Talk:Ganja

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Azeri, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Azeri-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.

See also Talk:Ganja (disambiguation).

Contents 1 City in Azerbaijan 2 Ganja or Ganca 3 Emblem of Ganca 4 Armenians of Gandzak/Ganja 5 Info 6 Sources needed 7 Ganja Etymology

[edit] City in Azerbaijan

Ganje was a city in the persian empire until its capture by the russians in the 19th century. For Azeri etnicity, please refer to the appropriate article. It is important to note that the present state of azerbaijan is a very new phenomenon and no such state has ever existed before 20th century.

Please get your facts straight. Ganja wasn't a part of the Persian Empire until its "capture by the Russians". Immediately before the war between Russia and Iran for the division of Azerbaijan and the Caucasus, Ganja was the capital of an independent Ganja Khanate, which was a feudal Azerbaijani state. The first paragraph is very misleading, because it tells about supposed Persian origins of the city (without any reliable proof) even before stating the fact that it is a city in Azerbaijan. Moreover, it is your personal opinion about a "new phenomenon" - the fact is that the Republic of Azerbaijan exists and that Ganja is its part and that Ganja is a very important city for Azerbaijani in terms of the Azeri culture and statehood.

Please, note that Ganja is a historical Azerbaijani city. Its inhabitants all the time have been Azerbaijanis or Albanians, ancestors of Azerbaijanis. Please, don't try to credit Ganja to persians. I have no relations to persiona. Azerbaijanis and persians are different civilizations, different cultures, different ethnicities, different language and etc. No common feature other than being neighbors. --68.49.90.60 18:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

68, your edits have consistently shown a point of view. Without having reliable sources to back up your claims, such assertions cannot be made in an encyclopedic fashion. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 13:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

(One more note)- note that the current fashion in which it is on the page is appropriate, being that it only claims to be a city in Azerbaijan, which is factually true. --Kuzaar^-T-C- 13:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ganja or Ganca

Ganja appears closer to the Persian spelling and Ganca seems to be closer to the Azeri spelling. The United Nations Group of Expects on Geographical Names issued a working paper (WP 82) in 2000 entitled Classification of the Populated Localities On 1/600,000 Scale Map of the Azerbaijan Republic but they acknowledged that the conversion of the Azeri from cyrillic to roman had not been fully accomodated. The UN report still used Ganja. Fallingrain.com uses Ganca. signed: Bejnar 05:42, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

The Azeri spelling is indeed Ganca, but based on the research I did for the subdivisions article, if I recall correctly the official romanization is "Ganja". See [1]. --Golbez 07:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

When I was in Ganja for a few weeks 3 years ago, it seemed that the Azeris spelled it "Gəncə" in Azeri, but "Ganja" in English. So I would say this is at the right place. --jacobolus (t) 21:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emblem of Ganca

The coat of arms used in the article is not being used since 1918 and I think it would be wiser to move it to the history section rather than display it as the emblem of the city. I have an image of the modern emblem adopted on January 21, 2003. I am still trying to figure out how to place it and what to do with licence. Does it count as a fair use if it is being used anywhere in the city?? Gancali 9:41, 4 November 2006(UTC)

[edit] Armenians of Gandzak/Ganja

The city was founded by Armenians in the early Middle Ages, has Armenian name, and from early times was home to a large Armenian community that was exiled in 1989. Gandzak gave Armenians many important figures of science, literature, arts and religion- see list. Zurbagan 07:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Not true -- there is zero evidence about Armenians founding a city in Caucasian Albania. Neither is "Gandzak" an Armenian name - it is Persian. All your POV is easily disproven by Enc. Iranica article [2]: "History. The post-Mongol historian Háamd-Alla@h Mostawf^ says that the Arab town of Ganja was founded in 39/659-60 (i.e., at the time of the first Arab incursions into eastern Transcaucasia) but gives no details (Nozhat al-qolu@b, p. 91, tr. p. 93). A passage of the anonymous Ta÷r^kò Ba@b al-abwa@b (extant in the Ottoman historian Monajjem-ba@æ^'s Ja@me¿ al-dowal) states that Ganja was founded in 245/859-60 by Moháammad b. Kòa@led b. Yaz^d b. Mazyad, of the family of Yaz^d^ governors in ˆarva@n, who was governor of Azerbaijan, Arra@n, and Armenia for the caliph al-Motawakkel, and so-called because of a treasure unearthed there, obviously a piece of folk etymology (see below). Moháammad resided there in his castle (qasár), presumably until his death in 247/861, making it the capital of Arra@n (Minorsky, 1958, tr. pp. 25-26, comm. pp. 57-58; cf. idem, 1953, pp. 5-6). Moháammad b. Kòa@led's role as founder (or rather, as re-founder, see below) of Ganja is confirmed by the Armenian historian Movse@s Dasxuranc¿i, where he says that the son of Xazr (for Xald, as explained by Marquart, p. 462) Patgos built Ganjak in the canton of Aræakaæe@n, with the date given in one manuscript as Armenian era 295/846-47 (bk. 3, ch. 20, tr. Dowsett, p. 218). The Persian name Ganja/Ganza (<ganj "treasure, treasury"; see MacKenzie, p. 35) points, however, to there having existed a much older, pre-Islamic town there."

Also, both of these references are incorrect: "Kirakos Gandzaketsi - author of the History of Armenia" -- he NEVER had the word Armenia in his title. Likewise, "Mkhitar Gosh - author of Armenia's Code of Laws" -- he NEVER had the word Armenia in his title. Indeed, here's prof. Dowset's aricle name: С.J.F. Dowsett. The Albanian Chronicle of Mxit'ar Gos. BSOAS, XXI/3, 1958. Same was true of his "Code of Laws" - which was simply named as such. --AdilBaguirov 09:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, Zurbagan is making disruptive edits and edit warring without providing sufficient evidence against body of evidence presented above or discussing on the talk page. The user is now added to ArbCom case, so should present his evidence and statement there. Atabek 20:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Info on Armenians should be in a separate chapter about the city's Armenian population. Pulu-Pughi 04:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Info

I added some things back that were referenced, [3] Artaxiad 03:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

What you added doesn't make sense. If "it was an urban center of the province of Utik of the Kingdom of Greater Armenia until the kingdom's breakup in 387 A.D." how can you claim that it was founded by Armenians in 5th century A.D., when it was first mentioned? Parishan 04:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, hopefully we'll get this fixed, thanks. Artaxiad 00:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources needed

The article needs sources which show that it was an important city of Caucasus Albania (the Iranica article mentions Aran, Iran, Atabegs, etc... but not C.A) and another source which mentions the Turkic/Kurdish origin theory of the etymology (Iranica says that Ganja is from the Persian language, says nothing of Turkic or Kurdish.).Azerbaijani 04:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Kurdish etymology based on word "genc" is impossible, as it's a Turkic word, that's why Kurdish cannot be put there, and is covered by the Persian (or actually, it should state Pahlavi, not Persian). What reference is needed for the word genc? I can scan an Azerbaijani-English dictionary's page, if needed, but is that really necessary? Meanwhile, if the city was founded in 5th century, then obviously it was in Caucasian Albania, which existed in its full form (Naxcivan+Arran+Shirvan+Mughan+Daghestan) until 705 AD, and after that, until 10th century, was re-established a few times in what is known as Arran region (i.e., only between Kura and Araxes rivers). Hence, no citation is needed for that, it's automatically covered. --AdilBaguirov 05:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

From the Ganca Media Center website:

Among literary scientists there are several theories about the meaning and the origin of the word “Ganja.” One group of researchers says the word comes from the Parfiyan word “gəncə” meaning “treasure.” Another group believes it comes from the word “gencə” meaning large or big, and others think it comes from the names of the ancient Turkish tribes the Huns and “Gəncək”.

Farrux Ahmadov, a young researcher was a post-graduate academic (kandidat kauk) in history. Although he passed away at a young age, he conducted large scale research about the history and ethnography of Ganja. In his book, “The historical memory of Ganja” (Baki, “Şirvannəşr”, 1998) he contributes significant information by proving the word Ganja’s Turkic origin: “… If the sources tell us, with confidence about the rule of the Turks in the regions around the Kur river, then obviously, this tribe leader- ‘Khan’ (‘xaqan’, ‘kaqan’) must have had a main village or a palace. And there is no fact to prove that Ganja was not the main village of that tribe. We believe that, in ancient times the city was not called ‘Gəncə’ but ‘Qança’ (or ‘Kançə’) (İbn Xordadbek ‘Kniqa putey i stran’ – kommentarii, issledovaniye, ukazateli i kartı Naili Velixanovoy, Baku, 1986, s. 78, 226). The first component ‘qan’, “kaan”, “xan”, in Turkic languages means a ruler, king or chief. ‘– ca (-cə, -ça, -çə)’, the second part of the word is widely used in the historical part of Azerbaijan and means place, location, motherland. We can take a broad view and consider that the words ‘Gəncə’, ‘Qanca’, ‘Kancə’ mean ‘Khan place’, ‘the location of the Khan’, ‘the motherland of the Khan’, ‘place where the ruler is’. It is interesting that until the beginning of the Twentieth Century the words "Qanja" and "Xan yurt" were still in use by the people in the mountainous regions South of Ganja.

This is all OR and none of it is academic. Further more, it says the theory is by a "young reseacher and post graduate academic"...Azerbaijani 14:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

What is OR? This is a major website source for the city of Ganja, and is properly references as one theory, so what's the problem? Secondly, what do you have against young POST GRADUATE academics (i.e., PhD degree holders -- which is higher qualification than majority of Wikipedia editors have). The reference is fine and should stay, as should other references. --AdilBaguirov 04:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Needs scholarly third party source. Havent seen one yet and I have done some searching. If you cant find one...than that probably means that the theory is not credible.Azerbaijani 22:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism by some drug-lovers was reverted, and restored the original wording from John F. Baddeley and Caucasian Albanian historian Moisey Kalankatuyski (Movses Dasxuranci) about Ganja. Additionally, Mxitar Gosh and Kirakos Gandzaketsi were Albanian, and their books were about Albania and written in Caucasian Albania (Arran). --adil 21:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Azerbaijani, you're replacing references to scholarly sources with pan-Armenian and pan-Persian POV. Sumgait.info is anti-Azerbaijani POV source, and despite your wording manipulations Utik was not permanently part of "Greater Armenian kingdom", because such existed only for brief period of few years in history. Atabek 23:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

This is ridiculous! These are the same users who have asked me in the past for third party scholarly sources yet refuse to do the same here! This is the source they are trying to use: http://www.ganca.az/history.html That is neither a neutral site, nor is it a scholarly site, and it says the creator of the theory is some (by the sites very own admission) was a young post graduate academic and also (again, by the sites own admission) the theory is based on pure speculation and point of view... This is ridiculous. I want a third party scholarly source for this theory.

And those edits that you are referring to were not added by me, they were added prior or after my edits, so if you have a problem with those, do not completely revert the article and instead talk to those users.Azerbaijani 01:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Interesting move by Adil. He replaces Persian and replaces it with Pahlavi, which isnt incorrect, however, neither was Persian, as Pahlavi was Middle Persian and was referred to as Parsik. The funniest part was when he put in place "middle Iranian" rather than putting in "middle Persian". I dont know what this user has against Persians, but he has expressed his feelings many times...I'll let others be the judge. Its also funny how he calls Encyclopaedia Iranica a "pan Persian" source...Lastly, he removes the dispute tag...Very interesting revert Atabek...Azerbaijani 01:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

user Azerbaijani, refrain from your insinuations. First off, I was not the one who placed Middle Iranian. Secondly, that's what it says on the actual Wikipedia page, so it is correct. Thirdly, Pahlavi was not the same as Persian, and hence it is more correct to say middle Iranian as Parthian language is shared by all Iranic people, not just Persians. Finally, "ganj" is from Pahlavi, hence it is 110% more correct than any other wording. How one would make wild claims such as yours, by trying to make it look anti-anyone, is beyond comprehension. Stop showing bad faith each and every time. --adil 17:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I wonder, Pejman47, what acedmic sources you are refering to in your claims--Dacy69 19:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

read IRANICA,--Pejman47 20:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

This is getting ridiculous. These are the same users that claim every single source that contradicts them "not scholarly or not neutral" and yet when it comes to their sources, they use whatever they want! There is no "Turkic theory" for the name Ganja, that is pure historical fiction. That is why you cannot find one scholarly source that also supports this theory! Iranica says the name is derived from Persian, you cannot argue with Iranica when you do not have a scholarly third party source.

Pahlavi is middle Persian, read Britannica. This is getting real tiring.

Here is the Wikipedia article on Pahlavi: [4]

Middle Persian or Pahlavi is the Iranian language spoken during Sassanian times.

Here is the Britannica article on Pahlavi: [5]

Middle Persian, the major form of which is called Pahlavi, was the official language of the Sasanians (AD 224–651). The most important of the Middle Persian inscriptions is that of Shapur I (d. AD 272), which has parallel versions in Parthian and Greek. Middle Persian was also the language of the Manichaean and Zoroastrian books written during the 3rd to the 10th century AD.

Here is what Iranica says about the name Ganja: [6]

The Persian name Ganja/Ganza (<ganj "treasure, treasury"; see MacKenzie, p. 35) points, however, to there having existed a much older, pre-Islamic town there.

Adil and Atabek, its really tiring having to deal with these POV edits and OR. Wikipedia has policies against these, and you two are trying to argue against Britannica and Iranica?

If you want, I can bring up literraly hundreds of Iranian sources for a lot of claims, would you take those out now that you have shown your double standard? This is ridiculousAzerbaijani 20:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

As per the failure of the users to bring up third party scholarly sources to back up their claims, as well as their removal of the dispute tag and of their manipulation of the term Pahlavi, backed up by all the comments above, I took the article back to the version by Pejman.

If you have a dispute with any of the content dealing with Armenia or Armenians, do not blindly revert the entire article but talk to the users involved with those edits. So far, I have put a dispute tag on the part of the article which you guys are contesting. Hopefully you and the users who put that information in can talk this out.Azerbaijani 02:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

user Azerbaijani, what is your problem man? I've told you already -- the Wikipedia's own page on Pahlavi language [7] says: "Pahlavi or Pahlevi denotes a particular and exclusively written form of various Middle Iranian languages." It is more correct to denote Pahlavi as Middle Iranian as it's shared by all Iranian people, not just Persians, and because primary Pahlavi speakers, Parthians, were different from Persians, who had their own language at the same time. So what is your complaint about? Meanwhile, nobody disputes the Iranica's take on Ganja, and of course, everyone (at least the Azerbaijani users) recognize that "ganj" is a Pahlavi word. As such, why don't you explain that to the Armenian users, so that they understand that a similar word in Armenian language, itself an Indo-European language, is from Pahlavi, and hence talking about Armenian origin of the word (and worse, the city) is groundless. --adil 07:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh wow. Adil, The article you are citing is about the WRITING SYSTEM OF PAHLAVI, NOT THE LANGUAGE. Your POV and OR is really really tiring. If you cannot find one third party scholarly source, than that means the theory is not credible and putting it in the article is undo weight.Azerbaijani 13:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

It's you who is tiring with never ending POV - for Middle Iranian Language, see http://www.iranologie.com/history/ilf.html] and Britannica [8] and UCLA [9] and [10] and [11] and [12] and [13] and [14]. Enough? --adil 09:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Adil, even your own sources call Pahlavi Middle Persian! You are confusing Middle Iranian, which includes all the middle Iranica languages that existed during the Sassanian and Parthian eras, just as Iranian languages today includes Kurdish, Persian, Pashto, etc...

A third part will be here to comment soon, and this will hopefully all be taken care.Azerbaijani 13:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ganja Etymology

I need to make some clarifications although since this seems to be an armenian/azerbaijani issue as well, I am not going to edit after arbcomm is over but I have made these comments assuming good faith from users to make the right edits. About the name, Ganja is Persian. Ganjak is the Middle Persian or Pahlavi version. Note the firt two links Adil brought: which are academic: [[15]]: The dominant language of this stage was initially Parthian (Pahlawanig)and later Middle Persian, commonly known as "Pahlavi". And also the Britannica link Adil mentioned: e Persian is known in three forms, not entirely homogeneous—inscriptional Middle Persian, Pahlavi (often more precisely called Book Pahlavi), and Manichaean Middle Persian. Middle Persian belongs to the period 300 BC to AD 950 and was, like Old Persian, the language of southwestern Iran.. [16]. The first article was written by someone I know through e-mail and he is a history student (Iranian history) in UCLA and he reads Pahlavi, Avesta, Parthian, Soghdian, Old Persian, Latin, Greek, English, German... Very bright fellow. There is of course a group of scripts collectively called Pahlavi scripts. Pahlavi originaly was a term that denoted Parthians in the ancient era and then in the Islamic era Pahla was the area (Azerbaijan,Esfahan, Ray, Hamadan..) but scholars and Zoroastrians and Persian literature have used Pahlavi for Middle Persian and Parthian (which is a very similar language) for Parthian. Over all, the words Parth,Pars,Pashtu, Pahlaw,Persian, Parthav (modern Bard'a) and the word Pahlavan all trace back to Old Persian/Avesta Persu (Morgenstein a scholar in Pashto has a good article on this). But to make a long story short, Iranica article should be quoted directly and the Iranica article by Boseworth references Mackenzie's Pahlavi dictionary. Mackenzie's Pahlavi dictionary is a dictionary of Middle Persian. Thus Ganjak is Pahlavi(Middle Persian) but Ganja/Ganjah is modern Persian. Lots of words in Pahlavi have lost their last k to h in modern Persian. One example is Bandak in Pahlavi which is now Banda (which I believe has entered Turkish as bende). Now I am going to make a comment on Turkish/Armenian origin.

Besides the fact that I have not seen it so far in any western academicaly professional (written by a major Professor of the area) manuscripts, the theory of Turkic etymology for such a word is faulty since etymology has to be sought for Ganjak and not Ganja, since Ganjak is the more archaic form. The Ganja media center site contains OR research not backed by third party sources and so it should be removed by any decent users. For example, the sentences are poorly formed even and not on par with an academic site: A young scientist, Farrux Ahmadov who also had a PHD in History begun filling those “white sponts” in Ganja’s history with his researches.[[17]]. What is white sponts? Also he says: We believe that, in ancient times the city was not called ‘Gəncə’ but ‘Qança’! And then sites İbn Xordadbek where-as the name is Ibn Xordadbeh and not Xordadbek. Note it does not connect to the word young anyways. Also note this sentence from the same link: According to the information given by Herodot, “Kirus crosses the Araz River and gets closer to Kur River. Then he moves toward a narrow valley (remember the Dar valley village in the Southern Ganja region- F.A.). The queen Tomris drags the multinumbered troops of Kiri into a trap and destroys them, and Kiri gets killed”.. Actually Herodotus mentions araxes which in his book denotes the Oxus. [18][19][20].I And futhermore Xenophon mentions natural death for Cyrus and I believe so does Ctesias, so over all there is some legendary material here which should not be used for etymology. The science of etymology is not easy but it has some general rules.

I am hoping based on the good faith of users, they will make the necessary corrections or or provide a neutral third party western source for any claim. As per the term being Armenian, Armenian language specially classical has a lot of Pahlavi/Parthian words words and one of them is Ganjak, but as described above, Ganjah is a Persian word where-as Ganjak is a Pahlavi (Middle Persian) word which also Armenian borrowed from Persian. Overall many etymologies in the region have Persian names: Azerbaijan, Darband, Ganja..Also one should add Shaddadid dynasty to the list as well since it was their capital as well. I'll make the edits with this matter of etymology after arbcomm, unless well intentioned users do so before. --alidoostzadeh 23:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, Shaddadi's should be added. Meanwhile, the Ganja Media Site obviously doesn't have an english translation done on professional or native level, and in fact, didn't even use a spell check, but this shouldn't be used against it too harsh, as obviously in native Azerbaijani it would be without mistakes [21]. Very often US websites, when written in Azerbaijani or Russian, for example, contain horrible and laughable mistakes too. Since this is a major website about Ganja and contains valuable information, such as on the celebration of the claimed 2500 year anniversary, recent pictures, etc., and contains reference to F.Ahmadov's book, it can't be considered OR, as it's a verifiable source. Meanwhile, the Turkic theory is identified as such properly in the article and takes secondary position to the main theory. This city is in Azerbaijan and obviously an Azerbaijani source deserves to be in the article, readers need to know what the local population believes the etymology is. --adil 02:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I did not mean to be harsh on the site, but its content is not reliable with regards to history. The Turkic theory should have academic backing by any Wiki standard. I mean we all should adhere to some standards with regards to matters that are debatable. For example if Minorsky says something and some Iranian scholar or website says another, one goes with Minorsky. Note even Kasravi who is mentions by tons of western scholars was omitted by me from Safavids since some users said he could be bias and I said fine even though I can make good execuses to quote him since Minorsky does. There are lots of good Turkologists out there like Doefer, Clauson and etc. Etymology is not the job of random people or even random scholars, but mainly the job of very trained linguists who know many languages like my friend. Note I have seen in a book published by a very nationalist Iranian azeri that Anglo-Saxon has an Iranian root. The guy has a PhD but sometimes nationalism makes a person illogical and he haphazhardly connection Saxon with an Iranian word. But anyways please note the wiki standard with regards to this matter: This means that we present verifiable accounts of views and arguments of reliable scholars.. in Wiki OR. My standard for reliable on history is a full professor in a major western university whose publications are cited. Turkic theory simply does not hold since the region was not Turkified in language at that time, definitely not during the time of Shaddadids when the name was already prevalent. Also currently the link has no connection to the word genj (young) and the article claims another thing, but that is also faulty as shown above. Anyways we should adhere to the scholarly standard in Wikipedia and with English Wikipedia, one should at least have a good reliable English source. Clauson's Turkish etymology is for example reliable and one should check there first for any etymology in Turkic languages..but since Mackenzie has covered it already then there is no need to look at another etymology book considering the word is used in Persian before Turkish (Ferdowsi for example). --alidoostzadeh 02:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the whole Anglo-Saxon connection to Iran was made by British themselves decades ago, I had an article by one such British researcher somewhere. So your friend is not that crazy. :) Meanwhile, Ganja and Azerbaijan in general don't have too much published in English yet. This page is about a city in Azerbaijan, and including information from a semi-official website is OK. It is not so in Safavid page, or some other pages, but in a page about a city it should not be politicized. URLs are routinely included in many pages, such as about Armenia and other nations, with no objections. And once again, the theory is properly identified as such, as an Azerbaijani point of view. Anyone comparing it to versions from Western scholarly sources would obviously believe the latter over the former. However, the GMC site is verifiable and is essentially a semi-official site of the city of Ganja right now. --adil 03:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Also Achaemenid and Parthian empires should be added..--alidoostzadeh 02:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

We can add many other preceeding empires too -- how far do we go? To Scythians? Possibly maybe Urartu had the area? Some others? If according to most scholars Ganja was founded after 5th century AD, and thus after these two empires you mention, then why make the list longer than it already is? Of course if we go by the claimed 2,500 years old history, then they both can be added, but this is only a claim by local authorities and some scholars. --adil 03:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Assuming 2500 years based on western sources or archeological journal is found, thenn Achaemenid, Parthian would be valid since Achaemenid empire started around that time. Assuming 5th century A.D. then Sassanids. Probably Ummayad and Abbassid dynasties should be added also. My guess is that like many areas, probably the place was habited but it became major during Sassanid or Ummayad times. Given that Urartu, Sumerians, Elamites , Manna were not too far off, I am sure there are tons of places in the caucus with archeological remains since migration has taken a paths from the North through the caucus. Anyways, if you find a 3rd party for Turkic etymology let me know. --alidoostzadeh 03:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Pulu-Pughi, you can't remove the fact that Gandz is a word in Pahlavi, from which is became a loan-word in ancient Armenian, grabar (and not the other way around). Hence, Pahlavi takes precedence. Secondly, Sumgait.inf is not a NPOV site, it is a racist propaganda website. third, Kirakos Gandzaketsi's book was simply called "History" (Patmutyun), and not "History of Armenia" (Patmutyun Hayots). --adil 02:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I can remove Pahlavi/Persian because it has already been discussed in the beginning. whether the word Gandz became a loan-word in ancient Armenian is your OR; with the same ease I can say the opposite - the original term was Gandz, and then it was translated into Persian. On Kirakos: stop your POV amd OR. In the Western historiography it is well documented that his work is called "Patmutiun Hayots" - hence the sources I had added. Sumgait.info - again, that is your OR and POV; it is just an article and should stay there asa link and readers will decide as to the nature of that website if they would want to go beyond the article into exploring the site. I can likewise suggest that Azerb. websites you included are racist. Leave this to the audience Pulu-Pughi 13:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I took out the fictional Turkic theory (which cannot be supported by another scholarly sources) and re-added the Middle Persian (Pahlavi) origin of the word.Azerbaijani 20:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. let's take out this dubious Turkic stuff. Ganja is either a Persian word or a Persian translation of the Armenain term Gandzak. Pulu-Pughi 02:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)