Category Archives: History of Islamic Civilization

Selim I, Ismail I, and Babur

Pre-publication of chapter XIX of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapters XXVII to XXXII form Part Eleven (How and why the Ottomans, the Safavids and the Mughals failed) of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Chapters XXVII and XXVIII have already been pre-published.

Until now, 21 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the present book; this chapter is therefore the 22nd (out of 33) to be uploaded. At the end of the text, the entire Table of Contents is made available. Pre-published chapters are marked in blue color, and the present chapter is highlighted in gray color. 

In addition, a list of all the already pre-published chapters (with the related links) is made available at the very end, after the Table of Contents.

The book is written for the general readership with the intention to briefly highlight numerous distortions made by the racist, colonial academics of Western Europe and North America only with the help of absurd conceptualization and preposterous contextualization.

References made to entries of the Wikipedia offer average readers a starting point for their research; they do not signify acceptance and approval of their contents.

———————–  

Certainly, the Safavid Empire was not the first Islamic state established by a mystical order; but earlier states launched by mystical orders were either set up in small and remote territories as form of local resistance against the Islamic Caliphate like the Babakiyah (Khurramites) or organized as a secret subversive movement coordinated from mysterious, faraway, unreachable and impregnable headquarters, like those of the Hashashin Isma’ilis (known as Assassins in Western literature). In this regard, at the level of governance, the main difference between the Safavids and the Isma’ilis was the fact that the latter did not try or even plan to proclaim an empire, whereas the former, even before solemnly announcing their empire, felt that they had the task to entirely reshape the Islamic world.

Selim I

Ismail I Safavi

Babur

The Safavid Order had the apocalyptic, eschatological and messianic feeling that their task would be the only way to save the Islamic world; they felt that they had the divinely bestowed obligation to institute a secular empire across the Islamic world, which would be based on spiritual values, moral virtues, cultural traditions, and epic revival. The name of the empire was no lees imperial than the following expression: “the Realm of the Outspread Universe of Iran” (ملک وسیع‌الفضای ایران /Molk-e vasi-ye fezaye Eran); one understands automatically the importance of Ferdowsi’s epic narrative and the cosmological dimension that Safavid spirituality gave to the state that the venerable members of the Order launched. The term ‘Iran’ does not denote either the territory of a nation/ethnic group or the land controlled by a state; all these divisive, nonsensical, modern notions were nonexistent at the time. In the very beginning of the Safavid times, the term ‘Iran’ was not even used.

Prof. Ali Anooshahr, speaking at the symposium “The Idea of Iran: The Safavid Era” (https://www.soas.ac.uk/lmei-cis/events/idea-of-iran/27oct2018-the-idea-of-iran-the-safavid-era.html; Center for Iranian Studies, SOAS; 27 October 2018) about the topic “Historiographical perceptions of the transmission from Timurid to Safavid Iran”, explained how historians of the early 16th c. dealt with the transition from the Timurid to the Safavid period. His speech is available here (from 8:10 until 46:19): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkvUfU2ruKM

The most important historians of the early Safavid times were Ghiyath ad-Din Muhammad Khwandamir (Habib al-Siyar; Khulasatu-l Akhbar; Dasturu-l Wuzra), Abdallah Hatefi (Khamsa), Amini Haravi (Futuhat-e shahi), Fazli Khuzani Esfahani (Afzal al-tawarih), and Fazl-Allah Khonji Esfahani (Tarih-e alamara-ye amini).

It is interesting to herewith include selected excerpts from Prof. Anooshahr’s well-founded speech, notably (11:30 onwards/no editing involved):

“There was no idea of something called Iran in this transition period”.

“The word ‘Iran’ only shows in Amini’s book twice; once is paired with Turan; and then immediately afterward, when the Rumi (: Roman) envoy shows up on behalf of the Ottoman Emperors”.

“As far as the people of the time were concerned, the actual participants in these events, they had no idea of Iran, and this was not because they were alien or unpatriotic, in fact they were non-patriotic, because there is no patriotism; this was because they had a radically different idea of territory than we do today. So, in our modern conception, people are defined as a nation, they own the land that they live on, and this land has a particular characteristic that is shared between it and all the people”.

“When Amini writes about territory, he sublimates it by using the Quran and comparing it to heaven; he does not connect it to any kind of territorial identity at all”.

“The establishment of Twelver Shi’ism, based on this text, does not seem to be that important. And then the establishment of a kind of Ancient Persian Empire is actually not on their agenda”.

As a matter of fact, Safavid Iran was the entire universe for the members of the Safavid Order, and as such it had no ethnic/national dimension or character and no religious identity. Spirituality was all that mattered. Even more importantly, it was not proclaimed only to encompass the territories that the Safavid emperors finally controlled, as Western Iranologists perniciously suggest, perversely viewing the Safavid empire’s territory as simply a larger ‘version’ of the modern pseudo-state of Iran. For the members of the Safavid Order, “Molk-e vasi-ye fezaye Eran” had the divinely entrusted task to contain the entire circumference of the Islamic world.   

Four major monarchs between Rome and China

Between Rome and China, four persons, who played a determinant role in the final formation of major empires and in the final delineation of their borders, were born between 1450 and 1487.  In chronological order they are as per below:

i. Muhammad Shaybani (Muhammad Shaybani Khan or Abul-Fath Shaybani Khan; 1451-1510), grandson of Abu’l-Khayr Khan, and Genghisid founder of the Khanate of Bukhara (1500), one of the empires that were formed after the split of the Golden Horde and demise of the precarious Uzbek Khanate; he evidently did not make any distinction between a) Turanians and Iranians (which shows the extent of the completed ethnic Turanization of Iran) and b) those who are fallaciously called today ‘Shia’ and ‘Sunni’ by colonial Orientalists, diplomats or statesmen and Islamic terrorists and extremists alike.

Muhammad Shaybani; 16th c. portrait painted by the famous Iranian artist Kemaleddin Behzad

The fight between Shah Ismail I and Muhammad Shaybani (1510); from the manuscript Tarikh-i alam-aray-i Shah Ismail (the world adorning History of Shah Ismail)

Bukhara; Chor-Bakr burial place constructed under Muhammad Shaybani (1505-1510)

The state of Muhammad Shaybani

ii. Selim I (سليم اول / Yavuz Sultan Selim; 1470-1520), grandson of Mehmed II and son of Bayezid II; he ruled the Eastern Roman Empire only for eight years (1512-1520), but he was by far the most important sultan of the 600-year long dynasty for having expanded the Ottoman territories more than any other. Then, there was no ‘Ottoman Empire’; not one man used that term at the time. The term ‘State of the Ottoman family’ (دولت عليه عثمانیه‎ / Devlet-i ‘Alīye-i Osmaniyeh) was introduced centuries later. Selim I was the Padishah (پادشاه‎), i.e. the ‘Great King’, thus bearing an Iranian title that goes back to the early Achaemenids who antedated him by two millennia. Selim I was also (βασιλεύς Ρωμαίων / Imperator Romanorum / قیصر روم‎ / Qaysar-i Rum, lit. “Caesar of the Romans”) like his father and grandfather after 1453, because Mehmed II claimed the title after conquering Constantinople, George of Trebizond endorsed the claim, considering Mehmed II as emperor of the world, and Gennadius Scholarius, Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church, fully recognized the title.

The state of Selim I was also viewed by others as the Roman Empire (in the sense of the Eastern Roman Empire, because the Western Roman Empire ceased to exist in 476 CE). From the aforementioned speech of Prof. Ali Anooshahr, I quote another excerpt here (exactly after 12:07 in the above mentioned video and link):

“I am referring to what we call ‘the Ottoman Empire’; but if the topic today is to look at how people perceived their own territoriality, then we shouldn’t call it ‘the Ottoman Empire’, because they didn’t call it that way; they called it ‘the Roman Empire’ (ruled by the Ottoman family)”.

Selim I was not styled “Commander of the Faithful” (أَمِير ٱلْمُؤْمِنِين‎ / ‘Amir al-Mu’minin) for most of his reign, and when he could claim the title, the majority of his subjects rejected it for him. The same concerns the later and minor title “Servant of The Two Holy Cities” (خَادِمُ الْحَرَمَيْن‎ / Hadimü’l-Haremeyn), which is somewhat a historical novelty introduced only as late as the 12th – 13th c. Last, it is only after 1517 that Selim I was accepted as ‘Caliph’ throughout his realm and dependencies.

Selim I (Yavuz Sultan Selim); portrait painted by the Ottoman artist Nakkaş Osman (16th c.)

The territorial expansion of the Ottoman Sultanate (focus on Anatolia and the Balkans)

Portrait (end of 18th-beginning of 19th c.) painted by the Christian Orthodox Eastern Roman artist Konstantin Kapıdağlı (Κωνσταντῖνος Κυζικηνός; Konstantinos Kyzikinos)

Ottoman Empire around 1520

Miniature from the 16th c. manuscript Hüner-nāme; I, Library of the Topkapi Palace Museum

The Ottoman Empire in 1875

Sultan Selim I and the Grand Vizier Piri Mehmed Paşa

Selim I portrait painted by Aşık Çelebi

Painting showing Selim I during the Egypt campaign, Army Museum, Istanbul

Portrait of Selim I painted by Paolo Veronese (Paolo Caliari); Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen – Staatsgalerie in der Residenz Würzburg

From the personal belongings of Shah Ismail that were captured by Selim during and after the Battle of Chaldiran. Topkapi Museum, Istanbul

iii. Babur (ظَهير اَلَدّين مُحَمَّد – Zahīr ud-Dīn Muhammad; 1483-1530) was the eldest son of Umar Sheikh Mirza, the Timurid governor of Ferghana who was the son of Abu Sa’id Mirza; consequently, Babur was the great grandson of Abu Sa’id Mirza’s father, Sultan Muhammad Mirza, governor of Samarqand for some time, whom due to an unknown reason Babur did not even mention in historical boon Babur-nameh. This implies that Babur was the great-great grandson of the father of Sultan Muhammad Mirza, Miran Shah, who was the third of Timur’s four sons. So, Babur was the great-great-great-grandson of Timur.

If he is basically known through his nickname (‘tiger’), this happens because he truly deserved it. Babur became the ruler of Ferghana at the age of 11 (in 1494), and he was an outstanding and exceptional adolescent in every sense. In his rather brief but most eventful life that had unprecedented ups and downs, Babur had to incessantly fight hard for long and in a most adventurous and often thunderous manner, undertaking campaigns, laying sieges, and winning battles, but also losing his capitals. He was defeated by Muhammad Shaybani, and he spent years in humiliation and poverty without a real shelter.

However, he managed to capture Kabul (1504) and to control parts of today’s Afghanistan; he then benefited from Ismail I’s victory over Muhammad Shaybani (1510), recaptured Samarqand, and prepared his army for the major campaign and the greatest success of his life, namely the invasion of the Indus River and the Ganges River valleys, the demolition of the Delhi Sultanate, and the foundation (1524-1526) of the Mughal Empire (1526-1858). So, triumph came at last to this intellectual soldier and philosopher-conqueror. By all means, Babur would have made -in a terrible historical irony- the perfect son to Timur himself!

iv. Ismail I Safavi (1487-1524) was none other than the son of Shaykh Haydar, the Grandmaster of the Safavid Order and the founder of the Qizilbash military order. It is noteworthy that his maternal grandmother was none other than Despina Hatun, i.e. Theodora Megale Komnene, of John IV of Trebizond, who became Muslim to get married (1458) with Uzun Hassan, the Aq Qoyunlu sultan, whose daughter Martha (mainly known as Alamshah Halime Begum) -in very young age- got married (1471) with Shaykh Haydar.

However, tribally and imperially, Ismail I’s lineage was not as important as the ancestry of Muhammad Shaybani, Selim I, and Babur, but his spiritual-mystical backing was incommensurately stronger; people of different origin, occupation and location could instantly rush to his support and give their lives personally for him. And his great military advantage was his unpredictability, which was due exactly to his spiritual-mystical backing. His opponents would never know from where his fighters would surface to protect him and defend his cause. 

Contrarily to Muhammad Shaybani who had the youth of a regular soldier, and to Selim I who spent years in palatial intrigues as he was his father’s third son, Ismail I was an exceptional youngster like Babur; but his father’s spiritual potency made an enormous difference. This is difficult to assess properly today, but in the circle of the Anatolian-Caucasus-Iranian-Central Asiatic members of the Safavid Order and the Qizilbash fighters, Shaykh Haydar was believed to be God Incarnate (elah) – in the spiritual (not theological) connotation of the word. This meant nothing less than an absolute faith as per which the infant Ismail, long before establishing the Empire of the Safavid Order, was believed to be ‘ebn Allah’ (Son of God).

Western colonial historians and Orientalist forgers, in their incessant effort to distort the historical reality of the Safavid times, select deliberately anti-Safavid authors of those days, like Fazl-Allah Khonji Esfahani, take their premeditated narratives at face value, attach to them several fake, pseudo-Islamic theological concepts, such as the ‘ghulat’, and portray the Safavids as ‘Shia extremists’ or ‘antinomians’ (another fake term), which is absolutely absurd. As said in the previous chapter, there cannot be religious evaluation of spiritual matters; this means that every attempt of theological interpretation of a spiritual term or expression is a failure already before it is stated. In fact, there are no ‘ghulat’ at all.

This term is a neologism, which is attributed by modern scholars to various mystics and spiritual masters (of different Islamic periods), who were misunderstood in their times by their theological critics. The perverse colonial interest in promoting the ‘ghulat’ bogus-literature and in using the fake term for people, who were not called ‘ghulat’ in their times, is due first, to the Western academics’ distortive effort to generate the nonexistent ‘Sunni vs. Shia’ divide, and second, to the Western intellectuals’ vicious attempt to portray several Muslim mystics and spiritual grandmasters as ‘heretics’, whereas the difference between Islam and Christianity hinges exactly on this point, namely that there cannot be ‘heresy’ within Islam.

Ismail I was undoubtedly an extraordinary youngster who lived in strict mystical seclusion for five years (from 7 to 12), before appearing as almost the Islamic Messiah (Mahdi). It is necessary to straightforwardly clarify at this point that this term has a totally different meaning in spirituality and in religion (or theology). Meanwhile, the bright and exceptional apprentice was communicating with several members of the Safavid Order and the Qizilbash army though a sophisticated network of agents that was too difficult for others to identify, let alone put under control.

For Ismail I Safavi’s early stage of life (during those five years), there were certainly several parallels between his concealed existence and that of Muhammad ibn al-Askari, the Twelfth Imam (who was born in 869 and finally disappeared in his Major Occultation in 941). However, only theological misinterpretation of spiritual activities and narratives could lead to the wrong assumption about an eventual identification of Ismail I with Muhammad ibn al-Askari. Not one member of the Safavid Order was confused in this regard.  

After having lived his childhood in the forests of Gilan, he appeared to his brethren and followers at 12 (in 1499), he achieved an unexpected, great victory over the Shirvanshah ruler Farrukh Yassar two years later (1501), and he was crowned king at 14. Thus, he was catapulted to power in the most exulting terms, whereas his merry, exuberant and legendary entry to Tabriz was followed by endless feasts, imperial banquets, endless consumption of wine, and fabulous erotic delights.

He who says that wine (or alcoholic drinks in general) is prohibited in Islam is either a conniving Westerner (diplomat, statesman, agent or academic) strongly motivated by his vicious hatred of the true, historical Islam or an idiotic puppet of the Western powers, i.e. an ignorant and idiotic, fanatic and extremist, Islamist sheikh, who – as per the Satanic orders of his Western masters – believes that “Islam is the Quran and the Hadith”. Quite contrarily to this fallacy, the extensively misinterpreted and calamitously misunderstood sacred texts of Islam do not represent even 0.001% of the existing voluminous literature (in classical Islamic languages, namely Arabic, Farsi, various Turkic languages, and Urdu), which has to be first studied, then correctly perceived and plainly comprehended before one attempts to read the Quran and the Hadith. No holy text exists without exact conceptualization and comprehensive contextualization. 

The sacred texts of Islam (similarly with those of every other religion) cannot be accurately and succinctly understood per se except in the light of literary, spiritual, historical, theoretical and scientific texts of the Golden Era of Islam. The same occurs in Christianity; without the Patristic Literature (Patristics or Patrology, i.e. the texts written by the Fathers of the Christian Church) no one can possibly understand correctly the New Testament, the Old Testament, and the true, historical Christianity. The fallacy, as per which anyone today can understand the Gospels and the other sacred texts of Christianity without the Patristic Literature, is a deviate, Protestant – Evangelical distortion.

The aforementioned four Muslim emperors were all authors, poets and highly educated and cultured monarchs. Muhammad Shaybani composed his Bahr ul Huda, a theological, moral treatise, being widely known as a consummate polymath and an erudite scholar who highly valued books, manuscripts, epics and arts. Selim I wrote poetry in Farsi and Turkish under the penname Mahlas Selimi. Babur excelled in prose; he elaborated his own biography in Chagatai Turkic; the legendary Babur nameh (Book of Babur) is a major historical source for the History of Asia during the 15th and 16th c.

Ismail I Safavi composed spiritual poetry in Turkish and Farsi under the penname Khatai, i.e. ‘the one who makes mistakes’; in and by itself, this fact constitutes the complete confirmation of the aforementioned statement, namely that there cannot be religious evaluation of spiritual matters. Confessing one’s own mistakes -by selecting a name that makes this reality so explicitly known- is full indication of humanity; a perfect human accepts that he/she makes mistakes. By using this penname, Ismail I fully demonstrated that the term ‘ebn Allah’ (Son of God) attributed to him was not meant in a rationalistic theological way but in terms of spiritual symbolism, which is absolutely unfathomable to juristic, rationalistic and materialistic theologians.

In the existing manuscripts (preserved in Tashkent and Paris) of Ismail I Safavi’s poetry, there are ca. 260 qasidas and ghazals, quatrains, morabbas, mosaddas, and three mathnawis (different types of Islamic poetry); two of his mathnawis are quite lengthy, namely the Dah nameh and the Nasihat nameh. Bektashis in Anatolia and the Balkans, as well as the Shabaks in Mesopotamia, extensively recite Ismail I Safavi’s poetry in their spiritual sessions down to our days.

The interaction of those four great emperors was not trouble-free, peaceful and bloodless; at times, it even took a dimension of extreme monstrosity. During the period 1497-1504, Babur and Muhammad Shaybani were repeatedly engaged in battles against one another, particularly for the control of Samarqand. Muhammad Shaybani proved to be Babur’s real nemesis, but both of them captured, lost and recaptured Samarqand several times. As Babur had a small basis of support in Central Asia, he undertook a most adventurous campaign in 1504, and with few men he captured Kabul, making of the area his new base. He made an alliance with a distant relative, namely the ruler of Herat Sultan Husayn Mirza Bayqarah; but Muhammad Shaybani chased him from there too.     

As Muhammad Shaybani was an ally of the Ottoman family and of Bayezid II, the father of Selim I, he concentrated his efforts in the East and Southeast, against the Hazara Turanian nomads in Khorasan (currently located in central Afghanistan) and the Kazakhs. In fact, his campaign against the Hazaras was a disaster, because first his cavalry had many casualties and second the war against the Hazaras produced a major reaction among the Qizilbash, because many members of the military order were of Hazara origin. Then, Ismail I Safavi, who had spent many years, invading and dismantling the Akkoyunlu state and its last remaining forces in Iran, Caucasus, Eastern Anatolia, and Mesopotamia, turned against Muhammad Shaybani. Then, in the Battle of Merv, the Qizilbash army, after devising a trick (i.e. a feigned retreat), ambushed and slaughtered an almost double Uzbek force.

The excesses after the Qizilbash victory were exorbitant; Muhammad Shaybani’s corpse was cut to pieces and parts were sent to be in public display in many cities; his skull ended up as a gold-plated cup for Ismail I. The cup was later sent to Babur himself, and the same occurred to one of Muhammad Shaybani’s wives, namely Khanzada Begum, who was Babur’s elder sister. These gestures started an era of cooperation between Ismail I, who had just risen to prominence, and Babur whose army and the Qizilbash fought side by side against the Uzbeks at the Battle of Ghazdewan (1512); however they were defeated there, and this event marked the end of Babur’s dream of recovering his father’s kingdom at Ferghana. For some time, Babur accepted Ismail I as his own emperor, while he was struggling to impose his rule in the mountains between Central Asia and the Indus River valley.

Opposing Ottoman allies at the Battle of Ghazdewan, Babur (today portrayed as a ‘Sunni’ by colonial Orientalists) became an ally of Ismail I Safavi (currently labeled as a ‘Shia’ by European and American historical forgers) and therefore an enemy of Selim I (nowadays described as a ‘Sunni’ by Western academics). The reality is totally different: Ismail I was a spiritual mystic, who became the ruler of a secular empire controlled by the army (Qizilbash) of his mystical order (Safavid), whereas Selim I was a palatial intrigue man controlled by evil theological circles and people who caused divisions, civil wars, internal strives and terrible bloodshed in the Eastern Roman Empire (of the Ottoman family). Then, in striking opposition with both, Babur was an intrepid, intelligent and opportunist, yet formidable, soldier entirely motivated by the dream to create an empire greater than his father’s and Timur’s.

The spread of Qizilbash force, movement, worldview, mentality, and lifestyle among Anatolian pastoralists was overwhelming in the 1500s. It triggered its own dynamics, which was not controlled anymore by the Safavid Order and the newly established Safavid Empire. The mystical order of Şahkulu was the perfect continuation of many long centuries of Anatolian Islamic spirituality and mysticism; it was energized by the introduction of the Qizilbash concept (an army for a mystical order that would establish a secular universal empire).

Ismail I Safavi in an incident from his campaign against Shirvan; he is charging down a mountain in pursuit of the King of Shirvan; miniature from the manuscript Shahnama-i-Ismail (Tabriz style), ca. 1540 (MS Add. 7784, f.46v. British Museum, London); his distinctive turban has twelve folds representing the twelve Imams of whom Ali ibn Abi Taleb was the first.

The Aq Qoyunlu tribal khanate (1378-1503) around 1475, i.e. 25-30 years before it was defeated and incorporated with the Safavid Empire

Miniature from a 17th c. manuscript with mystical representation of Sheikh Safi ad-din Ardabili (1252-1334) blessing the young Shah Ismail I; gouache heightened with gold on paper. The historic mystic is depicted at the top of a minbar in the mosque holding a Qur’an and blessing Shah Isma’il (identified in small brown script) who stands on a lower step of the same minbar, surrounded by courtiers and elders.

Ismail I Safavi offers an audience to the Qizilbash, after they have defeated his opponent Shirvanshah Farrukh in 1500; miniature from Bijan’s Tarikh-i Jahangusha-yi Khaqan Sahibqiran (A History of Shah Ismail I), which was written in Isfahan in the late 1680s. The painting was created by Muin Musawwir, a famous artist who also illustrated six editions of the Shahnameh.

Ismail I Safavi and his soldiers cross Kura River in the Caucasus region

Ismail I Safavi defeats Sultan Murad, the last ruler of the Aq Qoyunlu, near Hamadan in 1503.

Miniature from a manuscript of Bijan’s Tarikh-i Jahangusha-yi Khaqan Sahibqiran (A History of Shah Ismail I), which was written in Isfahan in the late 1680s. It was painted by or in the style of Mu’in Musavvir; gouache heightened with gold on paper. Ismail and his courtiers are depicted on horseback while hunting.

The fight of Ismail I Safavi against the Dulkadiroğulları in Southeastern Anatolia

Ismail I Safavi watches his soldiers defeat the Musha’sha (المشعشعية) messianic leader Sultan Fayyad in Khuzestan; from the miniature of a manuscript of the late 1680s.

Representation of the Battle of Merv between Shah Ismail and Shaybani Khan; fresco in the Chehel Sotun Palace in Isfahan

Ismail I Safavi’s envoy Ganbar Agha appears before the last Aq Qoyunlu ruler Sultan Murad; miniature from a manuscript of the 1670s

Representation of the Battle of Chaldiran (1514); fresco in the Chehel Sotun Palace in Isfahan

The helmet of Ismail I Safavi

The Şahkulu Spiritual Movement

However, the Anatolian mystical order was not stricto sensu created by the Safavid Qizilbash. Many Western Orientalists totally misinterpret the role, the scope, the targets and the motivations of the founder and grandmaster of the eponymous order; Şahkulu (also known as Shah Qoli Baba or Shah Kulu or Shah Quli or Karabıyıkoğlu, i.e. the son of the man with black moustache) was certainly not a Safavid puppet who attempted to subvert or infiltrate the Ottoman state; this misinterpretation is absurd. Şahkulu was an Anatolian original.

In this regard, colonial academics totally distort everything, even the real meaning of Şahkulu’s name! It is true that in Turkish, this word means ‘the servant of the Shah’; however, this is not meant in a theological and rationalist manner, but with a purely spiritual connotation. Şahkulu was indeed the ‘servant’ of the ‘Shah’, but according to the terminology of an Islamic mystical order, ‘Shah’ is God. In fact, even worse lies and incredible distortions are published by Western colonial historians as regards the bloodshed, the persecution and the oppression of the Anatolian Qizilbash by the usurper of the Ottoman throne Selim I. The reason for these lies is evident: on the misrepresentation of the historical events that took place in Anatolia during the dramatic period 1510-1512 hinge both, the entire falsification of the Ottoman History and the fallacious theory that “the Ottomans were Sunni and the Safavid Iranians were Shia”. In addition, Western historians tried systematically to obscure the fact that the Ottoman ruling class followed Maturidi theology, whereas the uncontrolled but intentionally tolerated majority of the madrasas and the imams were impacted by Ash’ari concepts.

As a matter of fact, the so-called Şahkulu İsyanı (rebellion), which was not an uprising but a messianic fervor, and the subsequent events, namely the battle of Chaldiran (1514) between Selim I and Ismail I, bear witness to the gradual rise of a pseudo-Islamic theological school at Istanbul (under the Hanafi madhhab coverage). Those indoctrinated and ignorant sheikhs progressively destroyed the Ottoman Empire with their absurd inhumanity and obdurate idiocy, which invariably took the form of nonsensical argumentation, strict anachronism, theological rigidity, verbal rationalism, worldly materialism, and nonsensical involvement in the governance of the expanding empire. Their worst and most catastrophic trait however was their explicit revilement and utmost hatred of Islamic spirituality (Batin/ باطن; Batiniyya/ باطنية; these terms literally means ‘inner’ and ‘esotericism’, but they have nothing to do with Western esotericism/mysticism).

These Istanbulite theological circles were not powerful at the time, but gradually, during the 16th c., they managed to prevail within the Ottoman court; their achievement was the destruction of Taqi ad-Din Muhammad ibn Ma’ruf’s Islamic Observatory of Istanbul in 1580 – an event that marks the irrevocable death of the Islamic Civilization. In 1510-1512, the same theological circles plunged Anatolia in terrible bloodshed; this was due to their determination to oppose the prevalence of Şahkulu Qizilbash spirituality. That’s why these pseudo-Muslim theological circles always represented the ‘enfant gâté’ of Western academics: they constituted indeed the perfect guarantee for the destruction and the disappearance of Islam, because they could be (and they were) easily induced by Western colonial agents to trigger interminable divisions and fratricidal wars among the Muslims.

Selim I was not predestined to become a sultan, as he was the fourth among the eight sons of Bayezid II. Şehzade Abdullah was the first among Bayezid II’s eight sons, but he died young in 1483; Şehzade Şehinşah was the Ottoman sultan’s fifth son and he was very well educated and militarily strong, but he never gained the support of the Ottoman bureaucracy, administration and theological nomenklatura. Although governor of big cities and loved by the people of Karaman, he died in 1511 for unknown reasons, possibly poisoned by some vicious Ottoman theologians. Born in 1465, Ahmet (known as Şehzade Ahmet; 1465-1513) was the second son of Bayezid II; born in 1467, Korkut (known as Şehzade Korkut; 1467-1513) was the third son of Bayezid II. Şehzade Mahmud (1475-1507), the younger brother of Şehzade Ahmet, died in 1507 for undefined reasons. Seventh son of Bayezid II was Şehzade Alemşah (1477-1502) who also died in 1502 or 1503 for unspecified reasons.

Compared to Şehzade Ahmet and to Şehzade Korkut, Selim I (born in 1470) was a far cry and an unimportant prince, even more so since Bayezid II’s favorite candidate to his succession was Ahmet. However, the Ottoman court had always been a matter of Istanbulite palatial intrigues, intra-family fights, and endless fratricides, pretty much like those occurred during the Eastern Roman times in God-damned Constantinople. Bayezid II (1447-1512; his reign started in 1481) had to fight to secure his succession, because Cem Sultan (1459-1495), his younger brother, laid claim to the throne. Selim I was an insubordinate, rebellious, idiotic and absolutely unworthy son, who was manipulated by the evil Istanbulite theologians as to how to plot, cheat and connive against his own father. This is what the pseudo-Islamic madhhab (jurisprudential schools) and theological schools were reduced to at those days – and ever since down to our days.

Selim I rebelled against his father not for any other reason, but because the vicious theological circles of Istanbul, which are nowadays mistakenly called ‘Sunni’, wanted to use him against the spread and the rise of the Şahkulu Anatolian spirituality. The succession to the throne of Bayezid II was only the pretext. In fact, Ahmet (Şehzade Ahmet) did not only have the right of primogeniture, but also his father’s consent and favor; that’s why the disloyal son and puppet of Istanbul’s evil theologians Selim I had to ceaselessly plot against his father.

In addition, there was a confusing and disastrous tradition in the Ottoman family, as per which among the dying sultan’s sons, whoever reached the dead monarch’s bed first would (or could eventually) become his father’s successor. A clear sign of the chaotic situation that prevailed in the Istanbulite palace of the disorderly, lawless and faithless family was the disastrous fact that, in order to make sure that the eventually insubordinate crown princes and the other princes would not fuel a rebellion against the sultan, the Ottoman rulers used to send their sons to faraway provinces in order to serve there as local governors – which in turn reduced their chances to successfully plot. This meant that distance mattered greatly at those days!

Ahmet was the governor of Amasya in Northern Cappadocia (675 km from Istanbul), Korkut was the governor of Antalya (then called Teke, in Pamphylia) in the southern coast (640 km from the capital), and Selim was the governor of Trabzon (1060 km from his father’s palace). In that ridiculous situation, everyone was preparing for the forthcoming confrontation; it was therefore normal that Ahmet rejected his father’s appointment of Suleyman (son of Selim I, who became later known as Suleyman the Magnificent) as governor of Bolu, because of the small distance that separated the tiny and insignificant city from the Ottoman capital (only 260 km). Suleyman was then sent to the Ottoman Crimea (Kefe or Kaffa or Caffa; today’s Feodosia).

Incessantly plotting, Selim asked his father to appoint him as governor in a sanjak in Rumeli (: Balkans). Bayezid II rejected this bizarre demand because the Ottoman sanjaks in the European territory of the empire were smaller, more recently acquired, and unfit for princes. This fact shows that Anatolia was always the central and most important part of the Ottoman state, as it was of the Eastern Roman Empire in earlier periods.

Involving foreigners in acts against his father’s decisions and affairs, Selim asked the help of the Tatar Khan of Crimea and he was finally appointed as governor of the pashalik of Belgrade (then named in Turkish as ‘Semendire Sancağı’, i.e. Sanjak of Smederevo), which is located at a distance of 900 km from Istanbul. However, instead of staying at the headquarters of his administrative province, the disloyal, immoral and faithless Selim approached Istanbul, and then Bayezid II had to fight against him and defeat him in August 1511. Selim escaped to his Tatar friends in Crimea, but at the same time, the Şahkulu spiritual movement and the ensuing messianic fervor took disproportionate eschatological dimensions in Anatolia, and the sultan tasked Ahmed to impose order and discipline through the Ottoman Empire’s eastern provinces.

As a matter of fact, there was never a Şahkulu rebellion, contrarily to what most of the historians claim nowadays. There was instead a passionate messianic fervor and the Ottoman attempt to suppress the spiritual movement was met with resistance. This situation cannot be termed as ‘rebellion’, because there was no intention for rebellion among the members and the followers of the Şahkulu mystical order. They did not want to overthrow any authority or to impose themselves as the rulers. As every spiritual movement brings forth liberation and salvation, a large number of people across Anatolia viewed in the Şahkulu movement and in their Qizilbash army the promise and the perspective of a better life free from the Ottoman family’s incompetence and incessant butchery and bloodletting; but this was not tantamount to public disobedience or disorder.

As spirituality enables the faithful to understand the real purpose of this life and of the Hereafter, the Şahkulu members, followers and army knew quite well that the Ottoman princes had absolutely no legitimacy to possess the wealth they garnered and to hold the positions they had. In terms of spirituality, states do not exist or are not needed; these evil social structures have absolutely no value and no authority for any spiritual mystic and any spiritually-awakened person.

Şahkulu Qizilbash army raids on cities, on Ottoman treasures, on imperial caravans, and on regional administration centers started therefore becoming very frequent around 1510. It is essential for both, experienced historians and erudite readership, not to evaluate those developments with today’s average Western mentality and approach; there was nothing illegal in those acts. They were absolutely just, moral and lawful; even more importantly, they were viewed as such by the outright majority of the Anatolian populations. In any case, ‘lawful’ is only the ‘just’ and the ‘moral’, in striking contrast to the modern Western societies and their lawless laws, criminal nature, and evil states that are all doomed to perish.

The historical reality was as simple as that: the Qizilbash soldiers were not thieves; quite contrarily, the Ottoman princes, administrators and theologians were crooks. Şehzade Korkut’s caravan was attacked once, whereas the beylerbey of Anatolia (Anadolu) was defeated, when he tried to engage the Şahkulu forces in battle. Then, Bayezid II realized that his empire was about to crumble in Anatolia; he therefore sent Şehzade Ahmet (1511) and the Grand Vizier Hadım (: eunuch) Ali Pasha in order to protect his, his family’s, and his gang’s lawless interests. I severely criticize the Ottoman sultan because he was ruling his realm as a disgrace; when a ruler is not just, moral and lawful, it is the plain right and duty of every person to take justice in his hands.

The dispatch of Şehzade Ahmet happened at the same time, when Bayezid II was fighting against his lawless, faithless and rebel son Selim; this was a development Şehzade Ahmet had to keep a close eye on. During the battle against the Şahkulu forces (near Kütahya), Şehzade Ahmet tried therefore to close a personal deal and an alliance with Şahkulu Karabıyıkoğlu himself; in other words, he attempted to gain his support, as well as that of his movement and of the Qizilbash army for the succession to the Ottoman throne. This would be an excellent solution for all, namely the local populations, the Anatolian Qizilbash, the messianic mystic, and the heir of the Ottoman throne. 

Şehzade Ahmet’s attempt to ascend to power with the support of the Şahkulu movement, if it brought forth great results, would make of the Ottoman Sultanate {then still called ‘(Eastern) Roman Empire’} a perfect copy of the Safavid Empire: a Turanian Empire ruled by a spiritual order. This would trigger exceptionally positive and truly propitious changes across the Islamic world, entirely revivifying Islamic spirituality and terminating the catastrophic theological indoctrination, which finally prevailed and gradually destroyed the Islamic World totally.

Of course, Şehzade Ahmet was not a mystic and he acted only out of his personal interest. Şahkulu Karabıyıkoğlu tried then to gain him to his own cause; however, the affair was very risky, and unfortunately the news leaked. Then, Şehzade Ahmet had to persuade Hadım Ali Pasha that the scope of the negotiations was other, ask him to continue the battle against the Qizilbash army, and run to major Anatolian cities to gain wider regional support for his ascension to the Ottoman throne. The correct place for this was Konya, the leading center of Anatolian spirituality.

The forces of Hadım Ali Pasha pursued the Şahkulu Qizilbash army and after several minor engagements, in the battle of Çubukova (Eastern Cappadocia), both Şahkulu Karabıyıkoğlu and Hadım Ali Pasha were killed (July 1511). However, the Qizilbash force was not dispersed and remained actively powerful. Having prevailed over his rebellious son Selim in August 1511, the embattled Bayezid II had to deal with the chaotic situation of his empire in Anatolia. As Şehzade Ahmet controlled Konya and disobeyed his father’s order to return to his position, Bayezid II believed that the true reason for the spread of the Şahkulu movement was Ismail I; this was a very wrong conclusion, because the Anatolian Qizilbash force was totally independent from the Safavid state. Actually, in the ensuing exchange of royal correspondence, Ismail I totally rejected any involvement in the Şahkulu events in Anatolia; he even went on to explicitly condemn the Anatolian Qizilbash attitude and practices.

Meanwhile, Şehzade Ahmet attempted to advance to Istanbul and dethrone his father, while Selim was in Crimea; however, he failed to advance, as he was blocked by the imperial guard before Bursa. At the same time, Selim gathered a Tatar force and, relying on the Istanbulite theologians’ and bureaucrats’ timely messages and direct support, returned to Istanbul in April 1512 and dethroned his father; no less than a month later (26 May 1512) Bayezid II died dishonored in shameful exile (in Dimetoka, today’s Didymoteicho/Διδυμότειχο on the Turkish-Greek border).

The confrontation between Şehzade Ahmet, who had gathered Qizilbash support in the meantime, and Selim I took place in April 1513 near Bursa, and after an initially indecisive clash, Şehzade Ahmet was defeated and killed. Although Şehzade Korkut had accepted his younger brother’s reign in 1512, Selim I had him killed too, in 1513. An extraordinary purgatory took then place against all the remaining nephews of Selim I, so that the bloody reign of the Ottoman butcher may not be endangered in any way; this would also concern particularly Şehzade Murad, the son of Şehzade Ahmet, who was viewed by the outright majority of the Anatolian population as the rightful heir to the Ottoman throne. However, Şehzade Murad was clever enough to escape to Eastern Anatolia, which was totally out of Ottoman control, communicate with Ismail I, get his support, and coordinate with other Turkmen and Qizilbash forces in order to oppose and eventually overthrow Selim I.

The terrain of the Şahkulu movement

Full of hatred, rancor and hysteria, Selim I carried out an unprecedented ‘white terror campaign’, killing dozens of thousands of civilians under the fake pretext of supporting the Qizilbash army; numbers vary in several historical sources, but an estimate of 50000 people would not be far from truth. This extraordinary bloodshed took place in only one third of today’s Turkey’s territory, namely Western Anatolia. Subsequently, a great number of captives were sent to Rumeli (European provinces of the Ottoman state) and finally settled in Mora Eyalet (ایالت موره; Eyalet-i Mora, today’s Peloponnese in southern Greece).

After the previous description, it becomes clear why, in today’s absurd, disastrous, anti-Turkish and pseudo-Islamic regime of Turkey, one can find journalists who still remember the illustrious Şahkulu movement, having however shaped a disastrously mistaken opinion about it. The so-called ‘political islam’ was indeed fabricated by the French, English and American Orientalists in order to entirely replace the traditional knowledge of the Muslims about the true historical Islam; for this project, an entirely fake History of the Islamic World was scrupulously written, taught and propagated by thousands of Western Orientalist forgers over the last 200 years.

The Islamic forgery of the Western academics did indeed match the ideological forgery that is known as ‘political islam’: they proved to be the two sides of the same coin. The scope of Western Islamology (or ‘Islamic Studies’) was exactly to come up with narratives, which would offer venues to all the Islamists and to the stupid Muslim followers of ‘political islam’ to misperceive the Şahkulu movement (and generally, the entire History of the Islamic World) and to thus shape a totally distorted idea about this topic (and about thousands of other topics). This was done in order to engulf all the Muslims in a totally false perception of the History of the Islamic World, and in an absolutely compact ignorance of their past and heritage.

The fallacious contextualization of the history of the Şahkulu movement had therefore started long before the English secret services selected the ignorant street seller Erdogan for the position to which they raised him, duly fooling the Turkish military, academics, politicians, and businessmen. As he functioned as the prefab puppet of the worst enemies of the Muslims, a false reading of the History of Islam spread throughout Turkey (as it had already been the case in all the other Muslim countries which, contrarily to Turkey, were colonized). As a matter of fact, nowadays all the worthless theologians and disreputable sheikhs of Diyanet (Turkey’s so-called ‘Directorate of Religious Affairs’) are the equivalent of the uneducated, idiotic and evil theologians of the times of Selim I.

A typical example of historical distortion concerning the Şahkulu movement in today’s Turkey is offered by the shameless villain and crook Murat Çolak who published a ridiculous article in the local newspaper of Kahramanmaraş (formerly Germanikeia) ‘Maraş Gündem’ on the 16th July 2018 under the nonsensical title “FETÖ’nun Tarihsel Kökleri Şahkulu İsyanı ve 15 Temmuz” (The historical roots of FETO organization, the Şahkulu Rebellion, and July 15), which is an allusion to the failed coup of the 15th July 2016. Useless to add that there is no connection at all between the Şahkulu movement (not rebellion) and Fethullah Gülen, the notorious leader of the said organization; https://www.marasgundem.com.tr/makale/fetonun-tarihsel-kokleri-sahkulu-isyani-ve-15-temmuz-16277

The war between the Ottoman state and the Safavid Empire had become inevitable, because the unprecedented killings and the Istanbulite anti-Anatolian malignancy caused an even greater reaction among all the populations of Anatolia, Turanian or not. Selim I and Ismail I exchanged several insulting letters prior to the historic Battle of Chaldiran (August 1514) and some of them have been preserved down to our times. They only bear witness to their reciprocal rejection, without however using the colonially-imposed (starting with the 19th c.) false terms ‘Sunni’ and ‘Shia’. About: 

Rıza Yıldırım, Turkomans between two empires: the origins of the Qızılbash identity in Anatolia (1447-1514).

Yasin Arslantaş, Depicting the other: Qizilbash image in the 16th century Ottoman historiography

Click to access 0006379.pdf

Yusuf Küçükdağ, Measures Taken by the Ottoman State against Shah İsmail’s Attempts to Convert Anatolia to Shia

University of Gaziantep Journal of Social Sciences 7(1):1-17 (2008)

https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/223506

https://www fas nus edu sg/hist/eia/documents_archive/selim.php

Click to access 02selimismail.pdf

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/ottoman-persian-relations-i-under-sultan-selim-i-and-shah-esmail-i

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/calderan-battle

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/esmail-i-safawi

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/abul-khayrids-dynasty

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/babor-zahir-al-din

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Shaybani

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Таварих-и_гузида-йи_нусрат-наме

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaybanids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzbek_Khanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanate_of_Bukhara

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selim_I

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/I._Selim

https://www.academia.edu/79310004/Masters_of_the_Pen_The_Divans_of_Selimi_and_Muhibbi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babür

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baburnama

https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/بابر

https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/ظهير_الدين_بابر

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Shaikh_Mirza_II

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Sa%27id_Mirza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Mirza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miran_Shah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughal-Mongol_genealogy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanzada_Begum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ghazdewan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ismail_I

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/I._İsmail

https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/شاه_اسماعیل_یکم

Darius the Great’s Suez Inscriptions: Birth Certificate of the Silk Roads

https://silkroadtexts.wordpress.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Marv

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ghazdewan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanzada_Begum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eahkulu_rebellion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eahkulu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_Islamic_theology#Sh%C4%AB%CA%BFa_schools_of_theology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batin_(Islam)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batiniyya

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esoteric_interpretation_of_the_Quran

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufi_cosmology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufism

https://ottoman.ahya.net/node/100

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/II._Bayezid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayezid_II

https://www.konyapedia.com/makale/3308/sehzade-abdullah-abdullah-bin-bayezit-ii

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eehzade_%C5%9Eehin%C5%9Fah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eehzade_Ahmet

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eehzade_Korkut

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eehzade_Korkut

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eehzade_Mahmud_(II._Bayezid%27in_o%C4%9Flu)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantinople_Observatory_of_Taqi_ad-Din

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Chaldiran

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eehzade_Murad

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padishah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_(title)#Ottoman_Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehmed_the_Conqueror#Conquest_of_Constantinople

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sultans_of_the_Ottoman_Empire#Names

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amir_al-Mu%27minin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custodian_of_the_Two_Holy_Mosques

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Caliphate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqi_ad-Din_Muhammad_ibn_Ma%27ruf

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/historiography-vi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Khwandamir

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habib_al-Siyar

https://www.sid.ir/en/Journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=709213

Click to access jaas072001.pdf

https://journals.openedition.org/asiecentrale/2866

https://journals.openedition.org/asiecentrale/499?lang=en

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatefi

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/golat

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghulat

Comparative evaluation

An objective assessment of the four Turanian rulers whose Iranian education and culture was evident may lead us to devastating conclusions. Finding themselves in different environments, they failed to go beyond the limits of their ‘worlds’. Still, this was imperative for the survival of their respective realms, taking into account what was happening in the Western confines of Asia, namely the pseudo-continent of Europe, which is Asia’s most worthless, most troublesome, and most barbarian peninsula. Consequently, we have to consider them as the initial reason for the collapse of their states, despite the fact that these empires lasted long and fell after 350-400 years. The sole exception is certainly Babur; but he also failed to effectively convey to his offspring and successors the mindset, the predisposition, the attitude, and the ensuing behavior which undeniably helped him transform his Central Asiatic failure into an Indian triumph.

The really embarrassing part of the conclusion is the ascertainment that all four rulers were very civilized, highly cultured, and impressively educated; it goes without saying that I use these terms with the connotation they had at the time, and not the meaning that they have in our fallen, corrupt and putrefied world. They all failed to assess the serious problems that existed in the Islamic World during their lifetime and they proved to be unable to detect the lethal threats that were mounted against their empires and more generally the entire Muslim World. Again, the only exception is Babur, because the time between his conquest of the Sultanate of Delhi and his death is truly brief.

With the exception of Ismail I Safavi (1501-1524), all the rest experienced a rather brief period of reign. Muhammad Shaybani ruled for 10 years (1500-1510); Selim I reigned for only 8 years (1512-1520). And Babur was the sovereign of an empire only for 4.5 years (April 1526-1530). One can truly be astounded with their narrow horizons, naïve approaches to governance, profane understanding of reign, and simplicity in worldview.

Muhammad Shaybani was the living intersection of all things Iranian and Turanian; from his paternal side, he belonged to the lineage of Shayban (also written as Shiban) who was the fifth son of Jochi, the eldest son of Genghis Khan; Jochi was the ancestor of all rulers of the Golden Horde. This means that Muhammad Shaybani was indeed associated and concerned, one way or another, with all the states that came out of the split of the Ulus Jochi (as the Great Empire of the Golden Horde was named at the time), namely the Kazan khanate, the Crimean Khanate, the Qassim Khanate, the Astrakhan khanate and the Nogais.

Muhammad Shaybani was almost 30 years old at the time of the renowned Ugra standoff (1480), when the emperor of the ailing Great Horde failed to impose his dictates on the formerly tributary statelet of Muscovy; Akhmat Khan of the Great Horde and Ivan III of Muscovy, facing one another from the opposite banks of Ugra River, hesitated to cross the river and start fighting, This rather bizarre event is generally considered as the beginning of Muscovy’s independence from the Golden Horde.  

From his maternal side, Muhammad Shaybani was the cousin of Janibek’s son Kasym Khan (reign: 1511-1521), the great Kazakh ruler, who expanded his khanate at the detriment of the Bukhara Khanate. Furthermore, according to the historical treatise “Tavarikh-i guzida-yi nusrat-namah” (Chagatai: تواریخ گزیده نصرت‌نامه ; Таварих-и гузида-йи нусрат-наме), which was elaborated by Alla Murad Annaboyoglu in the early 16th c. (ed. V. P. Yudin/В. П. Юдин, Alma Ata 1969), Munk Timur, i.e. Muhammad Shaybani’s great-great-great-great grandfather, was married to the daughter of a Turanian descendant of Ismail Samani (849-907; reigned after 892), the founder and first ruler of the Samanid dynasty of Eastern Iran, one of the states that seceded from the Abbasid Caliphate while also recognizing the caliph as the head of all Muslims.   

In spite of the aforementioned, briefly presented, background, Muhammad Shaybani remained always a sectarian and tribal ruler. Despite the fact that he was unbiased in his approach to people, although he did not discriminate among Iranians and Turanians (therefore viewing them as one nation), and in spite of the fact that he was truly tolerant in his stance towards Muslim mystics, theologians, members of various tariqas, and followers of different madhhab, he clearly proved to be a treacherous subordinate (to Sultan Ahmed Mirza, a Timurid), a cruel oppressor of the Kazakhs, a disastrous ally to khanate of Moghulistan, a distant and useless friend to Bayezid II, and a consummate plunderer. His poor judgment relied on tribal lineage, family affairs, and petty calculations; this resulted in vindictive deeds, sheer opportunism, and day-to-day governance. He would not be a match for any strong strategist who intended to create an empire. Hating all the Timurids, he defeated Babur several times, but he did not prevent him from establishing one of the world’s greatest empires of all times.

Muhammad Shaybani’s silly head had a well-deserved end; the skull served as a lovely drinking goblet in the hands of Ismail I Safavi. One can even assume that, although it was graciously bejeweled, the goblet was thrown to the ground many times, during those fabulous feasts and banquets of Tabriz – just for fun!

Among these four monarchs, Ismail I Safavi was certainly the best prepared to reign; but he was still acting as a semi-nomad pleased with what was available in nature around him. During his early years in the throne of Tabriz, he used to spend time, camping in the mountains and hunting for several months; there was no urgency to conquer lands and territories. The expansion of his empire was slow and it took the form of a joyful endeavor instead of a serious state affair, scrupulous programming or a major expansion stratagem. There were certainly many wars, notably against the Shirvan kingdom (in part of today’s Azerbaijan), the Kartli and Kakheti kingdoms of Georgia that became vassal states, and the Aq-Qoyunlu nomadic sultanate that was entirely eclipsed, but there was no methodical undertaking in this regard. Not a care in the world!

Within few years, the empire of Ismail I Safavi replaced the Aq-Qoyunlu tribal confederacy, but there were no second thoughts, no back thoughts, and no serious observations, let alone monitoring, of developments, state affairs, and relations among neighboring states. To offer an example, not one Iranian magistrate in the court of Ismail I Safavi took note that two Kakheti Georgian embassies had been dispatched by Alexander I to Ivan III of Muscovy (in 1483 and 1491) as soon as the tiny statelet stopped paying tribute to the Golden Horde.

Ismail I Safavi and his spiritual brethren, namely the members of the most ancient and most venerable Safavid Order and the combatants of the Qizilbash contingent, acted out of free will and spiritual illumination. They did not need to even name their empire; at the beginning; the structures of state were rudimentary, and there was no bureaucracy at all. Ismail I Safavid was indeed closer to Cyrus the Great than Shapur I was. Living the epic moments superbly narrated by Ferdowsi, Nezami Ganjavi and others, performing the spiritual exercises of Saif ad-Din Ardabili, and staying in cities only during the cold winter months of the Iranian plateau, they gave the impression that wars consisted merely in short break times of a peaceful eternity that they enjoyed. Fearless to die in battle, knowledgeable about the Hereafter, and devoted in their vow, they were less envious, possessive and worldly than most of the soldiers of their time. There was no need for a rational plan for war, because this is genuinely evil; there was impulse for war instead – which is genuinely human.

This situation may perhaps appear as confusing and unpromising to many people, but it is not. Of course, it is normal for a mystical fighter to believe that due to the synergy between his soul and body, he is indomitable and invincible; this conviction is basically correct and true. However, it takes a very high degree of moral discipline and of self-restraint for the spiritual potency and the inherent impulse of the fighter to be exacted and exerted. Quite unfortunately, Ismail I Safavi’s spiritual master and mentor, Hossein Beg Laleh Shamlu, tolerated a great degree of self-gratification, self-complacency, and even exuberance; he was lenient with the rising emperor, his brethren, and his guards. This did not bode well for the ruler, his army, and his empire. Compromised moral is tantamount to weakened spirituality and emollient attitude conditions human integrity.

This explains perfectly well why, after his defeat in Chaldiran (1514), Ismail I Safavi collapsed and lived the rest of his life ashamed, in sadness, despair, lamentation and uncontrollable alcoholism; in reality, there was nothing to be sad for. During the battle, the Iranians were about to mark a thunderous victory, being provenly better trained to fight; the Ottomans won only because they started using gunpowder artillery that the Iranians did not have. Even worse, the Ottoman army was about to be cut to two pieces, because the Janissaries did not accept to fight against and kill their Muslim brethren. Actually, the Ottoman soldiers who used the cannons that they had transported with greatly difficulty also murdered Ottoman Janissaries. However, a mystical fighter with compromised moral and self-indulgent attitude certainly collapses after a defeat; quite contrarily, a mystic strongly experienced in ascetic self-denial never feels sorrow, frustration and depression – ever after an extreme adversity.   

Having to fight against monstrous criminals, rancorous establishments, bloodthirsty rulers, rancorous enemies, inhumanely cruel soldiers, professional serial killers, and greedy armies that sailed off to intentionally perpetrate genocide in Mexico and to circumvent Africa by sailing around the Cape of Good Hope, the Safavid elite was rather living in a dream that turned out to become a nightmare for Iran and for the almost the entire world. Iran had always been a major empire with long maritime tradition; Achaemenid Iran is credited with the merge of several earlier regional trade routes that had existed for millennia; this was due to the unmatched, royal administrative genius of Darius I the Great (522-486 BCE).

Darius the Great’s contribution to the emergence of the east-west trade network was twofold: a) the establishment of the Royal Iranian Road and b) the circumnavigation of the Arabian Peninsula and the direct maritime connection of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea with the Persian Gulf. Oman was always an Iranian satrapy; and during the Sassanid times, Iran invaded also Yemen, which was a focal land for the world trade between East and West. However, this background was entirely lost and the Safavid elite did not care at all about the maritime presence and strength of their empire despite the fact that in the beginning of the 16th c., Iranians still controlled an important part of the commerce between East and West, having always been an important constituent of the Islamic times’ navigation and trade. But for all the people around Ismail I Safavi, treasures were to be mainly collected from lands conquered and cities pillaged.

For the case of Ismail I Safavi, one is however tempted to think that the historical heritage itself rather than the various individuals and the ruling elite resurrected the Iranian Empire under the Safavid dynasty. The spiritual exercises of the Safavid Order, their ruminations, their cordial illuminations, and their angelic invocations seem to have electrified the Soul of Iran as incantated by Ferdowsi; but their impious self-indulgence confused the serenity of their souls and made it sure that their pledge was predestined to doom.  

Selim I shared the same ideas as Ismail I Safavi and Muhammad Shaybani about a state’s chances to acquire wealth; this was not due to cultural tradition (as in Iran) or to geomorphological impact (as in Central Asia). The state that Selim I -through plots, family disloyalty, treason, and shameful banditry- managed to put under control stretched from Central Anatolia to Belgrade; this had been the usual, typical domain of the Constantinopolitan βασιλείς (basileis; emperors) from the 7th to the 12th c. The official name of the state was invariably ‘Eastern Roman Empire’, and this was the will of all the successors of Mehmet II. But quite unfortunately, the ill-fated Ottoman Sultanate was controlled by a criminal, pseudo-Muslim family, which was manipulated by idiotic theologians, sectarian sheikhs, and a bogus-Islamic authority, the sheikh-ul-Islam (also written as Shaykh al-Islam). The sultans wanted, quite absurdly, to represent the Eastern Roman imperial tradition, while remaining the petty warriors (غازى; ghazi), who relied on worthless and unnecessary razzias (غزية), i.e. military expeditions of greedy barbarians; this meant that they were a 14th c. state in a 16th c. world; this situation could not possibly have a successful exit.

The immediate descendants of Mehmet II continued ruling their realm in a most ineffective manner that included very contradictory elements, practices, concepts and procedures, which produced endless tensions. On one side, the devshirme (دوشیرمه; devshirme; lit. ‘collecting’), i.e. child levy, and the janissary infantry elite (یڭیچری; yeniçeri) gave the Ottoman sultan (and, after 1453, emperor) the real tools to create a formidable empire similar to that of Justinian I. But on the other side, the obscure, nefarious and ominous presence of a body of execrable theologians and their increasing, onerous and catastrophic impact on the sultan gradually turned the Ottoman sultanate to a sort of Papo-Caesarist realm, whereas for the Eastern Roman Empire (of which the Ottomans wanted to make their state the living continuity) the Caesaropapist model of rule had to be the sole, paramount and permanent concept of imperial order.

The existing anachronistic elements, the tensions ensued from the contradictory dynamics, the ruinous hatred unleashed by the blind, dogmatic and cruel sheikhs and sheikh-ul-islams, and the vindictive stance of many sultans (as well as of other members of the Ottoman family) triggered unprecedented reactions. In their outright majority, the populations, either Christian or Muslim, reviled the cursed state of the Ottoman family (دولت عليه عثمانیه; Devlet-i Aliye-i Osmaniye), whereas the wretched family in a vicious and most anti-Islamic manner disrespected the humans that God had entrusted to them. This situation led to real worsening of the living conditions, sheer deterioration of the state structures, and grave decrease of government effectiveness.

The Ottoman Sultanate never managed to acquire a well-structured administration; that’s why it was never a strong empire that could methodically elaborate a program of expansion or Reconquista. Islamic spirituality was besmirched, attacked and later prohibited; the worthless Ottoman bureaucracy was a burden; the wars declared against neighboring empires were due to sectarian or arbitrary motives; and the only sound element in the empire was the janissary elite.

A mere comparison of the Roman and the Ottoman possessions in Africa helps everyone realize how absurd, precarious and inconsequential the rule of the Ottoman sultans was. On the Black Continent, the Ottomans controlled an area more sizeable than the largest Roman dominions there. The Romans never managed to advance successfully south of Egypt and to conquer the Cushitic (i.e. Ancient Ethiopian) Kingdom of Meroe in today’s Sudan; but they controlled the African North up to the coasts of today’s Morocco.

The Ottomans invaded Egypt (1516-1517) to disband the Mamluk state, and then they progressively extended their rule over the entire coast of North Africa, thus including Algiers (1518), Benghazi (1521), Tripoli (1551) and Tunis (1574) in their domain; the Ottomans were invited and acclaimed by the indigenous populations that were mostly Muslim (only according to Western colonial propaganda, the Ottomans ‘colonized’ North Africa), and until the time these lands were incorporated into the Caliphate, the Ottoman Emperor was acknowledged as the caliph – which already made of these lands real dependencies of the Constantinopolitan Muslim ruler. Under Suleiman the Magnificent (1554) and Murat III (1576), two Ottoman military expeditions were undertaken in Morocco, ending with the capture of Fez.

In Eastern Africa, the Ottomans sent detachments and corsairs to defend the Somalis against the Portuguese (in the 1520s-1540s), having excellent relations with all the Somali sultanates, notably Adal and the Ajuuraan Empire. In fact, by recognizing the caliph at Constantinople and by mentioning his name first in the Friday prayer, all Muslim African sultanates and emirates recognized the Ottoman Caliphate, thus becoming effectively mere dependencies of the Caliphate. That’s why there was no real need for an Ottoman invasion of the Western Africa, Sahara (the Songhai, Mali, Hausa-Zaria, Kanem-Bornu, Wadai, Funj, Darfur, and other realms), and Eastern Africa. Located south of the Mısır eyaleti (as the province of Egypt was named in Ottoman Turkish), the Habeş eyaleti (i.e. the province of Abyssinia) comprised the coastal lands of today’s Sudan, Eritrea, Djibouti, and parts of today’s Somalia and Ethiopia). The Adal Somali sultanate shared therefore borders with the Ottoman Empire.

But exactly because of the highly de-centralized condition of the Muslim African world, it was totally impossible for them to establish a major, functional force ready to repel colonial attacks. Even worse, the Ottoman dominions in North Africa never became a serious matter of governmental concern and there was never a real effort to organize, systematize and standardize the integration of the African vilayets into the Ottoman state. Certainly, the Ottoman Empire controlled vast territories in Africa; but because of the aforementioned problems, these lands were a burden rather than an advantage and an asset. In this regard, Selim I’s attack against the Mamluk state and his subsequent invasion of Syria, Palestine, Arabia and Egypt, after the victory he marked over Ismail I Safavi in Chaldiran, proved to be a complete waste of the Ottoman military resources.

Bayezid II’s disloyal son was not prepared to become an emperor and that’s why he was a miserable opportunist without a clue of strategy; he could not understand what truly makes an empire strong, wealthy and sustainable. With respect to the expansion of a state, he did not know which lands are necessary and which are not; even worse, he did not observe -let alone study- patterns and models of expansion from the History of the Islamic Caliphates and Empires.

Selim I was a blind, indoctrinated idiot, who -after his victory in Chaldiran- lost the unique opportunity to promptly invade Iran, merge the two Turanian and Iranian empires, and then attack the Sultanate of Delhi. I have however to admit that he did not have the correct education, the shrewd mindset, and the accurate perception of the reality to possibly think strategically and act accordingly. The Iranian plateau and the valleys of Hindustan (India) and Bengal were far more important than the sands of Arabia and the waters of the Nile.

Had he attempted to establish one empire from Danube to Ganges, he would have followed the example of Timur (Tamerlane); at the same time, he would have created a uniquely wealthy empire able to possess the inexorable resources and the technical infrastructure needed to oppose and defeat the Western colonial kingdoms.

Babur makes Humayun his successor (1530); miniature from a manuscript of the Akbarnameh (created ca. 1602-3)

Babur treated by doctors during a serious illness, in 1498; while recuperating, Babur had a relapse and his condition became critical; for four days he could only take water dribbled into his mouth from a piece of cotton, and for several days he could barely speak.

In his Baburnama (Book of Babur), the founder of the Mughal Empire describes his struggle first to assert and defend his claim to the throne of Samarkand and the region of the Fergana Valley. After being driven out of Samarkand in 1501, he sought to create his headquarters in Kabul and then in northern India in Delhi. In this miniature from a manuscript of the Baburnama, Babur meets Sultan Ali Mirza near Samarqand.

Scene from Babur’s wars; from a miniature of the Farsi edition of Baburnama (translation by the Mughal courtier Abdul Rahīm in AH 998, i.e. 1589-90)

Babur from the miniature of manuscript of Baburnama currently in the Museum of Oriental Art (Государственный музей Востока), Moscow

Vasily III, ruler of Muscovy (1479-1533; reigned after 1505), son of Ivan III and Sophia Palaiologina, receives the ambassador from Babur; miniature from the 19th volume of the Illustrated Chronicle of Ivan the Terrible (Лицевой летописный свод Ивана Грозного)

The Mausoleum of Babur (Bagh-e Babur, i.e. Babur Gardens) in Kabul

Khusrau shah swearing loyalty to Babur; miniature from the Baburnama copy in Moscow

Babur receiving Baqi Beg Chaghaniyani, a Turkistani Qipchaq, in his encampment on the banks of the Amu Darya (Oxus); Baqi was a loyal supporter of Babur contrarily to his brother Khusraw shah, whom Baqi brought to pledge allegiance; however, at a later moment, Khusraw shah proved to be a traitor once more. Miniature from a manuscript now in the British Library (Or. 3714, f. 35v); it was painted by the Mughal artist Bhem Gujarati.

Miniature from a Baburnama manuscript now in the National Museum, New Delhi; squirrels, a peacock and peahen, demoiselle cranes and fishes

Babur was exempt of sectarian ideas, tribal mentality, and worthless theological prescriptions; of the Western colonial powers he had minimal knowledge, if any. Deep in his heart and mind he had apparently the wish and the dream to prove himself worthy of his glorious past; for this reason, he needed to establish himself somewhere, i.e. to set up the headquarters of his forthcoming empire. Samarqand was an ideal location; but there he failed repeatedly. Babur’s life was not that of a great emperor, because prior to the invasion of the Delhi Sultanate, his realm was always small and constantly under attack.

Continuously moving from place to place with his few but loyal and devout soldiers, Babur was however an indomitable adventurer, an indefatigable soldier, an excellent tactician, and a great strategist. The greatness of the Mughal Empire, which was far wealthier than the Ottoman Empire, Iran, Russia, Holland, England and even Louis XIV’s France, was basically due to its founder Babur. As it is known, he died rather young (at 47). If he had lived as long as his great ancestor Tamerlane (69), the History of Asia would have certainly been markedly different.

Great rulers are those who prepare well their successors; to do so, they have to endlessly convey to their heirs their way of thinking, their approach to facts, their reaction to developments, their world perception and worldview, and -last but not the least- their method of governance. This is often a long enduring process; it is not always sure that the elder son of a ruler is fit to it. For this reason, we often observe a ruler’s predilection for his second or third son. For Babur this dilemma did not exist; Humayun (همایون/lit. ‘auspicious’ in Farsi; born as Mirza Nasir-ud-Din Muhammad; 1508-1556) was his firstborn (being also son to Babur’s favorite wife Maham Begum), and he proved to be a loyal, shrewd and very knowledgeable heir.

Babur apparently imparted his first son with many of his crucial personal traits and great abilities, notably his mobility, agility, flexibility and adaptability. That’s why Humayun managed to survive, although he was inexperienced at the beginning of his reign, when he faced many challenges, particularly from his half-brother Kamran Mirza and from Sher Shah Suri, a villainous and heinous scoundrel who set up a divisive but temporary rule. All the same, Humayun recaptured his empire with the help of Ismail I Safavi’s son Shah Tahmasp I (طهماسب; 1514-1576), and later consolidated and even expanded his realm. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humayun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamran_Mirza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tahmasp_I

However, Babur did not achieve to pass onto his son and successor a superb quality that was the top trait of Timur’s and Genghis Khan’s idiosyncrasy; this consists in a rare moral expertise and spiritual dexterity to invariably disdain and undervalue material achievements of one’s own and to thus infallibly maintain the original impulse toward a great vision permanently alive. Genghis Khan and Timur were indelibly motivated by their vision to unite the world; Babur was stimulated by his first target to re-establish the great empire of his ancestors, but he did not stay long on the throne of Agra (1526-1530).

With him died the vision of a universal empire. Humayun had to fight all his life long to eliminate threats and challenges and, when everything was put under control, he did not enjoy his throne more than few months before dying at 48, due to an accident. When Akbar I (أكبر; born Abu’l-Fath Jalal-ud-din Muhammad; 1542-1605; reigned after 1556) was crowned, very little was left from the original vision of his grandfather, Babur. Akbar I expanded greatly his realm and, after a certain moment, he shifted his interest to the North with the intention to extend his borders up to the ancestral lands in Central Asia; but by the end of the 16th c., it had become very clear to Akbar I that it was impossible to incorporate Samarqand and the Ferghana Valley to his empire.

To the early instability of the Mughal Empire and to Akbar I’s effort to expand in Central Asia testify the incessant changes of the Mughal capital: Agra 1526-1540, Agra 1555-1571, Fatehpur Sikri 1571-1585, Lahore 1586-1598 (reflecting Akbar I’s move to the North), Agra 1598-1648 and Delhi 1648-1857. In fact, Akbar’s death marks the end of every Central Asiatic venture of the Mughal rulers.  

The Mughal Empire expanded greatly across the Asiatic South, notably the Deccan; it impacted considerably the formation of Muslim sultanates in Southeastern Asia and the islands of today’s Indonesia. All the same, the Gurkanian (گورکانیان; lit. ‘the sons-in law’), as the Iranians called the Mughal emperors due to an old Turanian tradition, only corroborated the unchangeable verdict of History, namely that from Central Asia, Iran, Mesopotamia and Anatolia great military expeditions to faraway lands have often been and can actually be undertaken successfully; but no ruler has ever launched a campaign and a conquest of major parts of Asia, starting from the Valley of Indus and the Valley of Ganges. (The same is also valid for the Yellow River and the Yangtze River valleys.)

Having a truly complex mindset, a very wealthy, composite and perplex culture, and a spiritual impact on their reasoning, the Mughals, the Safavids and the Ottomans could never understand how simple, low, and profane the intentions, attitudes, and mindsets of the colonial bandits, soldiers, merchants, academics and agents were. Had they perceived accurately the level of the colonial purposes and objectives, they would have early reacted against the Western barbarism, cruelty and monstrosity; but they were not able to lower their intellect in order to deal with petty things. They mistook the Western inhumanity for foolishness; their mistake allowed the Western colonials to achieve their targets. How could it have been otherwise? Occam’s razor, if described to a Mughal, Safavid or Ottoman erudite scholar, would have been considered as totally nonsensical, puerile, absurd, and typical for savages. That’s why English, French, Dutch, and American savagery plunged all these civilized lands to poverty, wars, genocides, and interminable destructions down to our days. About:

The simplicity principle in perception and cognition

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5125387/

Blue Mosque, Istanbul: the most representative Ottoman architectural masterpiece

Masjid-e Shah / The Mosque of Shah, Isfahan: the most representative Safavid Iranian architectural masterpiece

Taj Mahal, Agra: the most representative Mughal architectural masterpiece

——————————————————–  

FORTHCOMING

Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey

2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists

By Prof. Muhammet Şemsettin Gözübüyükoğlu

(Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

CONTENTS

PART ONE. INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I: A World held Captive by the Colonial Gangsters: France, England, the US, and the Delusional History Taught in their Deceitful Universities

A. Examples of fake national names

a) Mongolia (or Mughal) and Deccan – Not India!

b) Tataria – Not Russia!

c) Romania (with the accent on the penultimate syllable) – Not Greece!

d) Kemet or Masr – Not Egypt!

e) Khazaria – not Israel!

f) Abyssinia – not Ethiopia!

B. Earlier Exchange of Messages in Turkish

C. The Preamble to My Response

CHAPTER II: Geopolitics does not exist.

CHAPTER III: Politics does not exist.

CHAPTER IV: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: Orientalism, conceptualization, contextualization, concealment

A. Orientalism

B. Conceptualization

C. Contextualization

D. Concealment

PART TWO. EXAMPLE OF ACADEMICALLY CONCEALED, KEY HISTORICAL TEXT

CHAPTER V: Plutarch and the diffusion of Ancient Egyptian and Iranian Religions and Cultures in Ancient Greece

PART THREE. TURKEY AND IRAN BEYOND POLITICS AND GEOPOLITICS: REJECTION OF THE ORIENTALIST, TURKOLOGIST AND IRANOLOGIST FALLACIES ABOUT ACHAEMENID HISTORY

CHAPTER VI:  The fallacy that Turkic nations were not present in the wider Mesopotamia – Anatolia region in pre-Islamic times

PART SIX. FALLACIES ABOUT THE EARLY EXPANSION OF ISLAM: THE FAKE ARABIZATION OF ISLAM

CHAPTER XVIII: Western Orientalist falsifications of Islamic History: Identification of Islam with only Hejaz at the times of the Prophet

PART ELEVEN. HOW AND WHY THE OTTOMANS, THE SAFAVIDS AND THE MUGHALS FAILED  

CHAPTER XXX: The Battle of Chaldiran (1514), and how it predestined the Fall of the Islamic World

CHAPTER XXXI: Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals: victims of their sectarianism, tribalism, theology, and wrong evaluation of the colonial West

CHAPTER XXXII: Ottomans, Iranians and Mughals from Nader Shah to Kemal Ataturk

PART TWELVE. CONCLUSION

CHAPTER XXXIII: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: whereto?

—————————————————  

List of the already pre-published chapters of the book

Lines separate chapters that belong to different parts of the book.

CHAPTER VII: The Fallacious Representation of Achaemenid Iran by Western Orientalists

https://www.academia.edu/106013407/The_Fallacious_Representation_of_Achaemenid_Iran_by_Western_Orientalists

CHAPTER VIII: The premeditated disconnection of Atropatene / Adhurbadagan from the History of Azerbaijan

https://www.academia.edu/105841665/The_premeditated_disconnection_of_Atropatene_Adhurbadagan_from_the_History_of_Azerbaijan

CHAPTER IX: Iranian and Turanian nations in Achaemenid Iran

https://www.academia.edu/105880180/Iranian_and_Turanian_nations_in_Achaemenid_Iran

CHAPTER X: Iranian and Turanian Religions in Pre-Islamic Iran 

https://www.academia.edu/105664696/Iranian_and_Turanian_Religions_in_Pre_Islamic_Iran

—————————- 

CHAPTER XI: Alexander the Great as Iranian King of Kings, the fallacy of Hellenism, and the nonexistent Hellenistic Period

https://www.academia.edu/105386978/Alexander_the_Great_as_Iranian_King_of_Kings_the_fallacy_of_Hellenism_and_the_nonexistent_Hellenistic_Period

CHAPTER XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty

https://www.academia.edu/52541355/Parthian_Turan_an_Anti_Persian_dynasty

CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids

https://www.academia.edu/105539884/Parthian_Turan_and_the_Philhellenism_of_the_Arsacids

———————————   

CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire

https://www.academia.edu/105053815/Arsacid_and_Sassanid_Iran_and_the_wars_against_the_Mithraic_Christian_Roman_Empire

CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism

https://www.academia.edu/105117675/Sassanid_Iran_Turan_Kartir_Roman_Empire_Christianity_Mani_and_Manichaeism

CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates

https://www.academia.edu/96142922/Iran_Turan_Manichaeism_and_Islam_during_the_Migration_Period_and_the_Early_Caliphates

———————————-

CHAPTER XVII: Iran–Turan and the Western, Orientalist distortions about the successful, early expansion of Islam during the 7th-8th c. CE

https://www.academia.edu/105292787/Iran_Turan_and_the_Western_Orientalist_distortions_about_the_successful_early_expansion_of_Islam_during_the_7th_8th_c_CE

CHAPTER XIX: The fake, Orientalist Arabization of Islam

https://www.academia.edu/105713891/The_fake_Orientalist_Arabization_of_Islam

CHAPTER XX: The systematic dissociation of Islam from the Ancient Oriental History

https://www.academia.edu/105565861/The_systematic_dissociation_of_Islam_from_the_Ancient_Oriental_History

—————————————   

CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’

https://www.academia.edu/55139916/The_Fabrication_of_the_Fake_Divide_Sunni_Islam_vs_Shia_Islam_

——————————————  

CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate

https://www.academia.edu/61193026/The_Fake_Persianization_of_the_Abbasid_Caliphate

——————————————– 

CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash

https://www.academia.edu/96519269/From_Ferdowsi_to_the_Seljuk_Turks_Nizam_al_Mulk_Nizami_Ganjavi_Jalal_ad_Din_Rumi_and_Haji_Bektash

————————————————  

CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur

https://www.academia.edu/104034939/From_Genghis_Khan_Nasir_al_Din_al_Tusi_and_Hulagu_to_Timur_Tamerlane_

CHAPTER XXV: Timur (Tamerlane) as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr, his exploits and triumphs, and the slow rise of the Turanian Safavid Order

https://www.academia.edu/105230290/Timur_Tamerlane_as_a_Turanian_Muslim_descendant_of_the_Great_Hero_Manuchehr_his_exploits_and_triumphs_and_the_slow_rise_of_the_Turanian_Safavid_Order

CHAPTER XXVI: The Timurid Era as the Peak of the Islamic Civilization: Shah Rukh, and Ulugh Beg, the Astronomer Emperor

https://www.academia.edu/105267173/The_Timurid_Era_as_the_Peak_of_the_Islamic_Civilization_Shah_Rukh_and_Ulugh_Beg_the_Astronomer_Emperor

—————————————– 

CHAPTER XXVII: Ethnically Turanian Safavids & Culturally Iranian Ottomans: two identical empires that mirrored one another

https://www.academia.edu/105744200/Ethnically_Turanian_Safavids_and_Culturally_Iranian_Ottomans_two_identical_empires_that_mirrored_one_another

CHAPTER XXVIII: Spirituality, Religion & Theology: the fallacy of the Safavid conversion of Iran to ‘Shia Islam’

https://www.academia.edu/105770339/Spirituality_Religion_and_Theology_the_fallacy_of_the_Safavid_conversion_of_Iran_to_Shia_Islam

————————————————–

Download the chapter (text only) in PDF:

Download the chapter (with pictures and legends) in PDF:

Spirituality, Religion & Theology: the fallacy of the Safavid conversion of Iran to ‘Shia Islam’

Pre-publication of chapter XXVIII of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapters XXVII to XXXII form Part Eleven (How and why the Ottomans, the Safavids and the Mughals failed) of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Chapter XXVII has already been pre-published.

Until now, 17 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the present book; this chapter is therefore the 18th (out of 33) to be uploaded. At the end of the text, the entire Table of Contents is made available. Pre-published chapters are marked in blue color, and the present chapter is highlighted in green color. 

In addition, a list of all the already pre-published chapters (with the related links) is made available at the very end, after the Table of Contents.

The book is written for the general readership with the intention to briefly highlight numerous distortions made by the racist, colonial academics of Western Europe and North America only with the help of absurd conceptualization and preposterous contextualization.

———————– 

Keyumars: the central figure of Islamic mysticism, as he encompasses the souls of all prophets and kings. The miniature presents a vision of the “The Court of Keyumars” and it was painted by the illustrious Safavid court artist Sultan Muhammad around 1522. Who is Keyumars? Mentioned as Gayo Maretan in the Avesta and as Gayomard in Parsi (: late Zoroastrian) texts of Islamic times, he was superbly mythologized by Ferdowsi in his Shahnameh as the First Man, the First King, and the Founder of the Pishdadian dynasty of Righteous Rulers. Keyumars epitomizes life within a mortal world, thus setting in motion the concept of eternal presence and heralding the ultimate victory of the Messiah as the New (or Last) Keyumars.

Currently, the most common encyclopedic definitions of the two terms present these two distinct activities as overlapping or describe spirituality as a part of religion; this is however wrong, if it is considered as valid for all the religions of the world. Many historical religions started as a form of systematization of spirituality and of spiritual rules and they ended up as totally materialistic, rationalistic, and juristic systems of theology. The representatives of these systems have nothing to do with spirituality; they hate the spiritual universe about which they talk too much but only to confuse and besot the rest, and in the Name of God, they commit the world’s cruelest crimes in order to defend their otherwise nonexistent right to survive.

Irrespective of posterior alterations, deteriorations and degenerations, the original fact has always been spirituality; contrarily to religion, spirituality does not need a society to be activated, performed, and experienced. Spirituality is the cornerstone and the epitome of humanity. The human being was created as a unity of soul and body, and if one of the parts of the human identity is disconnected from the other, the being is not human anymore. In the human being, the soul represents the being’s connection to the spiritual world and the body consists in the being’s bond with the material world. What material vivacity is for the body is spiritual life for the soul.

Separation of the soul from the body is called death; disconnection of the soul from the body is also a form of death, and this was hinted at by numerous leading spiritual masters, like for instance Jesus (e.g. “let the dead bury their own dead”; Matthew 8:22). Since God is the Supreme Spiritual Being and the Creator of the spiritual and the material universes, the soul of the man connects, or does not connect, to God. And this is exactly what spirituality is about: spiritual life.

In other words, whereas human society is useless, worthless and unnecessary for the human being to exist and to live, spirituality encompasses all actions, practices, exercises, efforts and techniques pertaining to the interaction between a human being’s soul and body (: heart and mind) and to the activation of a human being’s connection with the spiritual universe – and with the countless spiritual beings and hierarchies that are set in motion and operate therein. Because spirituality, namely spiritual life, is of the foremost importance in the human being’s passage from the material world, many spiritual masters, mystics and spiritually active men departed from their society or lived a secluded life; this was due to the fact that human society can be either unnecessary or even harmful to a person’s spirituality. This common phenomenon is attested in numerous civilizations, and in some of them, it takes the form of asceticism or monasticism.

The early religions in Mesopotamia (Sumer, Elam, Akkad, Assyria, and Babylon), Anatolia (Hatti, Hurrians, Hittites, and Luwians), Egypt, Cush (Sudan), Canaan, and Iran were systems that offered their apprentice priests the possibility to

a) learn and practice all levels of soul-body (spiritual/material) interaction in a human being,

b) comprehend the nature, the norms, and the dimensions of the spiritual and material universes, the stages of their creation, and the phases of their final dissolution (every Cosmogony involves a Cosmology, a Soteriology, and an Eschatology), and

c) learn and perform all types of synergy with spiritual beings and hierarchies as per the needs and the targets set.

To be properly understood, the aforementioned has to be taken into consideration in the light of the following four critical points: 

i. the ‘language’ used for the spiritual initiation, formation, education and activation of the apprentice priests by the hierophants and the high priests was the archetypal Oriental Myth, i.e. the inherently created and permanently manifested, within the human being, system of spiritual perception and comprehension, communication and interaction with all other intelligences, spiritual beings, humans, animals, plants and other beings of the material universe. In and by itself, the original Oriental Myth is the complete field of symbolic semiotics that encompasses all forms of Being and Becoming, their opposites, and the correlation between Being and Non-being. In other words, it is part of the Creation, and not a human invention or perception.

ii. the spiritual exercises, practices, advance and completion of the apprentice priests took place irrespective of the spiritual/material duality of Moral Order, i.e. the Good and Evil; this does not mean that this duality is irrelevant. On the contrary, the spiritual duality was reflected on the material universe, and there were entire priesthoods that preached and practiced a counterfeit, evil spirituality at the very antipodes of the moral priesthoods, which followed the Moral Order, i.e. the Law of God.

iii. the aforementioned duality of Moral Order has a lot to do with the Fall of Man or rather the successive stages of the Fall, which are known as the Flood, the Tower of Babel, etc. within the Ancient Hebrew (Biblical) religious context, and accordingly in other, earlier or later, civilizations. These stages of gradual moral degradation caused a) the progressive disconnection of the soul from the body in most of the humans,

b) the subsequent dissociation of the human being from the spiritual universe,

c) the subordination of the immoral, counterfeit priesthoods to the fallen spiritual beings,

d) the deterioration of the conditions of material life on Earth,

e) the preservation of the spiritual potency among several sacerdotal circles during the 3rd and the 2nd millennium BCE, and

f) the abysmal confrontation between the moral and the immoral priesthoods as part of the clash between Good and Evil in both, the spiritual and the material, universes.

One of the repercussions of this confrontation was the compilation of counterfeit religions geared to engulf humans not only to spiritual disconnection, but also to spiritual impotence and black magic; the very concept of an ‘intermediate’ (being, priest, idol, thought or anything) between the human being and God is the epitome of black magic, as it helps transfer spiritual and material (intellectual) power from an impotent, unconscious and spiritually disconnected human being to another person that gets criminally powered at both, the spiritual and the material, levels, therefore resulting in impermissible and lawless exploitation.

Keyumars instructs his officers to combat Ahriman: this is how the preaching of all the prophets in encapsulated in one symbolic representation. Spirituality does not need volumes of otherwise useless treatises to set the norms and convey the truth about Life.

iv. at the very early days of the History of Mankind, spirituality constituted the epicenter of religion, and so it was in every teaching and practice of a great spiritual master. All true founders of religions were basically leading spiritual masters, who did not launch ‘religions’ properly speaking, but taught their disciples and preached at large the authentic spirituality (the interaction between the human being’s soul and body, and the human being’s connection with the spiritual universe) and the inherent (since the Creation) Moral Order that all humans must follow.

In fact, religion came later either in the simple form of systematization of spirituality and of spiritual rules within the context of human society where the Moral Order should prevail or in the perplex form of counterfeit religions with black magic rituals of many types, i.e. ‘cult’.

Now, if one wants to understand what spiritual potency means, one can find plenty of examples in every literature, tradition, culture and civilization. Within the context of Christianity, one can refer to the well–known excerpt from the Gospel of Matthew (17:20) in which Jesus says to his disciples the following:

“Because you have such little faith”, he told them. “I tell you, if you have faith even as small as a mustard seed, you could say to this mountain, ‘Go from here to over there’, and it would do it, and nothing would be impossible for you”.

Among numerous other deeds, which are nowadays erroneously (and due to the aforementioned, successive falls of Mankind) considered as ‘miraculous’, spiritual potency of a human involves the following: levitation, walking on water, telekinesis, teleportation across distances, healing, total control of electromagnetic fields, bodily luminescence, control over all natural forces, movement across various points in time, transfiguration, power over fallen (or evil, demonic) spirits and hierarchies, resurrection of the dead, and heavenly travels, like those of

a) the Biblical Enoch (Islamic Idris),

b) the Biblical Elijah (Islamic Ilyas),

c) Jesus (Islamic Isa),

d) Mani, the prophet and founder of Manichaeism,

e) Kartir, the leading theologian and high priest of the Mazdaean religion during the early Sassanid times,

f) the legendary Arda Viraf of the Parsis (as described in the Arda Wiraz namag), and

g) Prophet Muhammad, i.e. the well-known Isra’ and Mi’raj (الإسراء والمعراج) nocturnal travel; about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah#Ascension_into_the_heavens

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascension_of_Jesus

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/kartir (iii. Kartīr’s Inscriptions, Kartīr’s career and promotions; THE JOURNEY)

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/arda-wiraz-wiraz

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isra_and_Mi%27raj

As the fall of human societies and the decline of the human condition intensified, spirituality was reduced tremendously and the spiritual potency of most of the priesthoods became nil, with the exception of those whose spiritual power was not theirs anymore, but that of the demons inhabiting the souls of the priests who were acting as mere servants of negative hierarchies.

The fall of Mankind is symbolized within the context of Islamic mysticism by Kay Kavus, the second king of the Kayanian dynasty; in this miniature, Kay Kavus (son of the sublime Kay Kawad (or Kay Qubad), father of the misfortunate Siyavash (or Siyavush), and grandfather of Kay Khusraw, the resolute, selfless soldier and end times’ vanquisher) is being captured by the divs, i.e. the evil spirits that work for Ahriman.

As spiritual power among humans decreased considerably and was limited among few circles of priests and mystics or in isolated cases of ascetics, the condition of human life was restricted to the material level, and then an enormous materialistic, rationalistic, and juristic literature surfaced only to verbally and nominally guide the believers to the ‘correct path’, which was of course not correct and not a path, but a catastrophic swamp and a wrong impasse. Then, the ‘faithful’ were truly left without ‘faith’, because this term originally denoted only the spiritual potency acquired by an individual (as it is clearly shown in the aforementioned example).

In fact, the spiritual connotation of the word ‘faith’ means performance of acts, which in today’s fallen world are considered ‘miraculous’, but in reality they are not. ‘Faith’ does not mean mere acceptance of a narrative; this is a devious, degenerated and corrupt meaning of this word. This materialistic, rationalistic, and juristic literature, which appeared in later periods, among decadent nations, reduced the original Oriental Myth to a meaningless narrative about past times; this contributed to the alteration of the earlier form of religion, rendering some narratives ‘incredible’ or ‘inexplicable’, due to the proliferation of the idiotic rationalism of the fallen humans. Then, the worthless believers accepted the ‘unbelievable’ stories blindly, further worsening their condition of grave faithlessness (without of course realizing the calamitous situation in which they found themselves).

This worthless verbosity of materialistic, rationalistic, and juristic character is called nowadays “theology”. This means simply that what the average Assyrian, Egyptian, Babylonian, Phoenician and Hebrew of the 10th c. BCE knew as ‘Flood’ had nothing in common with the de-mythicized and therefore meaningless idea that the average Babylonian, Egyptian, Aramaean, Jew, Greek and Roman of the 1st c. BCE believed about that critical event. The same concerns the followers of later religions today, but not the disciples and the believers of later mystics and spiritual masters who had managed to attain the lost spirituality.

The term “theology” does not therefore apply properly to the earlier sacred texts of the 3rd and the 2nd millennium BCE; whatever their contents may have been (mythical, apocalyptic, moral, literary, etc.), the earlier sacred texts of all religions were in fact ‘texts of spiritual awakeness’ – except for sacerdotal texts compiled by immoral, counterfeit and polytheistic priesthoods.

The preservation of socioeconomic power by the theological gangs and all those, who distorted the early systems of spirituality and defiled the spiritual teachings of later mystics and spiritual masters, was their main concern. For these preposterous theologians, morality among believers did not constitute the true promise of an individual’s spiritual rehabilitation and ultimate salvation, but a means to implement their own anti-spiritual, anti-godly, material(istic) takeover of the society.

Theology therefore signifies the death of spirituality, the falsification of religion, and the degeneration of the sacred texts in the minds of the believers; for this purpose, the average believer’s mindset is aptly distorted, the earlier faith is disoriented, and the people are made unable to ever perceive and understand correctly all things spiritual. Consequently, theologically hijacked religions are tantamount to systems of mental, intellectual, educational, academic, cultural, artistic and socio-economic prison and tyranny. They apparently ended up in the putrefaction of the human being.

There is an exception to the aforementioned; it occurs when there is no established religion but conflicting theological systems, and then the various theologians act like profane philosophers trying to pull their followers to this or that theme and belief that they want to highlight and propagate. This confusing situation may trigger eventually fanaticism, but at times, the worst has been averted due to a shrewd theologian, who prevented others from presenting even worse concepts.  

This is the situation that Jesus faced opposite the Pharisees and Muhammad encountered, when confronting either the Jews and the idolatrous Arabs of Hejaz or the Constantinopolitan Christian clergymen, who forced Emperor Heraclius not to accept the invitation to Islam that the prophet extended to him. In reality, spirituality was defamed as black magic within Christianity by those who turned Jesus’ teaching into a black magic shamelessly performed in his name.

All spiritual mystics had to either permanently hide themselves or to develop and diffuse various forms of lesser theological distortion, which were then labeled as ‘heresies’ by the theological gangsters. The situation turned worse when mystics and theologians developed and launched systems of Christian spirituality limited only to the initiated members of secret religious orders (which was another form of hiding). For the average people, this meant that only as a monk or the member of a secret religious order, they could perhaps reconstitute the bond between their soul and their body in themselves.  

Kay Khosrow inspects his army before the eschatological battle with Afrasiab; from a manuscript of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh painted in Shiraz in 1561-1562.

Exactly the same occurred within the context of Islam, which was preached as the utmost spirituality by Muhammad and preserved as such by Ali, Hasan, Husayn and their descendants, before several mystics and transcendental masters maintained the Islamic spiritual tradition in several mystical orders. In fact, many Islamic spiritual societies attempted to reconstruct the continuity of Mankind’s historical spirituality by duly interpreting ancient sacred texts and properly decoding mystical traditions kept in various forms of popular culture across the lands occupied by the Islamic Caliphate. This explains to great extent why many aspects and elements of earlier religions and systems of spirituality have emphatically survived within the Islamic world, notably Zervanism, Mazdakism, Mazdeism, Gayomardism, Gnosticisms, etc.  

The characteristic difference that separates Christianity from Islam in terms of spirituality and the incomparably higher number of mystical orders that flourished within the Islamic world can be explained by the determinant fact that Islam as religious system is almost totally devoid of ‘cult’. This absence of the historically known and typically religious cult from Islam, as Prophet Muhammad entrusted his faith to his disciples and followers, impregnated an irrevocable mark that stood as major obstacle to all efforts of degrading this system of spirituality to a profanity.

Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, epic eschatology, Islamic mysticism, traditional painting, and popular spirituality: the departure of the mother and the grandmother of Kay Khosrow for Iran (by Hossein Qollar-Aqasi): the most adverse moment in Kay Khosrow’s transcendental life.

Of course, the earliest form of theological distortion of Islam was undertaken by immoral and evil theologians who were hired by the Umayyad and the Abbasid caliphs in order to justify their criminal acts and anti-Islamic practices. In Chapter XXI (The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’), I offer many examples in this regard. However, in the process of theological systematization of Islam (known as madhhab), there appeared systems of theological jurisprudence, which looked quite normal in the beginning, but later turned Islam into a system of rationalistic verbalism, juristic nominalism, and materialistic dogmatism. In their verbosity, the original spirituality was lost forever.

At a later stage, pathetic, ignorant and evil theologians considered every Muslim’s connection with the spiritual universe and God (which is Islam’s sole purpose) as their own personal interest and business, and they consequently reduced Prophet Muhammad’s preaching to a silly list of dos and don’ts (as if spirituality and religion are a schoolboy’s lesson). To best express their monstrous identity, they hijacked the madhhab (theological schools of jurisprudence) in order to instrumentalize them as tools of pseudo-religious oppression; first, they undertook vast campaigns against the Islamic sciences in order to plunge the believers into ignorance, and then, they fanaticized their idiotic, uneducated and illiterate followers at a time of conflict (notably the Crusades), turning them against various Islamic mystical orders or independent mystics.

These evil theologians, on whom today’s fake Islam is based, caused an incredible bloodshed throughout the Islamic world; however, it is essential to distinguish between

a) the early bloodshed that took place in the 7th and 8th c. due to orders of caliphs, who cared about how to secure their illegal grab of power from the early Islamic mystics and descendants of Prophet Muhammad (notably Ja’far al-Sadiq, sixth imam of all Muslims; 702-765), and 

b) the later, longer and more atrocious bloodshed that covered the period between the 9th and the 15th c. and which was caused by evil theologians, who wanted to control the Muslims by plunging them into ignorance, barbarism, ignominy, and fallacious interpretation of the sacred texts on the basis of their own pseudo-Islamic theological system. 

What these theologians, and more particularly the disreputable Ahmed ibn Hanbal and the cursed Ahmad ibn Taimiyyah, did was a literal Christianization of Islam; they viciously interpolated their juristic doctrines between the Man (in this case, the Muslim) and God (Allah). These theological doctrines consist in an impermissible intermediate that breaks the connection of man with the spiritual universe and God. And to do this, these Satanic theologians butchered numerous mystics whom they failed to understand in the first place. Great examples in this regard are Mansour Hallaj (858-922; lashed terribly and then decapitated) and Imadaddin Nasimi (1369-1417), who was accused as Hurufi, without however being so, and skinned alive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Hallaj

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imadaddin_Nasimi

Drawing therefore on earlier experience, the Safavid Order decided to take the correct measures so as to prevent the massacre of their members at the hands of ignorant pseudo-Muslims fanaticized by Satanic theologians (who may have been indiscriminately ‘qadis’, ‘sheikhs’ and ‘imams’) and shamelessly bribed or favored by Ottoman sultans. Having been launched by, and named after, Safi-ad-Din Ardabili (1252–1334) at the end of the 13th c., the Safavid Order was a band of mystics, an assembly of enlightened Muslims, and a confederation of the true faithful, who performed the royal art, carrying out acts of devotion and spiritual salvation, while engaging in diverse techniques of spirituality. They were the friends of Christians, Parsis, Yazidis, Jews, Ahl-e Haq, Tengrists, Hindus, and Buddhists.

After having operated for two centuries, at the times of the Order’s Grandmaster Shaykh Haydar (1459-1488), the Safavid Order launched another secret society, namely the Qizilbash (Kızılbaş /(قزلباش, i.e. the “red headed” (because of their red headgear); the Qizilbash functioned as the army of the Safavid Order and they duly prevented all pseudo-Muslim theologians and their cursed followers from asserting their evil power across lands that the Qizilbash controlled, thus fully defending the members of the (hereditary) Safavid Order. 

Safi ad-din Ardabili surrounded by his disciples, as illustrated in a 16th-century Safavid manuscript of the Safvat as-safa

Soon after their early successes, at the end of the 15th c., the mystical order and their army branch, knowing very well that the degenerate Islamic theologians would destroy the entire Islamic world, decided to set up their own state, which would be an empire ruled by the Safavid Order and predestined to save the Islamic world from total decay, slavery and decomposition. This type of state would not be and actually was not a religious or theological state; quite contrarily, it was a secular empire ruled by the mystical order. Automatically, every pseudo-Muslim theologian and every pseudo-Islamic state, which was nominally ruled by a sultan, emir, khan or king, but essentially it was governed by the bogus-religious authorities and the evil theologians, was found at the very antipodes of Safavid Iran.

It is crucial at this point to state that when the theologians put the monarch under control in a pseudo-Muslim state, this consists in the repetition of a phenomenon known only too well within the Christian world: Papo-Caesarism. No Christian and no Muslim state can adopt the Papo-Caesarist model. Spirituality imposes imperial rule, and this means Caesaropapism. This was solemnly introduced by Justinian I throughout the Roman Empire; it is for this reason that immediately after the death of prophet Muhammad, the followers of Ali asserted that only the prophet’s cousin and son-in law could possibly be the ruler of the Caliphate. Despite Ali’s astounding spiritual qualifications, his rule would follow the Caesaropapist pattern.

As a matter of fact, there cannot be religious evaluation of spiritual matters; this reality, which was never accepted by religious authorities and theologians alike (because it would herald their deserved dissolution and ultimate disappearance), is viciously concealed behind the Western confusion between spirituality (spiritalitas or numen / maneviyat/ معنویت/ الروحانية/靈性/ духовность) and religion (religio/din/ دین/宗教/ религия). Suffice it to check the most common definitions of spirituality and religion that are available online; there one gets a clear idea of the materialistic distortion of both terms’ meaning. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

Miniature created by Mo’en Mosavver: Shah Ismail I holds an audience and welcomes the Qizilbash after they defeated the Shirvanshah Farrukh Yasar; album leaf from a copy of Bijan’s Tarikh-i Jahangusha-yi Khaqan Sahibqiran (A History of Shah Ismail I), produced in Isfahan, end of the 1680s

Drawing of a typical Qizilbash soldier

Then, what is fallaciously termed as “Safavid conversion of Iran to Shia Islam” describes in reality the mere rise of the Safavid Order in large parts of Western Asia and the effort to eliminate the monstrous, pseudo-Muslim theologians who want to rule on the basis of their false Sharia, and of their pernicious interpretations of the sacred texts. Not one Safavid Emperor called himself a “Shia” and not one Ottoman Sultan used this term for the Safavid rulers, with whom the Ottomans fought so many times, although they were all Turanians. About:

https://www.doaks.org/resources/middle-east-garden-traditions/introduction/safavid

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/safavids

https://asiasociety.org/education/irans-safavid-dynasty

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/safavids/safavids.php

Click to access jaas072001.pdf

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/atd-tcc-worldciv2/chapter/safavid-empire/

https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/AXGWQG8WUIK2YIQ4YNSV/full?target=10.1080%2F00210862.2019.1647096

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/new-cambridge-history-of-islam/iran-under-safavid-rule/6ECC100CDA42D7F34EEEDAA231572E24

https://journals.openedition.org/abstractairanica/4628

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/safavids-ii

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291722345_The_Khalifeh_al-kholafa_of_the_Safavid_Sufi_order

https://ghorbany.com/inspiration/persian-empires-chapter-5

http://www.fsmitha.com/h3/h17isl.html

Click to access safavid.pdf

http://www.artarena.force9.co.uk/safavid.html

https://www.persee.fr/doc/anatm_1297-8094_1997_num_7_1_946

https://www.soas.ac.uk/lmei-cis/events/idea-of-iran/27oct2018-the-idea-of-iran-the-safavid-era.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariqa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufism

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kızılbaş

https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qızılbaş

https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/قزلباش

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Кызылбаши

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Кызылбаши_(Пенджаб)

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Сефи_ад-Дин

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Сефевиды

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_order

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_conversion_of_Iran_to_Shia_Islam

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_Iran

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qizilbash

Rıza Yıldırım, The Safavid-Qizilbash Ecumene and the Formation of the Qizilbash-Alevi Community in the Ottoman Empire, c. 1500–c. 1700

——————————————————–  

FORTHCOMING

Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey

2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists

By Prof. Muhammet Şemsettin Gözübüyükoğlu

(Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

CONTENTS

PART ONE. INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I: A World held Captive by the Colonial Gangsters: France, England, the US, and the Delusional History Taught in their Deceitful Universities

A. Examples of fake national names

a) Mongolia (or Mughal) and Deccan – Not India!

b) Tataria – Not Russia!

c) Romania (with the accent on the penultimate syllable) – Not Greece!

d) Kemet or Masr – Not Egypt!

e) Khazaria – not Israel!

f) Abyssinia – not Ethiopia!

B. Earlier Exchange of Messages in Turkish

C. The Preamble to My Response

CHAPTER II: Geopolitics does not exist.

CHAPTER III: Politics does not exist.

CHAPTER IV: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: Orientalism, conceptualization, contextualization, concealment

A. Orientalism

B. Conceptualization

C. Contextualization

D. Concealment

PART TWO. EXAMPLE OF ACADEMICALLY CONCEALED, KEY HISTORICAL TEXT

CHAPTER V: Plutarch and the diffusion of Ancient Egyptian and Iranian Religions and Cultures in Ancient Greece

PART THREE. TURKEY AND IRAN BEYOND POLITICS AND GEOPOLITICS: REJECTION OF THE ORIENTALIST, TURKOLOGIST AND IRANOLOGIST FALLACIES ABOUT ACHAEMENID HISTORY

CHAPTER VI:  The fallacy that Turkic nations were not present in the wider Mesopotamia – Anatolia region in pre-Islamic times

CHAPTER VII: The fallacious representation of Achaemenid Iran by Western Orientalists

CHAPTER VIII: The premeditated disconnection of Atropatene / Adhurbadagan from the History of Azerbaijan

CHAPTER IX: Iranian and Turanian nations in Achaemenid Iran

PART SIX. FALLACIES ABOUT THE EARLY EXPANSION OF ISLAM: THE FAKE ARABIZATION OF ISLAM

CHAPTER XVIII: Western Orientalist falsifications of Islamic History: Identification of Islam with only Hejaz at the times of the Prophet

PART ELEVEN. HOW AND WHY THE OTTOMANS, THE SAFAVIDS AND THE MUGHALS FAILED  

CHAPTER XXIX: Selim I, Ismail I, and Babur

CHAPTER XXX: The Battle of Chaldiran (1514), and how it predestined the Fall of the Islamic World

CHAPTER XXXI: Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals: victims of their sectarianism, tribalism, theology, and wrong evaluation of the colonial West

CHAPTER XXXII: Ottomans, Iranians and Mughals from Nader Shah to Kemal Ataturk

PART TWELVE. CONCLUSION

CHAPTER XXXIII: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: whereto?

—————————————————  

List of the already pre-published chapters of the book

Lines separate chapters that belong to different parts of the book.

CHAPTER X: Iranian and Turanian Religions in Pre-Islamic Iran 

https://www.academia.edu/105664696/Iranian_and_Turanian_Religions_in_Pre_Islamic_Iran

—————————- 

CHAPTER XI: Alexander the Great as Iranian King of Kings, the fallacy of Hellenism, and the nonexistent Hellenistic Period

https://www.academia.edu/105386978/Alexander_the_Great_as_Iranian_King_of_Kings_the_fallacy_of_Hellenism_and_the_nonexistent_Hellenistic_Period

CHAPTER XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty

https://www.academia.edu/52541355/Parthian_Turan_an_Anti_Persian_dynasty

CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids

https://www.academia.edu/105539884/Parthian_Turan_and_the_Philhellenism_of_the_Arsacids

———————————   

CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire

https://www.academia.edu/105053815/Arsacid_and_Sassanid_Iran_and_the_wars_against_the_Mithraic_Christian_Roman_Empire

CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism

https://www.academia.edu/105117675/Sassanid_Iran_Turan_Kartir_Roman_Empire_Christianity_Mani_and_Manichaeism

CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates

https://www.academia.edu/96142922/Iran_Turan_Manichaeism_and_Islam_during_the_Migration_Period_and_the_Early_Caliphates

———————————-

CHAPTER XVII: Iran–Turan and the Western, Orientalist distortions about the successful, early expansion of Islam during the 7th-8th c. CE

https://www.academia.edu/105292787/Iran_Turan_and_the_Western_Orientalist_distortions_about_the_successful_early_expansion_of_Islam_during_the_7th_8th_c_CE

CHAPTER XIX: The fake, Orientalist Arabization of Islam

https://www.academia.edu/105713891/The_fake_Orientalist_Arabization_of_Islam

CHAPTER XX: The systematic dissociation of Islam from the Ancient Oriental History

https://www.academia.edu/105565861/The_systematic_dissociation_of_Islam_from_the_Ancient_Oriental_History

—————————————   

CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’

https://www.academia.edu/55139916/The_Fabrication_of_the_Fake_Divide_Sunni_Islam_vs_Shia_Islam_

——————————————  

CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate

https://www.academia.edu/61193026/The_Fake_Persianization_of_the_Abbasid_Caliphate

——————————————– 

CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash

https://www.academia.edu/96519269/From_Ferdowsi_to_the_Seljuk_Turks_Nizam_al_Mulk_Nizami_Ganjavi_Jalal_ad_Din_Rumi_and_Haji_Bektash

————————————————  

CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur

https://www.academia.edu/104034939/From_Genghis_Khan_Nasir_al_Din_al_Tusi_and_Hulagu_to_Timur_Tamerlane_

CHAPTER XXV: Timur (Tamerlane) as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr, his exploits and triumphs, and the slow rise of the Turanian Safavid Order

https://www.academia.edu/105230290/Timur_Tamerlane_as_a_Turanian_Muslim_descendant_of_the_Great_Hero_Manuchehr_his_exploits_and_triumphs_and_the_slow_rise_of_the_Turanian_Safavid_Order

CHAPTER XXVI: The Timurid Era as the Peak of the Islamic Civilization: Shah Rukh, and Ulugh Beg, the Astronomer Emperor

https://www.academia.edu/105267173/The_Timurid_Era_as_the_Peak_of_the_Islamic_Civilization_Shah_Rukh_and_Ulugh_Beg_the_Astronomer_Emperor

—————————————– 

CHAPTER XXVII: Ethnically Turanian Safavids & Culturally Iranian Ottomans: two identical empires that mirrored one another

https://www.academia.edu/105744200/Ethnically_Turanian_Safavids_and_Culturally_Iranian_Ottomans_two_identical_empires_that_mirrored_one_another

———————————————————————-

Download the chapter (text only) in PDF:

Download the chapter (with pictures and legends) in PDF:

Ethnically Turanian Safavids & Culturally Iranian Ottomans: two identical empires that mirrored one another

Pre-publication of chapter XXVII of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapters XXVII, XXVIII, XXIX, XXX, XXXI and XXXII form Part Eleven (How and why the Ottomans, the Safavids and the Mughals failed) of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters.  

Until now, 16 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the book; the present chapter is therefore the 17th (out of 33). At the end of the present pre-publication, the entire Table of Contents is made available. Pre-published chapters are marked in blue color, and the present chapter is highlighted in gray color. 

In addition, a list of all the already pre-published chapters (with the related links) is made available at the very end, after the Table of Contents.

The book is written for the general readership with the intention to briefly highlight numerous distortions made by the racist, colonial academics of Western Europe and North America only with the help of absurd conceptualization and preposterous contextualization.

———————– 

Topkapı Palace, Ottoman Constantinople

Ali Qapu Palace, Safavid Isfahan

Western historiography enters a stage of exorbitant falsification when attempting to reconstitute the History of the Safavid dynasty of Iran (1501-1736). What stands at the forefront of the Western forgery and distortion of the History of Iran during the said period is the theory that the Safavid dynasty was ‘Shia’, and also that they ‘converted’ the Turanian population of 16th c. Iran to ‘Shia Islam’. Of course, such fictional conversion never took place, and the Safavid rulers would reject the fake division of Islam into two denominations, since they always proclaimed their Islamic authenticity and integrity, fully refuting the concept of a ‘divided Islam’.

However, this fake division is instrumental for the colonial distortion of History, because on this fallacy hinges the entire Western involvement in the Orient and the conflicts that the criminal and evil states of England, France and America generated across Afro-Eurasia. In order to fully and irreversibly embed the vicious divisive scheme of a supposedly bi-polar Islamic world revolving around two rival empires, namely the ‘Sunni’ Ottomans and the ‘Shia’ Safavids, the Western Orientalists, agents, explorers, diplomats, and statesmen invented the fallacy of the so-called “Safavid conversion of Iran to Shia Islam”.

Of course, at the time (: early 16th c.), the Western colonial powers did not have the chance to impose their false version of History on the Ottomans and the Safavids; they even had not developed Oriental studies properly speaking in their already established pernicious universities. At the time, History was in the making. The only thing that the colonial empires could do, and which they viciously did, was to frame the divisive plot and to pull their diplomatic strings in order to trigger as many Ottoman – Safavid wars as they could. The distortive interpretation and the evil misrepresentation of these facts would come later – in due course of time.

And the malignant fallacy ‘happened’ truly when it ‘should’ have; when the collapsing Ottoman and Iranian empires were eroded through colonial infiltration and evil subversion, then the colonial gangsters and the 19th c. Orientalists started carrying out the projection of the already preconceived forgery onto the Western powers’ local stooges, who by means of shameful bribery and high treason (termed as ‘scholarships for studies in Western Europe’) started diffusing pathetic nonsense and bogus-academic lies in their respective countries only to fit the needs of their masters, namely the colonial powers. At the last stage, the monstrous and murderous forgery of France and England was presented as “History” worldwide only because their colonial empires subjugated almost the entire world and imposed the racist Anglo-French intellectual-academic contamination.

So, the historical forgery that the Western academic murderers have been teaching for over two centuries in their bogus-universities as “Oriental History” is merely the coverage of their inhuman deeds, which plunged Afro-Eurasia into ceaseless local and regional wars, countless rebellions, and two world wars. But the original concept behind the inhuman diplomacy of England and France was already there at the beginning of the 16th c., when they started fallaciously calling Iran, namely a totally Turanian country, “Persia”; this was preposterous. Soon afterwards, they started also naming the Ottoman Empire “Turkey”, which is another expression of their evilness and forgery, because the Ottoman Empire was in reality the most anti-Turkic state in World History. 

No less than eight (8) times the Ottoman Empire and Safavid Iran came to war during the period of 235 years of Safavid rule over Iran. Actually, the wars started in 1514 and ended 1736 with the fall of the Safavids; of course, the historical fact of 8 wars does not mean in this case only 8 years consumed in wars! Most of these wars lasted many years. And actually, the Ottoman-Iranian wars did not end with the demise of the Safavid dynasty. Wars were resumed at the times of the Turanian Afsharid dynasty of Iran (1736-1796) and also during the period of the Turanian Qajar dynasty of Iran (1789-1925). So, from 1514 until 1823, in only 309 years, the Ottoman Empire and the Iranian Empire made eleven (11) wars one upon the other. In total, during 309 years, the two empires were engaged in wars against one another for no less than 81 years. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman%E2%80%93Persian_Wars

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afsharid_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qajar_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Russo-Turkish_wars

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Persian_Wars

If one takes also into consideration the fact that both empires made many other wars with numerous neighboring empires (such as the Mughal Empire, the lately risen Russian Empire, and the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation) and several colonial kingdoms (Spain, Portugal, France, England, etc.), one concludes easily why the two empires gradually collapsed. Furthermore, taking into account first, the diplomatically instigated and deliberately machinated twelve (12) wars between the Ottomans and the Russian Empire, which took place during a period of 350 years (1568-1918) and lasted for no less than 57 years, and second, the five (5) wars between the Iranians and the Russians, which occurred over the span of 177 years (1651-1828) and kept going for 19 years, one can plainly assess the evilness of the divisive intrigues that the Western European colonial diplomats instigated across Afro-Eurasia, and the unprecedented bloodshed that they caused.

Gate of Felicity (Bâbüssaâde), Topkapı Palace, Ottoman Constantinople

Chehel Sotoun Palace, Safavid Isfahan

Imperial Hall with the throne of the sultan, Topkapı Palace, Ottoman Constantinople

Central Hall, Chehel Sotoun Palace, Safavid Isfahan

Open recess (iwan) of the Yerevan Kiosk, Topkapı Palace, Ottoman Constantinople

Chehel Sotoun Palace, Safavid Isfahan

Scene from the Surname-ı Vehbi, located in the Topkapı palace, Ottoman Constantinople

Battle of Chaldiran (1514); Grand painting at the Chehel Sotoun Palace (despite the fact that the battle ended with Ottoman victory), Safavid Isfahan

The Third Courtyard of the Topkapı Palace in the Ottoman Constantinople, as depicted in a miniature of the Hünername, 1584

Chehel Sotoun Palace frescoes; Safavid Isfahan

Tiled room inside Harem, Topkapı palace, Ottoman Constantinople

Muqarnas of Chehel Sotoun Palace, Safavid Isfahan

Imperial Gate (Bâb-ı Hümâyûn) Topkapi Palace, Ottoman Constantinople

Paintings in the main hall of the Chehel Sotoun Palace, Safavid Isfahan

All the wars, which were machinated and instigated by the colonial English and French diplomacies, needed a sophisticated coverage, e.g. some fake reasons, which would ‘explain’ or ‘justify’ to anyone why these wars happened (or ‘had’ to happen). To be convincingly fake, these reasons were based on a total distortion of the identity of both empires, the Ottoman and the Safavid; these distorted identities, which ‘explained’ the Ottoman – Safavid wars to the average public opinion in Europe at the time, became later the vertebral column of the fallacious Western Orientalism and its entirely fake branches, namely Turkology and Iranology.

To describe the extent and the depth of the Western Orientalist fallacy, suffice it that I herewith state the following: a major topic for Turkologists to study should become the Safavid Empire of Iran as a Turanian state, because it was ethnically a Turanian Empire whereby the outright majority of the population used to speak diverse Turkic languages as their native tongues.

Similarly, a major topic for Iranologists to study should become the Ottoman Empire, because an overwhelmingly Iranian culture permeated the state to such extent that, when Mehmet II entered Constantinople on 29th May 1453 and proceeded to the Palace of the Eastern Roman Emperors, the first words that he uttered were neither in Ottoman Turkish nor in Medieval Greek nor in Arabic, but in the classical, literary language of all Turanians, i.e. in Farsi. 

The spider is curtain-bearer in the palace of Chosroes;

the owl sounds the relief in the castle of Afrasiyab.

These verses written c. 180 years before the conquest of Constantinople (1453) by the great Iranian poet Saadi (known as Saadi Shirazi, 1210-1291) reveal

– the absolutely identical nature of the Turanians and the Iranians,

– the common cultural background of all Iranian and Turanian nations, 

– key elements of the Iranian-Turanian apocalyptic and soteriological eschatology,

– the last moments of the ailing Iranian rule (Chosroes: the last major Sassanid emperor Khusraw Parvez; 570-628), and

– the Turanian revival of Iran (Afrasiyab).

(Tarih-i Ebu’l Fatih, Istanbul, 1330, p. 57)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saadi_Shirazi

Mehmed II, by uttering these verses, clearly indicated that he viewed his victory in terms of Iranian-Turanian culture and eschatology, before all the other eventual or hypothetical parameters involved in the topic (Palaeologi-Ottoman imperial family rivalry; Christian-Muslim religious conflict; Eastern Roman-Turkic ethnic quarrel; economic interests).

In fact, there should have never existed Turkology and Iranology within the context of Western Orientalism, if this unit of academic disciplines were to serve the true purpose of exploration and search for the historical truth. The reason is simple: Turan and Iran have always been an indivisible historical – cultural entity.

However, the false portrait of the Ottoman and the Safavid empires, which had been systematically produced by the 16th c. colonial powers, involved two dimensions of distortion of the reality, namely religious and ethnic. Then, 19th and 20th c. French and English academics and explorers misinterpreted the 16th c. Ottoman – Safavid wars that their countries’ duplicitous diplomats had instigated as of both, religious and ethnic, reasons; and in both cases, these scholars lied, pretty much like today’s Orientalists lie when presenting, teaching and propagating the following forgery: “Sunni Turkish Ottomans vs. Shia Persian Safavids”.    

In fact, at the beginning of the 16th c., with the exception of Eastern Iranians (namely the Tajik / Dari speaking populations), there was not one Persian ethnic alive; Iran had already been almost entirely Turanized at the ethnic-linguistic level. Farsi was a highly respected and widely used language of Literature, History, Spirituality, Art, Architecture and Culture that all the educated people felt obliged to learn in young age at the various madrasas of the cities, the towns and the villages of Iran. But in reality, Farsi was at the time a dead language like Latin in 16th c. Germany.

Only later and mainly during the 20th c., following the aggressive and extensive English involvement and the shameful colonial rule of Iran, which was carried out by local puppets, a ‘new’, systematized ‘modern education’ was imposed on all Iranians, the true, traditional Iranian History (based on Ferdowsi, Nezami Ganjavi and many other illustrious epic poets) was forcefully and calamitously replaced by the fake, materialistic, atheistic and evil Iranian ‘History’ of the Orientalists, and Farsi became obligatorily the meaningless ‘national’ language. These tasks have been completed by the pathetically ignorant, uneducated and charlatanesque soldiers, who were later called “Pahlavi dynasty shahs”.

The Universal Empire of Iran disappeared, and a fake, nationalistic, ‘Persian’ pseudo-kingdom was established only to implement the ensuing culturally anti-Iranian and ethnically anti-Turanian, nationalist tyranny. It was a villainous Freemasonic plot and eschatological conspiracy against Iran, involving many ulcerous English, French, American and other enemies of Imperial Iran, who postured as ‘friends’ of ‘Persia’ or ‘admirers’ of the ‘Persian civilization’. They only wanted to fool the Iranians and to insult Iran diachronically, after the absurd and abominable example given by ancient rascals like Herodotus and Aeschylus.

While the rocambolesque and even wacky Pahlavi pseudo-dynasty was in power, the criminal English colonials prepared their substitute, namely several pseudo-theologians, who composed pathetic theoretical systems, triggered absurd religious fanaticism, and engulfed the entire Iranian nation in colonial dilemmas and utmost confusion of political nature. Farsi, as the language of the systematized Western education, was indeed revivified particularly among the incessantly increasing urban populations, who started forgetting their native tongues, notably Azeri, Turkmen and other.

During the time of the Pahlavi bogus-Iranian ‘shahs’ (1925-1979), a ‘white’, nationalist terror was imposed on the misfortunate nation; the use of other languages was strictly prohibited. However, this linguistic revival is a fake, and it looks like an awakening of the mummy. The people, who speak Farsi as a native language in today’s Iran, are of Turanian ethnic origin in their outright majority; even worse, their culture is entirely Turanian–Iranian, and their most celebrated rulers and beloved emperors are all Turanians, like Shah Isma’il I, the founder of the Safavid dynasty.

This does not mean that there are not several genuine Iranian languages spoken today in Iran by native speakers; of course, there are many: they speak Baluch, Lori, Bakhtiari, Gorani, Faili, Kalhori, Gilani, Laki, Talysh, etc. But these ethno-linguistic groups represent rather small minorities in Iran. These populations are certainly of Iranian ethnic origin, but they share the common Iranian-Turanian culture with all the populations of Turanian ethnic origin in Iran and in many other countries.

The present situation in Iran looks strange and absurd to all the local victims of the diffusion of Western propaganda of educational-academic-intellectual character; in fact, the systematic propagation of the erroneous Western notion of ‘nation’ or ‘ethnic group’ triggered only troubles and conflicts. This noxious development relates to the inhuman intellectual perversion that is called ‘Enlightenment’ in the Western world. This consists in intellectual darkness and educational paranoia that caused numerous wars over the past 250 years.

For millennia, various ethnic groups -Iranian and Turanian- speaking different languages, shared always their common culture and tradition without feeling or caring about the unsubstantiated and otherwise nonexistent, fake borders and the evil division lines that the 18th c. Western European concept of ‘nation’ produced worldwide. This historical reality of Turanian-Iranian indivisibility was irrevocable within the universal Iranian Empire, which was the supreme blessing of God and the best present that the divine world had bestowed upon Mankind.

Whatever fallacy the Western Orientalists may eventually invent and include in their often nonsensical bibliography falls apart in the light of all historical sources and texts. If the modern Western academia and intellectuals cannot understand the true reality, this is due to their degenerate minds, the advanced rottenness of their decomposed educational and social structures, and the nauseating putrefaction of their moral core.

Then, the fabrication of the fake divide “Turks vs. Persians” helped the criminal colonial powers spread divisions among the Turanians of Western, Central, Southern and Northern Asia, and the Caucasus region. The parallel creation of the fake divide “Sunni Muslims vs. Shia Muslims” was instrumental in plunging the entire Islamic world in permanent strife. Then, the combined fallacy “Sunni Turkish Ottomans vs. Shia Persian Safavids” is an explosive mixture geared to prolong and perpetuate the catastrophic division of all the populations living between the Bosporus and the Indus River Delta.

However, if they destroy the evil deeds of the local puppets of the Anglo-Saxon colonial governments, these populations could triumphantly unite in a secular super-state of ca. 450 million people and thus become the new superpower and Western Asia’s real locomotive of nations. Alternatively, if the existing colonial divisions are allowed to further exist, they can trigger new fratricidal wars among the Turks, who are culturally Iranian, and the Iranians, who are ethnically Turks.

For all the aforementioned national divisions and historical distortions to be duly presented and propagated worldwide by the Western historical forgers in a complete manner, a key point had to be invented: the supposed Safavid conversion of Iran to ‘Shia Islam’. This Orientalist fallacy hinges of the misrepresentation of the mystical Safavid Order, which founded an entire empire for themselves: the Turanian Empire of Safavid Iran.

However, the falsification of the identity and the deeds of the Safavid Order would never be successfully undertaken worldwide, if the entire Western world was not already totally confused about two totally different issues, which were systematically presented to the average people of all the Western countries as supposedly ‘one’ by their religious, academic and intellectual authorities alike: spirituality and religion.

Nevertheless, spirituality and religion are totally distinct activities of the spiritual and the material hypostases of the human being.   

Sultanahmet Square in Ottoman Constantinople: the Eastern Roman hippodrome and Obelisk of Theodosius, which was transported from Luxor

Naqsh-e Jahan Square in Safavid Isfahan

Procession of the guilds in the hippodrome as per a miniature of the Surname-i Vehbi (1582)

Naqsh-e Jahan, the imperial square in Safavid Isfahan

Blue mosque (Sultan Ahmet Camii): built between 1609 and 1617

Blue mosque, part of the interior decoration

Blue mosque, the mihrab (center) and the minbar (right)

Shah Mosque (Masjid-e Shah): built between 1611 and 1629

The winter hypostyle

The dome

——————————————————–  

FORTHCOMING

Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey

2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists

By Prof. Muhammet Şemsettin Gözübüyükoğlu

(Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

CONTENTS

PART ONE. INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I: A World held Captive by the Colonial Gangsters: France, England, the US, and the Delusional History Taught in their Deceitful Universities

A. Examples of fake national names

a) Mongolia (or Mughal) and Deccan – Not India!

b) Tataria – Not Russia!

c) Romania (with the accent on the penultimate syllable) – Not Greece!

d) Kemet or Masr – Not Egypt!

e) Khazaria – not Israel!

f) Abyssinia – not Ethiopia!

B. Earlier Exchange of Messages in Turkish

C. The Preamble to My Response

CHAPTER II: Geopolitics does not exist.

CHAPTER III: Politics does not exist.

CHAPTER IV: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: Orientalism, conceptualization, contextualization, concealment

A. Orientalism

B. Conceptualization

C. Contextualization

D. Concealment

PART TWO. EXAMPLE OF ACADEMICALLY CONCEALED, KEY HISTORICAL TEXT

CHAPTER V: Plutarch and the diffusion of Ancient Egyptian and Iranian Religions and Cultures in Ancient Greece

PART THREE. TURKEY AND IRAN BEYOND POLITICS AND GEOPOLITICS: REJECTION OF THE ORIENTALIST, TURKOLOGIST AND IRANOLOGIST FALLACIES ABOUT ACHAEMENID HISTORY

CHAPTER VI:  The fallacy that Turkic nations were not present in the wider Mesopotamia – Anatolia region in pre-Islamic times

CHAPTER VII: The fallacious representation of Achaemenid Iran by Western Orientalists

CHAPTER VIII: The premeditated disconnection of Atropatene / Adhurbadagan from the History of Azerbaijan

CHAPTER IX: Iranian and Turanian nations in Achaemenid Iran

PART SIX. FALLACIES ABOUT THE EARLY EXPANSION OF ISLAM: THE FAKE ARABIZATION OF ISLAM

CHAPTER XVIII: Western Orientalist falsifications of Islamic History: Identification of Islam with only Hejaz at the times of the Prophet

PART ELEVEN. HOW AND WHY THE OTTOMANS, THE SAFAVIDS AND THE MUGHALS FAILED  

CHAPTER XXVIII: Spirituality, Religion & Theology: the fallacy of the Safavid conversion of Iran to ‘Shia Islam’

CHAPTER XXIX: Selim I, Ismail I, and Babur

CHAPTER XXX: The Battle of Chaldiran (1514), and how it predestined the Fall of the Islamic World

CHAPTER XXXI: Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals: victims of their sectarianism, tribalism, theology, and wrong evaluation of the colonial West

CHAPTER XXXII: Ottomans, Iranians and Mughals from Nader Shah to Kemal Ataturk

PART TWELVE. CONCLUSION

CHAPTER XXXIII: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: whereto?

—————————————————  

List of the already pre-published chapters of the book

Lines separate chapters that belong to different parts of the book.

CHAPTER X: Iranian and Turanian Religions in Pre-Islamic Iran 

https://www.academia.edu/105664696/Iranian_and_Turanian_Religions_in_Pre_Islamic_Iran

—————————- 

CHAPTER XI: Alexander the Great as Iranian King of Kings, the fallacy of Hellenism, and the nonexistent Hellenistic Period

https://www.academia.edu/105386978/Alexander_the_Great_as_Iranian_King_of_Kings_the_fallacy_of_Hellenism_and_the_nonexistent_Hellenistic_Period

CHAPTER XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty

https://www.academia.edu/52541355/Parthian_Turan_an_Anti_Persian_dynasty

CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids

https://www.academia.edu/105539884/Parthian_Turan_and_the_Philhellenism_of_the_Arsacids

———————————   

CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire

https://www.academia.edu/105053815/Arsacid_and_Sassanid_Iran_and_the_wars_against_the_Mithraic_Christian_Roman_Empire

CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism

https://www.academia.edu/105117675/Sassanid_Iran_Turan_Kartir_Roman_Empire_Christianity_Mani_and_Manichaeism

CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates

https://www.academia.edu/96142922/Iran_Turan_Manichaeism_and_Islam_during_the_Migration_Period_and_the_Early_Caliphates

———————————-

CHAPTER XVII: Iran–Turan and the Western, Orientalist distortions about the successful, early expansion of Islam during the 7th-8th c. CE

https://www.academia.edu/105292787/Iran_Turan_and_the_Western_Orientalist_distortions_about_the_successful_early_expansion_of_Islam_during_the_7th_8th_c_CE

CHAPTER XIX: The fake, Orientalist Arabization of Islam

https://www.academia.edu/105713891/The_fake_Orientalist_Arabization_of_Islam

CHAPTER XX: The systematic dissociation of Islam from the Ancient Oriental History

https://www.academia.edu/105565861/The_systematic_dissociation_of_Islam_from_the_Ancient_Oriental_History

—————————————   

CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’

https://www.academia.edu/55139916/The_Fabrication_of_the_Fake_Divide_Sunni_Islam_vs_Shia_Islam_

——————————————  

CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate

https://www.academia.edu/61193026/The_Fake_Persianization_of_the_Abbasid_Caliphate

——————————————– 

CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash

https://www.academia.edu/96519269/From_Ferdowsi_to_the_Seljuk_Turks_Nizam_al_Mulk_Nizami_Ganjavi_Jalal_ad_Din_Rumi_and_Haji_Bektash

————————————————  

CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur

https://www.academia.edu/104034939/From_Genghis_Khan_Nasir_al_Din_al_Tusi_and_Hulagu_to_Timur_Tamerlane_

CHAPTER XXV: Timur (Tamerlane) as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr, his exploits and triumphs, and the slow rise of the Turanian Safavid Order

https://www.academia.edu/105230290/Timur_Tamerlane_as_a_Turanian_Muslim_descendant_of_the_Great_Hero_Manuchehr_his_exploits_and_triumphs_and_the_slow_rise_of_the_Turanian_Safavid_Order

CHAPTER XXVI: The Timurid Era as the Peak of the Islamic Civilization: Shah Rukh, and Ulugh Beg, the Astronomer Emperor

https://www.academia.edu/105267173/The_Timurid_Era_as_the_Peak_of_the_Islamic_Civilization_Shah_Rukh_and_Ulugh_Beg_the_Astronomer_Emperor

—————————————————————-

Download the chapter (text only) in PDF:

Download the chapter (pictures & legends) in PDF:

The fake, Orientalist Arabization of Islam

Pre-publication of chapter XIX of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapters XVII, XVIII, XIX and XX form Part Six (Fallacies about the Early Expansion of Islam: the Fake Arabization of Islam) of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Chapter XVII and XX have already been pre-published.

Until now, 15 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the book; the present chapter is therefore the 16th (out of 33). At the end of the present pre-publication, the entire Table of Contents is made available. Pre-published chapters are marked in blue color, and the present chapter is highlighted in gray color. 

In addition, a list of all the already pre-published chapters (with the related links) is made available at the very end, after the Table of Contents.

The book is written for the general readership with the intention to briefly highlight numerous distortions made by the racist, colonial academics of Western Europe and North America only with the help of absurd conceptualization and preposterous contextualization.

———————————————————  

Bosra (South Syria), Bahira Monastery

This process is associated with the fabrication of numerous fake terms, such as ‘Muhammedanism’, ‘Arab invasions’, ‘Arab conquests’, ‘Arab civilization’, etc. also involving the denigration of Islam as ‘religion of the Arabs’. The ‘Arabization’ of Islam is a paranoid Western Orientalist effort to reduce Islam to the level of a religion of just one nation, which – in addition – was the realm of repugnant barbarians; that’s why Orientalists and Islamologists always tried to portray the early Islamic invasions as ‘Arab’. About the reasons for which the initial Arab – Yemenite invasions (633-638) were successful, I already spoke in the previous chapter XVII (Iran – Turan and the Western, Orientalist distortions about the successful, early expansion of Islam during the 7th – 8th c. CE; see sections VI to X).

But there is certainly more to it. First, among the Islamic armies’ soldiers, who advanced after 640 either in the direction of the Iranian plateau and Caucasus or toward Egypt, the Arabs constituted already the minority. Most of the soldiers of the Islamic armies after 640 were Yemenite, Aramaean, and Axumite converts and, speaking about the Islamic armies two decades later (after 661), one has to add also new Turanian and Egyptian converts.

Major centers of Aramaean Syriac Jacobite (Monophysitic/Miaphysitic) Christianity in 7th c. CE Syria and Mesopotamia

In the Umayyad Caliphate, Medieval Greek and Syriac Aramaic were the two official languages, while Arabic was only the religious language for the Muslim minority. And the Arab warriors, who settled in Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine, Egypt, Iran, and elsewhere, were so few that they were racially-ethnically assimilated with the local populations. The gradual, linguistic Arabization of the local populations in Yemen and in the formerly Eastern Roman provinces of the Orient was due to the fact that Arabic was the religious language.

In the lands where Islam was spread and became the official religion, there was no Arab culture diffused, because as I already said (chapter XVII, section I), to accept Islam the Arabs of Hejaz were de-Arabized and compactly Aramaized in the first place. This means that the ethnically Arab Muslim soldiers, who fought at Yarmuk and Qadissiyyah, were not culturally Arab anymore. They were indeed culturally Aramaized Arabs, thanks to their acceptance of Islam. There is no such thing as Arab culture in Islam.

Apparently, Arab culture existed before Islam in Hejaz and the desert, involving polytheistic cults, barbarian traditions, lawlessness and total absence of rudimentary civilization. To all the surrounding, civilized nations {namely the Yemenites, the Aramaeans, the diverse nations of Iran, the Eastern Romans, the Egyptians, the Sudanese Meroites (: Cushitic Ethiopians), the Axumite Abyssinians, and the Somalis of Other Berberia and Azania}, the pre-Islamic Arabs were known as the only barbarians of the wider region, and this was valid for many long centuries.

Homs/Emessa, Syria: Saint Mary Church; seat of the Syriac archbishopric and also known as Church of the Holy Girdle, it is a historical Syriac monument built over an underground church that dates back to 50 CE. Homs is famous for its black stones and rocks of which this church and many early mosques were built.

It is enough for anyone to read the text of the Periplus of the Red (‘Erythraean’) Sea (an Ancient Greek text written by an Alexandrian Egyptian merchant and navigator of the 2nd half of the 1st c. CE), so that he gets a very clear picture. Paragraph 20 of the said text, particularly if compared with earlier or later parts of the text, is quite revelatory of the rightfully deprecatory view of the Arabs that all the other ancient nations had.

Directly below this place is the adjoining country of Arabia, in its length bordering a great distance on the Erythraean Sea. Different tribes inhabit the country, differing in their speech, some partially, and some altogether. The land next the sea is similarly dotted here and there with caves of the Fish-Eaters, but the country inland is peopled by rascally men speaking two languages, who live in villages and nomadic camps, by whom those sailing off the middle course are plundered, and those surviving shipwrecks are taken for slaves. And so they too are continually taken prisoners by the chiefs and kings of Arabia; and they are called Carnaites. Navigation is dangerous along this whole coast of Arabia, which is without harbors, with bad anchorages, foul, inaccessible because of breakers and rocks, and terrible in every way. Therefore we hold our course down the middle of the gulf and pass on as fast as possible by the country of Arabia until we come to the Burnt Island; directly below which there are regions of peaceful people, nomadic, pasturers of cattle, sheep and camels“.

The text is to be found online here (translation by Wilfred H. Schoff):

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Periplus_of_the_Erythraean_Sea#Periplus

This barbarism took an end with the preaching of Prophet Muhammad, who transferred Aramaean culture, education, intellectuality and spirituality among the Arabs. All the themes and topics discussed by Prophet Muhammad, either in his revelations (Quran) or in his explanations (Hadith), were Aramaean. Of course, and with reference to developments taking place during the middle of the 7th c., there was an evident differentiation between a) Christian Aramaeans and b) Muslim Aramaeans and Muslim Arabs; but the differentiation was only religious, and not cultural. Culturally, the groups a) and b) were identical; and religiously they differed only partly and not fundamentally. But the perfidious colonial Orientalists have always been intentionally oblivious of this fact.

Founded by Mor Mattai the Hermit in 363 CE, Mor Mattai Monastery is situated 20 km north of Mosul and consists in a major center of Aramaean Syriac Jacobite culture and faith.

Deyrulzafaran (or Derzafaran; ‘the Saffron Monastery) is mainly known as Mor Hananyo Monastery, being located 5 km from Mardin (SE Turkey) in the famous Tur Abdin region, major center of Aramaean culture, faith and letters. In the Antiquity, there was a temple dedicated to the Assyrian-Babylonian and later Aramaean divinity Shamash; it was then converted to fortress by the Romans. The Syriac monk Mor Shlemon turned it into a monastery in 493 CE. Finally in 793, the bishop of Mardin and Kfartuta, Mor Hananyo, renovated it.

Surely there are ancient Oriental parallels to what happened to the Arabs in the early 7th c.

The Aramaeans and the Phoenicians, the Egyptians and the Anatolians, the Greeks and the Romans – all those who accepted the preaching of Jesus and belonged to the early Christian communities (except for the Jewish converts) – were culturally Hebraized (in the first two centuries of our era).

There is no such thing as Aramaean or Phoenician or Egyptian or Greek or Roman culture in Early Christianity. Aramaean culture revolved around Astarte or the ‘Syrian Goddess’, Baal, and many other Aramaean deities, myths and concepts; Phoenician culture was developed around Baal and other local divinities and myths; Egyptian culture was related to Isis, Osiris, Horus and the Heliopolitan religion or the Theban dogma of Amun or the Memphitic cult of Ptah or the Hermupolitan Ogdoad. Greek culture (which had earlier involved a highly politicized theater, Olympic games, philosophy, calamitous indifference for religion, and quasi-total ignorance of spirituality) and Roman culture were already heavily impacted by numerous Oriental religious, esoteric, spiritual and cultural-behavioral systems. Then, the diffusion of Early Christianity among them (up to the middle of the 2nd c. CE) consisted in cultural Hebraization.

What happened culturally to Arabs with their acceptance of Prophet Muhammad’s preaching had occurred already to the Aramaeans, the Phoenicians, the Egyptians, the Anatolians, the Greeks and the Romans, who accepted Early Christianity in the 1st – 2nd c.

Similarly, the Ancient Hebrews were not exempt of overwhelming foreign cultural impact. When in Egypt, they were heavily impacted by Atenism (also known as Amarna monotheism), which was the official, aniconic and monotheistic religion of Pharaoh Akhenaten in the middle of the 14th c. BCE. Excerpts from the Hymns to Aten, which were composed in Ancient Egyptian and written in hieroglyphic writing by the pious monotheist and great reformer Pharaoh, were later reproduced, word by word, in the Psalms of the otherwise ‘Hebrew’ Bible.

At this point I have to also add that Pharaoh Amenhotep IV (1353–1336), after his fourth year of reign, changed his theophoric name to Akhenaten, so that it does not contain the first component, which – as name of the polytheistic Theban religion’s main god Amun – was considered as an abomination by the Egyptian monotheists, after the solemn proclamation of Atenism.

And who were the Ancient Hebrews after all? Who was Abraham? An early 2nd millennium BCE Babylonian (from Ur, Southern Mesopotamia), who abandoned his land in order to preserve his monotheistic faith and openly reject the polytheistic religion that was imposed there at the time. The Assyrian-Babylonian impact on what is called Ancient Hebrew religion or Judaism is absolute, compact, and irreversible. The Old Testament is an Assyrian-Babylonian cultural, religious, intellectual, and spiritual byproduct.

Discussion near the mosque of a village (from the 43rd maqamah of the Maqamat al-Ḥariri); by the Iraqi painter and calligrapher Yahya ibn Mahmud al-Wasiti (13th c.); the illustrations of the famous Muslim painter show that rural life continued following exactly the same Aramaean patterns before and after the diffusion of Islam.

The aforementioned approach is extremely embarrassing to colonial Orientalist forgers and to Western pseudo-Christian Evangelical, Taliban-fashion theologians, who should rather be considered as the real instigators and the original perpetrators of Islamic terrorism, which they have studiously and scrupulously produced because of their vicious anti-Islamic hatred that they have ceaselessly diffused. That is why it is vitally important for them to stick the label ‘Arab’ onto the entire phenomenon of ‘Islamic Civilization’, ‘Islamic History’, ‘Islamic religion’, and ‘Islamic armies’.

However, there is even more to it, if one examines the fundamentals of the divine revelation as spelled out in Islam’s holy text and the associated explanations. The historical reality is that Muhammad, either one accepts him as prophet or not, never pretended that he was preaching a ‘new’ religion; according to his revelation (the Quran) and explanations (the Hadith), Islam (lit. ‘submission to God’) was the only true faith (‘religion’) of Adam. In fact, according to the prophet Muhammad’s world conceptualization, there has been only one religion in the History of Mankind; it was preached by various prophets, either they were/are known to humans as such or not. All prophets were sent by God to correct deviations, because beyond the only and true religion (which involves total devotion to God), there have been across the ages numerous deformations, distortions, deliberate alterations, and pernicious modifications of the true religion, and of the preaching / revelation of the various earlier prophets.

The birth of prophet Muhammad in presence of humans and angels; miniature illustration on vellum from Rashid al-Din Hamadani’s famous masterpiece Jami’ al-Tawarikh (lit. ‘Compendium of Chronicles’), which is also known as ‘Universal History’ (Tabriz-Iran, 1307)

Prophet Muhammad on his death bed (Jami’ al-Tawarikh)

Prophet Muhammad reveals to Ali (both protected by halos of golden flames) secrets he unveiled during Mir’aj (transcendental travel to the spiritual universe); from the Ottoman Turkish ‘Tarjuma-i Thawaqib-i manaqib’ (translation of stars of the legend), which was ordered by Sultan Murad III (1574–1595) to be done (in 1590) from the Farsi abridgement (14th c.) of Aflaki; found in Baghdad and purchased by Pierpont Morgan in 1911 (MS M.466, fol. 96r). According to this tradition, ten thousand of the hundred thousand secrets were revealed to Ali as the rightful successor to prophet Muhammad. Ali had difficulty keeping them, and that is why he shouted them into a well; however, a young man made a flute from the tree, which grew from the reed in the well. People came from all over to hear the young man play, and then prophet Muhammad requested to hear the youth perform, declaring that his notes “were the interpretation of the celestial mysteries that he had confided to Ali”. The flute was used ever since as part of the Mevlevi ritual dance (samaa). Jalal ad-Din Rumi has apparently borrowed the story of the barber, who shouted the secret of the Phrygian King Midas’ donkey ears into a hole over which reeds grew, and subsequently the winds whispered the secret to all. The early spirituality of the true Islam was greatly appreciated by Muslims of the Golden Era of Islamic Civilization, but there is nothing Arabic in it.

It is the aforementioned, outspoken universality of Islam that has deeply upset and dramatically embarrassed Western Orientalist forgers, colonial radicals, Catholic-Jesuit schemers, and materialist-atheist extremists. And this explains why they tried to imitate some Eastern Roman historians of the 8th c., who collectively called all the Muslims ‘Saracens’, a deprecatory term that is historically false enough to reveal either the ignorance or the evilness of the users.

However, to Eastern Roman Christian Orthodox theologians, like John Damascene (or John of Damascus), Islam was merely the latest Christological heresy. This is what Vatican, the pseudo-Christian Evangelicals, and the anti-Jewish Zionists do their ingenious best to conceal; because the Eastern Roman Christian Orthodox truth destroys their absurd lies and diabolical conspiracies.

The multiply controversial gold coins of the Umayyad caliph Abd al Malik ibn Marwan (reign: 685-705); during his reign, there was an apparent effort to impose Arabic as the official language of the divided Caliphate and to replace Christian signs (notably the Cross) with the declaration of Islamic faith. However, the caliph ruled only on a small part of the territory that most people usually see as enormous on the mostly false maps of the Umayyad Empire, and this was due to the fact that he was facing a multiple revolt. Even worse, following a defeat, he had to be tribute to the Eastern Roman Empire. But to his greatest surprise, when he tried to pay with these new coins, the Roman Emperor Justinian II (reign: 685-695 and 705-711) refused to accept them because they were of an unknown type and of evidently unacceptable character. This attitude triggered a new war; the offense was not only the absence of Christian symbols, but also the Arabic inscription with the Islamic declaration of faith (‘bismallah, la illah illa-allah muhammad rasul allah’, i.e. ‘in the name of God, there is no god but God alone; Muhammad is His messenger’) on the reverse and the presence of three standing figures on the obverse.

As there no names written on the coins, every discussion is basically a matter of assumption, but there are specialists, who suggest that the three figures are none else than prophet Muhammad (center), Abu Bakr, and his paranoid daughter Aisha, who was the last wife of the prophet. Abu Bakr was indeed one of the early followers of Islam (the very first being Ali ibn Abi Taleb, who was the prophet’s cousin and son-in-law). Abu Bakr, was selected by a small group of vicious Meccan renegades at the time prophet Muhammad was dying – in straightforwardly anti-Islamic rejection of the solemn investiture of Ali by the prophet at Ghadir Khumm on the 16th March 632 (18 Dhu al-Hijjah), i.e. only three months before prophet Muhammad’s death (8 June 632), in the 11th year of the Islamic calendar (Anno Hegirae). The heinous, anti-Islamic nature and practices of the Umayyad dynasty, which existed only after the massacre of the rightful heir of Ali and against the will of the quasi-totality of the Muslims, is the reason for which this interpretation can be considered as possibly correct.

The much loathed and decried, lawless and illegitimate caliph sought to ‘prove’ that he was the rightful ruler and that he represented a line of succession approved by prophet Muhammad. Of course, this was preposterous because at the very end of the prophet’s life, Abu Bakr acted openly and deliberately against Muhammad’s will, whereas the rancorous and hysterical Aisha supported the killers of Fatima and later of Ali. An extra reason for which we can accept this effort of interpretation is the fact that this shameless and absolutely anti-Islamic depiction caused an unprecedented outcry (because it was taken as a clear sign of overwhelming rejection of Islam by the court at Damascus) up to the point that these blasphemous coins were all ordered to be destroyed shortly after they were minted. As his wretched empire experienced divisions, civil wars, and real trichotomy, the shy and coward Abd al Malik ibn Marwan decided not to further risk his otherwise useless throne.

The supposedly powerful (according to Western colonial liars and forgers) Umayyad Empire was a multi-divided terrain of which Abd al-Malik Marwan controlled only a small portion (highlighted in red); the lands controlled by his opponents al-Mukhtar and al-Zubayr are colored in green and blue; and the territory under Kharijite power is shown in yellow. This chaotic period (680-692) is typically called ‘Second Fitna’, i.e. conflict, sedition, or civil strife; the word has many connotations, but the most accurate description of the historical fact would be ‘civil war’.

————————————————– 

FORTHCOMING

Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey

2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists

By Prof. Muhammet Şemsettin Gözübüyükoğlu

(Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

CONTENTS

PART ONE. INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I: A World held Captive by the Colonial Gangsters: France, England, the US, and the Delusional History Taught in their Deceitful Universities

A. Examples of fake national names

a) Mongolia (or Mughal) and Deccan – Not India!

b) Tataria – Not Russia!

c) Romania (with the accent on the penultimate syllable) – Not Greece!

d) Kemet or Masr – Not Egypt!

e) Khazaria – not Israel!

f) Abyssinia – not Ethiopia!

B. Earlier Exchange of Messages in Turkish

C. The Preamble to My Response

CHAPTER II: Geopolitics does not exist.

CHAPTER III: Politics does not exist.

CHAPTER IV: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: Orientalism, conceptualization, contextualization, concealment

A. Orientalism

B. Conceptualization

C. Contextualization

D. Concealment

PART TWO. EXAMPLE OF ACADEMICALLY CONCEALED, KEY HISTORICAL TEXT

CHAPTER V: Plutarch and the diffusion of Ancient Egyptian and Iranian Religions and Cultures in Ancient Greece

PART THREE. TURKEY AND IRAN BEYOND POLITICS AND GEOPOLITICS: REJECTION OF THE ORIENTALIST, TURKOLOGIST AND IRANOLOGIST FALLACIES ABOUT ACHAEMENID HISTORY

CHAPTER VI:  The fallacy that Turkic nations were not present in the wider Mesopotamia – Anatolia region in pre-Islamic times

CHAPTER VII: The fallacious representation of Achaemenid Iran by Western Orientalists

CHAPTER VIII: The premeditated disconnection of Atropatene / Adhurbadagan from the History of Azerbaijan

CHAPTER IX: Iranian and Turanian nations in Achaemenid Iran

PART SIX. FALLACIES ABOUT THE EARLY EXPANSION OF ISLAM: THE FAKE ARABIZATION OF ISLAM

CHAPTER XVIII: Western Orientalist falsifications of Islamic History: Identification of Islam with only Hejaz at the times of the Prophet

PART ELEVEN. HOW AND WHY THE OTTOMANS, THE SAFAVIDS AND THE MUGHALS FAILED  

CHAPTER XXVII: Ethnically Turanian Safavids & Culturally Iranian Ottomans: two identical empires that mirrored one another

CHAPTER XXVIII: Spirituality, Religion & Theology: the fallacy of the Safavid conversion of Iran to ‘Shia Islam’

CHAPTER XXIX: Selim I, Ismail I, and Babur

CHAPTER XXX: The Battle of Chaldiran (1514), and how it predestined the Fall of the Islamic World

CHAPTER XXXI: Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals: victims of their sectarianism, tribalism, theology, and wrong evaluation of the colonial West

CHAPTER XXXII: Ottomans, Iranians and Mughals from Nader Shah to Kemal Ataturk

PART TWELVE. CONCLUSION

CHAPTER XXXIII: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: whereto?

————————————————————- 

List of the already pre-published chapters of the book

Lines separate chapters that belong to different parts of the book.

Iranian and Turanian Religions in Pre-Islamic Iran

https://www.academia.edu/105664696/Iranian_and_Turanian_Religions_in_Pre_Islamic_Iran

————————— 

CHAPTER XI: Alexander the Great as Iranian King of Kings, the fallacy of Hellenism, and the nonexistent Hellenistic Period

https://www.academia.edu/105386978/Alexander_the_Great_as_Iranian_King_of_Kings_the_fallacy_of_Hellenism_and_the_nonexistent_Hellenistic_Period

CHAPTER XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty

https://www.academia.edu/52541355/Parthian_Turan_an_Anti_Persian_dynasty

CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids

https://www.academia.edu/105539884/Parthian_Turan_and_the_Philhellenism_of_the_Arsacids

———————————   

CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire

https://www.academia.edu/105053815/Arsacid_and_Sassanid_Iran_and_the_wars_against_the_Mithraic_Christian_Roman_Empire

CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism

https://www.academia.edu/105117675/Sassanid_Iran_Turan_Kartir_Roman_Empire_Christianity_Mani_and_Manichaeism

CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates

https://www.academia.edu/96142922/Iran_Turan_Manichaeism_and_Islam_during_the_Migration_Period_and_the_Early_Caliphates

———————————-

CHAPTER XVII: Iran–Turan and the Western, Orientalist distortions about the successful, early expansion of Islam during the 7th-8th c. CE

https://www.academia.edu/105292787/Iran_Turan_and_the_Western_Orientalist_distortions_about_the_successful_early_expansion_of_Islam_during_the_7th_8th_c_CE

CHAPTER XX: The systematic dissociation of Islam from the Ancient Oriental History

https://www.academia.edu/105565861/The_systematic_dissociation_of_Islam_from_the_Ancient_Oriental_History

—————————————   

CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’

https://www.academia.edu/55139916/The_Fabrication_of_the_Fake_Divide_Sunni_Islam_vs_Shia_Islam_

——————————————  

CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate

https://www.academia.edu/61193026/The_Fake_Persianization_of_the_Abbasid_Caliphate

——————————————– 

CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash

https://www.academia.edu/96519269/From_Ferdowsi_to_the_Seljuk_Turks_Nizam_al_Mulk_Nizami_Ganjavi_Jalal_ad_Din_Rumi_and_Haji_Bektash

————————————————  

CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur

https://www.academia.edu/104034939/From_Genghis_Khan_Nasir_al_Din_al_Tusi_and_Hulagu_to_Timur_Tamerlane_

CHAPTER XXV: Timur (Tamerlane) as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr, his exploits and triumphs, and the slow rise of the Turanian Safavid Order

https://www.academia.edu/105230290/Timur_Tamerlane_as_a_Turanian_Muslim_descendant_of_the_Great_Hero_Manuchehr_his_exploits_and_triumphs_and_the_slow_rise_of_the_Turanian_Safavid_Order

CHAPTER XXVI: The Timurid Era as the Peak of the Islamic Civilization: Shah Rukh, and Ulugh Beg, the Astronomer Emperor

https://www.academia.edu/105267173/The_Timurid_Era_as_the_Peak_of_the_Islamic_Civilization_Shah_Rukh_and_Ulugh_Beg_the_Astronomer_Emperor

————————————————————————

Download the chapter (text only) in PDF:

Download the chapter (with pictures and legends) in PDF:

The systematic dissociation of Islam from the Ancient Oriental History

Pre-publication of chapter XX of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapters XVII, XVIII, XIX and XX form Part Six (Fallacies about the Early Expansion of Islam: the Fake Arabization of Islam) of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Chapter XVII has already been pre-published.

Until now, 13 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the book; the present chapter is therefore the 14th (out of 33). At the end of the present pre-publication the entire Table of Contents is made available. Pre-published chapters are marked in blue color, and the present chapter is highlighted in green color. 

In addition, a list of all the already pre-published chapters (with the related links) is made available at the very end, after the Table of Contents.

The book is written for the general readership with the intention to briefly highlight numerous distortions made by the racist, colonial academics of Western Europe and North America only with the help of absurd conceptualization and preposterous contextualization.

————————————————  

Istakhri’s map: miniature from the Book of Roads and Kingdoms; Islamic Geography and Cartography are the continuation of the respective sciences of the Ancient Babylonians, Egyptians, Aramaeans and Iranians

In addition to the aforementioned, an enormous effort of historical discrediting of Islam was undertaken by all sections and disciplines of Western colonial Orientalism; the systematic dissociation of Islam, of the Islamic Civilization, and of the Islamic History from the Ancient Oriental History, civilizations and religionshas been an enormous, coordinated effort to historically distort and disfigure the Islamic world in its entirety and to deceitfully present Islam as a marginal and rootless story.

Western forgers did their ingenious best to

a) dissociate Islam as religion from earlier forms of monotheistic spirituality, doctrine, faith, religion, cosmogony, cosmology, and apocalyptic eschatology;

b) disconnect the Islamic civilization from the great Ancient Oriental civilizations (Sumerian, Assyrian-Babylonian, Hittite, Egyptian, Cushitic, Phoenician, Aramaean, Hebrew, Iranian and Yemenite); and

c) portray the Islamic sciences, arts, architecture, literature, moral wisdom, intellectual life, mythology, theology and philosophy as independent from and unrelated to the similar Ancient Oriental endeavors, exploits and accomplishments.

Yet, Islam as religion, spirituality, world conceptualization, intellectuality, culture, civilization and way of life is a comprehensive continuation, an investigative exploration, an overwhelming overhaul, and a consummate reassessment of the Ancient Oriental civilizations, and of their hitherto unequaled contributions to the History of the Mankind.

This historical reality was very well known indeed to all the major historians of Islamic times like Abu Ja’far Muhammad al-Tabari (839-923), Abu’l-Qasim ibn Khordadbeh (9th c.), Ahmad al-Ya’qubi (9th c.), Abu Muhammad al-Hasan al-Hamdani (893-945), Al-Mas’udi (896-956), Shamsaddin al-Maqdisi (945-991), Abu Rayhan al-Biruni (973-1050), Abu al-Faraj ibn al-Nadim (10th c.), Ibn Hawqal al-Nasibi (10th c.), Abu Ishaq al-Istakhri (10th c.), Sa’id al-Andalusi (1029-1070), Al-Shahrastani (1086-1153), Ali ibn al-Athir (1160-1233) and Shamsaddin adh-Dhahabi (1274-1348) to name but a few.

Map of Fars: miniature from the Book of Roads and Kingdoms of Istakhri

Map of the Persian Gulf: miniature from the Book of Roads and Kingdoms of Istakhri

Ibn Hawqal’s world map translated in English: a diagram

They all knew the truth, and they ostensibly presented Islamic History as the uninterrupted continuation of all Ancient Oriental nations and civilizations. This is only normal after all; when in the year 750 the Umayyad dynasty was superseded the Abbasid caliphs of Baghdad, Islam was the religion of the majority of all the people inhabiting the vast lands between the Atlantic Ocean in the West and India & China in the East.

Who were all these people? The Berbers of today’s Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and the Sahara, the Copts of Egypt, the Cushites (‘Ethiopians’) of today’s Sudan, the Yemenites and the Omanis, the Somalis of the Horn of Africa, the Phoenicians, the Palestinians, the Aramaeans of Syria and Mesopotamia (into whom the Ancient Babylonians had been assimilated already during the Parthian times), and all the nations of Eastern Anatolia, Caucasus, the Iranian plateau, the Indus River Valley and Delta, and Central Asia. But these peoples were indeed the descendants of the ancient Oriental nations that constituted the cradle of human civilization and had already impacted all the rest, and more particularly, the backward, uncouth and uncivilized tribes that inhabited the peripheral lands of Europe in pre-Christian times.

Why the aforementioned distortion, namely the dissociation of the Islamic World from the Ancient Oriental History, was necessary for the Western Orientalist forgers and deceitful historiographers is easy to grasp. By making the Islamic Civilization, the Muslim nations, and their History look like marginal heretics or barbarians, who come from nowhere and had no past, they portrayed them as an alien element in the World History, and instead of Islam, they viciously positioned the Anti-Christian ‘Christianity’ of Rome, Western Europe, and North America, as well as the perverse, degenerate, and putrefied modern Western world, as supposedly originating from the ancient Oriental nations and as representing the mainstream of historical evolution.

To promote racial discrimination, educational-academic contamination, cultural racism, intellectual terrorism, as well as abhorrent socio-economic exploitation, the villainous pseudo-professors of Cambridge, Oxford, Harvard and of other similar, criminal institutions have entertained deceptive and ludicrous discussions about the hypothetical ‘influence’ of the Ancient Greek philosophers on Islamic philosophy, whereas they certainly know that there has not been such ‘influence’.

The Ancient Greek term ‘philosophy’, in and by itself, is of lowly connotation when compared to the Ancient Oriental transcendental wisdom and spiritual science. The Ancient Greek thinkers and explorers, who coined the term, had visited and studied for many years in the temples of Egypt, Babylonia and Iran. They had deployed a genuine effort to reach the Oriental wisdom, but they knew that they had failed to attain the level of their Babylonian, Egyptian, Anatolian and Iranian sacerdotal instructors. That is why they declared themselves as ‘friends of the wisdom’, and this is the real meaning of the word ‘philosophy’. 

Neither the Ancient Greek temples, which were mostly dedicated to the cult, nor the various philosophical ‘schools’ that were established by the former students of the Oriental temples could possibly reconstitute a tiny portion of the transcendental wisdom and the spiritual sciences that were developed and maintained in the great Ancient Oriental temples, which were the true universities and research centers of those days.

Because the overwhelming supremacy of Oriental spirituality, mythical symbolism, wisdom, knowledge, science, mysticism and intellect was totally absent among the inhabitants of the peripheral lands of Western Anatolia and South Balkans, various Ionian. Aeolian, Attic, Dorian and other thinkers, the likes of Solon, Pythagoras, and Plato, traveled to Mesopotamia, Iran and Egypt to become there to duly educate themselves, We can therefore conclude that their thought systematization, world conceptualization, and philosophical verbalism (or at times verbosity) did not have any originality; they never advanced up to the level of Oriental spirituality, active spiritual performance, and theurgy. They were unfortunately limited in ceaseless talking, and only few among them made the exception, and they were able to perform what simple people called miracles.

Islamic spirituality, intellectuality, wisdom, knowledge and sciences constitute the continuation of the Ancient Oriental spiritual exercises, religious endeavors, and scientific-intellectual explorations. As far as the 8th – 15th c. Muslim historians, grammarians, astronomers, erudite scholars, scientists, authors, transcendental epic poets, and wise explorers are concerned, one has to point out that they resourcefully studied ancient languages, texts, sciences, religions, and arts; they certainly practiced numerous techniques of ancient spirituality, and they performed what was called ‘mysteries’. Consequently, it is normal to assume that they also studied, translated and commented on selected texts of Ancient Greek authors and philosophers. But this fact demonstrates only the existence of one extra channel of Ancient Egyptian, Assyrian Babylonian, Aramaean, Phoenician, Yemenite and Iranian impact on the Islamic civilization; it does not constitute any ‘influence’.

There were also some Islamic philosophers, who found various statements made by some Ancient Greek philosophers as quite useful elements for their argumentation and their opposition to other, slightly earlier or contemporaneous philosophers (example: the philosophical feud between Ibn Rushd and Al-Ghazali). This situation does not reflect any ‘influence’ either; it consists merely in a reference to different sources. Influence is defined as ‘the capacity to have an effect on the character, development, or behaviour of someone or something, or the effect itself’.

In the case of the Islamic wise scholars and so-called philosophers, this would entail a substantive adoption (either conscious or not) of earlier preached, taught, diffused and adopted concepts, perceptions, ideals, faiths, notions, rituals, doctrines, ideas, theoretical approaches, interpretations, spiritual exercises, cultic practices or behavioral systems. However, this never occurred.

To offer an example, I would state that there is an undeniable and multifaceted influence of Mani and Manichaeism on many Islamic and Christian mystics, esoteric groups, philosophers, scholars, theologians, spiritual masters, founders of orders, etc. But there is no Platonic, Neo-Platonic or Neo-Pythagorean influence on Islam; and in few cases that may look like cases of evident influence, this is not an Ancient Greek, but an Ancient Egyptian, Babylonian, Iranian, Gnostic or other influence on Islam, because there was no originality in Ancient Greek philosophy. 

In fact, what happened -as continuation of the Pre-Islamic Oriental erudition, spirituality, faith and knowledge, through Late Antiquity Gnosticisms, Manichaeism and other religions, down to Islamic times- is exactly the opposite of what the colonial academics of Western Europe and North America have meticulously tried for long to totally conceal:

a) with the appearance of Islam and the emergence of the Islamic civilization, Christianity was drastically ejected out of the mainstream human civilization. For many centuries, Orthodox and Catholic Christianity represented merely a wrinkle on the surface of the Earth (just the space between France, Central Europe, Central Italy, the Balkans and Anatolia) when compared to the Islamic world.

Even more so, because despite one strong imperial administration (the Eastern Roman Empire) and a powerful religious institution (Rome), Orthodox and Catholic Christianity together stretched over an area narrower even than that inhabited by Nestorian Christians in Asia, i.e. between Mesopotamia, India, Central Asia, Siberia, Mongolia and China. Despite the enormous spread of Islam between 700 and 1100 CE, Christianity in Asia (i.e. Nestorianism) stretched over lands that were far larger lands than the territory of the Eastern Roman Empire and the lands inhabited by Christians in Western Europe.

and

b) with the overwhelming proclamation of the Satanic perversion of Renaissance, after the demise of the Eastern Roman Empire (1453) and with the long prepared, systematic dispatch of criminal gangsters and colonial murderers across the world to shamelessly commit atrocious hecatombs and tyrannically impose the Renaissance deception (under the guise of ‘Christianity’), a counterfeit religion rose to prominence across the Earth (under the name of Christianity), disfiguring the historical past in order to justify its evil purpose.

In fact, if the Eastern Roman Empire had survived and had existed longer, it would have been the only institution to authoritatively denounce the Anti-Christian crimes and genocides which were perpetrated by the conquistadores and to reject the evilness of Renaissance as totally Anti-Christian.

————————————————–

Download the chapter in PDF:

Iran–Turan and the Western, Orientalist distortions about the successful, early expansion of Islam during the 7th-8th c. CE

Pre-publication of chapter XVII of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapters XVII, XVIII, XIX and XX constitute the Part Six (Fallacies about the Early Expansion of Islam: The Fake Arabization of Islam) of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Until now, 10 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the book; the present chapter is therefore the 11th (out of 33).  

———————————- 

As young merchant, Muhammad ibn Abd Allah is recognized as a prophet by the monk Sergius Bahira (Sargis Bḥira). Miniature from Jami’ al-Tawarikh (Universal History), by Rashid al-Din Hamadani (Tabriz-Iran, 1307)

Similarly with what Iranologists have been doing when distorting the Achaemenid period by using the misnomer ‘Persia’ for ‘Iran’, Orientalists extended the same policy for all periods of the Islamic History of Iran and, furthermore, they introduced new, deceitful concepts, fake terms, and interpretational distortions as regards all things Iranian and Turanian. Even worse, they invented a nonexistent religious – theological divide that they also applied to their systems of disfigurement of the historical reality.

A basic diagram of the early Islamic ages involves the following determinant points, which the colonial Orientalist academics tried always hard to either conceal or distort and undermine:

I. Islam as preached by Prophet Muhammad consists in the cultural, intellectual, educational, spiritual and religious Aramaization of the Arabs (i.e. the inhabitants of the Hejaz, which is the mountainous region of the Arabian Peninsula that stretches between Yemen and Transjordan).

II. Early Islam was not viewed as a new religion by the Oriental Christians, i.e. the Aramaean Nestorians and the Aramaean & Coptic Monophysites / Miaphysites; it was rather considered as a new Christological dispute and heresy, let’s say a form of radical Nestorianism. This initial approach was also expressed by outstanding Orthodox Aramaean theologians like John Damascene (or John of Damascus).

III. Already before Prophet Muhammad’s death, great ancient nations had accepted Islam without the Hejaz Arabs fighting a single battle; the most notable example is that of Yemen, namely a non-Arab, pre-Islamic nation which consisted of several kingdoms that wrote down their deeds, exploits, cults and faiths on numerous, now deciphered, inscriptions and epigraphic monuments. The existing Ancient Yemenite textual documentation covers more than 1200 years of Pre-Islamic History; the Ancient Yemenite writing system was later diffused in Africa (Ge’ez writing in Axumite Abyssinia) and India (Brahmi writing). Ancient Yemenites i.e. Sabaeans, Qatabanis, Himyarites, Awsanis and Hadhramis, were the Indian Ocean’s first and foremost seafarers, navigators and merchants; they totally controlled navigation across the Red Sea Bab al Mandeb straits, at least until the famous Roman maritime expedition, undertaken by Aelius Gallus, was launched in 25 BCE. Highly educated, the Ancient Yemenites colonized East Africa from the Horn region down to today’s Tanzania’s coastlands, and due to their perfect knowledge and use of meteorological and oceanographic conditions, they initiated the straight navigation from the Horn of Africa to the Deccan coast in today’s SW India.

Ancient Yemenites were ethnically-linguistically different from and totally unrelated to the Arabs of Hejaz, and in addition, they greatly outnumbered them. Several bilingual pre-Islamic Sabaean–Arabic inscriptions testify to this historical reality. By accepting Islam two years before Prophet Muhammad’s death (630 CE), Yemenites started using Arabic and taking Arabic names. Abyssinia also accepted early Islam without fighting a single battle.

IV. After Prophet Muhammad’s death, two groups of Muslim Arabs were formed; the first group accepted Ali (Muhammad’s son-in law) as the spiritual guide and the administrative ruler, whereas the second group wanted to elect someone else instead of Ali, in striking contrast to Prophet Muhammad’s instructions. This was not merely a personal disagreement, but a deep spiritual, religious, cultural and behavioral discord. It is essential to specify at this point that those, who sided with Ali, wanted to diffuse Islam peacefully and not by means of military invasions, which constituted also the advice given to his followers by the founder and preacher of Islam.

V. Following the prevalence of the sectarian group of people, who were against Ali, military attacks were undertaken at the same time against the Eastern Roman Empire and the Sassanid Empire of Iran (as early as 633 CE). The people, who wanted to carry out the military invasions, took this decision because of accurate and detailed data already gathered as regards all the adjacent lands, namely Mesopotamia, Syria-Palestine, the Iranian plateau, the Indus River valley, the Caucasus region, and Egypt.

It was normal for those Arab merchants, who used to move ceaselessly across the silk-, spice- and frankincense roads and reach from the mountains of Hejaz as far as the Persian Gulf, the Indus River delta, Fars, Mesopotamia, Syria and the Eastern Mediterranean coast, to know exactly what was happening across those lands and further beyond. They were therefore able to conclude, on the basis of their accurate information, that although militarily insignificant, numerically unimportant, and economically destitute, they had strong chances to prevail – as they finally did.

VI. Around the end of the 3rd decade of the 7th c. CE, the Eastern Roman Empire and the Sassanid Empire of Iran were in conditions of total collapse, great impotence and final disintegration. The wars between Rome and Iran were about to complete 700 years of almost incessant conflicts and clashes, but the ferocity of the battles and the devastation of the raids during the previous three decades had gone beyond all limits and precedents. Emperor Heraclius’ victory over the Shahinshah (king of kings) Khusraw II (628 CE) had only symbolic value, because the Eastern Roman Empire was in ramshackle too.  

VII. Even worse for the two multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and multi-religious empires, the devastating wars ruined, exasperated, and alienated vast populations that belonged to religiously oppressed nations, which were kept out of the imperial elites. Consequently, these nations truly reviled the respective imperial and religious authorities, which were totally unrelated to them ethnically and religiously. More specifically, the outright majority of the populations of the Eastern Roman Empire’s eastern and southern provinces (Southeastern Anatolia, North Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Libya were Aramaeans (in Asia), Copts/Egyptians and Berbers (in Africa). Aramaeans were either Monophysitic/Miaphysitic (like the Copts) or Nestorians. Both branches of Oriental Christianity rejected the Constantinopolitan Orthodox theology and deeply hated the Constantinopolitan armies that tyrannized and persecuted them, when they were not busy with their wars with Iran, which caused unprecedented destruction mainly to their lands. 

Palimpsest-manuscript in Christian Palestinian Aramaic written in Palestine, during the 6th century; it was turned upside down and palimpsested in Syriac Aramaic in the 9th century. It probably belonged to St. Catherine’s Monastery, which was built by Justinian I between 527 and 565.

Similarly, the outright majority of the populations of Sassanid Iran’s western provinces (Atropatene, Eastern Caucasus, Transtigritane, Southeastern Anatolia, Central and Southern Mesopotamia, and the Persian Gulf coastal lands) were Azeri Turanians and Aramaeans. Their regions had suffered enormously because of the wars with the Eastern Roman Empire. Even worse, the Aramaeans of Iran were of Nestorian, Mandaean or Manichaean faith, and they were all severely persecuted for centuries. The Azeri Turanians were the staunchest followers of the official Sassanid version of Zoroastrianism (: Mazdeism) and they were very dissatisfied with both, Khusraw II’s religious tergiversations and the ethnic Persian (from Fars) control of the Sassanid administration.  

All these ethno-religious groups that constituted the bulk of the populations between Cappadocia and the central Iranian plateau would surely welcome a foreign army that would preach a monotheistic doctrine, while also liberating them from the most loathsome capitals, namely Constantinople and Istakhr. This was made known to the Arabs by -mainly- the Damascus Aramaean merchants who were their closest trade partners and business associates; they wanted to have both already destabilized and ailing empires attacked by the soldiers of the new ‘heresy’. And this is actually what happened – in total contravention of Prophet Muhammad’s constant admonitions as regards the peaceful diffusion of the true faith, which he viewed as a unique entity and continuity from the days of the first man.

Continuity in Aramaean Art before and after the arrival of the first Islamic armies is noticeable in many cases, like the Hisham’s Palace, an Umayyad residence near Ariha/ Jericho (mosaic dating back to 724–743)

VIII. What Western Orientalists have systematically hidden is that Turanians did not contribute to the spread of Islam only after the 11th c. (Seljuk invasions), but also at the very critical moment, namely the 7th c. Islamic armies’ attack against Iran. How this happened is easy to grasp: they did not defend the empire to which they belonged. And for a very good reason: they reviled its administration.

In only 18 years (633-651), the Eastern Roman Empire lost almost half of its territory, and the Sassanid Empire of Iran disappeared – in spite of the frequent and at times ferocious revolts undertaken by heirs to the Sassanid throne, who kept fighting even 100 years after their empire had fallen and for this purpose several Iranian Sassanid princes and noblemen sought the help of the Sogdian and the Chinese monarchs.

Contrarily to them, Aramaeans, Turanians, Egyptians and Jews were very happy with the developments, and this reality is reconfirmed by the fact that Aramaean, Egyptian and Turanian sites were not destroyed, whereas Fars (Persia) was turned to dust. Sassanid Iran’s most prestigious sites in terms of spirituality, religion sciences, and knowledge, namely Adhur Gushnasp (Takht-e Suleyman) and Gundeshapur (Bet Lapat), were left intact by the invading Islamic armies; but Istakhr was leveled to the ground.

Chinese illustration depicting the Battle of Talas (751 CE), when an early Abbasid army faced Chinese forces; Western European Orientalists deceitfully portray the battle as a milestone that led Turanians to accept Islam. That’s totally false, because many Turanians lived already in the Sassanid Empire of Iran and encountered Islam as early as the 1st half of the 7th c. CE. The fact that they did not fight in the battles of Qadissiyyah (636), Nahavand (642), and Merv (651) brought down the Sassanid rule.

IX. The myth of the ferocious, bloody Islamic conquests is a colonial, Orientalist fake. It helps however demonstrate the nature of the evil alliance that tried repeatedly to drag our world to extreme bloodshed over the past 40 years; the two groups to whom this myth is vitally necessary are

a) the idiotic Islamists, the Taliban, the various Islamic terrorist groups, the radical extremists, and the naïve, uneducated and ignorant Muslims, who believe that the so-called ‘Islamic conquests’ can possibly be a model, an example, an ideal, and a point of reference (whereas they are not), and

b) the hysterically anti-Muslim, uneducated and paranoid, Zionist and pseudo-Christian Evangelical preachers, militant academics, bogus-intellectuals, Western diplomats and scheming politicians, as well as the Anti-Christian Freemasons of the Apostate Lodge, who need the Orientalist fallacy of the so-called ‘ferocious, bloody Islamic conquests’ as a tool for their strategy to denigrate the Islamic Civilization, distort the historical truth, and in the process, prepare a deeply Anti-Christian and superficially Anti-Islamic army of Evangelical-Taliban and LGBT-terrorists, who will clash with the abovementioned group a.

Papyrus PERF 558 with a bilingual Greek-Arabic text: a tax receipt dating back to 643 CE

X. There are two absolute and undeniable truths as regards the History of the Orient during the 7th c. CE:

First, the early Islamic invasions would be cancelled and the Umayyad Caliphate overthrown, if Aramaeans, Turanians and Egyptians did not truly approve of, and massively support, the new state that expanded across their lands. The approval and the support did not concern the religion but the governance, the imperial rule, and the economic measures.

For anyone who has doubts about this fact, it is enough to read the Coptic Chronicle of the Bishop John of Nikiû (7th c.) or the History of the Patriarchs of the Egyptian Church of Severus ibn al-Muqaffa (تاريخ بطاركة الكنيسة المصرية – Ta’rikh Batarikat al-Kanisah al-Misriyah; 10th c.) in order to discover how clearly the Christian Copts preferred the Abbasid Caliphate and rejected the Constantinopolitan theologians, patriarchs, and imperial guards (let alone the perverse, heretic and schismatic papacy of Rome). About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Niki%C3%BB

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/nikiu2_chronicle.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severus_ibn_al-Muqaffa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Patriarchs_of_Alexandria

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/severus_hermopolis_hist_alex_patr_01_part1.htm

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/severus_hermopolis_hist_alex_patr_02_part2.htm

Second, and with focus on the 7th and the 8th c., without

a) the overwhelming adherence and wholehearted participation of the Aramaeans (be they Christian, Manichaean or already Muslim) in the establishment of the administration, the academic endeavors, the intellectual exploration, the scientific research, the artistic-architectural undertakings, the educational life, the commercial activities (across the Silk Routes), and the economic decision-making of the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates,

b) the overwhelming adherence and wholehearted participation of the Turanians (be they Mazdeist, Nestorian Christian, Manichaean or already Muslim) in the training and the improvement of the Caliphate’s military forces, tactics, and ventures, in the establishment of the administration, in the introduction of imperial manners (mainly during the Abbasid times), in the initiation of diplomatic contacts (across Central Asia, and with China), in the maintenance of economic-commercial activities, and in the transfer of esoteric-spiritual traditions within the new, Islamic world that was under formation, and

c) the gradual acceptance expressed toward the new rule and the outstanding role played within the new context by Iranians, Yemenites, Egyptians and Berbers in all the above mentioned fields, tasks, deeds and exploits, …..

…….. there would have never been an Islamic Civilization.

The fights between the armies of the Eastern Roman Empire and the Islamic caliphates have shed a shadow on the fact that the leaders of the Aramaean populations of the empire had invited the early Muslims in order to get rid of the much loathed Constantinopolitan guards and armies. This happened because in reality the Umayyad Caliphate was substituted for the Sassanid Empire of Iran, and the contrast between the Christian and Islamic faiths appeared as a frontal imperial clash, as it became a state affair.

In fact, even few decades after the early Islamic invasions, the Arabs of Hejaz vanished within an ocean of imperial, cultural, spiritual, intellectual, academic, artistic, religious, military, economic, commercial, technological and educational dynamics that they definitely triggered at their unbeknownst. To say it in simple words: the average person’s life in Medina or Mecca during the period 600-670 CE (which is tantamount to a man’s lifetime) and the average person’s life in Baghdad during the period 800-870 CE were as different from one another as an average person’s life in Constantinople contrasted with another average person’s life in Chang’an (China’s capital) in either chronologies.

There were indeed few common points in Mecca in 630 CE and Baghdad in 830 CE; there were some people who prayed five times a day; one could listen to the adhan; during Ramadhan, they were fasting in daytime. But when the few things in common are fully enumerated, we discover that an incommensurable distance separated the two realms. However, the true, historical Islam is not to be found in Mecca in 630 CE, but in Baghdad in 830 CE.

What was Mecca in 630 CE? It was just a small, marginal village where Prophet Muhammad preached the true faith to God.

What was Baghdad in 830 CE? The undisputed center of the world! Therefore you cannot compare. Historically, Mecca was always insignificant. Spiritually, it was an important location.

The same parallel exists within Christianity too.

Speaking historically, what were Bethlehem, Nazareth, and the various locations of the desert where Jesus used to walk, fast and preach? Nothing! Marginal locations within a vast empire! What was Jerusalem in 33 CE? Historically, it was clearly less important than Antioch, Damascus or Alexandria. Spiritually, it was a key location for the early Christians and the Jews. 

What were Rome and Constantinople in 333 CE? The two capitals of a vast empire! Both cities were historically more significant than Jerusalem.

Late Mamluk-era training with the lance, c.1500; the Mamluks, the Ghulam and all other categories of Turanian soldiers did not ‘discover’ Islam in Central Asia thanks to the early Islamic armies; they encountered the new faith as early as the first battles in the first half of the 7th c., but they did not fight for their empire, Sassanid Iran, which collapsed because of their stance.

————————————-

Download the chapter (text only) as PDF:

Download the chapter (text only) as PDF:

The Timurid Era as the Peak of the Islamic Civilization: Shah Rukh, and Ulugh Beg, the Astronomer Emperor  

Pre-publication of chapter XXVI of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapters XXIV, XXV and XXVI constitute the Part Ten {Fallacies about the Times of Turanian (Mongolian) Supremacy in terms of Sciences, Arts, Letters, Spirituality and Imperial Universalism} of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Until now, 9 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the book; the present chapter is therefore the 10th (out of 33). A list of the already pre-published chapters (with the related links) is made available at the end of this chapter.

———————————   

Imam Reza Mosque, Mashhad – NE Iran

Timur was not a monstrous murderer as the Western historiographers depicted him in their vicious and pernicious, and therefore absolutely worthless and totally untrustworthy, narratives. Historical texts written by Western European authors about Timur reflect only the impotency of the hypocritical, sacrilegious, pseudo-Christian, petty kings of Europe. Like Genghis Khan, Timur shared the traditional Eastern Turanian vision of Tengrist Universalism; sectarian, ethnic, and other divisions or divisive lines were meaningless, barbarian, and inhuman to him. As per his worldview, these divisions represented only the interference of Evil in the human world. Contrarily to most of the then world’s kings and to all of today’s criminal politicians and statesmen, Timur did not engage in battles and wars for his personal, tribal, ethnic or national material benefit, but for the overall, true progress of the faithful Mankind.

Beyond being a grandmaster in chess, Timur was a great mystic, a knowledgeable interlocutor, and an emperor who highly evaluated erudition, literature, philosophy, arts, architecture and sciences. If today people get confused about Timur’s religious views, this is not due to an eventual misinterpretation of historical sources, but to the present confusion between spirituality and religion. It is enough for someone to associate spirituality with religion in order to totally misperceive entire historical eras. Consequently, Western scholars have nowadays difficulty to define whether Timur was a Sunni or a Shia; this is only normal, because there are no Sunni or Shia. This forged division cannot apply in Timur’s life. In fact, like every spiritually alive man, Timur was a secular monarch. Historically, he continued the tradition of Harun al-Rashid’s Abbasid Caliphate, the practices of the Seljuk sultans, and the modus operandi of the Ilkhanate: his empire was an absolutely secular state.

Today, the term ‘secular state’ is confused with the paranoia of the post-WW II world, but in reality the ‘secular state’ has nothing to do with atheism, agnosticism, academic elitism, sacrilegious intellectualism, rationalism, materialism, hedonism, pan-sexism, and all the evil modern bogus-concepts (politics, democracy, multi-partite system, human rights, etc.), which have been associated with the supposedly ‘secular’ societies of today’s decayed and putrefied Western world. In honorable distinction from, and in total contrast with, other modern states, Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey (more specifically, the 1923 Constitution and the period until 1938) had nothing to do with today’s pseudo-secular Western societies, which in reality are strictly religious, yet scrupulously masqueraded, states with Satanism as secretively and tyrannically imposed dogma.

In Timur’s empire, there was sheer distinction between spirituality and religion, and every person was allowed to believe the religious dogma that he chose; religious authorities of all doctrines had the freedom to perform the rites and fulfill the cults of their faith; and there was no interference of the imperial administration in these activities. Many Western scholars attempted to tarnish Timur’s fame by holding him responsible for the gradual decline of Nestorian Christianity, Buddhism and Manichaeism in Central Asia, Siberia and Mongolia; that is totally misplaced.

Neither Genghis Khan nor Timur were ‘personally’ responsible for this fact. Timur did not tolerate any sectarian act of violence and discrimination. The reasons for which these three religions disappeared in the aforementioned regions have nothing to do with imperial decisions of any sort; they are totally unrelated to the Genghisid and Timurid empires. As a matter of fact, Buddhism was already present in the eastern provinces of Achaemenid Iran. Manichaeism and Nestorian Christianity appeared during the Sassanid times.

These three religions had followers among several nations that lived across the Iranian plateau, Central Asia, and the mountainous ranges between China, Indus River valley, and parts of Siberia (Aramaeans, Eastern Iranians, Sogdians, Turanians, Khotanese, etc.). However, the process of their disappearance was complex, gradual and slow, covering ca. 700 years (750-1450); first, the Islamic advance towards Central Asia and the Indus River valley (middle 7th c. to middle 8th c. CE) was detrimental to some nations, notably the Sogdians, who were terribly decimated.

Second, the proliferation of mystical orders, spiritual systems, dissident movements, eschatological-messianic concepts, theological schools, soteriological groups, and literary-poetical reassessments of the historical, pre-Islamic past produced an abundance of attractive alternatives for all the nations of the aforementioned diverse regions (over the period between the 8th c. and the 11th c.).

Third and more important, the overwhelming migrations that took place across Asia between the 11th c. and the 15th c. totally changed the landscape between Central Europe and Eastern Siberia; the newly arrived nomads usually accepted concepts of Islam that suited best their traditions of Tengrism and Shamanism. Then, Nestorians, Buddhists and Manichaeans proceeded to the East (i.e. China), since it was well known that settled communities of their coreligionists existed there too and they lived in peace.

Timur met many leading mystics, scholars, scientists, theologians, architects and poets of his times; his meeting with Hafez (Khwaja Shams-ud-Din Muhammad; 1315-1390), the great Iranian poet from Shiraz, was commemorated for centuries among Islamic rulers and erudite scholars, because their conversation bears witness to Timur’s ostensible ability to appreciate wit, intellect, self-sarcasm, and modesty.

Manuscript miniature depicting the encounter between Timur and Ibn Khaldun

Two pages from a manuscript of Ibn Khaldun’s al Muqaddimah

16th c. copy of Hafez’s Divan with fighting scene

Ceiling decoration of the tomb of Hafez in Shiraz

Hafez’s Mausoleum, Shiraz

Timur met Ahmad ibn Arabshah (1389-1450) during the siege of Damascus; he saved him (along with many other scholars) and then sent him to Samarqand; later, the Damascene author returned to Damascus and proceeded to Edirne / Adrianople, the Ottoman capital at the time; there he composed a voluminous historical description of Timur’s deeds and conquests (Aja’ib al-Maqdur fi Nawa’ib al-Taymur: The Wonders of Destiny of the Ravages of Timur).

One can however instantly understand why Ahmad ibn Arabshah presented a negative image of Timur, who had saved his life: writing while you are at the Ottoman payroll can never be a guarantee for objective description and impartial narrative. Had Ahmad ibn Arabshah written a true and unbiased ‘Tarikh’, the Ottoman sectarian theologians and the rancorous courtiers of Mehmed I and of Murat II would have burned the manuscripts. The Ottoman hatred of Timur and the Timurids lasted until the demise of the Caliphate – only to the detriment of the Ottoman family.

The major and most trustworthy historical biographies and sources for the life, the conquests, and the deeds of Timur are Nizam ad-Din Shami’s Zafar nameh (ظفرنامه‎, Book of Victory), Sharif al-Din Ali Yazdi’s Zafar nameh, and Abu Taleb Husayni’s Malfuzat-e Timuri and the associated appendix Tuzokat (which is basically the Persian translation of an earlier manuscript written in Chagatai Turkic and found in Yemen; Abu Taleb Husayni presented his work to the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan in 1637).

The conquest of Baghdad by Timur depicted on the miniature of a manuscript of in Sharif al-Din Ali Yazdi’s Zafar nameh

Sharaf al-Din Ali Yazdi with Muhammad Amuli; folio from the Majalis al-Ushaq of Kamal al-Din Gazurgahi, which was written and decorated in Shiraz around 1560

The phenomenon that Western scholars describe as Timurid ‘Renaissance’ consists in a serious misperception of the entire historical period; the irrelevant terminology was invented to project Western concepts onto the Islamic world. In general, the term ‘Renaissance’ cannot apply either in the case where there is uninterrupted continuity or in the manifestation of newly invented concepts, ideas, forms, styles or rhythms. Truly, the 2nd half of the 14th century and the entire 15th century were a period of fully-fledged spiritual, academic, scientific, literary, artistic, architectural, cultural, intellectual, and artisan creativity and dynamism across almost all Islamic lands.

However, this phenomenon does not have any trait of revival or rebirth of an earlier experience or condition. Quite contrarily, it consists in the culmination of the Islamic genius as manifested since the days of Abbasid Baghdad, Bayt al-Hikmah, Ferdowsi, Nizam al Mulk, and Nasir el-Din al Tusi. One may eventually express a rhetorical question like the following in order to fully demonstrate the inaccuracy of the Western neologism Timurid ‘Renaissance’:

– What was interrupted, terminated, dispersed, lost or forgotten as Islamic science, art, scholarship and craftsmanship in the days of Nasir al-Din al Tusi (1201-1274), only to restart, resume, and be rediscovered, revived and reborn at the time of Timur?

The answer is very simple: nothing!

Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s works, explorations, studies, and astronomical tables and catalogues were continued in the works of Jamshid al-Kashi, Qadi Zadeh al Rumi (of Eastern Roman origin), and Ulugh Beg, Timur’s grandson, third successor, and astronomer emperor. There is an undisputed continuity from the Observatory of Maragheh to the Observatory of Samarqand, pretty much like there is an absolute continuity in Islamic science, academic life, and artistic creativity from Abbasid Baghdad to Timurid Samarqand.

Imam Reza shrine in Mashhad

Aerial view of Imam Reza shrine in 1976

The tomb of Imam Reza

And there was novelty! Timurid architecture, as manifested in Samarqand, Herat, Balkh, Turkistan {Kazakhstan; the Mausoleum of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi (1093-1166) which was commissioned by Timur himself}, Mashhad (Goharshad Mosque, built in honor of Empress Goharshad, Shah Rukh’s royal consort), and elsewhere, may have several traits that date back to Seljuk times, and may well represent the next stage of evolution from Ilkhanate architecture. However, in reality, Timurid architecture consists in an entirely different and totally new Islamic style of architecture. With their characteristically elevated, fluted domes, with their deep niches, with their impressively raised iwans (vaulted gateways), with their very typical shabestans (underground spaces), with their innovative muqarnas (also known as honeycomb vaulting), and with their inscriptions on mosaic tiles, all the Timurid mosques, madrasas and mausoleums are unique of style and known for their rule of axial symmetry.

Goharshad Mosque, Mashhad

Goharshad tomb, Herat

High place of Timurid architecture is by definition the Registan esplanade at Samarqand, a vast public square with three astoundingly monumental universities; ‘madrasa’ at the time did not mean only ‘theological school’, because theology was only one of the numerous -more than 20- academic topics taught in the madrasas. The first madrasa built in Registan was the Ulugh Beg Madrasah (construction: 1417–1420); two centuries later, the Sher-Dor Madrasah (1619–1636) and the Tilya-Kori Madrasah (1646–1660) were built at the times of the Janid dynasty (established by descendants of the Khanate of Astrakhan) in exactly the same architectural style. Subsequently, Timurid architecture influenced architectural styles in the Mughal, Safavid and Ottoman empires.

Registan Square, Samarqand

Ulugh Beg Madrasah: one of the three masterpieces of Timurid Architecture in Registan

Sher-Dor Madrasah, Registan

Tilya Kori Madrasah, Registan

Many irrelevant European scholars characterized the Turanian Timurid architecture as “Persian style”, but there is nothing ‘Persian’ in it. The enormous iwans may certainly be a reminiscence of the Parthian iwans, but Parthia was not ‘Persia’; quite contrarily, the Arsacid Empire of the Parthians was called ‘Iran’ and the Parthians were not ‘Persians’ but Turanians. Similar cases bear witness to the numerous colonial discriminatory abuses and to the academic, Indo-Europeanist racism. 

Bibi-Khanym Mosque, Samarqand; it was built in 1399 by the Tamerlane’s favorite wife, Bibi-Khanym, in honor of his return from the war in India

Timur and Shah Rukh patronized the arts, improving the traditional Art of the Book, sponsoring scholars, scientists and artists, and demanding exquisite illustrations of manuscripts (miniatures). Manuscript illumination became then a highly revered art and several schools (styles) were distinguished in this regard; elements of Turanian, Central Asiatic, Iranian, and Chinese artistic traditions were then blended into a new style. The Timurids in general were remembered as benefactors of scholars, poets, artists, artisans, and architects. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timurid_Renaissance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafez

https://www.academia.edu/17427522/A_Note_on_the_Life_and_Works_of_Ibn_Arabshah

https://www.bidsquare.com/online-auctions/skinner/ahmad-ibn-arabshah-1389-1450-ajaib-al-maqdur-fi-nawaib-al-taymur-the-wonders-of-destiny-of-the-ravages-of-timur-1292-ah-933933

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/historiography-v

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zafarnama_(Shami_biography)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharaf_ad-Din_Ali_Yazdi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zafarnama_(Yazdi_biography)

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/abo-taleb-hosaym-arizi

https://www.academia.edu/2256806/The_Histories_of_Sharaf_al_Din_Ali_Yazdi_A_Formal_Analysis

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/kasi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamsh%C4%ABd_al-K%C4%81sh%C4%AB

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q%C4%81%E1%B8%8D%C4%AB_Z%C4%81da_al-R%C5%ABm%C4%AB

https://www.maa.org/press/periodicals/convergence/mathematical-treasures-qadi-zada-al-rumis-geometry

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/ali-qusji-qusju-ala-al-din-ali-mohammad-theologian-and-scientist-d

https://www.academia.edu/398260/Timurid_Architecture_In_Samarkand

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mausoleum_of_Khoja_Ahmed_Yasawi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goharshad_Mosque

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqarnas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iwan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Persian_domes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gur-e-Amir

Forensic facial reconstruction: Shah Rukh

Gur-i Emir Mausoleum, Samarqand, Shah Rukh’s headstone 3rd from the left

Tanka (silvr coin) of Shahrukh Mirza (Yazd mint)

Shah Rukh’s reign (1409-1447) is considered as the Golden Era of the Timurid Empire. He ruled over the largest part of Timur’s territory and only after his nephew Khalil Sultan (1405-1409) proved to be totally unable to reign. Timur’s western territories were lost because of the chaos caused by the conflicts between the Karakoyunlu and the Akkoyunlu and following the Karakoyunlu victory over Miran Shah and the Timurid army (1408). Shah Rukh preferred to rule in peace with his neighbors and this helped the scholarly, artistic, artisan and architectural activities that burgeoned in his empire. Shah Rukh created a solid base in Herat (today’s NW Afghanistan) where many Genghisid relatives of his royal consort Goharshad lived, as they were the local administrators.  

Goharshad ranked below Shah Rukh’s other Genghisid wife, Malekat Aga. However, due to her family support, to her inclination for letters, arts and public works, and because of her sense of human relations, she became a considerable factor of her imperial husband’s success. As a matter of fact, Goharshad was the daughter of a notable Genghisid prince Giath al-Din Tarkan whose honorary title (Tarkan) was initially bestowed by Genghis Khan himself upon one of his ancestors. It is therefore only normal that, after Shah Rukh invaded Samarqand and was accepted as the final successor to his father by all, he transferred the imperial capital to Herat, leaving his son Ulugh Beg as governor of Samarqand. 

Herat had been destroyed by Genghis Khan (1221) but rebuilt during the Ilkhanate; however, the magnificent edifices and architectural monuments erected there at the time of Shah Rukh and Goharshad made of the city one of the Islamic world’s most splendid capitals. The erection of the Musallah complex of Herat (1417), which involved mausoleums, madrasa, mosque and five minarets, is the most important among the many monuments patronized by Shah Rukh’s royal consort. The famous shrine of Gazur Gah (an 11th c. mystic who lived in Herat and is historically known as Khwaja Abd Allah) was also built (1425) under the imperial patronage of the Timurids. And the same is valid for Goharshad Mausoleum that was built (1438) as the tomb of Shah Rukh’s and Goharshad’s son, prince Baysunghur.

Perhaps the most impressive and most colorful monument commissioned by the imperial couple was the enormous Goharshad Mosque built in Mashhad (today’s NE Iran). With a 43 m high dome, with two 43 m high minarets, and with four iwans, the mosque was always considered as one of the most impressive and most beautiful monuments of Islamic architecture worldwide.

Patron of authors, explorers and erudite scholars, Shah Rukh benefitted from the great talent of Hafez Abru, who had first been one of Timur’s most favorite scholars and authors. Abdallah ben Lutfallah (as is the full name of Hafez Abru) accompanied Timur in several military campaigns and was present in all the imperial court feasts and symposia convened by Timur. After the death of the conqueror, he entered the service of Shah Rukh, who commissioned the elaboration of numerous historical and geographical opuses, notably 

i. Dayl-e Zafar nameh ye-Shami (continuation of Nizam al-Din Shami’s biography of Timur for the period 1404-1405)

ii. Dayl-e Jame’ al-Tawarih (continuation of Rashid al-Din’s Universal History by an anonymous author who covered the period 1304-1335)

iii. Tarih-e Shah Rukh (History of the reign of Timur’s son until 1414; this text was later incorporated in other historical compilations by Hafez Abru)

iv. Tarih-e Hafez Abru, which is a Universal History and Geography commissioned by Shah Rukh in 1414 (originally it was scheduled to be the Farsi translation of selected geographical treatises earlier written in Arabic, but finally it became an original opus of historical geography); it also involved a map (British Library manuscript Ms. 1577) designed after the methods of the historical Balkh School of Cartography.

v. Majmu’a-ye Hafez-e Abru, i.e. a Universal History commissioned by Shah Rukh in 1418 in order to incorporate Bal’ami’s translation of Tabari’s Tarih to Farsi and Rashid al-Din’s Universal History, which was extended by Hafez Abru until 1393.

vi. Majma’ al Tawarih al Soltani, a Universal History until 1426, written for Shah Rukh’s son Baysunghur.

Shah Rukh established good diplomatic relations with Ming China by sending an imperial delegation to Beijing in 1419-1422. Member of the delegation was Ghiyath al-Din Naqqash, who was tasked to compose the official diary, which was not saved independently down to our times, but was largely incorporated in other historical opuses. As an official account, this text was highly evaluated and therefore translated to various Turkic languages in later periods. The Timurid delegation was received with imperial honor, traditional pomp, and great joy at the Ming court. Shah Rukh created an environment of stability and peace across Asia, systematically exchanging embassies and establishing good relations also with the Sultanate of Delhi (notably Khizr Khan), the Bengal Sultanate (and particularly with Shamsuddin Ahmad Shah), the Akkoyunlu, the Ottomans, the Turanian Ormuz kingdom in the Hormuz straits (then under Bahman Shah II), and even the Mamluks of Egypt.

As the Dravidian ruler (Samoothiri) of Calicut (in the presently occupied Deccan, in South ‘India’) encountered several Timurid officials who, while returning from the Sultanate of Bengal, anchored in his harbor, he decided to send an embassy to Herat. A Farsi-speaking Dravidian Muslim led the official delegation and impressed Shah Rukh, who subsequently dispatched a Timurid delegation to Calicut (Kozhikode; 1442-1443) under Abd al-Razzsaq Samarqandi (1413–1482); the scholar-diplomat wrote an extensive report of his mission that he later incorporated in his chronicle Maṭla’-e sa’dayn va maǰma’-e baḥrayn (the rise of the two auspicious constellations and the junction of the two seas). He thus offered insight into first, the small kingdom of Calicut and the local rulers (named Saamoothiri) and second, the Dravidian Vijayanagara kingdom, because the local king Deva Raya II invited Abd al-Razzsaq Samarqandi to his court.

Shah Rukh had however to fight several battles against the Karakoyunlu (in 1420, 1429 and 1434) and the Timurid army was victorious every time. However, since Shah Rukh did not inherit the brutality of his father, his victories did not solve the problem of the constantly rebellious Turkmen and the unstable situation in the western confines of the Iranian plateau, North Mesopotamia, South Caucasus and Eastern Anatolia continued during most of the 15th c. until the Akkoyunlu managed to achieve a decisive victory (1467) over the Karakoyunlu only to be later supplanted by the Safavid Empire (1501).

After Timur crushed the Hurufi rebellion in 1394, the secret Kabbalistic sect launched a subversive campaign of anti-Timurid hatred and evidently conspired against the empire by placing in the Timurid court several secret members who would be later mobilized against the imperial administration. In 1426, Shah Rukh risked his life in an assassination attempt; he survived and then undertook a great effort to uproot the evil secretive sect that promoted black magic practices by attributing numerical values to letters of the alphabet and then evoking spiritual potentates. Several modern scholars, who happen to be Kabbalists and Satanists, tried therefore to tarnish the fair name of Shah Rukh and to distort the truth by accusing him of ‘anti-intellectualism’, a nonexistent term coined by evil and inhuman gangsters in order to denigrate everyone who makes it impossible for them to conduct their perverse and evil operations. This is pathetic and ludicrous; the historical truth is that Shah Rukh was the patron of artists, scholars, erudite authors and architects. And in any case, an ‘intellectual’, who gets initiated in the secrets of a Kabbalist sect, already ceases to be a human.

When Shah Rukh died at the age of 70 (1447), his firstborn son Ulugh Beg (then at the age of 53; 1394-1449) succeeded him; he was also Goharshad’s favorite son and he had acquired a remarkable experience in travels, scholarly explorations, and imperial administration. He had been the governor of Samarqand and the entire Transoxiana (Mawarannahr) since 1409 (when he was just 15). And since the early 1420s, he was an accomplished scholar, mathematician and astronomer with his own madrasa and his own observatory – the best of his time. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Rukh

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/gowhar-sad-aga

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/power-politics-and-religion-in-timurid-iran/formation-of-the-timurid-state-under-shahrukh/C659802886B594A63374F0E1657E91BC

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6504717/

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/hafez-e-abru

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafiz-i_Abru

https://pieterderideaux.jimdofree.com/7-contents-1401-1450/hafiz-i-abru-1420/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musalla_Complex

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musalla_Minarets_of_Herat

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrine_of_Khwaja_Abd_Allah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gawhar_Shad_Mausoleum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goharshad_Mosque

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghiy%C4%81th_al-d%C4%ABn_Naqq%C4%81sh

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/abd-al-razzaq-samarqandi-historian-and-scholar-1413-82

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abd-al-Razz%C4%81q_Samarqand%C4%AB

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zamorin_of_Calicut

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vijayanagara_Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deva_Raya_II

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ormus

Mirza Muhammad Taraghay bin Shahrukh (mainly known as Ulugh Beg, i.e. ‘the great ruler’; 1394-1449) was the unique case of Turanian Muslim Emperor who was also a consummate scholar, a leading mathematician, and the then world’s foremost astronomer. He ruled for only two years and only after having delivered pioneering opuses, notably Zij-i Sultani (زیجِ سلطانی; the astronomical tables of the Sultan, i.e. of himself), which is a collective work of many leading astronomers working under his guidance to produce a list of no less than 1018 stars.

Ulugh Beg was an exceptional man in every sense; he had 13 wives, he spoke ca. 10 languages (Chagatai Turkic, Farsi, Arabic, Syriac Aramaic, Chinese, and several other Western and Eastern Turanian languages), and he seems to have been a prodigious young man, very knowledgeable since his adolescence; and thanks to his numerous travels, he saw great monuments, universities, libraries and centers of learning that impressed him. However, Nasir el-Din Tusi’s observatory in Maragheh seems to have impacted the young imperial traveler more than any other edifice, and this was the reason for which, after he was appointed governor of Samarqand by his father Shah Rukh in 2009, he started to turn the city into the world’s leading academic center.

Ulugh Beg, as depicted by an anonymous painter of the period 1425-50

Ulugh Beg coin; AH 852 (1448-9) Herat mint

Samarqand Observatory, constructed by Ulugh Beg in the 1420s and rediscovered by Russians archaeologists in 1908

Ulugh Beg Observatory; the trench accommodated the lower section of the meridian arc.

Mirzo Ulughbek and Ali Kushchi working in the Samarqand Observatory, as per the imagination of modern local artists

Ulugh Beg created therefore an inviting environment for scholars from various regions and countries, and that’s why many researchers, explorers, scientists and students gathered in Samarqand as early as the 1420s. Ulugh Beg Madrasa was built in the period 1417-1420, and its parts were decorated with tiles of blue, light blue and white colors that all have a great symbolism in Turanian Tengrism. Two years later, the Ulugh Beg Observatory was constructed, as we can deduce from the letters sent by Jamshid al Kashi to his own father; these valuable documents were recently (in the 1990s) found, published and translated. Jamshid al Kashi (1380-1429) was a leading astronomer who worked with Ulugh Beg in Samarqand’s imperial observatory.

Another leading scholar, who contributed to the academic works, scholarly studies, and astronomical tables and catalogues undertaken in the observatory, was Ali Qushji (1403-1474; full name: Ala al-Dīn Ali ibn Muhammad). Ali Qushji was not greatly important only because he participated in the elaboration of the Zij-i Sultani and he made many other contributions to sciences, writing numerous astronomical, mathematical, mechanical, linguistic, philological and theological treatises; he is also credited for having established a real bridge between Samarqand and Istanbul in terms of scientific-academic life, scholarly exploration, and intellectual endeavors.

As a matter of fact, Ali Qushji was one of the very few scholars of his times to have met personally with three powerful emperors, namely the Timurid Ulugh Beg, the Akkoyunlu Uzun Hasan (1423-1478), and the Ottoman Mehmed II (also known as Fatih; 1432-1481). Ali Qushji delivered personally a copy of Zij-i Sultani to Mehmed II, evidently making the Ottoman sultan envy the unequaled superiority of the great Timurid capital Samarqand in terms of science, exploration, scholarship and intellect.

Jamshid al Kashi: opening bifolio of his major opus Miftah al-Hisab

Two pages from a manuscript of Jamshid al Kashi’s Sullam al-sama’

Jamshid al-Kashi’s The Key to Arithmetic; the last page of the manuscript

Pages of a manuscript with treatises elaborated by Ali al Qushji

Other remarkable scholars, who formed Ulugh Beg’s team, were Mu’in al-Din al-Kashi and Qadi Zadeh al-Rumi (1364-1436), a leading mathematician and astronomer of Eastern Roman descent, tutor and mentor of Ulugh Beg; Qadi Zadeh was greatly renowned for his pertinent commentaries on the works of earlier Turanian Islamic astronomers, like al-Jaghmini (full name: Mahmud ibn Muhammad ibn Umar al-Jaghmini; 13th – 14th c.), Shams al-Din al-Samarqandi (ca. 1250 – ca. 1310), and Nasir ad-Din al-Tusi. Students from Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Egypt, the Indus River valley, the Ganges River valley, China and parts of Siberia were flocking to Samarqand to benefit from this worldwide unique environment.

To these great scholars it took no less than 15 years to compose in Farsi the voluminous Zij-i Sultani (completed in 1437), which was the World History’s most accurate and most complete astronomical table and star catalogue up to its time. Zij is an Islamic astronomical book that presents in tabular form various parameters used for astronomical calculations of the positions of stars therein included; as it can be assumed, it takes a great deal of observation in order to establish this type of documentation.

Around 20 different Zij catalogues have been established during the Islamic times, either saved until our times or not. However, Zij-i Sultani surpasses in terms of scholarship all earlier astronomical tables, including the 2nd c. CE Ancient Egyptian astronomer Ptolemy’s Almagest (Μαθηματικὴ Σύνταξις – Mathematike Syntaxis; المجسطي – al-Majisti). Ulugh Beg’s outstanding masterpiece was later translated to Arabic, Ottoman Turkish, and several European languages.  

In 1437, ten years before succeeding his father Shah Rukh on the throne of the Timurid Empire, Ulugh Beg specified the sidereal year as being 365d 6h 10m 8s long, which is an error of +58 s as per today’s calculations. Comparatively, Copernicus in 1525 reduced the margin of the error by 28 seconds, but the 9th c. CE Aramaean Sabian astronomer Thabit ibn Qurra (whose works, translated to Latin, were the primary sources of Copernicus) had determined the length of the sidereal year as 365 days, 6 hours, 9 minutes and 12 seconds (with an error of only 2 seconds as per today’s calculations).

After Shah Rukh’s death, Ulugh Beg had to fight in order to defend his right to succession; he won in the battle at Murghab (بالامرغاب; in today’s Afghanistan/not to be confused with Murgab in Eastern Tajikistan) over his nephew Ala al-Dawla (son of Ulugh Beg’s late brother Baysunghur/ بایسُنغُر) and advanced to Herat; there, in 1448, carried out a terrible massacre of the local population, taking revenge of their support to his nephew and demonstrating his Timurid originality. Ulugh Beg’s reign was brief and unhappy; his son Abd al-Latif Mirza (1420-1450) had an enormous psychological complex of inferiority toward his authoritatively intellectual and exceptionally erudite father, and he rebelled against him. After Abd al-Latif Mirza’s victory in a battle nearby Samarqand, Ulugh Beg had to surrender (1449), but the treacherous and evil son was not pleased with this, and he had his father assassinated, when the deposed Ulugh Beg was proceeding to Hejaz for Hajj. 

The patricidal Abd al-Latif Mirza (in Farsi: padarkush; پدر کش) ruled for less than a year, having the support of evil, ignorant and rancorous theologians, who hated Ulugh Beg’s scholarly integrity, intellectual genius, scientific leadership, and secular rule. However, the outright majority of the population hated the ungrateful son for his two repugnant sacrileges; few days after having his father executed, Abd al-Latif Mirza killed also his brother Abd al-Aziz. So, in 1450 the patricidal and fratricidal ruler was murdered, and then came to power Ulugh Beg’s nephew Abdullah Mirza (son of Ibrahim Sultan, who was son of Shah Rukh and also a renowned artist and calligrapher); he rehabilitated his uncle’s imperial tradition and reputation. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulugh_Beg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulugh_Beg_Observatory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomy_in_the_medieval_Islamic_world#Observatories

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulugh_Beg_Madrasa,_Samarkand

lea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zij-i_Sultani

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zij

http://vlib.iue.it/carrie/texts/carrie_books/paksoy-2/cam6.html

https://depts.washington.edu/silkroad/cities/uz/samarkand/obser.html

https://www.academia.edu/39741365/Bibliography_about_Ulugh_Beg_and_Samarkand_Observatory

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234382647_Ulugh_Beg_Astronom_und_Herrscher_in_Samarkand

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253678731_Die_Tabellen_von_Ulugh_Beg_Die_Sternkataloge_des_Ptolemaus_Ulugh_Beg_und_Tycho_Brahe_im_Vergleich

http://www.jphogendijk.nl/arabsci/kashi.html

https://www.orientalarchitecture.com/sid/1347/uzbekistan/samarkand/ulugh-beg-madrasa-of-samarkand

https://archnet.org/sites/2123

https://www.wdl.org/en/item/3864/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Qushji

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/astrology-and-astronomy-in-iran-#pt3

Click to access Journal%20for%20the%20History%20of%20Astronomy%20November.pdf

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Кази-заде_ар-Руми

https://islamsci.mcgill.ca/RASI/BEA/Qadizade_al-Rumi_BEA.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C4%81bit_ibn_Qurra

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdal-Latif_Mirza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_Sultan_(Timurid)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Mirza

After Ulugh Beg’s assassination, the Timurid Empire was in reality dissolved. The trends of imperial disintegration, tribal split, intra-family rivalry, and military localism prevailed at a time when Uzbek and Kazakh migrations were upsetting numerous settled populations in Central Asia. The Timurid Empire underwent a real fragmentation before totally disappearing. Abdullah Mirza was not able to rule for more than a year and only in Transoxiana (Mawarannahr); Timurid princes became independent in parts of Khorasan, Fars, and Iraq-e Ajami (Zagros Mountains).

Abu Sa’id Mirza (1424-1469; son of Muhammad Mirza, who was the son of Miran Shah, third son of Timur) was able to rule (1451-1469) and reunify the central parts of his great-grandfather’s empire. He allied with the Uzbeks (notably Abu’l-Khayr Khan: 1428-1468), but he faced many rebellions from Timurid princes of several provinces that he managed to suppress in terrible tribal massacres. He even executed Shah Rukh’s widow, the legendary dowager-empress Goharshad, accusing her of plotting against him by using her great-grandson. He arranged a temporary peace with the Karakoyunlu, but entered into an ill-fated war with the Akkoyunlu (who were former allies of the Timurids) and their powerful king Uzun Hasan. Finally, in February 1469, in the battle of Qarabagh, Abu Sa’id Mirza was defeated and held captive; Uzun Hasan handed him over to his Timurid allies, who remembering his monstrosity toward Goharshad executed him. Finally, Uzun Hasan sent Abu Sa’id Mirza’s decapitated head to the Mamluk ruler of Egypt Qaitbay, who arranged a proper burial.

Various Timurid princes ruled then in Khorasan, Kabul, Balkh, Fergana, Fars, and Iraq-e Ajami, whereas Transoxiana was first ruled by Sultan Ahmed Mirza from 1469 until 1494 and later divided into Samarqand, Bukhara and Hissar. Most of the northern part of the Timurid Empire was supplanted in 1488 by the Uzbeks, who set up their khanate under Muhammad Shaybani, a Genghisid prince. Soon afterwards, the Kazakh and the Sibir (Siberia) khanates were established, seceding from the Golden Horde. At the same time, Sultan Husayn Bayqara (a great-great grandson of Timur; 1438-1506) ruled (1469-1506) in Herat, continuing the Timurid tradition in terms of patronage of arts and sciences. He thus became a source of admiration for his nephew Babur, who was later the founder of the Mughal Empire of South Asia; but Babur was none else than the grandson of Abu Sa’id Mirza and therefore great-great-great-grandson of Timur.   

Last, the southern parts of the Timurid Empire were most;y incorporated into the nomadic Akkoyunlu Empire that also controlled Eastern Anatolia and Mesopotamia; however, internal strives decomposed that empire too around the end of the 15th c. It was then that the mystical Safavid Order, instead of supporting or infiltrating a state, decided to launch its own empire: the Safavid Empire. They already had their own army ready however: the formidable and renowned Qizilbash. About: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timurid_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timurid_family_tree

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Mirza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Sa%27id_Mirza

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/eraq-e-ajami

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu%27l-Khayr_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Qarabagh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzun_Hasan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultan_Ahmed_Mirza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Shaybani

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaybanids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzbek_Khanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakh_Khanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultan_Husayn_Bayqara

—————————————– 

Lines separate chapters that belong to different parts of the book.

CHAPTER XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty

https://www.academia.edu/52541355/Parthian_Turan_an_Anti_Persian_dynasty

———————————   

CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire

https://www.academia.edu/105053815/Arsacid_and_Sassanid_Iran_and_the_wars_against_the_Mithraic_Christian_Roman_Empire

CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism

https://www.academia.edu/105117675/Sassanid_Iran_Turan_Kartir_Roman_Empire_Christianity_Mani_and_Manichaeism

CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates

https://www.academia.edu/96142922/Iran_Turan_Manichaeism_and_Islam_during_the_Migration_Period_and_the_Early_Caliphates

—————————————   

CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’

https://www.academia.edu/55139916/The_Fabrication_of_the_Fake_Divide_Sunni_Islam_vs_Shia_Islam_

——————————————  

CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate

https://www.academia.edu/61193026/The_Fake_Persianization_of_the_Abbasid_Caliphate

——————————————– 

CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash

https://www.academia.edu/96519269/From_Ferdowsi_to_the_Seljuk_Turks_Nizam_al_Mulk_Nizami_Ganjavi_Jalal_ad_Din_Rumi_and_Haji_Bektash

————————————————  

CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur

https://www.academia.edu/104034939/From_Genghis_Khan_Nasir_al_Din_al_Tusi_and_Hulagu_to_Timur_Tamerlane_

CHAPTER XXV: Timur (Tamerlane) as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr, his exploits and triumphs, and the slow rise of the Turanian Safavid Order

https://www.academia.edu/105230290/Timur_Tamerlane_as_a_Turanian_Muslim_descendant_of_the_Great_Hero_Manuchehr_his_exploits_and_triumphs_and_the_slow_rise_of_the_Turanian_Safavid_Order

———————————————————————–

Download the chapter (text only) in PDF:

Download the chapter (with pictures and legends) in PDF:

Timur (Tamerlane), as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr, his exploits and triumphs, and the slow rise of the Turanian Safavid Order

Pre-publication of chapter XXV of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapters XXIV, XXV and XXVI constitute the Part Ten {Fallacies about the Times of Turanian (Mongolian) Supremacy in terms of Sciences, Arts, Letters, Spirituality and Imperial Universalism} of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Until now, 8 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the book; the present chapter is therefore the 9th (out 33). At the end of the present pre-publication the entire Table of Contents is made available.

Pre-published chapters are marked in blue color, and the present chapter is highlighted in green color.  

—————————- 

Many people believe that Timur (Tamerlane) was a descendent of Genghis Khan, but this is very wrong; however, he belonged to the same Eastern Turanian Mongolian family as his remote relative who died 109 years before Timur was born (1227-1336). There is actually a distance of 5 generations (the grandfather of the great-grandfather of a person) between the greatest conquerors of Eurasia. However, Genghis Khan and Timur seem to have as common progenitor Genghis Khan’s 4th patrilineal ancestor (the grandfather), who was Timur’s 9th patrilineal ancestor, namely Tumanay Khan.

More specifically, Genghis Khan was son of Yesugei Baghatur son of Bartan Baghatur son of Khabul Khan son of Tumanay Khan. And Timur was son of Taraghai Noyan son of Burgul Noyan son of Aylangir son of Ichil son of Qarachar Noyan son of Suqu Sechen son of Erdemchu Barlas son of Qachuli son of Tumanay Khan. The time passed from the death of Genghis Khan until the birth of Timur (109 years) is approximately the equivalent of the period between the deaths and the births of the following monarchs or spiritual leaders respectively: Consul Crassus’ death and Emperor Trajan’s birth (53 BCE-53 CE), Julian the Apostate’s death and Justinian’s birth (363-482), Nestorius’ death and Prophet Muhammad’s birth (451-571) and Napoleon’s death and Elizabeth II’s birth (1821-1926).

Timur (1336-1405) was born in Shahrisabz (Шаҳрисабз / شهر سبز‎; Timur’s tomb was built there, but his burial took place at Samarqand), in the southern part of today’s Uzbekistan, close to the border with Tajikistan; at those days, the city was named Kesh. Timur’s family belonged to the Turanian tribe of Barlas, which had recently accepted Islam and become sedentary in Mawarannahr (Transoxiana); those lands were thought to be the epicenter of the legendary and historical Turan, and at the time of Timur’s birth, they were provinces of the Chagatai Empire. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timur

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barlas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahrisabz

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timurid_dynasty

Shahrisabz: ruins of Timur’s summer palace, and modern statue

Today, not one scholar raises doubt about the Turanian ancestry and identity of Timur; quite interestingly, and in full refutation of the fallacious Western Orientalist academia, it is Timur himself who rejects this, and by so doing, he gives a lethal blow to the colonially invented distinction between Iran and Turan, to the forged ethnic-linguistic-cultural disconnection of the ‘Turkic nations’ from the ‘Iranian nations’, and to the evil pseudo-universities, institutes and foreign ministries of the colonial Western countries.

Dead before 618 years, Timur speaks to us today through the words that he said personally to the Berber (and not Arab as Western forgers claim) Muslim scholar Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), whom the great conqueror met during the siege that he laid to Damascus in 1400. When the two greatest men of those days came face to face, they were aged (in their 60s) and already world renowned among all Muslims; the fame of Ibn Khaldun had reached the great conqueror and the magnificence of of Timur’s conquests was known to all the people between the Pacific and the Atlantic. For over a month, the great scholar, who was blocked in the besieged city, was lowered by ropes from the walls of Damascus to encounter Timur. Ibn Khaldun gave extensive details about his daily encounters with Timur in his autobiography (Al-taʿrīf) and in his World History (Kitāb al-ʿibar wa-dīwān al-mubtadaʾ wa-l-khabar fī ayyām al-ʿarab wa-l-ʿajam wa-l-barbar wa-man ʿāṣarahum min dhawī al-sulṭān al-akbar). 

Two years before his staggering victory over the Ottomans at Ankara (1402), Timur saved all decent and benign scholars, artists and artisans of Damascus, by evacuating them and dispatching them to Samarqand, and then he sacked the city. There was a significant historical reason for this drastic solution, and Timur duly explained his actions. In fact, he rightfully massacred the entire population in due punishment for the sacrileges earlier perpetrated by the infidel Umayyad caliph Muawiyah, i.e. the murder of Hassan son of Ali (670 CE), and by Yazid I, the son of Muawiyah, namely the monstrous assassination of Husayn son of Ali (680). Ibn Khaldun returned to Cairo to complete his works and wrote exactly what Timur told him about his ancestry.

In total rejection of the Western scholarship’s historical forgery and division between Turan and Iran, the ‘Turanian’ Timur claimed maternal descent from the illustrious ‘Iranian’ (and certainly not ‘Persian’) hero Manuchehr whose legendary deeds were superbly narrated in Farsi poetry by Ferdowsi in his Shahnameh, already 400 years before the encounter of Timur with Ibn Khaldun.

Manuchehr enthroned; from manuscript miniature of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh

Who is Manuchehr, Timur’s remote ancestor?

Supreme legendary (or apocalyptic-eschatological) king of the Pishdadian dynasty whose first king was the first man Keyumars, Manuchehr is the 7th generation descendent of the founder of the Mankind’s sole royal dynasty. There is no doubt that Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh must have been almost holier than the Quran for Timur, and he definitely knew sizeable portions by heart. The Pishdadian dynasty involves eleven kings of kings: Keyumars, Hushang, Tahmuras, Jamshid, Zahhak, Fereydun, Iraj, Manuchehr, Nowzar, Zaav, and Garshasp. As a matter of fact, Fereydun had three sons, namely Iraj (from Shahmaz, Jamshid’s daughter), Salm and Tur (the latter two from Amavaz, Jamshid’s other daughter).

Manuchehr and Afrasiab fighting against one another; from a 16th c. Shahnameh manuscript

Historical interpretations of the legends superbly narrated in poetry by Ferdowsi offer specific identifications concerning the original ancestors of the three nations that shaped World History: Iraj was viewed as the ancestor of all the Iranians (involving also North Indians and several North Europeans); Tur was considered to be the forefather of all Turanians (Chinese included); and Salm was perceived as the progenitor of all the Anatolians and Eastern Romans (and in general the ‘West’). The three half-brothers represent the mythical-historical stage of division of the surface of the Earth among them.

According to Ferdowsi’s apocalyptic legend, Salm was the firstborn, but being trepid, he avoided fighting with the dragon that attacked him and his brethren; however, the dragon was only his father Fereydun transfigured in order to test his eldest son. On the contrary, Tur’s name means ‘brave’, and this functioned as prophecy. And Iraj was given the worldly glory (termed as ‘Farr’ in Shahnameh and as ‘Khvarenah’ in Avestan, i.e. glow or fortune) as a present granted by God. For this reason, Salm and Tur made a plot and killed Iraj.

At a later stage, Iraj’s daughter gets married with Pashang and their child is Manuchehr, who takes revenge for the assassination of his grandfather. Then, Fereydun (Manuchehr’s great grandfather) abdicates in favor of his great grandson. It is evident that all these ‘events’ take place in an atemporal, spiritual universe, representing values of moral order, hierarchical intelligences, prototypal virtues, choices, deeds and consequences.

However, from that ‘moment’ (Manuchehr’s revenge) started a spiritual clash between the entities ‘Iran’ and ‘Turan’; this clash is prophesied in Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh to end during the ‘reign’ of Kay Khusraw, the 3rd king of kings of the Kayanian dynasty, which was instituted after the termination of the Pishdadian dynasty. It is noteworthy that there is a difference of six (6) generations between Manuchehr and Kay Khusraw, namely Nowzar, Zaav, and Garshasp of the Pishdadian dynasty and Kay Qubad, Kay Kavus, and Kay Khusraw of the subsequent Kayanian dynasty; already Manuchehr’s ‘reign’ is symbolized as of twice perfect duration (120 years: 2×60, as per the sexagesimal system).

Before being extensively narrated and greatly praised in Ferdowsi’s poetry, Manuchehr was an illustrious hero of the pre-Islamic oral traditions; that’s why several rulers were named after this legendary figure. Coin of Manuchihr I, who ruled Fars (Persis) as vassal of the Arsacid Parthian shahs in the early 2nd c. CE (above); (below) coin of Manuchihr III of Persis (late 2nd c. CE)

The name Manuchehr, as part of the Iranian culture, went beyond the limits of the Iranian world and was used by numerous neighboring peoples; Manuchehr khan Enikolopian was an Armenian eunuch of the 18th-19th c. Fath Ali Shah Qajar of Iran.

Jabbar Farshbaf, Manuchehr; a millennia long legend that fascinates the imagination of modern Iranian artists

The above is enough to explain what Timur meant, while specifying to Ibn Khaldun that he was a remote descendant (through his mother’s side) of Manuchehr, i.e. Iraj’s grandson. Timur, a ‘Turanian’, claimed that his ancestry stretched indeed back to the grandson of the forefather of all ‘Iranians’ (Iraj) – and not to Tur, who admittedly was viewed (then and now) as the ancestor of all ‘Turanians’. This automatically means that the two terms were not ethnonyms, and they were perceived totally differently, and not through the distortive lenses of modern rationalism and materialism. In fact, with Timur claiming a clearly ‘Iranian’ origin, the vicious Orientalist distortion and fake division between Turanians and Iranians totally collapses and falls to pieces. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pishdadian_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fereydun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraj

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tur_(Shahnameh)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salm_(Shahnameh)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuchehr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayanian_dynasty

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/aql-e-sork-the-crimsoned-archangel-lit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Khaldun

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09503110.2016.1198535

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23801883.2019.1593089?journalCode=rgih20

https://www.academia.edu/652075/Ibn_Khaldun_His_Life_and_Works

Timur’s military formation, early experience, and rise to power were very different from those of Genghis Khan; the latter spent 20 years in wars against other Eastern Turanian Mongolian tribesmen until he achieved the unification of a certain number of tribes and only after his mid-40s, he went out of the borders of the already unified confederation of Eastern Turanian Mongolian tribes. The former was initially a small band leader, who was engaged in several battles as a mercenary, before allying with different kings (khans) against their opponents.

Originating from the Chagatai Empire, Timur fought along with his khan against the Turanian state of Volga Bulgaria, invaded Khorasan and Khwarazm, increased his basic military force, and then sided with Tughlugh Timur (1329-1363), the khan of Moghulistan (Eastern Chagatai Empire) only to be rewarded with the control of the entire Transoxiana (Mawarannahr). However, very soon, he had to defend that territory against Tughlugh Timur’ son, and his victory helped him consolidate his power. When Timur’s father died, he became a tribal leader, which enabled him to combine military experience and tribal status.

Gur-i Amir (Farsi: گورِ امیر; Uzbek: Amir Temur maqbarasi; ‘the emperor’s tomb’), Timur’s Mausoleum in Samarqand; the historical monument, except for being the burial place of Tamerlane, is one the most prominent architectural masterpieces worldwide as it determined Central Asiatic, Iranian and Indian architecture for many centuries.

Having well studied the History of the Abbasid Caliphate and the stories of the impotent caliphs of the last 350-400 years of Abbasid rule (ca. 850-1258), Timur ruled in the name of the various Chagatai khans, while reducing them to total impotency. Until 1370, Timur managed to establish a strong basis of popular support at Balkh (Bactra, in today’s Afghanistan) and then eliminate his contenders. He then spent considerable time to consolidate his empire. Only after 1380 (and at the age of 45), Timur started becoming a mighty opponent to reckon with beyond the limits of Central Asia. It was then that Timur started his own conquest of the world, thus creating a smaller but surely much more homogeneous empire than that of Genghis Khan.

He first had to defend Khwarazm and Azerbaijan against the powerful Tokhtamysh (1342-1406; Tuqtamış/ Тухтамыш), the khan of the reunified Golden (Blue and White) Horde, Kipchak and Sibir or Siberia (1376-1406). Tokhtamysh had oppressed the uprising of the Turanian Christians of Muscovy (Moscow) in 1382 (there were no Russians at time; they were invented later to set up the Romanov imperial narrative), and squelching the rebellion, he burned the Turanian city of Moscow to the ground. The hostilities between Timur and Tokhtamysh started in the 1380s and the wars culminated in the 1390s.

Timur’s main achievement in the 1380s was the elimination of all the petty dynasties that had surfaced after the decomposition of the Ilkhanate and covered the lands between Euphrates and Syr Darya (Iaxartes). Obliterating divisive statelets, Timur did in the aforementioned vast region what exactly the Ottomans were doing in Western and Central Anatolia and in the South Balkans. These were converging trajectories and one day, sooner or later, the clash between Timur and the Ottomans would come. Timur proved to be merciless in the oppression of rebellions, but his attitude was deliberate. He only wanted to prevent further resistance or opposition. However, he defended and supported the spiritual, academic, educational, artistic and artisan elites, while eliminating indoctrinated religious leaders, stupid sheikhs, tribal contenders, military opponents, and their supporters to the last. 

Timur throws a feast in the gardens of Samarqand

By invading Soltaniyeh (in NW Iran) in 1384, Mazandaran (Caspian Sea’s southern coast land), Maragheh and Tabriz (in Iranian Azerbaijan) in 1386, and Isfahan and Shiraz in 1387, Timur controlled the Iranian plateau. Timur’s soldiers executed the quasi-totality of the population of Isfahan (ca. 100000-120000 people). Then, Timur spent several years, asserting his rule throughout the mountains of Zagros, the Caucasus region, and Mesopotamia, and capturing Baghdad in 1393. It was then that Timur rushed to the center of the Iranian plateau to disperse the last Isma’ili remnants that had gathered there again to foment resistance.

During the same period, Timur had to rush to the North; there he reached Western Siberia and Tataria (the western territories of the Golden Horde that constitute today the central part of Russia), defeated Tokhtamysh in the battle of Kondurcha River (1391), burned Ryazan, and invaded all lands around Muscovy (Moscow). This campaign was one of the most remarkable military operations ever undertaken by Islamic imperial armies; Timur’s fast offensive to the North and further on to the West involved an operation of ca. 140000 soldiers, who crossed a distance of over 2700 km, progressing rapidly and for many long hours every day in the formation of a 20 km wide front. So, his soldiers complained that, due to the brief duration of Siberia’s and Tataria’s summer nights, they could not sleep enough between the evening prayer (Isha’a / صلاة العشاء‎; ca. one hour after the sunset) and the morning prayer (Fajr / صلاة الفجر‎; ca. one hour before the dawn).

In 1395, Timur returned to the North, after crossing the Caucasus region, and in the famous Battle of Terek River, he won a final victory over Tokhtamysh, destroying Sarai, the Golden Horde capital (near today’s Samara), and Astrakhan. Known as ‘Timur’s stone’, the bilingual {8 lines in Chagatai written in the old Uyghur alphabet (which was directly based on the Aramaic alphabet) and 3 lines in Arabic} inscription found at the Karsakpay mines (Western Kazakhstan) bears witness to the event, and to the commemoration of Timur’s victory, which was also mentioned in historical texts of the period, notably the Zafarnameh (‘book of the victory’) of Sharaf ad-Din Ali Yazdi.

In 1398, Timur turned to the southeast against the Islamic Sultanate of Delhi, which controlled already most of the territory of the modern states of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh; the then ruling Turanian Tughlaq dynasty (1320–1413) had replaced the also Turanian Khalji dynasty (1290–1320), which expanded greatly the territories controlled by the earlier Turanian Mamluk dynasty (1206-1290) that was substituted to the Turanian Ghurid Sultanate (879–1215) and to the Turanian Ghaznavid Empire (977–1186). When Timur arrived in the Delhi region (1398) and the northern parts of what today is confusingly called ‘India’ (instead of Bharat or Hindustan), the majority of the local population was already Turanian of origin, due to successive nomadic migrations, military invasions, extensive clashes, and subsequent amalgamation; and so the local population has been ever since and during the modern times, despite the colonially fabricated masquerade of the fake ‘Indo-European’ India, which is not the name of a real state, but the appellation of a colonial machination based on English perfidy, economic exploitation, political tyranny, historical distortion, and utter academic evilness. 

The destruction of many cities in the Indus River valley by Timur’s armies heralded the fall of Delhi, which was one the then world’s richest cities: Tulamba, Multan, and Bhatner were turned to ruins, and no less than 100000 war prisoners were massacred, before the Sultan Nasir al-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq (1394 – 1413) of the Delhi Sultanate experienced a crushing defeat in December 1398. The sultan of Delhi and his generals counted on the psychological effect that their armored elephants would have on Timur’s soldiers, but their calculations proved to be wrong.

The great conqueror was above all an inventive and resourceful warrior, who knew that even camels can prevail over elephants, if duly and timely utilized by an ingenious strategist; having loaded a great number of camels with straw well tied on them and having supervised the digging of a trench to protect his soldiers, Timur set fire to the camel-borne volumes of straw, when the enemy’s army and elephants attacked. His soldiers pushed the camels forward through use of iron sticks and the flaming camels ran crazily on the elephants, yowling in extreme pain and despair. Thus, Timur’s camels caused unprecedented chaos, hellish fire, and utmost panic to the mammals that smashed under their feet the powerless soldiers of the unfortunate sultan of Delhi.

This was the victory of the camel over the elephant or, if you prefer, the triumph of a conqueror’s intellect over a greedy caretaker’s sloth. Delhi was properly plundered to best finance Timur’s next campaigns, and the entire Bengal, the Ganges River valley, and the Indus River valley became provinces of Timur’s empire or tributary states. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tughlugh_Timur

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokhtamysh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokhtamysh%E2%80%93Timur_war

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karsakpay_inscription

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharaf_ad-Din_Ali_Yazdi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zafarnama_(Yazdi_biography)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tughlaq_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasir-ud-Din_Mahmud_Shah_Tughluq

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalji_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamluk_dynasty_(Delhi)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delhi_Sultanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_Sultanate

In 1399, Timur turned westwards; after eliminating Haleb (Aleppo) and Damascus, invading the Caucasus region, and demanding submission from the Anatolian Turkmen beys (rulers) in 1399 and 1400, Timur invaded Baghdad in June 1401. The menacing alliance of the Ottomans with the Mamluks of Egypt that had the support of Venice, Genoa and the Knights Hospitaller (who controlled Izmir/Smyrna) created an alarming situation west of Timur’s empire. However, other affairs were top of the priority list for the great conqueror, namely the incessant movements of Turkmen nomads from Central Asia though the Iranian plateau, the Caucasus region, and Anatolia. Timur sided with the Akkoyunlu (آق‌ قویونلو‎ /Aq Qoyunlu / White Sheep confederation – initially centered around Bayburt and known for their frequent intermarriages with Eastern Roman princesses; 1378-1501) and against the Karakoyunlu (قره قویونلو / Qara Qoyunlu /Black Sheep confederation – initially they were Turkmen vassals of the Jalayrid Sultanate in Baghdad and Tabriz; 1374-1468); this was only normal: by connecting themselves with the Ottomans and the Mamluks, the Karakoyunlu caused the ire of Timur.  

Within the context of 14th c. Anatolia’s fragmentation, the Ottoman Sultanate appeared to be the strongest state around 1400. But Timur’s viewpoint over the Anatolian affairs was different: he considered the Seljuks as the legitimate sultanate in the entire region, and he wanted to put an order to the Turkmen chaos caused by the numerous progressive migrations. This situation was not only critical for the developments that took then place, but also determinant for what followed, and for the imperial polarization around Anatolia and the Iranian plateau during the 15th – 20th c.

——– Incomparably brilliant & exorbitantly ingenious conquests ——-

Timur enthroned at Balkh

Timur commanding the siege of Balkh

Timur besieges the historic city of Urgench (in Khawarizm/ Chorasmia, today’s Uzbekistan)

Timur about to launch a war against Tokhtamysh

Timur against Tokhtamysh; from a miniature of the ‘Facial Chronicle’ (also known as ‘the illustrated Chronicle of Ivan the Terrible’; Лицевой летописный свод) volume 11, page 251

Timur in the conquest of Baghdad (1393) from a miniature in the Zafarnameh

Timur orders a campaign against Georgia

Timur’s army attacks the remaining survivors in Nerges, Georgia (1396)

Timur’s invasion of India, 1397-1399

The defeat of Nasir Al-Din Mahmum Tughluq at the battle of Delhi 1398

Timur defeats the Mamluk Sultan Nasir-ad-Din Faraj of Egypt

Sultan Bayezid prisoned by Timur, by Stanisław Chlebowski (Станислав Хлебовский; 19th c. Orientalist Russian painter of Polish origin)

Letter dispatched by Timur to Charles VI of France in 1402

————————————————————————————————————

Many people today believe that from the Seljuks to the Ottomans there has been a historical, cultural, spiritual, religious, literary and academic continuity in Anatolia. This is an enormous lie, and Timur’s perfect choice and drastic action help us fully understand how false this impression is. As a matter of fact, between the Seljuks and the Ottomans there was a disruption. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_beyliks

Timur defeated the Karakoyunlu in 1400; this brought the Akkoyunlu closer to him, and two years later, Timur conceded Diyarbakir to them. This development, in relation with the Ottoman defeat at Ankara in 1402, brought the Ottomans closer to Karakoyunlu and produced an atmosphere of enmity between the Ottomans and the Akkoyunlu. After Timur’s death, the Karakoyunlu managed to oppose successfully the Akkoyunlu for some time, but later the latter prevailed and the former were reduced to a small state in the Caucasus region.

This generated a ferocious rivalry between the then expanding Ottomans and the Akkoyunlu; the latter supported the Central Anatolian Karamanids and effectively stroke an alliance with the Ottoman Empire’s worst enemy, i.e. Venice. The escalation led to several battles between the Ottomans and the Akkoyunlu during the 15th c., and later, with the dissolution of the Akkoyunlu and the absorption of its structures within the rising Safavid Empire (established under the auspices of the homonymous mystical order), the rivalry was transformed into an Ottoman – Safavid quarrel that lasted centuries. But the conflict had basically the traits of an internal Turanian strife that metamorphosed from century to century; the Iranians represented the authentic Turanians, and the Ottomans were the corrupt renegades and the worst enemies of all Turanians. This situation was rectified only in the period 1919-1923, when Kemal Ataturk terminated the Ottoman shame, abolished the ridiculous ‘caliphate’, and reinstated Seljuk-Turanian valor and bravery across Anatolia.

Much discussion has taken place among scholars about the religious motives of all these successive conflicts which were misrepresented as supposed clashes between ‘Sunni’ and ‘Shia’, but this is a lie and there was no religious motivation. In reality, Timur and his successors, the Karakoyunlu, the Akkoyunlu, the Ottomans, and the Mystical Safavid Order were all Muslims, and no ‘Sunni’ – ‘Shia’ distinction applied to them, because simply there is no such distinction; it is a modern colonial academic invention that is not supported by the historical sources.

Even the scholars, who tried ceaselessly to create divisive religious lines where there is none, failed to ‘prove’ that the Karakoyunlu were ‘Shia’, and even if this absurdity could eventually be proven, it would be truly meaningless, because the Karakoyunlu sided with the Ottomans, who are portrayed today as ‘Sunni’ against the Akkoyunlu, who are also depicted as ‘Sunni’ by the fallacious Western academia.

What happened in reality behind all these successive developments was the fact that the internal Turanian strife (between Eastern Turanians and Western Turanians) and the exchange of terrible, written insults between Timur (66 years old at the Battle of Ankara) and Bayezid I (1360-1402; so 42 years old when fighting Timur, which means that there was one generation difference between the two rulers) cast an everlasting shadow on the Ottoman court’s foreign policy making. Then, even worse, Bayezid’s calamitous defeat and humiliating captivity pulled the Ottomans apart from the Turanian world and turned them to the West. Consequently, Ottoman reactions generated further deterioration and conflicts with their main Turanian neighbor, i.e. the Safavid Empire of Iran – which was an entirely Turkic state with almost no Persian population left there anymore. In the Turanian Safavid Empire, Farsi was almost exactly what Medieval Latin was in the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation: the language of culture and the administration.  

It appears odd, but the Timurid Mughal Empire of South Asia (fallaciously described by colonial historiographers as ‘Sunni’) had clearly better relations with Safavid Iran than with the Ottomans as late as 1700, i.e. 300 years after the Battle of Ankara; this delivers a blow to the historical forgery about a ‘Sunni-Shia divide’ which was first invented by colonial academics, then projected onto colonized Muslims worldwide by the colonial administrations, and later repeated pathetically by the postcolonial ignorant, uneducated and idiotic sheikhs, imams, cadis, and muftis.

Every spiritual order and mystical school that was treated well by Timur was viewed suspiciously within the Ottoman territory, and this was not a matter of religious divergence, but of internal Turanian divisions and of imperial rancor. The case of the Safavid Order is quite telling. This mystical order was established before the birth of Osman I (ca. 1255-1323), the ancestor of all Ottomans who belonged to the Kayı tribe of Oghuz Turks. In fact, the Safavid Order was the main emanation of the Zahediyah Mystical Order, which was founded by the Turanian ascetic and mystic Zahed Gilani (1216–1301), a leading spiritual master who was born in the Iranian province of Gilan (southern coast of the Caspian Sea) but originated from Sanjan in Khorasan, a region entirely populated by Turanians at the time. Zahed Gilani was highly revered among the imperial elites of the Ilkhanate. The mystical orders of the Jelveti and the Bayrami are emanations of the Zahediyah Order. Zahed Gilani’s most distinguished disciple was Safi-ad-din Ardabili (1252-1334), an Azeri Turanian who initiated the Safavid Order {named after himself: ‘Safavid’ (صفویه) being an adjective formed out of the name ‘Safi’ (صفی)} as a distinct order although the doctrine was exactly the same as that of the Zahediyah Order.

The holy land of the Safavid Order was Azerbaijan (i.e. the Ancient Iranian holy land of Atropatene), and from there numerous mystics and ascetics traveled across great distances to diffuse the rites of the order throughout the Iranian plateau, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Central Asia and other Muslim territories. The position of the grand master was hereditary, and after Safi-ad-din Ardabili’s death, his son Sadr al-Dīn Musa (1305-1391) and his grandson Khvajeh Ali Safavi (ca. 1365-1429) oversaw the operations of the order. Timur met Khvajeh Ali Safavi and, although quite older, he was impressed by the spiritual art of the extraordinary mystic; that’s why he treated him well and offered him abundant lands to further finance the expansion of the mystical order. Following this development and the subsequent penetration of the order across the territories of the Timurids and the Akkoyunlu, the Ottomans took an inimical stance toward the Safavid Order and all its spiritual and social ramifications.

Safi ad-din Ardabili in a 16th c, manuscript of the hagiographical text Safvat as-Safa

From the moment Khvajeh Ali Safavi encountered Timur only four generations succeeded one another until Ismail I managed to supplant the Akkoyunlu and establish the Empire of the Safavid Order, which became known as Safavid Empire. These four generations are represented by the Safavid Order’s grandmasters, namely Shaykh Ibrahim (ca. 1400-1447; son of Khvajeh Ali Safavi), Shaykh Junayd (ca. 1410-1460; son of Shaykh Ibrahim), Shaykh Haydar (1459-1488; son of Shaykh Junayd), and Ali Mirza Safavi (also known as Soltan-Ali Safavi; ca. 1475-1494; son of Shaykh Haydar and elder brother of Ismail I, founder of the Safavid Empire). In today’s Azerbaijan and all the peripheral lands (Eastern Anatolia, Iran, and parts of Central Asia), these formidable mystics are highly revered, deemed saints, and constantly venerated, whereas many people bear their names (example: Heydar Aliyev, former president of Azerbaijan).

Tomb of Sheikh Junayd in Khazra, in the northern confines of Azerbaijan

Tomb of Sheykh Heydar in Meshginshahr, Iran

The emblem of the Safavid Order

The Safavid Order grandmasters were Turanian mystics, who reviled the rationalistic and materialistic approaches of the theological circles that held the Ottoman family captive for centuries, therefore generating the ceaseless Turanian fratricide wars only to the benefit of the Pope of Rome and of the Christian Empires of Western Europe. The Safavid Order grandmasters were connected by successive intermarriages with the Timurids, the Akkoyunlu, and the Eastern Romans; for instance, Ali Mirza Safavi was the son of Shaykh Haydar and Alam-Shah Begum (born Martha), who was the daughter of the Akkoyunlu Empire’s most powerful shah, Uzun Hasan, and Despina Khatun (Theodora Megale Komnene).

As they appear to have commanded enormous spiritual powers and performed miraculous deeds, their followers expressed total devotion to them; however, we cannot be absolutely sure about what several contemporaneous historiographers wrote about them at the time, namely that the members of the Safavid Order considered Shaykh Junayd as God Incarnate (‘ilah’) and called his son Shaykh Haydar as ‘Son of God’ (‘ibn Allah’). There were many antagonistic spiritual orders and theological schools at the time, and the clash between esoteric spirituality and rationalistic theology was overwhelming. The rationalistic theologians, who realized their impotency vis-à-vis the spiritual masters of the different Islamic orders, instead of concluding about how far from the essence of the true religion their worthless jurisprudential and rationalistic rhetoric had gone, used inflammatory verbalism, immoral attitude, and malicious defamatory tactics against the grandmasters of the spiritual orders. This practice turned Muslims from living faithful to putrefied carrion.

Of course, the concept of ‘God Incarnate’ is intolerable in Islam, but there are no original sources written by members of the 15th c. Safavid Order about themselves, their noble rites, and their grandmasters; consequently, the then rising rationalistic and materialistic trends among several Muslim theologians may have resulted in total misunderstanding of the Safavid Order’s spiritual terminology, which cannot be comprehended by defective, rationalistic minds. In addition, the jealousy and the envy that several ignorant theologians felt against various renowned spiritual grandmasters make of their literature an untrustworthy libel; an example is offered by Fadl-Allah ben Ruzbehan Qonyi, the legalist and rationalist theologian of the Akkoyunlu court, in his Tāriḵ-e ‘Ālāmārā-ye amini.

About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zahed_Gilani

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zahediyeh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jelveti

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayramiye

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safi-ad-din_Ardabili

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_order

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadr_al-D%C4%ABn_M%C5%ABs%C4%81

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khvajeh_Ali_Safavi

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/ali-kaja-also-known-as-sayyed-ali-ajami-b

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-middle-east-studies/article/safavids-before-empire-two-15thcentury-armenian-perspectives/E33FE6069D55E57E7CA18081C15BD8B9

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/jonayd

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaykh_Junayd

https://www.academia.edu/4255709/Oghuz_Khan_Narratives

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/haydar-safavi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaykh_Haydar

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/ali-mirza-d

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Mirza_Safavi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ismail_I

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/esmail-i-safawi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzun_Hasan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despina_Khatun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kara_Koyunlu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aq_Qoyunlu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osman_I

The point is that this whole issue goes indeed back to the times of Timur, and the Ottoman enmity toward the Safavid Order first and the Safavid Empire later was only due to the devastating defeat of Bayezid I at Ankara (1402) and to the excellent relationship established between Timur and the Safavid Order’s grandmaster Khvajeh Ali Safavi. The Ottoman – Safavid hostility, which lasted for more than two centuries (and was subsequently inherited by the also Turkmen Afshar and the Qajar dynasties of Iran for almost another two centuries), was of no ethnic and no national character. Both empires were indeed ruled by Turanians, had populations that were Turanian in their majority, and claimed the same ancestry and traditions. Not even one drop of Persian blood could be found in the reins of the Turkmen Ismail I (1487-1524; reign: 1501-1524). In both empires, Turanian (or Turkic) languages were used in the army and the administration, Farsi in poetry, literature, history and culture, and Arabic in sciences (astronomy, mathematics, medicine, natural sciences, geography, etc.). But the Ottomans reacted instinctively to all things Safavid, because even the name of the order reminded them of the humiliating defeat at Ankara in 1402.   

The exchange of insults between Timur and Bayezid I involved ethnic denigration; but of course it was an entirely internal Turanian affair. As an Eastern Turanian, Timur rejected the lowly character, mentality and attitude of the settled Western Turanians; and he made his viewpoint bluntly known, fully rejecting assertions and pretensions earlier expressed in arrogant style by the pathetic Bayezid I. In fact, the Ottomans had to stop the blockade of Constantinople and turn the bulk of their forces to the east, because Timur invaded Sivas (Sebasteia) in 1401; arriving at Ankara, the Ottomans were supported by Albanian and Serbian soldiers, who fought along Bayezid’s army, as their states were vassals to the Ottomans.

Timur’s forces slightly outnumbered those of the Ottoman sultan, but this was not the determinant factor for the outstanding victory. Timur was smart enough to allow the Ottomans to advance to the east (reaching Çubuk) and to take an offensive, while part of his army ran fast southwestwards and then turned to the east, thus encircling the Ottomans. Timur counted also on his horse archers, who hit the Ottoman army terribly, and always thinking out-of-the-box, he made sure that his adversaries fail to secure water supply. To do this, some of his auxiliary forces diverted the Çubuk inlet to a reservoir, thus preventing the Ottoman soldiers from access to water; under the Anatolian plateau’s scorching summer sun, this trick had a catastrophic impact on the Ottoman army. To add misfortune to misery, Bayezid I faced desertions of soldiers and officers from his army, notably the Qarai Turks (originating from the Keraite Eastern Turanians) and the Sipahi cavalrymen of the former Anatolian beyliks; these forces joined Timur’s army.

That is why the 20th of July was always a ‘dies nefastus’ (an ominous day) for the Ottomans; actually, it was not only a defeat. It was the only time in the 600-year long Ottoman History when a sultan was held captive and died in captivity. It was also the beginning of the Ottoman interregnum, the civil war among Bayezid I’s sons, which lasted for 11 years (1402-1413). About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayezid_I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ankara

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Interregnum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qarai_Turks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keraites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sipahi

After his victory, Timur proceeded to the western confines of Anatolia and invaded Izmir (Smyrna), kicking the Knights Hospitaller out of there. The entire family of Timur fought with him in the West; his sons and his grandsons were engaged in the battle of Ankara. To support the Ottomans and confuse Timur, the Karakoyunlu ruler Qara Yusuf attacked Baghdad, but after the Battle of Ankara, Timur sent forces that recaptured Baghdad under the command of Abu Bakr, son of Miran Shah, Timur’s third son, who was then the older among his two surviving sons. Timur returned to Azerbaijan, Khorasan and Samarqand where he spent some time, planning his next conquests. Since the Yuan dynasty was overthrown in China (1368) and the first emperors of the Ming dynasty expressed an interest to be involved in Central Asia, Timur set up an alliance with Eastern Turanian Mongolian forces in order to attack China. However, marching toward the east, he died in February 1405 at Otrar (also known as Farab; Kangju in Chinese) in today’s Kazakhstan’s southern provinces.

Timur’s succession was not an easy affair, because all the contenders did not agree on the matter. As a matter of fact, two of his four sons had died before him: Umar Shaikh Mirza I (1356-1394) and Jahangir Mirza (1356-1376). Few years before dying, Timur expressed his favor for Jahangir Mirza’s elder son Muhammad Sultan Mirza (1375-1403), but he also died in young age and before his grandfather. Little time before dying, Timur appointed another son of Jahangir Mirza as his successor: Pir Muhammad Mirza (1374-1407); but the heir apparent failed to garner significant support or to control the capital city of the empire, Samarqand.

There were reasons for which Timur did not want any of his two surviving sons to rise to his throne. Miran Shah (1366-1408) had an accident in the late 1380s after having fallen from his horse; this generated a traumatic brain injury and subsequent mental difficulties that were known to many people. Exploiting this situation, the Hurufi mystics (the Hurufiyyah mystical order developed an Islamic system of Kabbalah, crediting letters of the Arabic alphabet with hidden, spiritual value, after the esoteric teachings of Fazlallah Astarabadi; 1340-1394) denounced Miran Shah as the Antichrist (Dajjal), absurdly altering his name to Maran Shah (King of the Serpents). However, Timur’s third son was successful in combating them. The Hurufiyyah were duly dispersed, although some of their erroneous teachings survived among other spiritual orders. The end result is that due to the extensive defamation, Miran Shah’s chances to rule became nil. However, he contributed to the turmoil, because he supported his son Khalil Sultan (1384-1411) as successor to Timur.

Timur’s youngest son, Shah Rukh (1377-1447), was considered as too soft to be an emperor; this was Timur’s publicly expressed opinion. The reality is that Shah Rukh was a man of letters, arts, sciences, trade, diplomacy and negotiations, and that he resorted to war only when no other solution was ostensible. As a matter of fact, Shah Rukh, who was the ruler of Herat and the eastern provinces, claimed the right to his father’s throne, but in modesty and wisdom; he was not urged for a showdown with Khalil Sultan. Having accurately evaluated his nephew’s capabilities, he preferred to let him rule incompetently (as he expected him to do), so that all the people finally turn against him. This process lasted four years (1405-1409); Khalil Sultan ruled indeed as successor of Timur, but he was so incompetent that, when Shah Rukh marched against Samarqand, no one opposed him. As he was not a bloodthirsty conqueror but a wise moralist, he appointed Khalil Sultan as governor of Ray. Shah Rukh ruled for 38 years (1409-1447), contributing to what is now called ‘Timurid Renaissance’ more than his father.

The internal turmoil of the Timurid Empire caused several defeats to Timur’s successors; in 1406 and in 1408, Qara Yusuf of the Karakoyunlu marked two victories over the Timurid forces in Azerbaijan, in the Battle of Nakhchivan and in the Battle of Sardrud; in the latter, Miran Shah was killed and then his body impaled. When Shah Rukh rose to his father’s throne, the western part of the Timurid Empire was lost the Karakoyunlu, the Akkoyunlu and the Ottomans. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Shaikh_Mirza_I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahangir_Mirza_(Timurid_prince)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Sultan_Mirza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miran_Shah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Rukh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pir_Muhammad_(son_of_Jahangir)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miran_Shah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Rukh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurufism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalil_Sultan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahrokh_(mythical_bird)

—————————————  

FORTHCOMING

Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey

2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists

By Prof. Muhammet Şemsettin Gözübüyükoğlu

(Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

CONTENTS

PART ONE. INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I: A World held Captive by the Colonial Gangsters: France, England, the US, and the Delusional History Taught in their Deceitful Universities

A. Examples of fake national names

a) Mongolia (or Mughal) and Deccan – Not India!

b) Tataria – Not Russia!

c) Romania (with the accent on the penultimate syllable) – Not Greece!

d) Kemet or Masr – Not Egypt!

e) Khazaria – not Israel!

f) Abyssinia – not Ethiopia!

B. Earlier Exchange of Messages in Turkish

C. The Preamble to My Response

CHAPTER II: Geopolitics does not exist.

CHAPTER III: Politics does not exist.

CHAPTER IV: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: Orientalism, conceptualization, contextualization, concealment

A. Orientalism

B. Conceptualization

C. Contextualization

D. Concealment

PART TWO. EXAMPLE OF ACADEMICALLY CONCEALED, KEY HISTORICAL TEXT

CHAPTER V: Plutarch and the diffusion of Ancient Egyptian and Iranian Religions and Cultures in Ancient Greece

PART THREE. TURKEY AND IRAN BEYOND POLITICS AND GEOPOLITICS: REJECTION OF THE ORIENTALIST, TURKOLOGIST AND IRANOLOGIST FALLACIES ABOUT ACHAEMENID HISTORY

CHAPTER VI:  The fallacy that Turkic nations were not present in the wider Mesopotamia – Anatolia region in pre-Islamic times

CHAPTER VII: The fallacious representation of Achaemenid Iran by Western Orientalists

CHAPTER VIII: The premeditated disconnection of Atropatene / Adhurbadagan from the History of Azerbaijan

CHAPTER IX: Iranian and Turanian nations in Achaemenid Iran

CHAPTER X: Iranian and Turanian Religions in Pre-Islamic Iran 

PART FOUR. FALLACIES ABOUT THE SO-CALLED HELLENISTIC PERIOD, ALEXANDER THE GREAT, AND THE SELEUCID & THE PARTHIAN ARSACID TIMES

CHAPTER XI: Alexander the Great as Iranian King of Kings, the fallacy of Hellenism, and the nonexistent Hellenistic Period

CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids

PART SIX. FALLACIES ABOUT THE EARLY EXPANSION OF ISLAM: THE FAKE ARABIZATION OF ISLAM

CHAPTER XVII: Iran – Turan and the Western, Orientalist distortions about the successful, early expansion of Islam during the 7th – 8th c. CE

CHAPTER XVIII: Western Orientalist falsifications of Islamic History: Identification of Islam with only Hejaz at the times of the Prophet

CHAPTER XIX: The fake, Orientalist Arabization of Islam

CHAPTER XX: The systematic dissociation of Islam from the Ancient Oriental History

PART TEN. FALLACIES ABOUT THE TIMES OF TURANIAN (MONGOLIAN) SUPREMACY IN TERMS OF SCIENCES, ARTS, LETTERS, SPIRITUALITY AND IMPERIAL UNIVERSALISM

CHAPTER XXVI: the Timurid Era as Peak of the Islamic Civilization, Shah Rukh, and Ulugh Beg, the Astronomer Emperor

PART ELEVEN. HOW AND WHY THE OTTOMANS, THE SAFAVIDS AND THE MUGHALS FAILED  

CHAPTER XXVII: Ethnically Turanian Safavids & Culturally Iranian Ottomans: two identical empires that mirrored one another

CHAPTER XXVIII: Spirituality, Religion & Theology: the fallacy of the Safavid conversion of Iran to ‘Shia Islam’

CHAPTER XXIX: Selim I, Ismail I, and Babur

CHAPTER XXX: The Battle of Chaldiran (1514), and how it predestined the Fall of the Islamic World

CHAPTER XXXI: Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals: victims of their sectarianism, tribalism, theology, and wrong evaluation of the colonial West

CHAPTER XXXII: Ottomans, Iranians and Mughals from Nader Shah to Kemal Ataturk

PART TWELVE. CONCLUSION

CHAPTER XXXIII: Turkey and Iran beyond politics and geopolitics: whereto?

————————————————————————————–

Download the chapter (text only) in PDF:

<object class="wp-block-file__embed" data="https://megalommatiscomments.files.wordpress.com/2023/08/timur-tamerlane-as-a-turanian-muslim.pdf&quot; type="application/pdf" style="width:100%;height:600px" aria-label="<strong>Timur (Tamerlane), as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr, his exploits and triumphs, and the slow rise of the Turanian Safavid OrderTimur (Tamerlane), as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr, his exploits and triumphs, and the slow rise of the Turanian Safavid OrderDownload

Download the chapter (with pictures and legends) in PDF:

<object class="wp-block-file__embed" data="https://megalommatiscomments.files.wordpress.com/2023/08/timur-tamerlane-pictures-legends.pdf&quot; type="application/pdf" style="width:100%;height:600px" aria-label="<strong>Timur (Tamerlane), as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr (pictures and legends)Timur (Tamerlane), as a Turanian Muslim descendant of the Great Hero Manuchehr (pictures and legends)Download

From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur (Tamerlane)

Pre-publication of chapter XXIV of my forthcoming book “Turkey is Iran and Iran is Turkey – 2500 Years of indivisible Turanian – Iranian Civilization distorted and estranged by Anglo-French Orientalists”; chapter XXIV constitutes the Part Ten {Fallacies about the Times of Turanian (Mongolian) Supremacy in terms of Sciences, Arts, Letters, Spirituality and Imperial Universalism}. The book is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters.

——————————-  

The Enthronement of Genghis Khan (1206); miniature of a 15th c. manuscript of the World History, known as Jami’ al-tawarikh (‘Compendium of Histories’), of Rashid al-Din Hamadani

Few years before Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash were born, another distinct erudite Muslim scholar, pioneering scientist and astronomer, statesman and diplomat of universalistic aspirations was born: Nasir al-Din al Tusi (1201-1274). This great man’s life was a ceaseless demonstration of the scholarly-intellectual courage to view ‘borders’ as nonexistent, ‘religions’ as immaterial, ‘states’ as worthless, and ‘institutions’ as useless. He was the epitome of human genius in every sense.  

Nasir al-Din al Tusi was not the elect of spiritual hierarchies like Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi; he did not have the Love for God that we attest across the poems of Rumi, but he replaced it with the love for God’s celestial creatures that he studied incessantly and in a worldwide pioneering manner. Nasir al-Din al Tusi was not a man of spiritual potency like Shams-e Tabrizi, and in contrast to Haji Bektash, he did not have great interest to actively participate in mystical orders, which however he had the chance to frequent for long, study in-depth, and comprehend their function and limits. He did not envision atemporal heroic figures and he did not conceive apocalyptic symbolisms, as he was very different from Ferdowsi and Nizami Ganjavi, but he managed to be highly appreciated and demanded by his times’ most formidable warriors, heroic conquerors, and secretive rulers. And contrarily with Nizam al-Mulk, who specified the rules of perfect governance, Nasir al-Din al Tusi used these rules to make kings’ and emperors’ governance useful to him and beneficial to mankind.

Above all, Nasir al-Din al Tusi was the Muslim, who personally controlled the various stages of the Mongol invasion and -most demanded- destruction of Baghdad (1258). Through his personal involvement as mediator or envoy, he helped the Buddhist Mongol emperor Hulagu (1218-1265) carry out the total demolition of the Abbasid capital. This historical event was not a ‘major historical development’ as many are inclined to believe today, because for many hundreds of years, Baghdad had lost its earlier importance as center of the world’s most immense and most formidable empire; in the middle of the 13 th c., the greatest capital of the Islamic world did not anymore have its hitherto unsurpassed significance as the world-center for letters, sciences, academic life, exploration, manuscript collection and translation, archivism, and arts. Baghdad was then only the shadow of the former Abbasid glory and splendor.

It has however to be underscored that the above description of the one-time Abbasid opulence was not the only way Muslims across the Islamic world viewed Baghdad at the time; the fallen Abbasid capital was also viewed as the palace of cruel rulers and unjust caliphs who imprisoned, poisoned and massacred several descendants of Prophet Muhammad and Ali, as the headquarters of deceitful potentates who misinterpreted Islam only to adjust it to their material needs and interests, and as the location of impotent, decayed ‘caliphs’ who for no less than ca. 350-400 years were more powerless than a single soldier and depended therefore on the mercy of the various secessionist emirs, sultans and shahs, who held the real imperial power in the regions of their states. In other words, for most of the then Muslims, Baghdad was not anymore a ‘glory’ but a disgusting ‘shame’.

Furthermore, long before the 13th c., numerous centers of Islamic spirituality, mysticism, letters, sciences, arts, philosophy and theology had already been established between the Atlantic Ocean and China and from the steppes of Siberia to the coast of today’s Tanzania and Mozambique. The annihilation of Baghdad’s library (with an estimate of about a million manuscripts) would not be and actually was not a detrimental and calamitous fact, as the mendacious modern Western historians and Orientalists try to depict. Spiritual, intellectual, academic, scientific, philosophical, and artistic life and creativity would continue and did indeed continue elsewhere. 

In addition, very few contemporaneous Muslims ‘cried’ for the fall of the Abbasid capital; one of them was the already famous Saadi Shirazi (1210-1291), one of Iran’s greatest poets who exerted enormous impact on Iranians and Turanians. But at the time, this side was rather an insignificant minority.

Last, one must also point out that this event was not a religious war, and it was not then viewed as such, because there were many Muslims on the side of Hulagu, and of his official envoy Nasir al-Din al Tusi. They viewed the destruction of Baghdad as a God-sent present.

Colonial Orientalists shed interminable crocodile tears for the loss of what was indeed the greatest accumulation of manuscripts, written sources, and academic – intellectual heritage throughout the History of Mankind before modern times. The hypocritical Western academic attitude constitutes only a deceitful attempt and a divisive racist policy intended to generate frictions among Muslims and to turn fake entities, like the so-called ‘Arab Sunnis’ and the ‘Shia Iranians’, against one another. At the same time, the fallacious representation of this minor historical event helps produce Anti-Turanian, Anti-Turkish, Anti-Mongolian, and Anti-Buddhist hatred and rancor among uneducated, ignorant and idiotic Muslims. 

In fact, any material record, any accumulation of written documentation, any library and archival institution has no value per se; humans and human life give its value to everything material. The treasures of 13th c. Baghdad’s libraries were to great extent copied and diffused from Andalusia to China. In any case, Baghdad would never again regain its 8th–9th c. position as the leading center of world’s knowledge, wisdom, science and spirituality; 500 years after its foundation, the Abbasid capital resembled, truly speaking, a mortuary.

As far as today’s ignorant and uneducated Muslims are concerned, it is extremely nonsensical and unprecedentedly shameful to express indignation for Baghdad’s destruction at the hands of Hulagu. What would actually their 18th, 19th and 20th c. ancestors have done, had Hulagu (or anybody else) not destroyed Baghdad? Judging from modern Muslims’ disgustingly materialistic approach to life and indifference for their own cultural heritage, they would have stupidly and inanely sold all these hundreds of thousands of supposedly remaining manuscripts to European and North American explorers, antiquaries, agents, diplomats, Orientalists, merchants and travelers, as they already did with what was left in other places. So, perhaps one can conclude that Hulagu’s only mistake was that he did not exterminate the entire population of the wider region to adequately purify the land, and thus prevent its putrefaction at a later age.

Nasir al-Din al Tusi was born in Tus to a theologian and jurist father; he studied in Neyshapur, Hamadan, Mosul and Baghdad. He encountered Attar of Neyshapur and Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi, who was a student of Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi and a friend of Jalal ad-Din Rumi. Although he was familiar with spiritual exercises, mystical doctrines, and philosophy, Nasir al-Din al Tusi had a greater interest for medicine, mathematics, natural sciences, and astronomy. In rather young age, he was already viewed as an exemplary young scientist and scholar, and he was noticed by many known and surreptitious people.

Among the latter, the Isma’ili governor of the city Sartakht in Quhestan (: i.e. ‘mountainous land’: the southeastern part of Khorasan) invited him (1233) to work on several projects. Writing about teaching ethics to children and conversing with a high dignitary of the Isma’ili (the so-called ‘Sevener Shia’) administration, which also controlled several cities and provinces (except their headquarters, which constituted a real enclave inside the caliphate), Nasir al-Din al Tusi became familiar with the practices of governance held by mystical orders; he emphatically disliked this.

Nasir al din al Tusi with his associates and students, working in the then world’s most important observatory at Maragheh, East Azerbaijan-Iran; miniature of manuscript dating back to 1562, 300 years after the erection of the Maragheh Observatory

Two pages from a manuscript of Nasir al Din al Tusi’s ‘Treatise on the Astrolabe’ that dates back to 1505 (found in Isfahan).

Two pages from Nasir al Din al Tusi’s ‘Compendium of treatises on Astronomy and Mathematics’ from a manuscript dating back to 1279

Kitab tahrir al-usul li-Uqlidis (Commentary on Euclid’s Elements); each page with 19 lines of Maghribi script within double rules (with numerous diagrams); from: Fes (Alawi Morocco), al-Matba’ah al-‘Amirah, Khidmat al-‘Arabi al-Azraq (colophon with name of Sultan Muley Hassan), [1 Nov. 1876 CE =] 13 Shawwal 1293 H.

The Tusi couple from Vatican Arabic manuscript 319

Kitab Tahrir Usul li’Uqlidis (Elementorum Geometricorum) recension by Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, first printed edition by the Medici Press (Typographia Medicea), Rome, 1594

Modern reconstruction: the dome of the Maragheh observatory

Central Tower of the Maragheh Observatory

Contemplation and Action: the Spiritual Autobiography of a Muslim Scholar – Nasir al-Din Tusi by Seyyed Jalal Hosseini Badakhchani

Nasir al Din al Tusi’s Maragheh Observatory and Library with 400000 manuscripts

Al Maragheh

Tashkent manuscript of Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s treatise ‘Collection of Arithmetic’ (Jami’ al-hisab bi-‘l-Takht wa-‘l-turab), folio 120

However, he also had the experience of staying long in Alamut, the Isma’ili order’s headquarters which were located in an almost inaccessible mountainous region in Alborz, namely the range that separates the Caspian Sea from the Iranian plateau. There, Nasir al-Din al Tusi’s fame as a scientist and philosopher grew among the local Isma’ilis tremendously, and he became widely known across the Islamic world. He thus lived no less than 20 years in Alamut, being cut off from the rest of the world, but surrounded by dozens of thousands (if not more) of manuscripts.

https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Al-Tusi_Nasir/

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/tusi-nasir-al-din-bio

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/tusi-nasir-al-din-mathematician-astronomer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasir_al-Din_al-Tusi

https://www.al-islam.org/message-thaqalayn/vol11-n2-2010/nasir-al-din-tusi-and-his-socio-political-role-thirteenth-century

https://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/vol11-no3-no4/awsaf-al-ashraf-attributes-noble-shaykh-khwaja-nasir-al-din-al-tusi

https://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/vol8-n2/alleged-role-khawajah-nasir-al-din-al-tusi-fall-baghdad-rasul-jafariyan

https://www.al-islam.org/message-thaqalayn/vol-15-no-3-autumn-2014/shiite-authorities-age-major-occultation-part-4-sheikh-tusi

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-institutional-economics/article/nasir-addin-tusi-on-social-cooperation-and-the-division-of-labor-fragment-from-the-nasirean-ethics/866D4BA0EA8C7BA5493767E465113B63 This was a period in which the entire world was transformed into a Turanian Eurasiatic Empire. The achievement was unprecedented, but the method was known. Simply the family of Temüjin Borjigin (later known as Genghis Khan; 1162-1227) eclipsed by far the family of Seljuk. There is a slight but noticeable difference in the attitude of both families’ patriarch; whereas Seljuk fled straightforwardly to another region, Temüjin fought numerous battles before prevailing among first the Mongols and later the various Eastern Turanian (: Mongolian) nations. Whereas Temüjin was elected khan of the Mongols in 1186 (when he was 24 years old), it took him 20 years of incessant battles to prevail among all the surrounding Turanian nations, i.e. the Naimans, the Merkits, the Tatars, the Khamag Mongols, and the Keraites. Only in 1206 Temüjin became the undisputed and sole ruler of all the Eastern Turanian nations, thus controlling a sizeable nomadic empire.

Genghis Khan: from a 14th c. Yuan era Chinese album originally painted in 1278

Börte & Genghis Khan from a 16th c. manuscript: along with Hoelun Ujin, the emperor’s mother, she was the person that impacted the conqueror most.

However, long before Temüjin’s spectacular successes in the South (China) and the West (Central Asia, Western Siberia, Iran, Caucasus and Eastern Europe) took place (which occurred only after he was 50 years old), critical developments had happened to his family, and they determined the future of his offspring and the destiny of his immense empire. At a certain moment, during Temüjin’s early combats, his principal wife Börte (who was by then already pregnant) was taken captive by Temüjin’s contenders for some months. This event decisively compromised the way she was viewed afterwards; when she was liberated only few months later, she gave birth to Temüjin’s son, Jochi (1182-1227).

These circumstances did indeed cast a doubt about Jochi’s real father. Although Temüjin fully and unreservedly recognized Jochi as his first son, the story reached the ears of his other three sons (from Börte) at a later moment; this development irrevocably compromised Jochi’s chances to succession. Among Temüjin’s next sons, i.e. Chagatai (1183–1242), Ögedei (1186–1241), and Tolui (1191–1232), Chagatai announced his intention never to accept Jochi as Temüjin’s succession; to properly address the situation, Temüjin appointed Ögedei, his third son, as successor to both, remove doubts and castigate disloyalty. Jochi died few months before his father, but the aforementioned situation predetermined the future of the four brethren’s sons, and actually caused several conflicts among them and even among the younger generation, i.e. Temüjin’s grandchildren.     

Basic source of information for the early stages of the Mongolian Turanian Empire is the ‘Secret History of the Mongols’; page from a 1908 Chinese edition (Mongolian text in Chinese transcription, plus a small glossary next to each column); the imperial historiographical source was written in Mongolian little time after the death of the great conqueror by an anonymous author as per the traditional imperial criteria. All surviving texts are transcriptions in Chinese characters and translations that date back to the 14th c. when the early Ming dynasty administrators wanted to offer an imperial narrative about the previous dynasty. A modern English translation of the Secret History of the Mongols can be found here: https://jigjids.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/the_secret_history_of_the_mongols_the_life_and_times_of_chinggis_khan1.pdf

‘Secret History of the Mongols’: the oldest copy preserved in Ulaanbaatar, capital of Mongolia

Mausoleum of Genghis Khan in Ordos, Inner Mongolia, China (not a personal tomb)

Temüjin was a staunch monotheist, and he observed the traditional rites of his religion, Tengrism. The early Turanian religion is a form of monotheism based on transcendental experience, spiritual exercises, utmost morality, military discipline, and universal perception of the world. Sticking always to meritocracy and combating favoritism, Temüjin was an extroverted man with great interest for the religious and spiritual beliefs of surrounding nations: he was therefore in constant contact with Buddhist monks, Manichaean Elects, Nestorian Christian clergymen, Muslim imams, and Taoist priests, being conversant in their respective faiths and cults. When he was not at the battlefield, Temüjin had also literary interests and to fight illiteracy, he introduced among Mongolians the Uyghur writing system, which had been attested as early as the 5th c. CE in Sogdian characters, being therefore of Aramaic origin.   

The great expansion of Temüjin’s empire occurred in the period 1206-1227, when the situation across his realm was already stable, solid and untroubled. Until 1211, Temüjin (Genghis Khan) conquered the nomadic Tangut Empire (‘Western Xia’ dynasty), another Turanian Empire located west of Temüjin’s territory. In the period 1211-1215, invaded the Northern Chinese kingdom (Jin dynasty), sacking Zhongdu (: the old Beijing city, capital of Jin China) in the process; the North Chinese king Xuanzong fled to the South, therefore losing more than half of his territory to Temüjin. In 1218, the ever improving armies of Genghis Khan defeated Qara Kitai, another nomadic Turanian Empire that was located west of the already demised Tangut Empire. This means that for the first time in the History of Eurasia an empire controlled all the lands between Lake Balkhash (in today’s Eastern Kazakhstan) and the coastlands of Northeast Asia, also including the northern half of today’s China. By that time, Temüjin’s empire bordered with the Turanian Empire of Khwarazm (Chorasmia) that stretched from the eastern coastlands of the Caspian Sea to today’s Eastern Kazakhstan and down to the Persian Gulf and Straits of Hormuz.

The Mongol Empire around 1207

The Serven Khallga inscription that contains the narrative about the 1196 campaign against Tatars; about: https://www.scribd.com/document/628906144/GENEI-NGIS-KHAN?irclickid=woDSqsSeWxyNUxZS3K3eC293UkF2Wh37l1K8040&irpid=2334778&sharedid=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.yieldkit.com%2F&irgwc=1#

Central, Southern, Northern and Eastern Asia in the early 13th century

Genghis enters Zhongdu (Beijing) in 1215; miniature from Jami al-tawarikh

The campaigns Genghis Khan in the period 1207-1225

From 1219 to 1223, an incredible thunderstorm hit Western Asia and Eastern Europe. Following the devastating defeat of Khwarazm (1221), Temüjin’s armies invaded the western parts of Central Asia and today’s Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan, engaging in successive ferocious battles; in one of them, Chagatai’s firstborn son Mutukan died (in Bamian). During the next two years, Eastern Anatolia, Caucasus, Crimea, today’s Ukraine and today’s Russia’s southern half were conquered by the Turanian armies led by Temüjin’s family members and relatives. The Christian state of Kievan Rus (which is spiritually rather than ethnically related to Modern Russia) collapsed after the defeat in the Kalka River battle.

Jalal al-Din Mangburni (also known as Jalal al-Din Khwarazmshah), the last of Khwarazm, crosses the Indus River trying to escape from the Mongolian forces; from a late 17th century manuscript of Jami al-tawarikh (by Rashid al Din Hamadani)

With the invasion of the multi-religious Turanian Cuman–Kipchak confederacy and following the annexation of the Muslim Turanian Khanate of Volga Bulgaria, the first two sizeable Turanian kingdoms in Europe took an end, after having lasted for more than 400 years. The khanate of Volga Bulgaria had been a Muslim state since 922 (so for more than 300 years before its demise), thus representing a major chapter of Europe’s Islamic past and identity. This highlights the fact that Islam antedates Christianity in Eastern Europe. As a matter of fact, the Volga Bulgarian ruler Almış sent an embassy to Baghdad, asking for religious instructors; in response to his demand, Ibn Fadlan (ca. 880 – ca.960) was dispatched at once to teach Islamic faith, theology and jurisprudence there. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jochi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagatai_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96gedei_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolui

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_History_of_the_Mongols

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_of_the_Mongol_Empire_under_Genghis_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongols

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_conquest_of_the_Khwarazmian_Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalchuq

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Volga_Bulgaria

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_Bulgaria

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_conquest_of_Jin_China

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Mongol_invasion_of_Poland

Kimek–Kipchak confederation (880–1035)

Cuman–Kipchak Confederation, also known as Desht-i Qipchaq (10th century–1241)

Greatest extent of Volga Bulgaria – More maps: http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/70_Dateline/72_Bulgars/bulgar_dateline_1_En.htm

Little resistance was attested following the Turanian conquests undertaken by Genghis Khan’s (:Temüjin’s) armies, and this is due to the religious-cultural tolerance that prevailed everywhere after the largest part of Eurasia was invaded and unified in about 20 years. The only significant rebellion took place in Tangut, and it was squelched by Temüjin who died next year.  

Ögedei became the 2nd Khagan of the Turanian Mongolian Empire. In the period between 1227 and 1241, he carried out military campaigns across Central Asia, Khorasan, Iran, Afghanistan, and Caucasus (1230), he invaded Korea (1231), and he completed the invasion of China (1230-1234), bringing about the final fall of the Jin dynasty. His armies carried out numerous campaigns in the wider Caucasus region (1232-1240), squelching revolts and conquering remote mountainous spots. During the period 1235-1241, Ögedei’s firstborn son Güyük Khan (1206-1248) and other relatives and generals invaded Eastern, Southeastern and Central Europe; Güyük Khan’s half-brother Kadan, Jochi’s second son Batu (c. 1207–1255) and Mutukan’s son Büri (Chagatai’s grandson) were also present in the invasions, leading armies and engaging in battles and sieges; the former territories of Kievan Rus and today’s Poland, Slovakia, Czechia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia and parts of Germany were swept and conquered.

Chagatai outlived his younger brother and 2nd Khagan of the Turanian Mongolian Empire by one year; with Ögedei as Khagan, Chagatai was entrusted with the administration of a vast Central Asiatic territory, which became later known as the Chagatai Khanate and under different forms and dynasties survived until ca. 1700. With capital at Almaligh (close to today’s Chinese – Kazakh border in Eastern Turkestan / Sinkiang), Chagatai favored Tengrism over Islam, causing hostility among his country’s Muslims, whose bulk inhabited the western and southern provinces of the vast state. Quite contrarily, he tolerated Nestorian Christianity, Manichaeism and Buddhism.

After participating in his father’s and older brother’s campaigns, Tolui sacrificed himself to save Ögedei from an illness caused by China’s spirits of Earth and Soft Waters; as per the description available in ‘The Secret History of the Mongols’, the earliest historical record in Mongolian language, Tolui by his own will drank a cursed potion to appease the spirits and heal his brother, therefore dying in the process.

Genghis Khan and Jochi standing in the left

Jochi Mausoleum, Ulytau-Kazakhstan

The funerals of Chagatai Khan

Coronation of Ögedei, from a 14th century’s manuscript of Rashid al-Din Hamadani’s Jami’al Tawarikh

Ögedei portrait from the times of Yuan dynasty 47×59 cm

Tolui

Mongol army captures a city of the Kievan Rus state (16th c. Russian miniature)

Among the generation of Genghis Khan’s grandsons prominent role played the following:

i. Ögedei’s sons Güyük Khan (1206-1248; 3rd Khagan of the Turanian Mongolian Empire for the period 1246-1248), Godan Khan (1206-1251), and Kadan;

ii. Chagatai’s sons Mutukan (died 1221), Baidar (who participated in the European campaign and was present in the election of Güyük Khan in 1246), and Yesü Möngke (Khan of Chagatai Khanate for the period 1246-1252, after and before Mutukan’s son Qara Hülegü, who was twice Khan of Chagatai Khanate: 1242-1246, 1252);

iii. Tolui’s sons were the luckiest in terms of posterity and imperial prevalence. Tolui was the regent of the empire for a certain period. His historically important sons were: Möngke Khan (1209–1259) 4th Khagan of the Turanian Mongolian Empire (1251-1259), Kublai Khan (1215–1294) Emperor of China (1st Emperor of the Yuan dynasty: 1271-1294) and 5th Khagan of the Turanian Mongolian Empire (1260-1294; however his imperial power at this level was only nominal due to the empire’s division), Hulagu Khan (1217–1265) who was tasked by Möngke Khan in 1251 to destroy Western Asia’s remaining Islamic states, and Ariq Böke (1219–1266; known for his Nestorian Christian sympathies) Khagan of the Mongol Empire (a title with only nominal value due to the empire’s division), who clashed with Kublai Khan and finally got imprisoned and then poisoned; 

The empire of Möngke Khan

iv. Jochi’s sons Orda Ichen (c. 1206–1251; participant in the invasion of Kievan Rus’ in 1237-1242) Khan of the Golden Horde Eastern Half (White Horde; 1226-1251), Batu (c. 1207–1255) Khan of the Golden Horde Western Half (Blue Horde; 1227-1255), and Berke, Khan of the Golden Horde Western Half (Blue Horde; 1257–1266), who was the first member of the Genghisid family to have become Muslim.

From the above, it can be understood that, despite the consented, appropriate and fair-minded division of Genghis Khan’s empire among his sons and grandsons, several disputes took place, and soon after Güyük Khan’s tenure as the 3rd Khagan, the supreme title shifted to the progeniture of Tolui; nevertheless, the empire was so immense to possibly supervise that Möngke Khan was practically the last to be effective as Khagan of the Turanian Mongolian Empire.

Many depict the great events of the period 1219-1258 as a unique moment in the history of mankind, but in reality, Eurasia had indeed experienced several similar cases before. Where does the difference lie then? This is easy to answer. Contrarily to earlier spectacular invasions, which had repeatedly crisscrossed Eurasia in the past, the Turanian Mongolian invasions of the 13th c. occurred at a time when historiography had already greatly progressed. Numerous nations had developed their own writing systems and great amounts of historical records were scrupulously kept in state archives, involving state annals and correspondence, royal chronographers, etc. In addition, diverse types of ample documentation, such as literary, theological, philosophical and other texts mentioning and commenting historical events, offer a wide-angle view of the facts. That is why these events are incomparably better documented, and this makes an enormous difference.  

One has however to observe a major new trait – something that finds early parallels only in the Achaemenid court of Darius I the Great at Parsa (Persepolis). For the first time after the procession of the subject nations’ representatives in the Apadana audience hall of Darius the Great’s palace occurred in the last years of the 6th c. BCE, Western nations’ defeated rulers, subjugated princes, and humiliated diplomats made headway to an Eastern imperial capital to attend a splendid event whereby they were summoned as humble servants of their superior potentates.

This sublime event of worldwide importance was Güyük’s enthronement as the 3rd Khagan of the Turanian Mongolian Empire; it took place on 24th August 1246, at Karakorum, Güyük’s capital. The Seljuk Sultans of Anatolia, the Abbasid caliph, the sultan of Delhi, the shadowy kings of Georgia, Armenia, and Vladimir (a city 200 km east of Moscow), the king of Poland, the pope of Rome, and other marginal Western rulers sent their representatives or attended the spectacular ceremony, i.e. the Great Kurultai (‘tribal assembly’). The scenery reminds us of the famous bas-reliefs of Parsa (Persepolis) where Ionians, Libyans, Egyptians, Sogdians, Indians and others were depicted bearing tribute, present and homage to the Achaemenid King of Kings. 

Letter written in Farsi and sent by Güyük Khan’s emissaries to Pope Innocent IV, demanding his submission (1246)

After Güyük Khan’s death, two kurultais were held, but his sons Naqu and Khoja did not make their case strong, and the title of Khagan passed on to Tolui’s sons, and more specifically to Möngke Khan. It is however wrong to call the events ‘Toluid revolution’, because everything occurred in full compliance with the Turanian-Mongolian tribal traditions and moral order; no revolution took place among the Turanian Mongolians; this is a Western colonial invention.

Möngke Khan ruled for eight years (1251-1259) over an area of over 30 million km2 (this is double the size of today’s Russia). The entire territory of today’s China and Vietnam, the northwestern part of today’s India, and other parts of SE Asia were invaded in the 1250s. Progressively, until the end of the 13th c., the Turanian Mongolian Empire reached the size of 37 million km2, being of course significantly decentralized into smaller structures. More than any other person among all his relatives, Möngke Khan had a genuine sense for imperial administration, taxation, systematization, organization and coordination. He definitely had to suppress various rebellions here and there, but he was not cruel and he pursued a rather tolerant approach to all the major religions of his vast empire.

Möngke Khan supported Buddhism, discussed with Christian priests of every denomination, engaged in conversations with Taoists, Manichaeans and Muslims, and although his brother Hulagu destroyed the Nizari Isma’ili enclave at Alamut and demolished Baghdad (thus terminating the Abbasid Caliphate), they both (Möngke and Hulagu) offered tax exemption to the Najaf Muslim community that had opposed for many long centuries the Abbasid cruelty and corruption. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCy%C3%BCk_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godan_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kadan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutukan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baidar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes%C3%BC_M%C3%B6ngke

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qara_H%C3%BCleg%C3%BC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%BCri

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%B6ngke_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuan_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulagu_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariq_B%C3%B6ke

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorghaghtani_Beki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_among_the_Mongols

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orda_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batu_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berke

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_from_Genghis_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toluid_Civil_War

https://en.wikipedia org/wiki/File:MongolMap.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagatai_Khanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chagatai_khans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khagan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe#Later_raids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Kievan_Rus%27

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Kievan_Rus%27#Age_of_Tatar_rule

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_the_Mongol_Empire

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Asia_in_1335.svg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Horde

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wings_of_the_Golden_Horde

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Khans_of_the_Golden_Horde

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanate_of_Sibir

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nogai_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Horde#Berke%E2%80%93Hulagu_war_(1262%E2%80%931266)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Siberia#Mongol_conquest_of_Southern_and_Western_Siberia

https://altaica.ru/e_SecretH.php

As early as 1251, Hulagu was entrusted (by Möngke) with the elimination of four Islamic states: the Assassins’ domain (the Nizari Isma’ili enclave), the Abbasid Caliphate, the Ayyubid state of Damascus, and the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt. Although it looks like a Buddhist’s attempt to destroy the most important of the remaining Islamic states, the demolition of the Isma’ili enclave (the state of those who are today falsely called ‘Sevener Shia’) really saved the Islamic world from an evil cancerous tumor and at the same time catapulted Nasir al-Din al-Tusi to supreme position among the top scholars, scientists and intellectuals of the world’s only formidable empire.

Kale-ye Alamut

The 26th Nizari Ismaili Imam Ala al-Din Muhammad (the Elder of the Mountain) in the Travels of Marco Polo

In 1253, Hulagu advanced westwards with no less than 20% of the entire military force of the Turanian Mongolian Empire. He crossed Transoxiana, invaded Khwarazm (Chorasmia) and Khorasan, and reinstated the imperial order. The major problem caused by the existence of the Nizari Isma’ili ‘state’ (i.e. the clandestine organization and the unreachable enclave) was that it did not function as an ordinary, regular state, but as a secretive clandestine organization with members dispersed across vast territories of the Muslim world and with an impregnable mountainous headquarters (Kale-ye Alamut, i.e. the Alamut Castle in Alborz Mountains) from where all the instructions for the members’ subsequent actions, tactics and schemes were dispatched by various camouflaged agents – at the unbeknownst of all the rest. In other words, it was the first time in World History a spiritual order attempted to get involved in the governance of the Muslim world as such. Even worse, this was not undertaken by means of frontal opposition to the caliph, like the rebellions against the Umayyad and the Abbasid caliphs, but in an evidently subversive manner.

Hulagu undertook the systematic elimination of Isma’ili governors of various regions, notably Quhistan (today’s Eastern Iran and Western Afghanistan) and Qumis (Eastern Iran between Gorgan and Dasht-e Kavir), before attacking Alborz Mountains from three different directions and finally demolishing Alamut Castle in December 1256. The events have been detailed in the Tarikh-i Jahangushay (‘The History of The World Conqueror’ /تاریخ جهانگشای‎), a voluminous masterpiece elaborated in Farsi by Ala al-Din Ata-ullah Juvayni (جوینی علاءالدین عطاءالله), a prominent Iranian historian (1226-1283) whose father had served as minister of Jalal ad-Din Mingburnu, the last ruler of Khwarazm, and of Ögedei Khan. Juvayni (from Joveyn in Khorasan) was also employed as an imperial administrator at Karakorum, and then he followed Hulagu in his campaign, therefore offering unprecedented insight and fascinating descriptions of the various events. Less than 14 months later, Juvayni was next to Hulagu during the siege of Baghdad. Meanwhile, Hulagu founded his new capital at Maragheh, not far from Lake Urumiyeh’s southeastern coasts

The fall of Alamut in miniatures of historical manuscripts

Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s reputation ran very high at those days; that’s why he was invited to join Hulagu’s camp and become his adviser and diplomat. Hulagu was highly educated and had great consideration for scholars, polymaths, scientists, poets and authors. In total contradiction to nonsensical narratives of the modern uneducated theologians and Islamists, who are idiotic enough to portray Hulagu as an oppressor or a barbarian, the great emperor relied always on erudite academics and actually promoted the scientific research in a most determinant and resolute manner – more than any other ruler of his time. Nasir al-Din al-Tusi was then tasked to negotiate with the imam of the Isma’ilis Rukn al-Din Khurshah and to convince him to submit to the imperial authority, save his family, and dissolve his order.

When demolishing Alamut Castle, Hulagu followed Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s and Juvayni’s advice, and they saved all the astronomical instruments that were found in the vast library, which had earlier functioned under the auspices of Nasir al-Din al-Tusi. Armillary spheres, astrolabes, manuscripts with astronomical observations and tables, books, copies of the Quran, and important documents were rescued, whereas the rest – and more in particular any literature related to the heretic faith and the malignant activity of the secretive Isma’ili order – was consumed by the fire. Hulagu indulged every scholarly and intellectual curiosity, and Juvayni narrates how he initially saved the biography of Hassan-i Sabah (1050-1124), the obscure figure credited with the rearrangement of the Isma’ili order and its transformation into an evil, secretive and terrorist organization, but after reading the evilness contained therein, he burnt it by himself!

So great Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s reputation as astronomer and astrologer was that Hulagu wanted to dispatch him to Karakorum, because Möngke demanded one leading erudite in his capital; Tusi accepted, but finally this journey was spared due to Tusi’s effective negotiation skills and successful astrological advice delivered to Hulagu. Due to Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, Hulagu’s army invaded the otherwise believed impregnable Alamut Castle with few casualties; Tusi’s negotiation skills caused a certain defeatism among the ranks of the Isma’ilis, as their peaceful dispersion was promised to be tantamount to survival.

Subsequently, Hulagu consulted Tusi about the then forthcoming assault on Baghdad. This was a serious issue, because among the Turanian Mongolian army soldiers, several rumors were circulating about an eventual extraordinary disaster which would eventually befall them, if they shed the blood of the last caliph who was a descendant of Prophet Muhammad’s uncle (Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib). The rumors would have not been easily accepted, had there not been a time-honored Turanian Mongolian tradition, which prohibited the spilling of royal blood. After observing the stars and finding that the celestial conditions were auspicious, Nasir al-Din al-Tusi assured Hulagu that his victory was certain and that he would replace the corrupt and idiotic caliph on the throne of Baghdad

The Battle of Baghdad (1258)

The siege of Baghdad (Supplément persan 1113, fol. 180v-181 ca. 1430)

The events that took place outside the gates of Baghdad during the last days of January and the first days of February 1258 bear witness to the nauseating corruption and the utmost paranoia that characterized the evil dynasty, which – in the Name of Allah – persecuted and executed great numbers of descendants of Prophet Muhammad only to serve filthy interests, secure material wealth, uphold imperial power, and ensure contemptible continuity. The idiotic attitude of the last caliph Al-Musta’sim, who could not even understand that his end had come and continued living carefree like all his predecessors over the previous 300 years, fully justifies the kind of death that he underwent (wrapped in carpet and crushed by horses).

During the siege of Baghdad, Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, acting as Hulagu’s chief envoy, delivered imperial messages to the senseless caliph and supervised the evacuation process, when an important part of the local population abandoned the city and surrendered. Tusi and the last vizier of Al-Musta’sim were able to save all Islamic shrines, holy sites, and monuments of Iraq, and to make the local Muslim population come to senses and realize that the end of Abbasid Baghdad was something good even for Muslims. Tusi was instrumental in convincing most of the Muslims that the Abbasid court’s pseudo-Islamic theologians were sectarian fanatics and evil blasphemers. Actually, many Iraqi cities’ populations welcomed the Turanian Mongolian armies. Such was Tusi’s success that many rumors started circulating that he had persuaded Hulagu to accept Islam and that the End of Times was about to come, since Hulagu’s armies had come from Turan (there are certain Ahadith that can be interpreted in this manner); of course, this was an exaggeration, because Hulagu died as a Buddhist.

Doquz Khatun, Hulagu’s most influential wife, was a Keraite Turanian princess that accompanied him in the campaigns to Asia’s southwestern confines. She was a Nestorian Christian (which was quite common among the Keraites) and because of this, she proved to be highly beneficial to Iraq’s Christian populations which were all Nestorians. The Church of the East (as the then Seleucia-Ctesiphon-based Nestorian Patriarchate was named) prospered indeed under Hulagu and his successors, the rulers of the vast Ilkhanate; the portion of the Turanian Mongolian Empire allotted to Hulagu comprised of all territories stretching between Indus River in the East and Sakarya River in the West (Anatolian Seljuks were a vassal state), and between Amu Daria River and the Caucasus Mountains in the North to Euphrates River in the South (totaling ca. 5 million km2).

Hulagu Khan and Doquz Khatun; miniature of a 14th c. manuscript of Jami’al Tawarikh

Thanks to the upgraded conditions of life of the Nestorian Christians in the Ilkhanate, it is not therefore strange that Nestorian Aramaean artists of those days, while depicting the Exaltation of the Cross by St. Constantine and St. Helena, depicted around the Cross the two saints of Christianity with the features of Hulagu and Doquz Khatun, thus equating them as the ‘new’ St. Constantine and St. Helena.

Because of Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s extraordinary services, Hulagu rewarded him with the library of Baghdad (Bayt al Hikmah), and the great astronomer saved dozens of thousands of manuscripts and other valuable items, taking them to Maragheh, the new capital of Hulagu’s empire. Furthermore, the treasures of all the waqfs (i.e. foundations collecting donations for religious or charitable purposes) of Baghdad and Iraq were forcefully given to Nasir al-Din al-Tusi in order to enable him to finance the erection of the then world’s leading Observatory at Maragheh. Following the death of Möngke in 1259, Tusi did not need to travel to Karakorum, and then he concentrated his scientific prowess and intellectual genius on the operation of the Maragheh Observatory, on the cooperation of numerous Muslim, Jewish, Nestorian Christian, Buddhist and other scholars in that magnificent venue, and on the preparation of his Zij-i Ilkhani, an extraordinary series of astronomical tables that consisted in an official imperial document dedicated to Hulagu Ilkhan (this title was attributed to Hulagu by Kublai Khan, after he defeated their youngest brother Ariq Böke).

Hulagu Khan and Dokuz Khatun depicted as the New St. Constantine and the New St. Helena in the miniature of an illustrated Syriac Aramaic Bible of the 13th c.

Rather known for his famous ‘Tousi couple’ (a mathematical device in which a small circle rotates inside a larger circle twice the diameter of the smaller circle), Nasir al-Din al-Tusi was not the only author of Zij-i Ilkhani. The extraordinary opus was the result of a uniquely international team of astronomers and astrologers, who worked under the guidance of Tusi, involving amongst others Bar Hebraeus {1226-1286; known as Mor Gregorios Bar Ebraya in Syriac Aramaic, Ebn al-‘Ebri in Arabic and Abulpharagius in Latin, he was the chief-bishop of the Aramaean (Syriac) Jacobite Orthodox -Monophysitic/Miaphysitic- Church across the Ilkhanid Empire}, Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi (1236-1311), Muhyi al-Dīn al-Maghribī, Mu’ayyid al-Din al-‘Urdi, Hulagu’s Chinese astronomer Fao Munji, and many others.

Page from Bar Hebraeus’ treatise Hewath Hekmetha (Butter of Wisdom), (Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, MS Or. 83, fol. 32r)

Zij-i Ilkhani includes data and observations made during a period of 12 years, starting as early as 1260. The magnificent opus was published at the time of Hulagu’s son Abaqa Khan (1265-1282) and became the model that many posterior Muslim astronomers and astrologers followed. Later astronomical tables and texts produced in Maragheh were translated from Arabic and Farsi to Greek by Gregory Choniades, who was the student of Shams ad-Din al-Bukhari, another Turanian astronomer who had worked at the illustrious Maragheh Observatory.

Page from a manuscript of Zij-i Ilkhani

Such was the success of Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s Observatory that Kublai Khan, Hulagu’s brother, trying to compete in terms of imperially promoted scholarship and pioneering research, had another observatory built in China at Gaocheng in 1276 under the supervision of the famous Chinese astronomer Guo Shoujing (郭守敬; 1231–1316). Around 150 years later, Ulugh Beg, the Timurid Emperor of Samarqand, who was his time’s worldwide leading mathematician and astronomer, studied the remains of the Maragheh Observatory to build his own observatory in his empire’s capital.

Guo Shoujing

Geometric model of Chinese Astronomy

For the exemplarily universal scholar Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, Bar Hebraeus, chief-bishop of the Syriac Church in the Ilkhanid Empire, wrote in his Chronography the following:  

“He constructed instruments for the observations of stars, and the great brass spheres that were more wonderful than those that Ptolemy set up in Alexandria, and he observed and defined the courses of the stars. And there were gathered together about him in Maragheh … a numerous company of wise men from various countries. And since the councils of all the mosques and the houses of instruction of Baghdad and Assyria were under his direction, he used to allot stipends to the teachers and to the pupils who were with him”.

This unsurpassed example of universal scholarship, erudition and intellectual genius disturbed at the time various uneducated, obscurantist, pseudo-Muslim theologians, like Al-Safadi (1296-1363); expressing the Mamluk state’s anti-Ilkhanid propaganda, he wrote against Nasir al-Din al-Tusi deprecatory comments, which were later reproduced by the idiotic religious authorities of the decayed Ottoman Empire in their catastrophic opposition to Safavid Iran, an attitude that ruined both empires. Even worse, over the past decades, anti-Tusi inflammatory speech is tantamount to Islamic terrorism.

The only historically pertinent response to the illiterate and uneducated pseudo-Muslims, who pathetically self-define themselves as ‘Sunnis’ and incessantly regret for the ‘fall of Abbasid Baghdad’ to the ‘barbarians’ is that, only thanks to the destruction of that wretched and worthless state and city, Islamic sciences reached their culminating point at Maragheh few decades later, and then at Samarqand, in the Mughal Empire of Hindustan, and elsewhere. Speaking with sadness about the demolition of the Abbasid Caliphate’s capital is typical camouflage for either idiotic Islamist politicians or criminal suicide-bombers. About: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulagu_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doquz_Khatun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ata-Malik_Juvayni

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarikh-i_Jahangushay

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_campaign_against_the_Nizaris

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan-i_Sabbah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rukn_al-Din_Khurshah

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Baghdad_(1258)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilkhanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilkhan_(title)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Ilkhanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maragheh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Anatolia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karakorum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maragheh_observatory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zij-i_Ilkhani

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tusi_couple

http://syri.ac/bhchronicles

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutb_al-Din_al-Shirazi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhyi_al-D%C4%ABn_al-Maghrib%C4%AB

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%27ayyad_al-Din_al-Urdi

https://en.maragheh.ac.ir/News/32/Specialized-Meeting-on-Archaeology-Held.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaocheng_Astronomical_Observatory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guo_Shoujing

Hulagu died in 1265 in his capital Maragheh and was buried on an island of the Lake Urumiyeh {: ‘the non-(Eastern) Roman’, because the Eastern Roman Empire never expanded over those regions} at a location still unidentified. For over 400 years, not one ruler had achieved to control so firmly the entire region over which he reigned. Even more importantly, as he ruled one of the four parts of Genghis Khan’s vast empire, his reign greatly facilitated contacts, exchanges, and movements.

Numerous nomadic populations and pastoralists moved across vast or small distances from Eastern and Central Siberia to either China or Europe, and from Central Asia either toward Caucasus, Mesopotamia, Syria and Anatolia or in the direction of Iran, the Indus River valley and further on to the Deccan (today’s India’s South). During the 13th, 14th, 15th and the early 16th c., practically speaking all the ethnic groups and nations of Eurasia and North Africa were greatly amalgamated with the incessant waves of new comers. From Sahara and Central Europe to the Bering Strait an indivisible ethnic-cultural entity was formed only to be locally accentuated and highlighted in some regions where major ancient civilizations had been developed.

A ‘universal man’ was then effectively created, no less than 600-700 years before the so-called ‘global world order’ that was calamitously announced at the end of the 20th c. only as an atrocious and vindictive reaction against most of the people worldwide. But back in the 13th, 14th and the 15th century, the only barbarians, who made the exception across Afro-Eurasia, were the Western European pseudo-Christian monarchs and their master, namely the heretic and schismatic pope of Rome, who was anathematized in 1054 by the Michael Cerularius, the Patriarch of New Rome Constantinople.

In this regard, ethno-linguistic and theological-religious diversity helped only underscore spiritual, cultural and imperial unity. In reality, the various empires and kingdoms were basically the specular reflection of one another. The major axes of differentiation were between nomads and pastorals (whereby the nomads viewed the pastorals as enfeebled) and between rural dwellers and urban inhabitants (whereby the rural populations considered the urban denizens as corrupt and degenerate).

The split of the Mongolian Empire

Hulagu’s vast empire (known basically as the Ilkhanate; 1256-1353) survived for almost 100 years after his death; taking into consideration the earlier divisions that existed across those regions and the massive migrations that occurred during the reign of Ilkhan’s successors, we can conclude that the Ilkhanate was a success story. In China, the Yuan dynasty (established by Kublai Khan) lasted also slightly less than one century (1279-1368). The Chagatai Khanate did not last much longer in its initial and integral form (1226-1347); after that term, it was decomposed and underwent several metamorphoses; its eastern part survived as Moghulistan (1347-1487), only to be later diminished and subdivided (Turfan Khanate, 1487-1690; Yarkand Khanate 1465-1705). Last, the Golden Horde survived longer, but only through early divisions (White Horde and Blue Horde) and subsequent multi-divisions (Great Horde, Crimean Khanate, Kazan Khanate, Astrakhan Khanate, Nugai Khanate, Sibir Khanate and Kazakh Khanate).

Since the times of the Ilkhanate, the entire landmass of Central Asia, the Iranian plateau, the Indus River Valley, the Ganges River Valley, Zagros Mountains, the South Caucasus region, Mesopotamia, Syria and Anatolia were practically speaking inhabited by populations of the same ethno-linguistic background and cultural identity. Since those days, the majority of the population either in Anatolia or in Iran was Turanian. As a matter of fact, the Ilkhanate could work as the ideal prototype for all posterior Oriental monarchs.

Being a paradigm in every sense, the Ilkhanate was a religiously tolerant empire whereby Tengrists, Shamanists, Nestorian, Monophysitic / Miaphysitic and Orthodox Christians, Muslims, Yazidis, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Manichaeans, and others lived peacefully under an initially Buddhist and later Islamic imperial court. The Safavids attempted to imitate and reinstate the Ilkhanate, but they failed because of their sectarianism; when at the end of the 16th c. they favored theologians instead of mystics, they heralded the final fall Iran. Contrarily, the Ottomans ignored the Ilkhanate model only to further expand to troublesome and otherwise worthless territories, which simply made their empire weaker and prompt to multi-division; the poor Ottoman choice was also the result of evil, pseudo-Islamic theological sectarianism – or to put it better sectarian opposition to Safavid sectarianism.  

Abaqa Khan (1234–1282) had to engage, during his reign (1265-1282), in many battles against the Golden Horde (for control of, and prevalence in, the Caucasus region; until Berke Khan’s death in 1267), the Chagatai Empire (because Baraq Khan tried to detach Khorasan from the Ilkhanate in 1270), the remains of the Nizari Isma’ilis (that tried to reassemble), and the Mamluks of Egypt (twice: 1271 and 1281, and always within the context of wider alliances, i.e. Golden Horde and Mamluks against the Ilkhanate, the Eastern Roman Empire, Armenia and the last Crusaders). Abaqa Khan was also the son-in-law of Michael VIII Palaiologos of the Eastern Roman Empire, because he got married with the basileus’ daughter Maria Palaiologina, who was initially dispatched to become Hulagu’s wife, but arrived after the great emperor’s death. However, Abaqa Khan was a religiously tolerant Buddhist in whose coins sometimes the Christian cross was depicted under the evocation of the Christian Trinity (in Arabic). Maria Palaiologina played an important role in the Ilkhanate after the death of Doquz Khatun, Hulagu’s Nestorian wife. 

Abaqa Khan’s brother Ahmed Tekuder (1246-1284) reigned for two years (1282-1284) after his elder brother died; in young age, he was baptized Nestorian Christian, but later he accepted Islam. However, he faced fierce opposition and many intrigues from the part of Abaqa Khan’s son Arghun, a Buddhist. After many battles (of purely tribal, not religious, background), Tekuder was accused of misgovernance in trial, condemned and executed.

Abaqa enthroned with one of his wives (most probably Dorji Khatun)

Three generations of the Ilkhanate in just one miniature. Abaqa on a horse; his son Arghun stands next to him under the imperial umbrella, holding his own son, Mahmud Ghazan, with his right arm.

Gold Dinar of Abaqa Khan, Isfahan Mint; obverse: (in Arabic) Al-Mulku Lillah, La Ilaha Illa Lah Muhammad Rasul – lallah Sallallahu Alayhi vasallam; reverse: Qa An Shah A’lam Ilkhan Al-A’azam Abaqa Khalada mulk allah

Arghun (1258-1291) was a pro-Christian, Buddhist emperor, who persistently tried to strike a Franco-Mongol alliance against the Muslim control of Palestine and Egypt; he did not view this in terms of religious enmity or rivalry, but clearly as an internal Turanian-Mongolian tribal contention. Any modern scholar, who disregards this reality, totally misinterprets that historical period, therefore failing to represent the main factors’ real motives and targets. Today’s Muslims and Christians, who attempt to view the then historical developments through distortive sectarian lenses, only generate problems; they create confusion to themselves, stay in ignorance, and are subsequently absorbed by fanaticism. The Mamluks were disdained by most of the Turanians (since the early Islamic times) as a disparate and disorderly element with no tribal ancestry, and this was actually a historically correct judgment.  

There is no difference in this regard between the Genghisid Buddhist Arghun of the Ilkhanate, the (‘Sunni’) Ottoman Selim I, the (‘Shia’) Safavid Isma’il I, and the (‘Sunni’) Timurid Babur, the founder of the Mughal Empire across South Asia. To all of them ancestry mattered; and the Mamluks did not have any. They were Turanian soldiers, who first acted individually, then made an alliance among them and formed a kind of international military class, and in the process ruled various unrelated lands, initially in the name of the caliph. So, their origin could be retraced either to all the branches of Turanian nations or to selected youngsters taken from among other nations, basically from either the Caucasus region or Egypt. However, no one takes seriously a group of experienced military warlords without tribal connection, tradition and ancestry, i.e. a group of deracinated soldiers who therefore fight for material goods and power, and not for honor. This is the whole matter. There is an extra, rather minor point. Many Mamluk originated from the Western Turanian branch of Cumans and the Kipchak, who were never taken in great esteem by the Eastern Turanians.

During Argun’s reign (1284-1291), the various posts were distributed among the emperor’s relatives; Argun’s cousins Jushkab and Baydu were entrusted with Baghdad and Mesopotamia; his brother Gaykhatu was tasked to maintain control in Anatolia, along with his uncle Hulachu. Khorasan was given to Argun’s son Ghazan and his cousin Kingshu. And the Jalayir tribesman Buqa, who helped Argun against his uncle and predecessor, got awarded with the top military and administrative positions. Argun had a close relationship and firm alliance with his powerful uncle Kublai Khan, but his mismanagement of the Ilkhanate was disastrous.

Gaykhatu (in Mongolian: Gaikhat, which means ‘surprising’) reigned for four years (1291-1295), after being the governor of Anatolia during the reign of his brother; although a staunch Buddhist (he was given the Tibetan honorific Rinchindorj, i.e. ‘diamond’), he got married also with Muslim princesses, notably Padishah Khatun who originated from the Qutlugh-Khanid vassal state, which was ruled by an ethnically Khitan dynasty in the region of Kerman. This is one more indication that in reality the Ilkhanate was a totally secular state, and that the ‘court religion’ was an individual expression of spirituality and not an imperial state order imposed on the society. Gaykhatu faced fierce opposition to his election (in the typical Turanian national assembly, the Kurultai, which was held in Ahlat, in today’s Eastern Turkey) by several disorderly elements that supported Baydu, his cousin.

Farman by Gaykhatu, dating back to 1292 and mentioning names of Shiktur Noyan, Aq Buqa, Taghachar and Sad ud-Din Zanjani

Gaykhatu enthroned: from a manuscript of Shams al-Dîn Kâshânî (Bibliothèque nationale de France; Département des Manuscrits, Division orientale, Supplément persan 1443 f.241v)

Gaykhatu’s reign was consumed in numerous internal fights, such as the uprising of Afrasiab of the Hazaraspid dynasty (a Turanian-Iranian vassal state in today’s Lorestan, Western Iran), the rebellion of several Turanian vassal states in Anatolia (notably the Karamanids, the Chobanids, the Eshrefids, and the Menteshe), and the plots of Taghachar in Iran. However, Gaykhatu was the first ruler in Western Asia and Europe to ever print paper money (Jiaochao /交钞), which was first introduced in China ca. 150 years earlier and then widely used at the times of Kublai Khan. In 1295, Gaykhatu, who despite his libertine morals liked Nestorian Christianity, was betrayed by several magistrates, who sided with Baydu, and thus his reign ended with his assassination.

Gaykhatu interrogates Shigtûr Noyan, ally & cousin of Arghun; miniature by Sayf al-Vâhidî. Hérât. Afghanistan (Bibliothèque nationale de France; Département des Manuscrits, Division orientale, Supplément persan 1113, fol. 208)

Baydu ruled only for few months in 1295, failing to oppose the centrifugal forces of the vast state where new populations had meanwhile settled, mixed with indigenous nations, and became a tool in the hands of every experienced and ambitious soldier. Born as a Buddhist, sympathizing with Nestorian Christianity, and wearing a cross, Baydu tried to befriend the outright Muslim majority of his ailing empire. However, his clash with Ghazan, Argun’s son, brought an end to his reign and life.

Mahmud Ghazan (1271-1304) was the first Ilkhan who accepted officially Islam; his reign (1295-1304) seems to be a period of stabilization in a vast empire composed of disparate elements stirred up by many newcomers. His strong advantage was that he had the chance, before rising to the throne of the Ilkhanate in Tabriz at the age of 24, to experience conditions of court plots, family betrayals, tribal rivalries, military conflicts, imperial alliances, administrative doldrums and governmental prowess during four different reigns within the span of only 13 years. He engaged in many wars against the Mamluks of Egypt in Syria and the Chagatai Khanate in Central Asia. Despite his conversion to Islam, he pursued the traditional Mongolian tendency to shape a Franco-Mongolian alliance, but he also failed in this effort.

In Ghazan’s times, the traditional religious tolerance that prevailed among Mongolian Turanians and the secular nature of the Ilkhanate took a severe hit; this was not due to Mahmud Ghazan himself, but to people around him. Buddhists were persecuted, Nestorian churches were looted, and Monophysitic/Miaphysitic Christian churches were demolished. A certain portion of the Ilkhanate’s Muslims, particularly those living in Syria and Anatolia, started being fanaticized at those days, due to the false and sectarian rhetoric of the entire Islamic History’s most ominous and most calamitous figure, namely the pseudo-Muslim theologian Ibn Taymiyyah whose demented thoughts represent a form of Christianization of Islam.

Conversion of Ghazan to Islam; Ghazan was born as a Buddhist, and converted to Islam as part of an agreement upon accession to the throne.

Ghazan studying the Quran

This type of religious fanaticism was earlier attested among 4th–5th c. Christians across the Roman Empire. The evil propagators of this fanaticism, who appeared for the first time within the Islamic world during the reign of Ghazan, immediately started dividing Muslims across historically nonexistent sectarian lines. To do this, they carried out an enormous effort of falsification, misrepresenting the earlier Islamic History through use of distortive sectarian lenses. They also spread vicious hatred against previous historians, scholars, erudite polymaths, astronomers, philosophers, poets and thinkers.

Ibn Taymiyyah’s ignorant, heinous and besotted followers diffused the fallacy that they were ‘Sunni’ and that their opponents were ‘Shia’; they therefore tried to adjust the earlier Islamic History as per the needs of their evil mindset, immoral nature, sick mentality, inhuman behavior, materialistic goals, nonsensical ideas, and obscurantist theories. This evil system that had absolutely nothing to do with the true, historical Islam survived during many centuries by means of deep and ceaseless hatred for the others, and through promotion of paranoid sectarianism and evil intolerance. In fact, it was substituted to true Islam and it eradicated the religion preached by Prophet Muhammad.

Then, at the end of the 18th c., this theological system was selected by the colonial powers as a fantastic tool for the final elimination of Islam through its transformation into a monstrous political ideology deprived of any spirituality; it was then adjusted to a modern pseudo-theology and pseudo-ideology (‘political islam’), which have nothing in common with the preaching of Muhammad and the teachings of Ali. Only due to Ibn Taymiyyah’s system, second rank figures of Early Islam, the likes of Abu Bakr, Umar ibn al Khattab, Uthman ibn Affan, Khalid ibn al-Walid, and Aisha Bint Abi Bakr, became important in the sick imagination of the fooled followers of Ibn Taymiyyah and his worthless ‘school’; suffice it to read the true historians of Islam, notably Tabari, and you find all those minor figures reduced in their real dimensions.

For this reason, the ignorant and sectarian followers of Ibn Taymiyyah deliberately disregarded Tabari, which is far more valuable than the Quran and the Ahadith for the History of the first three centuries of the Islamic Era; consequently, today’s fake Muslims, who are the perfect tools of the English and the American secret services, fully misinterpret the Quran (because they don’t rely on Tabari’s Tafsir) and conceal many facts and aspects of the historical truth that are to be found in Tabari’s Tarikh, while offering ridiculous excuses for their absurd propaganda and sectarian evilness.

Ghazan and his wives at the court; from the miniature of a 13th c Mongol manuscript

Seal of Mahmud Ghazan, over the last two lines of his 1302 letter to Pope Boniface VIII. The seal was given to Ghazan by the sixth Great Khan (Emperor ChengZong of Yuan; also known as Temür Khan). In Chinese (王府定國理民之寶) it reads “Seal certifying the authority of his Royal Highness to establish a country and govern its people”. There are two lines vertically overwritten on the seal; the text is Mongolian and the writing is the Old Uyghur script, which was formed on the basis of Aramaic (from the Vatican Archives).

Based on his experience, Ghazan realized that too many powerful noblemen, court advisers, and military warlords constituted a potential danger for any emperor; he therefore eliminated many people around him at the top of the imperial hierarchy. He maintained excellent relations with Yuan China and the Great Khans, while also improving his relations with the Golden Horde; however, he had to engage in battles against the Chagatai khans in Central Asia and to fight with the Mamluks in Egypt. He also faced strong opposition within his empire, but he was able to squelch the revolts of Baltu, Nawruz, and Sulemish. His war against the Mamluks consists in an extra proof that conflicts among the major states of those days mainly did not have religious motives. Ghazan allied with Georgia, Armenia and the Crusaders against the Mamluks, and advanced in Syria, but in the last war between the Mamluks and the Ilkhanate (1299-1303), he failed to invade Egypt.

Mahmud Ghazan, in striking difference with several religious, administrative and military authorities of his empire, was a religiously tolerant ruler and had special interests for the arts, the sciences, the letters; he sponsored every exploration and innovation. Due to his own interest and thanks to his own support, a World History was then elaborated -for the first time in the history of mankind- by Rashid al-Din Hamadani, a Jewish Iranian multilingual polymath and author. Its title shows the nature of the enormous composition (in three volumes) of which only a part was preserved until today: Jāmi’ al-tawarikh (جامع التواريخ‎ / lit. the ‘gathering of histories’, i.e. the collection of earlier written chronicles). It is the first historiography that was based on historical sources of so diverse peoples and civilizations as Iran, Turan, China, the subcontinent, North Africa, and Western Europe

15th c copy Jami’ al-Tawarikh in watercolor and gold More about: https://en.amordadnews.com/146238/

Mahmud Ghazan tolerated all Islamic spiritual orders and schools of philosophy and theology, exempted Christians from taxes, rebuilt Christian churches, preserved the Mongolian oral traditions, and offered safe passage to his empire’s Buddhists who wanted to move to Tibet. Being a multilingual, he supported improvements in technology, arts and crafts, introduced new measures, coinage, administrative methods, and fiscal policy, and reformed his empire’s military organization.

Öljaitü (1280-1316) was the last of all important successors of Hulagu, succeeded his brother, and reigned for 12 years (1304-1316). Not only he represents the Ilkhanate’s religious tolerance and secular character better than any other Ilkhan, but he also seems to have been the man who changed more religions in his life than any other person anytime anywhere! He was born Buddhist; he later accepted Christianity (1291-1295; being baptized as Nikolya – Nicholas); then in 1295, he adhered to Islam, and while an emperor he stopped siding with theologians, who are mistakenly portrayed as ‘Sunni’ today, and wholeheartedly embraced the spiritual faith and the teachings of Muslims, who are currently considered to be ‘Shia’ (those terms were not used at the time and in any case are totally invalid). After he became Muslim, his official imperial name was Ghiyath al-Din Muhammad Khudabanda Öljaitü Sultan

Khan Öljaitü accepts the Yuan China ambassador; miniature from Majma’ al-Tavarikh

Öljaitü supported the sciences, the letters, and the arts, subsidized the works of the Maragheh Observatory, tried hard to establish peace among the four emperors, i.e. the descendants of Genghis Khan (Ilkhanate, Golden Horde, Chagatai, and Yuan China), managed to squelch uprisings in the areas of today’s Afghanistan and North Iraq, advanced in Syria against the Mamluks, invaded Damascus, and in 1315 started an invasion of Hijaz in order to exhume and desecrate the corpses of Abu Bakr and Umar, who were viewed as the true traitors of Prophet Muhammad by the majority of his empire’s Muslims. More importantly, he founded a splendid new capital, Soltaniyeh (southeast of Tabriz), where one can still visit today his mausoleum, which is worldwide acknowledged and admired for its superb dome and impressive architectural structure.

The Letter of Öljaitü to Philippe le Bel, written in classical Mongolian script, bears the Chinese seal reading “真命皇帝天順萬夷之寶”, which was bestowed by Emperor Chengzong of Yuan China. The huge roll measures 302×50 cm.

Translation of Öljeitu’s message by Buscarello de Ghizolfi, on the back side of the letter (visible here)

Öljaitü’s son Abu Sa’id Bahadur Khan (1305-1335) ruled for almost 20 years (1316-1335) after his elder brothers and father died. Although very young, Abu Sa’id managed to win over the invading armies of the Golden Horde near Mianeh in Southern Azerbaijan (1319). He was viewed as a ‘hero’ (Baghatur in Mongolian), but he had to face in 1322 the rebellion launched by the infamous mystic named Chupan, who declared himself to be the Mahdi (i.e. the Islamic Messiah) in the Caucasus region. He tried to improve relations with the Delhi Sultanate, the Mamluks, and Venice (commercial treaty of 1320). Known also as al-Sultan al-Adil (the Just Sultan), he composed music, wrote poetry, and was a rarely educated and cultured monarch; that’s why Ibn Battuta wrote very flattering comments about him.

The Ilkhanate times were a transformative period for all the lands between Central Asia and Anatolia; after the 13th c., there was no Persian element left across the heavily Turanized Iran, except the language (Farsi); but Farsi had already been the language of Culture and Poetry of all Turanians. Anyway, after the dissolution of the Ilkhanate and down to our times, in reality “Iran” has been “Turan”, and “Turan” has been “Iran”.

However, after his death and after the one year reign of Arpa Ke’un, the Ilkhanate was dissolved and replaced by a multitude of small states. The territory of Hulagu’s empire was divided among the Muzaffarids, the Kart dynasty, the Chobanids, the Injuids, the Jalayirids, the Sarbadars, the Mihrabanids, the Artukids, the Ayyubids, the Eretnids, the Candar, the Karamanids, and many other tiny kingdoms. This was the situation, when a great conqueror and unifier was born (in 1336): his name was Timur. He was a mighty Chagatai warrior, although one of his legs was shorter than the other; that’s why in Farsi, he became rather known as Timur-i Lang (Tamerlane). About: 

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/il-khanids-i-dynastic-history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abaqa_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_the_Levant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Mongol_alliance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Palaiologina

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kutlugh_Turkan

https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/qotlogh-tarkan-khatun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padishah_Khatun

https://twocircles.net/2009dec27/mystery_missing_muslim_female_rulers.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tekuder

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arghun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buqa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaykhatu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baydu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghazan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96ljait%C3%BC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Sa%27id_Bahadur_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipchaks

https://en.wikipedia org/wiki/File:IranaftertheIlkhanate.png

after the collapse

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashid-al-Din_Hamadani

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jami%27_al-tawarikh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soltaniyeh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome_of_Soltaniyeh

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/il-khanids-ii-architecture

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/il-khanids-iii-book-illustration

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/il-khanids-iv-ceramics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzaffarids_(Iran)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kart_dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chobanids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Injuids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalayirid_Sultanate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbadars

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mihrabanids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutlugh-Khanids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khitan_people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazaraspids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chobanids_(beylik)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karamanids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eshrefids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiaochao

— THE ÖLJAITÜ MAUSOLEUM IN SOLTANIEH GALLERY —  

16th c. map Soltaniyeh by Matrakçı Nasuh

16th c. map Soltaniyeh by Matrakçı Nasuh

—————————————————————————

Download the entire chapter (text only) in PDF:

Download the entire chapter (with pictures and legends) in PDF:

Russia, Ukraine and the World-II: 5000 Years of Russian Asiatic Identity vs. 500 Years of Anglo-French Racism & Colonialism

Россия, Украина и мир-II: 5000 лет русской азиатской идентичности против 500 лет англо-французского расизма и колониализма

ul iššakkan salîmu balu mithui 

ul ibbašši ûbtu balu šitnuni

The peace is not established without conflict

The good relations don’t come without rivalry

Epic of Tukulti Ninurta (13th c. BCE)

Мир не устанавливается без конфликта

Хорошие отношения не бывают без соперничества

Эпос о Тукульти Нинурте (13 век до н.э.)

The times when peace and war alternated and rivalries were transformed into friendly relations between kingdoms have gone; we don’t live anymore in times similar to those of the great Assyrian Emperor Tukulti Ninurta I {lit. ‘My trust is in Ninurta’ (i.e. the divine concept of the Messiah for the Ancient Assyrians); reign: 1243-1207}. Those who are able to understand that World War I, World War II, and the Cold War were mere phases of the Great Game (Война теней or Большая игра) can now conclude that the Mankind entered into an undeniably eschatological clash that can only deteriorate down to the End.

All the perspicacious observers and the astute commentators do not waste their time in silly ‘geo-political analyses’ and ‘financial charts’ or econometrics, because they know that these bogus-sciences are entirely fake and deceitful. On the other hand and more importantly, eschatology is not relevant of religion (let alone theology) but does indeed hinge on Moral; the good, the just and the virtuous inherently disregard the evil, the promiscuous and the wicked. This is in their nature. Contrarily, the iniquitous, the vile and the abominable cannot accept the existence of the Good.

It is therefore inevitable that Russia ‘disturbs’; not because Putin and Medvedev are angelic beings, but due to

a) the nature of Russia as the Land par excellence, and

b) the character of Russians as the highest quality people of consciousness.

——- Scenes from the Great Game / Сцены из большой игры ————

Cartoon depicting Queen Victoria of England comforting widows and orphans during the Crimean War.

—————————————————————————–

Contents

I. The Western Anti-Russian Bias

II. Skillful Western European Falsification of Russian History

A. Erroneous contextualization of Archaeology of Northern Asia

B. Deliberate use of overlapping terms: Northern Asia, Siberia, and Scythia

C. Prehistory and Ancient History of Northern Asia are subject to modern borders and to the meaningless attempts for ‘national archaeology’

D. Failure to discern Northern Asia in its entirety and true dimensions

E. Deliberate, multifaceted distortion of the Asiatic Turanian Migrations

F. Minimization of the cataclysmic presence and prevalence of the Turanian nations throughout Eastern Europe

G. European academia-backed biases: malignant disregard of the spiritual value of Kievan Rus, and absurd focus on ethnic, racial and linguistic considerations   

H. Erroneous focus on Kievan Rus and disastrous neglect for Volga Bulgaria

I. Concealment of the historical reality of the Turanian (‘Tatar-Mongol’) period

Содержание

I. Западный антироссийский уклон

II. Умелая западноевропейская фальсификация российской истории

А. Ошибочная контекстуализация археологии Северной Азии

B. Умышленное использование совпадающих терминов: Северная Азия, Сибирь и Скифия.

C. Предыстория и древняя история Северной Азии подчинены современным границам и бессмысленным попыткам «национальной археологии»

D. Неспособность различить Северную Азию во всей ее полноте и истинных размерах

E. Умышленное, многогранное искажение азиатско-туранских миграций.

F. Минимизация катастрофического присутствия и распространенности туранских народов по всей Восточной Европе.

G. Предубеждения, поддерживаемые европейскими академическими кругами: пагубное пренебрежение духовной ценностью Киевской Руси и абсурдная сосредоточенность на этнических, расовых и языковых соображениях.

H. Ошибочное внимание к Киевской Руси и пагубное пренебрежение к Волжской Булгарии

I. Сокрытие исторической реальности туранского («татаро-монгольского») периода

I am not racist either in my conviction or in my expression; Russians are not a Slavic-speaking, Christian nation of Eastern Europe, which was incepted before 450 years. This biased and utterly false definition belongs to the Anglo-French rascals and their inhuman wickedness. Russians are the multiethnic, multilingual, multi-religious, and multicultural nation that lives within and outside the borders of Russian Federation.

I. The Western Anti-Russian Bias

The English, the French and the Dutch are ethnically and culturally unrelated to Ancient Romans; but they intentionally usurped the Roman Heritage while also distorting it.

Even more preposterously, the English, the French and the Dutch inhabit only a small part of the lands ruled by the Ancient Romans; but they deliberately attempted to take control of the lands of the Roman Empire (and of many other territories), and they did so by means of colonies, proxies, regime change, and history falsification. This was instrumental for their need to lay a claim to the heritage of the Roman Imperial.

Contrarily to them, today’s Russians are ethnically and culturally related to the Turanian (Turkic-Mongolian) nations, the Chinese, the Iranians, the Caucasians, and the Northern Indians, i.e. all the major Asiatic nations with which they have interacted for millennia.

Even more importantly, today’s Russians inhabit the lands from where all the ancestors of the aforementioned nations emigrated to conquer the lands in which they dwell nowadays. Viewed diachronically, Russians (in both usages: Россияне and Русские) did not truly invade the lands south and east of Moscow (‘Muscovy’) and later in Sibir (Сибирь/Siberia), North-Northeast Asia, and Central Asia, neither did they assume colonial control over those territories. This is a fallacious reading of History; this preposterous intellectual forgery was indeed conceived-elaborated in and propagated first from the heinous and criminal academic institutions of France, England, and Holland. Interesting reading:

https://www.gazeta.ru/science/2016/11/17_a_10341575.shtml?updated

https://dzen.ru/a/ZApJNqjBN01i_kOx

https://juic.livejournal.com/166659.html

https://kulturologia.ru/blogs/091219/44873/

Siberian fur trader in Leipzig c. 1800

Fur market in Irbit (Siberia)

Nizhny Novgorod fur trade c. 1905

Arms of Counts Stroganov

In fact, what has long been described as ‘Russian Conquest of Siberia, Caucasus and Central Asia’ is an effective attempt to reunify and pacify all the various peoples that had been endlessly roaming in the northern part of the so-called Euro-Asiatic landmass.

In reality,

what Genghis Khan achieved in a most formidable and spectacular manner in the 1100s and the 1200s,

what Genghis Khan’s descendants, and in particular Kublai Khan (志祖 /元世祖: Shizu of Yuan), attempted to ensure by dividing their forefather’s empire in the 1200s and the 1300s,

what Timur (Tamerlane) managed to accomplish by establishing an empire from Ganges River to Moscow and from Western Anatolia to the Altai Mountains in the 1300s and the 1400s, ….

… Ivan the Terrible, the Stroganovs (Строгановы/the accent is on the first syllable), and the Romanov (Романовы/the accent is on the penultimate syllable) were successful to implement in the 1500s through the 1800s.

This consisted in an unprecedented achievement and a uniquely outstanding feat, if we take into consideration the countless invasions, the incessant incursions, the endless wars, and the detrimental destructions that used to happen for thousands of years between the Kamchatka Peninsula in the East and Scandinavia and the Iberian Peninsula in the West.

However, this colossal achievement of pacification did not correspond to the evil targets of the inhuman maritime powers of France, England and Holland; quite contrarily, it damaged their interests irreparably. That is why these criminal states wanted to irrevocably negate the miraculous Russian triumph; and before they managed to demolish it in deeds, they have tried to destroy it in words. This is how and why the Western falsification of the Russian History started. Misperception and partial approach are at the origin of the racist portrayal of Russia by the Western academia.

Whereas the Western European sea powers usurped the Roman past, which does not belong to them, their political and academic elites do not want to accept that Czarist, Soviet and Republican Russia represents the summation of 5000 years of Asiatic civilization, the aggregation of a Turanian-Slavic confederacy, and the paramount example of peaceful multiculturalism.

Few people realize today that, even if the inhabitants of Ukraine did not speak a Russian dialect (which is what is now called Ukrainian ‘language’), the colonial powers of the West would find other victims to hire due to their bribery, corruption, false promises, and other evil techniques.

It is not the ‘Ukrainians’ that the criminal Western powers want to defend; not at all! This is a nave approach. London, Paris, Rome and Washington D.C. fabricate, show, support and promote the ‘Anti-Russians’. If they did not find elements of the local, Ukrainian, elite to first fool, second upend, and third utilize, they would pursue their tactics elsewhere.

It is not the ‘Ukraine’ that the criminal Western powers want to defend; not at all! This is a nave approach. London, Paris, Rome and Washington D.C. soil the Earth with the blood of innocent people caught between the two halves of a vice. The desecration of the land plays an extremely important role in the schemes of the sea powers. Any person, who fails to comprehend the evil spiritual agendas that secret organizations of the West (namely the Jesuits, the Freemasons, and the Zionists) want to implement, cannot have a clue of what this conflict and the forthcoming wars are all about.

(Note: If some readers find it odd that I use the definite article before the name of that land on the first line of the previous paragraph, they must come to terms with the fact that this was the original and correct usage in English in this regard. This in turn makes it automatically clear that Ukraine is not a nation, but a piece of land. These populations were actually never considered to be a nation before the 1990s. As a matter of fact, the definite article is prefixed to names of regions. About the topic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Ukraine#English_definite_article)

One should not confuse between the smokescreen (mainstream media and all the types of political discourse) used for the useful idiots (the atheists, the materialists, the evolutionists, the modernists, the consumerists, the rationalists, the fanatics, the agnostics, and the extremists) and the upper part of the ruling elites of the Western countries. They are aware -only too well- of their lawlessness, their iniquity, and their forthcoming end, and they try to effectively dissipate their sea (i.e. diabolical) nature, nonsensically shifting the focus on factoids, fake dilemmas, nonexistent concepts, and an enormous array of misinformation paraphernalia, involving false maps, memes, figures of speech, and associated techniques.

II. Skillful Western European Falsification of Russian History

In the previous, first article of the series, I explained the reasons and the targets of the systematic academic effort of the Western European powers to portray Russia as a European country and nation, also stating where it all leads. The article is here:

Russia, Ukraine and the World-I: ‘Moscou, les Plaines d’Ukraine, et les Champs-Élysées’

Russian Special Operation in Ukraine: One Year after – 24 February 2023

In the present article, I will enumerate the critical points of Western European falsification of Russian History on which the Western Anti-Russian bias is founded. 

A. Erroneous contextualization of Archaeology of Northern Asia

By limiting the study of prehistoric and early historical periods within modern borders and by classifying the material record as per modern, otherwise nonexistent terms, Western archaeologists prevent the adequate exploration of vast spaces within which human activities, cultures and civilizations were boundless because simply the modern (Western European) concepts of ‘state’ and ‘borders’ are worthless filth. In the links below, you get a brief impression of the intentional confusion created around the topic:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Asia#History

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_Mongolia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_China#Prehistory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Central_Asia#Prehistory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Russia#Prehistory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tibet#Prehistory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_nomads

Deer stones in Mörön, Mongolia

Slab grave from Horin region of Buryatia; relocated in the Ethnography Museum of E. Baikal peoples

Arkaim near Chelyabinsk; Sintashta culture (2050-1900 BCE)

Deliberate confusion does not prevail only in Archaeology; it is also omnipresent, when it comes to Linguistics:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altaic_languages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ural-Altaic_languages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleosiberian_languages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Uralic_language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_languages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolic_languages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Para-Mongolic_languages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungusic_languages

Irrelevant, racist literature:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_North_Eurasian

B. Deliberate use of overlapping terms: Northern Asia, Siberia, and Scythia

By using terms that are misplaced in time and by recurring to names attested in later historical sources, Western historians prevent the accurate understanding and the comprehensive representation of numerous human societies, cultures, movements, and migrations; the ensuing conclusions are therefore fragmentary and vague. The name of the Scythians is first attested in Assyrian-Babylonian and Achaemenid Iranian cuneiform texts in the 7th–6th c. BCE, but the lack of detailed topographical information makes the use of the term uncertain.

The Khanate of Sibir (Siberia)

Similarly, the name of Siberia (Sibir), which was a Turanian Muslim khanate formed after the dissolution of the enormous empire of Genghis Khan, cannot be used in replacement of the correct term ‘Northern Asia’, because Siberia represents only a small part of the Eurasiatic landmass’ northern circumference. The end result entails the abysmally wrong theory of Pan-Indo-Europeanism and the assumption that the Aryans (or Indo-Iranians, Indo-Europeans) are distinct from the Turkic or Turanian nations. Then, the preconceived, mistaken and absurd linguistic models are projected onto the diverse archaeological findings only to lead historians and explorers to the bogus-historical narrative, as per which no Turanians reached, lived in, and civilized Europe. The links below reveal only a small part of the erroneous schemes of the Western European academia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Siberia#Prehistory_and_antiquity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistory_of_Siberia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia#Etymology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronovo_culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Iranians

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%C5%A1kuza

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian_campaign_of_Darius_I

——————————–  The Andronovo culture misinterpreted / Андроновская культура неверно истолкована ——————————– 

Spread of Andronovo culture

Chariot model from the Arkaim Museum

Map in full contradiction of the facts and the findings, geared to conform to agendas

———————————————————————-

C. Prehistory and Ancient History of Northern Asia are subject to modern borders and to the meaningless attempts for ‘national archaeology’

By persistently implementing a fragmentary approach to archaeological-historical research, by disaggregating European Bronze Age cultures from the wider Asiatic landmass (of which Europe is merely a marginal peninsula), and by aptly utilizing the so-called Kurgan hypothesis to ‘demonstrate’ that the Indo-European fallacy exists, the colonialist and racist academia of Western Europe set the foundations of the falsehood that makes of Russia an ‘Eastern European modern nation’. The dire results involve the division lines between the Russians and the Turanian nations, the dissociation of Russians from the great Asiatic civilizations (Mesopotamia – Anatolia, Iran, Indus River Valley, and China), and the removal of Central Asia from its rightful position as the very epicenter of World History.

Kurgan Temir, Arkaim – South Urals

Kurgan sites in NW Iran

The notorious Kurgan hypothesis and Indo-European expansion fallacy

Read:

https://paleoglot.blogspot.com/2007/05/kurgan-hypothesis-is-hypothetical.html https://archeorient.hypotheses.org/15823

https://www.chel.travel/en/sights/arkaim-the-mystical-heart-of-the-southern-urals/ https://arkaim-center.ru/maps/kurgan_temir

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Зданович,ГеннадийБорисович https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gennady_Zdanovich

About;  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Europe#Prehistory_of_Europe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_Europe#Chalcolithic_(Copper_Age)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis#Kurgan_culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis#Stages_of_culture_and_expansion

D. Failure to discern Northern Asia in its entirety and true dimensions

Northern Asia has always been the pathway crossed by countless nomads, tribes, clans, families and armies, which sought to either find refuge in the West, i.e. the marginal confines of the Earth, or chase renegades and lawless fugitives there. This is how diverse Asiatics ended up in the faraway periphery that is now called ‘Europe’. This fact and the innumerable details of the process are at the origin of what is called Christian-Muslim, Turco-Mongol tradition. However, the racist Western academia, by failing to see Northern Asia in its correct dimensions, generated fake divisions between ‘Slavs’ and ‘Turanians’, deceitfully and criminally identifying the former with Christianity and the latter with Islam. That’s nonsense!

Nestorian Christianity was a major religion in Central Asia, China, India and Northern Asia. More particularly, there were many Turanian and Mongol adepts of Nestorianism, notably Dokuz Khatun, the wife of the Great Emperor Hulagu. This means that the so-called ‘Turco-Mongol tradition’ existed in reality as early as the 2nd millennium BCE, in spite of the deceitful scheme of the Western academia to describe it merely as a later phenomenon dating back to the 12th and the 13th centuries CE!

Xianbei Empire (1st – 3rd c. CE)

About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turco-Mongol_tradition

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doquz_Khatun

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_East

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Steppe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_eastern_steppe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_central_steppe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_western_steppe

Epitaph of a Nestorian, unearthed at Chifeng, Inner Mongolia

Spread of the Great Church of the East (Nestorianism) in Asia

Hülagü Han ve Dokuz Hatun

https://forum-eurasica.ru/topic/5835-буктаг-бокка-гугу-саукеле-головной-убор-средневековых-татаро-монголок-в-прошлом-и-в-настоящем

E. Deliberate, multifaceted distortion of the Asiatic Turanian Migrations

The term ‘Barbarian Invasions’ consists in heinous vocabulary and compact historical falsehood; it does not only reveal the incorrigibly racist mindset and mentality of the Western European academics and intellectuals, but it also involves a very systematic concealment of the true dimensions and the correct duration of the World History’s most seminal phenomenon. The fallacious representation of this millennia-long event by Western colonial historians is fragmentary and occasional. Whereas this truly momentous historical event generated numerous states, produced diverse cultures, terminated several empires, and facilitated the diffusion of diverse religions, the rancorous, biased Western scholars persistently avoid offering compulsory courses about it. Instead, they intermittently discuss it as an annex of Iranian, Roman or Chinese History. This is an outrage.

At the end, people get the extremely wrong impression that the Asiatic Turanian Migrations occurred in irregular intervals, whereas they constituted an endless development until the formation of modern states. In fact, there is no such period as ‘Migration Period’; the History of Mankind is a permanent migration. Furthermore, many important nations whose migration was recorded in different historical sources almost never appear in the title of a university seminar in spite of the existence of vast documentation.  

In addition, an enormous amount of false maps offer a transvestite version of the historical reality. Few examples of distortion can be found here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_human_migration

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period

Presenting World History as the history of settled populations is the quintessence of racism.

Fake map giving a very partly and very partial idea of the 2nd – 5th c. CE invasions of Asia’s western confines (which are called ‘Europe’); these invasions were one phase of the endless migrations that permanently determine the historical development.

History is an endless movement of people; all are migrants.

The state of Attila threatened Rome and Constantinople

The Hephthalites threatened Sassanid Iran

Another fake map showing that the Slavs came from nowhere or fell from the Moon!

F. Minimization of the cataclysmic presence and prevalence of the Turanian nations throughout Eastern Europe

In fact, from the time of the Turanian Pazyryk culture (Пазырыкская культура / 600-300 BCE; in the Ukok plateau of the Altai Mountains), which was erroneously defined as ‘Scythian’ by the racist Western European academics, an endless process of migrations created, strengthened, weakened and demolished kingdoms and other types of state in Central and Western Asia and as far as Central Europe.

Pazyryk culture in the Altai Mountains, Russia; burial mounds

Pazyryk: close to the borders of Kazakhstan, China and Mongolia

Typical samples of Pazyryk Culture artifacts and archaeological findings

Pazyryk Culture as exhibited in the Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg

Horse burial, Pazyryk

Tattoo of a man from the Second Pazyryk Kurgan

Read: http://unesco.ru/en/news/49-pazyryk/ https://siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/n0861-tattooed-owners-of-the-worlds-oldest-carpets-get-health-check-after-2200-years/?comm_order=best https://visit-altairepublic.ru/o-respublike-altay/istoriya-gornogo-altaya/gornyy-altay-v-drevnosti-i-srednevekove/

Watch: Hermitage Online. Пазырык. Жемчужина археологических коллекций Эрмитажа / https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNhi2rJMPiQ

Actually, the plains of Eastern Europe were already inhabited by Turanian nomads as early as the first years of the Roman Empire; later, the rise of the Turanian Rouran Khaganate (330–555 CE) in Central and Eastern Asia triggered numerous successive migrations because fleeing nomads forced semi-nomads and other migrants to move further to the West. The trajectory followed by the Turanian Tiele (Dili) tribes must have been extremely embarrassing for the disreputable liars of filthy institutions like the universities of England and France; in and by itself, it reveals much – and in full rejection of their interpretational schemes.

Gaochang (高昌/Kocho, near Turfan/Xinjiang-Eastern Turkestan) was invaded by the Rouran Khagan in 460 CE.

Gaochang (高昌/Kocho) / https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/80175657

With the establishment of the Avar Khaganate (587-825), the rise of the First Turkic Khaganate (552-603), the formation of the Old Great Bulgaria (632-668) in the area of modern times’ Novorossiya and in the territory of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, and with the settlement of the Cuman and Kipchak nomads throughout the plains of Ukraine and Russia, massive Turanian populations already inhabited a very large part of Europe. The process only intensified during the Western Turkic Khaganate (581-742), which functioned also as a secure passage from Central Asia to Eastern Europe for many nomadic populations.     

Impartial and honest scholars do not need to wait until as late as the 12th and the 13th centuries in order to make state of the arrival of Turanian / Tatar-Mongol populations in Eastern Europe; however, the racist Western European academics do not cover this topic but rather avoid referring to the said period. Unfortunately, this period is rather presented in a summarizing form. The following topics should be taken into account, when one examines closely the History of Eastern Europe from the 1st to the 9th c. CE:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pazyryk_culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuezhi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Huns

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiongnu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars#Etymology_and_origin

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Жужаньский_каганат

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rouran_Khaganate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiele_people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_G%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrk_civil_war

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephthalites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Great_Bulgaria

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Turkic_Khaganate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Turkic_Khaganate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Turkic_Khaganate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokhara_Yabghus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Turkic_Khaganate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tocharians

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipchaks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pechenegs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumania

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimek%E2%80%93Kipchak_confederation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Turkic_Khaganate

Also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya_(confederation)

Xi’an, China: tomb of the Sogdian nobleman and trader An Jia. Arrival of a Turkic leader (left); 579 CE

Xi’an, China: tomb of the Sogdian nobleman and trader An Jia. Negotiations between An Jia and a Turkic leader (left); 579 CE

Shoroon Bumbagar tomb mural – Mongolia, 7th c. CE

G. European academia-backed biases: malignant disregard of the spiritual value of Kievan Rus, and absurd focus on ethnic, racial and linguistic considerations    

Today for Russians, it is not Kievan Rus that matters most; it’s Volga Bulgaria. All Russians know very well that, when Ivan the Terrible attempted a series of conquests and carried out a unification effort, he basically wanted to bring peace to a vast territory which had already been united under Genghis Khan only to be divided again among his children and grandchildren. In a way, the closest possible parallel to Ivan IV’s effort was Timur’s triumph. None of these two conquerors undertook a religious war. The famous Oprichnina operation fully demonstrates that Ivan IV killed more Christians than Muslims. About: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oprichnina

It was only later that the historical link to the Kievan Rus became preponderant among the elites of the multiethnic, multilingual and multicultural kingdom of Russia. One has also to admit that this Russian link -for many long centuries- was never challenged by any ethnic group, social stratum, or religious/royal authority throughout the territory of Ukraine. The link to Kievan Rus, although historically valid and linguistically arguable, did indeed represent only one of the numerous imperial aspirations that the rising power of Moscow claimed to possess, namely the eschatological.

In other words, it was not an ethnic or national declaration but a spiritual-imperial-ecumenical assertion. And it was quite solemn. Muscovy, as a continuation of the multiethnic state of Kievan Rus, was not the reconstitution of the same state, but a continuity from the spirituality of Vladimir the Great (Владимир Святославич /958-1015; ruled after 980), who was married with (the daughter of the Eastern Roman Emperor Romanos II and the sister of the Eastern Roman Emperor Basil II) Anna Porphyrogenita (Анна Византийская – Άννα Πορφυρογέννητη /963-1011; princess consort after 989), introduced Eastern Roman Orthodox Christianity in his state, and also adopted Eastern Roman Law (Codex Justinianus/Code of Justinian, formally Corpus Juris Civilis: “Body of Civil Law”). About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus%27

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Kievan_Rus%CA%B9

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_the_Great

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Porphyrogenita

Vladimir the Great talks with a Greek theologian about the Christian faith; from the 15th c. Königsberg Chronicle, which is believed to be a copy from the 13th c. Radziwiłł family of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

Kievan Rus was a multiethnic principality without ecumenical ambitions; but Christian Orthodox Muscovy postured as Third Rome, after the Fall of the Eastern Roman Empire (1453), therefore in absolute opposition to, and detrimental rejection of, the schismatic church of Rome whose pope had been excommunicated (1054) by the Patriarch of Constantinople Michael I Cerularius.  

Enthronement of Michael I Cerularius, from the Madrid Skylitzes manuscript

The aforementioned facts are enough for any honest explorer to understand that the true importance of Kievan Rus lies in spirituality, and not in the ethnic continuity. Any state that lays claim to Kievan Rus must therefore reject the schismatic Catholic Church in order to be possibly taken seriously. Today’s Russians and Ukrainians are racially / ethnically unrelated to the ethnically diverse populations of Kievan Rus. Russians are the offspring of the numerous ethnicities that were amalgamated over the centuries throughout the space between the river Dniester and the Kamchatka Peninsula, whereas Ukrainians are Russians with linguistic particularities due to the fact that the westernmost parts of the Russian imperial territory had been partly occupied by Poland-Lithuania (formally the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania; 1569-1795) and Austria-Hungary.

However, any association with the heretic orders that rule Vatican and the Catholic Church, any relationship with the modern, anti-Christian states of England, France, Holland, and the US, and any tolerance towards (let alone adaptation to) the lawless laws, the blatant immorality, the sexual debauchery and the inhuman anomaly that prevail in the Western world make any claim to Kievan Rus absurd, invalid and ludicrous. In fact, the present pseudo-state of Ukraine is at the very antipodes of the Kievan Rus in every sense. 

H. Erroneous focus on Kievan Rus and disastrous neglect for Volga Bulgaria

As I already said, when it comes to the History of Russia, Volga Bulgaria is definitely more crucial than Kievan Rus for the Russians today. This is so because it highlights the Turanian nature of the Slavs; it underscores Islam’s anteriority over Orthodox Christianity in Eastern Europe, and it also emphasizes the historical reality of the extensive ethnic amalgamation that took place in Eastern Europe for over more than two millennia. These conclusions are not new, and I am not the first to explicitly state these truths, but it will be essential for the Russian establishment to make of them the standard-bearer of the country’s sovereignty and the pinnacle of the national positioning worldwide.

Volga Bulgaria was apparently inhabited by Turanian populations and its capital was located at Bolghar (Болгар), 180 km north of Kazan and more than 900 km east of Moscow. Yet, one of the foremost Muslim geographers, scholars, and leading magistrates of the Abbasid Caliphate, Ibn Khordadbeh (ابن خرداذبه; 820–913) wrote in his grand opus ‘Book of Roads and Kingdoms’ (كِتَاب ٱلْمَسَالِك وَٱلْمَمَالِك/Kitab al Masalik wa ‘l Mamalik) that the ruling title of the khan of Volga Bulgaria was “King of Saqaliba”, i.e. ‘king of (all) Slavs”.

The Iranian Muslim potentate was writing in Baghdad, but exactly the same details can also be found in the famous report (‘Risala’; الرسالة / كتاب إلى ملك الصقالبة) that was composed by Ahmad ibn Fadlan, who was not just a mere traveler but the official delegate of the Abbasid Caliph to the court of Almış, the Great Khan of the Bulgars. Ibn Fadlan, who was invited by the Khan to preach Islam in his kingdom, and was the first to do so in Eastern Europe in 922, called the Great Khan the ‘King of Slavs’, clearly denoting this ruler’s prominence among all the Slavs. This means that Islam was diffused in Eastern Europe no less than 67 years before the prince Vladimir of Kiev accepted Orthodox Christianity.

The Khan (king/’basileus’) of Volga Bulgaria and the Eastern Roman delegates

Modern painter’s imaginative representation of Ibn Fadlan, dressed in white, reading Caliph’s al-Muqtadir proclamation to King of Volga Bulgaria Yiltawar (also known As Aydai Khan); the painting is located in Bolgar State Historical and Architectural Museum, Russia.

Page from ibn Fadlan’s manuscript

The itinerary from Baghdad through Bukhara to Bolgar

B. A. Gilvanov, the arrival of the Caliph’s embassy in Bolghar

Readings: https://vk.com/bulgars

https://rezansky.com/volga-bulgaria/

https://islam-today.ru/istoria/kto-pervym-napisal-o-bulgarah-ibn-fadlan-ili-al-balhi-foto/

https://www.foreigner.bg/amazing-340-years-of-bulgarian-history-in-a-5-minute-read/ https://realnoevremya.ru/articles/13662

https://www.islamicity.org/80153/?referer=ecast https://humancircuspodcast.com/podcastscripts/2020/8/13/ibn-fadlan-2-a-letter-from-the-caliph

Bolgar, capital of Volga Bulgaria according to modern painter’s imagination

Bolghar today

It is quite interesting that the manuscript with the report composed by Ibn Fadlan was found in Mashhad (NE Iran) by the great Bashkir Turanian scholar, intellectual, activist Ahmed Zeki Velidi Togan, one of the most prominent Jadid thinkers. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eilki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alm%C4%B1%C5%9F

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_ibn_Fadlan#The_embassy

https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/أحمد_بن_فضلان

https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/ابن_فضلان

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%B0bn_Fadlan

https://www.librarything.com/work/2153225

https://www.academia.edu/37700548/The_Book_of_Ahmad_b_Fadlan_كتاب_أحمد_بن_فضلان_Книга_Ахмада_ибн_Фадлана_2016_Russian_translation_

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_Bulgaria

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Khordadbeh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Roads_and_Kingdoms_(Ibn_Khordadbeh)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolghar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bil%C3%A4r

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saqaliba

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batu_Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Volga_Bulgaria

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Kievan_Rus%27

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Kiev_(1240)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_of_the_Mongol_invasion_of_Kievan_Rus%27

https://thestrip.ru/en/materials/etot-narod-otnositsya-k-tyurkskoi-yazykovoi-gruppe-tyurskii-mir-kak/

https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=42602705

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Gumilev#Ideas

https://imrussia.org/en/nation/613-split-science

Ahmed Zeki Velidi Togan

It is however preposterous to see Western scholars like Hélène Carrère d’Encausse, illustrious Sovietologist and permanent secretary of the Académie Française, speak about Batu Khan, Genghis Khan’s grandson, and state that he pillaged Kiev(1240), while shamelessly hiding the fact that the great Turanian conqueror also invaded and demolished the Muslim kingdom of Volga Bulgaria; in fact, Batu destroyed Bolghar in 1236 before proceeding to the West and unifying those divided territories under his pacifying rule.

Genghis Khan (from an Iranian manuscript presently in Paris’Bibliothèque Nationale) – https://pravitelimira.ru/biograf/bio_ch/chingishan.php

Genghis Khan (miniature of a manuscript of Rashid al-Din’s Jami al-Tawarikh)

Even more outrageous is the attempt of the French academician to intentionally misinform her readers and audience by saying that only after the Turanian (the term Tatar-Mongol being inaccurate) conquest of Eastern Europe, Islam was diffused in that vast region for the first time (“La population installe l’islam”; 07:43/ «Les voyageurs au fil des siècles. Découverte de l’espace russe» by Hélène Carrère d’Encausse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kodw9azYVUI). The truth is that the outright majority of the Eastern European populations were already Muslims for more than 300 years before the thunderous and superb conquests of the illustrious offspring of Genghis Khan.

Khan Batu in the miniature of a manuscript (above) and in the modern popular imagination (below)

I. Concealment of the historical reality of the Turanian (‘Tatar-Mongol’) period

The fallacy of the so-called ‘Tatar-Mongol Occupation of Russia’ and its ‘annex’, namely the pretended ‘Russian Liberation from the Tatars’, complete the wicked assemblage of distorted facts, misinterpreted events, delusional factoids and gibberish discourse that the racist Western European academics teach as “Russian History” in their vicious universities. In fact, there is no ‘Mongol’ but Turanian presence throughout Eastern Europe; but this started more than seven (7) centuries before the destruction of Kievan Rus by Batu Khan. The so-called Mongol invasions were simply an internal Turanian affair. There were no anti-Christian feelings during the conquest of Kievan Rus, pretty much like there was no anti-Muslim sentiment during the invasion of Volga Bulgaria.  

‘Tatar-Mongol’ is a charlatanesque term deliberately used in order to diffuse wrong impressions and erroneous conceptualization of the historical events; the invading armies were Turanian. The local populations in Volga Bulgaria, Cuman-Kipchak confederation, Kievan Rus, Christian Alania, Vladimir-Suzdal, and Khazaria were predominantly of Turanian origin too. How could one scholar possibly speak of a ‘Turanian occupation of Turanians’? This would be an oxymoron.

For this reason, the Western European factories of falsehood, which pretend to be ‘centers of learning’, produce fake names in order to plunge the non-specialists and the credulous victims of their propaganda into endless confusion, thus positioning their deceitful narrative. One can describe the Turanian invasions of Genghis Khan and his descendants as a ‘civil war’ among Turanians or even as fratricidal clashes that spanned across Asia (with Europe being just an Asiatic peninsula). However, these events, in spite of the great number of casualties, were in reality merciless conflicts of tribal leaderships; the causes for them were issues of spiritual purity, moral integrity, Turanian identity, and imperial honesty.

The racist historians and the biased intellectuals of the Western European countries lack the academic ability, the free will, and the fair judgment to view things as they truly happened and in the way their champions felt them at the time. By continually projecting their immoral mindsets, worthless values, and conceited character, they get a shallow understanding of each historical development, and they always fail to fathom that it did not happen as they could expect or even imagine. Then, when the historical facts have to be distorted enough in order to be adjusted to the criminal agendas of the Western European elites and the colonial governments, their bigotry and partiality reach the level of madness.

The myth of the ‘Tatar-Mongol Occupation of Russia’ is the key ruse point of the racist Western historiography about Russia. This is the result of the discriminatory theory of racial purity. This approach was subtly diffused among Russian academic, intellectual and political elites over centuries; it forces Russians to believe that they were initially a small country which later expanded. This is wrong. Nations are not races with racist elites, but cultural communities organized in culture-based states that are open to all the inhabitants, and secret organizations have no right to exist.

Russians must not feel closer to Kievan Rus than to Volga Bulgaria and the other Turanian states of Asia and Europe that stretched at the time over today’s Russian territory; preponderantly, Russians are ethnically the offspring of all the Turanian khanates and nations, which were formed throughout the territory of Russia and several adjacent states. Slavicization (Russification) came later. Studying the topic of the Turanian invasions, Russians should not feel sentimentally linked to Kievan Rus. Their ancestors were truly on both sides of the war.

The 16th c. pledge made to Kievan Rus by the Muscovite authorities was entirely spiritual and eschatological, not ethnic – let alone political. This must become crystal clear, because it will play a decisive role in the much needed, forthcoming victory of Russia and annexation of Ukraine. Russians today must emancipate themselves from the czarist need for a European Russia; they have to envision their remote past as an all-encompassing heritage, 

Representations of eschatological concepts involving Kievan Rus and Third Rome-Russia

Read: https://portal-slovo.ru/history/35247.php / http://ttolk.ru/?p=21724 https://psyjournals.ru/journals/langt/archive/2015_n4/Dergacheva https://argumenti.ru/society/2021/01/707045 http://www.pravoslavie.ru/57480.html https://arzamas.academy/materials/169

Три конца света, которые ждали на Руси

https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/moskva-tretiy-rim-kak-arhetip-russkogo-pravoslavnogo-samosoznaniya

As intentionally racist fabrication of the Western academia, the so-called ‘Tatar-Mongol Occupation of Russia’ is fully refuted and utterly invalidated by historical facts and sources that the disreputable professors of English, French, Dutch, Belgian, American, Canadian, Australian and other universities do their ingenious best to hide. In fact, from the middle of the 13th to the middle of the 16th c., there were no religious fanaticism, ethnic enmity and social divisions throughout Eastern Europe.

On the contrary, after the incorporation of the Kievan Rus, there were frequent mixed marriages at all levels; as they were fluent in Turkic dialects, numerous Rus princes quite often got unreservedly married with Turanian princesses, thus getting the favor of their Emperor of the Golden Horde. There was no rancor and no hatred from the Christians against the Tengrists and the Muslims and vice versa, in striking contrast to what the villainous Anglo-French scholars ruthlessly attempt to represent, further drawing their lines of division. One can publish endless series of volumes, stating facts and referring to historical sources that totally discredit the criminal Western European academics, their vicious fallacies, and their murderous pseudo-historical divisive lines.  

A typical example is the case of the prince Yuri Danilovich (Юрий Данилович; 1281-1340/prince of Moscow/Muscovy after 1303), who was vassal of the Sultan Giyas al-Din Mohammed Öz Beg (غیاث الدین محمد /Султан Гийас ад-Дин Мухаммед; 1282-1341; reigned after 1313/also known as Özbeg Khan /Узбек-хан / اوزبیک خان), the great emperor of the Golden Horde. Giyas al-Din Mohammed was born Tengrist, but accepted Islam before being coronated. Yuri Danilovich managed to get married with the emperor’s sister Konchaka (Кончака; died 1318), who was authorized to become Christian Orthodox; Yuri Danilovich’s loyalty to the Golden Horde -at the very moment the vast empire adopted Islam as official religion- fully shows that at the time everything was very different from the vicious, divisive narrative that Western academics have ceaselessly and shamelessly have propagated. About:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Özbeg_Khan

https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/اوزبیک_خان

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Узбек-хан

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Кончака

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yury_of_Moscow

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Юрий_Данилович

Özbeg Khan

Uzbeg Khan summoning Mikhail of Tver in his court at Sarai, as per Vasili Vereshchagin’s painting

Paiza (gerege/type of royal insignia) of Özbeg Khan

V. P. Vereshchagin (1896), Yuri Danilovich killing Dimitri Mikhailovich

Read: https://diletant.media/articles/45285129/ https://rus.team/people/yurij-danilovich-knyaz-moskovskij

Due to the fact that Rus/Slavic-Turanian Christianity was the Orthodox faith (and not the schismatic Catholic heresy), the two more systematized faiths were viewed as they truly are, i.e. quasi-identical, and this facilitated the conversions from either side. In this regard, a typical example is Tsarevich (Czarevitch) Peter Ordynsky (i.e. Peter of the Horde; Пётр Ордынский/died 1290), who was also known as Peter Rostovsky (Пётр Ростовский) or Dair Kaydagul Orda-Ichinov (Даир Кайдагул Орда-Ичинов); great-grandson of Genghis Khan, nephew of Batu Khan and Berke (or Birkai) Khan (Бәркә хан; died 1266), the prince of the Golden Horde was the son of prince Orda-Ejen (or Orda Ichen) and grandson of Jochi. He accepted Christianity; he was baptized Peter and he saw formidable spiritual visions. Then, Bishop Ignatius of Rostov {Игнатий I (епископ Ростовский); died 1288} solemnly declared Peter Ordynsky and Boris Vasil’kovich (1231-1277) brothers under the vaults of the church; the latter was the vassal -to the Golden Horde- prince of Rostov. Before dying, Peter Ordynsky became a monk and established a monastery; he was early canonized in 1547. About:

https://ok.ru/group2yamirova/topic/160311655925760

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Пётр_Ордынский

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Борис_Василькович

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Борис_Василькович#Князь_Борис_и_Петр_Ордынский

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Игнатий_I_(епископ_Ростовский)

https://stjohndc.org/en/orthodoxy-foundation/saints/venerable-st-peter-prince-golden-horde

https://pravoslavie.ru/72184.html

https://travelerscoffee.ru/tr/fertilizer/tatary-na-sluzhbe-rossiiskoi-imperii-alina-kabaeva-i-drugie/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berke

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Орда-Эджен

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orda_Khan

https://thestrip.ru/en/glaza/chto-oznachaet-vyrazhenie-poskrebi-russkogo-naidesh/

https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/rostovskoe-duhovenstvo-i-mongolskie-vlasti-pri-episkope-ignatii

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Игнатий_I_(епископ_Ростовский)

Deceitfully written text by a supposedly Slavophile pseudo-Orthodox liar of … Anglican/Quaker background (!!):

https://heavyangloorthodox.blogspot.com/2020/06/righteous-peter-jonon-of-golden-horde.html

Berke Khan; painting by the distinguished Tatar painter Rushan Shamsutdinov (born 1946; Рушан Галяфович Шамсутдинов) on the basis of the description by the 14th c. Coptic Christian historian Al-Mufaddal ibn Abi al-Fada’il (المفضل بن ابي الفضائل) who wrote a historical book about the Mamluks, also including a report about the visit of a state visit (1263) to the palace of the Jochi Ulus.

Read: https://ar.culture.ru/en/subject/berke-han#

https://www.brepols.net/products/ON-M1-F1-17400590200-1

http://www.psh-kazan.narod.ru/photo_shamsutdinov.htm http://tatarlar.info/2021/11/25/rushan-shamsutdinov/

http://tatarlar.info/tag/rushan-shamsutdinov/

https://realnoevremya.ru/articles/108145-kolonka-rafaelya-hakimova-ob-etnonime-tatar

https://dzen.ru/media/woh/chem-siniaia-orda-otlichalas-ot-zolotoi-5ab162b1a815f19678dcfedc?utm_referer=www.google.ru

St. Peter and St. Paul appear in the vision of Tsarevitch Peter Ordynsky

Boris Vasil’kovich pays a visit to the court of his suzerain, Sartaq Khan

Peter Ordynsky hunting near Rostov

Saint of the Russian Church since 1547

Read: https://tatmitropolia.ru/mesyceslov/days/?id=60946

Other illustrious cases of noble intermarriages between Christian Rus princes and Turanian imperial families involve Gleb Vasil’kovich (Глеб Василькович; 1238-1278), who was the first prince of Beloozero (Белозерское княжество; 1238–1486), another small vassal state of the Golden Horde, and St. Fyodor the Black (also known as Theodore Rostislavich / Феодор Ростиславич Чёрный; ca. 1233-1299), another vassal of the Golden Horde and ruler of Smolensk and Yaroslavl, who was later (1463) canonized. The former got married with one of the daughters of Sartaq Khan (Сартак), who was the oldest son of the conqueror Batu Khan; and the latter wedded the daughter of Möngke Temür (or Munkh Tumur/ Мангутемир; died in 1280), who was the grandson of Batu Khan.

Coin of Möngke (Mengu) Timur Khan; Bulghar mint 1273

Seal of Theodore Rostislavich

About:

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Глеб_Василькович

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Сартак

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sartaq_Khan

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Фёдор_Ростиславич_Чёрный

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_the_Black

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Менгу-Тимур

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mengu-Timur

Built by Batu Khan, Sarai was the capital of the Golden Horde and the world’s most refined, most lavish, and most marvelous city of the 14th c.; amongst others, Ibn Battuta visited and described the Muslim world’s true capital of those days. One century later, Sarai was depicted in the map designed by the Venetian cartographer Fra Mauro around 1450.

Sarai in modern artist’s imagination

Read: https://ik-ptz.ru/en/literatura/istoriya-zolotoi-ordy-monety-zolotoi-ordy-chto-takoe-zolotaya-orda.html

https://en.atomiyme.com/saray-batu-is-the-ancient-capital-of-the-golden-horde-how-to-get-to-saray-batu-from-astrakhan-or-volgograd/

I will continue in the next article of the series; but at this point, I have to conclude that for the Russians the only path to victory involves

a) an accurate perception of their historical identity as a non-European, Asiatic Empire, and

b) a resolute rejection of the misperceptions, the inaccuracies, the distortions and the divisive sentimentalism that Western colonial historians and academics projected onto them in order to confuse them and make them unable to exploit in the best possible manner the chances that History offered to Northern Asia.

Napoleon I Bonaparte, who failed to win over the Russians, knew it, understood it and said it; but today’s criminal Western regimes do their best to hide the statement.

“Dig up a Russian and you will find a Tatar!”

1812 – Napoleon retreats from Moscow as it burns; painting by Viktor Mazurovsky (1859-1944)

Today’s Russian leadership must make the big leap; in it, they will have to combine

– Genghis Khan’s military acumen,

– Tamerlane’s martial ingenuity,

– Ivan IV’s imperial tenacity, and

– Nikolai II’s pledge to Kievan Rus-Third Rome.

But all these mental faculties, personal advantages, and moral challenges will need to be backed by the adamant spirituality and the concealed forcefulness that typified Stalin only 70 years ago.

Yet, it will be up to the forthcoming Last Czar to manifest the vitality that will irrevocably remove the Anglo-French perfidy and the Roman outrage from the surface of the Earth.

————————————————

Download the article (text only) in PDF:

Download the article (text, pictures and legends) in PDF: