Talk:Mountain Jews
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page. |
| NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritising and managing its workload. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the Project's importance scale. |
 |
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses. |
|
WikiProject Ethnic groups priority open tasks:
|
|
 |
Mountain Jews falls within the scope of WikiProject Jewish culture, a project to improve all articles related to Jewish culture. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to:
|
|
Project Jewish culture To-do:
|
|
Contents |
[edit] ATTENTION
I have PERMISSION from the people at this website. Don't say that there is suspicion of copyright infringement!
I even have the email!!!! Here it is:
- From: kiisu@eki.ee
- Subject: Re: Mountain Jews
- Date: March 18, 2004 11:16:18 PM PST
Some time ago I already gave full permission to use the whole book in Wikipedia. Please check if the contents of the Red Book are available in other sections, it may turn out that a simple link is sufficient. Anyway, you are free to use the material as you see fit.
- Indrek Hein
- webmaster@eki.ee
-User:Dagestan
- This is not enough. He needs to explicitly license the material under the GFDL. And he needs to actually say those words. Then the "some text from" can be removed and the site can be used as a source. --Storkk 11:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- Storkk: I think not. "You are free to use the material as you see fit" is basically a comprehensive license. You can't get much more comprehensive. It would certainly encompass permission for Indrek Hein to release it under GFDL. - 03:08, 7 October 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jmabel (talk • contribs) .
- Hrmn... It seems not to work like that for images anyway. The actual license words need to come out of their mouth from what I've seen. The basic reason (i think) is that we're not only using it, we're explicitly licensing it to everybody to use under the GFDL. --Storkk 15:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- If so, that's a matter of Wikipedia policy, not law.
- Dagestan, any reason you cannot get back to Indrek Hein and get that permission explicitly? - Jmabel | Talk 18:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about it "not being law", because using and licensing are two very different things (IANAL)... but good luck getting Dagestan to respond... his last edit was in May 2004. If someone could contact the author, that would be great. I would, but I don't use email. I agree that the original author gave what might be construed as de facto permission, but as far as I can tell, Wikipedia needs de jure permission. This is the dual reason that: I haven't blanked it as copyvio; and also why I'm being so insistent here. --Storkk 00:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- A crux of the problem: "Simple permission is not good enough. The owner can revoke permission at any time, and the content can't be reused anywhere else: not in Wiktionary, not in Wikibooks, etc. " (adapted from comments about image deletion). --Storkk 15:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- Storkk: I think not. "You are free to use the material as you see fit" is basically a comprehensive license. You can't get much more comprehensive. It would certainly encompass permission for Indrek Hein to release it under GFDL. - 03:08, 7 October 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jmabel (talk • contribs) .
I tried; the email addresses given above no longer work. So where do we go from here? Do we even know which material was taken from that source? - Jmabel | Talk 06:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- I have emailed the webmaster of the site, and will post back here and on talk:Mountain Jews/permission if and when I get permission. --Storkk 16:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] interesting article
Interesting article. :) But is there any reason for that National Geographic quote to be there? I'd much rather see our own summary, which obviously could incorporate any relevant information from the NG piece. Markalexander100 07:08, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
An anon recently added "Also known as Caucasian Jews." Does anyone know, does that term also include the Gruzim? (If so, article should clarify). -- Jmabel
-
- no. Geagea 17:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "wishful thinking"
I wish I was a mountain Jew. That's the coolest name for a race of people I've ever heard of. --NoPetrol 07:57, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Does anyone know if the recently anonymously added mention of National Geographic in the photo caption is correct? It's not mentioned on the image page. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:22, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Language/ethnicity
"here is some debate on the origin of the Jewish Tats, with some defending that they are not Tat at all but simply Jews that took the Tat language, while others argue that they are the descendants of Tats that converted to Judaism." What does this mean? They have to have come from somewhere. Being 'Jew' alone doesn't indicate an ethnicity, unless what is meant is that they are Afro-Asiatic->Canaanite->Hebrew! --Alif 03:05, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Jew indeed indicates ethnicity, among other things; read the article on Jew for more information. Jayjg (talk) 04:41, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-
- The article 'Jews' syas:
- "Most Jews regard themselves as a people, members of a nation, descended from the ancient Israelites and those who joined their religion at various times and places. The term Jew came into being when the Kingdom of Israel was split between the northern Kingdom of Israel and the southern Kingdom of Judah. Hence, the Israelites (who were later largely destroyed by the Assyrians) were those of the northern kingdom and the Jews (who survived) were those of the southern kingdom. Over time, the word Jew has come to refer to those of the Jewish faith rather than those from Judah. In modern usage, Jews include both those Jews actively practicing Judaism, and those Jews who, while not practicing Judaism as a religion, still identify themselves as Jews by virtue of their family's Jewish heritage and their own cultural identification."
- Adding to this what this article says:
- "There is some debate on the origin of the Jewish Tats, with some defending that they are not Tat at all but simply Jews that took the Tat language, while others argue that they are the descendants of Tats that converted to Judaism."
- This makes it more accurate and NPV to not assert such ethnical connonations. What do you think? --Alif 18:05, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Not quite true. According to the article, they use Tat language. Even when/if their dialect is affected by their religion in the form of loanwords, usage, it is still the same language as their neighbours. Also, from the article: "Any specific Mountain Jew features, distinguishing them from the Islamic environment, originate in Judaism", which means that their daily life details, costumes, customs, are due to their different religion. A Catholic Irish person isn't ethnically different from an Protestant Irish person, even though they may be affected with English culture to different extents, or even live in a different country.
- What I'm objecting to is using religion as a race-establishing factor, because it isn't logical. Saying a different prayer does not change one's genetic ancestry. Not that there's something as a "pure race", or "superior/inferior" nation or anything, but rather because it simply defies logic. --Alif 19:44, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I don't have strong opinions on most of this, but "ethnicity" is not just a code word for "race". Ethnicity is a mix of language, culture, physical type, self-identification, etc. as its etymology suggests, it is more like nationality. It is malleable. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:11, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
- They spoke Judeo-Tat [1] [2] , they have different customs etc. Catholic Irish and Protestant Irish are quite arguably different ethnicities; Protestant Irish originate mostly from Scotland, and have been separate from Catholic Irish for at least 400 years. And as Jmabel points out, ethnicity and race are different matters. (Jayjg 6 Mar 2005)
-
-
-
The Tat/Juhuri language is definitely NOT closely related to "Middle Persian". Middle Persian is an older stage of Persian, and Tat is not any closer to it than Modern Persian/Farsi. Haspelmath 20:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)--
[edit] A Question
Shalom from Pakistan
I am descended from the Pathans/Pakhtun/Pashtun of the Pakistan/Afghanistan Border and have done research on the Lost tribe subject for the last 5 years. The word Pakhtun or Pashtun is of Persian origin and means "those who live on the back of mountains", now you all know that we are B'nei Israel I dont have to get into the details of this. So technically you left Persia due to persecution after the Assyrian exile, as did we. You guys went north, we went south and east into Afghanistan, hence we are the same people and I read many articles on Mountain Jews, I found so many simillarities between your people and the Pathans/Pakhtuns/Pashtuns that I am convinced we are the same people. I need someone here to contact me with whatever research material you have, I also have tons of material. I am firstly going to write articles which will jointly (your name and mine) be published in journals and websites and then I am collecting material for a large and definitive book on the Lost tribes of Israel.
contact me immediately,
Qazi Fazli Azeem
qfazeem@yahoo.com
http://www.fazliazeem.com
Karachi, Pakistan
- I would suggest you have a look at Theory of Pashtun descent from Israelites. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Re: "Groups connected to the Khazars"
Either add all other Jewish groups, who were living in the area of Khazar Empire (Ashkenazi and Georgian Jews, Russian and Hungarian Subbotniks - Selezny), or remove Caucasian Jews from this group. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.65.248.4 (talk • contribs) 4 Feb 2006.
- The relationship between the Mountain Jews and the Khazars stems from the fact that the Mountain Jews' ancestors lived in the Caucasus prior to the rise of Khazaria, were probably subject to it, and may have contributed to its conversion to Judaism. See, e.g., Blady, Ken. Jewish Communities in Exotic Places.
- this is a very different relationship than that of the Ashkenazim, whose Khazar descent is an extreme minority view being disproven by genetic studies, or the other groups you mention, whose relationship with the Khazars is largely apocryphal. --Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 16:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not exotic
First, I do not like ignorant authors. Calling Transcuacasia "exotic place" in relation of anything Jewish is a top of ignorance. Transcaucasia, is known from ancient Mesopotamian, Hebrew, Persian and Greek sources. Anybody knows from the Megilat Esther, that Jews, were living in ALL satrapies of Persian Empire (including Caucasian Albania). From the point view of Jews - Western Europe ('Lands of Franks") , India and Ethiopia - are indeed exotic places.
Second, the name "Groups connected to the Khazars" implies, that those groups descended from the Khazars. For the sake of NPV I propose, to rename this group to "Groups supposedly connected to the Khazars", then you may include there all the groups, who at some point of view, where living in the area of Khazar Empire. This also include following Jewish sub-ethnic groups: Ashkenazim (or the earlier populations assimilated into Ashkenazim), Sepharadim in Bulgaria and Turkey (there is documented facts, that some Jewish Khazars moved to Byzantium), Crymchaks, Crimean Karaims, Hungarian Sabbatarins, Russian Subbotniks, East Caucasian Jews and Georgian Jews.
Nothing yet proven or disproven 100%. The DNA research of East Caucasian Jews doesn't show Khazar ancestry neither. Yet Ashkenazim not included into this group, and Caucasian Jews included. As Crimean Jews (Krymchaks) included, and anybody knows, that they were largely assimilated by Ashkenazim (that's one of reasons why they are almost extinct commnunity now), so Ashkenazim should be included too.
Anyway, I not removed all the old and long ago disproven theories about origin of Caucasian Jews. As I trying to preserve neutral point of view. But it hard to do, when other editors don't.
For example in the article about Juhuri language, written:
"The language is closely related to Middle Persian; it belongs to the Iranian division of the Indo-European languages. A similar, but still different language is spoken by the Muslim Tats of Azerbaijan, a group to which the Mountain Jews have sometimes been considered to belong. Speakers of Juhuri are called Juhuro, which simply means "Jews"."
The style of writing implies ancestral relation between Jews and Tats. It's like if I will write in the article about Yiddish:
"The language is closely related to High German; it belongs to the Germanic division of the Indo-European languages. A similar, but still different language is spoken by the Christian Germans of Germany, a group to which the European Jews have sometimes been considered to belong. Speakers of Yiddish are called Yiddn, which simply means "Jews"."
But nobody sane will imply conection between European Jews and Germans, while they freely doing this in case of Caucasian Jews. This was just example of not providing NPV. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.65.47.98 (talk • contribs) 11 Feb 2006.
- BTW, clearly some (perhaps many) hold precisely the view about Jewish Germans that you are putting forward as absurd. For example, I've been fighting a losing battle to describe Henry Kissinger as a Jewish American rather than a German American. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Juhurim / Juhuro
I see that "Juhurim" was changed to "Juhuro" without comment. A quick Google search suggests that they do, indeed call themselves "Juhuro"; does "Juhurim" also exist? It would follow the pattern of the naming of similar subgroups of the Jews ("Ashkenazim", "Sephardim", "Mizrahim"…). - Jmabel | Talk 06:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
RESPONSE: (IM NOT REALLY SURE HOW TO ADD AN ACTUAL RESPONSE SO I WILL DO IT THIS WAY
In our language we call ourselves "Juhuro" (which itself is plural in Caucasi for "Juhur"(Jew)). The "im" is a Hebrew ending added to words to indicate the plural. So in Hebrew if one were to use the word "Juhur" to refer to us, they would add the "im" to talk about more than one "Juhur". "Juhurim" is neither an actual Hebrew word nor Caucasi. A direct translation in hebrew (i.e. hebrew of Jews) would be "Yehudim" (plural for Yehudi).
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.136.21.126 (talk • contribs) 26 July 2006.
[edit] "IM"
66.81.74.75 01:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)"im" is a noun suffix in Hebrew for the bulk of masculine plural nouns.--66.81.74.75 01:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly. So is this change from a Hebrew plural to their own language what we want to do? - Jmabel | Talk 00:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
"Juhurim" / "Gruzim" / etc. are artificial terms. They are only used here in Wikipedia.
The only similar term, which is used in Hebrew is "Bukharim", meaning Bukharan Jew. East-Caucasian Jews called in Hebrew "Kavkazim". Georgian "Gruzinim" (not "Gruzim"!). Both have sometimes pejorative meaning, because they frequently used in jokes (mostly about "Gruzinim"). The Georgian Jews themselves preffer to be called "Georgian Jews" - "Georgim". Jews (and non-Jews) from Russia are called "Russim" in Hebrew. But I do not see any Wikipedia page calling Russian Jews - "Russim". —This unsigned comment was added by 212.25.107.145 (talk • contribs) 29 March 2006.
[edit] MJ in Germany
someone or me should add that a bunch of (don't know the number) of MJs live in berlin, just like me. -- Michael-O 2006-07-30
[edit] LEZGINKA
I put up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lezginka , if anyone wants to add to it or rewrite it so its not copying britanica, you can do so. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shulbek (talk • contribs) 13 August 2006.
[edit] Jews in Azerbaijan
The Jews in Azerbaijan and the Bukharan Jews are not the same
and in this "{{Asia in topic|History of the Jews in}}" you have mistake.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.250.174.211 (talk • contribs) 1 September 1, 2006.
