 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Notability
editFind sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
?
edit- The first reappearance of the Erzincan principality occurs only about" in 1163. (Claude Cahen, Peter Malcolm Holt, The Formation of Turkey: The Seljukid Sultanate of Rūm : Eleventh to Fourteenth Century, Longman, 2001, p. 36.)
- Kay-kubadh annexed the principality of Erzinjan and intervened in that of Erzurum (Pre-Ottoman Turkey: A General Survey of the Material and Spiritual Culture and History, c. 1071-1330, Sidgwick & Jackson, 1968, p. 126.)
Takabeg (talk) 02:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Is this a joke ? Beylik of Erzincan and Beylik of Mengücek were completely different principalities. Beylik of Mengücek, as well as the neighbouring beylik of Saltuklu were -so called -1st term beyliks, established during thee first Oghuz migration following the Battle of Manzikert.(Before Mongols) They were later on incorporated into Seljuk realm. The capitals were Erzincan and Erzurum. Sidgwick & Jackson refer to these beyliks. But they had nothing in common with this article. Beylik of Erzincan was a 2nd term beylik which formed after Mongol intervention and Mutaherten was probably an Uighur.The time difference between the Mengücek -Saltuklu and Beylik of Erzincan is more than two centuries. Please don't confuse the names of these beyliks. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 10:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Joke ? It's clear that the "principality of Erzincan" is not same as this "Beylik of Erzincan" in English historiography. Takabeg (talk) 10:18, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Well, established usage means common usage among the people, like for instance Battle of Waterloo. But except for a handful of academicians, who knows about east Anatolia of the middle ages. These names are not to be considered among the established usage. But even then, if you can find a better name than beylik of Erzincan (beylik of Mutaherten ?) you can move the name. But your claim which states that the principality of Erzincan has a different meaning in English is not supported by evidence. Mengücek (as well as the neighbouring Saltuklu) have articles in Wikipedia. If you really think that beylik of Erzincan refers to Mengücek why don't try to consult the creator of Mengücek to move the name ? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:59, 18 August 2011 (UTC)