Talk:Gundeshapur

Requested move

The article talks about the Persian city and that there was an academy; it focuses on the intellectual heritage of the city. Besides, there is more that can be said about the city and it seems pointless to create a new artcle for that purpose

Voting

• Support MrPMonday 04:06, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Zora 05:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
• tentative Oppose academy and city are two different things. who knows, maybe they will find more about the city in the future, we shouldn't overcomplicate the matter. Gryffindor 10:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

The Academy and the city where it was located are logically distinguishable. Instead of a move, we could have a split. All material relating to the city goes to Gundishapur (city) and the rest stays in the Academy. Zora 05:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Descision

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved.

Request was to move to Gundishapur. WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 10:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Zora's edit, and Vansibin

One editor just added a long essay on the superiority of Persian culture which is far, far from NPOV. I don't have time to rewrite just now -- I've spent a long day driving visitors about the city -- but it needs to be done. Zora 07:54, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

I dont think the NPOV tag is necessary. Just rewrite the section. It's no big deal.--Zereshk 17:19, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Zora,

Since you took the trouble to edit the entire article instead of just that section, is it OK if I ask you to restore some of the info that you deleted which I think is pertinent, such as the mentioning of Vansibin as well as Zeidan's writings? Or did you perhaps have a particular reason to delete such info? Thanx.--Zereshk 18:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Deleted because I was trying to streamline, but I may have erred in leaving those things out. I googled extensively on Gundishapur and didn't find either Vansibin or Zeidan mentioned -- however, it's likely that you have access to material in Persian that hasn't made it into English yet. Let me do some googling and fact-checking, and I'll get back to you if I can't find anything. Thanks very much for approaching this in a collaborative spirit! Zora 20:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I find ONE glancing mention of Vansibin in English, on an Iranian site. All other mentions are just mirrors of the cite in the Wikipedia article. Georgi Zeidan seems to have been a late 19th century historian/writer of historical fiction, not the best or most recent source. There might be more on these topics in your older paper copy of the Encyclopedia Iranica -- they're not covered in the online Iranica. I also found what seems to be the previous version of the Wikipedia article in various websites run by Manuchehr Noury, with his name attached as author. Is he plagiarizing the Wikipedia article, or is the Wikipedia article plagiarizing him? This is distressing -- I'm worried that more extensive rewriting will be necessary, to remove copyvio. Zora 21:11, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

The sources I used were indeed Persian. I did a superficial search in some books at my library, but did not find anything on Vansibin. (not surprising of course, considering that the west's current perspective on Iranian history is obsolete by 25 years). I did however find a mention on the webpage of the University of Tehran. Im very busy nowadays moving to Texas. Cant find the time to spend on WP much anymore.--Zereshk 18:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Update: "Jurji Zaydan" is an Arabic literature historian. He is mentioned in Edward Browne's Islamic Medicine, p94 ISBN 8187570199.--Zereshk 03:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Boasting

It's not clear that Gundishapur was the most important medical center in the world in the 6th and 7th centuries. How would you measure that? I removed this boast. I also removed quote re Persia inventing modern medicine, or suchlike. "Persia" is an abstraction. "Persia" can't do a darn thing. The achievement belongs to an enlightened monarch and a bunch of smart people, all of whom are now DEAD. In a wider sense, it's an example of what humans can do.

Zereshk, you didn't reply to the copyvio question. I'm taking that as a tacit admission that the article is a copvio, and will do more rewriting. Zora 22:43, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

1. As was the case for Elam, and every other persian page you have been trying to destroy with your biased edits, it is not uncommon for people to take material out of WP that I wrote, and publish it in an article under their name. After all, I have published alot of crap. If you are talking about this guy, then yes, he got his stuff from here, because some of the sentences of his text were written by me. You can verify this by checking the history of the page. I, first talked about Borzouyeh and the current ajums hospital. His 3rd and last paragraphs are directly from material I first wrote. He even mentions Georgy Zeidan (i.e. he copied it off of my probably incorrect transcription. His name is pronounced Jorji Zaydan in Arabic. The spelling "Georgy Zeidan" was only my guess. That's why you couldnt find anything on him). But Mr. Noury seems to have added stuff to what I wrote as well. I dont mind him copying my stuff. He's doing people a service by educating them.
2. There is hardly anything left of the page for you to re-edit. Each section has only 2 or 3 paragraphs.
3. I also recall the ajums website itself mentioning Vansibin. Unfortunately, the page where they mentioned it is currently broken linked.--Zereshk 05:55, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

One more reason why Google should not be a research tool

Contrary to what google hits say almost unanimously, Vansibin was not in Khuzestan, but farther up northwest, in the current Iraq-Syria region. It was then part of the Persian Empire. I finally found a mention of it in Donald Hill's book. He spells it "Nisibīn". The "Vansibin" word is a Persian equivalent. Same thing. I'm updating the article.--Zereshk 05:45, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Zora, if this is your belief that it's just a bunch of smart people and a monarch, then you better go and change the tens of thousands of articles that give credit of inventions and scientific breakthroughs to entire peoples (Romans, British, American, German, ect.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.246.73.38 (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Citation from New Delhi lecture

Zereshk, if you're going to INSIST on using this article to go "Persia, Persia, rah rah rah!" then I'm going to add the nationalism link. You aren't any bigger, or more important, because of something that people did several centuries ago. Who you are is what YOU have done.

I also removed the link you added to a lecture at a New Delhi university. The speaker is exalting Islamic homeopathic medicine and Islamic civilization in a public lecture full of boasting and hyperbole. I would agree that Islamic scholars, including scholars at Gundishapur and later in Baghdad, preserved various works that would otherwise have been lost. But they weren't the only ones! Much was also preserved in Byzantium, and taken to Europe by scholars who fled the fall of Constantinople. The quote is not a credible claim, or a credible source. Zora 06:38, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm only giving credit where it is due. Just as Vienna is the heart of classical music,

Italy and France would disagree, sharply.

OK. Let me try again: Flamenco music primarily comes from Spain. The piano was an invention of the Italians....every nation has its list of achievements. so does Persia!

or Germany (Bauhaus) where modern architecture was conceived,

Frank Lloyd Wright?

FLW isnt exactly modernist. His later works in fact devaited so sharply from MA, that many modernists dismissed him altogether. But again, youre doging the point: Every country has a list of achievements. Example. And Iran's is still largely unknown. Get it?

Achievements of German scientists, impossible without which?

Incorrect. Chicago is where the atomic age was born. No ifs, ands, or buts. And Fermi is the father of the Atomic age. Not any German. So there were a ton of foreigners in the Manhattan proj. But hey, what the hell do you think America is anyway? A MELTING POT! Helloooo!

so does Persia have its proud achievements.

The human race has achievements, anything less that that is parochialism.

Yes. But to selectively mention one nation's achievments while suppressing and expunging others from memory is ethnocentric, if not racist. That's why we have books by Gheverghese being taught at universities. So that racists like you will stop trying to erase the memory and contribution of others from the history of academic achievement.

Im sorry, but I cant let you take that away, no matter how hard you try to censor the existence of Persia with your "nationalism" pretext.

I don't give a flying whatsahoozi about Persia in particular -- I'd protest anything that smacked of jingoism, no matter what nation. Including the US of A.

Youre lying. You would give your whatsahoozi to ensure that Sunni Arab or Buddhist heritage is fully explored and introduced to the world. Theres a big difference between jingoism, and protecting a dwindling heritage from oblivion.

PS, I only provided the "New Delhi" link so that you wont throw me the Persian nationalist crap (which you did anyway, he he).--Zereshk 08:09, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Gol darn it, Zereshk, Wikipedia is not the Olympics, with every nation trying for firsts and bests and gold medals. I own Gundishapur and you own Wile's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. And vice-versa. Zora 10:02, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Im sorry Zora. You can huff and puff as much as you want. The facts will remain, and I will be there to make sure that people hear that Persia was a great civilization, just like the Indians, Egyptians, Mesopotamians, and Chinese. (only Persia has not had its fair share of publicity, because of people like you. Have you ever wondered why there are tons of books on Egypt or Greece or China on bookshelves in your Barnes and Noble store, and not even a few books on Persia? No really. Did you even bother and notice? Or were you too busy drooling with some aspect of Indian culture that has been safely and fully transmitted to you?). Im truly sorry that you have no clue about culture and its significance, specially that of Persia. Globalization does not apply to culture and heritage.

You can try to help me convey the story of Persia, and familiarize the westerner with what a great civilization it once was. (just like youve done for other nations).

Or you can choose to remain ignorant and hostile toward Iran and her history. Hey, its the latest fad! Hating Iranians and looking at them as camel riding retrogrades with no culture and history is so cool nowadays! Yipeeee.--Zereshk 11:10, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Response to vote oppositions

Its true, the academy did dominate the city in terms of significance, but there are other historical resources we can draw upon to discuss the city. I also see no need to split the article, there's nothing wrong with having one thorough and comprehensive article on either subject really. If the vote decides that the article name should remain, then the article shold be cleaned up. Right now it begins:

The Academy of Gundishapur (...) was the intellectual center of the Sassanid empire. Its Academy offered training...

How does an academy have an academy? There are several points in the article in which the subject is confused in the middle of the sentence. No matter what the verdict is on the name, we should make the article lucidly discuss either the City in the context of the Academy, or the Academy in the context of the City. The section The Rise of Gundishapur talks about the city, while Significance of Gundishapur talks about the academy, while Gundishapur Under Muslim Rule talks about both. No formal distinction is made.

I suppose thats the real issue, that the article needs to be clarified, and based on the content it can be about either the city or the academy. MrPMonday 16:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Split article (Seperate city from academia)

I split the article into Gundeshapur and Academy of Gundishapur. I'm not very happy with the different names, but "Gundeshapur" returned more results in Google (2.600, whereas most other common variants returned around 900).

Why did I split? It seemed that a lot of the article was about the city, not the academy (i.e. it was the site of the death of mani, it was founded by so-and-so, etc.).

I do agree that it's pretty hard to seperate the history of the city from that of the academy. I tried to do that, but left a fair bit of duplicate material. A rewrite of both may be in order.

Alternatively, everything could be left in the article on the city. Either one would be fine, I just don't think it was right to have the history of the city in the article on the academy. What do you think? Flammifer 07:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

The myth of the hospital?

Apparently there's some academic doubt as to whether the medical academy of Jundishapur/Gundeshapur actually existed.

eg. Roy Porter, The Greatest Benefit to Mankind: A Medical History of Humanity (1997), p. 94:

"Jundishapur was certainly a meeting place for Arab, Greek, Syriac and Jewish intellectuals, but there is no evidence that any medical academy existed there. Only in the early ninth century did Arab-Islamic learned medicine take shape.".

and Plinio Prioreschi, A History of Medicine (2001), p. 362:

"The problem is that such a historical sketch "bristles with difficulties"[601]. It has been pointed out that there are no Persian sources that support the claims that Jundishapar played such an important role in medical history, that the Arabic sources are late and not devoid of historiographical problems, ..., that there is no evidence that the academicians of the school of Edessa went to Jundishapar at the end of the fifth century, ...[601]

where [601]= Michael W. Dols, The Origin of the Islamic Hospital: Myth and Reality, Bull. Hist. Med., LXI, 367-390, (1987).

On the other hand, the Encyclopedia Iranica at [1], also [2] and [3], seems rather more well-disposed to the story. (Edited version of the first article also at www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Geography/gondi_Shapur_medical_school.htm).

In later times, according to Prioreschi, "there is no lack of assertions about the great fame of Jundishapur. For example, ibn al-Kofthi (d. 1248) writes:

The physicians of Jundishapar reached the highest degree of knowledge since the time of the Persian kings. Because of that they acquired a very great reputation ... They made very rapid progress in science, they found new ways to treat diseases with medications and distinguished themselves for their ability to a point that their methods were judged superior to those of the Greeks and the Hindus.

... but is this a reliable report of the legend, some three centuries after the medical school had ceased to exist?

Google Books doesn't show me the next page from Prioreschi, but on p.364 he continues:

[There] is no reference to a pre-existing Nestorian hospital, or to a medical school other than Nisbis (from which one of the court physicians had come)... From the above it is evident that the history and importance of Jundishapur as a medical centre is not clear. It would appear that although there was probably a hospital (or at least an infirmary) in the sixth century, there is no evidence of a major medical school in either the sixth or seventh centuries.[614]

where [614]= Peregrine Horden, "The Nestorians, Gondeshapur, and Islamic Medicine: A Sceptical Comment" (1983), noting that it is unlikely Gondeshapur could have been a major medical school in this period, since not a single graduate of it is identified.

Jheald 14:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I think Jheald makes an incredibly valid point. I have edited the page to reflect the recent scholarship I found (from Michael Dols), and Jheald, I would definitely encourage you to add your information as well!

I did make some other edits, based on research I had done in many of the same sources already cited on the page. I edited what I felt were oddly structured sentences, and in a few cases, removed what I thought was extraneous information. Also, I went through the entire article and changed the varied spellings of Gundeshapur to, well, "Gundeshapur," since that is the spelling on the title of this article. Also, I made all the book references I used, and all the sources into Chicago style format.

I hope I haven't truly offended anyone with these changes. Cmxwagner (talk) 02:19, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Ctesiphôn - NOT on Euphratês

The twin cities of Seleukeia and Ktêsiphôn (´Arabic al-madînatân or al-mudun)were NOT on the Euphratês / Firât, but on the Tigris / Dijlah.

Nuremberg 1.1.2013 Angel.Garcia ~ ~ ~ ~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.158.130.228 (talk) 16:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Sale of this page, is it allowed (or legal?)

It seems like the contents of this page are offered for sale at this Internet address:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/131205227/Gondishapur-Wiki

If you decide to read as a guest, it takes you to a page with a few payment options. is it allowed (or legal?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.255.40.219 (talk) 05:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gundeshapur. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110203013254/http://www.ut.ac.ir/en/main-links/historical.htm to http://www.ut.ac.ir/en/main-links/historical.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081002222214/http://rnb.uin.googlepages.com/v22n2spring2005.pdf to http://rnb.uin.googlepages.com/v22n2spring2005.pdf

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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:22, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

The part making kurdish claims

The bold revisionist claim about the so-called "Kurdish" bloodline of the Sassanian kings looks really dodgy. Omid.espero (talk) 09:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

"The origin of the Sasanian Kings were originated form the Kurdish family bloodline" is not saying munch since by that time kord was used in ardashir khodaname book (lord ardashirs book) to meant generic iranian nomads in kerman to the east, and neither where those nomad kord groups that became the modern group Kurds later already there, and from the famous people there it seems to be a christian center of religious service and the main fortrress in the area

So this is a claim of ethnic origins from kurdish family bloodline that uses the kurdish in turkeys word for village,گنده, wich is shared meaning from related langugages like luri and bakhtiari, in northern to mean village. gondeh,aswell.And shortened "deh" is the form used in khuzestan, but since there is over 1400 years seperating the word for army ,Gund and,gunde, and those groups that where referenced as kurd in the zagros mountain in the middle-ages, (village) and it being in the south of iran, where the iranian "Kurdish"language like luri/bakhtiari/kurdish use the short "Deh" from gonde and persian deh, like dehzful it being named such, and kunduz (old fortress) aswell and ruin-dez another, in kurdish is true, that the first part is most likely meant to referer to modern village shapur todaytoday, but towns around iran with fortress of soldiers) being by islamic time called gond-dez-shapor-shapor withouth saying any letter twice in a row is perfekt for a arabic jundeshapor form, since it was the main administritive center. So since it aligns with towns named kundez meaning old fort then its explanation can be found in the iranian language of the time withouth having to be in some form of kurdish. Kuhndiz-shah and if using local luri or kurdi in khuzestan then it should be more akin to deh-shapor or gund-shapor. Since it was christians living there primally and connection to kurdish is due to shared language, kohan-dez-shah is a eastern city title/place and replacing old with soldiers is propably the easiest way to give a hint of naming places back then)it seems very missleading to make it seems like the ancient word kord and modern kord-like group are refering to the same ethnic group, since what means to be kord today as a people is not the same as the word kord, for the sassanians/or parthians used it for nomadic groups know from central and easter iran, like amartiya and sagaratians like people who used lassos and whose migrating needed to be observed so it goes well with the other nomadic people. The islamicied kurds called such by arabs by the 10 century near the caucausus would be the first specific kurd named groups that was with the meaning of a iranian speaking group and not the word for nomads. So yeah the part of kurdish family bloodline and it being named village in kurdish should be taken away since its not correct that anyone knows if those people called kurd through history became lurs,western ,northern or southern kurds, or settled in a city. But the memeory of the islamicied and arab-family kurds near the caucusus was saved and given later to other groups of same speaking people in the mountains when their name started to run afoul sharia or decencey. Like a tribe of magician moutain kurds where among the first "modern kurds" living and changing their name to one of the names used today, like gurani or sorani or kurmmanji or luri, the kurds on the mountain slowly became distict groups and the new kurdish distint group startet to be predatory tribes untill the 20th century, being the modern group.

Whoever did that should remove the line about originated from kurdish blood, since at most it would be shared ancestral blood with ardashirs kin and nomad groups wich wwhere predatory, but claiming Gondeshapor stands for shapurs village is not like false information. I did not find anything. Editor please remmove or put it in context Bennanak88 (talk) 11:47, 6 January 2023 (UTC)