Pre-publication of chapter VIII 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 VI, VII, VIII, IX and X form Part Three (Turkey and Iran beyond Politics and Geopolitics: Rejection of the Orientalist, Turcologist and Iranologist Fallacies about Achaemenid History) of the book, which is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters. Chapter X has already been pre-published.
Until now, 18 chapters have been uploaded as partly pre-publication of the present book; this chapter is therefore the 19th (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.
———————–
Adhur Gushnasp- Praaspa- Takht-e Suleyman
For over 200 years, colonial, Orientalist historiographers undertook a vast project of evidently racist de-Turkification (or rather de-Turanization) of the Achaemenid period of Ancient Iran. This project took its most drastic form in the overwhelming distortion of the Ancient History of Greater Azerbaijan that corresponded to the Achaemenid satrapy of Media’s northern part, which was then named Atropatene (Adhurbadagan). Between Adhurbadagan and the modern name of Azerbaijan stand 2500 years and a minor linguistic change.
Atropatene is Azerbaijan, and its population was the earliest, historically known Turkic nation that was settled in the wider region. But for the Western Orientalist forgers, Atropatene appears to be either an uninhabited, bizarre land or a marginal territory inhabited by Medes (or Medians); in this manner, Modern Azeris and the state of Azerbaijan are criminally stripped of their Ancient History – entirely. For this to happen, the theory of ‘Migration Period’ was drafted and propagated worldwide with always inconsistent variants; this is due to the fact that, as a falsely invented concept, this theory can occasionally be dragged to different directions and adjusted to diverse narratives about distinct lands and regions. Actually, there is no such period in the History of Mankind, because all the periods are ‘migration periods’.
Extra addenda of the aforementioned biased theory are the over-magnification of the fact of the 11th c. Oghuz-Turkmen migrations’ impact on Azerbaijan, which is rather minor, and the assumption that the ‘Old Azeri’ was an Iranian (and not a Turanian) language. While these detrimental absurdities have been promoted as ‘historical science’, an enormous lack of academic research in the fields of History of Religion and History of Mysticisms prevents academics and general readership from duly assessing the spiritual-religious-mystical continuity that characterizes Atropatene / Azerbaijan. All the same, from the earliest form of Tengrism to Zoroastrianism to Islamic Safavid mysticism, there is a continuity of principles, concepts, virtues and practices that makes us understand that we have to deal with the same nation, which retains its core spirituality and monotheistic worldview while being successively impacted by new comers at the linguistic level.
Media Atropatene was the northern part of Media, but it was a totally different ethnic-cultural-religious environment; the illustrious capital of Media was Ekbatana (Hagmatana in Old Achaemenid), i.e. today’s Hamadan. But the central part of Media (where the Medes lived) ended there; and further beyond, from Zagros northern parts to the western confines of Alburz Mountains and to the western shores of the Caspian Sea, stretched Media Atropatene or simply Atropatene, which was the holy land of Ancient (pre-Islamic) Iran.
In that province, was located Adhur Gushnasp, the Holy of Holies of the original Zoroastrian monotheism. The modern name of the majestic archaeological site is Takht-e Suleyman, i.e. ‘the throne of Solomon’. This site is most probably identified with Praaspa of the Ancient Greek and Latin sources, and it was described as the capital of Media Atropatene during the Parthian Arsacid times (250 BCE – 224 CE).
There is an undeniable fact that determines the fundamentals of Achaemenid Iran, and that is why the colonial Orientalists of Europe and America have deliberately and incessantly attempted to undermine it. During the Achaemenid period, the imperial administration of Iran may well have been established in Fars (Persia) around Pasargadae and Parsa (Persepolis), but the center of Iran’s state religion was located in Atropatene (Adhur Gushnasp). This helps us understand that the vicars of the Zoroastrian faith and the high priests of the Eternal Fire lived mainly among not ‘Persians’ but ‘Azeris’. The name itself of Adhur Gushnasp has evident affinities with the national name of the Ancient Azeris: Adhurbadagan.
Ancient Azerbaijan, which included the southern part of the modern state of Azerbaijan and modern Iran’s northwestern corner, was always believed to also be the birthplace of Zoroaster and despite the existence of several other traditions, pretensions and possible interpretations, the most authoritative historical sources, notably Shahrastani, retrace Zoroaster’s family tree in Atropatene – Azerbaijan.
But when you undertake an inquiry about the Ancient History of Azerbaijan, you find either publications about independent archaeological excavations that are not historically contextualized or various academic researches about Albania of Caucasus, and all this in addition to the fake, Orientalist narrative of the so-called ‘Iranian occupation of Azerbaijan’ during the Achaemenid, Arsacid and Sassanid dynasties. This is a deliberate colonial distortion that takes the form of projection of modern times political situations onto the pre-Islamic History of the Azeri nation. The Ancient Azeris were an integral part of all the successive Iranian empires, which were at the same time Turanian empires. Turanian Atropatene – Azerbaijan was not therefore ‘occupied’ by the Achaemenid Iranians, but it constituted a most critical province of the Empire: as critical as Fars (Persia).
In his comprehensive History of Azerbaijan (AzMİU NPM, Baku 2017, 352 p. / http://anl.az/el/Kitab/2018/02/cd/i-44365.pdf), Dilgam Yunis Ismailov, a distinguished Azeri historian, demonstrates that he is conscious and knowledgeable enough to avoid the colonial trap in the misinterpretation of the historical role of Ancient Atropatene. However, he still fails to properly assess that, when referring to 1st millennium BCE Atropatene, we do not only refer to a historically Azeri, i.e. Turanian, territory (which is also Iranian territory), but we also talk about the very ancestors of his Turkic compatriots.
As one could expect it, the same occurs across the Internet. In the most popular sites and portals, you find nothing about Ancient History of Azerbaijan, as if the country is totally deprived of Ancient History. Unfortunately, only the Ancient Albania of Caucasus is included in what is presented as Ancient History of Azerbaijan. This is preposterous and it is entirely due to the diffusion/imposition of colonial Orientalist impact across the Internet. Then, first, Atropatene is disconnected from Azerbaijan, and to serve today’s colonial interests, Takht-e Suleyman (Adhur Gushnasp) is linked exclusively to Iran, although historically and culturally the magnificent site belongs to Azerbaijan and the Azeri nation.
Second, the people of Ancient Atropatene – Azerbaijan either ‘disappear’ or are confusingly portrayed as Iranians with no further specification – which is pathetic and ludicrous. About:
One thing is however is absolutely sure: thanks to Assyrian–Babylonian cuneiform texts, starting from the middle of the 9th c., we have a very good documentation about the Medes, the Persians and many other Iranian-Turanian peoples who settled and lived in the eastern confines of Zagros mountains and across the Iranian plateau, which in its western half was Assyrian territory for almost 200 years before the Medes and the Persians first became independent (end of 7th c. BCE) and second formed their early kingdoms. So, we know very well that there was never a Persian in Media or Media Atropatene. And the same continued during the Achaemenid Empire, because there is not a single proof of Persians moving from Fars (Persia) and Kerman (Carmania) northwestwards to Atropatene. About:
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 XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty
CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids
PART FIVE. FALLACIES ABOUT SASSANID HISTORY, HISTORY OF RELIGIONS, AND THE HISTORY OF MIGRATIONS
CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire
CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism
CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates
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 SEVEN. THE FICTIONAL DIVISION OF ISLAM INTO ‘SUNNI’ AND ‘SHIA’
CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’
PART EIGHT. THE DISTORTED TERM ‘PERSIANATE’
CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate
PART NINE. FALLACIES ABOUT THE GOLDEN ERA OF THE ISLAMIC CIVILIZATION
CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash
PART TEN. FALLACIES ABOUT THE TIMES OF TURANIAN (MONGOLIAN) SUPREMACY IN TERMS OF SCIENCES, ARTS, LETTERS, SPIRITUALITY AND IMPERIAL UNIVERSALISM
CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur
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
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?
—————————————————
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
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
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:
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 SotounPalace (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
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
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, OTTOMAN CONSTANTINOPLE —————-
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, SAFAVID ISFAHAN —————————-
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
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 XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty
CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids
PART FIVE. FALLACIES ABOUT SASSANID HISTORY, HISTORY OF RELIGIONS, AND THE HISTORY OF MIGRATIONS
CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire
CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism
CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates
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 SEVEN. THE FICTIONAL DIVISION OF ISLAM INTO ‘SUNNI’ AND ‘SHIA’
CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’
PART EIGHT. THE DISTORTED TERM ‘PERSIANATE’
CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate
PART NINE. FALLACIES ABOUT THE GOLDEN ERA OF THE ISLAMIC CIVILIZATION
CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash
PART TEN. FALLACIES ABOUT THE TIMES OF TURANIAN (MONGOLIAN) SUPREMACY IN TERMS OF SCIENCES, ARTS, LETTERS, SPIRITUALITY AND IMPERIAL UNIVERSALISM
CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur
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
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?
—————————————————
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
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
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):
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
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 XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty
CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids
PART FIVE. FALLACIES ABOUT SASSANID HISTORY, HISTORY OF RELIGIONS, AND THE HISTORY OF MIGRATIONS
CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire
CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism
CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates
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 SEVEN. THE FICTIONAL DIVISION OF ISLAM INTO ‘SUNNI’ AND ‘SHIA’
CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’
PART EIGHT. THE DISTORTED TERM ‘PERSIANATE’
CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate
PART NINE. FALLACIES ABOUT THE GOLDEN ERA OF THE ISLAMIC CIVILIZATION
CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash
PART TEN. FALLACIES ABOUT THE TIMES OF TURANIAN (MONGOLIAN) SUPREMACY IN TERMS OF SCIENCES, ARTS, LETTERS, SPIRITUALITY AND IMPERIAL UNIVERSALISM
CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur
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
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?
————————————————————-
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
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
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:
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:
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:
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.
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:
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.
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:
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:
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 XII: Parthian Turan: an Anti-Persian dynasty
CHAPTER XIII: Parthian Turan and the Philhellenism of the Arsacids
PART FIVE. FALLACIES ABOUT SASSANID HISTORY, HISTORY OF RELIGIONS, AND THE HISTORY OF MIGRATIONS
CHAPTER XIV: Arsacid & Sassanid Iran, and the wars against the Mithraic – Christian Roman Empire
CHAPTER XV: Sassanid Iran – Turan, Kartir, Roman Empire, Christianity, Mani and Manichaeism
CHAPTER XVI: Iran – Turan, Manichaeism & Islam during the Migration Period and the Early Caliphates
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 SEVEN. THE FICTIONAL DIVISION OF ISLAM INTO ‘SUNNI’ AND ‘SHIA’
CHAPTER XXI: The fabrication of the fake divide ‘Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam’
PART EIGHT. THE DISTORTED TERM ‘PERSIANATE’
CHAPTER XXII: The fake Persianization of the Abbasid Caliphate
PART NINE. FALLACIES ABOUT THE GOLDEN ERA OF THE ISLAMIC CIVILIZATION
CHAPTER XXIII: From Ferdowsi to the Seljuk Turks, Nizam al Mulk, Nizami Ganjavi, Jalal ad-Din Rumi and Haji Bektash
PART TEN. FALLACIES ABOUT THE TIMES OF TURANIAN (MONGOLIAN) SUPREMACY IN TERMS OF SCIENCES, ARTS, LETTERS, SPIRITUALITY AND IMPERIAL UNIVERSALISM
CHAPTER XXIV: From Genghis Khan, Nasir al-Din al Tusi and Hulagu to Timur
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
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?
Россия, Украина и мир-II: 5000 лет русской азиатской идентичности против 500 лет англо-французского расизма и колониализма
uliššakkansalîmubalumithuṣi
ulibbaššiṭûbtubalu 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:
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:
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:
——————————– 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
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!
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:
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
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.
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:
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:
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
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:
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 (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
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:
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:
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.
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
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.
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.
By Prof. Muhammet Şemsettin Gözübüyükoğlu (Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis)
Pre-publication of chapter XXIII 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 XXIII constitutes the Part Nine (Fallacies about the Golden Era of the Islamic Civilization). The book is made of 12 parts and 33 chapters.
—————————————————-
Known rather through his cognomen (‘Paradisiacal’) and his kunya (teknonym: Abu’l Qassem, i.e. ‘father of Qassem’), Ferdowsi was born (ca. 940) in Tus (Khorasan, NE Iran) around the time Muhammad ibn al-Askari, son of Hasan al-Askari and 12th Imam, went into his Major Occultation (941). The apocalyptic eschatological fascination of those days is explicitly shown in Ferdowsi’s own name, because the quest for the Paradise is the epitome of every reliable Messianism (: Soteriology) and Eschatology.
Ferdowsi is a worldwide unique case of highly venerated poet whose work is absolutely immense and whose known details of life are incredibly minimal; although he was historically referred to as the leading epic poet, erudite sage, and unsurpassed master of Farsi (and there have been several historical biographies of him), we don’t know even his real name. Judging from his son’s name, Ferdowsi (940-1020) was a Muslim, but there stop all the important biographical details that we know. In fact, Ferdowsi’s life is enveloped in mystery and legend similarly with the contents of his monumental and sublime epic; we know however that he had a great Turanian sponsor: the formidable Conqueror and Emperor Mahmud Ghaznavi (971-1030; the founder of the Ghaznavid dynasty), who invaded the Indus Valley, Punjab and the Ganges Valley, unifying territories that stretched between the Caspian Sea and today’s Bangladesh.
Ferdowsi mausoleum, Tus – Iran
Ferdowsi’s unsurpassed masterpiece, the Shahnameh (: the Book of the Kings) is the world’s largest epic totaling more than 100000 (one hundred thousand) verses. In terms of Iranian Literature, it was not the first epic composed under this title. Thanks to his historical biographies, we know that Ferdowsi started the composition of the enormous opus in 977, initially viewing it as the completion of a similar effort earlier undertaken by another Iranian poet, Abu Mansur Daqiqi, who did not have the chance to advance his Shahnameh much before being assassinated. However, Ferdowsi’s epic differs greatly from all the other Shahnameh epic poems or prose compositions in many ways; although similar narratives have been attested in other Iranian and Islamic epics, Ferdowsi places his heroes in an atemporal field of semiotics whereby they function as symbols of spiritual ideas, moral principles, and eternal values.
Was Ferdowsi a ‘Sunni’ or a ‘Shia’? The question sounds irrelevant; although it is evident that he was a Muslim and a strong monotheist (which also applies to several forms of pre-Islamic Iranian religions), Ferdowsi does not contain the slightest portion of reference to the Early Islamic History into his legendary opus.
Is pre-Islamic Iranian-Turanian History reflected in Ferdowsi’s epic? In a way, yes! But it is an ahistorical reference to a series of dynasties that modern Iranologists, philologists, specialists in Comparative Literature, historians and historians of religions, experts in Mysticism Studies and Symbolism try in vain to accommodate within the scholarly known frame of the Achaemenid, Arsacid and Sassanid dynasties. This is however quite impossible a task to carry out; and Ferdowsi is the only reason for this. Although there is not a single indication that Ferdowsi divided his masterpiece into ‘periods’, the entire Shahnameh is divided, on the basis of typical literary analysis, into three sections: mythical age, heroic age, and historical age.
As per this – absolutely wrong – categorization, all the aforementioned pre-Islamic Iranian dynasties belong to the third section (historical age). But more than two thirds of the enormous epic’s verses are dedicated to the narration of episodes of the so-called ‘heroic age’. An analysis of Shahnameh goes beyond the scope of the present book, but with the above brief description I wanted to point out that Ferdowsi mainly focused on pre-Achaemenid eras and that his intention was to illuminate the spiritual ideas and the human valor that predestined historical Iran-Turan to be what we know through regular historical documentation that it was. Despite the numerous distortive presentations and worthless analyses, if one stays close to Ferdowsi’s verses, one concludes easily that, as per the illustrious poet and mystic, Iran-Turan constitutes an indivisible world.
Was Ferdowsi a Persian or a Turanian? This question in and by itself reveals total ignorance of Iranian and Turanian History, Culture and Civilization. The undisputed and definitely unequaled mastership of Farsi to which the majestic composition of Shahnameh bears witness does not make of Ferdowsi a Persian. Across the ages, many Turanians excelled in Persian poetry. Ferdowsi’s origin from Khorasan (a region traditionally inhabited by Turanians and Persians alike) and his close relationship with the great Turanian Emperor Mahmud Ghaznavi show that it is quite plausible that Ferdowsi was a Turanian. Mahmud Ghaznavi vanquished the Samanid state (995-999) pretty much like the Seljuk Turks had destroyed the Buyids half a century later. Consequently, we can conclude that Ferdowsi ostensibly sided with Turanian institutions and rulers against Persian states and kings.
There are also some other indicators that must be taken into consideration, as regards Ferdowsi’s identity: although his legendary narratives reflect the foremost values of the Achaemenid Civilization and represent the Zoroastrian conceptualization of the Universe, the contents of Shahnameh do not stringently correspond to the world of Parsis, namely those among the Sassanid times’ Persians who managed to escape the Islamic onslaught and survived in Iran and in India, preserving a posterior form of Mazdeism (and Zoroastrianism) that we presently call ‘Parsism’. Several PhD-level dissertations can be elaborated to properly demonstrate that on many critical issues Ferdowsi’s viewpoint on the pre-Islamic Iran and the Parsis’ traditions pertaining to the Sassanid (and earlier) past differ greatly.
In Shahnameh, one cannot find the slightest support for the Parsi faith, let alone of the Parsis’ anti-Islamic feelings. There is not a single sign that Ferdowsi saw his grand opus as an Iranian ‘comeback’ (let alone ‘revenge’), as an instigation of pre-Islamic Iranian ‘patriotism’ among Iranian Muslims or as anti-Islamic fascination and mobilization. On the contrary, throughout Shahnameh, there are incessant references to Turanian gallantry and passion, bravery and confusion, unity and division, crime and punishment, discipline and order, mysticism and divination, honesty and treachery, clarity and confusion.
The Iranian – Turanian epic presents a magnificent equilibrium among all tendencies and characters, trends and exploits, attempts and regrets. Shahnameh attains a spherical perfection, contains no pointless element, locates all elements in their correct place whereby everything meets its reverse reflection and all spirits are accompanied by their opposites. All this is put in perfect Farsi, in lines of 22 syllables, in rhyming couplets (masnaviyat), and in metre 1.1.11.
Where does Ferdowsi stand among his time’s mystics, orders, kings and warriors, erudite scholars and theological jurists?
Was he close to late Sassanid Zervanism? Certainly not as much as Tabari, a fully accredited Islamic exegete and theologian, founder of a major madhhab, and the Islamic world’s supreme historian! Tabari dedicated the introductory chapter of his voluminous History to a theoretical analysis of the Time (: Zervan or Zurvan, a late Mithraic figure that was the central god of a late branch of Mithraists). But Ferdowsi started his epic with Keyumars (Gayomard of the late Zoroastrian texts), the first man and first king (Pishdad dynasty); this approach makes of royalty the first human virtue.
Was Ferdowsi close to the late Sassanid followers of Gayomard? Not quite! His focus on the recapitulation of themes related to heroic combats gives us the impression that Ferdowsi envisioned a dynamic universe in which Cosmogony and Eschatology consisted in an indivisible entity of spiritual and material order based on a permanent movement back and forth between Being and Becoming.
From all the major groups of early Muslims and from all the followers of then extant Iranian religions, the Khurramites, the Parsis, the Manichaeans, the Mazdakists, the so-called Twelver Shia, the Isma’ilis, between the Mazdeists and all the rest, Ferdowsi seems to be equidistant.
The same attitude appears in the Shahnameh; between the Turanian Afrasiab and the Iranians Siyavash and Kay Khosrow, Ferdowsi pursues a narrative that does not favor any of the combatants, while presenting brave deeds and mythical facts as the straight result of the great legendary heroes’ spiritual choices and divine providence.
In fact, Ferdowsi is to be found at cosmic distance from all his contemporaneous mystics, poets, erudite polymaths, historians, scholars and theologians. Next to him, all the rest appear infinitesimal. That’s why we can safely claim that within the wider context of Islamic Civilization across Eurasia only Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh proved to be as influential a book as the Quran. The great epic impacted all the Islamic nations, ethno-linguistic groups, mystical orders, intellectuals, poets, authors, and artists so irrevocably that, from the beginning of the 11th c. onwards, it would perhaps be more accurate, instead of speaking of Iranians and Turanians, to start referring to them as Ferdowsians. About:
Kay Qobad (Kay Kawad) on his throne; a leading figure of the Kayanid dynasty that was transcendentally constructed by Ferdowsi
In fact, one cannot speak about the Seljuk Turks, before briefly presenting Ferdowsi’s Cosmogony within the Islamic world. This is so because the Seljuk dynasty, along with the Ghaznavids, proved to be the first and the most enthusiastic adepts and supporters of the heroic worldview narrated by Ferdowsi, of the spiritual ideas revealed in Shahnameh, and of the moral values respected by the great heroes of the legendary, atemporal and apocalyptic Pishdadian and Kayanian dynasties. In fact, only this phenomenon, i.e. the Ghaznavids’ and the Seljuk Turks’ wholehearted acceptance and overwhelming promotion of the Universe as reassessed by Ferdowsi, makes of the grand master of Farsi Literature the national poet of all Turanians.
Quite contrarily to the historical facts, the criminal Western Orientalists depict a terribly tarnished and viciously distorted image of this reality; as per their false and nonsensical interpretations, the Seljuk Turks accepted Islam through Persian culture. This is as idiotic as an eventual, irrelevant assumption according to which a (fully hypothetical) educational jury was supposedly awaiting at the northeastern Iranian borders for the Seljuk Turks to come, and then upon their arrival, they told them: “pass your Ferdowsi exam, and come-in”! So pathetic and ludicrous is the Western Orientalist approach to the topic! Things did not happen that way, and this reality shows that it is absolutely absurd and utterly calamitous for any Turkic and Iranian nation to accept the presence of Anglo-American institutions in their territories or to allow their nationals to study in Western universities or even to visit West European, North American, and Oceanian countries.
The heroic, legendary, cosmological and eschatological order revealed by Ferdowsi in his Shahnameh was the basic oral culture of all Turanians and Iranians, Persians included, for millennia. Simply, this cultural background was not (and could not be) the religious dogma of Zoroastrianism (and of its subsequent forms, i.e. Arsacid Zendism and Sassanid Mazdeism) as attested in the holy texts of that religion and in the imperial inscriptions of the faithful Kings of Kings.
The fallacy of Modern Western Humanities, as developed in the racist, colonial, criminal pseudo-universities of Western Europe and North America, is due to the paranoid (but intentionally implemented) method of compartmentalizing the historical truth and the exploration thereof; this occurs in total contradiction to the universal, comprehensive and holistic approach and method (of viewing and examining the historical truth) that prevailed among all the great historical civilizations (whereby there was no compartmentalization). This vicious method leads colonial historiographers to the distortive division of topics into separate ‘academic fields’: history, archaeology, philology (‘literature’), linguistics, history of religions, ethnography and social anthropology, philosophy, history of arts, history of sciences, architecture, and so on. Consequently, this makes researchers separate their various study topics between “written cultures” and “oral cultures”; but by so doing, they totally misperceive and misrepresent entire historical periods.
As a matter of fact, Ferdowsi did not ‘invent’ (or ‘envision’ or ‘conceive’ or ‘devise’ or ‘create’) his narratives; he only managed to compose them in an incomparably genuine and superior poetic manner. All the terms, names and ideas of Shahnameh’s stories antedate Ferdowsi for about 1500 years – to say the least; this is something that all Orientalists accept. But they fail to see that these terms, names, ideas and stories constituted the oral culture of all the Iranians and the Turanians long before the heliocentric fallacy of Mithras was first propagated among them in the first half of the first pre-Christian millennium. Ferdowsi wrote down this millennia-long Turanian and Iranian oral anti-Mithraic cultural tradition in a literarily majestic manner. And by doing so, he did not ‘give’ the Seljuk Turks their culture (which was already theirs and their ancestors’), but the wings that they needed to conquer the world and implement their millennia long values and virtues as reinstated in the Quran and reinterpreted in the Shahnameh.
Of course, there is a reason the colonial historiography appears to have some success in plunging readers into deceitful schemes, distortive narratives, and nonexistent popups; if you are naïve enough to believe that the Seljuk Turks came from the North Pole or the Moon, then you will certainly accept the fallacy of the so-called Seljuk acculturation in Iran, and you will start believing the nonsense of the Turanian nations’ ‘persianization’. But the Seljuk Turks were neither in the North Pole nor in the Moon! In fact, they had been -for several centuries- just on the other side of the Islamic Caliphate’s northeastern border. And for cultures, for nations, for faiths, and for civilizations, there are no borders; even more importantly, borders do not apply to oral cultures.
Even more absurdly, “border historiography” cannot exist across the Silk Road; by ‘stopping’ their premeditated and therefore fallacious description of historical facts at the borders of the various modern states, the criminal Western pseudo-historians intentionally implement their evil political axiom ‘divide et impera’ throughout Humanities. This is the way most of the people worldwide have been deceived in this regard.
For several centuries, the ancestors of the Seljuk Turks lived within the wider Yabyu (English: Yabghu) territory within the land of the Oguz/Oghuz (Oğuz) nomads’ state. Its location stretched across vast territories of the modern states of Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and (to smaller extent) Uzbekistan. Yabyu spanned east of the Khazar Khaganate (or Khanate), between the Caspian Sea and Aral Lake, and north of the border of the Islamic Caliphate. The forefather of the Seljuk Turks was a formidable Oghuz combatant named Seljuk, who served also in the Khazar army, before clashing with other Oghuz warriors, migrating to southeast (around the year 980), and settling in Transoxiana (Arabic: Mawarannahr / ماوراءالنهر), next to Syr Darya (Iaxartes) river. At that original stage, the ‘Seljuk Turks’ (i.e. the family of Seljuk) were less than 1000 people in total.
Seljuk made an alliance with the Samanids (a mainly Persian kingdom) and fought against the Kara-Khanids, a Turanian Khaganate, mainly known as the House of Afrasiab (آل افراسیاب / which means that they were named (as early as the 9th c.; so before Ferdowsi) after the most important Turanian hero of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh. The development was not good for the Seljuk family, and Seljuk’s grandsons Tughril and Chaghri had to further migrate (ca. 1040) to the South (Khorasan). The son of Mahmud Ghaznavi, Mas’ud I of Ghazni, tried to prevent them from advancing, and the battle of Dandanaqan (near Merv in today’s Turkmenistan) opened the way for the Seljuk rise. Tughril’s and Chaghri’s victory (1040) was tantamount to Seljuk prevalence in Khorasan. Ten years later (1050), Tughril invaded Isfahan and established the Great Seljuk Empire.
However, only to prove the inalienable, indissoluble, and indelible nature of the Turanian–Iranian civilization and identity, the early Seljuk success across the Iranian plateau would have no historical continuity and impact without the astounding contribution of a Persian original: Abu Ali Hasan ibn Ali Tusi, who is rather known through his incredible title ‘Nizam al Mulk’ (:”Systems of Royal Governance”). Nizam al Mulk (1018-1092) was born two years before Ferdowsi died, but his inclination and genius covered a totally different field than that of the greatest epic poet of World History. Originating from Khorasan, Abu Ali Hasan ibn Ali Tusi left his position at Ghazni, the capital of the Turanian Ghaznavid Empire and entered the service of the Seljuk Turks (1043); there he was entrusted, among other tasks, with the education of Muhammad bin Dawud Chaghri (mainly known as Alp Arslan), i.e. the son of Chaghri and nephew of Tughril, the founding sultans of the Seljuk empire.
The assassination of Nizam al Mulk
Consequently, the rise of the Seljuk Empire is entirely due to the wise advice, the outstanding guidance, and the governance systematization introduced by Nizam al Mulk, a Persian; of course, all this would prove to be useless without the Seljuk bravery and thunderous attacks. One can call the Seljuk Empire a ‘Turanian’ (or ‘Turkic’ state); but it was equally ‘Iranian’ – notwithstanding the historical forgeries of the Orientalist gangsters of the Anglo-American universities.
Nizam al Mulk is perhaps the person, who studied best the infinite intrigues that occurred on daily basis among all the rulers who enjoyed some portion of power due to the already discussed phenomenon of the Abbasid Caliphate’s fragmentation. Highly respected and incessantly consulted by Tughril, Chaghri and their children, Nizam al Mulk methodically guided them in the splendid attempt to terminate the Abbasid Caliphate’s fragmentation. First, they consolidated their control across the northern part of the Iranian plateau until 1046-7. In 1048, they attacked an Eastern Roman – Georgian army near today’s Pasinler (or Hasankale), east of Erzurum, in the less publicized but historic battle of Kapetron. After ensuring a great capital for themselves at Isfahan (1050), in the Iranian plateau’s southern part, Tughril invaded Baghdad (1055), terminated the Buyid dynasty, and (according to modern Turkish Islamist bibliography) ‘liberated’ the Abbasid Caliph; this is however not accurate because it was not possible anymore to restore the original power of the Abbasid Caliphate. The Abbasids remained a weak and impotent dynasty for another 200 years.
Nizam al Mulk set up a series of academies named after him, ‘Nizamiyah’; his major opus Siyasatnameh (‘the Book of the Governance’) was the basic manual that was taught, discussed, and in-depth understood there, after the completion of an entire basic circle of studies. The numerous Nizamiyah academies that the indefatigable Nizam al Mulk founded in various parts of the expanding Seljuk territory were not similar either to the earlier appeared jurisprudential madhhabs or to the regular madrasas (theological schools).
The graduates of every Nizamiyah acquired first a spherical, encyclopedic knowledge, and at a second stage, an excellent command of the diverse methods of a successful administration of the state (one could vaguely compare them to various modern ‘national schools of administration’). Nizamiyah graduates could man the Seljuk administration and deliver spectacular results, due to the innovative and resourceful mindset that they were taught to build and thanks to their persistence on avoiding bureaucracy. Despite his indisputable imperial and administrative genius, Nizam al Mulk was also a combatant, and – contrarily to the worthless and corrupt, modern bureaucrats – he often accompanied his shahs in their campaigns.
Nizam al Mulk was ostensibly against the group of Isma’ilis and their system of secretive and elitist governance. In his book, he expanded on them; this however does not make of him a ‘Sunni’, as modern forgers pretend. He and his Seljuk emperors were Muslims, who did not accept either secretive governance or the particularities of various eschatological, messianic groups like the Isma’ilis (today mistakenly named ‘Sevener Shia’) or the apocalyptic adepts of the Ahl al Bayt (today erroneously called ‘Twelver Shia’), who expected the imminent reappearance of the 12th imam. This is an extra proof that throughout History there is no such sectarian division and false identification as “Turkish Sunni” and “Iranian Shia”; this is a colonial lie and a shameful Orientalist forgery.
All the same, because of the colonially imposed (during the 19th and 20th centuries) sectarianism, which prevails among today’s deceived and disoriented Muslims, Nizam al Mulk is totally unknown among African Muslims and Saudi-impacted Muslims in Southeast Asia, because he is idiotically viewed as “Iranian and therefore Shia”. This externally imposed pseudo-historical dogma is enough to reveal the criminal nature of the colonial countries France and England, of their successor state (USA), and of the various associated structures, like Canada and Australia.
The rise of the Seljuk Empire was the result of great bravery, heroic fascination, and superb imperial administration that greatly contributed to arts, letters, sciences and spirituality; but it was practically speaking the affair of one family. Few victories were enough to catapult the Seljuk Turks to world predominance between China and Rome. This was due to their wisdom, universal culture, and ability to compose out of many diverse elements; they therefore became a pole of major attraction. Within the general context of Modern Turkology, most of the researchers are specializing in the Ottoman Empire (eventually because of the abundance of historical sources) and have a certain predilection and admiration for the Ottomans, who also functioned as one family – only to the detriment of the Empire that they acquired and that they inherited. But this scholarly attitude is very subjective, highly sentimental, and therefore wrong.
In reality, the Ottomans were superior to the Seljuk Turks only quantitatively. They controlled larger territory and they lasted longer; that’s true. But if one examines the data qualitatively and evaluates comparatively, one easily concludes that the Seljuk were remarkably superior to the Ottomans. However, their undeniably inherent weakness, which consisted in numerous internal conflicts and in incessant, yet unnecessary, family divisions, antagonisms and rivalries, predestined them to fast decay. In fact, the Seljuk Golden Era lasted ca. 100 years: from the dissolution of the Buyid dynasty (1055) to the death of Ahmad Sanjar (1157). After that term, the Seljuk Empire split to several sultanates. The most remarkable among them was certainly the Sultanate of Rum, but that was an Anatolian state, not a major empire across Eurasia. All the same, the History of Mysticism and Spirituality in Seljuk Anatolia eclipsed the Imperial History of that branch of the Seljuk family.
Even Alp Arslan (1063-1072) and Malik-Shah I (1072-1092), who represent the top of Seljuk power, had to engage in battles to eliminate contenders to their throne, and the contenders were none else than their formidable uncles, Kutalmish and Qavurt respectively. Thanks to Nizam al Mulk, Alp Arslan organized a mixed form of feudal empire, at the same time sedentary and nomadic, and for this, he was praised by many Persians like Saadi Shirazi, whereas with the rising sectarianism of the 13th c. he was terribly scolded by Turanians like Shams al-din ibn Kızoğlu (Sıbt İbnu’l-Cevzi). Thanks to Nizam al Mulk’s concepts and Alp Arslan’s rule and practices, a great process of Turanian sedentism across Iran, India, Caucasus, Anatolia and Syro-Mesopotamia was initiated only to strengthen the local populations and transform the Central Asiatic and Siberian nomadism. More importantly, this ingenious idea and brilliant execution introduced -across a vast region- a new social system of mutual social interdependence among sedentary and nomadic populations, thus fortifying the states that would rule these populations. Many populations that still preserve their nomadic nature and traditions across the vast lands from the Mediterranean to the Indus River and from the Persian Gulf to the Tian Shan Mountains and the Siberian permafrost reached the regions where they currently live in the period between the arrival of the Seljuk Turks and the rise of Mughal Empire.
Contrarily to Orientalist deceitful schemes and deliberate misinterpretations, Malik-Shah I did not clash with the dangerous Isma’ili enclave of Hassan al Sabah (1050-1124) in Alamut and in various surrounding locations in the Alborz Mountains because of a hypothetical ‘Sunni’–’Shia’ dispute or an ethnic Persian–Turanian conflict. Simply, as a student of Nizam al-Mulk, he fully accepted and implemented his tutor’s and adviser’s recommendations as regards the nature of the imperial administration and state.
First of all, the small and perfidious Isma’ili state constituted real dynamite in the foundations of the Seljuk Empire; second, the treacherous nature of the Assassins consisted in permanent threat for all the local populations that wanted to live in peace across the Seljuk territory, and not in ceaseless strives. Above all, Malik-Shah I rejected the concept of elitist rule and the existence of spiritual orders with material aspirations. Unfortunately, his successors proved to be quite incompetent and totally unable to face the challenges that they encountered. Because of them and due to their internal discord, the Seljuk Empire was not prepared to oppose the Crusades that started at that moment. For a period of 26 years (1092-1118), four monarchs ruled the vast state that was gradually being decomposed; their incompetence triggered the secession of various lands that formed independent sultanates under the control of various members of Seljuk’s family.
Ahmad Sanjar (1118-1153) was the luckiest of the sons of Malik-Shah I, because he managed to defeat successive invasions from the Kara-Khanids (Afrasiab) of Central Asia, the Ghurids of Khorasan, and the Ghaznavids of the Indus River Valley; however, he faced a crushing defeat at the hands of the Siberian Turanians of Kara Khitan (at the Battle of Qatwan; 1141) and a disastrous uprising among his fellow Seljuk tribesmen (1153). After Ahmad Sanjar’s death, the Turanians of Khwarazm (Chorasmia) conquered the northeastern part of the Seljuk Empire, whereas the vast territory was finally divided among the Seljuk sultans of Hamadan and Baghdad, the Seljuk sultans of Kerman, the Seljuk emirs in Syria, and the Seljuk sultans of Rum (i.e. Romania-Ρωμανία: the Eastern Roman Empire). The endless internal strives of the Seljuk dynasty are no 1 reason of the Crusaders’ success in the Orient. In 1157, Muhammad II ibn Mahmud (1128–1159), Sultan of Seljuk Empire from 1153 to 1159, failed to conquer Baghdad, despite the siege that he laid to the city; this shows that the Great Seljuk state was already weak and that tensions often existed between Baghdad’s impotent caliphs and the various monarchs who ruled in his name.
The Seljuqian-e Rum (1077-1308 / سلجوقیان روم) lasted longer and became the forerunners of the Iranian-Turanian oral culture and the standard bearers of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh in the most important regions of the Eastern Roman Empire. If you only have a look at the list of the Seljuqian-e Rum monarchs for a moment, you come to realize that their spiritual world and their imperial identity originated from the all-encompassing Turanian-Iranian Universe of Shahnameh: among the 18 sultans, who ruled during a period of 231 years, there were three (3) named Kayqubad, two (2) named Kaykaus, and three (3) named Kaykhusraw. This means that almost half of this dynasty’s rulers named themselves after the most illustrious legendary Iranian kings of the Kayanian dynasty, which represents the focal point of Ferdowsi’s sublime Iranian-Turanian epic poetry.
Throughout Human History, we have known a great number of historical kings, who posthumously entered the world of the legend; but the Seljuqian-e Rum were the only to incarnate the legend and to make out of the realm of the spiritual intuition and the transcendental vision an undeniably historical reality. This fact irrevocably marked the central position that they occupy within the indivisible Iranian-Turanian world. About:
The prevalence of the Seljuqian-e Rum in Anatolia transformed this land into the high land of Islamic Civilization, Spirituality and Mysticism. Pretty much like the Islamic world’s gravitational center shifted from Arabia to Mesopotamia with the foundation of Baghdad and the establishment of the Bayt al Hikmah in the middle of 8th c., the Islamic world’s center of imperial power, mysticism and spirituality was relocated from Iran and Caucasus to Anatolia in the late 12th and early 13th c. For many centuries, Anatolia had lost its worldwide radiation; after the end of the Eastern Roman Isaurian dynasty (717-802), the defeat of the Iconoclasts (842), and the downfall of the Paulicians (dispersed in 872 and massively relocated in 970), Anatolia was in ramshackle. The overwhelming rejection of the evil Constantinopolitan theology by the quasi-totality of the Anatolian population irrevocably predestined their future and facilitated the forthcoming Islamization. The spiritual successors to the Iconoclasts and the Paulicians were to be the Mevlevis, the Bektashis, and above all the Qizilbash. The indigenous, traditional Anatolian mysticism predetermined the historical evolution.
The beginning of the Seljuk prevalence in Anatolia is entirely due to Kilij Arslan I (1092-1107; Kılıç Arslan / قِلِج اَرسلان), the first Seljuk to have Konya-Iconium as capital. He managed to defeat three Crusader armies and to secure a sizeable portion of Anatolia for his expanding state. He was a great warrior and an illustrious mystic. However, many scholars want to deliberately forget the fact that the two names of this sultan became the emblem of the Iranian Safavid Empire 400 years later! If this sounds somewhat strange, the English translation of the two names will be enough to clarify the case: “Kılıç Arslan” means “the sword holding lion”. See the emblem:
However, the main part of the preparatory work for the rise of Seljuk Anatolia was done by Rukn al-Din Mesud I (1116-1156; Rükneddin Mesud /ركن الدین مسعود) who was able to defeat two Crusader armies (led by the German Conrad III and the French Louis VII) in 1147 and 1148 and to welcome the adhesion of significant portion of the local Eastern Roman population to Islam. Even illustrious members of the Comneni / Komnenos imperial family, like John Komnenos Tzelepes (grandson of the Eastern Roman Emperor Alexios I Komnenos) who married Rukn al-Din Mesud I’s daughter, became Muslim around the middle of the 12th c.
Rukn al-Din Mesud I’s son and successor, Izz ad-Dīn Qilij Arslān bin Masʿūd (rather known as Kilij Arslan II (1156-1192; Kılıç Arslan / عز الدین قلج ارسلان بن مسعود) represents a very successful consolidation stage of the Seljuqian-e Rum; his critical victory at Myriokephalon (SW Turkey: between Isparta and Konya) in 1176 sealed the end of Eastern Roman presence in Anatolia. Kilij Arslan II, who claimed to be a far relative of Heinrich der Löwe (German prince of the Welf family and Teutonic Knight), expanded at the detriment of the Turkmen Danishmends and the Eastern Roman, but, despite his alliance with Saladin, proved to be unable to possibly stop Frederick Barbarossa’s Third Crusade; however, the numbers speak for themselves: for 76 years, the Seljuqian-e Rum were under only two kings – which is tantamount to great stability.
To the court of the Seljuqian-e Rum started flocking numerous Muslim mystics, spiritual masters, erudite polymaths, theologians, interdisciplinary scholars, great architects and artists, philosophers, leading medical doctors, poets, and other prominent intellectuals of those times. Konya had gradually become a major pole of attraction for the world’s leading wise men. In fact, Seljuk Anatolia eclipsed all other parts of the world in terms of spirituality, mysticism, letters, arts and sciences. This is not strange; despite the great confusion caused by colonial Orientalists and Western Medievalists, who elaborate a distortive and highly politicized representation of this historical period by focusing on the Crusades and the bloodshed caused by Papal Pseudo-Christianity, the 13th c. proved to be above all the peak of the Golden Era of Islamic Civilization.
Those were the times when Nizami Ganjavi (1141-1209; today celebrated as the national poet of Azerbaijan), based in South Caucasus, composed his illustrious epics Khusraw and Shirin (1177-1180), Eskandar-Nameh (: the Book of Alexander the Great; 1196-1202), and his apocalyptic eschatological masterpiece Haft Peykar (: the Seven Beauties; 1197), in which he detailed the troubles of seven major lands of civilization that will rise at the End of Time, when a formidable punishment will be adjusted to the evil perpetrator of crimes against those nations. The sublime epic is monstrously misinterpreted by materialistic Western pseudo-academics as “erotic poetry”, because those corrupt and worthless forgers cannot understand what apocalyptic symbolism is all about. The seven nations / lands of civilization are personified by
– Furak (or Nurak; India),
– Yaghma Naz (China, described as the land under the “Khaqan of the Turks”),
– Naz Pari (Turanian Central Asia, named ‘Khwarazm’/Chorasmia),
– Nasrin Nush (Russia, which is in reality Tatarstan, i.e. the Land of the descendants of the Rouran Touranian Khaganate),
– Azarbin (or Azareyon; Africa – called Maghreb, but viewed generally as the ‘West’)
– Humay (the Eastern Roman Empire’s lands), and
– Diroste (Iran, described as the House of Kay Ka’us, an illustrious Shah of Fardowsi’s heroic Kayanian dynasty whose deeds cover the largest part of Shahnameh).
Miniature from a manuscript of Nizami Ganjavi’s Haft Peykar: Bahram Gur in the Turquoise Pavilion with Azarbin, the personnification of Maghreb
Quite indicative of the Rum Sultanate’s court’s proclivity to mysticism, Turanian heroic tradition, and attachment to Ferdowsi’s epic genius is the fact that, only 14 years after Nizami Ganjavi wrote the incomparably revelatory Haft Peykar and only 2 years after he died, the new Seljuk sultan of Rum, Kaykhusraw I’s son, was named Kaykaus I (1211-1220). It was a time of extensive intermarriages with the Eastern Roman imperial family of the Comneni / Komnenoi. Kaykhusraw I (1192-1196 and 1205-1211) was fluent in Roman (‘Medieval Greek’) language and had evidently double Turko-(Eastern) Roman culture.
Kaykaus I’s mother was an Eastern Roman princess, daughter of Manuel Komnenos Maurozomes (Μανουήλ Κομνηνός Μαυροζώμης), who was an Eastern Roman nobleman. Ala ad-Din Kayqubad bin Kaykavus (1220–1237; Alâeddin Keykûbad / علاء الدين كيقباد بن كيكاوس) was the most illustrious sultan of the entire Seljuqian-e Rum dynasty. At the times of his son and successor Kaykhusraw II (1237-1246) starts the fall of the Anatolian Seljuk imperial power, basically due to the religious rebellion of Baba Ishak (1240-1243) and the Mongol victory at the battle of Köse Dağ (1243) where Baiju Noyan (appointed by Ögedei Khan) prevailed. As a matter of fact, this battle is the Seljuk equivalent of the Ottoman defeat in Ankara (1402) by Timur (Tamerlane).
In 1204, one of the most influential dignitaries of the Anatolian Seljuk court invited Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi (1165-1240; full name: Abu Abd Allah Muḥammad ibn Alī ibn Muḥammad ibn Arabī), the Islamic world’s foremost mystic and spiritual master, to Anatolia; Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi’s Futuhat al Makkiyah (: ‘the Mekkan Initiations’) is the greatest text of spiritual revelations (effectuated as result of successive initiations experienced under the guidance of supreme spiritual beings – not after the human fashion) that was ever written in the History of the Mankind. The incredible size (560 chapters or 37 volumes totaling ca. 10000 pages of modern books) of this unique masterpiece of spirituality matters very little when compared to the enthralling contents, which go up to the level of mystical communication with a) the souls of beings that were alive and inhabited the Earth during several generations prior to ours, and b) supreme hierarchies of spiritual beings, intelligences, spirits of elements, and numerous ethereal potentates.
h ttps://ibnarabisociety.org/futuhat-al-makkiyya-printed-editions-claude-addas/
Born in Andalusia’s coastal city of Murcia to parents of Arab and Berber origin, Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi studied in Seville, met and discussed extensively with Ibn Rushd (Averroes), worked as secretary in the city governorate, and undertook incessant travels across North Africa, Syria, Arabia, Mesopotamia and Anatolia. His travels’ most determinant stages took place in Mecca (where he wrote his celebrated masterpiece), in Mosul, in Damascus, and in Eastern Anatolia where he met the students of the great mystic Abdal Qadir Gilani (1078-1166), who was one of the leading mystics of an earlier generation and also the founder of the Qadiriyah mystic order.
Opening pages Konya manuscript Futuhat, handwritten by Ibn Arabi
It is interesting to notice the details of the theological and jurisprudential affiliation of that great mystic, who was born in Gilan (i.e. Caspian Sea’s southwestern coast) and lived most of his life in Baghdad and in various other locations of Mesopotamia. He was a descendant of Hasan ibn Ali, the second imam and grandson of Prophet Muhammad, but did not belong to Ja’far al-Sadiq’s madhhab; however, if one sees the world through today’s colonially imposed, sectarian and distortive lenses, Abdal Qadir Gilani should have been a Ja’fari. In fact, the great mystic and ascetic was a Hanbali and follower of the jurisprudential school that is nowadays said to be (whereas originally it was not) the most ‘anti-Shia’ or ‘anti- Ja’fari’.
The Qadiriya order had many followers in Anatolia and later in the Balkans, although its diffusion from Mesopotamia to China, to Somalia and to Western Sahara regions was spectacular. The sectarian viewpoint in this regard is posterior and it started with the catastrophic distortion of Ibn Hanbal’s doctrine by the vicious theologian Ahmed ibn Taimiyya whose pseudo-Islamic theology represents a sort of Christianization of Islam. The propagation of his fake Islamic ideas triggered obscurantism, ignorance, and utter hatred for the sciences and the arts among the Muslims; as a consequence, extreme fanaticism prevailed among the gradually decayed, spiritually debased, and increasingly ignorant Muslims of later periods (late 14th – early 16th c.), and then the Safavid reaction (as of 1501) to this situation only added oil to the fire.
Ala ad-Din Kayqubad (Kayqubad I) held in great esteem and sponsored numerous mystics, erudite scholars, poets, architects, artists and spiritual masters. His court was also frequented by very exceptional figures like Abd al-Latif al-Baghdadi (1162-1231), a great spiritual master, alchemist, physician and polymath, who explored antiquities at both, the spiritual and the material, levels, thus being an early, Muslim Egyptologist.
Following Kayqubad I’s invitation, the great mystic, theologian and jurisprudential scholar (of the Hanafi madhhab) Baha’ al-Din Muhammad Walad (1151-1231), a Persian originating from Balkh/Bactra (Khorasan), arrived and settled in Konya with his entire family in 1228; this event would have an everlasting impact down to our days. The entire Seljuk royal family was fond of the newly arrived scholar and mystic, who had earlier faced negative treatment from Ala ad-Din Muhammad II of Khwarazm (Chorasmia) in whose state Baha’ al-Din Muhammad Walad used to live. Khwarazm was a Turanian state with constant problems with the Seljuk sultanates, and the main reason Baha’ al-Din Muhammad Walad had problems with his shah was the fact that in Khwarazm’s court the most influential mystic and theologian was Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, the scholar who invented the concept of Multiverse (: the parallel existence of many Universes) and with whom Baha’ al-Din Muhammad Walad had terribly clashed. It was therefore only normal that, to flee the Mongol invasions and to get rid of Ala ad-Din Muhammad II’s enmity and disgrace, Baha’ al-Din Muhammad Walad found a subterfuge in Seljuk Anatolia. The everlasting impact is due to the prodigious poetry composed and the mystical exploits performed by his son, Jalal ad-Din Mohammad Rumi, who is also known as Mawlana or Mevlana.
Jalal ad-Din Rumi (1207-1273; جلالالدین محمد رومی) surpassed by far his father’s fame, literary mastership, mystical experience, intellectual acumen, spiritual ingenuity, and posthumous fame, being one of the Islamic world’s foremost mystics, poets, and holy men. Bringing spiritual activities at the epicenter of material life, Rumi turned dance into active meditation, and thus made of Anatolia the worldwide epicenter of all later Islamic mysticisms. He is considered as the founder of the Mevlevi Spiritual Order (the ‘tariqa’ of the ‘whirling dervishes’), although it is very clear that his son and his disciples founded the Order after Rumi’s death. In younger age, he was fascinated with the literary masterpieces of the mystic Sana’i Ghaznavi (1080-1141); remarkable influence on Jalal ad-Din Rumi was also exerted by his father, by the famous Persian Khorasani mystic and poet Farid ud-Din (1145-1221; known as Attar of Neyshapur), and by Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi. But the close companionship he had with Shams-e Tabrizi (1185-1248), a supreme spiritual hierophant and mystic, was the most determinant factor of his spiritual advance, mystical comprehension, sublime poetry, and whirling dance conceptualization as meditation technique.
Did Jalal ad-Din Rumi actually meet Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi?
This question has been raised by many modern scholars, although on the basis of several historical sources there is clear evidence that they first met during Rumi’s first arrival to Damascus, and later again during Rumi’s formative years there. Furthermore, there is ample evidence that several disciples of ibn Arabi (notably Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi) were companions of Rumi and that Shams-e Tabrizi knew personally ibn Arabi very well. In addition, several literary patterns and terms testify to a spiritual, intellectual and philosophical connection, despite the fact that the essence, the contents, and the forms of both masters of Islamic spirituality and mysticism differed greatly, pretty much like their respective quests, explorations, devotions, spiritual exercises, and transcendental experiences did.
Mausoleum of Jelaleddin Rumi Mevlana, Konya – Turkey
Rumi was a human, who discovered the divine world through love and through strict imitation/repetition of Prophet Muhammad’s manner of life; Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi was a man contacted by spiritual hierarchies, entrusted with the revelation of spiritual occurrences, and endowed with unique qualities to describe in human words unfathomable situations comprehended only through spiritual initiation. An enlightened man like ibn Arabi could never be strictly bound to only one religion.
Closer to Muḥyiddin ibn Arabi was indeed Haji Bektash (1209-1271; Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli / حاجی بکتاش ولی); born in Neyshapur (Khorasan), he was a descendant of Musa Kazim, the 7th imam and son of Ja’far al-Sadiq. He fled westwards because of the Mongol invasions and he arrived in Seljuk Anatolia in the late 1220s or early 1230s. He belonged to the Ja’fari jurisprudential tradition (madhhab), which is quite normal as he retraced his ancestry to the 6th imam’s son. Given his Arab ancestry, it is ridiculous to entertain discussions about his ethnicity (Persian or Turkic) as Western nonsensical Orientalists do; Haji Bektash was certainly acculturated among all Iranians and Turanians between Central Asia and Anatolia. However, this issue can allow us to better assess the locally prevailing ethnic and cultural environment; if a person of Arab descent, like Haji Bektash, living in Khorasan, preferred to bear a Turkish name, i.e. Bektaş, this means that we cannot afford anymore to consider that vast NE Iranian region as exclusively Persian (as fallacious colonial Orientalists do), but as predominantly Turanian. In his young age, Haji Bektash was apparently fascinated with the mystical poetry of the Turanian spiritual master, mystic, and Hanafi theologian Ahmed Yesevî (1093-1166; قوجا احمەت ياساۋٸ), the founder of Yasawiyah (Yeseviye) order.
The oldest painting of the Muslim mystic Haji Bektash Veli
Modern forgers and Western impostors try to associate Haji Bektash with the Qalandariyah Order (which is wrong) and with Baba Eliyas al-Khorasani, another Khorasani mystic who had settled in Anatolia and instigated the Babai revolt that was led by Baba Ishak in 1239. That’s totally false, because Haji Bektash, despite his Batiniyya approach to Islam’s holy scriptures (as per which all holy scriptures have ‘external’ and ‘internal’-mystical meaning), reprimanded the Isma’ili enclave in Iran, denounced Baba Ishak’s plot for the establishment of a Crypto-Christian state in Amasya (Anatolia), and condemned Baba Ishak’s infamous pretensions that he was a ‘prophet’. As a matter of fact, Haji Bektash was greatly esteemed by everyone in the Anatolian Seljuk court where they appreciated his contribution to the combat against the rebellion and to the refutation of anti-Islamic concepts among Turanian nomadic settlers in Anatolia. All the same, the early Bektashi Order accepted in their lodges (khanqah) many earlier adepts and followers of Baba Ishak, who had repented and regretted, and numerous participants in the failed rebellion. The Bektashi Order played later a determinant role in the formation of the Ottoman Sultanate and Caliphate and in the relations between the Ottomans and the Safavids.
The Seljuk Turks managed to assimilate among them a great number of Anatolian, Eastern Roman populations. This topic is critical in understanding later historical developments in the region. Whereas the Achaemenid Iranians failed to plainly assimilate Anatolia during their rule (546-330 BCE) and finally only later (during the Seleucid and Roman times) we clearly attest an undeniable Iranian cultural impact on the various Anatolian kingdoms, the Rum Sultanate proved to be far more efficient in rapidly shaping a diverse yet inclusive Anatolian Muslim identity which revolves around the Iranian-Turanian epic traditions and legends and an Islamic interpretation of the Eastern Roman Christianity. About:
Фальшивая геополитика, фальсификация истории Османской империи и несуществующий неоосманизм
Sahte Jeopolitik, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu Tarihinin Sahtekarlığı ve Var Olmayan Yeni-Osmanlıcılık
Оглавление
I. Геополитика: фальшивая наука
II. Фальсификация истории Османской империи
III. Нелепая беатификация убогих османов, злейших врагов турок
IV. Примеры туркменского, анатолийского и мусульманского неприятия османского псевдосуннитского богословия
V. Западный миф об «Османской империи»
İçindekiler
I. Jeopolitik: Sahte Bir Bilim
II. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu Tarihinin Sahtekarlığı
III. Türklerin En Kötü Düşmanları olan Sefil Osmanlıların Gülünç Kutsaması
IV. Türkmen, Anadolu ve Müslümanların Osmanlı Sözde-Sünni Teolojisini Reddetme Örnekleri
V. ‘Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun Batılı Miti
Table of Contents
I. Geopolitics: a Fake Science
II. The Falsification of the History of the Ottoman Empire
III. The Ridiculous Beatification of the Squalid Ottomans, the Worst Enemies of the Turks
IV. Examples of Turkmen, Anatolian and Muslim Rejection of the Ottoman Pseudo-Sunni Theology
V. The Western Myth of the ‘Ottoman Empire’
The modern ‘science’ of geopolitics is an entirely fake doctrine which promotes biased interpretations of geographical data out of any historical relevance; matched with colonially forged History, it generates enormous troubles, plunging billions of people into unnecessary wars, endless conflicts, sectarian clashes, confused education, false national identity, cultural disintegration, and moral depravity.
A while back, a Somali friend sent me the article of a Romanian ‘geopolitical analyst’ about the so-called ‘Neo-Ottomanist’ trend in today’s derailed, gravely endangered, and seriously menaced Turkey. Upon reading the title of the publication, I exploded in laughter!
First, geopolitics is a nonexistent science or, if you prefer, a pseudo-science.
Second, how can one possibly be ‘Ottomanist’ or even ‘Neo-Ottomanist’, when the historical truth about the Ottoman Empire is virtually unknown, partly concealed, and viciously falsified?
By declaring yourself as ‘Neo-Ottomanist’, you guarantee that you don’t have a clue about what you are. You are an idiot.
By declaring yourself as ‘an enemy of the Neo-Ottomanism’, you certify that you don’t have an idea about what happens around you. You are an imbecile.
Idiots and imbeciles are not born as such; they are gradually produced within an evil society mainly because of their mistake not to examine everything meticulously, not to reject everything that they hear or read, and not to carry out an austere self-criticism every single day.
This is the fate of the people – of those who consider themselves ‘Neo-Ottomanists’ and of those who oppose them. This is so because when ignorance prevails, simply you are nothing more than a feather blown in the wind. These misfortunate people will plunge into strife, clash, wars, and hatred only due to their delusions, sick dreams, calamitous ignorance, and spiritual misery.
The failure to apply an austere self-criticism, the fake concept of post-Enlightenment ‘patriotism’ (let alone nationalism or chauvinism), the false History taught in the schools and propagated by publishing houses, mass media, and cinematography, the confusion between spirituality and theology, and the impermissible association of religion with politics leads people to death in this world, and to Hell in the Hereafter.
What follows is my response to my suave Somali friend.
————— Response to a Somali friend —————————
Dear Bischara,
Thank you for your email of 7th May, feedback, attachment and your questions!
I went through the paper that you sent me.
I. Geopolitics: a Fake Science
Please, do not be so naïve as to believe that you will learn anything true, succinct and worthwhile through most of the billions of the books and the articles that you can find online or in hard copies. You are living in a fake world; a fake world has fake sciences. Geopolitics is just one of them.
There is no such a science — in striking contrast with Egyptology, Assyriology, Iranology, etc. which are real academic disciplines examining the past of the respective countries / nations / civilizations.
If you uttered the fake, ridiculous and meaningless word «geopolitics» before 170 years, suggesting that it is a ‘science’, all the then scholars would laugh at you. But those scholars in the middle of the 19th c. were far better than, and truly superior to, those of today.
Only subliminal manipulations make the average people of today to be stupid enough to believe that there is evolution of species (in the manner it is claimed), that there is real progress from the past to the present and the future, that people now are more knowledgeable than in the past, that science advanced from the Antiquity until nowadays, and that today’s science is ‘higher’ than that of the great civilizations of Ancient Orient. However, nowadays you definitely cannot build a pyramid like that of Khufu in Kemet (Egypt), and all the scientists of the world are good enough only to bring about the total extinction of the Mankind (which is not a nuclear war but the diffusion of Metaverse, a form of Non-being). So, stop considering the modern science and the ensued materialist-consumerist world as anything worthwhile! It would be better to live in Somalia before 600 years or before 3600 years than to live now.
As a matter of fact, without understanding it, all the average people worldwide have fallen victim to deliberately produced delusions like Darwinism and Evolutionism; even those, who say that they reject the false conclusions of these theoretical systems at the paleontological / anthropological level, are indeed their victims, and quite unfortunately, their thoughts are contaminated (by evolutionist concepts, notions, standards, considerations or world perceptions) without them realizing it. Because of this situation, people all over the world stupidly believe that the Mankind is now more knowledgeable and more powerful, whereas the Mankind was far better before 4000 and 5000 years.
What is the fake science geopolitics?
A vicious and insidious trickery as per which you theorize, presenting things as it pleases you.
Geopolitics is a matter of paranoia. You need to be paranoid to possibly accept the idea of the so-called ‘geopolitics’. You can see that on the sick and devious faces of the so-called ‘specialists in geopolitics’.
Every word of the fundamentals of geopolitics is an arbitrary aberration.
There is no such thing as ‘heartland’ or ‘rimland’
– Would you or any other Somali call, under any circumstances whatsoever, the coastland of Somalia from Raas Caseyr and Ras Xaafuun down to Kismaayo, and for 50 km inland, …… ‘rimland’?
– No, you would not! This would be only an imaginary line, which would not represent any historical, cultural, intellectual or academic truth.
But if you had drawn that hypothetical line from Raas Caseyr and Ras Xaafuun down to Kismaayo for your own benefit and for the disastrous consequences, which that line would have on the local inhabitants, you would have then officialized it by calling it ‘geopolitics’.
This is the whole value of the so-called ‘geopolitics’. A trashy concept that suits the criminal interests of the villainous Anglo-Saxon gangsters! The Hell with them!
Do not waste any moment of your life on this mental excrement of ‘geo-politics’!
Such nonsense only corrupts the mind with useless nonsense:
History does not confirm the slightest portion of those silly ‘lines’ that the Anglo-Saxon syphilis drew only to confuse others and plunge billions into endless wars.
Actually, this is what most of today’s average people never observed:
Not one criminal gangster, who postures as a ‘specialist in geopolitics’, has ever bothered to explain the historicity of the «lines» that you and others «see» on their fake maps.
How does all this function?
Backed by big money and taught in supposedly important universities, the fallacy of geopolitics generates idiotic pseudo-academic elites who, after studying in the fake universities, i.e. the academic brothels of England, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the US, are hired due to their nonexistent credentials (in reality their credentials damage their respective countries) only to promote the choleric Anglo-Saxon world’s paranoia, evilness and inhumanity.
Brzezinski’s Eurasian Balkans: there are no ‘Eurasian Balkans’. It’s a fallacy. Wherever you draw an arbitrary ellipse across Asia (or Africa or Europe), you will discover … ‘Balkans’. It’s idiotic, but backed by big money, it is presented as a serious academic analysis. This is a tragi-comical deception, because wherever you want, you can draw historically meaningless lines that you will later call ‘heartland’ and ‘rimland’. Fake words for historically nonexistent concepts. Pure absurdity to fool the idiots.This is a deliberately constructed reality, because Western bankers educated, prepared and launched the so-called ‘red adversary’. There is no such thing as ‘Midland Ocean’; that’s ridiculous.Absurdly drawn lines that are rejected by all the conclusions of the History of the MankindThere is no such thing as ‘The World Island’; it is a non concept. You cannot define the Earth with respect to the Sea. The sea is NOT a place where people lived or can live. It is a space that you only cross to reach other parts of the Earth. The map is entirely fake because not one civilization grew and no humans lived with this map in mind. So, it is an aberration – the vicious fabrication of a paranoid uneducated guy or a heinous schemer.Another fake map established by a paranoid pseudo-scientist: anyone can call ‘middle space’ (and ‘West’, ‘South’ and ‘East’) any part of the Earth that he chooses to designate so. Not a single civilization worldwide ever viewed or named these lands in this ludicrous manner.An absolute absurdity fabricated to confuse othersA total distortion of the World History: there has never been a ‘sea power’. That’s a lie. Every major kingdom or empire was a continental power. The only powerful kingdom that was headquartered in an island is England. But no island has ever existed on its own; every island is a continental dependency. The English theoreticians’ evil effort to produce a fallacy in this regard is tantamount to conscious and systematic desire to abnegate the World History and therefore to annihilate the Mankind.
There is nothing to help «correct» the «mistakes» of geopolitics. Throw the entire fallacy of ‘geopolitics’ to the rubbish basket!
There cannot actually be «mistakes» in a peremptory fallacy: it has been all rotten from Day 1.
This is the mistake of the Russians, who subsidize big institutes and think tanks like VALDAI (https://ru.valdaiclub.com/ and https://valdaiclub.com/) to prove the Americans and the others wrong in the terms of geopolitics. There is nothing to prove in geopolitics; it is all false from the first word.
Only now the Russians start realizing that the mistake was theirs! And they also understand that they accepted already too much of the Western fallacy.
So, do not waste your time with the worthless publications of every Romanian pseudo-scholar! He simply tried desperately to reproduce the same geopolitical fallacy, this time slightly turning the story in a way to suit the interests of Romania. Worthless rubbish! You cannot possibly waste your time on such bogus-publications!
All the countries, which were detached from the Ottoman Empire, are fake states; they merely constitute fabricated tools of the French and English colonialism and inhumanity. Few states make an exception in this regard, as they represent true, real nations. Nowhere else can one study this so well, except in Egypt! This is an entirely fake nation of ignorant and blind people who do not know anything about their own identity, history, past and culture.
When an Iranian speaks about the Achaemenid Emperor Darius I the Great (550-486 BCE; he reigned after 522 BCE), the Iranian feels that he is the descendant of that great emperor and he is fully aware of the numerous elements of his popular (not elite) culture that refer to Darius the Great. This does not happen in today’s Egypt; they speak of Akhenaten or Amenhotep III or Thutmose III as if these pharaohs reigned in another continent and among other people!
Before two years, a US-based Oromo friend wrote to ask me why Egypt does not help the Oromos achieve national independence in return for the ensuing dissolution of Abyssinia (Fake Ethiopia) and the subsequent cancellation of the Renaissance Dam. I answered saying that, for this to be done, Egypt must first understand that this proposal is suitable for the national interests of Egypt, but this is impossible because Egypt is not a nation first, and second (and worse), the country was entirely constructed by the French and the English in a way that it would not become and it would never function as a state.
I ended saying that, in a way, the Oromos are a nation, although subjugated and persecuted, but the Egyptians never got a proper national education, never realized what national identity is, and never understood how they have been aptly utilized (against their own national interests) by the colonial governments of the Western countries and the evil secret societies behind them.
Here you have my series of five articles as response to his naïve question:
Fake borders of a fake nation ignorant of their past: Modern ‘Egypt’. On this land, there was ‘Kemet’ during the Antiquity and there was ‘Masr’ after the arrival of Islam. The fact that the modern state’s name is in Arabic ‘Gomhuriyah Masr al Arabiyah’, but the Masriyyin (fake Egyptians) do not have the courage to internationally renounce to the fake name ‘Egypt’ and impose their own true name ‘Masr’ worldwide fully demonstrates the colonial nature of their fake state, highlighting the reality that they never became a true nation.
Without understanding the viewpoint of my criticism expressed in the above articles, you cannot understand anything in the world you are living in. You are hypnotized and -like all the other totally deceived Muslims- you live in a fake, parallel world or dimension of your own.
Now, I have to add that, what I noticed and understood from the tenures of both Abdirashid Sharmarke and Siyaad Barre is that, in contrast to the Egyptians, the Somalis -back in the 1960s, 1970s, etc.- felt themselves very well as a real and historical nation. It is not only the very legitimate and glorious effort to liberate Ogaden that makes me believe so, but plenty of other points. This situation is normal however, because Italy was never a «true» colonial country (in striking opposition to France and England) and that is why, during Somalia’s colonization by Italy, the Italians did not try to destroy your inherent national identity – which was very different from what the French and the English carried out in Algeria, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Iraq, etc.
Now, Romania is a fake nation fabricated out of thin air, only to function against -at the same time- the Ottoman Empire and Russia. There is no Romanian nation; there are Wallachians and Moldavians — two different nations.
There is no Romanian language; it did not exist. It was fabricated by French linguists, grammarians, and colonial Latinists, who intended to falsely portray the Wallachian and the Moldavian languages as the two «dialects» of the hypothetical Romanian language. In fact, they fabricated a linguistic mixture, and their silly local pawns imposed it nationwide as ‘official language’. It is a very filthy story, which also involves the occupation of the Hungarian land of Transylvania and of the Bulgarian province of Dobruja. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobruja
Knowing the above about the ‘national’ background of the author and ‘specialist’, whom you presented to me, what do you think that he can possibly say — except the lies that he was taught (at home or abroad) to diffuse worldwide?
Remember that, if he ever tried to oppose the official Romanian state dogma and the orchestrated falsehood of the French, the English, the American and other Western universities, all the doors would be closed to him and his career would be destroyed irreparably. He is therefore a bureaucrat, a clerk, who nonchalantly repeats the state dogma’s falsehood and nonsense.
So, if you please, forget it!
II. The Falsification of the History of the Ottoman Empire
If geopolitics is a fake science, plenty of real sciences have also been filled with lies and misperceptions, whereas a great number of topics well known to specialists remained concealed and unknown to the general public — only to the benefit of the criminal colonial agenda.
The History of the Ottoman Empire, the History of Islam, and the History of Modern Turkey are three sectors of the academic discipline of History that have been monstrously falsified by the Orientalist, colonial academics. The reason for this is simple:
– if today’s Turks and Muslims know the truth about these topics, they will not believe the colonial lies, which have been fabricated by the West only to destroy them — and have actually destroyed them. So, without the silly lies that they have in their heads, they would not be destroyed.
The falsification of the History of the Ottoman Empire is a multilayered case of forgery; it involves numerous factors and methods of distortion, namely
1- several historical facts have been concealed from the average public;
2- numerous events have been dissociated from other circumstances, which however constituted their inevitable consequences;
3- various developments were misinterpreted and their significance was over-magnified in order to intentionally cause emotional involvement of the readers;
4- positive forces, pillars of the Ottoman state’s spiritual and physical strength, were deliberately depicted as negative;
5- catastrophic institutions were portrayed as ‘normal’;
6- disastrous oversight, lack of foresight, and other dramatic failures of the sultans, which brought about the gradual decomposition and the final end of the Ottomans, were systematically disregarded or even purposefully hidden from readers;
7- false interpretations and wrong assumptions made by scholars were extensively propagated in order to cause further confusion among the naïve readership; and
8- a ‘mythical’ Ottoman Empire was fabricated to be ‘useful’ for all colonial purposes.
In the process, two very different entities were calamitously confused in order plunge average readers and people in Turkey and worldwide in mysteries: Ottoman dynasty (Ottoman Empire) and Ottoman Civilization. The two entities are entirely unrelated to one another.
Quite indicatively, for the time the Ottoman Civilization existed (until 1580), the real factors of civilization were overwhelmingly opposed to the corrupt, paranoid, inhuman, genuinely anti-Islamic, and absolutely idiotic Ottoman family.
The Ottoman Sultanate became an Empire when Mehmet II invaded the tiny remnant of the Eastern Roman (falsely called by Western colonials as ‘Byzantine’) Empire, namely the city of Constantinople, in 1453; it was then that Mehmet II got the title of Qaysar-i Rum (i.e. Roman Emperor; literally ‘Caesar of Rome’). After the inception of the Ottoman Sultanate in 1299 and until the end of the 16th c., Islamic Civilization flourished in the Ottoman Empire, as it also did in the Safavid Empire of Iran, in the Mughal Empire of India, in Central Asia, in many parts of Africa, and in Indonesia. As you can easily understand, in real historical terms, there is no ‘Ottoman Civilization’; this is ‘Islamic Civilization’.
The Ottomans as a minor Turkmen beylik in the early 14th c.Anatolia around 1350
The real factors of the Islamic Civilization were all the scientists, the mystics, the spiritual leaders of various esoteric orders, the poets, the historians, the authors, the wise scholars, the artists, the architects, the astrologists (who were at the same time real astronomers – because there was no distinction between Astronomy and Astrology at the time, and this was very correct), the alchemists, the masters of the supernatural force, the physicians, the grammarians, the explorers, the inventors, the natural scientists, and all the masters of spiritual and material knowledge and Wisdom.
These people performed and delivered working in several research centers, libraries, academies, archives, and in observatories like those of Maragheh in Iran (13th and 14th c.) and Samarqand in Uzbekistan (15th c.). We find the same driving forces of spiritual and academic life later (16th c.) in the Observatory of Ottoman Constantinople, which was however short-lived since the barbarian mob that followed the Satanic theologians and the ignorant sheikhulislam destroyed it in 1580, because according to their silly opinion “Islam does not permit Astrology”. It goes without saying that every spiritual school (tariqa) was a major scientific center too.
The situation eliminated the ominous impact that a marginal theological group had on parts of the Islamic world; however, this viciously anti-Islamic group made its way to the Ottoman capital (first at Söğüt, near Bilecik, at 200 km from the Eastern Roman capital: 1299-1331; second at Nicaea/Iznik, at 140 km from Constantinople: 1331-1335; third at Prousa/Bursa, at 150 km from the Christian Orthodox capital: 1335-1363; then at Adrianople/Edirne, in Thrace: 1363–1453) long before Mehmet II invaded Constantinople.
The Ottoman Sultanate before the conquest of Constantinople was already kind of a substitute for the Eastern Roman Empire.
To effectively hold the Ottoman sultans hostage of their evil pseudo-Islamic theology, they convinced the sultans to establish an absolutely non-Islamic state position, which had never existed before in any Islamic Caliphate and was actually nonexistent at that time in the Mamluk Caliphate (transferred in Cairo): the position of sheikhulislam. This repugnant and disreputable chicanery turned the Ottoman Sultanate into a viciously sectarian state, therefore promoting the ultimate Christianization of Islam. Any Muslim society that has a top religious authority becomes utterly papal in nature; Islam is by definition a religion with no priests.
As an exaggerated, exorbitant description, the term ‘sheikhulislam’ was never of true, essential value in the Golden Age of Islamic Civilization. On some occasions, it had merely a nominal value, whereas in other cases it constituted an honorific distinction void of any substantive importance. Among Ottomans, it started being used during the 13th c., only to become official at the time of the controversial sultan Murad II (1404-1451; reigned from 1421 to 1444 and from 1446-1451). The reasons for which such an unprecedented measure was taken hinge indeed on the sectarian situation that prevailed among the so-called Ottoman family, which was looking like a brothel whereby every prostitute would fight to make of her son the ‘king’.
If kingdoms are known as the realm of discipline and order, the Ottoman sultanate was the ever moving circumference of nefarious disorder and chaotic wickedness.
Incredibly nauseating stories of divided harems, concubines allying with filthy sheikhs against other concubines supported by other imams, qadis and muftis – with several foreign powers involved in the internal conflicts of the disreputable Ottoman ‘family’ (because this absurd mass of concubines originated from different Orthodox, Catholic, Muslim kingdoms, khanates, principalities, sultanates, emirates and beyliks) and with constant clashes between the sectarian theologians and the only valuable and virtuous body of the state, namely the Janissaries (the indomitable infantry corps) – produced an infernal situation at the top of the world’s most misgoverned country.
The overall socio-economic situation of the population and the ruling conditions of the absurd state that hosted so many centrifugal forces deteriorated significantly due to the rising influence of the odious, sectarian and deeply anti-Islamic theologians around the idiotic Ottoman sultans, the likes of Murad I (1326-1389; reigned after 1362), Bayezid I (1360-1402; reigned as Sultan-i Rum, i.e. ruler of the ‘Eastern Romans’ because of his Eastern Roman mother, after 1389), Mehmed I (1386-1421; reigned after 1413, when the Ottoman interregnum 1402-1413 ended) and Murad II.
III. The Ridiculous Beatification of the Squalid Ottomans, the Worst Enemies of the Turks
The Ottoman ‘family’ and the religious elite achieved to indisputably become the world’s most loathed ruling class; there was no time the wretched Ottoman family garnered the support of more than 10% of the sultanate’s population. Even worse for the Islamic world: further the Ottoman Empire (after 1453) expanded, more loathed it was. The absurdity of these undeniable facts is meticulously hidden by Western and Turkish Turkologists alike; this is due to external interference and colonial involvement in Turkey after the death of Kemal Atatürk.
First, the French ‘school’ of the Annalistes (academics publishing in the ideologically motivated periodical ‘Annales’ in order to portray all historical developments as of socio-economic and not spiritual of nature) and Fernand Braudel (1902-1985) showed an extraordinary interest for the Ottoman Empire’s commercial relations with Venice, Genoa, France and other European kingdoms, thus shifting the focus from other more crucial issues which help average readership identify the disastrous nature of the Ottoman rule.
Fernand Braudel
Second, Anglo-American Orientalists, notably the Zionist Bernard Lewis (1916-2018), the real father of today’s anti-Islamic ‘Political Islam’, decided not to criticize anything related to the History of the Islamic Caliphates (the Ottoman state included) in the way the Western historians used to do as regards the History of the Western European Christian kingdoms after the fall of the Roman Empire. This premeditated anti-academic choice left the then newly created Islamist perspective unchallenged.
Even worse, in Turkey, following Mehmet Fuat Köprülü (1890-1966), a scholar known for his academic tergiversations, weak personality, political confusion, and total inability to contextualize facts, events and developments, several Turkish historians, rather acting as agents of colonial powers, undertook the ridiculous task to ‘familiarize’ the Turks with the Ottomans. Among them, I clearly distinguish Halil İnalcık (1916-2016) and İlber Ortaylı (born in 1947). Their biased publications consist in an academic preparation for an anti-Atatürk political cholera.
Mehmet Fuat Köprülü (right) with Modern Turkey’s most disreputable rascal Adnan Menderes who was rightfully executed in 1960.
When it comes to Turkish Turkologists and Islamologists, it is true that Kemal Atatürk was not as lucky as he was with Turkish Hittitologists, Assyriologists and Sumerologists. Until 1938, there was not one single Turkish historian specializing in Turkology who would truly express with academic arguments the position of the founder of the Turkish state about this topic. This produced a posterior confusion, because many tried to depict Atatürk as Pan-Turkist or Pan-Turanianist, but he was not.
Muazzez İlmiye Çığ, a leading Turkish Sumerologist and Assyriologist
On the contrary and due to Kemal Atatürk’s personal interest in History and Archaeology of Anatolia and Mesopotamia, there were many important Orientalists, historians and archaeologists of Turkish origin as early as 1930-1935, and in many fields of the Humanities, Turkey closed the gap that had been created by the apathy, the indifference and the inaptitude of the 18th, 19th and early 20th c. Ottoman authorities. Highly knowledgeable scholars, like the Assyriologist-Sumerologist Prof. Muazzez İlmiye Çığ, the grand Turkish lady and leading intellectual (born in 1914; 108 years old as of today) and the Hittitologist and archaeologist Ekrem Akurgal (1911-2002), were the sheer result of Kemal Atatürk’s willingness to make of Anatolia the focal point of the new nation, leaving the old capital to its past. About:
Unfortunately, after his death (1938), the founder of the Turkish Nation was betrayed by Kemalists, Pan-Turanianists and Islamists alike. I expanded on the topic at the governmental and ideological levels in my article on Kemal Atatürk:
At the academic, intellectual, educational, and cultural levels, the traitors of Kemal Atatürk attempted to fabricate, under Western colonial academic guidance, a fake story of supposed ‘Ottoman-Turkish’ continuity. This is utterly false; the Ottomans, i.e. the Ottoman family, were the worst enemy of the Turks. Kemal Atatürk liberated Anatolia from both enemies, external and internal: the armies of the French, the Italians and the Greeks constituted the first menace, whereas the wretched and obsolete, anti-Turkish family of Osman was the second opponent. When it comes to the liberation of Anatolia, the pinnacle of the historical process took place on the 3rd March 1924, with the abolition of the Caliphate, which was merely a tool available in the hands of the cursed family to be used against all the Turks throughout the Ottoman lands.
Halil İnalcık: a Turkish origin cosmopolitan who worked in Turkey as historian of the Ottoman Empire only to diffuse misconceptions, misperceptions, and historical falsifications adjusted to criminal Anglo-American colonial plans providing for Turkey’s fake re-islamization and final destruction. His professor in London was the criminal colonial liar and political schemer Bernard Lewis.Execrable clown İlber Ortaylı – he resigned from his academic position in Turkey in 1982 to react against the very correct involvement of the Turkish army in the chaotic political life of the country.
You may have heard about the incessant Ottoman – Iranian wars that ruined both empires, caused hundreds of thousands of casualties, and ruined vast territories of today’s Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Iran for more than three centuries. No less than 11 wars, which lasted in total 88 years, in only a period of 300 years! You must surely be as stupid as an Ottoman original to do it! Incredible!
Quite often, there was foreign incitation, as the Ottomans sided with the French and the Iranians with the English, but all this demonstrates the shameful disgrace that the Ottoman family proved to be for all Muslims across the centuries. These wars were fratricidal indeed, not in the sense that both empires were at least nominally Islamic, but because the two ruling dynasties were Turkic-Turanian. The Safavid dynasty (1501-1736) of Iran was an entirely Turkmen family from Azerbaijan.
In both empires, as well as in the Mughal Empire of India, the official language was Turkic; in all three empires, Farsi was the language of the education, literature, and culture, whereas Arabic was the language of the science. In this regard, all three realms continued an almost millennium long tradition attested in the Abbasid, Samanid, Ghaznavid, Buyid, Seljuk, Ilkhanid and Timurid times.
All the same, under Safavid, Afshar (1736-1796) or Qajar (1789-1925) rule (all three dynasties were Turkmen), the Iranian shahs intervened many times to save the Turkmen populations of Anatolia from the wrath and the cruelty of their Ottoman rulers; it would perhaps be better for the Muslim, Christian and other populations of Anatolia that the Akkoyunlu dynasty (1378-1503), which controlled the lands of Eastern Turkey and most of today’s Iran’s territory, prevailed and lasted to possibly supplant the Ottomans in Western Anatolia and the Balkans. Quite unfortunately, with the Safavid tariqa (spiritual Order) launching their own empire, the Akkoyunlu state perished and the Safavid dynasty rose in power in Iran.
Afshar Iran under Nader Shah invaded the Mughal Empire of IndiaThe Qajar Empire of Iran
IV. Examples of Turkmen, Anatolian and Muslim Rejection of the Ottoman Pseudo-Sunni Theology
Quite indicative is the case of the Shahqulu (Şahkulu/ شاه قولی) movement in Anatolia (1509-1511), which was terribly oppressed by Selim I; at the time, several dozens of thousands of populations were massacred throughout Anatolia, and at the end, no less than 20000 people were sent to exile in South Balkans (Mora / Peloponnesus). In brief, the Ottoman family performed a real anti-Muslim genocide in Anatolia. About:
The Aq Qoyunlu Turkmen state in 1478; all the peoples between the Balkans and the Indus River Valley would live better and more happily with no wars, no oppression and no misery, if the Safavid rise did not put an end to the Aq Qoyunlu Turkmen confederacy and if the Aq Qoyunlu prevailed over the ill-fated Ottomans in Western Anatolia.
Closely related to this fact, the rise of the Turkmen Ağıtlar poetry (ağıt: lamentation) definitely bears witness to the overwhelming rejection and the strong revilement of the Ottoman Constantinopolitan pseudo-Sunni theology, absurdity and wickedness by the quasi-totality of the Anatolian Turkmen population.
The spread of the Şahkulu (Shahqulu) rebellion in 1509-1511
The rejection of the Ottoman family was very well known to the disreputable Dîvan-ı Hümayun (the Constantinopolitan imperial council); it is from there that the most vicious and the most racist, anti-Turk literature emanated. The filthy clerk of the council Hafız Hamdi Çelebi, serving there in the period of Bayezid II (1447-1512; reigned after 1481), wrote the following libel against the main population of Anatolia and the God-damned Ottoman Empire:
– Prof. Dr. Faruk Sümer, Oğuzlar, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Vakfı, Istanbul, 1992, p. 348
– Ahmet Refik, Anadolu’da Türk Aşiretleri, Enderun Kitabevi, Istanbul, 1989, p. 77-78
– Baki Yaşa Altınok, Rakka ve Orta Anadolu Ekseninde Bir Oymağın Tarihi (Ceritler) { History of a Tribe on the Axis of Raqqa and Central Anatolia (Ceritler)}, Gazi Üniversitesi Türk Kültürü ve Hacı Bektaş Veli Araştırma Dergisi, Yıl 8, Sayı 21, 2002, p. 211-224
– Baki Yaşa Altınok, Öyküleriyle Kırşehir Türküleri, Destanları, Ağıtları (Kırşehir Folk Songs, Epics, Laments with Their Stories), Oba Yayıncılık, May 2003, Ankara, p. 91-93
Speaking about the spiritual, cultural, educational, intellectual, moral and socio-behavioral traditions of the Anatolian Turks, one has to concentrate on the four cornerstones of the Turkic (mainly Turkmen) Anatolian identity and integrity:
1- the Turkic military epics (notably the legend of Köroğlu),
A statue for the legendary hero of the Turanian world
2- the Iranian epic tradition (an amalgamation of Iranian and Turanian world concepts as narrated by Ferdowsi, Nizami Ganjavi, Amir Khusrau and many others in their epics),
Fereydoun receives Toorshead: miniature from Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh manuscript prepared for the Iranian Shah Tahmasp in the 16th c. The world’s most exquisite manuscript ever is one of the many manuscripts of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh preserved down to our days and it is known as ‘Shahnameh of Shah Tahmasp’ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahnameh_of_Shah_Tahmasp). It would however be very erroneous to consider Ferdowsi’s epic as part of the Iranian national culture only. It consisted in an inextricable part of the Turanian national culture too from Siberia to the Balkans and from Eastern Europe to India. It is noteworthy that the Ottoman Emperor Selim I, writing letters to Ismail Safavi, Shah of Iran, prior to the Battle of Chaldiran, compared himself to the great hero Fereydun. All Ottomans constantly read Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh which reflected the popular legends, traditions and cultures of all people throughout the Ottoman Empire.
3- the Turkic mysticism and spirituality (as embodied by several esoteric Orders, starting from Ahmed Yasavi and the Yasawiyya or Yeseviye and going down to the Mevlevi, the Bektashi and the Safavi Orders), and
Symbols and traditions of the Bektashi Order; the Bektashis and their military branch the Qizilbash had the only correct perception, understanding, and interpretation of the Quranic text and the Hadith. Their enemies were the Constantinopolitan Ottoman theologians, who represented a profane distortion of Islam and a systematic effort of Christianization of the teachings of prophet Muhammad. That is why the evil Jesuits loved the Ottoman sultans’ stupidity (that would bring the collapse of the Ottoman Empire sooner or later); for this reason they also love the disreputable political ideology of ‘political islam’, a most anti-Islamic, colonial theory.
4- the sacred texts of Islam (Quran, Hadith) and the traditional Islamic historiography, science, literature, wisdom, and legendary traditions.
Of these foundations, the Ottoman family despised the first, loathed the third (the Bektashi Order was prohibited in 1826, but was well versed in the second (Iranian epics), and excessively utilized the fourth (Quran, Hadith) for their own illegitimate and profane profit.
The Turkic epic tradition, which forms the basis of Modern Turkish literature, refers constantly to the endless Turkic Anatolian rebellions against the Ottoman rulers and their fake Muslim sheikhs and Constantinopolitan sheikhulislams. It is not actually by coincidence that Nazim Hikmet, Modern Turkey’s national poet, wrote his illustrious Simavne Kadısı Oğlu Şeyh Bedreddin Destanı (The Epic of Sheikh Bedreddin, Son of Simavne Kadi), in 1936, about this superb personality of the 14th and the early 15th c.
Nazim Hikmet
The illustrious Sheikh Bedreddin (شیخ بدرالدین; 1359-1420) was a Seljuk mystic and scholar, who in the early 15th c. sided with the great Turanian Emperor Timur (Tamerlane) against the filthy rascal Bayezid I in the Battle of Ankara (1402). At the time, all Anatolian Turks sided with Timur against the Ottoman pseudo-Muslim sultan, because they already realized very well that the silly Ottomans and their treacherous, fake Sunni sheikhulislams and sheikhs would make of their state a tool for the Anti-Christian pope of Rome, ultimately enslaving all the Muslim and the Christian Orthodox populations to the Western European kingdoms.
Map of the Empire of Tamerlane (Timur): it is relatively wrong because it does not include the conquered lands into the state of the Great Emperor, but colors these lands differently.A quite mistaken map of Tamerlane’s EmpireTotally fake map in which most of Tamerlane’s conquests (Moscow, Delhi, Damascus, Ankara, Izmir) are not included in his Empire.
The absolutely perfidious nature of the Ottoman family is fully demonstrated in the case of Timur’s siege (December 1402) and conquest of Izmir (Smyrna, by far the largest and most important city in Anatolia’s western coastland). The Knights Hospitaller and Venetian army had invaded the Eastern Roman city of Smyrna in 1344, fighting against the Seljuk Turkmen Emir of Aydin. For more than 50 years, the cursed dynasty of Ottomans was waging sectarian wars against other Turkmen Anatolian Muslims, but did not bother to attack and eliminate the Western armies from Izmir/Smyrna.
This constitutes an indication of the good relations that some fake Muslim sheikulislams in the Ottoman court maintained with the Catholic forces and the papal delegates. But Timur fully realized what was at stake. That is why, after vanquishing the useless Ottoman sultan Bayezid I, Timur proceeded to Izmir and liberated the Western coastland of Anatolia from the Western European armies.
In fact, viewed historically, Kemal Ataturk and Timur (Tamerlane) seem have achieved -in the same exactly location- parallel military triumphs, against both the cursed Ottomans and the evil Western intruders.
It is for this reason that, after Timur’s death, sheikh Bedreddin led an anti-Ottoman revolution in 1416; the great effort of liberation from the Ottoman yoke started at the same time in Western Anatolia {in Izmir (Smyrna) and Manisa (Magnesia)} and in the Balkans (Dobruja and Wallachia in today’s Bulgaria and Romania). It constituted one very vibrant rejection of the Constantinopolitan Ottoman theological cholera. Evidently, sheikh Bedreddin’s anti-Ottoman rebellion in the early 15th c. was tantamount to declaration of Turkish national identity. About:
Fake map of the Ottoman Empire, with vast part of the empire left out (notably the Arabian Peninsula, the Red Sea coasts, Sudan, Sahara and the African Atlas)Fake map of the Ottoman Empire, probably paid by Saudi petrodollars in order to deliberately present the Arabian Peninsula as located out of the Ottoman Caliph’s control. In reality, the Ottomans treated the desert tribes of the Arabian Peninsula as dogs, and they were very correct in this practice and approach. Correct map of the Ottoman Empire and its dependencies
Many Western scholars deliberately interpret the wars between the Ottomans and the Safavids (16th–18th c.) as a ‘Sunni-Shia’ clash, but this is a lie; this is tantamount to an attempt of viewing History with today’s eyes. It is very wrong. In reality, the Ottoman – Iranian wars were due first, to the well-known and repeatedly attested Turkmen rejection of the devious Ottomans and second, to the clash between the Anatolian Islamic spirituality and the sectarian Ottoman theology. The Iranian Turkmen wanted to support their brethren and save the Anatolian Turkmen from the cruel Ottoman sultans and their devilish sheikhulislams. As you can understand due to my previous paragraphs, it was not only a matter of the early 16th c.; it had already occurred one century earlier: with Timur (Tamerlane)!
One of the consequences of the aforementioned unbearable situation was that great populations (notably the nomads) had to be constantly on the move; more than 200 Turkmen tribes are known to have relocated from the Taurus Mountains to the Zagros mountain range or to the Caucasus region and vice versa (back and forth) during the 15th – 18th c. Coming back to Anatolia after some generations with a richer Georgian or Farsi vocabulary, eventually different names, and also slightly modified beliefs and traditions (as per each case), these originally Turkmen tribes became the ancestors of populations that are nowadays mistakenly thought to be ethnically different (‘Zaza’, ‘Kurmanji’: known as ‘Kurds’).
Areas where Zazaki is spoken in Turkey; Zazaki is closer to Georgian and other Caucasian languages.Kurmanji and Sorani are very different from one another; only perverse linguists can call Sorani ‘South Kurmanji’. This ridiculous classification is tantamount to calling Spanish …. ‘South French’. Both languages are closer to Farsi than to Zazaki. All the same, they have also sizeable Turkish and Arabic vocabulary.
Then, due to the Ottoman lawlessness and out of thin air Anglo-American and French scholars (or German and Russian erudite explorers under Western European influence or guidance) created the ‘myth’ of the so-called ‘Kurdish’ nation.
From the above you can understand that Turkey is by definition an anti-Ottoman Turkish state, which respects the Anatolian culture and heritage of Turkic and non-Turkic populations; it was created thanks to the War of Independence (1919-1923), and by definition, Turks have left the Ottoman past to die. Nothing and nobody will bring it back. Any stupid guy, who may wish to try to revive the Ottoman filth, will merely fall inside the Ottoman tomb, fully deserving its putrefaction.
Demolishing the modern (colonial – Western) myth of the Ottoman Empire would take a 50-volume encyclopedia to effectuate, but I herewith wanted to only pinpoint few critical elements.
Examined with respect to governance, administration, and military force, the Ottoman Empire had the most defective structure of Islamic state. Shortsighted and disingenuous, its rulers (sultans, caliphs or emperors) lost incredible opportunities and doomed their chances to worldwide supremacy. Among the major Muslim empires {disgracefully called ‘gunpowder empires’ by the Western colonial forgers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_empires)}, the Ottoman Empire occupied the most useless lands (the deserts of Africa and the sand dunes of the Arabian Peninsula), delivered the most undeserving wars, wasted its mediocre resources (particularly if compared with the Mughal Empire of India), and attacked the wrong enemies.
Last year, I needed more than 4500 words to explain (in an article – see link below!) why it was absolutely pathetic for Mehmed II to conquer the city of Constantinople, i.e. the tiny remnant of the erstwhile formidable Eastern Roman Empire.
I will need more space to expand on how Selim I (1470-1520; reigned after 1512) weakened the Ottoman Empire with his sectarian religious beliefs and his depravity as attested in the already mentioned civil war that followed the Shahqulu rebellion. It will take even more space to analyze the disastrous side-effects of his absolutely unnecessary war against Iran. I must however add that, in this regard, the most astounding absurdity of Selim I was the inane use that he made of his victory at Chaldiran (1514).
Selim ISelim I’s major rival, Ismail Safavi, as painted by the Florentine painter Cristofano dell’Altissimo (the guy who painted Saladin as a devil!)The Battle of Chaldiran as painted in the imperial palace Chehel Sotun in IsfahanThe location of Chaldiran, close to today’s Turkish-Iranian border, NE of the Lake Van
By uselessly invading Syria, Mesopotamia, Arabia and Egypt (1516-1517), he lost the chance to conquer the Iranian plateau down to the Indus Valley and further on to Delhi and the Ganges Valley, thus effectively reconstituting Tamerlane’s formidable state from the Aegean Sea to Bengal. This would be the only way to establish a formidable Muslim state very wealthy and powerful enough to efficiently oppose all European colonial powers and plans.
The terrible mistake of Selim I: instead of merging lands with dense populations from the Adriatic Sea to the Ganges River Valley (by fully invading Iran and subsequently attacking the then ailing Delhi Sultanate), he preferred to collect the sands of Arabia and Egypt as his … treasure.
Last, speaking about Selim I’s son Suleiman I (1494-1566; reigned after 1520), one should first notice the extraordinary eulogies and the bright epithets that Western Europeans used when speaking of him (‘Magnificent’; basically because of his involvement with Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire as regards the liberation of the imprisoned Francis I of France). It is however common wisdom that, when your enemies praise you, you have to realize that you committed a calamitous error. Militarily brave but mentally retarded, Suleiman the ‘Magnificent’ is indeed the person who created the Christian Orthodox ‘Russian’ kingdom of Muscovy with his ill-fated expeditions, his useless wars against Iran, his misperception of the situation in Crimea, Kazan and Muscovy, and his inability to put an end to fratricidal wars among Tatars, Mongols, Turanians and Muslims.
Suleiman I was not ‘magnificent’.
– Do you remember that Ibn Battuta had stated that the world’s most opulent city was Saray, the capital of the Golden Horde (one of the vast states that emanated from Genghis Khan’s Empire)? But who destroyed Saray? Was it the deed of a Russian?
– No! It was the idiotic act of a Crimean Tatar!
Suleiman I’s failure to identify the meaning of the second marriage of Ivan III of Muscovy (1440-1505; reigned after 1462) with Zoe (later Sophia) Palaiologina (niece of the last Eastern Roman Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos), which took place under the auspices of the pope of Rome, meant that he could not even imagine the back thoughts and the menacing intentions of Vasili III of Muscovy (1479-1533; reigned after 1502).
Ivan III of the tiny principality of Moscow(baptized Zoe) Sophia PalaiologinaVasili III of MuscovyFake map of the principality of Moscow in 1505; the Muscovy rulers did not control even 20% of the territory in green color at the time. Presenting the early Muscovy state larger than it truly was serves the colonial purpose of concealing the enormous size of Turanian and Muslim khanates on Eastern European soil. Even more importantly, the majority of the population of the state of the predecessors of Ivan IV was Turanian and Muslim. They have been gradually russified and Christianized.
That is why, when Suleiman I was about to die (1566), a great rival to the Ottoman Empire had already appeared in the North, after Ivan IV (known as The Terrible; 1530-1584; reigned after 1533) invaded the Islamic Khanates of Kazan (1552) and Astrakhan (1556), being ready to expand at the detriment of the Islamic Khanate of Siberia.
Even worse, the rise of a northern Christian Orthodox empire as successor to the Eastern Roman Empire had already become known to leading Christian authorities in the realm of the otherwise unsuspecting, foolish Suleiman I, as Patriarch Joachim of Alexandria sent to Muscovy demands for financial assistance (1558), because the famous Saint Catherine’s Monastery (in the Sinai) had been damaged by Ottoman soldiers! The unraveling of the Islamic Caliphate and the beginning of the demise of the Ottoman dynasty had already started!
Prof. Mikhail Mikhaylovich Gerasimov’s plastic facial reconstruction of Ioann (Ivan) IV (the Terrible): a Turk who even looked like Tamerlane.
However, the calamitous doctrinal blindness of the Ottomans was such that it irreparably condemned them to ultimate collapse and disappearance 364 years later, when the ludicrous clown Vahdettin (also known as Mehmed VI), the last of all Ottomans, was kicked in the ass and left his palace to find shelter {not in a humble village in Anatolia among Turks (as he should have sought) but} in a British warship, then in Malta, and finally in the Italian Riviera where he shamefully died (1926) only to be buried in Damascus (under French mandate) with the money that his daughter collected like a beggar. About:
Скачать PDF-файл (текст, картинки и легенды): / PDF (metin, resimler ve efsaneler) dosyasını indirin: / Download PDF file (text, pictures and legends):
Over the past decades, the Uyghurs have gradually become one of the most favorite topics of the distorting propaganda undertaken by the Western colonial powers; it is a pity that a great and historic nation turned out to be the indispensable mascot of every disinformation and misinformation campaign carried out by the Western mainstream media and by some of the leading social media in the Internet. More recently, themes related to the illustrious Turanian nation were promoted to the forefront of the clash between China and the corrupt, ailing and worthless Western world.
However, in the case of the Uyghur nation and their land, i.e. the Tarim Basin, the lies diffused nowadays only pale if compared to the methodically established in the 19th c. and systematically expanded ever since academic fallacies about the Uyghurs, all the Turkic nations, Central Asia, Siberia, China, India, Iran, the so-called Middle East, and in general, the History of Asia. The same concerns of course Africa as well.
Each and every historical distortion is due only to the evil political needs of the colonial powers, i.e. their attempt to subdue the world, by fooling the others in various ways that the colonial academia are not ashamed to call ‘Orientalism’, ‘Humanities’, and ‘unbiased science’. That’s why only very few scholars today have an idea about the true dimensions of the colonial falsehood, the extent of the historical falsification, and the disastrous targets that the colonial powers attempted through their enormous academic fallacy. This unfortunately concerns also the Uyghurs themselves because, due to various circumstances occurred over the past 300-400 years, they have been detached from their past and dissociated from part of their extraordinarily remarkable historical-cultural heritage, thus failing to achieve a proper nation building process.
————————————————————————
Uyghur Civilizationconstitutes one of the most fascinating parts of the Turanian and Oriental Cultural Heritage; more than any other nation in the World History, the Uyghurs developed civilization through five (5) different religions: Tengrism, Buddhism, Manichaeism, Nestorian Christianity, and Islam.
Buddhist Uyghur princes depicted on wall paintings of Bezeklik Cave 9Manichaean Elects (priests) as depicted on walls of the Manichaean temple at Qocho Wall painting from the Qocho Church; a process of Nestorian priests commemorating Palm Sunday (7th-8th c.)The famous map featured in Mahmoud al Kashgari’s masterpiece Diwan Lughat al-Turk (“Compendium of the languages of the Turks” / 11th c.), which is a monumental work that shows the advanced level of scholarship that the Uyghurs had reached among all Turanian and Muslim nations.The tomb of Mahmud al Kashgari, one of the most illustrious Uyghur scholars and erudite academics – Kashgar, Eastern Turkestan/XinjiangUyghur Christian Nestorian priests, architects and merchants built the Daqin Pagoda-Church in Xi’an, the ancient Chinese capital Chang’an, during the 11th c.The travels of the Uyghur Nestorian Chinese diplomat Rabban Bar Sauma (13th c.)
—————————————————————————-
Ignorant and idiotic people, who believe the lies of the criminal gangsters of the Western countries against China and accept the Western propaganda about the so-called oppression or persecution of the Uyghurs in Eastern Turkestan by the Chinese authorities, are the disgrace of the human race, and they will soon have to pay an enormously high price for their ignorance and idiocy. This concerns also several foolish politicians in Turkey, notably Mansur Yavaş, the mayor of Ankara, and Meral Akşener, the head of Iyi Parti, who recently took disastrous positions against China, therefore only proving that they are on the CIA payroll.
Their sick sentimentalism and evil rhetoric heavily damage Turkey’s national interests, which are irrevocably linked with China. Not one Turk can today possibly support and defend positions that help -in any sense- Turkey’s enemies, namely US, UK, EU, NATO, Canada, Australia and their likes. Either both, Mr. Yavaş and Ms. Akşener, will return to common sense or they will contribute to the disastrous failure of Turkey, which has been the quintessence of the miserable and anti-Turkish AKP governments’ policies since 2002.
On the contrary, sticking to Kemal Ataturk’s secular concepts, principles and practices, today’s Turkey can become instrumental in solving the Uyghur problem, in offering Beijing great assistance and effective advice in the matter, and in dragging the embattled Uyghur nation far from the useless pseudo-Islamic theological indoctrination, which has been diffused -in a most nauseating and disgusting manner- by the ignorant, uneducated and villainous sheikhs and pseudo-professors of Al Azhar, Madinah and other similar, backward and pseudo-Islamic universities of today’s decayed Islamic world.
Better than anyone else, Turkey’s Kemalists, and more particularly the members and the deputies of CHP (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi), are in a position to convincingly explain to the Uyghurs the worldwide unique achievements made by Kemal Ataturk and to pull them far from the evil manipulation undertaken by the colonial Western countries against -not only the Uyghurs but also- all the Turanian nations.
————————————————————-
When different maps of Eastern Turkestan / Xinkiang uploaded in different versions of the Wikipedia reveal the hidden intentions of scheming colonial diplomats
Eastern Turkestan / Xinjiang autonomous region of the People’s Republic of ChinaDzungaria (in red) and the Tarim Basin (in blue) are the two parts of XinkiangUyghurs, Han Chinese, and Kazakh: Xinjiang nationalities by prefecture – Date: 2000The entry East Turkestan of the English version of the Wikipedia features this ridiculous map, which has no historical credibility, but it only shows the territories that the CIA and the State Department order the so-called ‘World Uyghur Congress’ to publicly demand for secession! This treacherous organization terribly harms the interests of the Uyghur Nation.
———————————————————————
If today’s Uyghurs believe -in any way- even a single word uttered to them by the monstrous, paranoid, disreputable and criminal statesmen, military, politicians, diplomats, agents, academics, analysts, journalists, etc., they will all fall victims of a scheme providing for the cynical utilization of their nation, and in the process they will bring upon themselves their destruction. Any sort of contact, communication, association or cooperation between the Uyghurs and any representative of the US, UK, EU, NATO gangsters will only end with the fatal and total eradication of the Uyghur nation, and the only responsible will be the naïve Uyghur pundits and activists who thought it possible to communicate with the leeches and the parasites of the Western world.
It has nothing to do with ‘religion’, and it is as simple as that: the inhuman monsters, who rule the US, UK, EU, NATO, etc., do not give a damn about the Uyghurs and their lives, let alone their souls. Already, these evil governments and their insidious academia abominably disfigured and deliberately minimized the History of Uyghur Nation in a shameful manner, concealing major achievements of the illustrious Turanian nation. The demented, inhuman and devilish atheists, who rule London, Paris, Brussels, and Washington D.C., do not care whether the Uyghurs pray in the mosques or fast in Ramadhan; under other circumstances, they would be pleased to throw thousands of insulting caricatures of prophet Muhammad inside the Uyghur mosques and thus profane them. They only care to generate problems to their principal rival: Beijing.
That’s why the gangsters of US, UK, EU, NATO, etc. use the Uyghurs like their most worn out shoes. The descendants of a major Turanian nation should not therefore fall victims of the fetid and bestial pedophiles of the West, who first pay some millions of dollars to the Uyghur traitors of the ‘World Uyghur Congress’, and then calmly enjoy their abnormal lives, destroying young children’s lives.
———————————————————————————-
Who pays the bill for the World Uyghur Congress and for all the lies published in Western mass media against China?
Those who pay one category of their puppets, namely the atheist and Zionist cartoonists, to publish disreputable cartoons ridiculing prophet Muhammad, …
View of the premises of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, in Paris, France, 02 November 2011, after they suffered destruction due to an incendiary bomb attack overnight. According to Police sources the fire started around 01.00 am. Charlie Hebdo had published a special edition on 02 November related to the Arab Spring, renaming the magazine Charia Hebdo for the occasion, in reference to the Ennahda Islamist party victory in Tunisia and the transitional Libyan executive’s statement that Islamic Sharia law would be the country’s main source of law. The cover featured a cartoon of the Mohammed, saying: ‘100 lashes if you don’t die of laughter!’.
those who pay another category of their puppets, namely the Islamic extremists and terrorists to fire-bomb the offices of the newspapers that published the disreputable cartoons …
….. are those who pay the otherwise ‘good Muslims’ and ‘patriotic Uyghurs’ of the World Uyghur Congress to betray their nation, their religion, their history and their heritage, just for … a fistful of dollars!
And how do the world’s most criminal countries, France, England and the US, i.e. the states that perpetrated the world’s most abhorrent crimes, happen to care now about the nonexistent ‘genocide of the Uyghurs’ after they exterminated all the American Indians and the African and Asiatic nations that they colonized?
Only idiots and fake Muslims believe these lies – only to end up in the Hell that they deserve.
————————————————————————————–
The present series of articles will shed light on the evil deeds and the criminal plans that the mendacious and duplicitous Western ‘supporters’ of the Uyghurs have long carried out and it will underscore the imperative need for a cordial alliance between Turkey and China, which will reshape the world and ditch the anomalous, colonial West in the landfill once for all.
Contents
I. The Dispute about the Uyghur Past and Heritage
II. A Brief Diagram of Uyghur History
III. Eastern Turkestan: the Clash of Terms for the Center of the World
IV. Turkey: the Turanian and the Islamic World’s Foremost Example as a Secular State
V. Islam: turned to a Theological System, Islam does not exist anymore as Religion VI. China and the Problems of Eastern Turkestan – Xinkiang
VII. Kemal Ataturk: the Only True Salvation for today’s Uyghurs
I. The Dispute about the Uyghur Past and Heritage
Uyghurs ( ئۇيغۇرلار- Уйғурлар /Uygurlar/維吾爾/ Уйгуры) are one of the most ancient and most important Turanian (Turkic) nations; as per a conventional, flawed and Western colonial linguistic classification, Uyghur belongs to the Karluk category of Turanian languages, like Uzbek. On the contrary, Turkmen, Turkish, Azeri and other languages belong to the Oghuz (Oğuz) branch of Turanian languages, whereas Tatar, Kazakh, Kyrgyz and several other languages form the Kipchak (Kıpçak/ Кипчак – Кыпчак) group of Turanian languages.
Uyghur History covers four (4) millennia documented in several languages and an endlessly increasing material record; however, it has been detrimentally distorted by Western colonial explorers and academics, notably English and French, since the time of what was termed as the Great Game. This ominous term denotes basically the 19th c. antagonism of primarily German, Russian, English and French Orientalists, explorers, scholars, secret agents, diplomats and statesmen for the fabrication of the borders that each great power wanted to impose in a vast area to which none of these powers was related (Russia reached that area only by invading other kingdoms and empires).
The Great Game: the Afghan Emir Shir Ali between the Russians (bear) and the English (lion)
The various borderlines that were envisioned by the respective headquarters and expressed only the wishes of Berlin, St. Petersburg, London and Paris needed to be backed-up by aptly, properly and systematically falsified historiography, and consequently, History ‘had’ to be written in a way so that it can be adjusted to each of the aforementioned political interests that were opposite to one another. That’s why several gangsters and thieves, like ‘Sir’ Aurel Stein, masqueraded as scholars, crossed many thousands of kilometers and penetrated in dangerous deserts to search, find and distort/misinterpret antiquities first. The entirely fake science of ‘geopolitics’ was also fabricated at that time only to theorize the nonsensical colonial claims raised by every white racist criminal. There are no historical lines that can possibly divide Asia. The true historical process, as documented in written sources and the archaeological material record, totally discredits every hypothetical line drawn by any biased ‘political scientist’.
It is crucial at this point to underscore the fact that the useless Ottoman Empire, although primordially concerned by the aforementioned developments, was totally absent from the Great Game, pretty much like the ailing Qajar Empire of Iran. The roots of the Asiatic Great Game could to some extent be attributed to the Napoleonic scheme of an eventual French-Russian alliance geared in order to invade the then still expanding English colonial force in South Asia (the so-called ‘India’). As it can be understood, the collapsing and terminating Mughal Empire (Gorkanian) was (in the early 19th c.) at the brink of extinction due to the ceaseless plots and colonial wars undertaken by Portuguese, Dutch, French and English against it, whereas in Qing China, the emperors Jiaqing (嘉慶帝; 1796-1820) and Daoguang (道光帝; 1820-1850) were only a shadow of their formidable predecessor Kangxi (康熙帝; 1661-1722), and their rule over the land of the Uyghurs was only nominal. So, none of the four great historical Asiatic empires (Ottomans, Iranians, Mughal and China) could be able to withstand or divert the colonial onslaught.
Speaking of today’s Uyghurs, I felt obliged to briefly divert my presentation to issues pertaining to the Great Game for a simple, yet crucial, reason; the outcome of the Great Game determined what we know today as ‘borders’ in the vast lands of Central and Eastern Asia. And as I already said, it also shaped to great extent what is today taught in universities worldwide as History of Asia or Uyghur History. Several modern scholarly juxtapositions and polarizations about various points of Uyghur History are only the result of the systematic, sophisticated and insidious distortion of Asiatic History by Western colonial academia. This is so because tons of deliberately falsified data and material record have not yet been duly refuted and rejected, but they still constitute harmful traps that disorient researchers from a correct and proper conceptualization and contextualization of the historical sources.
Turghun Almas (Тургун Алмас/ تۇرغۇن ئالماس/吐尔贡·阿力玛斯; 1924-2001), a great Uyghur scholar who was persecuted because of his secessionist misinterpretation of Uyghur History, supported the thesis of 6000+ years of indigenous Uyghur History in Eastern Turkestan. Official Chinese historical interpretations associate today’s Uyghurs with the Tiele people, who were part of the vast Hiung-Nu (Xiongnu /匈奴 / Хунну) tribal, confederate Empire, some of whose descendants became later known as Huns in Central Asia, Western Siberia, and throughout Europe. The Hiung-Nu are a major part of China’s History and the Hiung-Nu wars with Han China (133 BCE-89 CE) shaped China as we know it.
Turghun Almas
Their heirs are the so-called White Huns (‘Ebodalo’ in Bactrian/厭帶夷粟陁 – Yethailito/Εφθαλίται-Hephthalites/Эфталиты), who formed various kingdoms in Bactria, Sogdiana and the entire Tarim Basin (Eastern Turkestan). Although vassals of the Rouran Khaganate (see below), they were formidable warriors and defeated the Sassanid armies of Iran several times. The Hephthalites contributed greatly to Civilization, Spirituality and Art, being the enlightened rulers who sponsored superb and majestic monuments like the Qizil Caves of the Tarim Basin (Caves of the Thousand Buddhas) and the Buddhas of Bamiyan (Afghanistan).
However, trying to demonstrate, who arrived first in a specific territory, in order to subsequently issue historicity claims is the least successful method for anyone to get rid of the Anglo-French colonial Orientalist scheme, and of its implications. It is essential to first understand the nature of the Ancient Turanian History and second outsmart the colonial distortion of the History of Asia.
Turanians were nomads or semi-nomads whose acts demonstrate that they were absolutely convinced that home-dwellers were sinners and degenerate people unable to attain the ancestral human originality because of their attachment to one only location. The difference, opposition and clash between Turanian nomads and settled populations are the real axis around which revolves the History of all Turanian nations. This is attested in historical sources, in the archaeological material record, and also in epics, legends and every literary effort of mythologized History. With this in mind, one can comprehend the entire History of Asia far better and perceive the interaction between the Northern Chinese and the Turanians as a historical process that concerns the same family of nations. Actually, many historical and literary sources view the Northern Chinese as simply settled Turanians, and this can provide far better insight into the violence of their wars. In this regard, the Han – Hiung-Nu wars constitute an early episode of the permanent phenomenon of Turanian nomad-settler polarity.
On the other hand, the colonial perfidy in misinterpreting historical evidence and in contextualizing it as per the colonial interests of England and France is easy to assess; it merely constitutes a reflection of their own attitude at the political-international level. Since they viciously generate all types of divisions at the political level, they deliberately proliferate divisions at the academic-scholarly level, when writing down the history of lands that they hate enough to viciously distort, fittingly adjust, and totally subordinate it to the fallacy that they diffuse as their own, ‘Western’ or ‘European’, History. Western Orientalists played therefore with ethnic names, personal names, toponyms, and the vocabulary of languages that they deciphered.
Although it is very well known that an ethnic group can have many diverse names in different historical sources written in several languages, colonial academic forgers intentionally multiplied the historically recorded (in various languages under different names) ethnicities in order to deprive several nations from
a) a past that the Western colonial academics did not want to attribute to them,
b) a presence in remote locations that they did not want to acknowledge to them,
and
c) an achievement that was ‘too great’ so that the Western schemers possibly concede it to all those nations that they viewed hatefully and enviously for their past, cultures, civilizations and achievements.
The subsequent fabrication of, otherwise nonexistent, pseudo-historical nations (which are only the duplicate of other nations known under different names) is a method that was widely used by Western Orientalists in order to disfigure the History of Asia. This fact had a disastrous impact on Uyghurs, China, the History of Uyghur, and the History of China as these topics are presently taught in universities and manipulated in politics.
An example in this regard is offered by another ‘stolen’ part of the Uyghur heritage: the Yuezhi (月氏/ Юэчжи; 3rd c. BCE – 4th c. CE), who became later known as divided (Great Yuezhi and Lesser Yuezhi), are not different from the Hiung-Nu but only constitute a part of them. They clashed with them and they migrated only to be further divided in their migration. But the Yuezhi and the Hiung-Nu were indeed Turanians, and they constitute an authentic part of Uyghur History, pretty much like they are an inalienable part of the History of China, which de facto comprises and is partly identical with the History of Turan.
Eurasia in the time of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty 141-87 BCEHan China expansion in the ‘West’, the Xiongnu, and the Yuezhi at the end of the 2nd c. BCE and the beginning of the 1st c. BCE
The supreme stage of the colonial historiographical distortion contains the disgrace of white racism; this took the monstrous form of excessive Indo-Europeanization of everything. How this was processed is easy to unveil: Friedrich W. K. Müller, a famous German Orientalist of the Deutsche Turfanexpeditionen (German Turfan expeditions) associated the Yuezhi with the Tocharian nation (Τόχαροι/ Тохары/吐火罗人) of the Ancient Greek historical sources. The problem exploded when other Western European Orientalists did not want to identify the Tocharians of Eastern Turkestan with the Tocharians of Bactria, whose language they had arbitrarily identified as ‘Indo-European’.
In brief, they wanted to Indo-Europeanize an essentially Turanian/Chinese continent of which Europe constituted in reality the tiniest, the most unimportant, and the only barbaric peninsula whereby every form of culture and every portion of civilization came from the Orient, i.e. the Asiatic mainland, with significant African additions.
The Uyghur Manichaean Sermon from Manichaean manuscript unearthed in the legendary German Turfan expeditions
Um Ihre eigene Suche zu starten und die erforderliche Bibliographie zu finden:
為了開始您自己的搜索並找到必要的參考書目：
Kendi araştırmanıza başlamak ve gerekli kaynakçayı bulmak için:
Чтобы начать собственный поиск и найти необходимую библиографию:
In order to start your own search and to find the necessary bibliography:
Sampul tapestry from the area of Khotan, today at the Museum of Urumqi, Eastern Turkestan/Xinjiang – 1st c. CE; it depicts a Yuezhi soldier.
II. A Brief Diagram of Uyghur History
Uyghur History apparently involves a very wide range of sites, monuments and historical sources, starting with the famous Tarim mummies that are dated in the 1st half of the 2nd millennium BCE. The modern Uyghur nation was progressively formed following first, the numerous Turanian migrations that determined World History for several thousands of years, and second, the expansion of the Han dynasty of China in the ‘West’, which corresponds to the eastern confines of what we call nowadays ‘Central Asia’. Han expansion in the West is the result of the victorious wars of the Han kings against the Hiung-Nu.
Tarim mummies
However, we cannot discuss of proper ‘ Chinese expansionism’ in the way we use this term in Ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, Phoenicia-Carthage, Iran, Rome, the Eastern Roman Empire, and several Islamic caliphates, empires and kingdoms; it was rather a ceaseless effort to bring order, peace, balance and security to a vast area that was incessantly crisscrossed by migrants, raiders and nomads. Even the expeditions of Ban Chao reflect rather an effort of mercantile interests and diplomatic contacts with other orderly kingdoms, and not a real, genuine effort of militarily undertaken territorial expansion. The wider Tarim Basin was not literarily annexed to China, but rather viewed as a ‘protectorate’. Several preponderantly Turanian kingdoms prospered there for many centuries, succeeding to one another, under only nominal Chinese authority; they constitute the early phases of Uyghur History because, Turanian or not, they have been progressively assimilated, ethnically and culturally, into the Turanian Uyghurs.
Uyghur History and Cultural Heritage encompass the various small Turanian kingdoms that prospered under Chinese tutelage during the last century of the 1st millennium BCE and the first half of the 1st millennium CE, namely the kingdoms of Qiemo (且末), Loulan (or Kroran / كروران/楼兰), Khotan (于闐), Shule (疏勒) in Kashgar, Gaochang (高昌/ of the Jushi people /車師; in the area of today’s Qocho), the kingdom of Kucha (كۇچار /龜茲) which was described in the Chinese Annals as the strongest and largest among the “thirty-six kingdoms of the Western Regions”, and many other states.
Tarim Basin in the 3rd century CE
Colonial historiographers erroneously Indo-Europeanize the pre-Khaganate (First Turkic Khaganate: 552-603) historical periods of Ancient Asia; otherwise, they could not further support the theory of ‘Turkic migration’. This theory is entirely fabricated in order not to disrupt many Orientalist fallacies concerning the history of many different nations and lands that colonial academia intentionally dissociated from Turanians, due to entirely racist political reasons. The phenomenon of Turanian movements across all parts of the Asiatic continent (‘Europe’ included) is true, but it antedates the 6th c. CE, which is the very false date that colonial historiographers comfortably set for the above mentioned purposes. For instance, the Rouran Khaganate (330-555) cannot be dissociated from the Turanian History, and there are many Chinese historical sources testifying to this, because they ostensibly and repeatedly associate the Rouran with the Hiung-Nu.
Rouran Khaganate First Turkic Khaganate / Göktürk Kağanlığı – 575 CEDas erste Kaganat der Kök-Türken im Jahr 575Shoroon Bumbagar tomb: Göktürk period – 7th c., MongoliaThe famous bilingual Bugut inscription (from the Guden Sum temple, which was built at the end of the 17th c.) dates back to the times of the First Turkic Khaganate (ca. 584 CE): this is the part written in Sogdian. Tsetserleg, MongoliaTurkic knights depicted on the wall paintings of the Maya Cave (section 3) in the Kizil Caves of Eastern Turkestan that date back to the times of the Buddhist Uyghur kingdom of Kucha (not to be confused with Qocho) 6th c. Western Turkic Khaganate (On-Ok: 581-742) and Eastern Turkic Khaganate (Oguz: 581-645) Western Turks visit the king Varkhuman of Sogdiana in Afrasiyab (Samarkand) at ca. 650 CE Western Turkic Khaganate Second Turkic Khaganate (682-744)
After the First Turkic Khaganate was divided into Western Khaganate (581-742) and Eastern Khaganate (581-645), after the Tang China campaign against the Eastern Turks (629-630), after the defeat of the Western Turks (657), and after the rise and fall of the Second Turkic Khaganate (682-744), the Uyghurs rose in prominence. The Uyghur Khaganate (744-840) was the first and only Manichaean state in the World History. Following its decline, a certain number of smaller kingdoms were formed, notably those of Khotan and Qocho (843-1132; also known as Kara-Khoja), before they were all gradually absorbed within the Afrasiab (Kara-Khanid) Khanate (840-1212). This confederate Turanian kingdom expanded also westwards in Transoxiana (Υπερωξειανή / ما وراء النهر – Mawarannahr / мавераннахр), in today’s Uzbekistan, and the ruling dynasty adhered to Islam. Around the middle of the 10th c., we attest to a process of systematic diffusion of Islam among the Uyghurs.
Asia around the year 600 CETang dynasty China at 669 CEUyghur KhaganateUyghur Khaganate
This phenomenon continued also when the Qara Khitai (1124-1218; also known as Great Liao) supplanted partly first and entirely later the Afrasiab / Kara-khanids. As a matter of fact, the Buddhist Qara Khitai dynasty was a family of tolerant Turanians who ruled over a population that was Muslim in its majority; they prevailed across vast territories in Central Asia, Central Siberia, and Eastern Siberia, also establishing an alliance, in the ‘West’, with the Turanian Muslim dynasty of Khwarazm (which controlled parts of today’s Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan and Iran). Muslim, Buddhist, Nestorian Christian, and Manichaean Uyghurs coexisted for several centuries, under either non-Muslim or Muslim dynasties.
Kara-Khanid Khanate at 1006 CEThe Kara-Khanids and their powerful NE neighbor, the Yenisei Kyrgyz KhaganateThe Buddhist Turanian Qara Khitai Empire and the Uyghur Khanates of Turfan and KansuThe maximum expansion of the Qara-Khitai
At the times of the Turanian Mongol Empire (1206–1368), the Chagatai Khanate (1225–1340s), the Uyghurs were incorporated into these vast nomad states, and the Chinese imperial authority over them was only nominal, even during the Turanian Mongol ‘Yuan’ dynasty (1272-1368). Following the Chagatai division into Western Chagatai Khanate (1340s–1370) and Eastern Chagatai Khanate (also known as Moghulistan; 1340s–1680), the Uyghurs were either incorporated into the latter or ruled by various local dynasties; they were still followers of different religions, who coexisted peacefully within a culturally unified environment fostered by common interests, activities and means of communication.
Genghis Khan, his movements and his immense empire The Chagatai Khanate was divided into Western Chagatai Khanate (1340s–1370) and Eastern Chagatai Khanate (also known as Moghulistan; 1340s–1680); this map shows Moghulistan at ca. 1370.The Chagatai Khanate was divided into Western Chagatai Khanate (1340s–1370) and Eastern Chagatai Khanate (also known as Moghulistan; 1340s–1680); this map shows Moghulistan at ca. 1490.
The existence of several prosperous Uyghur kingdoms highlights the spiritual-cultural pluralism that prevailed among them at those days; among them the most important are the Kara Del kingdom (1389-1513), which was predominantly Buddhist, the Islamic Turpan Khanate (1487-1690), which entered into wars with Ming China (1368-1644), the Islamic Yarkent Khanate (1514-1705), as well as the Khojas of Kashgar and of the six cities (Altishahr). Due to the divisions among the branches of Khoja Islamic mysticism, following the troubles they had with Tibet, and after the intervention of the extremist Oirat Turanian Buddhists (rather known as the Dzungarian khanate), the Uyghur lived a real nightmare during the Dzungar – Qing China wars (1687-1757).
East Asia at 1616The Chinese-Muslim Uyghur-Russian alliance against the powerful, extremist Buddhist Dzungar Turanian Khanate (1687-1757)China at the time of the extremist Chinese-Christian Taiping Rebellion (1850-1864), which was instigated by the uncontrolled, vicious activities of the American Protestant missionaries and their local puppets, notably Hong Xiuquan
The successful result of the many, consecutive Chinese campaigns against the Dzungar extremists pacified the Uyghurs and determined to great extent the borders of Modern China, allowing also the possibility of several local Muslim rulers to fully govern their realms as vassals of the Qing monarch. It was only then that the last Buddhist Uyghurs renounced their religion. In fact, the Dzungar genocide was the result of an Islamic Uyghur – Chinese alliance. However, the relations worsened when the Manchus controlled China; various atrocities ended up in the Afaqi Khoja holy war (1759-1866), which is at the origin of all posterior problems between the Uyghurs and the Chinese authorities.
Turkestan divided between Russia and China: Russian-Chinese borders and Russian administrative provinces of Western Turkestan in 1900The Chinese-Russian borders in the area of Semirechye (Семиречье), i.e. the ‘Seven Rivers Region’, which is today part of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan
Um Ihre eigene Suche zu starten und die erforderliche Bibliographie zu finden:
為了開始您自己的搜索並找到必要的參考書目：
Kendi araştırmanıza başlamak ve gerekli kaynakçayı bulmak için:
Чтобы начать собственный поиск и найти необходимую библиографию:
In order to start your own search and to find the necessary bibliography:
The territories of the precarious, secessionist First East Turkestan Republic in 1933-1934The territories of the precarious, secessionist Second East Turkestan Republic in 1944-1949
megalommatiscomments 
