Talk:Plovdiv/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Age of Poldiv redux

That there were people living in the area for thousands of years is fact. But I see no evidence that it is one of the world's oldest cities. "The project "From here begins Plovdiv" states:[1] Based on known explored and partially documented prehistoric mounds and settlements map provides information for these periods in the development of the city:

1. Home of settled life in today's Plovdiv - middle Neolithic - Late Neolithic / sixth - fifth millennium BC. /

2. Permanent generic settlements of today's Plovdiv - Late Neolithic - Eneolith / fifth - the fourth millennium BC. /

3. Generic-tribal settlements and villages in the first three hills in Plovdiv - Eneolith - Early Bronze / fourth - the third millennium BC. /

4. Thracian mounds living in today's Plovdiv - early - medium bronze / third - the second millennium BC. /

5. Villages of Orphic societies and municipality with fortifications Kendrissos - late Bronze - early Iron Age / second-first millennium BC. / 6. Mestozhivelishta

The other sources have been moved around and the dates changed so much it's hard to see what actually references what, but the two ITIAM sources are from 1963, 53 years old, far too old to use for this. Philippopolis Album“, Kesyakova Elena, Raytchev Dimitar, Hermes, Sofia, 2012 is hard to verify although it exists. I can find this which does say " is among the oldest cities in Europe, with evidence of human settlement going back 6,000 years. Established first as the Thracian settlement of Eumolpia, today its ancient remains near the city center are most often identified with the name Philippopolis by archaeologists. That was the name given to the city after it was Hellenized within the Macedonian Empire under Philip II during the 4th century, B.C.E. But its most visible ancient remains took shape when the city was absorbed into the orbit of ancient Rome during the 1st century B.C.E. - 1st century C.E.,". That conflicts slightly with the source above, but doesn't claim it was a city 6000 years ago or that it has been continuously inhabited. Real life calls and I'll stop now, removing the obsolete sources before I go. Doug Weller talk 16:59, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't appear that the sources even claim it's one of the world's continuously inhabited cities, just one of the world's oldest cities. The official website only says "It is claimed that the city is a contemporary of Troy and Mycenae, but it is more ancient than Rome, Athens and Constantinople." Doug Weller talk 18:20, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
1.User:Doug Weller, why have you removed the source of P.Detev's publication from 1965? Saying its "far too old to use for this" is ridiculous. In this publication the archeologist confirms that there was a settlement established around 4000 BC. Please do not remove references randomly.
2.What about Philippopolis Album of Kesyakova? It is easy to find. I can show you scanned imagees if you want.
3.What is dubious about 4000 BC. Here is a quote from arch. Matey Mateev's Ancient Philippopolis publication (from 1999 ISBN: 978-954-491-821-7)

"Безспорно е времето на укрепяване на Небет тепе - то е научно изследвано и намерените материали имат давност от 3600 - 3800 година пр.Хр." In English: The time of the establishment of a fortified town on Nebet tepe is scientifically proven - between 3800 - 3600 BC.--Realsteel007 (talk) 16:42, 10 October 2016 (UTC)


((yo|Realsteel007}} Detev? It would help if English translations were given, but you mean the 1963 source I removed, not 1965. It was being used to source "ranking it among world's oldest continuously inhabited cities." Obviously a 53 year old source can't be used for that - but in fact it wasn't, the text it was used for was originally "n the end of the 4th millennium BC, there already was an established settlement there,[1][2]". Someone decided that wasn't good enough, someone 'improved it' by changing the text. It's also a bit questionable - many dates that old (1960s) have been radically revised, radiocarbon dating was in its infancy, etc.
I used another source by the same authors of the Philippopolis Album. Do they say something different there? But you seem to be missing the point. The claim that "The city is continuously inhabited since 4000 BC ranking it among world's oldest continuously inhabited cities." is just wrong. There was no city there 6000 years ago, not even 3000 years ago. And so far as I can see the archaeological sources don't make that specific claim. I don't know how much you know about archaeology, but "continuous habitation" is sometimes very hard to prove. We also have a policy called WP:UNDUE. What other reliable sources make these claims? Your source says "The time of the establishment of a fortified town on Nebet tepe is scientifically proven - between 3800 - 3600 BC." - but we can't say that when other sources dispute it. Another source says that:
"In connection with the topic under discussion, some results deserve attention. A wall surrounds the highest part of the hill, and its chronology has been much debated. Some scholars date it to the Late Iron Age and more precisely to the time after the conquest of Thrace by Alexander the Great (Botousharova 1963b, 110-115), while others are of the opinion that the wall dates to the Early Iron Age or to an even earlier period (Peikov 1986, 32-34). It has already been proved that the wall- building technique - unworked stones of different size without mortar between them - does not allow an exact dating of the site to the Early Iron Age (Domaradski 1982, 44-50). Therefore the existence of an enclosing wall of this type on Nebet Tepe is not an adequate reason to call this an Early Iron Age fortress or citadel. There has been much discussion in the archaeological literature of the problem of fortresses in the Early Iron Age settlement system. From all available data it has become evident that we cannot speak of purely military fortresses or chieftain citadels in Ancient Thrace in the second phase of the Early Iron Age (Gotzev 1994b). In the preliminary publication of the latest and most extensive archaeological excavations Dr. A. Peikov reports a temple complex, the residence of a ruler defended by a stone wall, and speaks of their role in the urbanization process (Peikov 1986, 35-38). For the time being there is no additional information to support his hypothesis and the question of the functions of the buildings on the hill of Nebet Tepe remains open." Urbanization in the Mediterranean in the 9th to 6th Centuries BC.[2] Doug Weller talk 18:17, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
User:Realsteel007 pinging again, typo in first one. Doug Weller talk 18:19, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
User:Doug Weller, I think we are speaking for different issues. I agree that claims such as "continuosly-inhabited" are debatable and not suitable for wiki. What I meant was that the earliest signs of habitation on Nebet tepe are dated as far back as ~4000 BC as P.Detev stated in his publication from 1963. Perhaps I misunderstood your edits and comments. So, it would be better to remove the "continously inhabited" part.--Realsteel007 (talk) 22:00, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, User:Realsteel007, I obviously misunderstood you. I still distrust using archaeological material that old for dating. But until we can find something better, ok. It seems likely that there was something there then, most areas have had some occupation in the last 10,000 years! I'll say now and later that we should not use official city or regional sites for history or archaeology, they can't help being political and used for political purposes, that's their nature. Doug Weller talk 16:14, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

"often referred to in Bulgaria as the City of the Seven Hills"

According to the Bulgarian version of this article the city is referred to as "Градът под тепетата" ("the City beneath the Hills"), a phrase that occurs three times. I can't find any mention of seven hills.213.127.210.95 (talk) 15:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Plovdiv. 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:

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) 01:43, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Demographics

Either make the demographics a table or don't include them. They read very clumsily and I don't think they add much to the article.HRouillier (talk) 22:14, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

"According to provided records of the households and owners/renters in the central part of Plovdiv by the Bulgarian chronicler Genchev, in the 19th century, of 358 households/owners there were 141 (39.4%) Bulgarian, 94 (26.3%) Gulidas (Hellenized Bulgarians from Plovdiv), 41 (11.4%) Bulgarian parents with children Gulidas, 36 (10.1%) Langeris (Helllenized Bulgarians from Plovdiv's surroundings), 14 (3.9%) Greek from other parts of the Ottoman Empire, 12 (3.3%) Aromanian, 9 (2.5%) Bulgarian speaking Muslim, 7 (2%) Albanian; according to the Greek chronicler Lyberatos of 370 households 141 of the owners/households were Gudilas (38.1%), 118 (33.7%) were Bulgarian, 39 (10.5%) were Langeris, 20 (5.4%) Armenian, 14 (3.8%) Aromanian, 17 (4.6%) Greek from other parts of the Ottoman Empire, 8 (2.2%) Greek/Bulgarian, 6 (1.4%) Albanian, 5 (1.4%) Bulgarian speaking Muslim, 2 (0.5%) Karmanli.[3][4] "

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Plovdiv. 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:

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) 20:24, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Plovdiv. 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:

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) 04:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Renaming

Can we find a source for when the name of the city was changed (from Philippopolis), and by whom? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.213.116.3 (talk) 21:15, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Ethnic data for 2011

The sources listed for population by ethnicity for 2011 are both dead links. I found data for the district of Plovdiv but the numbers are too large - it seems to relate to a bigger region than the city itself (for one thing the total population is 620,373). Additionally it seems a column in this row was hidden due to bad markup. So I have no idea which figure correctly belongs to which column and I was unable to verify the data. Hairy Dude (talk) 00:50, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Oldest still-inhabited city topic

Regarding the following lines in page's intro: however, archaeological excavations in 2016 and 2017 have shown that this may not be the case.[4][5]
The source clearly states that:

  • 'The new dating of the fortress does not change the fact that the cultural and historical monument is of exceptional value, as confirmed by the new archaeological findings.'
  • 'the renewed archaeological excavations in the Nebet Tepe Fortress have confirmed that the earliest traces of civilized human life there date back to the Chalcolithic (Aeneolithic, Copper Age) in the 5th – 4th millennium BC, and continued into the Bronze Age (3rd – 2nd millennium BC), and the Iron Age (11th – 10th century BC.
  • 'The very top of the Nebet Tepe hill was fortified in the 4th century BC, and life there continued into the Hellenistic Age and then the Roman period when the massive fortress walls were built, and the Middle Ages'

Therefore I think the quoted line from the page's intro is irrelevant and should be removed.

None of this is evidence of when it became a city rather than a town. Doug Weller talk 07:44, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The Santa photo

This photo is never shown 2001:8003:3083:4700:18CE:D1C2:39C7:FC6C (talk) 19:41, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

S

Xoxox 2600:1702:2C0:4318:D0B9:421D:C9CE:4522 (talk) 21:32, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:24, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

  1. ^ Детев, П. Разкопки на Небет тепе в Пловдив, ГПАМ, 5, 1963, pp. 27–30.
  2. ^ Ботушарова, Л. Стратиграфски проучвания на Небет тепе, ГПАМ, 5, 1963, pp. 66–70.
  3. ^ Graecomans Archived 19 February 2016 at the Wayback Machine
  4. ^ Detrez, Raymon (2003). Relations between Greeks and Bulgarians: The Gudilas of Plovid. Aldershot, England: Ashgate. p. 34,36. ISBN 978-0-7546-0998-8.
  5. ^ Dikov, Ivan (26 March 2018). "Latest Discoveries In Nebet Tepe Fortress Cast Doubt On Status Of Bulgaria'S Plovdiv As Oldest City In Europe". Retrieved 22 April 2019.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Plovdiv/Archive_3&oldid=1112980857"