The Greatest Islamic Empire

Ummayad Empire

 

well mehmet ali pasha's army was egyptians under Turkish and Albanian generals. not that egyptians doesn't mean All arabs.

about memluks i know that they were from different races but majority was turkish ,but dont know really what was the official language of their empire?

was it turkish or arabic?

 

In fact his army a mix of Arab,Turk,Alban(Arnaoot).

In his earlier reign he was in the service of Sultan (Arabia campaign,Greek revolution and Sudanese campaign)after that he rebeled against Sultan because of a promise from Sultan to him to ,ake him governor of Syria but after the defeat at Navarino the Sultan refused and Mehmet marched toward Istanbol.

I guess you put him in difficult situation,In my opinion they were Ottoman people because they were under Ottoman rule and lived in Turkish land,Like you,You are not from Saudi Royal Family but you are Saudi Citizen.

Agree,If he will say not Turk the military achievments will go a way to the slave,balkanian Janissaires whom in fact no origion Turk.

 

Finally the voice of reason

I have no point here rather than cornering him in his own words..go back to previous posts.

Edited by �ok ge�

Sorry, this is out of topic, but how do you say your singature?

"Ku �sht� shpata, �sht� feja"

Is the �  pronounciation is different to the e? is the J here pronounced like "Ye" as in Serajivo?

Which Empire was "better"?

It seems Most getting their History lessons from Hollywood movies and "story" books.. Lets make a general comparison of Empires:

The one that is called "barbarian" Ottoman Empire, and "Civilized" western "Empires"..
Let's see these "barbarians!" ruled half of the world for 600 years , but not one Christian Country population have been forced to convert to Islam, yet The "civilized" nations invaded latin America, Africa, Asia, they all have been (nicely) converted to Christianity. I havent read any "exterminated" population under this "Barbarians", yet I have read the extermiantion of Indigenous people all over the world by "civilized" nations. No other Country, remaining 600 years under Turkish domination, speaks Turkish but their own language, yet wherever the "civilized" nations conquered , or dominated, they have spoken the language of conquerers ...Either English, Spanish, or French..
People from all religions lived peacefully together under this "Barbarian" empire.; Like Jews, Muslims & Christians in Middle east, especially in Phalestine, Similiarly in Bulgaria,and  North Africa.
"Civilized" results of  The "Civilized" empires'  exterminate, convert ,divide & conquer policy has been the bloodiest of all, still today.

They were some strange "barbarians"this Ottoman Empire I should say..
They kept all the Arab nations together for centuries with an "Arab pride", Then came the "Lawrence of Arabia" era, and divided and conquered ..any pride?, Then came the John Negroponte era first  latin America and then Iraq,soon Lebnan, Syria (rest already inthe hands),,divide and conquer...any pride?
People who do not study and draw lessons from history, will be facing the same consequences of past history...A self deceptive pride...

Originally posted by Asena This is an example of how  much you know about history..Turkish is not a language boundry it is an ethnic boundry..Turks spoke Turkish 7000 years ago, still speak Turkish with inevitable variations and influences. Language they speak mostly taken the name of the tribes later nations/minorities (like Uygurs in western China), like Azeri, Kirgiz,....

So now I don't know about history? . Im afraid that me -the ignorant- will correct your turkish information

First, you cannot say they spoke Turkish. In English language, Turkish is the language of Turkey only and other languages are called Turkic to distinguish them.

And yeah! Turkish is a language boundary if you like it or not, because if Turkish is the language of Turkey, and Turkey has no one uniformed race, then it is a clear language connection and not ethnic. Com'on! what is the similarities between Mehmet of Istanbul and Mehmet of Uyghur in their face look? Anyhow, I know you will repeat to me the same argument "but some Uyghurs are blonde..bla bla" Yeah Yeah, they are called mixed Uyghur.

Whatever, let me just save my time and your time, Just go read that all in Wikipedia. Thanks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks

Edited by �ok ge�

Originally posted by Mortaza But you cannot call ottomans as albanian, or arabic empire. do you? memluks were same, we call It as a turkic empire, because their ruler was Turks. We know who is their people.

Who are you talking to? No one here called Ottomans as Albanian. Go back to previous posts. The analysis is simple. Choose what is the turkish tie between you from Turkey and an Uyghur in East China, Ethnic? Language? or both? After you answer we will see what is the topic even.

Originally posted by Mortaza Langauge has not much job at here. Langauge was changing in time, so should we call ottomans a little ethnic than Turkey turks, because of arabic or persian words?.

Wasn't my point. My point was clear already as yourself used it correctly. Say Turkish language for turkey, but say Turkic for other turkic languages. Don't confuse the termonology. That is all. Do I have to teach you my Turkish friend what you call your language correctly in English?

Originally posted by Mortaza Mehmet of Istanbul and Mehmet of Uyghur in their face look? Well you can find a lot different Mehmet in Turkey too, point?

Really? there is Mehmet too in Istanbul? . I know dude. The question was even cut from its half, but anyhow, read the sentance again. It says "in their face look".  Sorry, wasn't my theory that what ties a Turkish person from Istanbul with a Turkic person in Uyghur land is only the language. Not the ethnicity.

Afterall, think about it. It will be almost like saying the Portuguese race!!, There is no Portuguese race, there is Europeans in Portugal, and a mix of European, Mestizo, Africans, American Indians...etc in Brazil. Portuguese is a language bound not an ethnic one.

     VS 

Damn! Look up there. they must be of the same ethnicity .  That is an Uyghur and that is Mehmet II. If you don't agree that they are of different race, talk to the Turkish Royal Academy of the government in London under the people section to change that too on their website: http://www.turks.org.uk/index.php 

Edited by �ok ge�