Don't worry, I am extremely aware of the current ethnic composition of Turkey and how it got there, trust me :)) On the other hand, what is important is choice and not nature, ethnicities and cultures are dynamic.. Race is also a different issue.. Which means that Turks of the 8th century are Turks of the 8th century and Turks of Turkey are the Turks of the 21st century, meaning that it is a group of people that live there and call themselves as such, there is no rule in stone that says a nation has to keep the religion it had 1400 years ago to be called as such, just coz Turks were pagans than and that they became Muslims later doesn't make them any less Turkish. The same for culture, it evolves and it is not for us to judge if someone is what he says he is by looking at how his great-great-great-great-grandfather danced at the local village festival.. As for Persian culture being the standard of Islamic culture, there I will have to disagree.. Blue Mosque in Istanbul was clearly influenced by Byzantine architecture and all the rest of Ottoman architecture was clearly influenced by Byzantine and Roman elements, much more than Persian.. The millet system of the Ottoman Empire had many similarities with the ethnic system of the Roman Empire.. And Ottoman culture was the standard-bearer for Islamic culture for 500 years, so I fail to see the connection with the Persian culture being the standard of Islamic culture.. Which brings me to the reason why originally put up my post, I am aware of all that you have said, I didn't jump here from a posting that I saw on MySpace.. What I object to is this constant inter-changing of the terms Iranian and Persian.. I wiff a sense of pan-iranism here and a leaning to apply these historical research to current day political problems and issues, such as the Azeris.. Azeris are Iranians who speak Turkish?? ha ha.. No political undertone there, right?? Come on, we are not kids here.. If you had said Azeris are Persians (peoples of the Persian Empire) who speak Turkish, that might be a different thing.. Why don't put it that way? Iranians are not Persians (without the name game, see above my reply to khosrov as well) You see what I mean? :)) Baristarim 04:58, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't u rename the article Greater Iran to Greater Persia?? That's how it is commonly known anyways, that name is just a

POV fork coz it implies something that doesn't exist: that Iran is the same thing as Persia.. That's way too clear.. I wasn't aware until a couple of hours ago how much pan-iranism was going on around here... I will take a closer look at this in the future.. Baristarim 05:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

You dont seem to know that for all of the Ottoman Empires history, the culture was Iranian. The cultural language of the empire was Persian. Islamic culture, from the begining of the Arab invasions of Iran, was founded on top of Persian culture. By the time the Abbasid Caliphate came around, it was more Persian than it was Arab. The Mughals, the Ghaznavids, the Seljuks, the Ottomans, the Abbasids, etc... All adopted Iranian culture and the Persian language for a reason. Why? The same reason the Romans adopted Greek culture, because they believed it was superior to their own. It even happens today. Why do so many non-Western people adopt Western traditions and culture? Becuase they prefer it. Its not for you to decide who the Seljuks identified with, its history's job, and no matter how much historical revisionism you try to use to spin things around, it wont work, because there is such a thing as the scholarly community that isnt so easily fooled.Khosrow II 05:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, talk with some more respect.. You don't know me, so don't pass judgements like that.. If you want, you can take a look at my user page and see if I am one of those people who think that Turks were in Anatolia for 5000 years', that's a lie and everyone in Turkey knows that Turks have come from Central Asia, I have never seen a Turk who seriously believes that - maybe it is you who should get his head straight.. I am an international lawyer and travelled the world much more than you have and most probably read much more than you have about history.. I am a communist as well.. I am perfectly aware of how Ottoman history unfolded.. Ottoman Empire was much more influenced by the Byzantine and Roman culture than the Persian, you cannot fool the scholarly community, either.. A look at Ottoman architecture can easily tell you that, alright buddy (there are tons of sources for this)? Except for Islam, the whole Ottoman culture after 1452 was derived from the Byzantine and Roman culture.. Your efforts to lay claim to the whole culture of the Middle East, Turkish culture through the Ottoman Empire is nothing but pan-iranism, scholarly community, whatever, ahmedinajad community more like.. What you don't see however, is Tajik's claims that nomadic Turcoman "Beyliqs". Countless clans of mostly nomadic Oghuz Turks fought each other for land and power. They were not familiar with the court-life of the Seljuq "Darbār", they were not familiar with the "civilized" Persian court language or with Arabic literature. That's why they promoted their own "house languages" - the Oghuz Turkish dialects - and their subjects were politically forced to learn those languages in order to communicate with the new rulers. At the end of the great war, only the Ottoman "Beyliqs" were left - and soon, they realized that they had to adopted the Persian court-life of the previous rulers in oder to organize their kingdom. Since the Ottomans came to power as a nomadic clan, they had not been influenced by Arabs or Persians that much..

Yeah, whatever, this is coming from someone who put a proud to be Iranian tag in his user page.. No pan-iranism there, right?? :))))))))) It's you who should get his ideas checked, I am not the one who is a nationalist, trust me... Ottomans were not Iranian, nor their culture was so, it was much more Byzantine.. Their language got mixed with Persian because of religion, otherwise there were no similarities, go to Turkey one of these days and have a look.. Mosques of Istanbul resemble Byzantine churches, not Tehranian mosques.. It was superior to their own - yeah whatever, and what does that do to you? You think that it makes you any superior? It doesn't make Iran any superior either, Mr. Ahmed is still busy making nukes in his garage.. And Ottomans, just like the Romans, adopted one culture as basis and later improved it by themselves by also mixing it with other cultures, which makes Ottoman culture NOT Iranian, and in fact superior (similar maybe originally, but not the same - if origins were at stake, I can also say that Iranians are Babylonians), and today's Iran has nothing to do with the Persia of yore, no matter what you say.. What is even funny actually, is the fact that it is worse :)) It actually went backwards.. Put that in context.. Baristarim 05:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you one of those people who think that Kurds are originally Iranian? What a joke... Baristarim 06:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk about historical revisionism.. All of this is condecending Pan-iranism that pretends that somehow Persians were/are superior to others.. It is accepted by everyone that Seljuqs were Turkish so were the Ottomans, the influences they might have had on their cultures are different, Seljuqs were influenced by the Persian culture and the Ottomans by the Byzantine culture - but they were not assimilated - it is not even comparable to the English royals, the fact that Turkey exists today shows that, at the end of the day, they were not assimilated, how about that for the scholarly community?.. Where does this pan-iranist nationalist rhetoric come from???? Language of the Ottoman Empire was Turkish, and in the court Ottoman, a mix of Turkish-Persian-Greek-and later French was used.. Baristarim 06:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mughals

or India and Central Asia.

The Ottoman Empire began as a powerful empire in the 14th century - more than 800 years after the beginning of Islam - and it was based on previous Islamic dynasties. Before the take over of Anatolia and eventually the growing influence of former Christian lands, the entire Islamic culture was based on the old

Goharshad, and Taj Mahal

had nothing to do with Ottomans.

Your writings even contradict the opinion of leading Turkish scholars. Let me quote O. Özgündenli (in

Encyclopaedia Iranica, "Persian Manuscripts in Ottoman and Modern Turkish Libraries", [6]

):

The Encyclopaedia Iranica goes on explaining ([7]):

What you are doing here is contradicting and rejecting major sources.

The Seljuqs were not Turcoman Beyliqs ... the Turkish language developed because of those Beyliqs, NOT because of the Seljuqs. The way of prnouncing certain words, the large amount of loand words, as well as typical Non-Turkic intonations of old Turkish words are a clear proof for the Non-Turkic origin of the modern Turkish population and proves the "language replacement" that took place after the fall of the Seljuqs. The "final blow" to the Non-Turkic-speaking population was Atatürk's language reform that was forced on everyone in Turkey. Except for a few powerful resistances (such as the Kurds and a few other), all other Non-Turkic-speaking communities of Anatolia have vanished - NOT because of the Seljuqs, but because of the post-Seljuq era and Atatürk's extreme reforms and Turkish nationalism.

As for "Persian" and "Iranian" ... well, I've tried to explain ... but obviously you did not get it ... *sigh*

Tājik 09:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for this claim that is floating around kinda like some sort of Domocles' sword about who spoke Turkish where and when in Anatolia: That argument is not being able to consider things in context and give them appropriate meanings, until last century many people in France didn't speak French, they spoke Norman, Breton, Provençal etc.. They speak French today because of a process called nation-state, there can be many claims as to how this happened in Turkey and late Ottoman Empire, but to say that they are not Turkish (in the modern sense) just because they were not Turkic (ethnically from Central Asia) is also adding new meanings and twisting the old ones of certain political and ideological movements that happened in Europe after the French Rev. The same processes also happenned in Italy, until the last century, there were approx 20 languages spoken in Italy and today they have all been wiped by the same process.. Read some political sciences and political history before you gang up on Turkey as if it were the big daddy of nationalism in Europe.. Such nationalism was common in Europe at the time in every single country, please put things in context and avoid anachronisms.. Ataturk's extreme reforms?? loooool. I lived in Saudi Arabia for years and seen all the Middle East, I am used to this Ataturk-bashing.. Well, compared to Iran, I would say that Turkey is in a better situation at the moment... At least Turkey doesn't chop people's hands for stealing or sells heroin to make balance its economy.. You catch my drift??

Well you want a source?? This is not Encyclopaedia Iranica but Encyclopaedia Brittanica, a bit better, u know, just a bit :)) :

[8]

• Nizam al-Mulk - Persian vizier of the Turkish Seljuq dynasty sultans.
• Seljuq dynasty - (c. 11th-13th centuries) Muslim Turkmen dynasty that ruled Persia, Iraq, Syria, and Anatolia.
• Manzikert, Battle of - (1071) Battle near the town of Manzikert (present-day Malazgirt, Turk.), in which the Seljuq Turks (see Seljuq dynasty) under Sultan Alp-Arslan defeated the Byzantines under Romanus IV Diogenes.

• More on "Alp-Arslan" from the 32 Volume Encyclopædia Britannica:
• Alp-Arslan - second sultan of the Seljuq Turks (1063-72), who inherited the Seljuq territories of Khorasan and western Iran and went on to conquer Georgia, Armenia, and much of Asia Minor (won from the Byzantines).
• Nizam al-Mulk - Nizam al-Mulk was the son of a revenue official for the Ghaznavid dynasty. Through his father's position, he was born into the literate, cultured milieu of the Persian administrative class. In the years of confusion following the initial Seljuq Turk expansion, his father fled, eventually to Ghazna (now in Afghanistan), where Nizam al-Mulk, too, in due course entered Ghaznavid service.
• Manzikert, Battle of - (1071), battle in which the Byzantines under the emperor Romanus IV Diogenes were defeated by the Seljuq Turks led by the sultan Alp-Arslan. It was followed by Seljuq conquest of most of Anatolia.

I was asked to check into this via e-mail and therefore I am going to be keeping an eye in these articles for a moment, pan-iranist has to stop. Period.. Baristarim 12:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AS FOR PERSIAN AND IRANIAN, you didn't need to explain me the difference, I already knew, and more then you did I am afraid, you are not talking to a fifth-grader here.. In English, and in MANY languages, as well as in political sciences and history, Iran and Iranian refers to the nation-state after the Shah in the 50s (when he decided to impose the name Iran to the world), that is the turning point, everything before that is considered Persia and Persian (NOT persian empire btw, that is the empire that was ended by Alex the Great).. Iran or Iranians cannot impose on the English language, Iran refers to a recent period of greater Persian culture, before Iran is Persia proper.. (anology: Constantinople is the city before its renaming in the 20s, after that is Istanbul, even though the name Istanbul was used on and off for centuries by Ottomans to refer to the city) So please don't lecture others on what it means to be Greater Iranian, Smaller Iranian, Greater Persian, Smaller Persian or whatever.. That is historical revisionism, there is no such thing as Greater Iran, and there will never be, there was Greater Persia and Greater Persian culture, but Iran refers to the state after the 50s Baristarim 12:13, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your basic argument is that they became so civilized and mannered that they can no longer be considered Turkish, well that's a bit fascist thing to say: r u trying to say that when Turks became civilized they lost their Turkishness coz being civilized was against the nature of being a Turk?? Cultures change and people can improve, they can stay still who they are.. Baristarim 12:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comparison of Turkey and Iran is totally meaningless to this discussion, because it has nothing to do with the Seljuqs. Besides that, you are comparing a nation that is doing everything to be accepted in the EU (and which is enjoying financial support from Europe and America) with a nation that is being plagued by international sanctions, as well as the late consequences of a bloddy war with Saddam Hussein. Keeping in mind that Iran had to fight a bloody war, that Iran has to withstand countless international sanctions, that many intellectuals have left Iran, and that Iran has the highest percentage of foreign refugees (from Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkmenistan, Kuweit, etc), I do not think that Iran is that much worse than Turkey. I would rather say that Turkey is pretty lucky that right now, Iran does not have the capability to expand its economic and political influence. If Iran had the same possibilities as Turkey right now, then - no question - the Iranians would be way ahead of Turkey.

As for your source: yes, the Britannica is a good source, but it is in NO MEANS as good as the

Richard Nelson Frye, just to name a few. However claims that "Britannica is better than Iranica" only proves that he has absolutely NO knowledge of what he is talking about. The Encyclopaedia Iranica is the collection par exellence of authoritative sources - whoever rejects this fact is nothing but an amateur. And, by the way, here is a quote from Britannica ([9]

):

As for "Persian" and "Iranian" ... Oh boy ... you have no clue! Iran is the REAL historical name of the land and it's people. It's a name that is shared by all Iranian peoples (or Aryan, as some still say). It'S the word that is used in the Shahnameh.

Tājik 13:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim Baristam, that the Ottoman Empire was more Byzantine (Greek) and Roman in culture than Iranian is ridiculous. This is the type of things they teach in Turkey because they want to be Western and make it into the EU. Tell me, if the Ottomans were more Greek and Roman in culture, then why was the cultural language of the empire, from the begining to its end, Persian? Why do Turks today still revere some of the greatest Persian poets of all time, like Rumi? Why was 40% of the Turkish language made up of Persian and Arabic words? Why do you have to know Persian in order to read ancient Ottoman cultural texts (for example the poems written by Ottoman sultans)? Why do you have to learn Persian to even be able to understand the Ottoman Turkish language? Tell me, if the Ottoman Empire was so Greek and Roman in culture...

Further more, is that what the Turkish education system has taught you in Turkey? That Iran is not what the west calls Persia and that the Persian Empire ended with Alexander?

• Iran has always been Iran to Iranians. While the west called it Persia, we called it Iran. Furthermore, the decree you are talking about that officially changed Iran's name back to Iran, instead of Persia, in the west, changed the Western name of Iran, to Iran from Persia. Later, that decree was changed so that it allowed both the usage of Iran and Persia as the official name of the nation.

• And the Iranian Empire ended with Alexander? Then who were the Parthians and Sassanids, Turks?

Khosrow II 13:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tajik, as far as I'm concerned, we need not debate them unless they can refute our evidence. If they start an edit war, we can just report them. If you cannot refute the evidence brought up by us, then you have no argument for a change of the article.Khosrow II 14:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah whatever.. Report whoever you want for whatever you want.. Go to a law and political sciences faculty to learn why Persia and Iran would not refer to the same thing.. It is not only me, but many academicians who refer to the Persian Empire per se as the Empire that ended with the conquest of Alex the Great, pls stop trying to pretend that Iran was the source of all the world's cultures, and maybe even Mars's culture who knows? As for Aryans, yeah whatever, there have been many people who have criticized the usage of that word in modern English language, you can use the word Aryan in Iranian, but in English it has a different meaning and has long been replaced by the word Caucasian, Iranians don't have a right to impose on the English language.. Iran has been Iran to Iranians, but it has not been so for non-Iranians. Is that clear?? You can call it Jupiter if you want.. That decree is very important in the eyes of the world and law, see Bombay/Mumbai et al.. Ok? I have not grown up in Turkey, so stop engaging in ad hominim attacks is that what the Turkish schools have thought you?, if you saw my diploma roll you would flip coz you will never have one that can parallel it, FYI, take a look at my user page.. That's the standard info you get in any Western school, bi1 compris? est-ce t'va le boucher? Even if I went to school in Turkey, I have the impression that it would be better than Iranian universities where they give regular speeches aboutjihad.. Pan-iranism is a disease, is that what they thought you at school in Persia, that Persia was the center of the universe?? As for the difference between Turkey and Iran, yeah whatever :))) I just said that because Tajik said Ataturk's reforms blah blah.. Turkey doesn't enjoy anything from the EU, it has also suffered a war with the PKK.. The ONLY difference is that Turkey doesn't try to build nukes in its garages or hang people by cranes in public stadiums in front of 10000 people. Iran's destiny is Iran's doing, not other people's fault.. Turkey's destiny is Turkey's doing, not other people's fault.. I definitely sense a wiff of caressing the wounds of Iran to compensate for the trauma of the last twenty years.. Period.. Baristarim 15:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making things so much more easier for us incase we do need to report you.Khosrow II 16:07, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

is that what the Turkish education system has taught you in Turkey? or This is not Turkey, where every intellectual is put into prison because of "insulting the Turkish nation", yeah whatever, I have only replied to things you an Tajik have said, in exactly the same way.. There is no evidence that I have been disruptive, if I add something to the article, I will never remove something sourced.. So there you go.. Baristarim 17:14, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last I checked, there is actually a law in Turkey that against "insulting Turkishness" and intellectuals have been persectued, the latest case being a woman who wrote a fiction book that was considered insulting to Turkish identity. And by the way, the Turkish education is really faulty, its as much full of historical revisionism and Irans education is based around religion.Khosrow II 17:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really can believe that. I just don't know for certain if their practice of whitewashing past atrocities has reached the extent it has in Japan. --Tzekai 17:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Every country's education system encompasses propaganda, when I lived in Saudi Arabia half the residents always tried to prove to me that they were the descendants of the so-called prophet muhammed :)))))))).. I have also seen with my own eyes people who had their hands chopped off for stealing over there. So there you go.. As for what you have mentioned about insulting Turkishness and that women writer that got persecuted - well stop using half-lies and follow global politics better.. It was a group of ultra-nationalist lwayers that complained and she was relaxed and charges annulled by the first court of instance during its first sitting. Clear?? And just a couple of weeks ago I also saw a video of a public murder (hanging) by a crane in front of 10000 people in a stadium in Iran.. There is a saying in German: people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.. You know, just in case.. :))) Baristarim 17:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about the case of the "Tehran desert vampire"? In his case, I think medieval style public executions are the only way to get the message across. Where I live, he would probably be sentenced to life in prison, and then ten years later be released on parole. Kind of gives the wrong message on how seriously each state takes such crimes. --Tzekai 18:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between historical revisionism being taught in schools, and a nationalistic spin on history being taught in schools. Turkey's is both nationalist and historical revisionist. Also, Thank God that Turkey wants to get into the EU, or all these poor intellectuals would probably be in prison. Me personally am neutral on the death penatly issue, I dont like to take sides because I believe sometimes its necessary. Anyway, stop changing the subject.

There is a great quote by Hafez Shirazi, which applies here very well: Do not consider the intestinal conflicts of sects: For, not having found the truth, they went to the invention.... Please, I urge you guys to find the truth, i.e the enormous amount of facts posted by me and Tajik. Do not resort to the invention (i.e historical revisionism).Khosrow II 18:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of EU opinion on the basic instincts of the Turkish authorities, check this out. --Tzekai 18:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He was later relaxed, is that that hard to understand?? Yeah whatever, people who support the death penalty shouldnt even talk; as u said, if a country is so incapable of governing and educating its people that it needs to hang people in front of ten thousand people with a crane, than there is something wrong with that country, you see what I mean? lool. Unlike u zekai, I have seen the hells of the middle east, there is a reason why people snap and start being vampires and stuff over there.. I would do too if I lived there!! U dont know the Turkish education system, so refrain from talking, it's only hearsay that u know; in any case I only went to kindergarten and three grades in Turkey!! In Charles Wright Academy [10], a selective private school in Seattle that I attended, it was also mentioned as Seljuq Turks.. Is that historical revisionism too?? :)) Whatever man, at least I would not get my hand chopped off in Turkey for some reason.. The funny thing is, Turkey is actually getting better.. What is important is never where u are, but where u r going.. Iran is actually going backwards.. So, put that in context.. :)) Baristarim 03:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect