Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedRequest to change subforum title

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Request to change subforum title
    Posted: 08-Oct-2013 at 18:50

Ancient Mesopotamia, Near East and Greater Iran

I think the above should be changed to Middle East as it covers pretty much all these regions and is better known. If this request is in the wrong section please change it. 

Back to Top
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2013 at 21:07
I think the reason it is not Middle East is because Persia is not in the Middle East.
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2013 at 22:27
Originally posted by Toltec

I think the reason it is not Middle East is because Persia is not in the Middle East.


Not in the Middle East. Are you serious?

Besides the terms "greater Iran" and such are new terms to refer to regions populated by Iranic speaking populations, never historically part of a state called Iran.
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2013 at 22:58
Historically speaking we are on shaky ground using the terms "Near East" & "Middle East", unless we qualify the particular usage by explaining just exactly where we mean. This is because geographically the meanings of these terms have varied over time. However, this being said, the term, "Near East" is somewhat an academic term used within both the fields of ancient history and archaeology, so could be said to be appropriate given it use on here, a history forum.
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10111
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2013 at 10:07
Okay, how bout someone put up a poll.  We'll see what the consensus is. 
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2013 at 15:01
These are all geographic terms nothing more. Iran is geographically in the Middle East. Somebody wanting to post on this region may not know where to look 
Back to Top
Ollios View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 22-Feb-2011
Location: Diyar-ı Rum
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1131
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2013 at 16:54
Most of geographic terms are on shaky ground such as Europe. There is no way to explain it with science. It is about perception and dogma. You can just explain technotics plates with science

so Pakistanishield is right about something, our subtitles are not very clear

example 
*Ancient Anatolia; Near East or Mediterranean 

*Ancient Egypt; Near East, Mediterranean or Africa 

However Pakistanishield's offer can be cause problem. Term Middle East is also not very certain, but Iran is in it, even the narrowest Middle East defination Big smile 

example Pakistan is it in Middle east or İndian Peninsula


so I think there is not possible to find a excellent solution




Edited by Ollios - 12-Oct-2013 at 16:55
Ellerin Kabe'si var,
Benim Kabem İnsandır
Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2013 at 18:33
Originally posted by Ollios

Most of geographic terms are on shaky ground such as Europe. There is no way to explain it with science. It is about perception and dogma. You can just explain technotics plates with science


I think the confusion lies when 2 unrelated populations share the same geography. Take for example subsaharran Africans and North Africans. They might have mixed with one another in many instances, but they are classified as very distinct populations, but still referred to as Africans because they inhabit the same continent.

so Pakistanishield is right about something, our subtitles are not very clear

example 
*Ancient Anatolia; Near East or Mediterranean 

*Ancient Egypt; Near East, Mediterranean or Africa


All examples can apply. Anatolia is on the Mediterranean and conjoined East and West. Same for Egypt. It's in Africa and Mediterranean.


However Pakistanishield's offer can be cause problem. Term Middle East is also not very certain, but Iran is in it, even the narrowest Middle East defination Big smile


No question to that. For example Australia is not in Europe, but majority of it's population are Europeans.


example Pakistan is it in Middle east or İndian Peninsula


Right on the border of the middle east, better defined as South-Central Asia, the way Mexico is South-Central America.

But definitely not Indian peninsula. It's definitely in the subcontinent  yes, but it's not a peninsula.
Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2013 at 18:41
Also for cultural purposes, the term greater Middle East has been applied to countries on the basis of common language, culture, religion etc.

On this conclusion, the countries stretching from Morocco to Iran are defined as greater middle east. I have elementary school textbooks defining these countries as such and in high school there were special independently made books on each of these countries including north africa all being defined as 'greater middle east.'

But these are more out of common culture, religion, language, not at all geography. UAE and Morocco cannot be considered the same region geographically, only culturally, linguistically. You can include religion but then I don't see where Indonesia would fit in, plus Lebanon was onec majority Christian and still was considered the Middle East.

When I play flight simulator, you can select which country you can start flying out of and countries are distributed in different continents to select from to make it easier. Turkey and Cyprus are included in the Middle East. I simply think there are countries that conjoin into different geographic regions.




Edited by PakistaniShield - 12-Oct-2013 at 18:44
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2013 at 21:48
Originally posted by PakistaniShield

Originally posted by Ollios


However Pakistanishield's offer can be cause problem. Term Middle East is also not very certain, but Iran is in it, even the narrowest Middle East defination Big smile


No question to that. For example Australia is not in Europe, but majority of it's population are Europeans.


Not sure as to the United States governmental position on including Iran officially in the middle east now, but up until recent times it didn't. 

Originally posted by PakistaniShield

Originally posted by Ollios

example Pakistan is it in Middle east or İndian Peninsula


Right on the border of the middle east, better defined as South-Central Asia, the way Mexico is South-Central America.

But definitely not Indian peninsula. It's definitely in the subcontinent  yes, but it's not a peninsula.
The Indian subcontinent for which includes India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, is considered to be a peninsula.  

Edited by TheAlaniDragonRising - 12-Oct-2013 at 21:58
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2013 at 22:38
Here's a question that someone might like to address. The terms near east and far east define in a round about way where they are, or aren't. However how does the term middle east justifies itself in comparison to where it is located if there isn't an eastern region either side of it?
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2013 at 22:55
Right, if we're to have a poll is there any objections to the categories being "Near East" "Middle East" "Near or Middle East"? 
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 01:13
Near East would be Central and South Asia. Far East would be East Asia. 
Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 01:22
Originally posted by TheAlaniDragonRising

[QUOTE=PakistaniShield] The Indian subcontinent for which includes India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, is considered to be a peninsula.  


India is a peninsula yes, at least most of it. But Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal are not part of this peninsula. It would be like including Iraq, Iran in the Arabian peninsula when they really aren't. Kuwait could be considered part of this peninsula.

Peninsulas are vast strips landmasses surrounded by waters on both sides while connecting inland and that's what India really is, most of it anyway.

To simplify, i would suggest putting India, Pakistan, Nepal into a South Asia forum.

The European countries in a European forum. Africa for all African states etc.

And then create separate forums for inter-continental regions such as the Mediterranean (africa & europe), or Greater Middle East (middle east + north africa)



Edited by PakistaniShield - 13-Oct-2013 at 01:27
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 06:29
Originally posted by PakistaniShield



India is a peninsula yes, at least most of it. But Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal are not part of this peninsula. It would be like including Iraq, Iran in the Arabian peninsula when they really aren't. Kuwait could be considered part of this peninsula.

Peninsulas are vast strips landmasses surrounded by waters on both sides while connecting inland and that's what India really is, most of it anyway.

Nevertheless, PakistanShield, it is the Indian Subcontinent, for which Pakistan and Bangladesh are a part of which is considered to be a peninsula. These things may include historical, and political, reasons. As far as Iraq & Iran, but not Kuwait, is concerned, there is no physical, historical, or political reason they should have been considered so. Kuwait on the other hand already is.  

Originally posted by PakistaniShield

To simplify, i would suggest putting India, Pakistan, Nepal into a South Asia forum.

The European countries in a European forum. Africa for all African states etc.

And then create separate forums for inter-continental regions such as the Mediterranean (africa & europe), or Greater Middle East (middle east + north africa)

PakistanShield, for historical purposes, the South Asian, African, and European forums already exist, as does a forum covering a significant period for ancient Europe and the Mediterranean region. For discussions away from the historical areas they cover there are a number of forums for that too. The trick, as with many things, is simplicity, or should I say to keep it as simple and tidy as possible. This is not to say we're not open to change, as we are. As our Admin. red clay has said polls maybe put forward for consideration.


Edited by TheAlaniDragonRising - 13-Oct-2013 at 06:32
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 17:15
In regards to the last post, I think it's been misunderstood. I did not oppose placing Pakistan in the subcontinent.

I simply opposed including it in the Indian peninsula.

I think Mesopotamia is  already part of the middle east as is Persia and other places. If one were to look up the historical definition of the middle east, we can include regions on that basis.

We can have regional forums but also separate forums for regions that exist in 2 or more regions such as the Mediterranean, the Caucasus etc.

 Besides terms like "greater India" or "greater iran" are not historical, but mostly inspired by political motivation.


Edited by PakistaniShield - 13-Oct-2013 at 17:21
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 18:51
Originally posted by PakistaniShield

In regards to the last post, I think it's been misunderstood. I did not oppose placing Pakistan in the subcontinent.

I simply opposed including it in the Indian peninsula.

I think Mesopotamia is  already part of the middle east as is Persia and other places. If one were to look up the historical definition of the middle east, we can include regions on that basis.

We can have regional forums but also separate forums for regions that exist in 2 or more regions such as the Mediterranean, the Caucasus etc.

 Besides terms like "greater India" or "greater iran" are not historical, but mostly inspired by political motivation.

It has been duly noted that it's your belief that Pakistan should no longer be included as a part of the Indian Peninsula, and wish you all the luck in the world in your endeavour to convince the wider community that the root should not be classed as a part of the tree.

As for your proposal for altering the arrangement of the forums, I'm sure if you are able to come up with sufficiently details, and a compelling argument, then all due consideration will be made.    
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 23:20
Originally posted by TheAlaniDragonRising


It has been duly noted that it's your belief that Pakistan should no longer be included as a part of the Indian Peninsula, and wish you all the luck in the world in your endeavour to convince the wider community that the root should not be classed as a part of the tree.

As for your proposal for altering the arrangement of the forums, I'm sure if you are able to come up with sufficiently details, and a compelling argument, then all due consideration will be made.    

Don't know where you got that. Pakistan is definitely not a peninsula as it defies that definition, which is strictly scientific/grographic and not political or cultural.

I classify regions based on locations and so does the rest of the world. I also find it absurd to think the rest of the world class's it such because I have not come across this in any geographic or other academic sources. I think I already am lucky as I don't need to convince the rest of the world on something that is quite well known.

But the topic is to rename it middle east forum as it covers all the areas this forum is titled by. If you wish to start a debate of why or how Pakistan became part of the peninsula, you should create a separate thread for that. And as other posters have mentioned a consensus or poll can be held on my proposal.


Back to Top
PakistaniShield View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2008
Location: North America
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 240
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2013 at 23:23
Originally posted by TheAlaniDragonRising


Nevertheless, PakistanShield, it is the Indian Subcontinent, for which Pakistan and Bangladesh are a part of which is considered to be a peninsula. These things may include historical, and political, reasons. As far as Iraq & Iran, but not Kuwait, is concerned, there is no physical, historical, or political reason they should have been considered so. Kuwait on the other hand already is.  


Oh OK i get it now, you consider the subcontinent to be the peninsula. No it doesn't work like that. See Nepal or Sri Lanka or Maldives on the map. Nepal is a landlocked country, Sri Lanka and the Maldives are islands. All these countries, including Pakistan defy the definition of a peninsula.

The Indian peninsula is a region within the subcontinent. 
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6072
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2013 at 11:52
Originally posted by PakistaniShield

Oh OK i get it now, you consider the subcontinent to be the peninsula. No it doesn't work like that. See Nepal or Sri Lanka or Maldives on the map. Nepal is a landlocked country, Sri Lanka and the Maldives are islands. All these countries, including Pakistan defy the definition of a peninsula.

The Indian peninsula is a region within the subcontinent. 
That the Indian Peninsula is an Indian Subcontinent region, is not just one of it's geographic positioning, but also one of geology too. Generally speaking the Indian Subcontinent is on the Indian Plate, which collided into the Eurasian Plate. It by definition, the Indian Subcontinent, a peninsula, bordered on three sides by water. Just because an area can be landlocked within such a region, doesn't preclude it from being a part of that peninsula.  
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.