Is it true that they all used Persian as their official language

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

The Kind of Tired That Sleep Won’t Fix Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, and besides Persia herself they eventually replaced it with the Persian creoles that are Ottoman Turkish and Urdu.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I seriously don't get it, why doesn't Anatolia and India speak persian? Specially india, all the islamic empires there used persian as an official language no? Maybe with the expectation of ottoman turkish

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I suspect for the same reason French is not widely spoken in anywhere but France

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Persian really only had an administrative role in the Mughal and Safavid Empires. The Ottomans generally used Ottoman Turkish and Arabic alongside Persian to make administrative decrees.

      Persian was only spoken by an incredibly tiny minority of aristocrats. It's like how the English never spoke French despite being ruled by French-speaking noblemen for four hundred years, and instead high-class Anglos simply began to incorporate French vocabulary into their own (which is how Urdu got started too, with poets and writers adding elegant Persian words to their writing)

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All their ruling classes were turkic

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Are you happy now that your dogshit threads got replies in here while it died on IQfy, you Mexican shitposter?

      >WE WUZ KANGZ
      SSSAAAARRRR

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous
        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >"Barbur"

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, Barbur, the great turko-mongrel conqueror

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur
            this guy? because I've never heard about anyone called 'barbur' playing any role in Indian history.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Safavids were iranian kurds who claimed to be arabs via being descendants of hussein, they married into turks but your mother side doesn't decide who you are, they also used them then dumped them
          >Mughals
          Are mongols, if you care much about mother side then timur bragged to ibn khaldoun that his mother was a descendant of some legendary persian commander

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Holy cope, Azeri's and Qashqai Turks ruled the c**t

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            They spoke turkic languages and identified as turkomans, the rest is irrelevant horseshit

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Who do you mean by they spoke turkish?
            >identified as turkomans
            The safavids didn't, and you just need to look at the name of the mughals to know what they identified themselve as, the ottomans didn't like to be called turk

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            First of all, you're obviously biased

            >Who do you mean by they spoke turkish?

            Here's a poem by shah ismail, in turkish, where he identifies with turkomans during turkoman conquests from the dahname, marvel at his persian prose:

            >As we exhaust the abode of the Arab
            >Our Turkmen will rise within Baghdad
            >Shirvanis shall move into Tebriz
            >And Persians will ask
            >Is Doomsday upon us?

            Clearly a persian/arab/kurd

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The word "turk" is different from a place to place, in the arab world turk meant a slave soldier, by the ottoman conquest some arab historians still called the mamluk soldiers turks even though they were Circassians because they were slave soldiers, on the other hand they called the ottoman soldiers roman soldiers, the ottomans also didn't like the word turk and didn't like the language that much especially for poetry, even selim the guy who fought ismail wrote poetry in persian, btw, the biggest claim for the safavid dynasty to rule is having an arab ancestry from hussein.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            your pic contradicts you since the turks described there were the shia turkmen. Even your book is extremist shiites: The Ghulat sects

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That sounds like cope, if that hatred was against shia turks then they would've said shia turks not generalize all turks

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            except the pastoral turkmen were literally all shia

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That sounds extremely stupid, it's the equivalent of the umayyads saying "Arabs are shit" because all the rebellions aginst them were done by arabs

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            your post doesn't make any sense.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The ottomans are turks
            The umayyads are arabs
            The ottomans see the word "Turk" in a bad light because they shia(your claim)
            The umayyads didn't see the word "arab" in a bad light even though all the revolutions against were done by arabs(shias, zubayrids, Kharijites,etc)
            This gives to explanations
            1.The word turks is different from a place to place like I said earlier
            2.the ottomans didn't see themselves as turks
            Because there's just no way someone will shit on his own people like that.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The ottomans see the word "Turk" in a bad light because they shia(your claim)
            again you're an idiot. the shia turkmen of eastern anatolia rebelled against the state and led to the creation of the safavids. They were enemies and the main difference between them and other turks were that they still practiced the turkic way of life while the ottomans were urbanized. That's why turk was an insult. It's what your picture was referring to in the first place. The fricking book it's from is about shia.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Then they should be disgusted bt the term shia not turk

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            the qizilbash were ghulat shia and different from the rest. The main noticeable difference was that they continued to live a pastoral lifestyle

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            cool poem except Tabriz was already majority turk due to the mongols and qara qoyonlu

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Here's the actual poem. Tabriz was under the control of Ismail and the Shirvanis were his enemies since they killed his father. The Aq Qoyonlu his other major enemy was the abode of the arabs

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >States he's the leader of the Ajam (Persian) Kingdom
            >promises destruction to the turks
            lmao

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No that's a shitty persian interpolation, so many added words from the turkish original.

            There's 0 (ZERO) ambiguity about his turkishness, here's a poem where he literally explicitly identifies with turks:

            >Ey Hatâî! Şol Huten Türki saçınun şemmesi, Nafe-yi sehraya saldı belki misk ü enberi!

            >Söyle kim ol Türk-i mesti nece tir-endaz imiş, Kim menüm bağrumda andan sed hezaran pare var.

            >Çün yetdi seba o yar katına Ol Türk-i vefa-güzar katına

            Note how you can't read it because he only wrote in turkish

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >shitty persian interpolation
            Cope. It's from minority a premier scholar

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            address these poems you little homosexual

            >Ey Hatai! Söyle kim ol Türk-i mesti nece tir-endaz imiş,
            >Kim menüm bağrumda andan sed hezaran pare var

            >O Hatai! You're an ecstatic Turk, you're a good archer
            >because I have a hundred-thousand pieces of you at my bosom.

            >Ey Hatai! Sen ey Türk-i peri peyker, ecaib sün-i Yezdan’san
            >Görenden berü ruh-sarun, sözüm, Allahu ekber’dir

            >O Hatai! You, fair-bodied Turk! You are extraordinary, created by Allah.
            >Since I saw your face, I say Allahu akbar.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I don't need to. As you're the same guy who posted this crap

            First of all, you're obviously biased

            >Who do you mean by they spoke turkish?

            Here's a poem by shah ismail, in turkish, where he identifies with turkomans during turkoman conquests from the dahname, marvel at his persian prose:

            >As we exhaust the abode of the Arab
            >Our Turkmen will rise within Baghdad
            >Shirvanis shall move into Tebriz
            >And Persians will ask
            >Is Doomsday upon us?

            Clearly a persian/arab/kurd

            . It's pretty obvious what your motives are

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >I don't need to.
            just say you can't

            >crap
            I can read the original word for word

            >Yetdükçe tükenir Arab’ın kuy u meskeni
            >Bağdat içre her nice Türkman kopar
            >Şirvan halayiki kamu Tebriz’e daşına
            >Mülk-i Acem sorar ki, kıyamet haçan kopar?

            you don't even speak turkish or azeri

            that scholars translation is horseshit

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >that scholars translation is horseshit
            It's only horseshit to you since it BTFOs you. Your translation is the one that's dogshit because Ismail was not a shirvani. You blatantly got things wrong or warped them to suit your needs. Just take the L.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            also, just to be sure, I'll demonstrate why that guys translation is dogshit

            the original:

            >Yetdükçe tükenir Arab’ın kuy u meskeni
            6 words, 13 syllables
            >Bağdat içre her nice Türkman kopar
            6 words, 11 syllables
            >Şirvan halayiki kamu Tebriz’e daşına
            5 words, 14 syllables
            >Mülk-i Acem sorar ki, kıyamet haçan kopar?
            7 words, 14 syllables

            4 lines in total

            my translation:

            >As we exhaust the abode of the Arab
            8 words, 11 syllables
            >Our Turkmen will rise within Baghdad
            6 words, 9 syllables
            >Shirvanis shall move into Tebriz
            5 words, 9 syllables
            >And Persians will ask
            4 words, 5 syllables
            >Is Doomsday, upon us?
            4 words, 6 syllables

            5 lines in total

            dogshit translation:

            >Let all the people of Shirvan rush to Tabriz, the Persian kingdom will but ask: when is the Last Day to come?
            22 words, 32 syllables
            >As he arrives, the streets and homes of the Arabs will cease to exist, however many Turcomans will turn out from Baghdad
            23 words, 31 syllables

            2 lines in total, and he changed the order of both lines and the word order of almost every word

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >my translation:
            Lmao. You're not the expert here minorsky is. His translation does have breaks with commas and colons. Minorsky actually explained what Ismail's poems were about in the context Ismail's own life.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            minorsky is a russian homosexual from 100s of years ago who didnt even speak a turkic language as his mother tongue, and whose works are outdated as frick

            >that scholars translation is horseshit
            It's only horseshit to you since it BTFOs you. Your translation is the one that's dogshit because Ismail was not a shirvani. You blatantly got things wrong or warped them to suit your needs. Just take the L.

            i demonstrated how youre a moron who is wrong, youre just saying it, reminder:

            >O Hatai! You're an ecstatic Turk

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Been following your guys' back and forth for a couple minutes now.
            This is just an appeal to authority, I could follow why the other anon disagreed with you, but you have yet to demonstrate why we should care about your book

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Been following your guys' back and forth for a couple minutes now
            >This is just an appeal to authority
            You didnt read shit. Minorsky has the actual context. When Ismail wrote the poem he was in control of Tabriz and just declared himself Shah. His enemies were the Aq Qoyonlu in Iraq and The Shirvanshahs who killed his father. According to that dude's "translation" Ismail was shirvani which makes no sense. The poem is him stating he will crush his two main enemies.
            >the beauty (ismail) will decide last judgement
            >if the shirvanis attack the persian kingdom (Ismail's kingdom around tabriz) the persians will cry out for the last judgement (the coming of Ismail)
            >the home of the arabs (iraq) will be exhausted no matter how many turkmen (aq qoyonlu) turn out.
            >the flood ia about to burst (Ismail going on the attack)
            Minorsky's translation is obviously superior.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >that guys translation is dogshit
            I tend to think that all translations of poems are dogshit. poems are intrinsically linked to the language they were originally written in. I am fluent in three languages and translations of poems between them are for me an inexhaustible source of cringe.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            my translation is actually good because i speak both languages

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Ey Hatai! Söyle kim ol Türk-i mesti nece tir-endaz imiş,
            >Kim menüm bağrumda andan sed hezaran pare var

            >O Hatai! You're an ecstatic Turk, you're a good archer
            >because I have a hundred-thousand pieces of you at my bosom.

            >Ey Hatai! Sen ey Türk-i peri peyker, ecaib sün-i Yezdan’san
            >Görenden berü ruh-sarun, sözüm, Allahu ekber’dir

            >O Hatai! You, fair-bodied Turk! You are extraordinary, created by Allah.
            >Since I saw your face, I say Allahu akbar.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/D0XldFI.jpg

            Here's the actual poem. Tabriz was under the control of Ismail and the Shirvanis were his enemies since they killed his father. The Aq Qoyonlu his other major enemy was the abode of the arabs

            The poem is him declaring he's the last judgement of the shirvanshahs and aq qoyonlu

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >the rest is irrelevant horseshit
            tell that to ismail

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >turks larping as mongols for lineage reasons
          >turks larping as persians for prestige reasons
          lmao

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >"Barbur"

        Seething jeet

        All their ruling classes were turkic

        This, Persia was a Azeri empire till the late 1800's

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          No, their civilization was Iran, but they were still 100% a turkic dynasty, these 2 things arent mutually exclusive

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That’s like saying the British Empire was actually Indian because most of their population resided in India

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            British imposed British way on India.
            but Turks had to follow Persian way in Persia.
            This is what has happened when nomadic power conquered the major settled societies in the history.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Seething jeet
          so you think there was a mughal emperor called "barbur"? fricking illiterates ...

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You being a seething jeet has nothing to do with how a name is translated for western audiences

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It's not translated, it's misspelled by an orang-utan. All western audiences ever saw it written as 'Babur'. And it never was written 'Barbur', except by illiterates.
            Are we done here?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      turkic elites needed to rely on Persian bureaucrats for the governance in the agricultural civilization they were not accustomed to.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        What? The Ottomans and Mughals were in their respective regions for 500 years. Why would they need Persian interpreters after like a generation of running a state?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          because the language of the scholarly/scientific field remained Persian. Turkic language was preferred in the army to control the horse riders efficiently. They both were used in the different fields.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            China uses Mongols to administer their c**t in parts of inner Mongolia, does that now mean China is actually Mongolia? moronic

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      All three empires were part of Persian cultural hegemony. The dialogue has changed in the 21st century, now that the Islamic government of Iran is an enemy of the West, the Pakistanis and Turkics separate their entire history from Iranian culture simply because they want massive white wieners in their mouths.

      Turkishness was a matter of culture in this period, not ethnicity. A lot of turkish leaders have Georgian origin. This is not the case for prominent Iranian figures.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >All three empires were part of Persian cultural hegemony
        cringe. The only people who actually guzzled persian wiener were the safavids who were persian and the deccan sultanates who were shia and treated persians like they were from the heavens

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The Ottoman royalty literally spoke Farsi at home.
          Also, what I wrote isn't just my own opinion, it's the current consensus in academia.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persianate_society

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Persian
    >remembers CK2 playthroughs and all the divine marriage
    heh

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Is it true that they all used Persian as their official language
    Yes, but it was only for government. None of the people spoke it as a first language it was a prestigious language.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    What's up with jeets ITT slobbering Persian wiener to somehow own the Turks in... the theory that instead of being slaves to roaches, they were slaves to Arabo-Persian mutts? lmao Sounds like a pathetic larp to eventually push the meme that all Iranians are secretly jeets in their equally make believe out of India theory lmao

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The Ottomans are fascinating because you needed to understand Turkish, Persian and Arabic to understand the official language of the court and administration (Ottoman Turkish). They basically created this highly complex hybrid language that you could only understand if you were trilingual. It's a big part of why Ataturk had to do such dramatic language reforms - the people in Anatolia and the cosmopolitan elites basically spoke different languages to each other.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This applies to much of the world, not just the Ottomans. France, China, Germany, Norway, and Spain are examples off the top of my head that had to standardize their languages and impose it on the bulk of their populations because their dialects had become different languages over the millennia. French for example is based heavily on Parisian French, and China's is based on how the Manchu spoke Chinese in Beijing

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Where I think Turkish differs is that the standardisation wasn't towards a high status dialect in existing use (like say Parisian French) because of the peculiar dynamics of Ottoman Turkish.

        It was difficult to foist Ottoman Turkish with its vast trilingual vocabulary and grammatical rules onto the general public because you needed a working knowledge of three languages to navigate it. It was equally difficult to rely on the Turkish spoken by the lower classes in Anatolia, because there were major regional variations and no Turkish words for a vast array of different ideas.

        The Modern Turkish that emerged was such a dramatic departure from what preceded it that Ataturk's speeches from the 1920s were incomprehensible to Turks in the 1960s and required official translations.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    None of you people get pussy.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *