This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Afghanistan Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Iran Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Central Asia Low‑importance Perso-Turkic war of 588–589 is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Classical B‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles B This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

On 9 October 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from First Perso-Turkic War to Perso-Turkic war of 588–589. The result of the discussion was moved.

Naming it the Turkish-Hephthalite War presumes a Persian background and is fundamentally ethnocentric. Just because our records of the war come from Persia doesn't mean the Persians were not combatants. TheLateDentarthurdent 06:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I just changed these numbers to the real ones. 

The persians were combatants. Look at it this way: we dont call the vietnam war the "vietnam american war", we dont call the Korean war the "North Korea-South Korea-UN war", we dont call the Iraq war "the American-Iraq war" etc....

Its just a name, dont worry so much about it. if your that worried, i suggest you go worry about more well known wars such as the above mentioned and change their names. Khosrow II 15:39, 29 July 2006 (UTC) reply

I agree with TheLateDentarthurdent: the name is confusing. The article should be moved to The Sassanid-Turkish War. Tājik 12:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Well, not Turkish, but it could be Sassanid Turkic war...but I dont see whats wrong with the title... Khosrow II 20:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Sassanid-Turk Wars would be the best name, I guess. The present name is confusing, because it sounds like a war between Hephthalites and Turks. Tājik 00:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply

By the way, when you rename it, please also get rid of the "The". Wikipedia article titles normally don't start with a definite article. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC) reply

about the number of turkic army, isn't it too much, 300 000? and what is your sources? i propose to remove that number, it is ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.213.207.104 ( talk) 22:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC) reply

• Turks were people of thinly populated steps. How could they gather 300 000 soldiers and how could they support this army ? A typical example of exaggeration. ( The same exaggeration is repeated in the article on the second war with almost the same wording.) Nedim Ardoğa ( talk) 10:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Although the number is from the ancient sources , it can be exaggerated in the original source , anyway the armies of that time were not national armies and a confederation of various peoples could build up a big army . Anyway , if a modern text gives a new estimation , it will be welcomed to mention it alongside the ancient sources . Thank you -- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 12:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC) reply

300,000 certainly is an exaggeration. Not even the Seljuqs who lived 400 years later had such a large army. The early Seljuq armies consisted of 15,000 Turkmen steppe-warriors and later included - at best - 50,000 slaves and "ghazis". However, the sources seem to agree that the nomads had a larger army than the Persians. Personally, I believe that it was 8-12,000 Persians vs. - at best - 20-30,000 Turks. It's a ratio of 1:2 to 1:3, and hence realistic. Tajik ( talk) 12:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC) reply

I think you are right , but anyway , in Wikipedia we can't use our original research and we may site a source who tells that . I think every new source may reduce that large number , but as you can see in the numbers for Battle of Thermopylae , the impossible numbers like 5,283,220 (!) are still mentioned in the articles because the old sources give them . Please add new number with it's source to improve the article . -- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 13:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC) reply

I have added "likely exaggeration" which is stated by the reference and needs to be conveyed to the reader. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 19:36, 25 September 2011 (UTC) reply

• "First Perso-Turkic War" -Llc 0
• "Perso-Turkic War" -Llc 0
• "Sasanian-Turkic wars" 1, Sasanian ? Sassanian ?

Takabeg ( talk) 04:27, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

According to the Pei-shih, both the Sasanians and the Hephthalites revolted against Tardu (Ta-t'ou) kaghan in 581 or 582. Some years later, in 588–589, in a further war with the Hephthalites, the Sasanian army, under their commander-in-chief Bahram Chobin, took Balkh and crossed the Amu Darya.

Takabeg ( talk) 04:46, 29 July 2011 (UTC) reply

The relationship between Hephthalites and West Turks is a complex and yet unknown one . As Iranica says [2]: "It was only with the rebuilding of Sasanian power under Ḵosrow I Anoširvān, between A.D. 558 and 561, when the Persians acted in concert with the newly-arrived Turkish horde under their Khāqān Sinjibu (Silzaboulos, with variants, in Byzantine sources), that the two powers were finally able to crush the Hephthalites in an epic battle near Bukhara, dividing their territories along the line of the Oxus (Amu Daryā). The Šāh-nāma names the defeated Hephthalite king Ḡātfar (ed. Moscow, VIII, p. 157), though in Ṭabari (I, p. 895) he appears as Warāz (variant Wazar). Yet, though the power of the Hephthalites was destroyed in Transoxania, Hephthalite kingdoms remained in Afghanistan, of which fragments survived for some time even after the Arab invasions."

There was other wars between Sasanid army and Hephthalites before the war of 588 , but before 561 , the independent Hephthalite empire acted as a buffer state between Sasanids and Western Turkic empire .Then I tink calling this war as the First is resonable .-- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 06:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC) reply

300.000 Men ?? 280.000 Killed ?? Huh Persian 6.000 Killed Very Dumb I am requesting the rearrangement — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warlordcry ( talk • contribs) 02:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC) reply

After finally getting to read the reference, the 300,000 was used for the Second Perso-Turkic War, not the First Perso-Turkic war. The 300,000 needs to be removed from the template then. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 03:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC) reply

I am also sure about the exaggeration , but that does not means we have to remove it at all . In all ancient wars , there has been historical exaggeration in historical texts about the size of the forces . In Bal'ami translation of Tabari's , Tarikh-e Bal'ami , there is direct citing of that 300000 figure , and Bal'ami says he had not translated that from Tabari , but he had picked it out from the Sassanian historiography of "Tarikh Muluk e Ajam" and included it in the Tabari's book Translation . Anyway , overall , that is a historical exaggeration and we may not remove it . -- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 09:12, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Have you read the source, Alborz? The 300,000 appears in the 2nd paragraph, which starts out, "Nearly 30 years later....". The first paragraph covers the Hephthalite attack in 588, whereas the second paragraph concerns itself with "30 years later" and is where the 300,000 appears. [3] I have already added the "300,000(likely exaggeration)" to the Second Perso-Turkic War article. The only thing that remains is to remove the "300,000 (likely exaggeration)" from this article since it does not apply to this war, but to the Second Perso-Turkic War. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 17:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply

That is from the Kaveh Farrokh text. Yes , in the book Sassanian Elite Cavalry , the 300,000 figure is of second war , but in Balami (which is an ancient history book ) the first war is also 300,000 . I can post a scan if is it necessary.-- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 17:29, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply

That would be great. Then we would need to change the reference then, correct? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:46, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Sure , but the text is in Persian . Does it have problem as a reference ?-- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 20:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply

If it is a primary source then it could be considered a problem. As for it being written in Persian, I do not know. I, unfortunately, can not read Persian. What about this source? [4] Or this one. [5] These mention Oxus, Bahram, and 300,000 Turks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 21:04, 1 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Both of the above sources can be used . About the Bal'ami translation of Tabari's book, Tarikh-e Bal'ami , this is the address : Natell Khanlari , Safa, Parviz , Zabih Allah (1977 , 9th edition). Barram Chobin ( A section of Bal'ami translation of Tabari's History of the Prophets and Kings. Tehran: Amir-Kabir. p. 10. {{ cite book}}: Check date values in: |year= ( help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( link). Can we use it like this , or it needs more (I mean scanning the page ) ? A view of the cover of this book is available in this address ( [6]) -- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 05:57, 2 October 2011 (UTC) reply

If the page is in Persian, then it would be of little use to the majority of readers visiting English Wikipedia. As for whether it would be considered a primary source, you may have to inquire on the reliable sources noticeboard. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 06:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC) reply

In the question of primary vs secondary , I think this discussion of that board may be of help : [7] .

....they can be cited for what that particular work says explicitly, but not to comment on or interpret whatever topic they're discussing

.-- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 06:39, 2 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Works for me. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 06:42, 2 October 2011 (UTC) reply

OK , Thank you . Although the sentence about the exaggeration is not in the Bal'ami's history , but I think it is better if it remains . -- Alborz Fallah ( talk) 11:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Do you really believe this? only persian sources added and they show 300.000 Turks vs 12.000 persians and persians won! lol. I think numbers of the Turks must change to "unknown" because nobody knows actual numbers. also, same for second perso-Turkic battle. seriously, 300.000 in 6th c. laughable... BöriShad ( talk) 13:54, 24 July 2013 (UTC)BöriShad reply

There is no source cited for the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph of this article that states "He then proceeded to cross the Oxus river and managed to repulse the Turkic Invasion and taking over Hephthalite territory that was occupied by the Turks."

If you guys do have a source for this information then please cite it. I really would like to know where you all found it. Regards. :) Keeby101 ( talk) 16:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Did you have a chance to check references? This seems to a myth of ancient Persia depends on minor battle with huge exaggrations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karadede3512 ( talk • contribs) 15:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC) reply

@ HistoryofIran:, please take a look at the sources, the figure for the turkish army is sourced, but the "likely exaggeration" is nothing but a POV, it should be removed because as far as i know, Wikipedia goes with what sources say, not people's POV.

• Comment I would say that your remarks are quite legit, but edit-warring like you did against a veteran editor in order to change a long-standing content is not, please do not do that again. Also consider signing your comments with 4 ~. Thanks.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:00, 10 October 2019 (UTC) reply

I think 'sic' is the standard way to cite a questionable source. Benjamin Trovato ( talk)

@ Nomad108: Hey, do you have links for the sources, i would be happy to be able to check them and change the figures, but we need reliable sources to do so. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Wikaviani: Is there any problem with Gumilyov's source? –– Isvind ( talk) 19:43, 25 July 2021 (UTC) reply

That source and the others that have been added recently should go to WP:RSN. Also, as i said above, i would like to have links for these sources in order to verify what they say.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC) reply

The number of Turks is 300 thousand? In the third battle, the Turks defeated 200,000 Persians with 60,000 men. 300,000 people and 12,000 Persians will be defeated? looking at the source, the Persian source Icameforarealhistory ( talk) 06:11, 18 September 2021 (UTC) reply

I think 300,000-400,000 army is impossible for nomadic state. 300,000 person means half population of empire(maybe entire). I think you should remove one zero and use another sources like Chinese,Armenian,Greek,Arab 178.245.86.64 ( talk) 09:21, 12 December 2021 (UTC) reply

That's unfortunately never gonna happen, because some editors who have taken an eye on this article revert such changes in an instant. Of course, if it had been the other way around and 300.000 Persians were counted against 12.000 Göktürks, they would vehemently demand such a change. Anyway, I do continue keeping an eye on this article but have long given up any hope for neutrality.

~~~~ TengriKhagan ( talk) 13:16, 10 April 2022 (UTC) reply

@ Gokturklerrr: Please take your concerns here per WP:CONSENSUS. No personal attacks either. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 14:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC) reply

@ Wikaviani: Hi, hope you're doing well. For the first time, it was actually not a disruptive IP/brand new account that removed the bit about the Turkic numbers in the infobox, but myself [8]. I did it due to al-Tabari being a primary source. Bests. HistoryofIran ( talk) 21:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Hey, hope you're doing well too. My bad, sorry for my edit summary that was not about you, of course. i'm so used to trolls vandalising this article (as well as other articles) that as soon as I see any kind of significant change here, I think of those trolls first. Now this article is indefinitely protected, this should prevent it from being vandalised as often as before. For my part, I think that since the figures are explicitly attributed to the (primary) source and furthermore, a "better source needed" template is included, the infobox is fine as it is, but of course, if you think it's not, we can remove the Göktürk figures, I have no problem with that. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:19, 2 September 2022 (UTC) reply

No problem, I didn't expect anything else, as I have the exact same "issue" as well. I will be removing it then, best. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 17:43, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks very much for fixing my mistake and the infobox. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:05, 4 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Why were the numbers removed on here? The same source(Tabari) is used for other battles aswell. Seems very biased 5.47.10.132 ( talk) 18:56, 11 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Hi IP, see the above section. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:54, 5 November 2022 (UTC) reply

@ HistoryofIran: The Coinage of Hormiz in Chach and Samarkand seems to be before the war (see note 7 in the article: According to Rezakhani, coins of the years 3-5 (582-584) of the reign of Hormizd IV (579–590) were minted in Khulm and Samarkand, and coins of year 6 (585) were minted in Chach, and should "probably" be assigned to this period, attesting to the "northernmost extent of Sasanian power, extending beyond the Syr Darya/Jaxartes" p.176 p.178). Shouldn't the sentence "The Sasanians now held suzerainty over the Sogdian cities of Chach and Samarkand, where Hormizd minted coins." be revised, since the minting is not apparently a consequence of the 588–589 war but rather an indication of previous Sasanian territorial extent circa 582-585, before Bagha Qaghan's 588 southward expansion? पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 07:35, 6 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Huh, really? Well, that’s a pain. I’ll try to take a look at it today. HistoryofIran ( talk) 11:00, 6 February 2023 (UTC) reply

I think that we should at least add something like "significantly larger army* to the number of the turks SeljukK2 ( talk) 07:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC) reply

This edit request to First Perso-Turkic War has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

BaghaKhaghan army strength : 300000 men to approximately 400000 . This information comes from the Credible book Tarikh al Tabari which has information on major historical events and details on historical wars. 2A01:5EC0:2800:6B8D:4D90:C87D:203A:E715 ( talk) 12:09, 4 June 2023 (UTC) reply

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Paper9oll ( 🔔 • 📝) 12:14, 4 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The Turkic army had a number of 300000 men and the Persian army led by general Bahram Chobin is 12000 cavalry . 2A01:5EC0:2800:6B8D:4D90:C87D:203A:E715 ( talk) 12:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Strength of the Sasanian Army: 70,000 soldiers at the border according to Larissa Baratova: Larissa Baratova: "Turkish Khaganate in Central Asia (600-800 AD) Turks C. II, p. 90 12,000 cavalry under Bahram Chobin accoridng to Lev Gümilev: Lev Gumilev, Ancient Turks, p. 165 Strength of the Göktürk Army: 12,000 cavalry according to: Lev Gumilev, Ancient Turks, p. 165 Ahsen Batur, Kürdoloji Yalanları, p. 109 Ahmet Bircan Ercilasun, Türk Kağanlığı ve Bengütaşları (400,000 or 300,000 is clearly an exaggeration) Göktürk Commander in the Battle: Yangsu Tegin according to Lev Gumilev, Ancient Turks, p. 167 (Not Bagha Khagan) Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 22:39, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Please see WP:SPS and WP:VER. I haven't done a proper research on him, but Lev Gumilev looks about to be the only WP:RS here. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you just copy-paste it from here [9]? -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 22:54, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Yes i copy pasted it from Turkish Wikipedia, one of my friends edit the Turkish Wiki and it doesn't matter if it is reliable and correct, not only Lev Gümilev, also other sources are reliable too, especially Larissa Baratova: "Turkish Khaganate in Central Asia (600-800 AD) Turks C. II, p. 90, Turkish sources are also accurate i don't understand this prejudice to them. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 23:09, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Also i want to correct somethings in English Wiki there are so many wrong info, second perso-turkic war for example. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 23:11, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

So I presume you haven't verified those citations yourself now that you've copy-pasted them from an article which along with the Turkish wiki of the Second Perso-Turkic War article suffers from misuse of sources, non-WP:RS and whatnot (something which they attempted to export not long ago here into the English wiki [10], I hope this is not what you meant by "correct somethings"). And which friend is that? There's no "prejudice", please dont cast WP:ASPERSIONS. And please demonstrate how they are WP:RS and how WP:VER (for example, nothing even appears when I write "Larissa Baratova: "Turkish Khaganate in Central Asia" in Google) isnt a issue here. I would also advise you to read WP:SPS and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 23:14, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I've read Lev Gümilev myself, i have a Turkish reprint and there are no sources about Bagha Khagan being killed in action or Göktürk Army's number in this article, i just want to put Lev Gümilev which is an accurate source and made a calculation about the number of the Göktürk's army. I will send the calculation now Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 09:07, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

"The collision area - the Bauligah plain - has a width of 12 km. Cavalry will enter the collision position, 20 km. they have to fight in a front area. Moreover, there cannot be more than two thousand warriors in one line. In this case, the Turks could only form ten ranks and use a maximum of twenty thousand soldiers to take Herat. Considering that the valley narrows towards the west and the elephants are in the center of the Turkish army, it will be understood that this number is less. In short, the number of Turkish and Persian armies in front of Herat was equal." Lev Gümilev, Eski Türkler(Ancient Turks), p. 167-168 Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 09:15, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Feel free to cite Gumilev, but please don't remove sourced information that says something else than him. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 12:51, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

But Bagha Khagan isn't the commander in this battle and there are no sources about him being killed in this article. This "Bagha Khagan" started with Marquart and his info is based on nothing while other sources says that the commander is actually Yangsu Tegin Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 17:56, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Can you explain how this edit I reverted wasnt you misusing citations? [11]. You literally said yourself that Gumilev stated that the Sasanians had 12,000 men, yet you cited him under 70,000, basically swapping him with Baratova? Same goes for Tabari, who is a primary source anyways. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 20:48, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

lemme explain 70,000 Sasanian soldiers at the border: In August 589, Black Chuin's younger son Yang-Su invaded eastern Iran. The Persian army of 70,000 holding the border ran away, opening the way for the Turks via Khorasan and Talekan to the fortified ancient region of Bactria with the forts of Herat, Belh and Bagdis; Panic broke out in Iran. Source: Lev Gümilev, Ancient Turks, p. 165 and he used Tabari as a reference lol learn the article you are editing Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 10:04, 7 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Also again one of my friends in discord has the Tabari's Chronicle books himself, he sent me the page that says this Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 10:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC) reply

70,000 Sasanian soldiers at the border, so not at the battle itself? Yet you added it to this article under the numbers of the battle? And why would they run away? The Sasanians won the battle, it contradicts everything else the actual accessible WP:RS says. It literally doesn't make sense. So you dont even know if the sources you are using says that, you are editing as a proxy for your ur unnamed friend, who wouldnt happen to be indeffed in the English Wikipedia? You literally said that Gumilev stated that there were 12,000 soldiers earlier yourself. Can you send a picture/pdf of the page? The source is basically WP:VER too, can't find anything to verify it. And al-Tabari is still not WP:RS, see WP:PST and WP:PRIMARY, there's a reason I removed that the Turks had 300,000-4000,000 men [12]

lol learn the article you are editing

Another comment like this and you will be reported, I have no patience for behaviour like this. Again, see WP:NPA and WP:ASPERSIONS. I would also highly advise you to revert yourself, as you've reached no WP:CONSENSUS. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 11:28, 7 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I read Lev Gumilov, I have e-book in russian(native), there is no such information. Please give me access or edit army size correctly. Let's look at this :

The army of Save, according to Tabari, reached 300 thousand people(440), and according to Firdowsi - 400 thousand(441). The Turkuts were armed with war elephants(442), while the Persians had "lions", i.e. flamethrowers, powered by oil and used against elephants(443). 440 Tabari. Chronique... II. P.248: Tabari, Noeldeke. Geschichte der Perser und Araber... S.269- 441 Firdousi. Le livere des rois. VI. P.566. 442 Firdousi. Le livere des rois. VI-P.566; Tabari. Chronique... II. P.262. Ferdowsi counts 1200 elephants. Tabari - 200 443 Foreigners K.A. Sasanian studies. S.80-81; Balami. Tarihi Tabari. Gothic manuscript (in Persian) P.227.

Source = Lev Gumilov. Ancient Turks. p87 Shervanshah ( talk) 21:03, 7 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I finally got access to his book in Russian [13]. And guess what, I can't see anything on page 167-168 (which Hunnic Enjoyer claims the info to be at) nor page 165 (yet Hunnic Enjoyer cited this one in the article). @ Hunnic Enjoyer: Care to explain? -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 00:19, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

It is in Turkish reprint, pdf's in internet are not the same as the original book itself, check Selenge Yayınlar: https://selenge.com.tr/ Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 07:48, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

It is fake, look at original version of this book in russian. Shervanshah ( talk) 13:34, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

How can be so sure about Turkish reprint being fake? and please send me the Russian original version please Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 17:38, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Check the other page while Lev Gumilev explaining why the Turkish forces and Sasanian forces are equal and he makes a calculation there? Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 07:50, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

"The collision area - the Bauligah plain - has a width of 12 km. Cavalry will enter the collision position, 20 km. they have to fight in a front area. Moreover, there cannot be more than two thousand warriors in one line. In this case, the Turks could only form ten ranks and use a maximum of twenty thousand soldiers to take Herat. Considering that the valley narrows towards the west and the elephants are in the center of the Turkish army, it will be understood that this number is less. In short, the number of Turkish and Persian armies in front of Herat was equal." Lev Gümilev, Eski Türkler(Ancient Turks), p. 167-168 (Turkish reprint, Selenge Yayınları) Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 07:53, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

it is impossible to a nomadic state to have that kinda' army that's like half of the population and Tabari and other historians from that time clearly exaggerated the number of the enemy soldiers Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 07:54, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Hunnic Enjoyer: You're not listening. I am talking about the 70,000 number here, which you cited on one page in this talk page, and another in the article. Also, in terms of the way the info is conveyed, the original version of the book is always going to be the most reliable one. You literally cited Tabari yourself in the article for the alleged 70,000 number of the Sasanians, but now he cant be used because he cites a number for the Turkic Khaganate that you dont agree with? Not how it works. I am gonna ask one last time: Do you have proof that 70,000 soldiers took part in the battle, yes or no? -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 11:30, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Please brother, add true version of information to page(I sent it here, but if you want i can send it again, and i can also able to send it in original version(in russian)) and help to stop falsifying of historical informations. Shervanshah ( talk) 13:38, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Brother still rejects the fact that Gumilev debunked this different exaggerations from historians lived in that time in the next page (I am not talking about you HistoryofIran) Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 16:10, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Imagine that there is some kind of exaggeration (but there is none). You wrote in an article about 70k soldiers on the border. The first thing I want to note is that even if it were so, they did not participate in the war and it should not be indicated on the table. Secondly, it is specifically written about page 165, which refers to the events of the seventh century, which means falsification. It seems that you said that you took a source from a Turkish publishing house. So the source is not reliable, the text of the original written in Russian has been changed. I advise you to use authoritarian sources and refer to the original inscriptions. Thirdly, as I pointed out earlier, Lev Gumilov did not say that this was an exaggerated figure. He wrote that according to Tabari, 300 thousand (for the Turks) participated there, and according to Firdowsi, the number of the army was 400 thousand (for the Turks). Yet again. you can purchase the original inscription and be sure of the information to which I am sending. Additional information about the book: Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov. Ancient Turks. Crystal Publishing. 2003. ISBN 5-306-00313-3 Shervanshah ( talk) 16:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

1-How can a Nomadic state have that kinda army that's like half of the population and clearly an exaggeration

2- "Turkish publishing house isn't reliable" this isn't an argument, i hope i have permission to read history books in my own language and country?

3- Yes Lev Gümilev mentions all of those things that you said in the Turkish reprint and referencing Tabari and Firdowsi, but you just checked that page, in the next page it says this:

"The collision area - the Bauligah plain - has a width of 12 km. Cavalry will enter the collision position, 20 km. they have to fight in a front area. Moreover, there cannot be more than two thousand warriors in one line. In this case, the Turks could only form ten ranks and use a maximum of twenty thousand soldiers to take Herat. Considering that the valley narrows towards the west and the elephants are in the center of the Turkish army, it will be understood that this number is less. In short, the number of Turkish and Persian armies in front of Herat was equal."

4- 70,000 soldiers in the border is a part of the war, when the Turks attack and started the war, they ran away and opened the way through Iran to the Turks, that's how war started Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 17:37, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

1. Why not? How do you know how many there really are if in that era, maybe there is some kind of demographic statistics in which I am not covered? Didn't the nomadic Turks in Central Asia have a military way of life? Do not talk among Turkish nationalists and in Turkish sources about how from children to women fought in battles? Maybe the numbers differ from reality, but for me there will be no global difference (relying on the contribution of these historians to histography)

2. Of course, everyone has the right to study, speak, including read, in their native language. But the text of the original will always differ from the translations of the publisher from different countries. Sometimes the meaning, including the literary meaning of a word, can change during translation.

3. Oh, I understand what you were referring to. But let me explain. How can you add 70 thousand people to the table when you rely on equality in the number of armies? Why didn't you write in the table about equal forces, if you refer to it? I don’t think it’s right to write a theory about the topographic point of view, knowing that in that period this area was not developed, and hardly anyone from the 20th century (Belentsky, to whom Gumilev was referred) would know better than authoritarian historians like Tabari ( known as the father of Muslim history). Gumilov presented us with three sources, he believed that this could be, but did not confirm. It's up to us to confirm, but that doesn't change the fact of your decision to ignore other factors.

4. Then why not write the entire number of the army? It is not correct to record the number of soldiers who did not participate in the battle, but simply waited at the border. Shervanshah ( talk) 19:13, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

then send me the Russian version and i will show you the part where Lev Gümilev debunks. Also 70,000 Sasanian soldiers at the border literally in the war when the Turks attack and when they ran away, road to the Iran was opened to Turks. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 19:27, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I wrote about the original because you put page 165, that is, you falsified the source. Since you did not indicate on the source about the publisher, about the language, pages and a specific page, but I looked from the original and found this information, which was on 87 pages. And yet, he indicated on that page 3 sources, At-Tabari, Firdovsi and a Soviet figure from the 20th century. He gave us the thesis with uncertainty and referring to the topographical point of view. I do not think that some person from the 20th century will be able to find out the number of the army by referring to the topogryophic, geographical position that a person from the 20th century is unlikely to know about the 7th century. I want to add something, if I came to this, the Persians would hardly be able to take 70 thousand soldiers, since they fought with internal forces, they fought with Byzantium, they would hardly have had enough just to put 70 thousand troops on the border. Shervanshah ( talk) 11:29, 9 July 2023 (UTC) reply

check ^[1], i tried to explain why a nomadic state can't have an army of 400,000-300,000 Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 19:31, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

There is something that historians living in the sources of that period or at the time of the war always do, which is to overstate the number of the rival army by exaggerating, if you have read a little bit of resources from that period, you would already know this. Why would a historian living at that time exaggerate the number of armies of his own nation or state? exaggerating his side's army would be to his own detriment. To give an example from the Battle of Baideng, Chinese sources said that the number of Xiongnu army was 400,000, and Lev Gumilev disproved this possibility with another calculation and proved to be an exaggeration. For example, historians like Sebeos called the Göktürk army 300,000 in the 2nd Göktürk Sassanid War. While these historians keep the number of armies of their own side or their nation realistic and normal, they exaggerate the number of armies of the other side, and this is a very normal thing in history. Modern sources already refute such events, if Lev Gümilev thought that this was an exaggeration, be sure he would have refuted this event as he did to the Göktürk army. And yes I have over 5 sources that there are almost 70,000 soldiers on the border with Tabari. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 16:09, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

by the way sorry if there are any grammer mistakes, it would be hard to me to write a text this long, i hope you can understand me and what i am trying to say. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 16:13, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

About Bagha Khagan:

It is written that he went on a campaign against the Sassanid Empire and that he was killed by the famous Sassanid general Behrâm-ı Çûbîn in the war. However, when we take into account that Baga Khagan died in the winter of 587/588 and that Behram Chubin's war with the Turks was in August 589, it is clear that Baga Khagan was killed not by Behram Chubin, but by Tardu Khagan. According to this, the person whom the Sassanids call Sava Shah is none other than Tardu Khagan's younger son Yang-su Tegin.

And Bagha Khagan was the ruler of Eastern Göktürk Khaganate not Western, how could he been on an expedition to Sasanian while he has bigger things to deal with, he died a year before this war.

if you want i also have sources explaining this thing, i can send it to you. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 16:29, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Also Bagha khagan dies with an arrow shot in the forehead. Şabe (commander who died in the war) dies by being shot with an arrow from the back. the commander in the war clearly isn't Bagha Khagan Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 16:33, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Hunnic Enjoyer: This is not a place to debate we think is right and how, we only follow what WP:RS says. And since you've (at least partially unknowingly since you're editing for another person?) misused citations, disregarded WP:CONSENSUS, WP:ONUS, WP:VER, WP:RS - I will be reverting to the original, stable revision. If you continue edit warring, I have to take this to WP:ANI for violating those rules. Putting 70,000 in the Strength section of the infobox is pure misrepresentation, not only they did not take part in the war (translated [14] from the original Russian version [15]), it also makes it seem that they took part in the battle of Bahram Chobin against the Khagan, which they did not and that battle is the only major event recorded in the conflict per the sourced information of the article. And thus I have removed the 12,000 number too - this article should get renamed to what the battle between Bahram Chobin and the Khagan was called, as the current name seems to be a Wiki invention. Also, directly translating something from a source is still WP:PLAGIARISM, you need to rewrite it. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 23:12, 8 July 2023 (UTC) reply

I explained every single detail with sources and ima do that thing again but this time it will be huge Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 08:06, 9 July 2023 (UTC) reply

@ HistoryofIran First Perso Turkic War:

In August 589 ^[2], Tardu's younger son Yangsu Tegin invaded eastern Iran. The Persian army of 70,000 holding the border fled, opening the way for the Turks via Khorasan and Talekan to the fortified ancient region of Bactria with the forts of Herat, Belh and Bagdis; Panic broke out in Iran. ^[3] According to Tabari, Savo-shah sent word to Hürmizd and said: "Repair the bridges over rivers and streams so that I can cross over them and come to your hometown. Build bridges to rivers that do not have bridges. Likewise, make rivers and streams so that I can cross from your hometown to Anatolia. Because I want to go there through your country." ^[4] This ultimatum states that the Western Turks agreed with the Greeks; proves that this walk is really very important.

Based on the recommendation taken in Ctesiphon, Bahram Chobin, who came from the Mihrab family and was the governor-general of Armenia and Azerbaijan, was assigned to stand against the Turks. Bahram selected a troop of 12,000 elite experienced veterans aged between 40 and 50. In fact, they were veterans in peacetime and Iran's most reliable and elite soldiers in wartime. The answer to why Bahram didn't favor younger fighters is essentially simple. According to what is told, the main strength of that period consisted of archers, and it took at least 20 years to train good archers. The fate of the war was determined not by hand-to-hand combat, but by mutual arrow shots. VI. The Persian archer unit of the century had reached the pinnacle of their mastery, and had become snipers enough to hit their targets from the ear rather than the chest. Their Arrows were at a distance of 700 meters and could even pierce armor made of well tempered iron.

Savo's army was 300,000 according to Tabari ^[5] and 400,000 according to Ferdowsi. ^[6] The Turkish army had elephants ^[7], and the Persians had lions, that is, useful, naphtha-operated flamethrowers against elephants. After their initial success, the Turks turned west and followed the fleeing 70,000-man Persian army. Despite all these problems, the Persians managed to hold Belh until Bahram's army arrived. Hürmizd changed his mind and thought to take advantage of the unfailing naivety of the Turks. He sent Hurrad Burzin, "the master of cunning and deception" ^[8] of the court gentry, to Savo. ^[9] Hurrad, who came to Savo, managed to seduce him after a long talk with him. He advised him to change the direction of the attack and head towards the Herat valley. ^[10] Meanwhile, Bahram had reached the east with a forced march. He succeeded in coming from Kuhistan, passing through shortcuts outside the known roads, and turning the Turks from behind. Savo-shah marched on Herat from the north-west, on the only road that followed the coast of Hîrûd.

In order to evaluate the situation better, it is useful to take a look at the geographical situation of Herat. Herat is located in the middle of a wide valley. It is surrounded by mountains to the north and south. The eastern side of the mountains is surrounded by the Hîrirûd river, which is impassable and passes through narrow straits. Although the north-west entrance, called Baroron, is a little high, it is suitable for the passage of cavalry after climbing. This pass forms a 8 km long strait. The valley, which falls to the north of Hîrirûd, is 12 km wide and extends to the Zencir-gah mountains. Hîrirûd is not very deep and although it gives passage in autumn, most of it is impassable due to the rapid current. But there is a second pass in the Herat valley with a low mountain pass in the South-West. ^[11]

Crossing the Baroron pass, the Turks reached the Bauligah steppes. This plain is located between the northern mountain range and the river. There is a thin strait behind the mountain. Bahram's army occupied this strait and the Turks had no freedom of movement. Of course, the Turks did not give all their power to Herat. This narrow passageway couldn't hold 300,000 people anyway. Moreover, one flank of the Persian army, which was in a war position, had the Turkish army under siege. Presumably, Savo took only a small part of it, taking into account that the Turkish army would only encounter the Herat garrison. The situation of the Turks was not encouraging. Hurrad Burzin, having completed his duty, fled to Bahram at midnight to "get away from his dreadful fate" ^[12], bypassing the Turkish patrols.

Moreover, the topographic structure of the Herat valley reveals what opportunities the Turks had. The collision area - the plain of Buligah - has a width of 12 kilometers. The cavalry who will enter the combat position have to fight in a front area of about 20 kilometers. Moreover, there cannot be more than two thousand warriors in one line. In this case, the Turks could only form ten ranks and they could use a maximum of twenty thousand soldiers to take Herat. Considering that the valley narrows towards the west and the elephants are in the center of the Turkish army, it will be understood that this number is less. In short, the number of Turkish and Persian armies in front of Herat is equal. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 09:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC) reply

@ HistoryofIran I worked on this so hard please do not send me some rules of Wiki, debunk the thing i've wrote with sources. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 09:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Sorry, but what is your point here? See also WP:PLAGIARISM: "If the source is in a language other than English, the contributor may be under the mistaken belief that the act of translation is a sufficient revision to eliminate concerns of plagiarism. On the contrary, regardless of whether the work is free, the obligation remains to give credit to authors of foreign language texts for their creative expression, information and ideas, and, if the work is unfree, direct translation is likely to be a copyright violation as well" -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 12:25, 9 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Your only argument is about rules of Wikipedia or copyright rules or smth, bro please stop i spend a hour on the thing i've written before and ur just coming up with stuff like rules of wiki. I explained the 70,000 soldiers at the border and their affect in the war, Turkic and Persian army being equal etc. Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 21:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC) reply

What...? What was the point of writing so much stuff if you only paid attention to one specific bit? Please re-read my latest comments. And even if that was the case, it's still very important. These rules are here to follow; to be put it more bluntly; violating them will have consequences. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 21:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Can you please change the army numbers like:

70,000 soldiers at the border

12,000 cavalry under Bahram Chobin

12,000 cavalry

And the commander as Yangsu Tegin Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 14:37, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Sorry, but are you even listening? HistoryofIran ( talk) 14:49, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

are you even listening pal' i am making arguments with sources about our topic ur still throwing me rules of wiki just stop Hunnic Enjoyer ( talk) 15:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply

That was a question you just made beforehand, not an argument. You’re yet to adress what I’ve said (and Shervanshah for that matter). If you dont like how the rules work here, then perhaps you should consider something else. And please act properly, don’t call me “pal”. HistoryofIran ( talk) 15:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC) reply