Talk:Galashians

Galashians

@WikiEditor1234567123 Salam Aleykum, since you mentioned Malkhiy in your edit we might as well make a distinction now rather than later. I have always been for keeping Ingush teips as Ingush and Chechen teips as Chechen. In reality the only teips that are split between us are Orstkhoi teips, should we make a consensus now to keep clearly Ingush societies as Ingush and Chechen as Chechen? that means not including Melhi, Äkkhiy, Maystoy, T'erloy etc as Ingush and Fyappi, Tskhoroi, Ozdoy, Evloy etc as Chechen. I was under the impression that we are adding every source. I don't mind not including Galashki as Chechen if we make a consensus here to not include Chechen teips as Ingush over cherrypicked sources. Goddard2000 (talk) 01:51, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Wa aleykum assalam. Sure thing we can keep articles about Ingush societies and teips as Ingush and Chechen ones as Chechen. Regarding Malkhiy however, in the Russian Census (2010), the Malkhiy were both included as part of Chechens and Ingush so I personally would want to make the article similarly to the Orstkhoy article where the lead-section will say "Chechen and Ingush teip". WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 14:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Which Russian census was that? could you please link it here and quote it. I am pretty sure the vast majority of Melkhi in Ingushetia and Chechnya consider themselves ethnic Chechens. Especially if we take into account the writings of Shakhri Dahkhilgov who mentions very few Melhi surnames as Ingush. The Melhi situation is the same as Fyappi in my opinion, the Aukh Fyappi consider themselves ethnic Chechens so we could include Ingush Melhi in the article the same way Aukh Fyappi are included in the Fyappi article. Goddard2000 (talk) 16:05, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Here is the census [1]. Malkhiy are mentioned in the census as Мелхи btw. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 18:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't think this should be a reason to count them as Ingush since people can add these terms randomly, the 2021 census for example show that, for example they added these subgroups: Ингуши (галга, галгаи, евлойцы, калгаи, карабулакцы, мелхи с языком ингушским, мелхистинцы, нарт-орстхойцы, орстхоевцы, орстхойцы, ортсхой, орстхо, орстхой, орцхо, орштхой, аланы с языком ингушским, вайнахи с языком ингушским, чечено-ингуши с языком ингушским)"

Besides let's stick to facts that we both know, 99% of Melkhi (in Ingushetia) live in Chemulga & Arshty, Shakhri Dakhkilgov says as much when he gives the location of Melhi surnames as Arshty and Chemulga. All of the censuses refer to the inhabitants of Arshty and Chemulga as ethnic Chechen, the 2021 census showed that Chemulga was 99.9 % Chechen and Arshty 98.74% Chechen. The 2010 census showed roughly the same result, it is well known that the inhabitants of these villages are ethnic Chechens. I think mentioning Melhi Ingush in the Melhi article is fair but as long as its done like the Fyappi Chechens (Aukh Fyappi) in the Fyappi article. Goddard2000 (talk) 20:13, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Well I could mention the fact that in 1926 the population of Chemul'ga and Arshty was completely Ingush but anyways. How does this text sound for the lead-section "Malkhiy are a Chechen (mostly) and Ingush society or teip"? Keep in mind that the "(mostly)" part will only be added if you have reliable and neutral sources for that. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 00:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Chemulga and Arshty was more mixed and it didn't become fully Melhi until after the deportation since most Melhi lived in their mountainous villages. Most Ingush ethnographers agree that most Melhi families live in Chemulga/Arshty, Malsagov, Dakhkilgov and others say this clearly. These villages have identified as ethnic Chechens in every census since after the deportation, and this is while these villages have been in the Ingush autonomous republic so there is no possibility of foul play. Arshty for example has only 17 non ethnic Chechens in a village of 1400, Chemulga has just 2 non-Chechens in a village of almost 700, most Melhi families are settled there and we aren't even talking about villages in Chechnya where Melhi live today. It is as obvious as day that most Melhi identify as Chechens, do we really need to play the "prove it with sources" game? We can also do this to the Tskhoroy teip, their main village and several villages like Khay and another i forgot the name of was majority ethnic Chechen in 1926 census, there are several sources saying Tskhoroy are ethnic Chechens and Nakhchi, there are actual Tskhoroy living in Katar-yurt and Valerik that identify as Chechens but i have no plans to create a Tskhoroy-Chechen section in their teip page.

If you are planning on turning the Melhi teip page into "Orstkhoi-style" page then it is fair for me to turn the Tsorins (Tskhoroi) teip page into "Orstkhoi-style" article. It is better we have this discussion in here before proceeding so we don't argue about it later. Goddard2000 (talk) 01:34, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

The Malkhiy were already intensively moving to Arshty after the Orstkhoy were deported in 1865 so I don't know why you're mentioning the 1944 deportation. I'm not sure how me asking you the source for Malkhiy being mostly Chechen is playing some games, as I said, if you have source for that then you can add the "(mostly)" part for the Chechens which to me is fair. We can't do the same with the Tsoroy teip and I also can't verify your words that Tskhoroy in Katar-Yurt and Valerik identify as Chechens as you didn't show reliable and neutral source for that, although if even if that's true, that's understandable as people assimilate. If you're gonna mention the single census of 1926, take a look at these ones way before in 19th century where Tsori and Khay have completely Ingush population: [2][3][4]. Tsoroy were always mentioned as Ingush and these "several sources" that you're talking about where the Tsoroy are mentioned as Chechens are the same sources where even the Ingush are mentioned as Chechens (keep in mind that this was equivalent to the term "Vainakhs" back then). At that time this was only a classification to make it easier to study and control Caucasian peoples by grouping them together. Similarly the Avars and other peoples of Dagestan were classified as Lezgins despite them being completely different. Despite this classification, societies like Tsorins were still mentioned as part of Ingush and not to the Chechen proper. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 13:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I never said there were no Melhi in Arshty before the deportation, i mentioned 1944 because before 1944 all Melhi settlements were inhabited by Melhi and they were all forcefully moved down after the deportation and started moving down more to Arshty and Chemulga. When it comes to Tsoroy being mentioned as Chechen/Nakhchi because of a supposed "equivalent to the term Vainakh" i could say the very same thing about the term "Ingush" when used for Melhi. I don't know why this even matters since the census from 1926 showed that the main Tsori villages and 2 other villages identified mostly as ethnic Chechens despite Ingush also being recorded in the village. As for the earlier censuses one could speculate on their validity since the 20th century one shows variety rather than one nation plastered on it but that is a different topic. So here we have several mentions of Tsoroy being mentioned as Chechen/Nakhchi and several villages in a census showing a Chechen majority (despite there being Ingush). I think there are grounds to turn the Tsorin article into an Orstkhoi-style article in my opinion. Goddard2000 (talk) 16:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

As for the Katar-Yurt Tsoroi i don't remember the source but i personally know families from there and Shaami-Yurt that are Tsoroi-Chechens. Valerik however there are recorded Chechen Tsoroi in 2008 by the Russian Geographer Tverdiy here: http://apsnyteka.org/2810-tverdy_kavkaz_v_imenah_nazvaniah_legendah_2008.html (page 80 in the Valerik section). Goddard2000 (talk) 16:54, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Checked the source and it mentions that Tsoroy live in Valerik and the author mentions them as one of Chechen tribe, but could you prove it's authority? I didn't even scroll down much far away from the p. 80 when in p. 89 it's said that Galashki is in Chechnya (??), while in p. 40 it's said that Arshty is in Chechnya aswell and in p. 260 the Malgobesky District is apperantly part of Chechnya (???). Where did the author learn his geography))? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 19:05, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I know that it's hard to accept but really, the term Chechen was simply a unifying term, equivalent to "Vainakh" in the 1850-1910s. Same thing can't be said about the term "Ingush" as the term "Ingush" wasn't a unifying term for all Vainakhs. I mentioned the similar case with Dagestanis, where they were all unified under the term Lezgins, does this make them Lezgins? Of course not, it was simply a classification at the time and modern day scholars didn't make instant assumptions and claim that Dagestanis are Lezgins or Ingush are Chechens. These sources of yours are once again the same ones where the Ingush are mentioned as Chechen aswell and you should use sources where there's clear distinction about Chechen and Ingush societies, so that we could see which societies are mentioned as Ingush and which are mentioned as Chechen. For example let's take a look at Adolf Berge, many secondary sources unanimously agree that despite unifying all Vainakhs into 1 single entity, he made a distinction between the Ingush and Chechen societies where the Tsorins for example were mentioned as part of the Ingush. I also showed you that the 3 censuses way before the 1926 and also before the population of Tsori decreased where the inhabitants were all listed as Ingush and you're still mentioning the single census in 1926 where roughly 52% population of Tsori were Chechen and 48% were Ingush. Also in the same census, a village Koki which was never even close to being Chechen and geographically very far away from Chechnya had also Chechen population (16 out of 16 people living in the village) despite the village always having Ingush population in previous censuses and historically. There's no grounds for the Tsorins article to be remade the Orstkhoy article style. Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh Muqale, what do you think about this? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 19:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Wa'aleikum As'salam. The 1926 census has many errors. Indeed the most significant ones are the villages Tsori and Koki. The latter one was destroyed 16 years prior and always belonged to the ethic Ingush. In 1924 it was also listed as Ingush, how could the villagers tranform into Chechens in 2 years? For some reason it in the 1926 they completely changed it to Chechen, which shows that the 1926 census has many flaws and cannot be used as trustworthy source. Regarding the Tsoroy, even Chechen researcher Ahmad Suleymanov stated that the Tsoroy conisered themselves as true Ghalghaï (Цхьоройцы считают себя истинными Галгаями). I can find some sources which attribute several Chechen teips and societies to the Ingush, but if the majority calls them Chechen, why should I dispute it in the article, as you are doing @Goddard2000? Your approach will only cause confusion, because many Chechen clans will then also we named Ingush as well as Chechen based on a couple of sources. This is not the correct way to handle this. Muqale (talk) 20:10, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

We can agree that the source mistakes some Ingush settlements as part of Chechnya but my point was that Tsoroi live in Chechen villages which this source specified when it mentioned the teips living in Valerik. Even if we don't include this source then there is still grounds to make an Orstkhoi-style article for Tsorins. Your "equivalent to Vainakh" argument doesn't matter in this context when there are sources like The 1926 census (an actual national census not some text from a random source) which refers to 3 Tsori villages as majority Chechen, this proves that the Nakhchi/Chechen term wasn't just used as a Vainakh term, if it was then they wouldn't divide the village between Chechen and Ingush. It is also strange to me how you refuse to acknowledge Chechens in this "Galashian" article when you have a "To the Chechens" section in the Galashki naibstva article which further proves that Galashki was identified as both Chechen and Ingush.

@Muqale Koki inhabitants returned to their original village and as you said were listed as Ingush in 1924, you're not the guy to decide which censuses are accurate and which is not. Just because they are listed as Ingush in one census while listed as Chechen in another doesn't matter. I didn't even include Koki, i included mainly Tsori which is the main Tsorin village and it was majority Chechen with a big Ingush minority. Suleymanov isn't the authority of Chechen ethnography, Tsorins have been referred to as Chechens in national censuses (in 3 villages including their main one) and in historical records. This is grounds to include them as a Chechen teip. Goddard2000 (talk) 20:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Muqale "Your approach will only cause confusion, because many Chechen clans will then also we named Ingush as well as Chechen based on a couple of sources. This is not the correct way to handle this"

This is precisely why i am against including Chechen teips as Ingush and Ingush teips as Chechen, the Melhis have been identified as Chechens by authoritative ethnographers and historians like Volkova who interviewed Chechen and Ingush elders, the Melhi are considered an integral Tukkhum among all Chechen ethnographers and a dialect. The most authoritative Ingush sources are "Military Statistical Review of the Russian Empire" from 1851 that made a mention of Melhi as Ingush similar to how Tsoroi have been mentioned as Chechens in sources from that time period. This is why its better to mention Ingush-Melhi similar to how Chechen Fyappi are mentioned in Fyappi article (Aukh Fyappi). Otherwise it will just result in confusion as Ingush teips can also be identified as Chechen through similar means.

I'm not planning on changing Galashians, Tsorins, Fyappins articles but if Chechen teips like Melhi are styled like the Orstkhoy-article instead of Fyappi then Galashians, Tsorins, Fyappins should also be changed, Galashians already is in that style if you look at the "Galashki naibstva" article. Goddard2000 (talk) 22:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay lemme first of all make some things clear:

• 1. Tsorins (society) and Tsoroy (teip) aren't quite the same thing. The society Tsorins included other teips like Guloy and Ozdoy so you shouldn't be confusing them. To me it's not clear which articles you want to make Orstkhoy-style as you're both mentioning the Tsoroy living in Valerik and the Tsorin society.
• 2. I have so many times explained over and over again, so please just carefully process this in your mind, okay? These sources of yours where Tsorins or Galashians, or any other Ingush society is mentioned as "Chechen", are the same ones where the Ingush are mentioned as "Chechen" aswell (here the Chechen term being equal as Vainakh"). If you wanna prove that Tsorins are Chechen, then please show me a source where there's clear distinction between Chechens and Ingush, so that we could see which societies are mentioned as Ingush and which are mentioned as Chechen. There you will clearly see that the Tsorins aren't attributed to Chechens but Ingush. You probally can't provide me such source as you're showing sources where there's simply an old classification of the time, when similarly the Dagestanis (for example Avars) were classified as Lezgins despite them being different from each other.

Now to the main point. You also ignored over and over again 3 censuses from 1874, 1883 and 1890, way before 1926, where all the villages in Tsorin societies were ethnic Ingush. So despite there being 3 censuses, you show only 1 where the population has also decreased and suddenly in 1926 not only in Tsori but also Koki, an Ingush village too, has Chechen population. If this is a single census you have, then how is it "national censuses"? There's not even teip or family names mentioned in the censuses so we can't really be using these censuses to prove that a society or a teip is Ingush or Chechen. The "Ethnic composition of the population" section in the Galashkinskoe Naibstvo article was added by Товболатов (who created the article) and not me, personally I don't really see the point of that section, to me it looked an attempt to claim Galashians as Chechen. At that time the section only had the sources "in favor of Chechens" (in reality the cherrypicked sources were the same sources where the Ingush were classfied under the term "Chechen", again the same thing like with the Tsorins). WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 20:42, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I am open to suggestions to reach consensus on this matter. But we have to be honest in our statements. When we study history, Galashians, as well as Fyappiy and Tsoroy are undoubtely a part of the Ingush, just like I would not state that Terloy or Nashkhoy are Ingush, because some sources mention them as Ingush. The ethnic belonging of these clans and societies are not disputed by researchers. Commonly debated (by researchers) however are Mälkhi, Orstkhoy, Äkkiy and Maistoy (last to a lesser degree). Here's the thing, somewhere above you mentioned that it is only the Orstkhoy that are divided among Chechens and Ingush. We both know that the Orstkhoy are attributed to the Ingush more throughout history, even though they were also linked to the Chechens, though in the Orstkhoy article you were keen on epmhasizing that they were equally if not more linked to the Chechen based on some sources stating that they speak a Chechen dialect. Exactly similar sources exist on the Myalkhiy, Äkkiy and Maistoy, epmhasizing their connection to the Ingush and Ingush language, though we know that throughout history, especially modern history, the last three have been linked to Chechens significantly more. My point is: that you took a stance regarding the Orstkhoy who were linked more to the Ingush throughout history, but when in turn it comes to the Mälkhiy, Äkkiy or Maystoy, you do not want the articles to be similar to the Orstkhoy article. Objectively, this appears to be a double standard from your part. Muqale (talk) 20:58, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Muqale @WikiEditor1234567123 Great both of you respond at the same time) The 1926 census has been used in several articles in fact Wikieditor used it in the Orstkhoy article for the Bamut village census so i don't understand the point in trying to debunk this census. It seems a bit hypocritical to me to use this in your favor but then suddenly make up excuses when someone else uses it in their favor. We don't know why earlier census said they were all Ingush but then 1926 divided the villagers, maybe in these villages the natives gave a plot of land to ethnic Chechens, maybe the inhabitants identified as Chechens where as in earlier censuses they were written down as Ingush because their village elder who happened to be an Ingush wrote them down as such. We don't know, making excuses and claiming the censuses are incorrect is wrong. At least use an authoritative neutral secondary source that claims this before making your own conclusions as this is classified as Original research on Wikipedia. That is all i have to say about 1926 census, deleting it is wrong and shouldn't be done just because of your assumptions.

I disagree that Orstkhoy were identified more with Ingush, it is funny how you claim that i use sources to claim Ingush teips when in fact i am only using yours and Wikieditors arguments. The Mälkhi being connected to Ingush is only through one miltiary source from 1851 (which btw has a lot of errors since it claims they conquered the "Dalne Kists" when they didn't), then other authors using this as a source identified them as Ingush. These sources are enough for you to claim Melhi and for Ingush authors to create a new Shahar for Melhi despite the fact that Melhi villages in Ingushetia all identify as ethnic Chechens even to this day through national censuses. Even Volkova which you two love to quote identified Melkhi only with Chechens and at times as a separate tribe.

As i said i have no plans to include Fyappi and others as Chechen teips but if i or someone else does it then it is fair, i only started this topic to see what Wikieditor thought but it seems to me that you two have a very close bond since you message each other and join in the discussion very quickly) I think we can leave the discussion for now and focus on other articles that we are already editing on. Goddard2000 (talk) 21:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

There's no need to bring up conspiracy theories, just because you received 2 replies around the same time. I know for a fact that you know that the 1926 is inaccurate, I also liked the whole backstories you created for this census)) You know what, I won't speak for WikiEditor1234567123, but I, myself for the time being will not remove this source, but will take it as an insight in your intentions and views. Moving on, both Genko and Volkova actually said that the language of Mälkhi and Maistiy was more Ingush than Chechen. In O. Pavlova's research, as recently as 2013 (Чеченский этнос сегодня), Mälkhi's living in the Chechen republic, Moscow and St. Petersbug all stated that they understand Ingush beter than Chechen. Even more so for Akkiy. Like I said, it goes both ways. Muqale (talk) 22:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

The backstories have as much weight as your accusations of the source being inaccurate) The language of Melhi, Maysti being closer doesn't mean as much when these authors (Volkova at least) bring them ethnically closer to Chechens. Chechen dialects in Galanchozh are close to Ingush language similarly the Sharoy-Chebarloy are close to Batsbi language. Anyways at least you and I agree to not remove the 1926 source so we can leave this topic. Goddard2000 (talk) 22:35, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

References