Top 9 most influential empires

Originally posted by Iranian41ife i agree, but i dont want a person exactly like ataturk. i dont want iran to be purged of it its outside influences, i dont want us to change everything so we can "look" western, and i dont want pan iranism to happen. i just want a leader who cares about iran more than anything else, not a leader that will destroy irans culture, and history, like ataturk did. ataturk effectively cut of turkey its ottoman history, why? just because they lost one war? if you ask me, that did a lot of damage, and his nationalistic teachings is having effects that we can see today.

first of all neither Ataturk nor today's Turkey is pan or whatever you name it, you should get rid of this idea.The pan Turkists(ulkucu or grey wolves) you refer get only %5 of votes in elections and not all of them are Turkist but just nationalists.

By irans culture you didn't mean mollah regime did you?You clearly know nothing about the late ottoman and early Turkish history so you shouldn't ask questions that you already made up answers on your mind.He didn't end the history or culture.He ended the empire(which there was nothing left) and religious laws, and by this you criticise Ataturk so be it.

Keep one thing in mind, if you want to get rid of mollahs and radical muslims you have to be as radical as them.You can't just ran away and wait for foreign invaders to help you.Iran is free of mollahs, thanks to USA.Is this what you want to say or remember in the future?

not only that, but he wiped out anything that wasnt turkic from both turkish culture and language,

Westernization was a long procedure for Turks, since the early 18th century, followed by the Tanzimat period in 19th century. It didn't just come out of the blue in one day.

Ataturk actually revived the Anatolian identity again, which was dominated by the Islamist-Ottoman identity for centuries, and whose center was Istanbul elite. He studied on Hittitology, he studied Turkology, and I bet he also studied religious sciences as he was a true intellectual. He wiped out a language which was only used in official state letters and replaced it with the language spoken by %99 of the people all over Turkey. If that means changing a language, then Iran needs a leader to change its language from Arabic to Persian again, altough we cannot see any courageous lions to dare that except the fake ones roaring in such history forums...

there has to be other options. but the thing is that iranians now know (or atleast most of them) that religion and politics should not be mixed, even the religious community in iran knows that

Sure, that's why they still imprison women who don't cover their heads.

these 30 years ahve been a valuable lesson, and i think change in iran can happen without a figure like ataturk.

You don't have to get that jelous mate. Just keep dreaming.....

Edited by Bashibozuk

but persian words were all over the turkish language which was spoken by most turks.

Prove that. It must be hard for you to even assume what Persian language sounds like.

first of all, what do the hitites have to do with turkish identity?

More than you have with Persian identity.

its funny, and we are the ones getting called chauvinistic.

Not you (plural), but "you" (singular). Generalising is not my habit.

hey man, its just my opinion

It must also be hard for someone to have an opinion without knowledge. Lets not turn this into a flame war and get rid of your obsessions...

Edited by Bashibozuk

Let's make a distinction between Ottoman Turkish and contemporary Turkish.
It is true that Ottoman turkish was a combination of Arabic, Persian and Turkish.  There are also originally Persian words that we use today in modern Turkish.  However, there has been a seriuos reformulation of the languaage in the Early Republican Period, not only in terms of getting rid of some foreign words but also homogenizationof the spoken languages.  This '99% Turkish spoken all over the country' is not what we imagine today because of various different dialects and different languages spoken at the time.. so on.

Coming to the point of being cut off from our past is also a big exagguration, there is some history as a discipline existing in Turkey  The discouse of rupture from the Ottoman past was there, yes, but i am sure you can see how difficult it can be just to erase the past, don't you think?  Moreover, almost every nation-state creates its history and that is how national histories come into being in which members of the nation are though about the glories of the past.  BUT that does not mean that it is NOT criticized or revised later in the light of historical researches.     There may traces in popular history of these national histories but let's not generalize

I can't give countries numbers, but i do believe the Cholas should be up there.

They had a trade route from South East Asia and China all the way down the African coast. This also included Rome and Egypt.

are you denying that there were persian words in the turkish language?

No. I am denying that it was never all over regular Turkish as you claim, which was always spoken all over Anatolia and Balkans by the Turks unlike the official Ottoman language. You try to look like a scientific observer, though those links you provide just make you look funnier, trying to teach me my own language...

obviously know more about this than you do.

Yeah, whatever...As the saying goes, when you're debating with the ignorant, you are always to lose. Let's continue pretending being a Persian and I am no longer to waste my time repeating myself...

There is a difference between the official-cultural and popular Turkish in the Ottoman era. In the Ottoman times, the literacy was very low:

[quote]Ottoman Turkish was really used by 9% of the population and the
rest was not actually acquainted with it. http://linguistlist.org/issues/14/14-2029.html[/quote]

The official and literature language had the grammar of Turkish, but dominated with Persian and Arabic words. Also some words were produced through Persian and Arabic grammar rules (these words were only used in Turkey, AFAIK like "cumhuriyet" for republic) We do study the pieces of Ottoman literature at high schools and everybody knows this fact; don't think that nobody is aware of that. On the contrary, most of the students complain for being have to study so much non-understandable words.

On the other hand, the folk language and poetry, tales didn't have so much foreign words in it. I can read in Ottoman script and I see that the popular fok tales were written in the popular language of today. I don't need a dictionary to understand those. The popular language didn't change much since the Ottoman times.

Through the language reform, the popular language became the official language. The stupid "Sun Language Theory" was popular only a few years in 1930s, with the influence of popular studies of national purity in Europe, however it was abandoned soon. The Language Society invented some words through Turkish grammar rules (some were stupid and some were logical - the logical ones lived but the others were forgotten and left to the garbagecan of history).

One interesting thing was that, when the Military junta took over the political power in 1980, it forbid the use of some Turkish words and replaced them with Arabic-Persian ones. For example "Devrim" is a Turkish word that means "revolution". It was replaced by "Inkylap". Another interesting thing is that the pan-turkists prefer the Persian-Arabic words and the communists-leftists prefer the Turkish words. So Iranian41life, your "lovely pan-turkist friends" love those Persian words more than Turkish ones  

Edited by kotumeyil

Originally posted by Iranian41ife and irans language is persian with some arabic words in it. what is wrong with that? why should we change that?

and ottoman language is turkish with some persian words in it.what is wrong with that? why should we change that?


Edited by finikis

Originally posted by Iranian41ife seriously, answer my question, do they tell you that hitites were turkic? hitites are part of the indo european family, which means they are close to iranics and other indo europeans.

what is indo european family? I assume you meant the language.It is correct, they spoke an IE language.by this logic Azeris of Iran are Turkic as well since they speak Turkish.I remember one of your posts, you said, language they speak doesn't make them Turkic 

And no, they don't teach they were Turkic but it is a known fact that many Anatolian Turks are descendant of Anatolian natives such as Hittite,Phrygian,Lydian,Lycian,Greek etc... So it's not the Turks who claim this but science

Iranians have nothing to do with Anatolinan natives.


Edited by erci

Originally posted by erci what is indo european family?

indo iranians, greeks, germans, celts, italics, etc...[/quote]

Originally posted by erci  I assume you meant the language.It is correct, they spoke an IE language.by this logic Azeris of Iran are Turkic as well since they speak Turkish.I remember one of your posts, you said, language they speak doesn't make them Turkic

azeri's are turkic, i have never denied that. please show me this post that you are talking about. azeris are turkic now, that is undeniable.

Originally posted by erci And no, they don't teach they were Turkic but it is a known fact that many Anatolian Turks are descendant of Anatolian natives such as Hittite,Phrygian,Lydian,Lycian,Greek etc... So it's not the Turks who claim this but science Iranians have nothing to do with Anatolinan natives.

so what, you guys claim you are turks and now you are claiming that you arent turks but actually indo europeans?

Originally posted by finikis and ottoman language is turkish with some persian words in it.what is wrong with that? why should we change that? you DID change it! have you not been paying attention about what we've been talking about for hte past 20 posts? YES �RAN�ST YES! I changed it sorry. what is wrong?This is my comment after your nonunderstandable anti-turk posts.

so now we know who the real chauvinists are.

Originally posted by finikis sorry but where there is something about turks in this forum you are always dominant aunt there why?

why not.

Originally posted by finikis NO IRANIST NO!  i dont understand what you have been talking for last 20 posts.

well that explains it,  i suggest you re read the thread.

Originally posted by finikis Hittites and us are firstly anatolian(same region) so where are they now?Ahhh yes you know the answer we killed all of them with our bloody hands

i dont know, did you kill all of them with your bloody hands?

so what are you guys, turks or indo europeans?

Originally posted by finikis Note:my god i cant be serious against you  (and i know you are really serious on us) Again SORRY!!

i accept your apology. now if more people were like you and would just apologise, there wouldnt be many flame wars.

thanks for apologising.

Edited by Iranian41ife