Talk:Shirazi people

Zanj, African slaves, Comoros Genetics

@Soupforone: I am reverting some of your edits, because the sources do not use the word Zanj in many cases. Please see our discussion in Talk:Amhara people on proper use of sources. If you do see proper support, please identify the pages. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

@Soupforone: I removed your OR on paternal lineages and maternal clades, replaced it with the language that is supported by the source. If you disagree, please explain with page number of the source. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

I've embedded direct url text to fix any ambiguity. Soupforone (talk) 06:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

No you introduced your OR/confusing wording again and removed well sourced content plus sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

That's incorrect. Mikaberidze indicates that "the Bantu-speaking peoples of East Africa were called the Zanj" [1]. Likewise, Freeman-Grenville writes that "these raids he considers a Holy War, for the Zanj are idolaters" [2]. Please do not ambiguate these to the continental "African". The Appiah url text is not by Appiah (editor), but rather by Ari Nave (writer) [3]. Also, Msadie et al. write that "there are no mitochondrial lineages on the Comoros that are frequent in the Middle East (Figure 3). We have tested for, but did not find, the R haplogroups, H, J, T, U and V, or N(xR) that represent 80% of the mitochondria in Iran. There is therefore striking evidence for male-biased gene flow from the Middle East to the Comoros". Thus, the "striking" male-biased gene flow from the Middle East is in comparison to the complete absence of Middle Eastern maternal lineages among the the Comorian population, not relative to the entire study's haplogroup distribution [4]. Further, Msadie et al. do not assert that "the most common paternal lineages among the contemporary Comorian population... are sub-Saharan Africa", but rather that "the most common Comorian haplogroups, E1b1-M2 (41%) and E2-M90 (14%), are those that are frequent in sub-Saharan Africa". They also indicate that "the remaining 15.3% of the Comoros sample is composed almost exclusively of haplogroups that can either be unambiguously identified as SEA (B4a1a1-PM, F3b, and M7c1c - 10.6%), 25 or fall into the paragroup M(xD,E,M1,M2,M7) (4%) (Figure 3). The latter haplogroups are probably also originally from Southeast Asia." Hence, the M(xD,E,M1,M2,M7) paragroup is tabulated within the 15.3% of maternal clades linked with Southeast Asia. Soupforone (talk) 16:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

@Soupforone: Mikaberidze does not mention Shirazi, rather is discussing Zanj. Your edits seem to have this persistent problem. @Cordless Larry: would you please check. Is the length of the genetic section in this article getting undue? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't know the topic all that well, but it's worth noting that contemporary scholarship on ethnicity tends to define ethnic groups in terms of shared culture much more than it does shared genetics. I am therefore suspicious of long genetics sections in ethnic group articles, which may well be undue. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Ms Sarah Welch, that's interesting since you linked to Mikaberidze. Soupforone (talk) 03:14, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

@Soupforone: Because you disruptively keep mass changing "African slaves" to "Zanj slaves" even when the sources are using the former phrase. 'Zanj' needs to be mentioned and its Islamic context explained given its relevance to this article. Explaining it is constructive, but your attempts to change 'African slaves' to 'Zanj slaves' is not. If the source is using the term African slaves, we need to stick to it because there are numerous WP:RS stating Swahili-Arabs led armies raided, kidnapped and seized slaves from interior Africa (Congo, Malawi, Mozambique, interior Tanzania etc) and brought them to the Swahili coasts for trading in Shirazi people controlled coastal regions and islands near Africa mainland. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:04, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: Indeed. We should take out the excessive details of one genetics paper, and trim it down to their results interpretation and conclusions relevant to Shirazi people. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:04, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

• Update: I moved the Genetics section to a pre-existing dedicated article on Shirazi and Comoros, as that is where it fits better. We have a summary section in the Contemporary demographics section and there is no need for repetition. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Ms Sarah Welch, African is far too broad and WP:Ambiguous. Zanj (which Mikaberidze and Freeman-Grenville indicate) is more precise. Anyway, the actual haplogroups must therefore be disambiguated. Soupforone (talk) 03:40, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

@Soupforone: The article clarifies "African slaves" with phrases such as Bantu-speaking, source locations, etc. Most readers will understand "African slaves", Zanj is a specialist word. It may feel more "precise" to you personally, but we disagree. So, we need to stick with the sources. Right now, the main article is using Zanj when the source is using that term, and African slaves where the RS use that phrase, which is the way it should be. On listing haplogroups, it is unnecessary and makes the article difficult to read, but I will leave it in. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 04:20, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I have changed that line, for now, to say 'Some scholars' as it's only supported by two specific papers. Wikipedia is not saying 'the claims of ancestral people are fiction' it is saying that some people describe them as fiction, which is demonstrably true. 151.231.187.205 (talk) 14:12, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

1917 source + statement

The "Geographical Journal (Vol. 50)", dated 1917, is not WP:RS, used here in this article to back up the statement; "Although all modern Shirazi are of dual Bantu and Persian heritage, they trace descent to the old Persian founders of Kilwa, and some have retained physical resemblances to this original Aryan stock.[81]" Either a more appropriate reference should be added, or this stuff has to be removed in its entirety. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:47, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. Lets wait for @Soupforone to explain or offer a better source, as they added it with this edit. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

2023 study

A 2023 study has found that the remains of high-status Shirazi people, interred over the past several centuries, had 50% (or, in some cases, even more) Asian (and, more specifically, Persian) male DNA showing that this admixture began approximately 1,000 years ago, essentially confirming local accounts of the Shirazi people's origins. Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05754-w 173.88.246.138 (talk) 04:26, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes and no. The study confirms the existence of mixture between peoples of Persian, as well as Indian and Malagasy background with those of more "generic" East African ancestries. It does NOT confirm indigenous accounts vis-a-vis the origins of urbanism / large settlements, political organisation, or other key traits--nor does it directly locate the sources of this ancestry (for which, there are valid claims of complexity beyond a simple migration from Shiraz -- nor does it give any information about the broader population. Given this, the "factual information" tag is unnecessary; the study has been integrated into the article in its appropriate context -- as an interesting, and important, development which will surely inform more research to follow. HiddenHistoryPedia (talk) 12:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Move Origins Controversy Section

This article is obstensibly about the Shirazi people of the East African coast -- their history, social norms, and culture. However, I find it somewhat disrespectful that the bulk of the article's text is spent on a historiographic controversy that is ultimately unrelated to the material expression of Shirazi culture. I suggest the bulk of that section be moved to a separate Wikipedia page (ie: Historiographic Controversy on the Origins of the Shirazi), so that this article can be more properly dedicated to the Shirazi people, instead of a semi-politicized debate as to their origins. The Shirazi, of course, did more than spontaneously appear (however that happened) at the turn of the millenium and rule a few cities for a few hundred years. HiddenHistoryPedia (talk) 12:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I restored the simple title "History" before noticing your comment here. Let's leave this original title for now and see if there's a consensus for changes. Largoplazo (talk) 15:53, 23 August 2024 (UTC)