Europe remained christian because of them!

its from /int/ my friend

Avarage white man with Turks

Qizilbash were also Turks

KARA BOĞA takes life
KARA BOĞA gives life

KARA BOĞA is a merciful god.

Bosnia is unique, before the Ottoman rule they belonged to a heretic sect of Christianity without any strong sense of hierarchy.

More like a Protestant shithole, but okay.

>Ottoman Persian Wars
-From the 10th to the 20.th century Iran was ruled by NON-Persian dynasties. The Safavids were one of those.
>Persian Shahs
-Those Shahs were not Persian.

How the fuck is this so hard to understand?

And >Persian Empire

Are you kidding me? They called themself Devlet-i Safaviyye

They connected themselves and used the poets of kings to connect Azerbaijan to Persia. Before the Turks invaded Azerbaijan it was a majority Persian speaking place. They themselves called themselves Persian. That is also not the point. Gyzibashis completely integrated into the Persian culture. The people who belong to the Qajar and Afshar tribe cant even speak Turkish anymore.

That is why I used ottoman and not Turk.

How do Iranians view Nader Shah nowadays? As a great hero or a crypto-Sunni infidel?

The only Statue the Ayatollahs did not destroy was Nader Shah's statue. The statue of all other Iranian shahs was destroyed after the revolution. He was certainly unsure about Shia Islam at best. But he did not pray and drank heavily. He is extremely loved in Khorasan. The ayatollahs secretly hate him, but if they say anything negative against him the Khorasan region of Iran will revolt.

It can be argued that Ismail was not Persian, although he was definitely Iranian, but people like Shah Abbas were definitely more Persian than anything else through generations of inter-ethnic marriages.

Also

> >Persian Empire

lol buttmad Turk

>If the Ottomans had managed to invade central Europe with full force
>1529
>if

Battle of Chaldiran in 1514 was one of the deadliest battles in human history. You are telling me they wasting the majority of their best-trained troops on conquering Iran did not help the Austrians in 1529.

Iranian is not Persian, and Persian is not İranian. Those ore two different things. First, are we talking about linguistic groups? Or citizens of İran?

The Safavid, Qajar, and Afshar dynasties, were like the Kara Koyunlu, Ak Koyunlu, Timurid, and Seljuqs, are nother Turkic, foreign dynasty who took control over todays İran. At this time İran, and Persians were called 'Acem'. This term is still used by Turks for Persians. Kurds were called Ekrad.

The Safavid, Qajar, and Afshar dynasties spoke Oghuz Turkic at their courts, while Persian was the state language, and Arabıc the relıgıous tongue. They did not call their country 'İran', or Persia, and they did not refer to themself as Persians, or İranian. The term 'İranian' was used in the 20th century, before that the Persians were called Fars, Acem, the Azerbaijani were called Tatar or Turk, the Kurds were called Ekrad, and the Arabs were called Arabs.

>Southeastern Europe
It was basically Christian Slavs, Greeks, Vlachs and Albanians against Muslim Slavs, Greeks, Vlachs and Albanians with Ottoman banners.

'Azerbaijan it was a majority Persian speaking place.'

The natives of Azerbaijan were called Albanians. (They had nothing to do with the Albanians of the Balkans) They spoke a non İndo-İranian Caucasian tongue. Azerbaijan was invaded by İranic speaking people (not Persians) in 10th century BC. Today the İranian speaking mıniroties are Tats, Kurds, and Talish. They speak all İranic languages, which a Persian can hardly understand, and make 5% of the population. Turkic tribes settled their since the 8.century ad.

>Gyzibashis completely integrated into the Persian culture

The Qızılbaş, were a military religious order. Those order was founded in Anatolia, and were created by seven Oghuz tribes called Afshar, Rumlu, Şamlu, Bayat, Dulkadır, Karamanlı, Hasanlu. They migrated to Azerbaijan and later to Acem (Fars). Their order was banned under Shah Abbas. Shah Abbas used Gulams, are army of Georgians, Circassian and Armenian slaves. Those were settled in the Azerbaijan province of todays İran. They were not a nation (What I mean ıs that theır numbers were not big)

>Qajar and Afshar tribe cant even speak Turkish anymore.
First : The Kaçer, and Afşars live in today Macedonia, Bulgaria, Turkey, Azerbaijan, İran, Afghanistan, and İndia. The Afshars and Kaçer of Afghanistan and İndia are assimilated, the Afshars and Kaçer of İran can mostly speak their dialect, or simple Azerbaijani Turkic.
Second : According to your logic the African Americans of the USA should be seen as Anglo Saxons.

>It can be argued that Ismail was not Persian

His grand grandfather was called "Pir-i Turk", or "The Turkish son". His grandfather claimed to be a Seyyid (Descandent of the prophet Muhammed), and married a Turkmen-Rum princess from the House of the Ak Koyunlu Turkmens, and his father married also a Turkmen-Rum princess of the Ak Koyunlu. The Ak Koyunlu Turkmen lord "Uzun Hasan" was his grandfather from his motherside. His mothertongue was Oghuz Turkic, he grew up under Turkmens, he learned Persian, and Arabic as he was a child, he spoke Turkic as his court. There is no discussion needed.

>Shah Abbas were definitely more Persian than anything else

How? What makes someone Persian? He had no Persian origin, Persian was not his mothertongue, and he did not seem himself as a Persian. Why is this to hard to understand? I dont understand Persian nationalist.

Actually not. The main part of the Ottoman army came from the eastern provinces (Anatolia, and so on), and were halftime farmers. The Yeniceris made up 10% of the army and were used as guards of the Sultan. Foreign mercenaries were common, but I doubt that their numbers were big.

Persian nationalism took over Iran with Reza Shah in the 20th century. With him Iran got "Persian again", and every non Persian was declared one. The Seljuqs were Turko-Persian, the Safavids were Persians, and all other foreign dynasties. They even declared all other non Persian iranic people to Persians like the Sogdians. (Atatürk did the same in Turkey. The Hittites, Hattis, Luwians and even the Trojans were declared ancestors of the Turks, and Turks themself.) With Mohammad-Reza Shah, Persia (Acemistan) turned in to iran, the land of the Aryans (although the population of todays Iran are just non Indo European natives who speak a Indo European language.)

You will find no Safavid, Afshar, or Qajar sources were they describe themself as Persian/Acem, or "Iranian", or describe their kingdom as "Persia", or "Iran/Acemistan"

>provides no sources
>lashes out on persian "nationalists" for asserting their heritage

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Intermezzo

Hello Mehmet. You're blatantly lying by saying those Iranian dynasties weren't Iranian or Persian. All the actuall Turkish dynasties numbered in the few and were weak and inaffectual and nothing more than a footnote. While Persians didn't always make up the ruling class or king the people who did rule were heavily Persianized (essentially Persianized Iranians like Azeris and Afghans). The Shah only made Iran "Persian again" insofar as making Persians dominate in the monarchy again after the last Turkic rule (who of course were Persianized). Culturally Iran as always been Iran.

Fuck you.

That's all great, but we know from his genealogical record that Shah Ismail was more Iranian (Kurdish exactly) than anything else.

>He had no Persian origin,

His mom was Persian. He definitely grew up speaking Persian.

>You will find no Safavid, Afshar, or Qajar sources were they describe themself as Persian/Acem, or "Iranian"

This is bullshit.
>Even Ottoman sultans, when addressing the Āq Quyunlu and Safavid kings, used such titles as the “king of Iranian lands” or the “sultan of the lands of Iran” or “the king of kings of Iran, the lord of the Persians” or the “holders of the glory of Jamšid and the vision of Faridun and the wisdom of Dārā.” They addressed Shah Esmaʿil as: “the king of Persian lands and the heir to Jamšid and Kay-ḵosrow” (Navāʾi, pp. 578, 700-702, 707).

I mean ffs Shah Ismail claimed descent from Yazdgerd III lol.

>Turks
nigga those are greeks, I cant even imagine what turks look like

Is my English so bad, or did you just not understand what I wrote? I argued that those dynasties were neither Iranic, or Persians, because they spoke Turkic as a mothertongue, and had Turkic origins. Further I argued, that Persians are Iranic because they speak a iranic language, but not all Iranic nations are Persians, or speak the Persian dialect, and that Persians make a small part of the Iranic nations.

Now you have send me a link to Wikipedia.
-First, you must know that the writers there are not allways objective. They have their own political views, and use certain sources. As someone who knows German, Arabic, Turkish, Azeri Turkish, and Turkmen, I read many different views on the same topic in Wikipedia.
-To your link :

-The Daylamite dynasties were Iranic, but not Persian. Like I argued before, there is a difference between Persian and Iranic.

>Persianized
And no one denies that. Farsi, like Arabic, was important for the Turkic dynasties. Even the Ottomans and the Ak and Kara Koyunlu used Farsi. For them, Farsi was a language of religion, and symbolised knowledge. Nobody denies that, and this is well sourced. But this not make them Persians, or Iranic. If it were so, we would be Arabs, because the Arab culture and language is important in the whole Islamic world.

>numbered in the few and were weak and inaffectual

Also, you may dont like Turkic people, but what you write is pure ignorance. Turkic dynasties ruled Iran from the 11.th century on. The Seljuqs, the Ghaznavids, the Khwarazmian dynasty, the Ak Koyunlu, the Kara koyunlu, the Safavids, the Afshars, the Kacars, the Timurids. You say that those dynasties were weak, and inaffectual?

>Shah Ismail was more Iranian (Kurdish exactly)
Could you explain me how? You are talking about Şeyh Safiyüddin, his grand-grand-....grandfather. As far as İ know some Persian sources claim that he was Kurdish. We can't prove that, but we can't deny that so easy.

Zahid Gilani, a Kurdish Sufi, and father-in-law of Safiyüddin Safevi, called him “Pīr-i Türk”/'The Pir of the Turks'' (Source : Sohrweide, Hanna, “Der Sieg der Safaviden in Persien und scine Rückwirkungen auf die Schiiten Anatoliens im 16. Jahrhundert”, Der Islam, 41 (1965), 95-221.), Some other sources say ''Son of the Turk''. But like I said, his origin is not clearly know, but what is known is, that the Safavid family married with Turks, lived with Turks, started to speak Turkic as mothertongue, and became Turks. So, you accept him as Kurd, because of a claim which can't be proven, but deny that he was Turkısh, although Turkish was his mothertongue, his family mixed with Turks for decades, and were seen as Turks? Ok. Your opinion man.

>His mom was Persian
His mother was Alemşah Halime Begüm, the princess of the Ak Koyunlu dynasty, who were Turkmens. His grandmother, Hatice Begüm the wife of Shaykh Cuneyd, was also a princess of the Ak Koyunlu dynasty.

>'King of İranian lands'
You can call you happy, because you have Turkish history freak here. The Ottoman sources never used the term 'Iran'. Persians, and what we call today İran, was called 'Acem'. ''Acem diyarı'', The lands of the Acems, and this term is still used for Persians by some elderly Turkish people. İn case of the Safavids, the terms like 'Devlet-i Qızılbaş', and ''Devlet-i Safevîyye'' were used.

Correction : The term ''Acem diyarı'', was also used as a geographical term, like 'Chorasan'.

>He definitely grew up speaking Persian.

His teacher was Mevlâna Şemseddin Lahicî.
From him, he learned Arabic, Persian, the Quran, Sufism, and Shia islam. He was declared a 'Şeyh' and 'Pir' (religious leader) with 10-13.

That he spoke Turkic as mothertongue, and even in court is something known. (Source : Shaffer, Brenda (2002) (İngilizce). Borders and Brethren: Iran and the Challenge of Azerbaijani Identity. MIT Press. s. 19.)

Türkçe İsfahan sarayında öylesine önemliydi ki, Farsça
çok az kelime duyulurdu.”

''Turkish was very important in the (Safavid) palace in İsfahan, there was not much Persian (words) to hear.''
-Adam Olearius (German mathematician, and geographer from the 17.th century)
(Source : Mirza Abbaslı, “Safevilerin Kökenine Dair”, Belleten, C. XL, 19, TTK
Basımevi, Ankara 1976)

''As the Italian composer Pietro Della Valle visitted Shah Abbas Safavi in his palace, he noticed the differences between the Ottoman Turkish, and the Safavid Turkish.''
(Source : Ивaнoв, M. C., Oчepк Иcтopии Иpaнa, Mocквa 1952.)

Iran is certainly not Persia, but then my point is the Azeri elites like the Qajar tribe, and Afshar tribe completely integrated into the Persian culture. My grandfather was from the Afsha tribe, and for generations, they had lost the Azeri Turkish dialect.

You sound like you get all of your information from Wikipedia. The Zoroastrian religion comes from Azerbaijan. And the Zoroastrian holy script was written in old Persian. It means the people who first accepted the Zoroastrian religion, Azeris, spoke Persian. Also, Baharam Moshiri, one of the most popular Iranian historians, said that they spoke Persian in Azerbaijan during the rule of the Sassanid empire. The Albanians which you are talking about are more related to Ossetians in Georgia and not Azerbaijan.

>African Americans of the USA should be seen as Anglo Saxons.
That is the dumbest analogy I have ever seen. Azerbaijanis spoke Persian before the Seljuk invasion of Persia. They are literally Persians that adopted Turkish. It's more like Germans who have moved to Britain and have become British. As just like the Germans and English the Persian and Azeris are ethnically extremely similar.

First point : No one denies that the Turkmen tribes got assimilated in Iran. I am happy to see that you accept your Turkic origin.

Second point : It is actually from books(PDF) about the Safavids written in Turkish, and I translate ıt and the sources ın to Englısh. Correct me if I am wrong, but Zarathustra was born in todays Uzbekistan. Zoroastrianism was founded in Ferghana in Uzbekistan, and according to the Zoroastrian texts the first people to accept this religion were "Turanians". How did you came to the idea that it came from Azerbaijan? Third: About who are we talking? Are we talking about the Azeris of today, the "Azaris" of the Sassanid period, the Azeris in Caucasia, or the geographical term "Azerbaijan" in todays Iran? The 'Albanians' of todays state of Azerbaijan were Caucasian Albanians, those spoke no Indo-European language, and were natives of Caucasia. The Ossetians are Iranic people and probably descandent of the Alans, who invaded these place during the Indo-Iranian expansion. The native language of the Iranian Azerbaijani province was called "Azari", and it was a northwestern Iranic language, connected to Tat, while Persian was a southwestern Iranic language spoken in the Farsi province. The Azari language is dead today, but I don't know if it is true that Persian replaced Azari and Tat in Iranian Azerbaijan, or Albanian in Caucasia, but I find it unlikely because Tat is still spoken in Iranian Azerbaijan.

Third point : Well, before the Indo-Iranian invasion the people in the State of Azerbaijan spoke Albanian, and the people in todays Iranian Azerbaijan spoke probably a pre Indo European language like Elamite, Hatti, or Urartian. After the Indo-Iranic invasion the people of Iranian Azerbaijan spoke Tat and Azari, and after the Persian invasion they spoke according to you Persian.

>They are literally Persians that adopted Turkish.

Well, genetically, Persians are just pre Indo-Iranian natives who adopted an Indo-Iranian language. So, according to your logic, Persians are not Persian either. Linguistically, Azerbaijan was never Iranian, genetically it shows that it was, and it is multiethnic, but linguistically and culturally Turkic dominated. According to many sources, Tebriz, Hoy, Ardabil, and Urmu in Iranian Azerbaijan had a Turkic speaking majority. In Caucasian Azerbaijan, Turkic speaking people had a majority in Baku, Irevan. and Nahcivan.

The Khazars, Seljuqs, Khwarazmian, Ildeniz, Kara Koyunlu, Ak Koyunlu, Safavids, Afshars, and Qajars were the only Turkic dynasties ruling over Azerbaijan, and they had no "assimilation policy". In the Seljuq period, Persian and Arabic were state languages, and were teached in the Medreses (Schools), and not Turkish. The same under the Ottomans, the Kara Koyunlu, and Ak Koyunlu, and I guess also under the Safavids, Afshars and Qajars. Tell me, how did those "Persian" became Turks? The only logical reason is, that Turks made up the majority, and that Persians got mixed with Turks, and became Turks.

The majority assimilates the minority, and not the other way around. I mean, look at the Turkic Pechenegs. They conquered parts of Ukraine, Russia, Romania, and what happened to them? They got assimilated by the Slavs. The Germanic Franks conquered France, and what happened to them? They started speaking a Romance language, because they were a minority. The Seljuqs conquered the Levant, Mesopotamia, eastern Anatolia, even parts of Arabia, the Fars province, Afghanistan, Pakistan. Why didn't they started speaking Turkish? According to your logic they should have.

What's going on with inner anatolia in that map?

>Europe
>Christian

The oldest fire temple in the world is in Azerbaijan. I have actually seen a lot of retarded Iranian history books relating the ancient Persians to northern Europeans. It doesn't surprise me that some Turkic centric historian could make a lot of bullshit to hide the ancient history of Azerbaijan. The area of Azerbaijan spoke Persian before the Seljuk invasion. You can not change that.

Orange : Borders of the Great Seljuq Empire
Yellow : Borders of the Seljuq Sultanate of Rome
Pink : Byzantine

>The oldest fire temple in the world is in Azerbaijan.

This still doesn't change the fact that the religion was founded in Farghana, that the first believers were "Turanian", and that it spread from east to west.

>Turkic centric historian could make a lot of bullshit to hide the ancient history of Azerbaijan

How? Azerbaijani history books teach the history of the geopgraphy of Azerbaijan from the pre Indo-European period till the modern period. Nobody denies the Albanians, the Indo-Iranians, or the Arabic period.

> The area of Azerbaijan spoke Persian before the Seljuk invasion. You can not change that.

-Historical evidence speaks against this.
-sources speak against this
-known history speaks against this
-logic speaks against it.

But you still want to believe it. Well, remembers me of a quote :"Men willingly believe what they WISH to be true."