|
|
Post by schiirschach on Jun 27, 2011 5:41:27 GMT 3
Most of the Central Asian tribes have been influenced by the Persian Culture. It seems to be as prevalent as Sanskrit in the Indian sub continent and Latin in Europe or Greek in Eastern Europe.
My question is - what is the extent of this influence with regard to the language and the general lifestyle of the TUrkic people ? How distinguished is the original Turkic culture from the Persian influence ?
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jun 27, 2011 21:51:21 GMT 3
Not just Persian, but Iranic in general. The earliest well-attested influences are from the Soghdians who introduced new religions (Buddhism and Manichaeism), new vocabulary and new titles starting from the 6th century (the Iranicness of Scythians-Sakas is still not accepted by all, so I'll skip that). There were also very few Khwarazmian and Persian influences at that time too. The second wave of Iranic influences came with the establishment of the Persian Samanid dynasty in Transoxiana. They were crucial in the introduction of Islam and Arabic-Persian loanwords which were on a greater extent compared with the earlier Soghdian and other influences. Persian influences continued in the following centuries, rising in times of the Ghaznawids, Seljuks and Timurids.
|
|
|
|
Post by Azadan Januspar on Jul 5, 2011 10:56:06 GMT 3
Again with being attentive to the fact that the Iranian shouldn't be confused with Persian in general, we can easily say, Central Asia was a major home to various ancient Iranian people, and it is properly regarded as the pivotal cradle or even heart of early Iranian civilization by many historians. So it is no wonder that in the Iranian epic of Shahname for example the cities, places , figures are found predominantly in greater Central Asia.
|
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Jul 6, 2011 0:13:07 GMT 3
In my opinion, Persian culture is influenced by Turkic culture more. They changed their daily diets after meeting Turkic people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ardavarz on Jul 6, 2011 2:42:41 GMT 3
Zoroastrian texts contain some data about climatic and astronomic conditions in Iranian homeland which indeed allow to identify it as the Steppe region (most likely that in Central Asia).
|
|
|
|
Post by Azadan Januspar on Jul 6, 2011 18:51:04 GMT 3
Could you be more specific, cause so far I used to think it was somehow the pposite due to many Turkic cuisines names of Iranian root.  |
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jul 7, 2011 15:50:13 GMT 3
Well, that's normal because ancalimon thinks everything in the World is Turkic  |
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Jul 7, 2011 17:01:01 GMT 3
Well, that's normal because ancalimon thinks everything in the World is Turkic Not really. I think may things in the world are not "Turkic". I just think there were small Turkic groups that influenced and/or oppressed mass populations. That's why "for example" we see words that are rooted back to Proto-Semitic in Arabic but can be found in the controversial Nostratic roots and Proto-Turkic roots as well. For example Sanskrit "chakra-tekre", Turkic "teker-çark" and Semitic dhikr (zikir), tekrar (repeat) or sihir (magic). What's more is that "for example" "dhikr" shares the same root with "male phallus" and not surprisingly in Turkic "sik" is the same thing. I think words that are thought to be originally Persian came to life in Persian language "using Turkic roots". That's how Turks were influenced by Persian culture. They created most of Persian culture themselves by being influenced from it. In my opinion that makes "Turkic culture" influence "Persian culture" more. All in all even in Iran, Persian does not identify an ethnic identity but a language. |
|
|
|
Post by Azadan Januspar on Jul 7, 2011 18:37:56 GMT 3
I just can't get hold of what you're trying to say. Nostratic family is according to yourself controversial enough but irrelevant to both.
here comes to mind question: why are you so obsessed with the term Persian? and its for you in use in such a wide sense?. The culture of Iranians and to a great extent Persians is highly advanced culture regarding the essential cultural components, no doubt and the term has played a major role in the Iranian history so far, thats for sure. But explain to me how "They [Turks] created most of Persian culture themselves by being influenced from it" and supposing that so-called influence, they wereto do such a task and no one else did? how can that be a regareded of their influence on what you call Persian culture? how can Persian should have come to life by Turkic roots and by no other roots?
Iranian cuisine is a wide-range cuisine and like other nations it is established primarily on local and geographical qualities, which means even far back from the time in which we could speak of Iranians, same local cuisines might have invariably existed yet possibly under different names.
|
|
|
|
Post by ancalimon on Jul 7, 2011 21:16:47 GMT 3
Could you be more specific, cause so far I used to think it was somehow the pposite due to many Turkic cuisines names of Iranian root. for example? Pilâv ? Law means "batter, paste" in old Turkic. This would explain the LAH part of Lahmacun which is thought to be Arabic as well. LAVAÞ: thin bread. LAV-AÞ (Aþ:food) See where this is going? Lava is "lav" in Turkish as well. There are huge problems with accepted etymologies of words. |
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jul 9, 2011 14:55:58 GMT 3
Ancalimon, I think you truely are sick and I think you should go to a doctor.
By the way, I will start locking every topic where you will say something non-Turkic is actually Turkic, or other nonsense like that.
|
|
