Turkey-Iran Relations | News and Discussions

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

@doritos
According to the Encyclopedia of Islam:[35]"At the present day, the inhabitants speak Adhar Turkish, but in the 14th century they still spoke "arabicized Pahlawi" (Nuzhat al-Qolub: Pahlawi Mu’arrab) which means an Iranian dialect of the north western group."

Turkish language is very recent in Iran, replaced persian only in last 400/500 years in the so called Turkish Azerbaijan area.

Also, the same Evliya Chelebi notes Turkic spoken chiefly in Van and Diyarbakir (barely any left today), which was the Azerbaijani variety (hence, not Ottoman influence or Kurds using the language of Ottoman state), I'm not sure if anyone should draw some conclusions from it.

generalization/majority speaking persian is something else than few persons speaking Turkish between thousands of non-Turks.

 

[ASQ-1918]

Only that all of your quotes are taken out of the context, as its usually done on wikipedia by the same people. Like Vladimir Minorsky's comment about Tabriz dialect (the only Azerbaijani dialect with loss of vowel harmony and the use of so-called "Persian inotations") being atributed to Azerbaijani language as whole (when one looks into the source, the title itself is named "dialect of Tabriz", but it should be already obvious)

14th century was still the Ilkhanate era (the quote most likely refers to early 14th century, ie early 1300s), most of Turkic migration was during that period and afterwards, non-Turkic should have been spoken alongside Turkic in major cities such as Tabriz, but other lands, especially pastures should have been chiefly Turkic, especially Mughan and areas north to Tabriz and up to and beyond Araz river.

Let me give you a quote from 13th century (even earlier than 14th century) about Caucasus from Ajayib Al-Donya:

ADZHA'IB AD-Dunya, Geographical works in the XIII.

Arran. A blessed place full of benefits: it was the winter seat of the kings / l. 192a /. No other site has as many Turks: they say there are a hundred thousand Turkish horsemen.

ЧУДЕСА МИРА->ПУБЛИКАЦИЯ 1954 Г.->ТЕКСТ

It also talks of Mughan as Turkmen region (in 13th century), and mentions big Turkic settlement (a process that were actively underway when it was written, it is written from such perspective) even in big cities such as Tabriz and Ardabil.

Even today, one can really see the strong Persian influence on Maragha and Tabriz dialects, but you move north to Arasbaran and Mughan, you meet a totally different culture (formerly nomadic, nomadic, affiliation with Turkic tribes), dialect with minimal Persian influence, far more "genuine" Turkic with strict rules of vowel harmony, and "purer" vocabulary as well. That is not to say that the innhabitants of Tabriz and such are not Turks, but indeed its mixed with non-Turkic, Persian influence. Hence, generalization is very wrong, not all parts of Azerbaijan are the same.

No one said anything about "few". Stop drawing conclusions.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

Let me give you a quote from 13th century (even earlier than 14th century) about Caucasus from Ajayib Al-Donya:

ADZHA'IB AD-Dunya, Geographical works in the XIII.

Arran. A blessed place full of benefits: it was the winter seat of the kings / l. 192a /. No other site has as many Turks: they say there are a hundred thousand Turkish horsemen.

ЧУДЕСА МИРА->ПУБЛИКАЦИЯ 1954 Г.->ТЕКСТ

It also talks of Mughan as Turkmen region, and mentions big Turkic settlement even in big cities such as Tabriz and Ardabil.

Even today, one can really see the strong Persian influence on Maragha and Tabriz dialects, but you move outside of them in Arasbaran and Mughan, you meet a totally different culture (formerly nomadic, nomadic), dialect with zero Persian influence. That is not to say that the innhabitants of Tabriz and such are "converted", but indeed very likely that its mixed with strong Persian influence.

No one said anything about "few", you don't know that.

The quote is comparing, "no other site has as many turks", in other words in other places there were not so many Turks as here which is the max. Turks ever seen. Further in the quote..."they say", it seems he heard this indirectly.

What's also strange for me, when I see an azeri celebrating nowruz, I see actually a persian celebrating, they do exactly the same, same culture, habits etc. However that totally differs from turks of turkey while the location is not that far from azerbayjan.

Genetic tests have proven that Azeris are mainly related to Caucasians and rest of Iran, including to people of Isfahan.

In 2006 M. Regueiro and A.M. Cadenas of Stanford University show that the population of central Iran (Isfahan) group to Caucasian Azeri people more than population of Turkey in terms of haplogroup distributions and genetic homogeneity.[9]

Genetic testing has also revealed Azeri population of Iran group more with other Iranian peoples[10] especially with central Iranian people of Isfahan[9] and Azeri population from the Republic of Azerbaijan group more with Caucasian people and people of central Iran.

I do admit there was a little Turkic admixture, but not significant.

 

[ASQ-1918]

You should read more, the part about 100 thousand horseman refers to a military strength, so indeed he cites others, but he also writes down his own eyewitness accounts, he compares the presence of Turkic tents in Arran and Mughan to "ants", something he uses to describe how numerous they are. Like said, the author also talks of Mughan as a Turkmen region. This was 13th century, large-scale migration continued well after that in several waves.

Novruz was state holiday of Seljuqs and all other Turkic dynasties in Iran and elsewhere as well (Muslim Turkic dynasties), what is strange about that? Of course it passed on to Azerbaijani Turks whom have been present in the region for centuries and bear the legacy from those same empires. It is celebrated by all of Central Asian Turkic nations as well, in more or less the same fashion. In Turkey, it was national holiday in Ottoman Empire as welll, but ceased duirng the Republic period.

Are you a bot or something? I'm actually spending some time here and write down lines based on my own information and knowledge, all you do is quoting wikipedia and such. You skip and ignore 99% of what I say. Those so-called genetic tests says nothing, neither is their realiability to be believed, or their background. And I think I already told you that there are certain differences between regions of Azerbaijan.

If you are just going to continue to ignore most of my posts, then kindly stop wasting my time please. And the same if you have nothing intelligent to say.

 

[ASQ-1918]

@Kaan

Can you actually delete these off-topic posts in last several pages? Shouldn't be a problem as they are off-topic. This robotic troll bot is just going to repeat his robotic stuff it seems.

 

[rmi5]

@Kaan

Can you actually delete these off-topic posts in last several pages? Shouldn't be a problem as they are off-topic. This robotic troll bot is just going to repeat his robotic stuff it seems.

No, he can't delete it by himself, since his authorities is only in Turkish section. But, he, and us, can report it to delete off-topics

 

[Hakan]

@Kaan

Can you actually delete these off-topic posts in last several pages? Shouldn't be a problem as they are off-topic. This robotic troll bot is just going to repeat his robotic stuff it seems.

Only the regular mods can not int'l mods like myself.

 

[ASQ-1918]

The only problem is that the response is also usually very slow and late, and that if they may decide it appropiate to "clean" the thread. Most of the threads gets unfortunately derailed, and its always the same members. No wonder that this place needs stricter rules and better moderation.

 

[Hakan]

The only problem is that the response is also usually very slow and late, and that if they may decide it appropiate to "clean" the thread. Is there a single thread that are not derailed by certain Iranian members here, and probably something that applies to majority of threads in other sections as well. No wonder that this place needs stricter rules and better moderation.

Mods were called in atleast 6 hours ago.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

You should read more, the part about 100 thousand horseman refers to a military strength, so indeed he cites others, but he also writes down his own eyewitness accounts, he compares the presence of Turkic tents in Arran and Mughan to "ants", something he uses to describe how numerous they are. Like said, the author also talks of Mughan as a Turkmen region. This was 13th century, large-scale migration continued well after that in several waves.

Novruz was state holiday of Seljuqs and all other Turkic dynasties in Iran and elsewhere as well (Muslim Turkic dynasties), what is strange about that? Of course it passed on to Azerbaijani Turks whom have been present in the region for centuries and bear the legacy from those same empires. It is celebrated by all of Central Asian Turkic nations as well, in more or less the same fashion. In Turkey, it was national holiday in Ottoman Empire as welll, but ceased duirng the Republic period.

Are you a bot or something? I'm actually spending some time here and write down lines based on my own information and knowledge, all you do is quoting wikipedia and such. You skip and ignore 99% of what I say. Those so-called genetic tests says nothing, neither is their realiability to be believed, or their background. And I think I already told you that there are certain differences between regions of Azerbaijan.

If you are just going to continue to ignore most of my posts, then kindly stop wasting my time please. And the same if you have nothing intelligent to say.

you skipped the genetic tests and also that nowruz of azeris is celebrated like persians. Nowhere i see that, even not among persian speakers of afghanistan. Nowruz is not something to forget by common folk, so it seems that Turks of turkey had no interest in nowruz.

The genetic tests confirm the ties between Persians and azeris.

If they were an army, then ofcourse then concentrated their manpower so that this 100000 were nearly on 1 location. Further who says these people settled? maybe they went to fight and settle in other locations such as turkey or Caucasus, and maybe many of them lost their life since they were warriors. They had their horses and weapons to expand.
Even if not these turks would be like a lost needle in the mountains of Iranians.

This is backed by genetics and those who witnessed the language of the locals. You can't dismiss the genetic tests by simply saying they are unreliable.

 

[Islamic faith&Secularism]

The truth will make it very hard for Acems; but the Turks ruled that region for centuries, therefore influenced it in every respect. to make excuses for each of those inluenced issues will only delay to face the truth, not more not less.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

The truth will make it very hard for Acems; but the Turks ruled that region for centuries, therefore influenced it in every respect. to make excuses for each of those inluenced issues will only delay to face the truth, not more not less.

Turks ruled and brought disasters into the new regions, but had not much influence, actually other way around, Turks were always influenced. "Turk" term is also not really clear, and how it was used.

Within the Ottoman Empire, the name "Turk" was sometimes used to denote the Turkmen backwoodsmen, bumpkins, or the illiterate peasants in Anatolia. "Etrak-i bi-idrak", for example, was an Ottoman play on words, meaning "the ignorant Turk".[30]

Özay Mehmet in his book Islamic Identity and Development: Studies of the Islamic Periphery mentions:[31]

“The ordinary Turks (Turkmen) did not have a sense of belonging to a ruling ethnic group. In particular, they had a confused sense of self-image. Who were they: Turks, Muslims or Ottomans? Their literature was sometimes Persian, sometimes Arabic, but always courtly and elitist. There was always a huge social and cultural distance between the Imperial centre and the Anatolian periphery. As Bernard Lewis expressed it: "in the Imperial society of the Ottomans the ethnic term Turk was little used, and then chiefly in a rather derogatory sense, to designate the Turcoman nomads or, later, the ignorant and uncouth Turkish-speaking peasants of the Anatolian villages." (Lewis 1968: 1)
In the words of a British observer of the Ottoman values and institutions at the start of the twentieth century: "The surest way to insult an Ottoman gentleman is to call him a 'Turk'. His face will straightway wear the expression a Londoner's assumes, when he hears himself frankly styled a Cockney. He is no Turk, no savage, he will assure you, but an Ottoman subject of the Sultan, by no means to be confounded with certain barbarians styled Turcomans, and from whom indeed, on the male side, he may possibly be descended."

 

[Islamic faith&Secularism]

."

Wikipedia is not an answer.

The Turks have founded more than 16 states, at the moment there are 7 Turkic countries, there are some Turkic organisations to which PMs and Presdients attend regularly.

Howver you come here and copy/past some texts from wiki, and claim some things.

I repeat The truth will make it very hard for Acems.

 

[F117]

@Shapur Zol Aktaf I believe a major part of Turkic history was invented in the Soviet and post-Soviet era, by the newly independent people who needed to define themselves. This may explain the issue of cultural and historical plagiarizing. Have you considered this before?

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

@Shapur Zol Aktaf I believe a major part of Turkic history was invented in the Soviet and post-Soviet era, by the newly independent people who needed to define themselves. This may explain the issue of cultural and historical plagiarizing. Have you considered this before?

That's correct.