninformed guesswork.
   • "As any educated person knows", the military commander was a Parthian, and the family was Parthian.
   • "As any educated person knows", the only knowledge we have of General Suren comes from Latin sources.
   • "As any educated person knows", the idea that the "actual word has been found in an script which is in 'Pahlavi Script'" is false.
   • "As any educated person knows", sur is written swr/swl in Pahlavi script. It can mean "salt", "feast", "strong", "fat person" or "digger". "As any educated person knows", the Persian word for "strong" is zor, in Pahlavi script written "zwr".
   • "As any educated person knows", "salt", "feast", "strong", "fat person" or "digger" all derive from the same basic idea, which is "of the soil".
   • "As any educated person knows", sur/zor is not the same word as "Suren", just as "Suren" is not the same word as "Zorik" or "Zoromand" (both epithets of strong people), and just as "surprise" is not the same word as "sure".
4. Until you find a reliable source to sustain the theory that "Surena" meant "strong", such ideas do not belong on Wikipedia. And I respectfully advise R.z to follow Wikipedia policy. He/she "might wish to start a blog or visit a forum if [he/she] want[s] to convince people of the merits of [his/her] favorite views."^[1]

Since R.z is obsessed with finding a meaning for "Surena" and is likely to continue to demonstrate his/her WP:POINT, I'm going to WP:IARing WP:INDISCRIMINATE and turn the spurious "Surena means 'strong'" into "One of the Middle Iranian meanings of the prefix sur- (written swr) in 'Suren' is "strong". Other meanings of the same prefix include "salt" and "feast"." This is at least not folk etymology, and can be attributed to a reliable source (n: that source knows nothing of "Suren(a)"). -- Fullstop (talk) 14:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

As it has been mentioned in the Persian version of Wikipedia , 'Suren' means 'Strong' in Pahlavi script. http://fa.wiki.x.io/wiki/%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%B1%D9%86%D8%A7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.z (talk • contribs) 21:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

'Suren' means 'Strong' in Pahlavi script which is a kind of Middle Persian :

1. http://fa.wiki.x.io/wiki/%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%B1%D9%86%D8%A7
2. https://www.mypersianforum.com/showthread.php?t=25673
3. http://ariobarzan.blogfa.com/post-48.aspx
4. http://www.shafighi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2323
5. http://my.opera.com/nahid_roxan/blog/show.dml/603505
6. http://www.ferekans.com/news/show_detail.asp?id=7889
7. http://www.surenaco.com/Surena.aspx
8. http://farzanegan.blogsky.com/?PostID=55
9. http://www.aariaboom.com/content/view/138/72/
10. http://www.sourena.ir/otherf.aspx?name=history
11. http://www.robosorena.com/Default.aspx?p=Surena
12. http://soorena.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=60
13. http://www.amordad.net/forum/index.php?topic=7197.0
14. http://www.sat2sat.org/showthread.php/-15088/index.html?p=62770#post62770

R.z (talk) 07:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

The name of 'Suren' has been mentioned twice in an inscription in 'Kaba of Zoroaster' , line 23 and 25 which is in Middle Persian Language :

1. http://immortals.blogfa.com/post-4.aspx
2. http://www.ghiasabadi.com/zoroasterkaba.html
3. http://www.kishmehr.blogfa.com/post-285.aspx

You can find more in " www.cais-soas.com " . R.z (talk) 08:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

• You've made it amply clear that in folk etymology "Suren" is said to mean "strong". Since you refuse to accept that it is folk etymology, and insist that it really means "strong", you will need to find a reliable source that says so.
• There are two inscriptions at the Kaba of Zoroaster. One by Kartir in Middle Persian, and one trilingual (Parthian, Middle Persian, Greek) one by Shapur. In which one does "Suren" mean "strong"?

Please refrain from editing this article until this issue is resolved. For more information, see WP:BRD. Thanks -- Fullstop (talk) 08:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Only the name of 'Suren' has been stated in that inscription, not the meaning. About the meaning, if you search all persian encyclopedias,you will find it as 'Strong'. R.z (talk) 09:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

• Since you acknowledge that "only the name of 'Suren' has been stated in that inscription, not the meaning", then you cannot say 'Suren means strong in Pahlavi script'.
• Your note "about the meaning" does not add anything to what I already said ("You've made it amply clear that in folk etymology 'Suren' is said to mean 'strong'"). -- Fullstop (talk) 09:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Justi, Ferdinand: Iranisches Namenbuch, Marburg, 1895 ( p. 316-317 )

http://www.worldcat.org/wcpa/oclc/214319063?page=frame&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnbn-resolving.de%2Furn%2Fresolver.pl%3Furn%3Durn%3Anbn%3Ade%3Abvb%3A12-bsb00005484-3%26checksum%3De1666c8c34c2af31a438ca3a10705a33&title=&linktype=digitalObject&detail

R.z (talk) 12:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

References

Statue of General Surena

Ignoring http://www.persianempire.info/parthia9.htm#OrodesII, There is also http://www.visbellica.com/Scenarios/Carrhae/sc_Carrhae.htm which shows the Statue of General Surena. Of course it mentions livius.com as a source for this picture, but unfortunately that source is not available any more. In fact ( contact ) 08:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Yet more of the same. Bringing dozens more of the same kind of random websites won't help you. This is a war games site, for crying out loud. You need to head off into an actual library and read actual books, otherwise this is hopeless. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:34, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

By the way, for future reference, here's a link to the noticeboard thread where you were told what you didn't like to hear, and which you then promptly abandoned: [1]. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh, come on, I said I am going to continue the discussion in here, simply because I am not talking about the first source.

I am looking for the fact. In Iran where the statue has been found, it is strongly believed to represent General Surena. Searching Persian sources for Surena in Google.

They have actually named their National humanoid robot as Surena. Check this: http://www.persiansurena.com/En/?Page=AncientSurena

We can not deny all these facts, true or false, it's a fact. In fact ( contact ) 08:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

http://www.khabaronline.ir/news-149024.aspx

http://jamejamonline.ir/newstext.aspx?newsnum=100840400836

In fact ( contact ) 09:28, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Not reliable sources either. Please do get this into your head: Wikipedia doesn't care about what "is strongly believed" by some people. Wikipedia cares only about what experts in archaeology publish in reputable academic outlets. And what on earth has the robot got to do with anything? Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I thought it's pretty normal to mention that X believes in Y in this case.

BTW, It's not about the robot, it's the website which shows the statue with the name of Surena.

In fact ( contact ) 12:26, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Companies that develop robots aren't reliable sources about ancient archaeology either. How often do you have to be told that you are wasting your time searching for stuff on random google websites, as long as you can't be bothered to get off the couch and go to a library? You are wasting everybody else's time too; please don't. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

The crest of the House of Suren

Now I have checked the book in the national library. I have even scanned the pages 310 and 311 for those who may doubt it. (I can send them by email.)

Title of the book: IRAN IN THE ANCIENT EAST, by Ernst E.Herzfeld, year:1941, publisher:OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, Printed in the United States of America, pages: 310-311

The picture of the crest is in page 310 of the book above and the description is in page 311.

I wonder how it was deleted here and here again!. In fact 11:00, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Please quote the exact sentence where Herzfeld describes one of the crests as being that of Surena. I looked at the book the other day and didn't find it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I can send you the pages if you want. However, he says :

"Behind the king stands his son and successor Shahpuhr I, whose crest is a circle, surmounted by a crescent and standing on a foot. This symbol, used before by Gundopharr of Sakastan, may indicate a relationship of Shahpuhr, through his mother, to the house of Sakastan, the Suren Pahlav."

In fact 11:42, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, right, then we're at least talking about the same book and the same page. I remember reading this sentence. But it describes a different symbol. It's not Surena's but Shahpur's, and Gundopharr's, and it has the crescent on top, then the circle below it (look up what "surmounted by" means), and then some kind of "foot" on which the circle stands. (If you look back to the illustrations on p.130, if I remember correctly, there actually was another drawing to which this description might apply, but the identity isn't stated.) So, one member of the Suren family (not our General Surena himself) used this, related but different, symbol. Whether it, or some other version of it, or the one proposed here, were considered characteristic of the whole family, and whether our General Surena ever used it or some other version related to it, Herzfeld isn't saying. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:51, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not saying this crest belongs to General Surena. It belongs to his family (House of Suren/Surenas).In fact 12:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Fine, but then you've got the wrong one. And we still cannot conclude from this sentence that the same symbol was used by the whole family anyway. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I am going to continue my research. But could you also please ask other people/users who are familiar with this subject to help us. Thanks, In fact 12:32, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

• Interesting, I found this source, which describes the crest we are talking about. any ideas? In fact 12:52, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Hah. That's one curious piece of circular sourcing. Iranicaonline cites an anonymous website, with a big disclaimer that the website is unreliable and doesn't provide its own sources. It's a page titled "Suren-Pahlav Clan" hosted on a "myinfo24.com" site that's now dead. From the title and the description, it's almost certain that page was nothing other than an off-wiki copy of our own Wikipedia page Suren-Pahlav Clan, which indeed used to make that same claim [2] before it was redirected here. That claim was inserted here, by a sockpuppet of the same now-banned user who also inserted the crest image here and was generally known for playing fast and loose with the truth, and it was just as unsourced in the Wikipedia article as in the version the inranicaonline author found later. – It's a bit disappointing to see a source like Iranicaonline even bothering to report such claims. We usually treat Encyclopedia Iranica as a decent source; they clearly should know better than to cite anonymous Wikipedia mirrors. If the alleged "15th-century manuscript al-Mamālek Sistān, reportedly written by Moḥammad b. Faḵr-al-Din Sistāni" actually existed, authors writing for a reliable academic encyclopedia ought to have the resources to identify it and verify its contents on their own, and not be reliant on anonymous web pages. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:22, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

For the record, I looked for this on the Encyclopaedia Iranica Online page. I can't find it. This might be because I didn't look hard enough, but it might also be because the page was revised on 7 October 2011, just after Fut.Perf. made this comment. Andrew Dalby 18:01, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

• There is one book by Christensen from 1944 but as far as I know it was in Danish with a possible French translation where he also makes reference to the same type of symbols.

In case, you go to a library, could you possibly check this book, please? Thanks. In fact 06:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Exact ref please? And how/where/in what context do you believe he would be treating this symbol? Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Statue and unreliable sources, again

About this [3] revert: As the previous section on this page shows, this has been discussed before. No reliable sources have so far been found that link the Tehran statue to the name of Surena. This idea is something that has been spread on the web, but is apparently not reflected anywhere in the academic literature.

The two "sources" added by HistoryofIran (talk · contribs) are again not reliable according to the rules of our project, as has been pointed out before:

• persianempire.info is just a random, anonymously-run amateur website. The page linked is a textual mirror of an old book publication (George Rawlinson, The Seven Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World, originally from 1885). This book as such, though heavily outdated, might be useable as a source, but the image and the caption that links it to the name of Surena are not actually part of the book; it's just a random illustration added by the creators of the website and as such of no value as a source at all.
• Iranchambersociety.com is also not a reliable source. It's some privately-run association that prints user-submitted articles, without any standing as an academic publisher. The name of the author who wrote that particular article has been associated with some highly problematic activities here on Wikipedia in the past (sockpuppet abuse, copyright violations) and in particular with massive insertions of dubious unsourced content on this particular topic, so that source ought not to be touched with a ten-foot pole.

If the Tehran statue has been associated with the name of Surena anywhere in earnest, please cite a reputable academic book publication by an historian or archaeologist who says so. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:47, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Update: the additional references added since [4] are of course just as useless. Random unreliable websites (one of them [5] actually a copy-paste from Wikipedia). What's so difficult to understand about the idea that we need actual books, not random Google finds?

Also, the current version makes a rather blatant misattribution, by referring to "Bivar 1983" (currently footnote 7). As far as I can see, that article in Enc.Ir. was suitable as a reference for the other passage where it's currently referred to, but has nothing to say about that sentence in the intro paragraph. – Finally, contrary to repeated assertions by HistoryofIran, the livius.org page [6] is clearly not making a commitment to identifying the statue as him. It's calling it simply "Head of a bronze statue of a Parthian prince".

HistoryofIran had better show up at this talkpage very soon and demonstrate he is able and willing to participate in reasoned discussion. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:04, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Lol, looks like everything i post is fake in your eyes! persianempire.info is a amateur website? no, it's show the truth and history about the Parthians including Surena, as a Iranian, i know the history about the Parthians and i have seen the statue of Surena myself when i was in the National Museum of Iran, and it was said to be the statue of a Parthian hero named Surena. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:14, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

It is not up to you to decide what is or isn't a reliable source just because it seems to support some idea you believe you "know" to be correct. We have rules about what counts as a reliable source here on this project, and I just pointed you to those rules: WP:RS. Those things you cited aren't. Go into a library and read some books, then come back here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:28, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

The funny thing is that i know more than you about this, so no, it's you that should go read a book, kid. There are five sources on the page, and you say all of them are not good enough? since when what you say is true? sources are sources, it even says on the sources that it is the statue of Surena, even the image is named Surena. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:43, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Surena

Im going to make a article of the things that aren't related here to avoid confusion and making it better, i am going to make a new article called House of Suren, and make this article about the Parthian General Surena. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:15, 24 May 2013 (UTC)