The Qaraqoyunlu (Black Sheep) Empire

[Deleted]

I think you guys have a bit of misunderstanding here.

There is nothing as "Azeri" ethnicity, you will not find such an ethicity or nation during medieval times, Azerbaijani Turks today are made-up of several Turkoman tribes. Fuzuli was from Bayat tribe, yet hes mother language was Azerbaijani, and also the langauge he wrote his works in. He was not even from Azerbaijan, he was born and lived in Karabala/Iraq, but his ancestors were from Azerbaijan.

Or rather, shall I say the Oghuz language spoken in Azerbaijan, when I say Azerbaijani.

You guys perhaps should understand the definition of Turkoman or Turkmen (Turkoman would be more correct to use in this sense), it was and is not only applied to Turkmens of Central Asia. It was general name of all Oghuz Turks, including ancestors of modern day Azerbaijani Turks. Iraqi Turkomans today for instance speak a dialect of South Azerbaijani, and they are Turkomans, they don't speak a dialect of Turkmen of Central Asia but that of Azerbaijan.

If you look at the list of Qara-Qoyunlu confederation tribes, most of them are from Azerbaijan or settled in Azerbaijan. Qara-Qoyunlu tribe itself rose from Ercis in Van, and Ercis dialect today are considered as a dialect of Azerbaijani Turkish (and not Anatolian). There are cases of which there are similiar dialects of Anatolian Turkish to Azerbaijani, but there are also cases of dialects actually belonging to the group of Azerbaijani Turkish, like Ercis and Bayburt dialects.

[Deleted]

May 20, 2009 13:11:52 GMT 3 H. İhsan Erkoç said:

They were not exactly the same with the Turkmens of Central Asia because they were Anatolian Turkmens speaking Old Anatolian Turkish (which is a branch of Oghuz Turkic).

I would not say that Qara-Qoyunlu's really spoke "Old" Anatolian Turkish, rather what they spoke was much more similiar to Azerbaijani. Ercis (Van), which is where Qara-Qoyunlu tribe rose from, today speak a dialect which is considered to belong to Azerbaijani Turkic.

This also applies to Agh-Qoyunlu.

Azerbaijan and Eastern Anatolia were the same during these times, so it would be a bit wrong to really classify Qara-Qoyunlu and Agh-Qoyunlu as "Anatolian", as in modern sense.

After all, Eastern Anatolia was not under Ottoman control untill Ottomans defeated Safavids during battle of Chaldiran.

It is not a coincidense that both historically and in modern sense Turkomans of Eastern Anatolia are much closer to Azerbaijan, rather than to other parts of Turkey.

[Azadan Januspar]

There is nothing as "Azeri" ethnicity, you will not find such an ethicity or nation during medieval times, Azerbaijani Turks today are made-up of several Turkoman tribes.

Thanks for your sublime mention again but in addition to that, it is again worthy to say that they are like you said are made-up several Turkoman tribes, intermingled with local Iranians and Arabs of the time. Not only them but the same goes for many adjacent regions.

[Deleted]

This guy strikes again, what's up with your obsession that Azerbaijani Turks are "intermingled" with local Iranians (that is understandable from your perspective), but also mentioning Arabs.

I have no intention to discuss any of it again with you, but if we go by your logic we could even add Mongols or Russians or any other ethnicity that have set their foot in Azerbaijan to your "list". To say that Arabs played any slight significant role in formation of Azerbaijani ethnicity are laughable, Iranians certainly less so, but still.

About "local Iranians" or whatever "local" people, they were just too few against centuries and centuries of Turkic settlement into Azerbaijan, to play any important role in formation of Azerbaijan's population.

When I talk about Turkoman tribes, these are tribes that still live-on with thier names. I'm not only talking from a historical perspective.

For instance everyone knows that Azeri Turk population in and around Urmiya are from Afshar tribe.

[Deleted]

Also I would like to remind you that this thread is about Qara-Qoyunlu and my post was only intended in that context.

Like som members mentioned, Qara-Qoyunlu were Turkoman/Turkmen yes, and so is Azeri Turks. Turkoman/Turkmen was a general term used for all Oghuz Turks, including population of Azerbaijan. And we have Iraqi Turkomans/Turkmens as an example, whom speak a dialect of Azerbaijani (and not Central Asian Turkmen).

Regarding Qara-Qoyunlu and their language, we do know that what they (and Agh-Qoyunlu) spoke was most similiar to current Azerbaijani Turkish out of all Oghuz languages, including Anatolian Turkish and Turkmen of Central Asia.

Their centers in Anatolia, like Ercis for Qara-Qoyunlu, and Bayburt for Agh-Qoyunlu, today speak a dialect which is considered to be identical to that of Azerbaijani Turkish, and often included as a dialect of it.

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

I am no expert in this, but as far as I know, even though the distinction between Anatolian and Azerbaijani Turkish started around 15th century, there were not that much of significant differences at all but rather minor dialectical nuances. Correct me people please if I am wrong.

[Azadan Januspar]

Nice indication Sir, the thing is that here for instance is intended to talk about Qaraqoyunlu, so what is it about you being smart and again bringing up your personal views about Azeri ethnicity amongst those lines, which I know is a real hot debate for you guys back there. However I didn't say anything bad, did I? I just added more details to your saying. chill dude. People here tend to study history in detail rather than going by your or my logic.

Speaking of which I just added that if your talking about their ethnicities they are strongly composed of those ethnical elements more than anyother not only Turkomans; which was significant by the way. Afterall that was nice of you to add Russians too. And please for further Azerbaijan historical statements, please write in its respective section.

[Deleted]

Azeri Turks are branch of Oghuz Turks, how is that my personal view.

Some members mentioned Qara-Qoyunlu being Turkmen, and that's why I wrote that. Azeri Turks are also Turkmen/Turkoman, and Qara-Qoyunlu are actually a part of ethnical history of Azeri Turks, not that of Anatolia.

That's more like trolling, not adding details into "my saying". The funny thing is you talk as if it's some kind of fact. Basically following your logic every ethnicity that has set their foot in Azerbaijan should have played a"significant" role in formation of Azerbaijani ethnicity. The more funny part is Arabs would be at bottom of your example, while you talk as if it's significant.

There were kingdom of Albania, there were Khazars settled in north Azerbaijan (Gabala town was known as Khazar in Arab sources), there were Scythians before them and so on, and in fact in much more significant numbers...That some Arabs may have been there does not means they have played any role in ethnic formation. And likewise no one claims that Scythians, or Khazars or even Albanians has played any role in formation of Azerbaijani ethnicity, let alone calling it a significant role.

And all these are something centuries before Turkic settlement into Azerbaijan.

While the FACT is Azerbaijani ethnicity are a branch of Oghuz Turks, and collection of many Turkoman tribes. Now if there are some other "intermingles" according to you, they are basically insignificant.

[Azadan Januspar]

You are funny dude, nice to know you are familiar with the word "trolling". I claim no logic as you do and insist on your remarks. Funniest thing is that you every now and then try to include your so-called off-topic logic into posts and make them look relevant and thinking you can change anything, in the meanwhile trying to smoothly take the posts to another level of argument as can be found in some propaganda forums eslewhere by using certain words. People are not stupid and not illitearte about history at all and know who tries to troll and has certain obsessions if you will.

After all why are you trying to make sure everyone is convinced that Azerbaijani people of Iran and people from Azerbaijan republic are ethnically Turkic Oghuz? I am amazed at your pockets of the same efforts.

I only added that the role of Iranian ethnic element is so strong that you can not say they are made-up of the Oghuz alone anymore and that's not my logic why should it be? And you know I meant no harm to remind you of the Arab tribes heavy settlement of the area besides the Iranian population of that time. I couldn't have guessed why you might find it unpleasant.

Azeri Turks according to hearsay are a branch of Oghuz Turk. But if you just embark on reading some basic history books on subjects like Oghuz, Azeri people, Azeri Turks, Turks in Azerbaijan etc. suddenly you realize you can not call them ethnically solely Oghuz Turkmen.

To be honest back then I used to think kind of like yourself, until I chose to know more and actually read various history books. And I am glad I do that instead of being glued to some certain ideas. And I am sure there is till much to learn about it.

[Deleted]

Azerbaijani language are a branch of Oghuz languages, and Azeri Turks a branch of Oghuz Turks. How is this something needed to be proven? Do you need to prove that Persians are part of larger Iranic peoples?

You are telling me to read history books, yet you are totally unaware of history to begin with.

There was kingdom of Albania in present-day Azerbaijan, there was Khazar settlements and so on...But none of it played/plays any significant role in formation of Azerbaijani ethnicity. The examples of Arabs and "local" Iranians are the same thing. Later there were Mongols, and later Russian invasion. How did any of that play any role in formation of Azerbaijani ethnicity? If we go by your logic, any ethnicity who have set their foot in a certain region should have played a significant role in that regions ethnic formation.

On the other hand, Azeri Turks to this day consists of different Turkoman tribes, like Afshars, Shahsevens, Qarapapakhs, Ayrims and so on...I personally belong to the Qaradaghli tribe, what else could I tell you.

Settlements of Oghuz Turks was a mass-migration, not few political settlements. Maybe you should first be aware of this.

[Azadan Januspar]

Ok dude you got me name some reads for me to begin with.

Azerbaijani language are a branch of Oghuz languages, and Azeri Turks a branch of Oghuz Turks. How is this something needed to be proven? Do you need to prove that Persians are part of larger Iranic peoples?

This is a history forum please define Persians for me here at the first place? Azeri people today are composed of Turks + Iranians mainly and then other notable people like Arabs if you speak of medieval times until now. I don't think by repeating that over and over you could actually change the very fact. It's useless to say they are only Turks or purely Iranians.

There was kingdom of Albania in present-day Azerbaijan, there was Khazar settlements and so on...But none of it played/plays any significant role in formation of Azerbaijani ethnicity. The examples of Arabs and "local" Iranians are the same thing. Later there were Mongols, and later Russian invasion. How did any of that play any role in formation of Azerbaijani ethnicity?

Well they did and still do. language is only one ethnic component and there are several others like culture,values, art, styles, literature, family life, religion, ritual, food are all to be considered.

And on the other hand the Azeri people of Iran for majority of them don't belong to any type of clan or tribe.

[Deleted]

;D

Azeri Turks are Turks, what is consisting of Turks supposed to mean? In Iran the more popular ethnic designation for Azeri Turks are "Tork", "Azari" are used officially but among population it is stil Tork that is widely used. Even Khamenei in his speech said "Türk də Fars kimi, Fars da Türk kimi bir birinə qardaşdı", he didn't say "Azəri də Fars Kimi, Fars da Azəri kimi bir birinə qardaşdı".

When you talk about Torki language in Iran, you refer to the Azeri Turkish. If you would refer to Anatolian Turkish, it would be Istanbul Torki. Since you are from Iran yourself, you must be already familiar with it, right?

You should seriously stop presenting your personal claims as fact. The FACT is that Azeri Turks are a branch of Oghuz Turks. Are we arguing basic facts here now? As I already told you, we have Albanians, Khazars and others as example. The example of Iranians and Arabs are not more significant than others.

Here you can see what tribe/clans make-up Azerbaijani ethnicity in Iran (not complete list, and there are many mistakes in that map but thats not the point, it can maybe help you about tribe/clans).

gestaltist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/iran_languagemapl.jpg

And it is beyond me how a troll like you became a part of administration of this website. Maybe Ihsan can help you with defining basic ethnic groups.

[Deleted]

To İhsan:

Böyle bir Türk düşmanını buranın yöneticisi yapmanızı gerçekten anlamıyorum.

Ayrıca şimdi gelip beni burda azarlarsınızda önce yaptığınız gibi, bu kişinin böyle uyduruk şeyler yazmasına nasıl musahide ediyorsunuz anlamıyorum.

Sözdende anlamıyorki anlatayım, aynı şeyleri tekrar edip duruyor, şimdi buna ne anlatasın. Yaptığı tek kelime ile trolluk.

Herkesin düşüncesini söylemesine hakkı var, ama böyle uyduruk şeylerle değil, bu başka bir şey. Amacınıda anlasam...

[ancalimon]

Aren't people in Azerbaijan as much "Persian" as people living in Egypt are "Ottoman"?

And it's perfectly normal for assimilated Iranians to exists among Azerbaijanis, but there was always an enmity between Persians and Turks.

But the language spoken must have "always" been a Turkic language. Even the Armenian alphabet was created with Turkic spelling of words in mind. (that's probably something to do with religion and prayers)

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

*facepalm*