Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Population through History

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234
Author
HulaguHan View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 26-Jan-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote HulaguHan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Population through History
    Posted: 03-Jul-2005 at 23:18

Just a small note to cut the crap. Hushyar, While Grousset is trembling in his grave, let me make some more citations:

Take a look at pake xxv:

Before the unification under Jenghiz Khan, Blue Mongols, part of present day Mongolia was Turkic.

I hope you will cut the crap and learn the truth, which hurts... Blue is our eastern color.

I am really curious which Persian historian (I suppose namez Al Jalal Al Jabbar bin Qomani) claims Seljuks are Iranian and, Turks and Mongols are different.

Look I am giving more voltage:

Lets have look at the linguistics, from a pure source, Urgunge Onon (Have you heard his name?)  from Secret History of Mongolia

Page 16: Non-Dawr Mongols liguistically influenced by Orkhon Turks (Mentioning Tu-c'hueh)

And I assure you no Oghuz, like Mongols has a tribal relationship with Tu-c'hueh... We are different tribes but one nation. And it is true all of us are influenced by the Tu-c'hueh achievements. Qahan title for the greatest ruler, linguistics, etc... Yes since then we are all called Turk. Infact Chinese all called us Turk not looking if they were from Tu-c'hueh tribe or not...

If Mongols are influenced by Chinese in the followong years and Turks influcenced by Iranians and Greeks, that does not delete our history and identity.

And in that case, Iranians are Arabs. Like you said, they managed to inject their religion to you which is governing your social life ever since.

Hushyar, we are proud of our conquering history. We can live with this fact. And one of our conquests was the Iranian conquest and you should accept this fact. We do not consider ourselves superior, never get me wrong. Claiming Mongols and Turks as a kin (Lord Kinross, Ottoman Centuries, Introduction - Describing Turks) is not dreaming.

And French are Frank. Read First Crusade of Thomas Asbridge, He never uses the term French, he says Frank. Germans and French were once the same. Lotharingian Dukes of Germans used same language with Western Frank Kingdom (French) and Norman English Kings, Lotharingian Dukes: Godefroy De Boullion, Baldwin De Boulogne.

Their language and culture of the Germanic world (Except nordic tribes) was all dominated by Latin influence. But later Luther and his revolution revived the German nation. Now you will ask, what is this, a religious revolution? Mate take a look at Iran. Your mullahs consider Sassanid period as the dark period of Iran and Arabs brought salvation from the desert. religious influence deletes the national identity like it "almost" deleted the Iranian one. For example, after our revolution with Kemal Ataturk, we speak a completely different language than the Ottomans (ruling class at least).  At least now we can communicate with Turkmenistan people and Uzbeks. Yes French are Frenk but highly influenced by Latin culture.

Oh I am sorry, you were educated in a system which claims Seljuks are Iranian because they learned some Farsi words.

NOTE: grousset in the early chapter, mentiones about the rivalry between Turkic(Gokturk oriented) tribes and Mongolian tribes.

Let me quote what he writes:

These are the dominators:

1) Hsiung Nu of Turkic in our own era

2) Hsien Pi of Mongolian in 3rd century AD

3) Juan Juan of Mongols in the 5th century

4) Tu-c'hueh of Turkic in the 6th century

5) Uighur of Turkic in the 8th

6) Kirghiz of Turkic in the 9th

7) Khitan of Mongols in the 10th

8) Kerait or Naiman of Turkic in the 12th

and so on...

If the word Turkic is particularly for Tu-c'hueh (and it is in this quote, he thinks Gokturks and Huns were the same tribe, I mean the ruler tribe) and Khitan is Mongol, and they are because these are the first people used the name of Turk (Chinese gave this name to us, all of us), Hsiung Nu and their descendants Uighurs are not, like we Oghuz are not too. We are not Tu-chueh, they subjugated Oghuz but that does not mean we are from the same tribe, if there is a tribal discrimination. And Hunnics and Gokturks were ENEMIES, with a great blood vengeance. Khitans are number three. If we have to divide it to two, Gokturk, Hunnic rivalry beats. Anyway this is still good.

And also Keraits were the supreme ruler of Mongolia, not the Naimans. no need to that or... Keraits are directly Turkic by the way if Turkic is for Tu-c' hueh, descendants of Tu-c'hueh. Cenghiz was in the beginning Tughrul (Kerait Qahan)' s ally and friend. Later he took the Qahanate from him. Regarding the language differences, they were not using interprators. By the way, Tu'c-hueh were always esixting far before they formed their Qahanate. They were subjugates of HUns later Hunnic tribe the Avars. They became independent and drove Avars to west.

that is why he mainly fails. In overall, (actually he mentiones about Hunnic and Tu-chueh rivalry a lot) there are three major branches. but when one is ruler, the rivalry is away. While on tribe is having the blue color, the other will not have the same. Blue is east, thats it. There is no Blue Huns and Blue Turks (mantioning Tu-c'hueh).

Anyway, Chinese sources all consider us as Turks. Like grabbing the rubbish and putting in the same waste basket, LOL.

Well it is not his only failure. He claims Seljuks were muslim before 980s which is not true. Divitcioglu had proved it and there is major evidence that they were Nestorian while advancing in Khurasan, around 1000s. They hit the Ghaznawids while they were worshipping. 

Anyway, Grousset is one of the first, off course it is normal he has done many mistakes.

And our dear friend Hushyar and his dreams are not even amusement, just ridiculous. Yes Seljuks are Iranian, yes yes... All Seljuks, Safavids, Turks, Huns, Khitans are trembling in their graves, their herediatry is under violence.



Edited by HulaguHan
Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jul-2005 at 02:14

Mutaza said:

Uh, you complately understand me wrong, Yes. You are right one of my ancestor can become Greeks, or even all of them. did this make me a less Turk?


But this does not mean that the past heritage of Anatolia didnt belong you. Hittit were Indo-European (or spoke IE languages) but they are your heritage or ancestors not any other else.


When I call someone Turkic, This does not mean their father is Turkic. I dont care with much. But morely culture, and lets accept, langauge is one of the main specialty of culture.


But not all of it. Culture is very diverse and complicated.Even your grand mother cooking method of a cake is a part of culture. Even those oldmen  sayings that sat in the old caf and their proverbs are part of your culture.So Language is important but its not all thing. You can not draw a wall around yourself just by language (first language that you learned or actually first language of your parents).


 I can speak with an azeris easily, when both of our using our main langauge. So no, If you learn Turkish, you will not become Turk. Because It is not your main langauge. And I am not sure, you can speak an azeris like me. So why do you think, you are more close them more than us?

Ofcourse we are closer to Azeries and actually too much.

I know both language (azeri and Turkish)  until that point (very little indeed) that to know they both can be considered as dialects of the same language. With some practice native of one language could easily understand the other. Is it enough? I am Kurd I can understand majority of Kurds both in Turkey and Iran and Iraq. Persian is my second language ,am I a foreigner to other Persians? You think I am more closer to Kurd in  Istanbul than my Persian neighbor? Of course You can feel some more sympathy with Azeries than others but this does not mean that you have same culture. You spoke about language, Actually language is a communication tool , and could be learned easily, but proverbs ,stories , fictions, jokings and background of language forms culture. And I think I am more related to my azeries friends or Persian neighbors than a kurd in Isanbul, ofcourse he is important with me, But I dont think he could bear Iranian dish more than a few months.
Culture is primary regional not lingual, we have Iranian culture, Indian culture , Chinese culture or Anatolian culture, Central Asian culture , but saying Turkish culture is a bit generalization and I think Central Asia is more like Iran that Turkey. Ofcourse language could be a good cultural bridge ,but it can be done only through  media (literature, Tv.)and you know that there was not any cultural contacts between these countries, until recent years and now it is being swept by western culture.



Please read carefully and consider History is not reading an interesting nationalistic history book and then take deep breathes and to think flying over clouds and to say We were ruler of the world!!! how big we are!!! And then radio says EU postponed the Turkeys request for participation in EU because of Human Right abuse. Real world is bitter but we must live in it.

And by the way, these words are realy not  necassary. I know our issues with Human Right. But I am not sure If this is related with our topic

First of all I am not speaking about politics in a Historical room, second I dont mind about turkeys politics ,Why it is important for me? I have never been in that country and dont have any relatives there and I dont think Ill ever go there, more ever I have no data about your country and I know internet and media could create a complete virtual reality that have no relationship to reality, So dont expect me to speak about Turkeys politics. Its simply none of my business and I dont make myself an Idiot to speak about a thing that have no data about it.
you didnt understand my hidden joke in the above sentence, so lets make it clear.
Europe and USA and each country (and even turkey in northern Iraq) use the famous motto Human right abuse as a pressure tool against other countries or state.
Human right abuse (I dont know it is correct or not) is used in the hand of Europeans as a tool to press Turkey or better said Humiliating it ,I meant that powerful state is not so  powerful in todays politcs of world.(like majority of other countries of world)


Tell me ask you a question, what is different between an Azeris who live in Iran or Azerbaijan?

Acually they are the same people but they are more archaic in some respects , and russianized in other respects.
 

Because Azeris who live in Azerbaijan call us as their brothers. I dont think they call Persians like this?

Oh my god and  you take that so serious, Oh no dont believe so much in these mottos.
They said oh Turk kardashler and you believed it.
Actually they more relates to Iranians than Turks(people of turkey I mean) , I was there and assure you there is no much difference between their cultures and ours. Actually the best way to understand Iranian culture is simply go and study Azerbaijan International magazine (which is online) and 80 percent of material (I mean behavour) is exactly the same. Even half of their proverbs are exact proverbs of Iran.
And they dont like us, Its not important. They are dreaming in creating a big Turan with centre of big azerbaijan (they want to grab Iranian Azerbaijan) Its not important and does not change reality. They think that must hate us, so  try their best to show that they have no relationship to Iranian Civilization , they even created a strange history that Azeri is native language of their country from Stone age. But all of these are artificial and Artificial things can not stand in front of realities. Just check their names and see after 200 years departing from Iran still majority of them have Iranian names.
Well they were being stoled from our country  for ever 200 years and  Russians tried their best to eliminate any traces of  Iran presence there , Its understandable and need time for them to understand their roots.


And, I am not nationalist, to call some Turkic People as "Turk" wont count as nationalism, I think.

1)Being nationalist is not bad at all. Being blind nationalist is bad, because It will create a tool from person in the hands of some stupid men.
2)This Term Turk that is used to call all people that their native language is one of Turkic languages, well some of them are interchangeable (like azeri and Turkish ) and some not (like Khalaji). This theory was invented in the end of 19th century in Kazan and then in Turkey it was formulated.I personally dont feel any threat from this idea but comparing it with Arab world is wrong. Arabs have a standard language ,They form a continuum of a same culture, While you can have same picture in Central Asia you cant find same picture in all of Turkic world.
Just remember that when leaders of these Turkic countries are assembled,they speak in Russian , and When Turkey delegate is present he has a translator.(Russian to Turkish)

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jul-2005 at 02:20

Erci :

This is my answer to murtaza but it will your response too.

First of all I am not speaking about politics in a Historical room, second I dont mind about turkeys politics ,Why it is important for me? I have never been in that country and dont have any relatives there and I dont think Ill ever go there, more ever I have no data about your country and I know internet and media could create a complete virtual reality that have no relationship to reality, So dont expect me to speak about Turkeys politics. Its simply none of my business and I dont make myself an Idiot to speak about a thing that have no data about it.
you didnt understand my hidden joke in the above sentence, so lets make it clear.
Europe and USA and each country (and even turkey in northern Iraq) use the famous motto Human right abuse as a pressure tool against other countries or state.
Human right abuse (I dont know it is correct or not) is used in the hand of Europeans as a tool to press Turkey or better said Humiliating it ,I meant that powerful state is not so  powerful in todays politcs of world.(like majority of other countries of world)



Edited by Hushyar
Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jul-2005 at 04:54

Hulagu:

although you are angry but I must confess that this is first time I wrote an offline response in this forum, so I think I must admire you that atleast you tried knock out me with sources not with your imagination.

you said:

Just a small note to cut the crap.  Hushyar, While Grousset is trembling in his grave, let me make some more citations
hope you will cut the crap and learn the truth, which hurts
I am really curious which Persian historian (I suppose namez Al Jalal Al Jabbar bin Qomani) claims Seljuks are Iranian and, Turks and Mongols are different
Look I am giving more voltage
Hushyar, we are proud of our conquering history. We can live with this fact.  And one of our conquests was the Iranian conquest and you should accept this fact. We do not consider ourselves superior, never get me wrong
Oh I am sorry, you were educated in a system which claims Seljuks are Iranian because they learned some Farsi words
And our dear friend Hushyar and his dreams are not even amusement, just ridiculous. Yes Seljuks are Iranian, yes yes...  All Seljuks, Safavids, Turks, Huns, Khitans are trembling in their graves, their herediatry is under violence.

I take the above statements with a grain of salt , you were angry and It is very clear.Calm down boy, I teach you about Islamic history and you teach me about central asian history.

I categorize your statements into two different secion:
1)Franks and germans:
you said:

And French are Frank. Read First Crusade of Thomas Asbridge, He never uses the term French, he says Frank. Germans and French were once the same. Lotharingian Dukes of Germans used same language with Western Frank Kingdom (French) and Norman English Kings Godefroy De Boullion, Baldwin De Boulogne.
Their language and culture of the Germanic world (Except nordic tribes) was all dominated by Latin influence. But later Luther and his revolution revived the German nation. ..Yes French are Frenk but highly influenced by Latin culture.

1)French is derived from the word of frank. Muslims until recent century called all westerners as Farangi or Farank .
2)Frank was a federation of Germanic people that was formed in 2nd century A.C. in Eastern Rein river.When they invaded Gaul and conquered it, they gave their name  to this land.And except Bonaparte family approximately all of the royal families of france were descendants of those Franks.
3)In the end of 10th century approximately all of the  Frank nobles adopted a dialect of Lain as their primary language.
4)Normans that invaded Britain used this special latin language (which we can call French) official language of England and it remained until in 14th century English language replaced French.
5)Only in France , Italy and spain Latin language remained dominient. In germany dialects of german language remained and they formed the the modern day of German language (as well as Skandinavia and northern of part of flander)
6)By Latin culture I dont know that you mean Catholism which were dominant in all of western Europe before Luther or languages that descendants are Latin that remained in France Ialy and Spain and never came in Germany.
7)thinking tht people of germany spoke Latin or highly influenced by latin just shows that you dont know anything from middle age (sorry but it is true)
8)And germany as Holy Roman empire existed (and apart from its name it was completely Germanic , ) Latin language until the end of 19th century was thaught in all  of Europe.
9) comparing Luther with Ataturk is realy meaningless .
10)Clovis and Charlemagne are considered as France Heritage not Britain not Germany.

Now second part: 2)Turks and Mongols:
I must admit that I have no knowledge in this specific field because It needs old Turkic and Chinese lanuage knowledge and referring to one or two history book does not solve any problem. Refer to Steppe and central Asian room.
You said:


And I assure you no Oghuz, like Mongols has a tribal relationship with Tu-c'hueh... We are different tribes but one nation. And it is true all of us are influenced by the Tu-c'hueh achievements. Qahan title for the greatest ruler, linguistics, etc... Yes since then we are all called Turk. Infact Chinese all called us Turk not looking if they were from Tu-c'hueh tribe or not...

Actually you are saying that in 6th century Chinese historian say about a big triabal empire in north and northwest of them and named them as Tu-cheh. (same GokTurk)
I told you that It was a big federation.Until the WW1 in Iran turks was used for Othman citizens wether they were Turk Kurd or Arab. (and we had so many turks in iran , but noody call them turks) so are Arabs descendant of the same Othmans that in 14th century fought with byzanthian in north western of anaotolia.


If Mongols are influenced by Chinese in the followong years and Turks influcenced by Iranians and Greeks, that does not delete our history and identity.

Again you repeat that meaningless quotes, mongols and Turks are different peoples, Ilkhanids were mongols but affected with iranina culture and Oighurs are Turk but affected with chinese culture.


Claiming Mongols and Turks as a kin (Lord Kinross, Ottoman Centuries, Introduction - Describing Turks) is not dreaming.

what is the word Kin in here?
1)If it means that they both had a similar culture and lived together  , it is true.
2)If it means that both language family may be related, well until now it is not proved.
3)If it means that they were one people and spoke one language (or its dialects) It is defenitely wrong.


These are the dominators:
1) Hsiung Nu of Turkic in our own era
2) Hsien Pi of Mongolian in 3rd century AD
3) Juan Juan of Mongols in the 5th century
4) Tu-c'hueh of Turkic in the 6th century
5) Uighur of Turkic in the 8th
6) Kirghiz of Turkic in the 9th
7) Khitan of Mongols in the 10th
8) Kerait or Naiman of Turkic in the 12th
and so on...

Except number 10 all of above are steppe empire that compsed of  federation of different tribes and ruled by one or some dominant tribe. (and surely majority of their people of these empires were same, they ruled over same people , just after a period one tribe replaced another tribe as ruler)


If the word Turkic is particularly for Tu-c'hueh (and it is in this quote, he thinks Gokturks and Huns were the same tribe, I mean the ruler tribe) and Khitan is Mongol, and they are because these are the first people used the name of Turk (Chinese gave this name to us, all of us), Hsiung Nu and their descendants Uighurs are not, like we Oghuz are not too. We are not Tu-chueh, they subjugated Oghuz but that does not mean we are from the same tribe, if there is a tribal discrimination. And Hunnics and Gokturks were ENEMIES, with a great blood vengeance. Khitans are number three. If we have to divide it to two, Gokturk, Hunnic rivalry beats. Anyway this is still good

The above paragraph is very important and it is why I say  you tremble body of grusset in tomb.
Again we analyze your quotes:

If the word Turkic is particularly for Tu-c'hueh

True and still is accepted that It was first Tu-chueh that used the term Turuk for themselves.(up until I know)


and it is in this quote, he thinks Gokturks and Huns were the same tribe, I mean the ruler tribe

This is your quote and reasoning and it is completely wrong. How did you find it?


and Khitan is Mongol

Up to what I know It is correct, (I dont anything about this complicate labyrinth of Tribes)


and they are because these are the first people used the name of Turk

You mean Tu-chueh I think


Chinese gave this name to us, all of us

Wrong. Chinese called a big steppe empire that was a collection of many tribal federation as was founded by Asina Tribe  by the name of Tu-chueh.
Iranians and then muslims that their first contact with Turkic tribe was through Gokturks called all tribes that had similar language or culture by the name of Turk.


Hsiung Nu and their descendants Uighurs are not, like we Oghuz are not too.

Uighurs and Oghuzes belonged to tribal confederation named Tie-Le,


We are not Tu-chueh, they subjugated Oghuz but that does not mean we are from the same tribe, if there is a tribal discrimination

Ok I said so.


And Hunnics and Gokturks were ENEMIES, with a great blood vengeance

No when Gokturk Empie was formed there were not any traces of Xiung Nu  and If you mean European Hun, I have doubt that gokTurks ave any knowledge of them.
If you mean RuanRuan they were differet from Xiung Nu (ofcourse ruling tribe)

Khitans are number three. If we have to divide it to two, Gokturk, Hunnic rivalry beats. Anyway this is still good

I realy didnt understand what did you mean by that sentence.


And also Keraits were the supreme ruler of Mongolia, not the Naimans. no need to that or... Keraits are directly Turkic by the way if Turkic is for Tu-c' hueh, descendants of Tu-c'hueh

It is just your speculation. After collapse of uighur empire in the middle of nineth century by the hands of Qirqiz tribes , Nobody  mentioned of Tu-cheh, If you have any Chinese source Ill be glad o see it. But Tu-cheh completely diminished.


they were not using interprators.

This is exactly the main reason that every body believes that kereits were Mongols. And consider that when Temuchin wanted to use Uighur script that Naiman used , He (or his shamans) found that this scrip is not suited to their language and they must do some changes in script to be suited for their own language. Well we know ughurs are turk so we can conclude that Naimans were not Mongols , but turk. (but many say that Naiamns were Mongols too , so may be I am wrong)

Tu'c-hueh were always esixting far before they formed their Qahanate

We are speaking after collapse of their empire.


They were subjugates of HUns later Hunnic tribe the Avars. They became independent and drove Avars to west.

Well another mistake. RuanRuan were not Xiung-Nu. They were not Avars , nowadays They are called  pseudo Avars to distinguish them from Avars. Gokturks drove RuanRuan  remnants to west.



Anyway, Chinese sources all consider us as Turks.

I said before that this is wrong. It was Iranian and Arabs that used term Turk for all of these tribe and It was clear that they have no deep knowledge about them.



Anyway, Grousset is one of the first, off course it is normal he has done many mistakes

No objection, I just want to show that you misunderstood him in some points.

And remember all of my quotes here can be wrong as well as you, because none of us have suficient knowledge about it.

 

 

 

 

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jul-2005 at 16:50

Wow!

I was on holiday for two weeks and now look at it! People begin sh*ttin' nonsense again, and it is out of control now. So there is a desperate need to be briefly enlightened...

First of all, Hushyar, Kara Koyunli, Selchuklu (Seljuks), Timurlu etc. They are my ancestors, not yours. I think neither you nor any other Iranians need to steal others historical heritage, so lets not get in nationalist discussions. Why dont you keep on your ancestors before claiming Turkic ancestry? Safavids are the ancestors of today's Turkic Azeris, not Iranians. Kara Koyunlu is Turkmens ancestors, including mine. And Seljuks are the cultural and ethnical ancestors of Anatolian Turk. Yes, we know what Timur did to Bayezid and his wife, but I like Timur and his achievements, he helped Anatolian Turkmen Begs against Ottoman pressure. Ottomans werent the only Turkic Empire of that time, and we werent Ottomans during the Battle of Ankara (1402), Ottomans conquered the rest of Anatolia after they invaded much of Balkans.

And Hulagu, we arent Mongols and Mongols arent Turkic. It would be like saying all IE people are Persians or French.

Back to Top
ramin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 16-Feb-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 921
  Quote ramin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jul-2005 at 17:21
finally some sense
"I won't laugh if a philosophy halves the moon"
Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Jul-2005 at 23:14


Originally posted by oguzoglu


I think neither you nor any other Iranians need to steal others historical heritage,

It is exactly vice versa you have confiscated  all of our history.


Why dont you keep on your ancestors before claiming Turkic ancestry

Who are our ancestors?


Safavids are the ancestors of today's Turkic Azeris, not Iranians

You mean Azeries that live in Iran are not Iranians!!!!
You mean a foreigner rules our county now!!!! Oh my Lord, I didnt Knew that.
Ok who are Iranians? Pashtuns in Afghanistan are Iranians but Azeries are foreigners , This is your logic? I think you again misinterpreted the meaning of Iranian.



Yes, we know what Timur did to Bayezid and his wife, but I like Timur and his achievements, he helped Anatolian Turkmen Begs against Ottoman pressure

Timur is not a defendable person, He was a sadistic killer and his political achievements was nil. After his death all of his political achievements were lost. And only pillage , massacres and ruined cities remained after him.I have discussed about it with Temujin a few pages earlier. You can refer to that.


we werent Ottomans during the Battle of Ankara (1402), Ottomans conquered the rest of Anatolia after they invaded much of Balkans
I ask a question , So Othmans are not considered as your heritage?


It would be like saying all IE people are Persians or French.

Actually not correct comparision , because Altaic classification is not proved yet.(but if it is proved you are right)

I answered your other claims before in my previous posts you can refer to them, for start read this:
Who is Persian? Who is Turk? Who is Kurd? Who is Spanish? At first we must define these terms. So you think in 1000 years ago there were some poor Persian speaking people  living in Iran (that spoke a Persian language like nowadays) and then some Blond Turks like (Istanbul people) came and conquered them. These Turks spoke modern Anatolian Turkish.(like you).they ruled Iran for 1000 years and Azeries are descendant of them. And those poor Persian are ancestors of nowadays Persians. of course every Turk believes that when we speak about Iran, It means Persian, and every other language in Iran is a Persian dialect, except Azeri which is Turkish dialect and Turcoman which is a dialect too and khalaj it is a dialect too and Its not important that except linguistic nobody could understand them khalaji is dialect because it must be, so it is how you see world. Very beautiful and simple but Im sorry there are some minor flaw in this picture that will ruin all of it.
 
1000 years ago when saljuqs (which numbers of warriors were something between 15000, 25000 warriors ,they were half of the ghaznavid army size.)entered Iran and Anatolia, in southern cenral north western and northern of Iran there were different languages (and they were not interchangeable with modern Persian).Modern Persian (Dari Persian) was prevalent in khorasan, northern of nowadays Afghanistan and Trnsxosania . Moqadasi said that in Sistan this language was spreading fast any way When Saljuqs conquered Iran and Anatolia and Iraq and Syria they spread Persian along with Turkish in all of these countries( Dont ask me why, but they did) for example you know that in Rumi saljuqid and Daneshmandian Courts Persian was official language and It was Karamanli state in 14th century that substituted Turkish instead of Persian as official court language. Go to your museums and check Historical letters and commands, poems ,
So spreading Persian and old Turkish to western Iran was simultaneous and both considered as foreign languages. Why Turkish was spreaded in some regions and why Persian in others , I dont know but I know that in 200 years ago condition was not like that and there was not such a regional classifications for these language.
So by these data you want to claim that 50-55 millions of people of Turkey and 18 millions of Azeri population in Iran and 7 million of republic of Azerbaijan and 1 to 1.5 million of northern Iraq and 2-3 million immigrants that live in Europe all and all are descendant of those 20000 wariors and their family???? Remainder of Iranian people are descendant of few old and clever khorasanian Vazirs that accompany saljuqs??!!!
Are you sure that your ancestors were not some fat and clever Anatolian peoples that spoke greek language in city and in Home spoke a forgotten Anatolian language , and then he by considering benefits of being muslim converted and married their children with other muslims and their subsequent generation all became turkified. Its not that poetic but it looks more real.
You have 2 parents 4 gand parents and maybe more than 1000 parents in your 10 th generations of your ancestors.(may be some redundant) they all lived between 200 o 300 years ago .Ok how many of them do you now? how many of them lived in Anatolia? Now  look at 600 years ago and then 900 years ago and then completely forgot racial purification . Another example is Qajar family they are known as Shazdeh (Shah zadeh) means prince . actually majority of them are rich and living in USA or Europe or Tehran or Isfahan. all of them are considered as Persian and actually majority of politicians of Pahalavi dynasty were from that family.
Nobody in Ian can claim that they have no relationship with saljuqs and no azeri could claim that he is descendant of saljuqs. We know many Persainized Azeri in Tehran.We knew many turkied Talish and Tat in Azerbaijan. In Bijar we have a Turkifed Kurdish tribe and Kurdified Turkish Tribe. At least one third of Tehran population may have some trace of azeri blood in their veins. In 15th century Tabriz main language was not Azeri.In the end of 16th cenury still all of names of  streets and places of Tabriz were Tati.
In Markai Isfahan Qazvin Kerman Fars province in 60 yearsa go there were many independent languages that all of them were assimilated in Persian. In zanjan from 400 years ago Azeri from a minority language became a prominent language and now its threatened by Persian language.


 

Back to Top
ramin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 16-Feb-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 921
  Quote ramin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Jul-2005 at 12:06
Originally posted by Hushyar

You mean Azeries that live in Iran are not Iranians!!!!.
doesn't matter hushyar. Do you want to end this childish discussion or not?
"I won't laugh if a philosophy halves the moon"
Back to Top
HulaguHan View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 26-Jan-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote HulaguHan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Jul-2005 at 22:39

Oguzoglu I do not say todays Mongols and Turks are the same. BTW, Altaic classification can not be finished because there is no way you can finish it. These tribes, except Tu'c-hueh did not write their history. We learn it from Chinese.

What we know is, Chinese did not care for that classification too, which is very normal.

But one thing is certain. I have never claimed that the ruler classes of Xiong Nu, Tu-c'hueh and Mongols and others coming from the same place. But what I say is, somehow in Tu-c'hueh era they were the same, and now claiming this is their history. It is like saying French (most was in that era Frank and Vizigoth) and Germans were once, one body in Carolienge days.

And if that is the case, like you said, Bulgarians were melted in the bossom of Slavs and they are no longer Turkic. Well today Mongols are not Turkic.

That classification will not finish, they did not write their culture. Off course I understand classification by a classification like done for Iranian people, looking at the linguistics, culture, tradition, etc... But if you want to consult Urgunge Onon, mojaority Non-Dawr Mongols were influenced by Orkhon Turks (probably mentioning the ruler dynasty of Tu-c'hueh). And it is precise, Blue (Turkic east) Mongolia which is the east was Turkic still if we consider Grousset. If you consult Ismail Aka who observes Timur, there is one nation, that' s it.

Both cultures, colors are same, language was almost the same. tribes, living isolated from each other sure have different dialects. I know Spartans had different dialcet than even Messenians no need to go to Athens (Paul Cartledge, the Spartan, mentioning Spartans had a Dorian Accent of Greek like Macedonians).

Huns are Turkic case:

Grousset says that, in the pages I told you. If you call everybody considered Turk, yes Huns are Turkic. But I think by Turk he means Tu-c'hueh. These are the things I tell you where he fails. And off course grousset fails on many issues, he does not need me to tremble his bones.

And I reply, there can be no classification (Even inside Kirghiz and Kazak and others in the history), infact by looking today, we can not manage it because Mongols are almost Chinifed and interestingly the nomadic culture only lives in Mongolia now. No self written history, no arts, no ancient language, nothing.

One half the Turkic world, because of the Iranian interaction speaks a language which is composed of Persian and Arabic words. The other half completely different uses Chinese words...

Original Turkic names and words are also used in Mongolian too, like kurultay, ulus, or Hulagu (), Cengiz, Kubilay, Timucin, and mainly Batur.

Well we have common in antiquity. In Mongolia many started to learn Turkish dialect of Turkey, in a news I read, because of all the central asians, we made our first linguistical revolution (getting rid of many foreign origined words.) So it is easy for them to get the ancient words.

That classification never finished I said to Hushyar, actually I said it because there is no way to finish it like they did to Iranians, Greeks, Arabs, etc... On the other hand, famous historians like Lord Kinross, Stanfor Shaw, at least strictly mentions Mongols and Turks (Lord Kinross mentions Ottoman Turks in his Ottoman Centuries) are kins.

Book of Kosztolynik, Hungary under the early arpads mentiones this issue, Mongols and Turks are just in the same tree neighboring to each other (he mentions western and central asian Turks). The other member was Tunguz people.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0880335033/qid =1120617189/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-8628750-55264 06?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

So famous historians in the beginning all classify us in the same sub branch like Franks and Goths and etc...

Either they are assumptions or truth, this is the fact how Turks are considered now. Like no German reclaims France and Frenks, we do not reclaim Mongols (No need to got Mongolia, we have Kazakhs who became Russianified).

BTW, I am not a pan-Turkic, TBH, I am against Pan-Turkism. I would feel much better to be a member of EU (which is another impossible option anyway...) or even forming an economical union with Iran. I do not visit racist websites, I like islamist websites more fun.

Advising Turkish people to use Arabic names, and especially not giving Turkik names like Hulagu, Cengiz, Timucin etc... BTW, they also do not advise the Persian name Cenk (is it Jeng in Farsi meaning battle?). they claim it was banned by prophet. Now there are 2 choices.

1) Arabs were using Farsi names in Muhammedan days, pre conquest (of Iran) era so that he can forbid it.

2) They are bullsh*tting.

Which one?

 

BTW: YIldirim and Timur had a relationship close to friendliness after the battle of Ankara. Timur was too old to rape women.

Timur was a deeply religious man who would never dare to rape women.

Timur was greatly astonished by the father of Bayezid I. He was calling him as son of Murat, since the beginning. No Oguzoglu, what you know is not right.

Lets leave everything back, including Emir Buhari' s accounts, Timur was way too old to have sex.



Edited by HulaguHan
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 05:26
I didnt say he raped Bayezid's wife, but what I know is he made Bayezid and his wife dance in front of the army...
Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 10:25

HulaguHan :
Because Oguzuglu was busy and because It seemed that you answered me except answering him , He sent me a letter (which I lost but Ill find it soon ) to answer you. Well both hope youll not be offended by that.


1)Franks were a german tribe and they spoke a Germanic languages , so they were kin to Goths, and all of the greek peoples you have mentioned had similar language. But you can not say that for turks and Mongols. Monglian and Turkic languages were not related to each other not 1000 years ago and not 2000 years ago they simply completely different language.
Because you again mixed many things together Ill try to explain it with some example:
Chavush can not be understand by other Turks even Bashkirs and Tatars who are their neighbors. But linguistics proved that except borrowed words all of the words of Chavush is related to Turkic languages It means that Chavush is kin to other Turkic languages although ordianary  people can not understand it.
Well nobody in the world could claim such things for Turks and Mongols and many have doubt that even these two languages be related to each other, but we can say that for recent 2000 years this two group of languages were completely uninterchangeable I mean they were completely different language group.


2)You said Mongols didnt have their ancient  language , History or culture. Its completely wrong well you yourself have Secret History this is their History. And Changiz Yasay has been written in Old Mogolian by Mongolian Script.


3)Western Linguistics have classified Tungustic people and Turkics and Mongolian people under a mega group and named it Altaic language. Some even considered Japanese and Korean and even Aino language in It. Nowadays many criticized this classification and in its best it is a hypothesis but I know you dont refer to that classification, you want to say in time of changiz Mongolian and Turkish were dialects of same language .It is wrong we have Mongolian texts in 800 years ago and it is completely a different and independent language from all of the Turkic languages of that time, while we know that in that time majority of turkic languages were interchangeable .

4)you made another meaningless claim that Turkic languages and Mongolian are the same languages but first is affected by Persian and Arabic and greek and the latter is affected by Chinese .well it is meangless. How many Turkic languages we have, What effect of Persian is on Tatar language, what was on tuva language what was on sakha language? They all are Turkic language and have no relationship not to Persian and not to Arabic and still the are Turkic. And Uighurs have been affected more than any other people by chines and still their language is Turkic.
Mongolian on the other hand is an idependent branch of language and it is not important how you knew well old Turkish , still you can not understand Mongolian.(just a few borrowed words)

you said:



Both cultures, colors are same, language was almost the same. tribes, living isolated from each other sure have different dialects

Langauge were different and culture does not prove anything because they all lived in same region.



Huns are Turkic case:
Grousset says that, in the pages I told you. If you call everybody considered Turk, yes Huns are Turkic. But I think by Turk he means Tu-c'hueh. These are the things I tell you where he fails. And off course grousset fails on many issues, he does not need me to tremble his bones

You completely misunderstood him. He had two different meaning from word Turk in his mind.
In majority of book He uses the word Turk in its common meaning for all of Turkic language speaking people and to distinguish them from other Altaic people like Mongols and Tungustics . So when he says that Huns were Turks he meant that ruling class of Xiung Nu  empire spoke a Turkic language.(and many think that it was related to modern chavush ofcurse some think)
In Tu-chueh part by saying that they are true Turk he wants to say that Tu-chueh people were first people to name themselves as Turk (or better said Turuk)
Now read book another time and see what does it look like?


 

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 10:28

Originally posted by HulaguHan


Timur was too old to rape women.

He was too old but his army soldiers were not

Originally posted by oguzoglu


but what I know is he made Bayezid and his wife dance in front of the army...

much more humilating

Mamluke king and golden Hord khagan and many others and even those clergy men that said Bayazid was Kafir condemned Timur act,nobody could humilate a king like that ,and they said that god will punish Timur heavily.Timur died 5 years later and could not achieve his dream to conquere china.
Bayazid one later died frome shame.Writer of Zafar nameh said that Desponia was christian and Kafir and was not legal wife of Bayzid so timur act was not bad at all.
I don't want to say that Bayazid was a saint, but just read the letter of Bayazid to "Jean Conte De Nevers" which was tranlated by Froissart and compare Timur with him.And Hulagu don't make a legend rom Timur he was a good commander actually a genius , but as a human .......

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 10:33

Originally posted by ramin

Originally posted by Hushyar

You mean Azeries that live in Iran are not Iranians!!!!.
doesn't matter hushyar. Do you want to end this childish discussion or not?

Come on Ramin ,thats a way of passing time for me until a new and serious discussion begins, I use here as an AE Tavern.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 19:03
Then there are better forums for you to introduce your ideas to us. I suggest you the Historical Amusement section, that is where your claims would truely fit...
Back to Top
HulaguHan View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 26-Jan-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote HulaguHan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 22:43

I know the dancing too.

I thought you were mentioning about the raping issues.

No I do not know if Timur's soldiers raped anyone, but I know one thing.

Bayezid was not less guilty than Timur.

For the classification dude, in any sources I have (the ones I posted), we are in the same branch, in the same classification, neighboring each other in sub trees.

Uighurs protected their culture because they hade some culture. Mongolians are just nomads dude... That is why we did not lose our identity.

Exactly, the Turkic tribes you mentioned had never an interaction with Persians and Arabs and they have a language which is away from Persian and Arabic.

But for example we have BUlgarians, HUngarians (Onogur Turks). NOw, are they Turkic? Do they speak something close to Turkish? No...

And like I mentioned before, Mongolia was mixed. The Mongol people were not living in the eastern parts, infact it was Turkics who were living in east.

In a mixed region, with no cultural background, no one can claim these are completely different.

And excuse me, how did they manage to analyze the ancient Turkic and Mongolian language?

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jul-2005 at 01:06

HulaguHan said:

I know the dancing too.

current game is more intresting. And dancing I prefer it with ladies, so sorry.

Bayezid was not less guilty than Timur

Avtually Bayezid was very relentless, but not comparable with Timur by any means, and one more fact, when you said that timur respected Bayezid , I thaught may be you are right , so I checked my sources , actually It was Bayezid that insulted Timur in his letters and told thim that after victory enslave Timur's wife and after victory in Anqreh , Timur had many respect for Bayeid , then Bayezid fleed and when was caught , this time timur put him in a steel cage with chain and ......when I make an error I will accept it.

But for example we have BUlgarians, HUngarians (Onogur Turks). NOw, are they Turkic? Do they speak something close to Turkish? No...

Bulgars are speaking Slavic language and they originally spoke a forgotten form of Turkic language that may be kin to Chavush.Hungarians are Ugric people and as you mentioned they got their name from an old turkic tribe (Onogur)(does it means ten arrows or something like that?)may be they are ruled by those people and learned from from them cattle breeding and nomadic life and to use horses,(their original way of their life was hunting and fishing) they later became so good that were used by Khazars and when khazar empire after Muslim invasion weakened they got their independence, why they came to europe? well Hungarian nationalist say that they were originally Huns (their name) and hey wanted to complete their fathers work.Other historian say that may be Pechengs(a turkish tribe confedrations) or Kumans or both invaded them and drove them to Modern Hungry that they perished remanants of Avars there.
But what about Mongolian? Mongolian is a independent language , it is no chinese it is not Turkish it is a complete independent group of languages.

Uighurs protected their culture because they hade some culture. Mongolians are just nomads dude...  That is why we did not lose our identity.

I told you that old Uighur and mongolian texts is present and they are not similar or even kin language.There is too many common words in two language but it could be because of bowrrowing because Turks had heavy influence on mongols.look at your language in 100 years ago (how many arabic words existed in your language , and turkish and Arabci are completely different langauges)

And excuse me, how did they manage to analyze the ancient Turkic and Mongolian language

because they had texts from ancient Turkick languages from 8th century and mongolian texts from 13 th centry.Then It is a process in linguistics that is called retro building (It is translation of persian terms , I don't know its english equivalent) in this process if you have two or more kin languages and know the morphological rules and sound changes of that language , with the help of Syntax and phonetics can rebuilt a language that is ancsetor of these languages.so except Chavush from all of the other Turkic languages you can rebuilt a mother language and this work had been done and result was a language that was very close to old Uighur, orkhon scripts of Gokturks and and Qirqiz Yeni sei inscriptions, by this method you can find how two language have started to diverge from each other (and became unundrestandable to native speakers) by this method it is found that chavush was seperated from other Turkic language more than 20 century ago and it is the date that western xiung Nues seperated from other Turkic people, It is why some thinks  that Chavush is langauge of Xiung-Nues and also after them Huns.By using this method it is known It is not possible fo find a common ancestors for all of altaic language, except a recorded text (some thing like Orkhun inscriptions) to be found in near future that dated back to more than 2000 years ago and this will make a revolution in Altaic linguistics, up that time no dreaming.

And like I mentioned before, Mongolia was mixed. The Mongol people were not living in the eastern parts, infact it was Turkics who were living in east.

We know that Mongolic speaking peoples came after the turkic people to Mongolia.Check sources because chinese names are realy confusing, But up to what I know ancsetors of Mongolic speaking peoples lived in Manchuria and eastern Mongolia while ancsetors of turkic people lived in central monglia and upper brenches of yeni Sei river, I am not sure, But I know that Mongolic people entered Mongolia after Turks,(ofcourse name mongol iself is new term and after changiz was used but this does not mean that Mongolic people did not exist exactly like term turk) 


 

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jul-2005 at 01:08
Originally posted by HulaguHan

In a mixed region, with no cultural background, no one can claim these are completely different.

Well i must confess that I can not refute this statement,....

Back to Top
Hushyar View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 16-Apr-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 301
  Quote Hushyar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jul-2005 at 01:16

Oguzoglu:

Don't Compare yourself that stuck up in a fictional world and your sources are comedians like PulaT KAYA with me ,I see History a science you see it as a children play that sometimes to look at it , could boast to it, blow your self like a baloon and then I am there with a needle in a my hand!!!!!!
I never say my dreams like you , I only speak with sources, give sources and let others to go and study.
and amusement yes because I repeat here a truth for 10 times and give source and then people like you came and again repeat their original words, if it is not a game so what is it?

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.