![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I read that defensive towers were 30m high somewhere else to. But I'm not sure if that's true. Searching for evidences but I think they were maximum 20 or 25 meters high... Normally they had 5 or 6 floors+3 or 4meter height of first floor(in defensive reasons) level from terrain. it makes 6xFloor hight+4meters=30 that mean each floor was in best case 6 meters high.. thats impossible..(and not esthetic) So in my opinion someones wrote 30 in place 15 or 20 and other followed his/her mistake... By the way the towers I saw in real wer far lower than 10floors building -- Nakh 09:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
The detailed descriptions of the Nakh medieval towers were moved to their own article,
Vainakh medieval towers. There was too much technical detail for this article, which is meant to be a genaral survey of all aspects of the history and culture of the Nakh peoples.
I am not sure what is the proper name for the new article ("Vainakh" or "Nakh"? "medieval" or "Medieval"? etc.) Suggestions? All the best, --
Jorge Stolfi (
talk)
18:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Vainakh is mostly used by Nakh people theirself. It means "our people" like our relatives, in that Nakh is "People". People prefer to call that Ethnic group "Nakh". I dont know does it matter if its written "m" or "M". Nakh 04:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
this image should not be in this article. the "built in typical Nakh style" seems to be original research
to Nakh ( talk · contribs): if you dont give any source about nakh style i will be to delete the image.-- Bouron ( talk) 12:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Dear Bouron, It's well known that ancestors of Ossetians (Scythians, Sauromats and Alans) practised nomad culture and they had no advanced architecture. We also know that these people share not only the Vainakh architecture traditions but also Byzantian. for example Churches built by Alans are in traditional Byzantium style. I didn't published my researches on this issue, will cite if find someone elses. PS: Byzantum church was also shared by Georgians and Armenians. Nakh 04:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Nakh peoples. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:32, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
This page isn't written in proper English. It's filled with grammatical errors and incomplete and incoherete sentences. Purplefishy ( talk) 14:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
I removed the "foreign teips" section since it had almost no sources and because there are no Foreign teips among Chechens. This is a myth that was popularized by Soviet researchers who included foreign nations like "dzhugti"(jews), "Örsi"(Russians), "Chergizy"(Circassians) etc into the Chechen teip lists when in fact these were just nations that happened to live in Chechnya.These are Chechen names for those nations, not Teips. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goddard2000 ( talk • contribs) 22:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Kist-Dzurdzuk Hello, i made some changes to your Ghalghai edit in Nakh peoples. The changes are as following: 1. I removed Strabo as a source for the Gelia people's since he never claimed they are Ghalghai. I replaced him with Pallas who did indeed theorize that the Gelians Strabo mentioned were in fact Ghalghai. This is a theory however and many other theories exist about Gelians so its better to have Pallas as a source than Strabo.
2. Your claim that Chechen Highlanders called Ingush Makhaloi, this is the first time i heard about this and if i recall correctly Khalid Oshayev claimed Svans are called Makhloi not Ingush. If you bring a source that claims otherwise then i see no problem in undoing my edit.
3. I added Nakhchoy to the list of peoples that Ingush were referred to, since there is already "Tschetschena" in that list i assume you have no problem with adding Nakhchoy. It would only be fair. Goddard2000 ( talk) 12:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Goddard2000, I would like to discuss your flawless rollbacks of my edits, in which I actually added sources. And to prove that your accusations that I add "disinformation" are only slander in relation to my person:
1. You claim that I allegedly did not read Laudaev's scientific work "Collection of Information about the Caucasian Highlanders" and that I allegedly entered false information, in this book it is written in black and white on page 76 that the name "Nakhchoy" is translated as "cheese" This is confirmed by the Chechen legends about the "turpal nokhchi" who, at birth, held an iron in his right hand, and in his left hand he held a creamy mass similar to cheese, this is an indisputable fact that the Chechens themselves speak of.
2. You also canceled important edits about the work of the Chechen ethnographer Suleymanov, deleted the photo depicting the Ingush, and also eliminated information about the Ingush translation of the word "isting", and at the same time you did not justify your actions.
3. You say that it is an insult to remove information about the alleged connection of the Chechens to the Dzurdzuks, although it would seem that the map of the Georgian prince "Vakhushti Bagrationi" has already proved everything. The map shows kists, gligvas, and dzurdzuks indicating that this is a single ethnic group, and to the west we can observe the Chechen ethnonym "chachan" which refers to Dagestan, now the question is: Where is the connection between the Chechens and the dzurdzuks? Niyskho ( talk) 14:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello
Niyskho
1. I misread your original edit regarding Laudaev, i thought you meant that Chechens themselves used Laudaev sources to claim that they were named after cheese, my bad on that part. However Laudaev never claimed that Nazranians refer to Chechens as "Nakhchi" while Chechens refer to themselves as "Nokhchi". He only referred to Chechens as Nakhchi, your edit implied that Laudaev claims that Chechens only called themselves Nokhchoi which is false.
As for Turpal Nokhchoi this is a legend, should we also assume that Ingush are descendants of Arabs? because Ingush folklore says they are descendant from an Arab king named Turpal? Besides there are as many sources where Chechens themselves say Nakhchi comes from "people", "people of excellence", "from Nashkha" etc. 1 Folktale doesn't confirm this theory.
2. I deleted all of your edits since you came out of nowhere and deleted + changed large chunks of text, adding a picture of Ingush or an Ingush etymology is no problem as long as you don't delete other stuff.
3. Vakhushti is the only source we are using now? What about other far more reputable historians such as Javakhshvili, Melikshvili and others that clearly say Chechens are Dzurdzuks. What about the toponym "Zurzuka" in Chechnya? Also Vakhushti never claimed modern Chechens were not Dzurdzuks, he claimed half of modern Chechnya was Dzurduketia (territory that is west from the river of aragvi that is). Before "Chechen" was only the name of a city, then it became the name of a territory and then Russians referred to everyone as Chechens. Nowadays Chechen is only referred to the Nokhchi/Nakhchi people, so to claim that Chechens aren't related to Dzurdzuks is ridiculous especially when several historians also call Chechens "Dzurduks".
Vakhushti also claimed that Gligvi (Ghalghai which as you know is the self-name of Ingush) who lives in Angusht (Ingush) are descendants from Dzurdzuks. How can you then claim Dzurduks are only Ingush if the very Ingush Vakhushti mentions are descendants of a people that are not Ingush? who are then the Dzurduks? major Chechen tribes live on the territory which he claimed are Dzurdzuks. As we well know many Ingush taips claim to descend from Chechen taips as Nashkhoi, Dishni, Äkkhi and Terloy. Nashkhoi especially was always the capital and cradle of the Nokhchi/Nakhchi people so you can't claim we aren't Dzurduks when Vakhushti locates Dzurdzuketia west of the Aragvi (Argun river) where Nashkha is.
Goddard2000 ( talk) 17:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
To begin with, I thank you for an adequate dialogue, unfortunately, in my experience, some individuals among the Chechens they introduced themselves extremely inappropriately, and even tried in every possible way to offend our people.
1.Laudaev wrote in his work that the name "Nakhchi" was translated as "cheese", in the same work he wrote that Nazranians who speak "not a pure Chechen language", mockingly called the flat Chechens "cheese people", I want to note what exactly the flat Chechens wore this name, this ethnonym did not apply to the mountain Chechens, if we refer to the same Laudaev and Suleymanov.
This is just the most common legend among Chechens (especially among the older generation), the Chechen historian Suleymanov wrote that the name "nakh" (people) and the ethnonym "Nakhchi" are not of the same series, proving that these are completely different names. For the first time I hear about the legend of the Ingush about a certain Arab Turpal, although I read something similar in the works of the Russian historian Adolf Berger, but there it is a completely different matter: In labor: Chechnya and Chechens. , A. Berger Ruler of Affairs of the Caucasian Department of the Imperial
Russian Geographical Society.
T I F L I S. 1859.” On page 125, there is a legend about a certain Arab named "ali" who arrived in the Caucasus from Arabia, where he was received by the Galgaevs and allowed to live in their homeland,after a while, Ali (Arab) has a son whom he called "Nakhchi" because of the creamy mass that he held in his left hand, on the same page it is written that "Nakhchi was a brave Galgai", Chechens originated from the same person, according to legend.
2.I was confused by the fact that the general article for the Ingush and Chechens to a greater extent reflect the hypotheses that are beneficial to the Chechens themselves, why is there practically nothing related to the Ingush? Respect your neighbors, and finally, let me add a section with the ethnonym "Galgay", there are quite a few works in which it is said that this ethnonym was widely spread to the Nakh ethno-societies. Dzurdzuks in many Georgian sources are recorded as the ancestors of the Ingush, but nevertheless, I do not deny that they are the ancestors of the Chechens!
3.And now please don’t tell stories about the “Chechen origin of the Ingush clans”, if we start a discussion on this subject, then a lot of things will become clear, referring to the same German traveler and professor Johann Guldeshtend and his works, then we will find out something the village "nashkha" and its inhabitants from which many Chechen teips originate is the territory of the Ingush massif.
Thank you for your attention! Don't take my words as insults! In no way am I trying to offend anyone! You just need to study history honestly! Dal bart ca1 bolb vey! Niyskho ( talk) 19:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
I am also glad we can have a normal dialogue instead of a fight, previous conversations with your fellow countrymen here have resulted in bans and curses. However your post contains more inaccuracies.
1. Laudaev did indeed say the Nakhchi ethnonym originated from Cheese but he did not say Mountain Chechens don't use this term. This is a very inaccurate statement from you and it puts doubts about your intentions, he said the ethnonym originated in the lowlands but is now being used by both mountaineers and lowlanders. The quote about Nazranians (Ghalghai) i posted in the article clearly shows that he said Ingush and Chechen mountaineers (Shatoy) call each other "Nakhchiy".
As for Suleimanov not applying the ethnonym to Mountain Chechens, this is up for debate, Suleimanov was a Chechen nationalist and i'm assuming you are referring to his quote about Chanti-Argun and Sharo-Argunians referring to lowland Chechens as "Nachkhi aka cheese" instead of Nakhchi. Suleimanov also refers to all Chechens as "Nakhchi" later on in the very same page (145):"нахчи — чеченское самоназвавие,". This is a very weak source from you since he doesn't say that Mountain Chechens do not call themselves Nakhchi, just that "they pronounced and some still pronounce Nakhchi as Nachkhi when referring to lowland Chechens which means cheese". Nowhere does he say that Mountain Chechens are neither Chechens or Nakhchi, he outright refers to all Chechens as Nakhchi in the very same page.
Not to mention all of the toponyms he names in the mountains of Chechnya that are related to Nokhchi and Nakhchi, for example he names "Nokhchi-khutor" in Nashkha, another variant for a place in Nashkha is "Nakhch-Khazie", another variant for "Nokh-kort" he names as "Nokhch-kort" etc. In every book of his he says that Chechen self name is Nakhchi-Nokhchi, Suleimanov himself claimed he is Chechen and if you didn't know he was from taip Chanti which means he is a Mountain Chechen.
As for the Arab "Turpal" that came to Caucasus, married a Georgian woman and then had 3 sons called Ga (Grandpa of Galgai), Arstkho and Nakhcho you can find in Yakovlevs book about Ingush here: https://litresp.ru/chitat/ru/%D0%AF/yakovlev-nikolaj-feofanovich/ingushi
The story of a Chechen Arab marrying a Ghalghai woman and then having a Nakhcho son is also just that, a story. Berger recorded it from 2 men, this type of folktale was common in North Caucasus where Muslims regarded Qurayshi tribe almost as a holy people. There are plenty of Folktales that contradict these stories such as Ingush being descended from Nokhchoi or that Ingush ancestor was an Armenian prince instead of Arab. We could compete by throwing these folktales at each other but it will just be a waste of time.
Berger himself considered both Ingush and Chechens "Nakhchiy", he says it himself in page 83 of "Чечня и Чеченцы":
"Here is the calculation of all the tribes into which it is customary to divide the Chechens. In the strict sense, however, this division has no basis. It is completely unknown to the Chechens themselves. They call themselves Nakhche, i.e. "people" and this refers to the entire people who speak the Chechen language and its dialects. The mentioned names were given to them either from auls, like Tsori, Galgay, Shatoi, etc., or from rivers and mountains, like Michikovtsy and Kachkalyks. It is very likely that sooner or later all or most of the names we have given will disappear and the Chechens will retain one common name."
As you can see Berger stated that the ethnonym means people and he doesn't say non-lowlanders are not Nakhchi. The same can be seen by many authors such as Semenov, Dubrovin, Dalgat (who many times studied in Ingushetia) and many others. Dalgat also wrote: “It seems to me that the interpretation of N. Semenov is correct. Nakhchuo comes from the word: nakh - people, people and chu - inside, here is a place, and means a place inhabited by people; and the word Nakhchoy means the very people”
So no "Cheese" isn't widely accepted, most authors even in the 19th century use "People" or "Nation" as the correct etymologi. If there are authors that disagree with it then it's fine, Suleimanov like you said disagreed that it means Nation but in no way did he say that Mountain Chechens are not Nakhchi like you claimed.
Why is there no Ingush input? go check the edit history first before you ask, it is full of Ingush that delete and edit in unnecessary stuff. You are the first one that i can have a normal discussion with, if you look on this talk page i had nothing against someone adding Ghalghai etymology. The only thing i did was try to correct some mistakes but the author never answered and the page was as usual attacked by trolls.
Dzurdzuks are not Ingush only, if Gligvi (Angusht) is the descendant of a bigger and older people (Dzurdzuks who aren't Gligvi/Ingush) then how can Ingush alone be Dzurdzuk? Think about this question because you fixating on the "Chechen" toponym without taking in the account of it's history is very irresponsible and will lead to a lot of misinformation. I also have to note that Vakhushti himself never wrote detailed info on Chechan, like he did about the Gligvi, Kist and Dzurdzuks, and during this time "Chechen" was already a common Russian exonym that spread to others. I should remind you that the oldest map that mentions either of our nation is not Vakhushtis rather it is a Kabardin who served in the Russian army. Map is from 1719 and "Chechens" cover all of the territory of modern Chechnya and Ingushetia, Source: https://www.kavkaz-uzel.eu/borders
We can tell the origins of each taip no problem, especially with DNA testing now i can confirm everything. Guildenshtedt claimed Nashkha was divided into the "little Angusht" region by the Russians. You can understand why if you look geographically but that doesn't matter, parts of Ingushetia and oftentimes all of Ingushetia was referred to as Chechnya for administrative and military reasons. Nashkhoi however has nothing in common with Ghalghai genetically and belong to the Chechen branch. But i do think we will sit here for years if we try to continue on this discussion about Ingush and Chechen teip origin so it is up to you.
Goddard2000 ( talk) 18:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
I agree that this discussion will continue indefinitely, I can present evidence to you, and you, in turn, will present your arguments.
I would also like to say that some authors called the Ingush Chechens only because this ethnonym was easy to pronounce. You understand that the Ingush never called themselves Chechens and Nakhchoys, we called and still call ourselves Galgai and Ingush, our history is common, but by circumstances of fate we became two peoples, taking a neutral position, I will only say that no one comes from anyone ! You are Chechens, We are Ingush, and that's all.
And please answer, if I add information about the hypothesis of the origin of the ethnonym "Galgai" and that this ethnonym was also widespread in other Nakh ethno-societies, including information that the Chechens themselves were called Galgai, you will tell me interfere in any way? after all, on this page there is already information that allegedly "the Ingush were called Chechens", now let the Ingush add their own section. Niyskho ( talk) 18:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Excuse me, but where am I impatient? We've discussed everything. I don't want a useless edit war, I just want to contribute. Niyskho ( talk) 14:57, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
I do not want hostility, you are very mistaken! I am for a peaceful solution to the problem. Niyskho ( talk) 15:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
You must have patience Niyskho , ( Personal attack removed) but we have to have a discussion about the edits before we edit again. This is why the Talk page exists, i don't want to get the admins involved again since that is very exhausting and i don't have time for edit wars. Regarding your recent edits:
The edit with a picture of Ingush men: I see no problem with this image but why do you have the need to raise your image above every Chechen image in this article? you did the same on the istang images, the Chechen image was posted first so let it stay there. There is no need to have a complex regarding it. I let the Isting image stay above the Chechen Istang image if you are this fixated on above-below positions of images.
Edit where you deleted a chunk of text in the Durdzuk section: I have no problem with this either since you rightfully pointed out that the text has no source, i hadn't noticed it before so i think this is a valid edit.
Edit with Isting: No problem here either, good edit and very useful.
Edit with Durdzuks: Here is my biggest gripe, your edits with Durdzuks are full of original research and attempts at claiming the exonym of Durdzuk all for yourself. The image you posted i have no problem with, it is the map of Vakhushti however your text is completely original research. Vakhushti never claimed all 3 societies were Ingush, the only people he ever claimed were Ingush were the Gligvi (Ghalghai) who he said lived in Angusht (Ingush). Otherwise he said Gligvi/Ingush are descendants of Durdzuks (a people that are clearly NOT Gligvi (Ghalghai) or Angusht (Ingush). Do you think we can call the USA the United Kingdom? or Argentina the Kingdom of Spain? no we can't. Vakhushti mentioned Chachans but during this time Chachan was not referred to all Chechens, especially not highlanders. Chachan itself is technically only a region in central Chechnya.
I have a proposition on how we can solve this problem, we can copy paste the Russian version of the Durdzuk page onto this page (and the English version of Durdzuk page which you already edited on). If you post Vakhushti's map and source and claim the things you claim then that is original research which isn't allowed on Wikipedia, however you can post the sources that claim Durdzuks were Ingush (like Volkova who claimed Durdzuk were referred to all Vainakhs but later on only located in Ingushetia). Then i can post the sources which call both of us Durdzuks and the sources that claim Ingush were only Gligvi while Chechens were Durdzuks. This is how the Russian wikipedia version looks:
"Dzurdzuki or Durdzuki ( Georgian დურძუკები ) is a medieval ethnonym used mainly in Georgian and Arabic sources in the 9th-18th centuries. Some researchers localize the Dzurdzuks in mountainous Ingushetia and identify them with the Ingush [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] , others believe that during the Middle Ages the population of Chechnya was known to the South Caucasian peoples under the name "Durdzuks", or "Dzurdzuks" [6] [7] [8] , and the population of Ingushetia under the names "Gligvi", "giligii" [9] [10] . Other researchers identify them in general with the ancestors of both the Ingush and Chechens [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] . The Georgian historian V. N. Gamrekeli claims that “Durdzuk” is definitely and, with all its references, uniformly localized between Didoet-Dagestan in the east and the gorge of the Terek River in the west [18]"
You can also post the map but without text since again this is original research on a map that claimed nothing close to what you described. What do you think?
Goddard2000 (
talk)
16:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
No, I don't care if the photo of the Ingush is higher than the photo of the Chechens or vice versa, I don't care at all.
As for the isting photo, I didn’t quite understand, I didn’t add a photo of the Ingush isting, you probably made a mistake.
Much is obvious about Vakhushti, he specifically noted in his work that the ethnonym Dzurdzuks belonged to the Kists (as the Georgians used to call the Ingush), this is a fact, one way or another. But still, I do not deny that there are also sources saying that the dzurdzuks are the ancestors of the Chechens. Apparently I was in too much of a hurry, here I made a mistake.
Regarding your proposal: I agree with you! your version of the Russian Wikipedia suits me very much. I think this is how we will solve this problem.
Thanks for the good discussion. Niyskho ( talk) 16:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Niyskho I meant the Ingush version of Isting above the Chechen istangs, not image. Either way let's ignore that, if i over-analyzed it then Kxinter val. Regarding Georgians using Kist for Ingush only) this is also something that is very much up for debate but either way, I will use the Russian version in this article and the Durdzuk article, i think it is neutral to both of us. I am glad we managed to come to an understanding without involving the admins. Also regarding an admin removing my "insult": it wasn't meant as an insult, you can check the edits if you want to see what i said.
Goddard2000 ( talk) 18:01, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
I am also glad that everything went pretty well, you behaved very worthy, I did not observe any insults from you. Niyskho ( talk) 18:00, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi colleague Muqale, could you consider creating a section on the self-name of the Ingush in this article? I think this is quite important information for this article. Targimhoï ( talk) 16:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Muqale Targimhoï I undid your edit because you are removing a large chunk of the text without at least contacting other editors like me. We have talked in talk page many times with others about edits on this page and come to consensus. Do not edit war and vandalize, Targimhoï making multiple edits in 1 day on 1 page is not permissible i believe. It is better to make 1 edit, both of you have edited out a large chunks of the article and changed it with dozens of edits in 1 day. Start a discussion in here before you edit to reach a consensus, otherwise it might result in an edit war. Goddard2000 ( talk) 23:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
WikiEditor1234567123 Before there is a chance for edit war i will tag you in here, why do you have a problem with me pointing out that these sources are from modern writings and 18th century? the whole text already mentions other dates such as the 1st century Strabo and 16th century Russian sources. I have added the date for every single major Nakhchi writing as well so i don't understand the problem with pointing out the dates of the mentions of Gligvi.
Goddard2000 (
talk)
13:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Goddard2000 ( talk) 14:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Muqale I suggest you read the foreword of the 2008 edition of Dalgat's book and ignore the conspiracies you wrote previously. The 2008 edition is heavily edited by Uzdiyat (Daughter of Dalgat) who includes letters of correspondence between Malsagov and Dalgat where Malsagov talks about editing his text. We both know that the scientific term "Vainakh" was not used at all before Malsagov created it in the early 20th century, certainly not in the 19th century when Dalgat wrote his text. The 2008 edition as i said was edited and supervised by Uzdiyat Dalgatova who has the original writings of her father and his letters. If you want to claim there is a conspiracy by Chechen authors to include Nakhchoy in Dalgat's text then bring unbiased sources instead of nationalistic Ingush blogs who ignore important details and context. Also it is important to note that Uzdiyat Dalgat is a respected historian and has written a lot about North Caucasus history. Her students include famous Ingush historians like Ibragim Dakhkilgov. Goddard2000 ( talk) 13:18, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmattulahi wa barakatuh @ Goddard2000. I wasn't planning on having another dispute over a article but alright, I will try to not get dragged too deep into the discussion. Could you show me here which parts of my edits you disagree with? Hopefully this will be a constructive discussion. WikiEditor1234567123 ( talk) 12:24, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
The proclamation that the soviets created the name Vainakh is totally wrong, Chechens have used this name even before they were called Chechen, the Vainakh name was used to describe the 4 main branches of the Nakh people, Nokhtchi(lived in the current Chechen Republic) Aqui(lived in the eastern part of Chechnya all the way to Caspian Sea) lngush(lived in current Ingushetia) Lamrkhoy(are the Batsoy and Kist in Georgia), the proof that Vainakh was used from the old time is that all the Chechens who migrated to Turkey Syria Jordan Iraq in the 18 hundreds and beginning of 19 hundreds before the Bolsheviks even existed used the name Vainakh to describe themselves. Smurad 2000 ( talk) 00:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Assalamu aleykum wa rahmattulahi wa barakatuh @ Goddard2000. Could you show me which document/source mentions "Nakhshai" in 1756 exactly? I checked this source, which is in the article: "Баширов, Саламбек (2018). Этническая история Терско-Сулакского междуречья (на примере семьи Башир-шейха Аксайского). Grozny". However, to my surprise, I couldn't find mention of Nakhshai anywhere. Perhaps, you're referring to this document dating back to 1756, which does mention certain Chechen uzdens (princes), though no mention of Nakhshai again. WikiEditor1234567123 ( talk) 12:48, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=note>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=note}}
template (see the
help page).
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I read that defensive towers were 30m high somewhere else to. But I'm not sure if that's true. Searching for evidences but I think they were maximum 20 or 25 meters high... Normally they had 5 or 6 floors+3 or 4meter height of first floor(in defensive reasons) level from terrain. it makes 6xFloor hight+4meters=30 that mean each floor was in best case 6 meters high.. thats impossible..(and not esthetic) So in my opinion someones wrote 30 in place 15 or 20 and other followed his/her mistake... By the way the towers I saw in real wer far lower than 10floors building -- Nakh 09:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
The detailed descriptions of the Nakh medieval towers were moved to their own article,
Vainakh medieval towers. There was too much technical detail for this article, which is meant to be a genaral survey of all aspects of the history and culture of the Nakh peoples.
I am not sure what is the proper name for the new article ("Vainakh" or "Nakh"? "medieval" or "Medieval"? etc.) Suggestions? All the best, --
Jorge Stolfi (
talk)
18:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Vainakh is mostly used by Nakh people theirself. It means "our people" like our relatives, in that Nakh is "People". People prefer to call that Ethnic group "Nakh". I dont know does it matter if its written "m" or "M". Nakh 04:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
this image should not be in this article. the "built in typical Nakh style" seems to be original research
to Nakh ( talk · contribs): if you dont give any source about nakh style i will be to delete the image.-- Bouron ( talk) 12:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Dear Bouron, It's well known that ancestors of Ossetians (Scythians, Sauromats and Alans) practised nomad culture and they had no advanced architecture. We also know that these people share not only the Vainakh architecture traditions but also Byzantian. for example Churches built by Alans are in traditional Byzantium style. I didn't published my researches on this issue, will cite if find someone elses. PS: Byzantum church was also shared by Georgians and Armenians. Nakh 04:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Nakh peoples. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:32, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
This page isn't written in proper English. It's filled with grammatical errors and incomplete and incoherete sentences. Purplefishy ( talk) 14:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
I removed the "foreign teips" section since it had almost no sources and because there are no Foreign teips among Chechens. This is a myth that was popularized by Soviet researchers who included foreign nations like "dzhugti"(jews), "Örsi"(Russians), "Chergizy"(Circassians) etc into the Chechen teip lists when in fact these were just nations that happened to live in Chechnya.These are Chechen names for those nations, not Teips. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goddard2000 ( talk • contribs) 22:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Kist-Dzurdzuk Hello, i made some changes to your Ghalghai edit in Nakh peoples. The changes are as following: 1. I removed Strabo as a source for the Gelia people's since he never claimed they are Ghalghai. I replaced him with Pallas who did indeed theorize that the Gelians Strabo mentioned were in fact Ghalghai. This is a theory however and many other theories exist about Gelians so its better to have Pallas as a source than Strabo.
2. Your claim that Chechen Highlanders called Ingush Makhaloi, this is the first time i heard about this and if i recall correctly Khalid Oshayev claimed Svans are called Makhloi not Ingush. If you bring a source that claims otherwise then i see no problem in undoing my edit.
3. I added Nakhchoy to the list of peoples that Ingush were referred to, since there is already "Tschetschena" in that list i assume you have no problem with adding Nakhchoy. It would only be fair. Goddard2000 ( talk) 12:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Goddard2000, I would like to discuss your flawless rollbacks of my edits, in which I actually added sources. And to prove that your accusations that I add "disinformation" are only slander in relation to my person:
1. You claim that I allegedly did not read Laudaev's scientific work "Collection of Information about the Caucasian Highlanders" and that I allegedly entered false information, in this book it is written in black and white on page 76 that the name "Nakhchoy" is translated as "cheese" This is confirmed by the Chechen legends about the "turpal nokhchi" who, at birth, held an iron in his right hand, and in his left hand he held a creamy mass similar to cheese, this is an indisputable fact that the Chechens themselves speak of.
2. You also canceled important edits about the work of the Chechen ethnographer Suleymanov, deleted the photo depicting the Ingush, and also eliminated information about the Ingush translation of the word "isting", and at the same time you did not justify your actions.
3. You say that it is an insult to remove information about the alleged connection of the Chechens to the Dzurdzuks, although it would seem that the map of the Georgian prince "Vakhushti Bagrationi" has already proved everything. The map shows kists, gligvas, and dzurdzuks indicating that this is a single ethnic group, and to the west we can observe the Chechen ethnonym "chachan" which refers to Dagestan, now the question is: Where is the connection between the Chechens and the dzurdzuks? Niyskho ( talk) 14:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello
Niyskho
1. I misread your original edit regarding Laudaev, i thought you meant that Chechens themselves used Laudaev sources to claim that they were named after cheese, my bad on that part. However Laudaev never claimed that Nazranians refer to Chechens as "Nakhchi" while Chechens refer to themselves as "Nokhchi". He only referred to Chechens as Nakhchi, your edit implied that Laudaev claims that Chechens only called themselves Nokhchoi which is false.
As for Turpal Nokhchoi this is a legend, should we also assume that Ingush are descendants of Arabs? because Ingush folklore says they are descendant from an Arab king named Turpal? Besides there are as many sources where Chechens themselves say Nakhchi comes from "people", "people of excellence", "from Nashkha" etc. 1 Folktale doesn't confirm this theory.
2. I deleted all of your edits since you came out of nowhere and deleted + changed large chunks of text, adding a picture of Ingush or an Ingush etymology is no problem as long as you don't delete other stuff.
3. Vakhushti is the only source we are using now? What about other far more reputable historians such as Javakhshvili, Melikshvili and others that clearly say Chechens are Dzurdzuks. What about the toponym "Zurzuka" in Chechnya? Also Vakhushti never claimed modern Chechens were not Dzurdzuks, he claimed half of modern Chechnya was Dzurduketia (territory that is west from the river of aragvi that is). Before "Chechen" was only the name of a city, then it became the name of a territory and then Russians referred to everyone as Chechens. Nowadays Chechen is only referred to the Nokhchi/Nakhchi people, so to claim that Chechens aren't related to Dzurdzuks is ridiculous especially when several historians also call Chechens "Dzurduks".
Vakhushti also claimed that Gligvi (Ghalghai which as you know is the self-name of Ingush) who lives in Angusht (Ingush) are descendants from Dzurdzuks. How can you then claim Dzurduks are only Ingush if the very Ingush Vakhushti mentions are descendants of a people that are not Ingush? who are then the Dzurduks? major Chechen tribes live on the territory which he claimed are Dzurdzuks. As we well know many Ingush taips claim to descend from Chechen taips as Nashkhoi, Dishni, Äkkhi and Terloy. Nashkhoi especially was always the capital and cradle of the Nokhchi/Nakhchi people so you can't claim we aren't Dzurduks when Vakhushti locates Dzurdzuketia west of the Aragvi (Argun river) where Nashkha is.
Goddard2000 ( talk) 17:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
To begin with, I thank you for an adequate dialogue, unfortunately, in my experience, some individuals among the Chechens they introduced themselves extremely inappropriately, and even tried in every possible way to offend our people.
1.Laudaev wrote in his work that the name "Nakhchi" was translated as "cheese", in the same work he wrote that Nazranians who speak "not a pure Chechen language", mockingly called the flat Chechens "cheese people", I want to note what exactly the flat Chechens wore this name, this ethnonym did not apply to the mountain Chechens, if we refer to the same Laudaev and Suleymanov.
This is just the most common legend among Chechens (especially among the older generation), the Chechen historian Suleymanov wrote that the name "nakh" (people) and the ethnonym "Nakhchi" are not of the same series, proving that these are completely different names. For the first time I hear about the legend of the Ingush about a certain Arab Turpal, although I read something similar in the works of the Russian historian Adolf Berger, but there it is a completely different matter: In labor: Chechnya and Chechens. , A. Berger Ruler of Affairs of the Caucasian Department of the Imperial
Russian Geographical Society.
T I F L I S. 1859.” On page 125, there is a legend about a certain Arab named "ali" who arrived in the Caucasus from Arabia, where he was received by the Galgaevs and allowed to live in their homeland,after a while, Ali (Arab) has a son whom he called "Nakhchi" because of the creamy mass that he held in his left hand, on the same page it is written that "Nakhchi was a brave Galgai", Chechens originated from the same person, according to legend.
2.I was confused by the fact that the general article for the Ingush and Chechens to a greater extent reflect the hypotheses that are beneficial to the Chechens themselves, why is there practically nothing related to the Ingush? Respect your neighbors, and finally, let me add a section with the ethnonym "Galgay", there are quite a few works in which it is said that this ethnonym was widely spread to the Nakh ethno-societies. Dzurdzuks in many Georgian sources are recorded as the ancestors of the Ingush, but nevertheless, I do not deny that they are the ancestors of the Chechens!
3.And now please don’t tell stories about the “Chechen origin of the Ingush clans”, if we start a discussion on this subject, then a lot of things will become clear, referring to the same German traveler and professor Johann Guldeshtend and his works, then we will find out something the village "nashkha" and its inhabitants from which many Chechen teips originate is the territory of the Ingush massif.
Thank you for your attention! Don't take my words as insults! In no way am I trying to offend anyone! You just need to study history honestly! Dal bart ca1 bolb vey! Niyskho ( talk) 19:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
I am also glad we can have a normal dialogue instead of a fight, previous conversations with your fellow countrymen here have resulted in bans and curses. However your post contains more inaccuracies.
1. Laudaev did indeed say the Nakhchi ethnonym originated from Cheese but he did not say Mountain Chechens don't use this term. This is a very inaccurate statement from you and it puts doubts about your intentions, he said the ethnonym originated in the lowlands but is now being used by both mountaineers and lowlanders. The quote about Nazranians (Ghalghai) i posted in the article clearly shows that he said Ingush and Chechen mountaineers (Shatoy) call each other "Nakhchiy".
As for Suleimanov not applying the ethnonym to Mountain Chechens, this is up for debate, Suleimanov was a Chechen nationalist and i'm assuming you are referring to his quote about Chanti-Argun and Sharo-Argunians referring to lowland Chechens as "Nachkhi aka cheese" instead of Nakhchi. Suleimanov also refers to all Chechens as "Nakhchi" later on in the very same page (145):"нахчи — чеченское самоназвавие,". This is a very weak source from you since he doesn't say that Mountain Chechens do not call themselves Nakhchi, just that "they pronounced and some still pronounce Nakhchi as Nachkhi when referring to lowland Chechens which means cheese". Nowhere does he say that Mountain Chechens are neither Chechens or Nakhchi, he outright refers to all Chechens as Nakhchi in the very same page.
Not to mention all of the toponyms he names in the mountains of Chechnya that are related to Nokhchi and Nakhchi, for example he names "Nokhchi-khutor" in Nashkha, another variant for a place in Nashkha is "Nakhch-Khazie", another variant for "Nokh-kort" he names as "Nokhch-kort" etc. In every book of his he says that Chechen self name is Nakhchi-Nokhchi, Suleimanov himself claimed he is Chechen and if you didn't know he was from taip Chanti which means he is a Mountain Chechen.
As for the Arab "Turpal" that came to Caucasus, married a Georgian woman and then had 3 sons called Ga (Grandpa of Galgai), Arstkho and Nakhcho you can find in Yakovlevs book about Ingush here: https://litresp.ru/chitat/ru/%D0%AF/yakovlev-nikolaj-feofanovich/ingushi
The story of a Chechen Arab marrying a Ghalghai woman and then having a Nakhcho son is also just that, a story. Berger recorded it from 2 men, this type of folktale was common in North Caucasus where Muslims regarded Qurayshi tribe almost as a holy people. There are plenty of Folktales that contradict these stories such as Ingush being descended from Nokhchoi or that Ingush ancestor was an Armenian prince instead of Arab. We could compete by throwing these folktales at each other but it will just be a waste of time.
Berger himself considered both Ingush and Chechens "Nakhchiy", he says it himself in page 83 of "Чечня и Чеченцы":
"Here is the calculation of all the tribes into which it is customary to divide the Chechens. In the strict sense, however, this division has no basis. It is completely unknown to the Chechens themselves. They call themselves Nakhche, i.e. "people" and this refers to the entire people who speak the Chechen language and its dialects. The mentioned names were given to them either from auls, like Tsori, Galgay, Shatoi, etc., or from rivers and mountains, like Michikovtsy and Kachkalyks. It is very likely that sooner or later all or most of the names we have given will disappear and the Chechens will retain one common name."
As you can see Berger stated that the ethnonym means people and he doesn't say non-lowlanders are not Nakhchi. The same can be seen by many authors such as Semenov, Dubrovin, Dalgat (who many times studied in Ingushetia) and many others. Dalgat also wrote: “It seems to me that the interpretation of N. Semenov is correct. Nakhchuo comes from the word: nakh - people, people and chu - inside, here is a place, and means a place inhabited by people; and the word Nakhchoy means the very people”
So no "Cheese" isn't widely accepted, most authors even in the 19th century use "People" or "Nation" as the correct etymologi. If there are authors that disagree with it then it's fine, Suleimanov like you said disagreed that it means Nation but in no way did he say that Mountain Chechens are not Nakhchi like you claimed.
Why is there no Ingush input? go check the edit history first before you ask, it is full of Ingush that delete and edit in unnecessary stuff. You are the first one that i can have a normal discussion with, if you look on this talk page i had nothing against someone adding Ghalghai etymology. The only thing i did was try to correct some mistakes but the author never answered and the page was as usual attacked by trolls.
Dzurdzuks are not Ingush only, if Gligvi (Angusht) is the descendant of a bigger and older people (Dzurdzuks who aren't Gligvi/Ingush) then how can Ingush alone be Dzurdzuk? Think about this question because you fixating on the "Chechen" toponym without taking in the account of it's history is very irresponsible and will lead to a lot of misinformation. I also have to note that Vakhushti himself never wrote detailed info on Chechan, like he did about the Gligvi, Kist and Dzurdzuks, and during this time "Chechen" was already a common Russian exonym that spread to others. I should remind you that the oldest map that mentions either of our nation is not Vakhushtis rather it is a Kabardin who served in the Russian army. Map is from 1719 and "Chechens" cover all of the territory of modern Chechnya and Ingushetia, Source: https://www.kavkaz-uzel.eu/borders
We can tell the origins of each taip no problem, especially with DNA testing now i can confirm everything. Guildenshtedt claimed Nashkha was divided into the "little Angusht" region by the Russians. You can understand why if you look geographically but that doesn't matter, parts of Ingushetia and oftentimes all of Ingushetia was referred to as Chechnya for administrative and military reasons. Nashkhoi however has nothing in common with Ghalghai genetically and belong to the Chechen branch. But i do think we will sit here for years if we try to continue on this discussion about Ingush and Chechen teip origin so it is up to you.
Goddard2000 ( talk) 18:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
I agree that this discussion will continue indefinitely, I can present evidence to you, and you, in turn, will present your arguments.
I would also like to say that some authors called the Ingush Chechens only because this ethnonym was easy to pronounce. You understand that the Ingush never called themselves Chechens and Nakhchoys, we called and still call ourselves Galgai and Ingush, our history is common, but by circumstances of fate we became two peoples, taking a neutral position, I will only say that no one comes from anyone ! You are Chechens, We are Ingush, and that's all.
And please answer, if I add information about the hypothesis of the origin of the ethnonym "Galgai" and that this ethnonym was also widespread in other Nakh ethno-societies, including information that the Chechens themselves were called Galgai, you will tell me interfere in any way? after all, on this page there is already information that allegedly "the Ingush were called Chechens", now let the Ingush add their own section. Niyskho ( talk) 18:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Excuse me, but where am I impatient? We've discussed everything. I don't want a useless edit war, I just want to contribute. Niyskho ( talk) 14:57, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
I do not want hostility, you are very mistaken! I am for a peaceful solution to the problem. Niyskho ( talk) 15:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
You must have patience Niyskho , ( Personal attack removed) but we have to have a discussion about the edits before we edit again. This is why the Talk page exists, i don't want to get the admins involved again since that is very exhausting and i don't have time for edit wars. Regarding your recent edits:
The edit with a picture of Ingush men: I see no problem with this image but why do you have the need to raise your image above every Chechen image in this article? you did the same on the istang images, the Chechen image was posted first so let it stay there. There is no need to have a complex regarding it. I let the Isting image stay above the Chechen Istang image if you are this fixated on above-below positions of images.
Edit where you deleted a chunk of text in the Durdzuk section: I have no problem with this either since you rightfully pointed out that the text has no source, i hadn't noticed it before so i think this is a valid edit.
Edit with Isting: No problem here either, good edit and very useful.
Edit with Durdzuks: Here is my biggest gripe, your edits with Durdzuks are full of original research and attempts at claiming the exonym of Durdzuk all for yourself. The image you posted i have no problem with, it is the map of Vakhushti however your text is completely original research. Vakhushti never claimed all 3 societies were Ingush, the only people he ever claimed were Ingush were the Gligvi (Ghalghai) who he said lived in Angusht (Ingush). Otherwise he said Gligvi/Ingush are descendants of Durdzuks (a people that are clearly NOT Gligvi (Ghalghai) or Angusht (Ingush). Do you think we can call the USA the United Kingdom? or Argentina the Kingdom of Spain? no we can't. Vakhushti mentioned Chachans but during this time Chachan was not referred to all Chechens, especially not highlanders. Chachan itself is technically only a region in central Chechnya.
I have a proposition on how we can solve this problem, we can copy paste the Russian version of the Durdzuk page onto this page (and the English version of Durdzuk page which you already edited on). If you post Vakhushti's map and source and claim the things you claim then that is original research which isn't allowed on Wikipedia, however you can post the sources that claim Durdzuks were Ingush (like Volkova who claimed Durdzuk were referred to all Vainakhs but later on only located in Ingushetia). Then i can post the sources which call both of us Durdzuks and the sources that claim Ingush were only Gligvi while Chechens were Durdzuks. This is how the Russian wikipedia version looks:
"Dzurdzuki or Durdzuki ( Georgian დურძუკები ) is a medieval ethnonym used mainly in Georgian and Arabic sources in the 9th-18th centuries. Some researchers localize the Dzurdzuks in mountainous Ingushetia and identify them with the Ingush [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] , others believe that during the Middle Ages the population of Chechnya was known to the South Caucasian peoples under the name "Durdzuks", or "Dzurdzuks" [6] [7] [8] , and the population of Ingushetia under the names "Gligvi", "giligii" [9] [10] . Other researchers identify them in general with the ancestors of both the Ingush and Chechens [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] . The Georgian historian V. N. Gamrekeli claims that “Durdzuk” is definitely and, with all its references, uniformly localized between Didoet-Dagestan in the east and the gorge of the Terek River in the west [18]"
You can also post the map but without text since again this is original research on a map that claimed nothing close to what you described. What do you think?
Goddard2000 (
talk)
16:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
No, I don't care if the photo of the Ingush is higher than the photo of the Chechens or vice versa, I don't care at all.
As for the isting photo, I didn’t quite understand, I didn’t add a photo of the Ingush isting, you probably made a mistake.
Much is obvious about Vakhushti, he specifically noted in his work that the ethnonym Dzurdzuks belonged to the Kists (as the Georgians used to call the Ingush), this is a fact, one way or another. But still, I do not deny that there are also sources saying that the dzurdzuks are the ancestors of the Chechens. Apparently I was in too much of a hurry, here I made a mistake.
Regarding your proposal: I agree with you! your version of the Russian Wikipedia suits me very much. I think this is how we will solve this problem.
Thanks for the good discussion. Niyskho ( talk) 16:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Niyskho I meant the Ingush version of Isting above the Chechen istangs, not image. Either way let's ignore that, if i over-analyzed it then Kxinter val. Regarding Georgians using Kist for Ingush only) this is also something that is very much up for debate but either way, I will use the Russian version in this article and the Durdzuk article, i think it is neutral to both of us. I am glad we managed to come to an understanding without involving the admins. Also regarding an admin removing my "insult": it wasn't meant as an insult, you can check the edits if you want to see what i said.
Goddard2000 ( talk) 18:01, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
I am also glad that everything went pretty well, you behaved very worthy, I did not observe any insults from you. Niyskho ( talk) 18:00, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi colleague Muqale, could you consider creating a section on the self-name of the Ingush in this article? I think this is quite important information for this article. Targimhoï ( talk) 16:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Muqale Targimhoï I undid your edit because you are removing a large chunk of the text without at least contacting other editors like me. We have talked in talk page many times with others about edits on this page and come to consensus. Do not edit war and vandalize, Targimhoï making multiple edits in 1 day on 1 page is not permissible i believe. It is better to make 1 edit, both of you have edited out a large chunks of the article and changed it with dozens of edits in 1 day. Start a discussion in here before you edit to reach a consensus, otherwise it might result in an edit war. Goddard2000 ( talk) 23:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
WikiEditor1234567123 Before there is a chance for edit war i will tag you in here, why do you have a problem with me pointing out that these sources are from modern writings and 18th century? the whole text already mentions other dates such as the 1st century Strabo and 16th century Russian sources. I have added the date for every single major Nakhchi writing as well so i don't understand the problem with pointing out the dates of the mentions of Gligvi.
Goddard2000 (
talk)
13:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Goddard2000 ( talk) 14:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Muqale I suggest you read the foreword of the 2008 edition of Dalgat's book and ignore the conspiracies you wrote previously. The 2008 edition is heavily edited by Uzdiyat (Daughter of Dalgat) who includes letters of correspondence between Malsagov and Dalgat where Malsagov talks about editing his text. We both know that the scientific term "Vainakh" was not used at all before Malsagov created it in the early 20th century, certainly not in the 19th century when Dalgat wrote his text. The 2008 edition as i said was edited and supervised by Uzdiyat Dalgatova who has the original writings of her father and his letters. If you want to claim there is a conspiracy by Chechen authors to include Nakhchoy in Dalgat's text then bring unbiased sources instead of nationalistic Ingush blogs who ignore important details and context. Also it is important to note that Uzdiyat Dalgat is a respected historian and has written a lot about North Caucasus history. Her students include famous Ingush historians like Ibragim Dakhkilgov. Goddard2000 ( talk) 13:18, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmattulahi wa barakatuh @ Goddard2000. I wasn't planning on having another dispute over a article but alright, I will try to not get dragged too deep into the discussion. Could you show me here which parts of my edits you disagree with? Hopefully this will be a constructive discussion. WikiEditor1234567123 ( talk) 12:24, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
The proclamation that the soviets created the name Vainakh is totally wrong, Chechens have used this name even before they were called Chechen, the Vainakh name was used to describe the 4 main branches of the Nakh people, Nokhtchi(lived in the current Chechen Republic) Aqui(lived in the eastern part of Chechnya all the way to Caspian Sea) lngush(lived in current Ingushetia) Lamrkhoy(are the Batsoy and Kist in Georgia), the proof that Vainakh was used from the old time is that all the Chechens who migrated to Turkey Syria Jordan Iraq in the 18 hundreds and beginning of 19 hundreds before the Bolsheviks even existed used the name Vainakh to describe themselves. Smurad 2000 ( talk) 00:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Assalamu aleykum wa rahmattulahi wa barakatuh @ Goddard2000. Could you show me which document/source mentions "Nakhshai" in 1756 exactly? I checked this source, which is in the article: "Баширов, Саламбек (2018). Этническая история Терско-Сулакского междуречья (на примере семьи Башир-шейха Аксайского). Grozny". However, to my surprise, I couldn't find mention of Nakhshai anywhere. Perhaps, you're referring to this document dating back to 1756, which does mention certain Chechen uzdens (princes), though no mention of Nakhshai again. WikiEditor1234567123 ( talk) 12:48, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=note>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=note}}
template (see the
help page).