PDA

View Full Version : Egypt's Turkic dynasties era: Egypt's golden periods



Böri
08-18-2017, 11:04 PM
Egypt lived its most glorious and prosperous days and years under the rule of the 3 different Turkic dynasties which ruled the Nile country at 3 different eras.

1. Tulunids (868-905)


Ṭūlūnid Dynasty, first local dynasty of Egypt and Syria to exist independently of the ʿAbbāsid caliphate in Baghdad, ruling 868–905. Its founder, Aḥmad ibn Ṭūlūn, a Turk, arrived in Egypt in 868 as vice governor and promptly (868–872) established a military and financial foothold in the province by organizing an independent Egyptian army and securing the management of the Egyptian and Syrian treasuries.


2. Bahri line Mamluks (1250-1382)


The Bahri dynasty or Bahriyya Mamluks (Turkish: Bahri Hanedanı, al-Mamalik al-Bahariyya - المماليك البحرية) was a Mamluk dynasty of mostly Cuman-Kipchak Turkic origin that ruled the Egyptian Mamluk Sultanate from 1250 to 1382.
In 1250, when the Ayyubid sultan as-Salih Ayyub died, the Mamluks he had owned as slaves murdered his son and heir al-Muazzam Turanshah, and Shajar al-Durr the widow of as-Salih became the Sultana of Egypt. She married the Atabeg (commander in chief) Emir Aybak and abdicated, Aybak (Kwharezmian Oghuz Turcoman) becoming Sultan. He ruled from 1250 to 1257.


3. Ottoman Turk period (1517-1798)


Selim’s subjugation of the Dulkadir (Dhū al-Qadr) principality of Elbistan (now in Turkey) brought the Ottomans into conflict with the Mamlūk rulers (Circassian Burji line) of Syria and Egypt, who regarded Dulkadir as their protégé. Selim defeated the Mamlūk armies at the battles of Marj Dābiq (north of Aleppo; Aug. 24, 1516) and Raydānīyah (near Cairo; Jan. 22, 1517), thus bringing Syria, Egypt, and Palestine under Ottoman rule. In Cairo the sharif of Mecca presented Selim with the keys to that holy city, a symbolic gesture acknowledging Selim as the leader of the Islāmic world.

In 1798 the French under Napoleon invaded Egypt and left it in 1801. After 4 years of vacuum, Albanian Mohammed Ali took over Egypt and controlled it until 1848.


Egypt's most prosperous days were under these Turkic dynasties. Especially the Bahri Mamluk era is still remembered as the golden era of Egypt. Baibars (Cuman-Kipchak) even surpassed Ramses II as he did what was never done before: defeating the Mongol Empire's army in close combat.
Back then during Baibars' era, Egypt was even called Turkey. It became a second Turkiye.

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:10 PM
Yeah cool, the funny thing is tulunids and mamluks didn't see themselves as turks and didn't care about other turks.

actually mamluks along with the egyptian army fought the mongols ( turks ancestors) and defeated them in ain jalut battle, that's number 1.

second, mamluks fought also ottomans(their brothers), that's number 2.

number 3 which is the most important thing, Egypt conquered south turkey and Turkish sultan had to ask the russian and english help.

The First Egyptian-Ottoman War, First Turco-Egyptian War or First Syrian War (1831–1833) was brought about by Muhammad Ali Pasha's demand to the Ottoman Empire for control of Arab Greater Syria, as reward for his assistance in Crete against Greece. As a result, Muhammad Ali's forces temporarily gained control of Syria, and advanced as far north as Adana.





Outraged, Ali sent his army into Syria under the command of his son Ibrahim Pasha, and his navy, under command of General Ibrahim Yakan, landed at Jaffa. The Egyptians rapidly occupied Jerusalem and the coastal regions of Palestine and Lebanon.

Several battles between the Egyptians and Ottomans ensued. At a village south of Homs on the Orontes, on April 14, 1832, the Egyptians under Ibrahim Pasha defeated an Ottoman force of 15,000 under Othman Pasha. After reducing Acre, the Egyptians occupied Damascus on June 14, 1832. A new Ottoman army under Mohammed Pasha advanced south to Homs, and a major battle took place on July 8, 1832 on the southern approaches to that city. The Ottomans were routed with large losses and the Egyptians occupied Homs on July 9; then Aleppo on July 17, and Antioch on July 28. On July 29 another major battle took place at the Pass of Beilan through the Nur Mountains, where the Egyptians defeated an Ottoman force of 45,000 equipped with 160 guns, under Hussein Pasha and captured 25 guns along with considerable war booty. The Egyptians occupied Beilan on July 30, then Tarsus and Adana on July 31. At this point the Egyptian army halted, having occupied the Arabic-speaking regions it had intended to annex to Egypt, and awaited instructions from Ibrahim's father, Muhammad Ali Pasha in Cairo.

In the ensuing lull, the Sultan recalled the Grand Vizier Reshid Pasha and organised a new army of 80,000 to repel the Egyptians. Anticipating a final major battle, Ibrahim set about to capture territory in Southern Turkey to secure his supply lines. On December 21, 1832, the Battle of Konya was fought, where the Ottomans were easily defeated and the Egyptians thereafter threatened Constantinople. In February of the following year, the Ottoman Empire entered a defensive alliance with Russia and received military assistance from Nicholas I of Russia.
Foreign pressure[edit]

The Egyptians were eventually forced to call off the invasion because of British and French pressure.[1] Although they initially backed the Pasha, they threatened military action against him if he did not halt his advance. They feared that if the Egyptians were to continue advancing, an already severely weakened Ottoman Empire, would collapse and leave a power vacuum, in which Russia could possibly take or gain advantage.
Aftermath[edit]

The war ended in 1833, and Egypt was left in control of Syria and much of Arabia. At the Convention of Kutahya, held in May 1833, Syria and Adana were ceded to Egypt, and Ibrahim became governor-general of the two provinces.[2] Later that same year, the Ottomans signed the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi with Russia, in which both countries agreed to mutual assistance should either empire enter a military conflict.

But the settlement of the Peace Agreement of Kutahya was not satisfactory to either party, resulting in the Second Ottoman-Egyptian War (1839–1841).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypti...%E2%80%9333%29

wvwvw
08-18-2017, 11:12 PM
Those were Albanian dynasties, the Golden Era of Egypt.

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:15 PM
Those were Albanian dynasties, the Golden Era of Egypt.

no albanian was here.

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:15 PM
Siyendi fairy tales.

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:16 PM
no albanian was here.

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

wvwvw
08-18-2017, 11:16 PM
no albanian was here.

Albanian pashas build Egypt and left their genetic imprint on most Egyptians.

gültekin
08-18-2017, 11:16 PM
Yeah cool, the funny thing is tulunids and mamluks didn't see themselves as turks and didn't care about other turks.

Is that why they named their state "al-Dawla al-Turkiyya", LOL? Turkiyya/Turkey was the offical name of the Mamluk State.

Turkish was the spoken language of the Mamluk elite, they regarded Turkish as their caste's vehicle of communication. Even the Burji dynasty kept using Turkish.

Böri
08-18-2017, 11:17 PM
@ Egyptian
Stop distorting history.
Under Bahri (Turkish) dynasty, Egypt was called as al-Dawla al-Turkiyya. The Turkish line Mamluks ruled Egypt until 1382.
Tatar influxes from the Pontic-Caspian steppes to Egypt ended in mid 14th century, Mamluk Sultans started to bring in Circassians. Circassians became majority of the Mamluk class and took over from Turks in 1382.
So the Ottoman Turks didnt fight Turkish Mamluks in 1516 and 1517. It was Circassian warriors who were ruling Egypt back then.

wvwvw
08-18-2017, 11:18 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali_of_Egypt

Laberia's great grandfathers descend from the linage of Great Ali

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:19 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali_of_Egypt

he was macedonian from kavala.

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:20 PM
Laberia's great grandfathers descend from the linage of Great Ali

People don't understand that even enormous number of Greeks used similar names... and still they call them Arabs for some reason.

People today call Egyptians Arabs for some reason as well..

What's wrong with people...

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:21 PM
he was macedonian from kavala.

There are many Albanians is Greece that's nothing new.

gültekin
08-18-2017, 11:21 PM
https://i.hizliresim.com/Akja4r.png (https://hizliresim.com/Akja4r)

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:22 PM
Is that why they named their state "al-Dawla al-Turkiyya", LOL? Turkiyya/Turkey was the offical name of the Mamluk State.

Turkish was the spoken language of the Mamluk elite, they regarded Turkish as their caste's vehicle of communication. Even the Burji dynasty kept using Turkish.

The Arabic sources for the period of the Bahri Mamluks refer to the dynasty as the State/Realm of the Turks (Arabic: دولة الاتراك‎‎, Dawlat al-Atrāk; دولة الترك, Dawlat al-Turk; الدولة التركية, al-Dawla al-Turkiyya).[20][21][19] Other official names used were State of the Circassians (دولة الجراكسة, Dawlat al-Jarākisa). A variant thereof (دولة التركية الجراكسية, al-Dawla al-Turkiyya al-Jarkasiyya) emphasized the fact that the Circassians were Turkish-speaking.[19]

Some misconception names include “the Baḥrī Sultanate/period” dawlat al-Baḥriyya ( الدولة البحرية) and the “Burjī Sultanate/period” al-Dawla al-Burijyya ( الدولة البرجية) these were rarely used by medieval Mamluk historians but are currently used as sub-periods of the Mamluk Sultanates.[clarification needed]

The term Mongol State (الدولة المغولية, al-Dawla al-Mughuliyya) was used during Sultan al-Adil Kitbugha's rule, who was of Mongol extraction.

-----------------

these were used by story tellers and historians to describe the era not the name of the state lol

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:23 PM
@ Egyptian
Stop distorting history.
Under Bahri (Turkish) dynasty, Egypt was called as al-Dawla al-Turkiyya. The Turkish line Mamluks ruled Egypt until 1382.
Tatar influxes from the Pontic-Caspian steppes to Egypt ended in mid 14th century, Mamluk Sultans started to bring in Circassians. Circassians became majority of the Mamluk class and took over from Turks in 1382.
So the Ottoman Turks didnt fight Turkish Mamluks in 1516 and 1517. It was Circassian warriors who were ruling Egypt back then.

see my answer to gutlekin

wvwvw
08-18-2017, 11:23 PM
There are many Albanians is Greece that's nothing new.

I estimate around 6 million

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:24 PM
https://i.hizliresim.com/Akja4r.png (https://hizliresim.com/Akja4r)

are you really N1b y-dna... Genghis Khan people..

Are there many N1b, R1b people in Turkey?

Those are True Turks.

Many are just Turkified.. but True Turks.. I've respect for them.

They have achieved a lot.

gültekin
08-18-2017, 11:25 PM
Egypt was always ruled by foreigners. Macedonians and Ptolemy, Romans, Fatimids (Arabs from Arabia), Tulunids (Turks), Mamluks (Turks), Ottomans (Turks), French, British...

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:26 PM
Egypt was always ruled by foreigners. Macedonians and Ptolemy, Romans, Fatimids (Arabs from Arabia), Tulunids (Turks), Mamluks (Turks), Ottomans (Turks), French, British...

Well eventually Romans and Egyptians made a pact... through marriages etc...

Egyptian mythology and culture has been mixed and absorbed with Roman.

Well.. It worked until Arabs came.

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:28 PM
There are many Albanians is Greece that's nothing new.

M.Ali didn't point at himself as albanian.. his children and grandchildren spoke arabic untill the last king Ahmed Fouad II .. that's interview with him, he speaks only in Egyptian Arabic


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvGTijKEfHg

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:29 PM
Egypt was always ruled by foreigners. Macedonians and Ptolemy, Romans, Fatimids (Arabs from Arabia), Tulunids (Turks), Mamluks (Turks), Ottomans (Turks), French, British...

yeah even though we managed to occupy turkey, and the sultan asked for russian help, isn't that ironic?

Böri
08-18-2017, 11:29 PM
Turkish was actually the spoken language in the palaces and garrisons of Cairo, Damietta and Alexandria during the Bahri Mamluk era. The Egyptian folk spoke Arabic, Greek etc but Turkic rulers spoke Turkic.
This is one of the best examples in history how the language of Turks, originally just like their blood, is the elite among all the others.

Circassian Mamluk is detail thing. They came later and took over from Turks. Their era was mostly poor and Egypt lost its greatness it reached under the Bahri Turks. They might have spoken Turkish, even Albanians did after 1805 :)

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:32 PM
M.Ali didn't point at himself as albanian.. his children and grandchildren spoke arabic untill the last king Ahmed Fouad II .. that's interview with him, he speaks only in Egyptian Arabic


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvGTijKEfHg

They speak Arabic.. but they descended from Albanian family.. they can even personally dismiss that since they were born in Egypt.. but then
they have Albanian Ancestry.

There is nothing wrong with that.

In Ancient Times Greek and Roman people shared ancestry with Egyptians as well through marriages etc.. it was a common thing back then.

It is only in modern times that "Europeans" started to distance themselves from Egypt.

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:32 PM
Turkish was actually the spoken language in the palaces and garrisons of Cairo, Damietta and Alexandria during the Bahri Mamluk era. The Egyptian folk spoke Arabic, Greek etc but Turkic rulers spoke Turkic.
This is one of the best examples in history how the language of Turks, originally just like their blood, is the elite among all the others.

Circassian Mamluk is detail thing. They came later and took over from Turks. Their era was mostly poor and Egypt lost its greatness it reached under the Bahri Turks. They might have spoken Turkish, even Albanians did after 1805 :)

Yeah , They WUZ KANGZ, PYRAMIDS WAS BUILT BY TURKS KANGS AND ALBANIANS.

haha

Egyptian
08-18-2017, 11:34 PM
They speak Arabic.. but they descended from Albanian family.. they can even personally dismiss that since they were born in Egypt.. but then
they have Albanian Ancestry.

There is nothing wrong with that.

In Ancient Times Greek and Roman people shared ancestry with Egyptians as well through marriages etc.. it was a common thing back then.

It is only in modern times that "Europeans" started to distance themselves from Egypt.

If you understand Arabic, the last king Ahmed Fouad says to the interviewer about his grandfather M.Ali everything , and how he wanted Egypt as a separate nation from the ottmans and he succeded.

the guy tells everything about his ancestry.. so bad he isn't allowed to back again i guess.

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:37 PM
If you understand Arabic, the last king Ahmed Fouad says to the interviewer about his grandfather M.Ali everything , and how he wanted Egypt as a separate nation from the ottmans and he succeded.

the guy tells everything about his ancestry.. so bad he isn't allowed to back again i guess.

What is the name of Egyptian language before Arabs brought Arabic?

Do Egyptians seek to learn their own language against Arabic one?

Böri
08-18-2017, 11:38 PM
Yeah , They WUZ KANGZ, PYRAMIDS WAS BUILT BY TURKS KANGS AND ALBANIANS.

haha

Who the f*ck care pyramids? Ramses was cucked by pathetic Armenoid Hittites at the battle of Kadesh (13th century B.C. first recorded battle in history).

Egyptian army of Bahri Turks, led by Qutuz and Baibars, defeated the Mongols at Ayn Jalout. They did what was never done before. Nobody had ever defeated Mongols until then.

Egyptian history's greatest military achievement: Battle of Ayn Jalout.
Baibars > Ramses :)

Not to mention all the architectural heritage Bahri Mamluks left in Egypt. Egyptian architecture reached the zenith also under the Bahris.
Albanian era was a poor era. Nothing special.

Bosniensis
08-18-2017, 11:42 PM
Who the f*ck care pyramids? Ramses was cucked by pathetic Armenoid Hittites at the battle of Kadesh (13th century B.C. first recorded battle in history).

Egyptian army of Bahri Turks, led by Qutuz and Baibars, defeated the Mongols at Ayn Jalout. They did what was never done before. Nobody had ever defeated Mongols until then.

Egyptian history's greatest military achievement: Battle of Ayn Jalout.
Baibars > Ramses :)

Not to mention all the architectural heritage Bahri Mamluks left in Egypt. Egyptian architecture reached the zenith also under the Bahris.
Albanian era was a poor era. Nothing special.

They probably fought with them cause Mongols were Pagans.

Religious wars are common in human history. Greeks fought each other just because other town worshiped different idol.

wvwvw
08-18-2017, 11:49 PM
They probably fought with them cause Mongols were Pagans.

Religious wars are common in human history. Greeks fought each other just because other town worshiped different idol.

Stop pulling things out of your arse

Böri
08-19-2017, 12:21 AM
They probably fought with them cause Mongols were Pagans.

Religious wars are common in human history. Greeks fought each other just because other town worshiped different idol.

They fought Mongols because Mongols were assaulting them. Mongols being pagans might also have played. Mamluks were all Muslims, just as you mean yeah.

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 07:02 AM
What is the name of Egyptian language before Arabs brought Arabic?

Do Egyptians seek to learn their own language against Arabic one?

Egyptians has their own unique arabic accent which is basically arabic modified with old egyptian words, it's the most famous accent in Middle East and the most easy one.

Böri
08-19-2017, 03:23 PM
Egyptian history's greatest military achievement.

After Egypt became al Dawla al Turkiyya, the Egyptian army wipped out the Mongol army in southern Levant.


Battle of Ain Jalut 1260

The Battle of Ain Jalut took place on 3 September 1260 between Muslim Mamluks and the Mongols. The battle marked the extent of Mongol conquests, and was the first time a Mongol advance had ever been permanently beaten back in direct combat on the battlefield. This is the battle that saved Islam from Mongolians.

Location of Ain Jalut (today in Israel)
http://i.hizliresim.com/blogbb.jpg (http://hizliresim.com/blogbb)

In 1260, Hulagu (grandson of Genghis Khan) sent envoys to Qutuz in Cairo, demanding his surrender. Qutuz responded by killing the envoys and displaying their heads on Bab Zuweila, one of the gates of Cairo.

http://i.hizliresim.com/dnVWGp.jpg (http://hizliresim.com/dnVWGp)

The opposing forces met at Ain Jalut on September 3, 1260, both sides numbering about 20,000 men. The first to advance were the Mongols. The Mamluks had the advantage of knowledge of the terrain, and Qutuz capitalized on this by hiding the bulk of his force in the highlands, hoping to bait the Mongols with a smaller force under Baibars. The two armies fought restlessly for many hours, with Mamluk leader Baibars most of the time implementing hit-and-run tactics, in order to provoke the Mongol troops and at the same time preserve the bulk of his troops intact. When the Mongols carried out another heavy assault, Baibars and his men feigned a final retreat, drawing the Mongols into the highlands to be ambushed by the rest of the Mamluk forces, who were concealed among the trees in the highlands. The Mongol leader Kitbuqa, already provoked by the constant fleeing of Baibars and his troops, committed a grave mistake; instead of suspecting a trick, Kitbuqa decided to march forwards with all his troops on the trail of the fleeing Mamluks. When the Mongols reached the highlands, Mamluk forces appeared from hiding and began to fire arrows and attack with their cavalry. The Mongols then found themselves surrounded on all sides by the Mamluk forces.

The Mongol army fought very fiercely and very aggressively to break out. Some distance away, Qutuz watched with his private legion. When Qutuz saw the left wing of the Mamluk army almost destroyed by the desperate Mongols seeking an escape route, Qutuz threw away his combat helmet, so that his warriors could recognize him. He was seen the next moment rushing fiercely towards the battlefield yelling "wa islamah!" (Oh my Islam), urging his army to keep firm and advanced towards the damaged side followed by his own unit. The Mongols were pushed back and fled to a vicinity of Bisan followed by Qutuz's forces but they managed to gather and returned to the battlefield making a successful counterattack. However, the battle shifted in favor of the Mamluks, who now had both the geographic and the psychological advantage, and eventually some of the Mongols were forced to retreat. When the battle ended, the Mamluk heavy cavalrymen had accomplished what had never been done before, beating the Mongols in close combat. Almost the whole Mongol army that had remained in the region, including Kitbuqa, was destroyed.



:)
On that day, even the Pharoahs who declared themselves 'gods on earth, werent as great as the Mamluks

Laberia
08-19-2017, 03:34 PM
Laberia's great grandfathers descend from the linage of Great Ali

No, his ancestors were from Korça. From us descend everyone in Greece with the surname Liapis. Also many other people in your country.

Selurong
08-19-2017, 03:36 PM
Who the f*ck care pyramids? Ramses was cucked by pathetic Armenoid Hittites at the battle of Kadesh (13th century B.C. first recorded battle in history).

Egyptian army of Bahri Turks, led by Qutuz and Baibars, defeated the Mongols at Ayn Jalout. They did what was never done before. Nobody had ever defeated Mongols until then.

Egyptian history's greatest military achievement: Battle of Ayn Jalout.
Baibars > Ramses :)

Not to mention all the architectural heritage Bahri Mamluks left in Egypt. Egyptian architecture reached the zenith also under the Bahris.
Albanian era was a poor era. Nothing special.

I would just like to point out that that statement is wrong, several other countries also defeated the Mongols asides from them. You have the Japanese, the Vietnamese and Indonesians, who also defeated the Mongols in their lands.

Böri
08-19-2017, 03:50 PM
I would just like to point out that that statement is wrong, several other countries also defeated the Mongols asides from them. You have the Japanese, the Vietnamese and Indonesians, who also defeated the Mongols in their lands.

Historians commonly agree that Ayn Jalout was the turning point. Because Mongols assaulted, not only their army was defeated but they also lands they controlled in northern Levant to Mamluks. Later Hulagu Khan came in person to fight Baibars, Baibars defeated Mongols on every single occasion.
The Mongol mythical invincibility was defeated on a global scale by Mamluks.

Selurong
08-19-2017, 03:58 PM
Historians commonly agree that Ayn Jalout was the turning point. Because Mongols assaulted, not only their army was defeated but they also lands they controlled in northern Levant to Mamluks. Later Hulagu Khan came in person to fight Baibars, Baibars defeated Mongols on every single occasion.
The Mongol mythical invincibility was defeated on a global scale by Mamluks.

That's great and all, but the Turks weren't the only ones to defeat the Mongols...

The Indonesians defeated the Mongols in the Battle of Java. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Java)

The Mongols were defeated by the Vietnamese in the Battle of Bach Dang (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_B%E1%BA%A1ch_%C4%90%E1%BA%B1ng_(1288))

The Japanese defeat the Mongols in Northern Kyushu. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Japan)

Böri
08-19-2017, 04:25 PM
That's great and all, but the Turks weren't the only ones to defeat the Mongols...

The Indonesians defeated the Mongols in the Battle of Java. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Java)

The Mongols were defeated by the Vietnamese in the Battle of Bach Dang (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_B%E1%BA%A1ch_%C4%90%E1%BA%B1ng_(1288))

The Japanese defeat the Mongols in Northern Kyushu. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Japan)

Mongol attack against Java (Chinese Yuan Mongol dynasty in fact): 1293
Mongol attack against Vietnam: 1288
Mongol attack against Japan: First attack 1274

Ayn Jalout Battle: 1260.

My friend, are you fit to think about those dates and try to understand the point when we say 'Ayn Jalout was turning point,?

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 04:40 PM
That's great and all, but the Turks weren't the only ones to defeat the Mongols...

The Indonesians defeated the Mongols in the Battle of Java. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Java)

The Mongols were defeated by the Vietnamese in the Battle of Bach Dang (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_B%E1%BA%A1ch_%C4%90%E1%BA%B1ng_(1288))

The Japanese defeat the Mongols in Northern Kyushu. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Japan)

turks have nothing to do to defeat the mongols.. you speak like they were the poplution of egypt.. only baibars and qoutoz were turkic and not turks.. plus few soldiers.. egyptian army is the one who defeated mongols.

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 04:40 PM
I like how turks and albanians try to steal Egyptian history .. turks claiming they defeated mongols in ain jalut and albanians claiming it was albanian army who occupied turkey during the egyptian-ottoman war LOL

gültekin
08-19-2017, 05:12 PM
turks have nothing to do to defeat the mongols.. you speak like they were the poplution of egypt.. only baibars and qoutoz were turkic and not turks.. plus few soldiers.. egyptian army is the one who defeated mongols.

That was not "Egyptian" army, they were Mamluks of Turkic origin. There were even Sudanese auxiliaries, but local Egyptians? No, they were simply not part of the army. They were merely peasants paying taxes to their Mamluk Turkic overlords.

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 05:18 PM
That was not "Egyptian" army, they were Mamluks of Turkic origin. There were even Sudanese auxiliaries, but local Egyptians? No, they were simply not part of the army. They were merely peasants paying taxes to their Mamluk Turkic overlords.

hahahaha i love when turks and albanians change history.. WE WUZ KANGZ IN EGYPT

you people even asked the egyptian help in the first Crimean war lol

https://vid.alarabiya.net/images/2014/03/03/cde124af-b8ba-45ef-b09e-8c88c9fc85c5/cde124af-b8ba-45ef-b09e-8c88c9fc85c5_16x9_788x442.jpg

gültekin
08-19-2017, 07:36 PM
hahahaha i love when turks and albanians change history.. WE WUZ KANGZ IN EGYPT

you people even asked the egyptian help in the first Crimean war lol

https://vid.alarabiya.net/images/2014/03/03/cde124af-b8ba-45ef-b09e-8c88c9fc85c5/cde124af-b8ba-45ef-b09e-8c88c9fc85c5_16x9_788x442.jpg



Ptolemy and Macedonians, Romans, Arabs, Tulunids, Mamluks, Ottomans etc. Name me a single native Egyptian dynasty/empire from the last 2000 years LOL

We did not ask "egyptian" help lol, egypt was a province of the Ottoman Empire.

Kamal900
08-19-2017, 07:44 PM
Lol, there's nothing golden about the Ottoman empire. The first two Turkic dynasties have nothing to do with Anatolian Turks since both of them are of Kipchack and pre-Anatolian Turkic origins, and they fought against Europeans rather than spit shine their shoes like your fellow Turks here do like Gezim and The Ghostface.

Pennywise
08-19-2017, 07:48 PM
I like how turks and albanians try to steal Egyptian history .. turks claiming they defeated mongols in ain jalut and albanians claiming it was albanian army who occupied turkey during the egyptian-ottoman war LOL

I swear to god, you're one of the biggest retards on this forum. Your inferiority complex screams through your posts. LOL

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 07:50 PM
I swear to god, you're one of the biggest retards on this forum. Your inferiority complex screams through your posts. LOL

OWD to being a turk? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL... for god sake am not the one who kisses european asses to be in EU.

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 07:52 PM
Ottoman forces were defeated in a number of battles, and the Egyptians were ready to capture Constantinople, which forced Sultan Mahmud II to seek Russian military aid. A Russian army of 10,000 landed on the Bosphorus shores in 1833 and helped to prevent the capture of Constantinople.


Naval Battle of Navarino, 1827
As the result of that Russian military operation, the Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi was signed. Russia benefited greatly from this treaty. It provided for a military alliance between Russia and the Ottoman Empire, if one of them were to be attacked. A secret additional clause allowed the Ottomans to opt out of sending troops but to close the Straits to foreign warships if Russia was under threat.

In 1838 the situation was similar to 1831. Muhammad Ali of Egypt was not happy about his lack of control and power in Syria, and he resumed military action. The Ottoman Army lost to the Egyptians at the Battle of Nezib on 24 June 1839. The Ottoman Empire was saved by Britain, Austria, Prussia and Russia, who signed a convention in London on 15 July 1840 granting Muhammad Ali and his descendants the right to inherit power in Egypt in exchange for removal of Egyptian armed forces from Syria and Lebanon. Moreover, Muhammad Ali had to admit a formal dependence to the Ottoman sultan. After Muhammad Ali refused to obey the requirements of the London convention, the allied Anglo-Austrian fleet blockaded the Nile Delta, bombarded Beirut and captured Acre. Muhammad Ali accepted the conditions of the London convention in 1840.

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

Pennywise
08-19-2017, 07:52 PM
OWD to being a turk? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL... for god sake am not the one who kisses european asses to be in EU.

You're kissing Turkish ass. Turks are known to be treated like gods in Egypt's history. That's why you are so butthurt but you can't hide your admiration to Turks either.

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 07:55 PM
Ptolemy and Macedonians, Romans, Arabs, Tulunids, Mamluks, Ottomans etc. Name me a single native Egyptian dynasty/empire from the last 2000 years LOL

We did not ask "egyptian" help lol, egypt was a province of the Ottoman Empire.

1-all of these guys were Egyptians, we aren't racists fucks like most of the nations .. anyone can be egyptian as long as he works for Egypt and its progress, Muhamed ali kicked ottman asses and took independence even though he is macedonian and he even didn't care about macedonia., except for ottmans (they were occupiers but we invaded them back)- Romans also were kicked

2-Ottmans ask for the Egyptian help in Crimea

The sultan needed help to defeat his longstanding arch-foe, and called on the army in its province Egypt to assist.

Dynastic superiority

Egypt, which had previously rebelled from Ottoman rule under viceroy Muhammad Ali, had a superior military capability to the 550-year-old Ottoman Empire.

Ali’s grandson, the ruling Abbas Pasha, believed that sending troops to Crimea for the Ottoman cause could help curry favor with the sultan for a time when it might be needed.

“In a sense, this was one way of Egypt’s ruler... to appease Istanbul and say: ‘I’m the loyal, reliable viceroy sending you assistance in times of need’,” said Khaled Fahmy, a history professor at the American University of Cairo.

Taking no chances, the sultan also amassed a Tunisian contingent of 10,000 men.


Troops - presumed to be of Egyptian origin - pictured in the Crimea. (Photo courtesy of the Roger Fenton collection)

Egypt amassed 40,000 soldiers specifically to fight in Crimea under the designation of the Ottoman Empire, said Sabit, a descendant of Selim Pasha, a general who led the main Egyptian military contingent in the war.

In 1853, with war brewing, the sultan sought the help of Britain and France, making up a powerful allied force against the vast, feared Russian army.

The first military action the Egyptian contingent experienced was the siege of Silistria in mid-1854.

Supply and command

The Egyptians went on to another military victory at Eupatoria, an important part of the allied supply chain, said Sabit.
In early 1855, Russia began an assault of 19,000 men and 108 guns in an attempt to take back Eupatoria. The attack failed, although 400 Egyptian soldiers, along with Selim Pasha, were killed.

The conflict, which lasted almost two and a half years, saw total losses over half a million soldiers on all sides.

The Egyptians “fought better and were more disciplined compared to the regular Ottoman army,” said Sabit, quoting the account of a French logistics commander who was at the battle of Eupatoria.

For the remainder of the war, Egyptian replacements continued to arrive in Crimea, and were eventually repatriated in 1856, when the war finally ended with Russia’s defeat.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/features/2014/03/03/Arab-involvement-in-Crimean-War-erased-from-history-.html

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 07:56 PM
You're kissing Turkish ass. Turks are known to be treated like gods in Egypt's history. That's why you are so butthurt but you can't hide your admiration to Turks either.

That's why we invaded Turkey and the sultan had to ask russian help?

gültekin
08-19-2017, 08:06 PM
Lol, there's nothing golden about the Ottoman empire. The first two Turkic dynasties have nothing to do with Anatolian Turks since both of them are of Kipchack and pre-Anatolian Turkic origins
Tulunids were not Kipchak. The Mamluks were mainly Kipchak. They had many things to do with Anatolian Turks, the Mamluk military was indistinguishable from the Seljuk military.



and they fought against Europeans rather than spit shine their shoes like your fellow Turks here do like Gezim and The Ghostface.

Hahaha, is this a joke or what? You are not in a position to call anyone asskisser or shoe-cleaner, because you are the number one asskisser around here. It is in your blood.

It was Turkic peoples who defended the eastern world; Seljuk Turks in Anatolia, Kipchak Mamluks in Egypt, Zengids (Turkish dynasty) in North Syria/Mesopotamia. Otherwise the entire region would have been easily colonized by the Crusaders. Arabs played no role in any part of this period. It was a war between Turks and "Franks".

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 08:09 PM
It was Turkic peoples who defended the eastern world; Seljuk Turks in Anatolia, Kipchak Mamluks in Egypt, Zengids (Turkish dynasty) in North Syria/Mesopotamia. Otherwise the entire region would have been easily colonized by the Crusaders. Arabs played no role in any part of this period. It was a war between Turks and "Franks".
ROFL

gültekin
08-19-2017, 08:10 PM
Egypt was a place where anyone with some military skill could become a God. None of those dynasties were "Egyptian" in origin.

gültekin
08-19-2017, 08:12 PM
ROFL

What's so funny, Egyptian slave? Amin Maalouf (an ethnic Arab) admits it in his book (The Crusades Through Arab Eyes)

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 08:13 PM
Egypt was a place where anyone with some military skill could become a God. None of those dynasties were "Egyptian" in origin.

You have been crushed with sources and evidences and you all you do is bitching now :'D

trust me if any war to happen again between Egypt and Turkey, everyone will welcome the Egyptian occupation of Turkey, no russian help will happen again.

Kamal900
08-19-2017, 08:13 PM
Tulunids were not Kipchak. The Mamluks were mainly Kipchak. They had many things to do with Anatolian Turks, the Mamluk military was indistinguishable from the Seljuk military.



Hahaha, is this a joke or what? You are not in a position to call anyone asskisser or shoe-cleaner, because you are the number one asskisser around here. It is in your blood.

It was Turkic peoples who defended the eastern world; Seljuk Turks in Anatolia, Kipchak Mamluks in Egypt, Zengids (Turkish dynasty) in North Syria/Mesopotamia. Otherwise the entire region would have been easily colonized by the Crusaders. Arabs played no role in any part of this period. It was a war between Turks and "Franks".

Sure, because I go around different threads and forums begging for Whites to accept me like your friend, Gezim, does. Again, the Kipchaks fought against the Europeans while today's Turks like The Ghostface are begging Europeans to accept Turkey as part of the EU. Ataturk himself hated the idea in linking his people to the Ottoman and the Seljuk empires since they represent "impurity" of the Turkish people by adopting the Persian and Arabic cultures to a certain extent, and anyone who was caught practising cultural aspects that links them to either of these empires were severely punished by the state. In other words, according to the Kemalist point of view, modern Turks have nothing to do with the old Turkic peoples of the middle east, period.

gültekin
08-19-2017, 08:14 PM
Egyptian occupation of Turkey

http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/illK6U.gif

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 08:16 PM
http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/illK6U.gif

help us russia :'D

gültekin
08-19-2017, 08:31 PM
Ataturk himself hated the idea in linking his people to the Ottoman and the Seljuk empires.... In other words, according to the Kemalist point of view, modern Turks have nothing to do with the old Turkic peoples of the middle east, period.
I live in Turkey and what you say is UTTERLY bullshit. You are a fucking propaganda machine living on an internet forum and repeating the same shit over and over again.

The Ottoman Empire is always praised in our education system (which was based on "Kemalism" until recently), the late Ottoman administration is another story. No one, not even Islamists favour the late period of the empire. Atatürk had nothing against the Seljuks you piece of shit. Stop pulling things out of your disgusting fat ass.

gültekin
08-19-2017, 08:35 PM
help us russia :'D

They were Ottomans rebels, not Egyptians. "Egyptians" were nothing more than peasants paying taxes to their Ottoman overlords. There is nothing "Egyptian" in the last 2000 years of Egypt's history.

Egyptian
08-19-2017, 08:37 PM
They were Ottomans rebels, not Egyptians. "Egyptians" were nothing more than peasants paying taxes to their Ottoman overlords. There is nothing "Egyptian" in the last 2000 years of Egypt's history.

ahahahahahahaha

Kamal900
08-19-2017, 08:58 PM
I live in Turkey and what you say is UTTERLY bullshit. You are a fucking propaganda machine living on an internet forum and repeating the same shit over and over again.

The Ottoman Empire is always praised in our education system (which was based on "Kemalism" until recently), the late Ottoman administration is another story. No one, not even Islamists favour the late period of the empire. Atatürk had nothing against the Seljuks you piece of shit. Stop pulling things out of your disgusting fat ass.

Today it is praised but not under Ataturk's rule. Oh, so you deny that Ataturk himself tried to erase anything that links them to the Seljuks and the Ottomans? Gg, you should ask Petros to give you the references on what the man used to do back in the 20's and the early 30's whenever someone said something that is positive about the Ottomans back in the day. Again, the Seljuks were a Turko-Persianate empire, and Ataturk himself hated anything that links them to the middle east. So, please, stop bullshitting me that Kemalism see these Turkic empires that were heavily adopted the Middle Eastern cultures as normal since the fundamental ideas of Kemalism was to fully westernise Turkey by cleansing anything that links them to the oriental world, not the opposite. We got to hand it to Gezim and The Ghostface though since they follow Kemalism to the fullest rather than compromising the ideology as what people like you are doing here. Don't make me laugh.

Böri
08-19-2017, 09:10 PM
Atatürk didnt erase anything about Seljuks and Ottomans. He succesfully erased anything that linked us to MENA culture. Even though criticized, time showed Atatürk was right. Especially after the current influxes from MENA to Turkey, people understand a lot better how Atatürk was right.

gültekin
08-19-2017, 09:32 PM
Today it is praised but not under Ataturk's rule. Oh, so you deny that Ataturk himself tried to erase anything that links them to the Seljuks and the Ottomans? Gg, you should ask Petros to give you the references on what the man used to do back in the 20's and the early 30's whenever someone said something that is positive about the Ottomans back in the day. Again, the Seljuks were a Turko-Persianate empire, and Ataturk himself hated anything that links them to the middle east. So, please, stop bullshitting me that Kemalism see these Turkic empires that were heavily adopted the Middle Eastern cultures as normal since the fundamental ideas of Kemalism was to fully westernise Turkey by cleansing anything that links them to the oriental world, not the opposite. We got to hand it to Gezim and The Ghostface though since they follow Kemalism to the fullest rather than compromising the ideology as what people like you are doing here. Don't make me laugh.

They did not erase anything, the only thing they erased was the Ottoman dynasty, which was nothing more than a British puppet at that time. The Seljuks are highly respected by everyone in Turkey. Our education system has been praising them (except for late Ottomans) from the beginning.

Why the hell are you associating Ghostface (=Gizem) with Kemalism? He is not "Kemalist", not at all LOL. The only thing he cares about is lifestyle and shit, he represents a very small segment of Turkish population, true Kemalists are hardcore nationalists. You can't even tell random secular people (like Ghostface) and Kemalists apart.

Egypt
11-14-2017, 05:35 PM
lmao @Golden

Egyptians were literally poor and ignorant until they got rid of the Afghan-like Turks

it was France and his highness Napoleaon who made Egypt developed and modern

they brought the printer with them

Turks made sure to leave people in poverty and illiteracy so they don't revolt

and the country came back to where it was under the Turks, thanks to the Islamization and scum brotherhood and Salafists

Copts will rise up one day and clean that filth

Böri
11-14-2017, 10:27 PM
lmao @Golden

Egyptians were literally poor and ignorant until they got rid of the Afghan-like Turks

it was France and his highness Napoleaon who made Egypt developed and modern

they brought the printer with them

Turks made sure to leave people in poverty and illiteracy so they don't revolt

and the country came back to where it was under the Turks, thanks to the Islamization and scum brotherhood and Salafists

Copts will rise up one day and clean that filth

Egypt was better and more glorious under Turks (Tulunids, Mamluks of Bahri, Ottomans) than it was under Coptic old Pharoahs. Bahri Turks turned Egypt into a true power center and military giant during late 13th century neither Mongols nor Crusaders could face them.

Egypt
11-14-2017, 11:20 PM
lmfao are ya on drugs or somethung, STFU before you make fun of youself

you didn't have an Alphabet even, you had to adopt the Arabs alphabet. . pathetic, you remind us of the sub Saharan niggers Taheee :)

we have kicked your grandfathers azzes out of Egypt over a century before that actual fall of your savage Sultans

you built nothing but ugly mosques that teach terrorism and if there any leader with balls today he would have demolished them with pride

but it seems it will be only Copts who are going to claim this country back and certainly we will exterminate and slaughter until the last one of the brainless muzzies

Danniboy
01-21-2018, 09:33 AM
Egyptian civilization was at its highest and most advanced during the construction of the pyramids. No one remembers Egypt civilization after it was conquered many times.

StonyArabia
07-26-2018, 05:19 AM
Mamlukes had little to do with Anatolian Turks lol

Yaglakar
07-30-2018, 07:28 PM
Lol, there's nothing golden about the Ottoman empire. The first two Turkic dynasties have nothing to do with Anatolian Turks since both of them are of Kipchack and pre-Anatolian Turkic origins, and they fought against Europeans rather than spit shine their shoes like your fellow Turks here do like Gezim and The Ghostface.

Tulunids were not Qipchaq. Tulun was of Toquz Oghuz descent. Name and surname Tulun and Tulum are still common in northern Xinjiang.

But one should bear in mind that Qipchaq/Kipchak is a collective image like Scythian, or Türk in medieval ages. Initially ethnonym Qipchaq denoted a distinct people but during medieval times started carrying a collective meaning like Türk or Scythian. Qipchaks in the east were distinct from the ones in the west and did not constitute a single people or entity. Same goes for Cumans, separate stock, different people.

Yaglakar
07-30-2018, 07:34 PM
Defeated a Mongol tumen (10,000 men) what a major victory. LOL. And considerering the setup of Mongol army so far to the west, mercenaries, irregulars of West Asian descent fighting under Mongol commanders can hardly be called Mongol army. 8 tumens stormed Khwarezm Empire, here 1 tumen gets defeated and Mongol hating Bori calls it a turning point. Hehe.

Böri
07-30-2018, 11:13 PM
Gengis Khan’s army attacking the Kwarhezm was 50k upon leaving Mongolia. When it reached the shores of Caspian, it numbered 200k. The reason was the vengeance of Tengrist Turkic tribes joining Mongols against their fellow Islamized Turks of Kwarhezm who pushed them to what’s today North Kazakhstan. Tengrism made a last, very bloody stand against Islam before disappearing, going until Baghdad and executing the Abbasid Caliph. But later Tengri faith lost against Budhism in the East.

The Mongol army defeated by Mamluks at Ain Jalut was not in full number, since Hulagu took most of his troops and went to Mongolia for great khan Mongke’s funerals. However that was psychologically important victory for Baibars and Kutuz since Mongols were deemed having invincibility.
Later Hulagu returned attacked with multiple tumens but he failed. And his son Abaqa too.

StonyArabia
07-30-2018, 11:16 PM
Tulunids were not Qipchaq. Tulun was of Toquz Oghuz descent. Name and surname Tulun and Tulum are still common in northern Xinjiang.

But one should bear in mind that Qipchaq/Kipchak is a collective image like Scythian, or Türk in medieval ages. Initially ethnonym Qipchaq denoted a distinct people but during medieval times started carrying a collective meaning like Türk or Scythian. Qipchaks in the east were distinct from the ones in the west and did not constitute a single people or entity. Same goes for Cumans, separate stock, different people.

Cumans were Caucasoid and most Kipchaks were. I don't think they had mongoloid elements

Böri
07-30-2018, 11:18 PM
Get lost Arab fatty. Medieval Kipchak samples are tested now and it appears it was 20% EE. More or less same rate as you Arabs have SSA.

StonyArabia
07-30-2018, 11:25 PM
Get lost Arab fatty. Medieval Kipchak samples are tested now and it appears it was 20% EE. More or less same rate as you Arabs have SSA.

Cossacks were most likely Kipchak and they are pure caucasoid before they were slavized most Mamelukes were from the same stock as them. Anatolian mutt.

Böri
07-30-2018, 11:31 PM
Mamluks in their golden age were overwhelmingly Kipchak, Turkic. Followed by Kwarhezmian (Turcoman) Turks. Mamluk State was actually founded by such a Kwarhezmian named Aybak al Turkmani. Then there were Circassian, Georgian and even some Muslim Mongolian convert Mamluks.
Your ancestors, assimilated by Arabs from Baal-worshipping Levantine masses were peasants or camel riders when these Mamluks made Egypt greater than at Pharaoh Rameses II era.

StonyArabia
07-31-2018, 12:24 AM
Mamlukes were founded by Ayyubuid Arabized Kurds who purchased them mostly from the Mongols and many were prisoners or slaves.

Böri
07-31-2018, 08:34 AM
And Ayyubids started as clients of Zangi who was Turcoman.
When Abbasid caliph al-Mustahzir Billah started a rebellion against Great Seljuk sultan Mahmoud (grandson of Malik Shah), Turks fought many wars against Baghdad-based Arabs. Zangi who was a Turcoman general and Basra governor helped the Sultan against the Caliph.

In one of these wars, near Mosul, Zangi was defeated by Caliphate forces. He was almost being killed through drowning. A Kurdish villager named Ayyub helped him cross and escape. Later the Caliph rebellion was put down, with Caliph being killed. Sultan gave Zengi north Syria and Mosul. that's how Zengi got his state and later followed by Ayyubids.

Petros Houhoulis
09-09-2018, 02:28 PM
Atatürk didnt erase anything about Seljuks and Ottomans. He succesfully erased anything that linked us to MENA culture. Even though criticized, time showed Atatürk was right. Especially after the current influxes from MENA to Turkey, people understand a lot better how Atatürk was right.

Note for idiots:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/4/who-lost-turkey/


As the think-tankers like to say: “Who lost Turkey?” In a nutshell: Kemal Ataturk. Since he founded post-Ottoman Turkey in his own image nearly nine decades ago, the population has increased from 14 million to more than 70 million. But that fivefold increase is not evenly distributed. The short version of Turkish demographics in the 20th century is that Rumelian Turkey - i.e., Western, European, secular, Kemalist Turkey - has been outbred by Anatolian Turkey - i.e., Eastern, rural, traditionalist, Islamic Turkey. Ataturk and most of his supporters were from Rumelia, and they imposed the modern Turkish republic on a reluctant Anatolia, where Ataturk’s distinction between the state and Islam was never accepted. Now the Anatolians don’t have to accept it. The swelling population has spilled out of its rural hinterland and into the once solidly Kemalist cities.

If you have ballz come and discuss it you dipshit canine. Here's the thread:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?257344-STEYN-Who-lost-Turkey-Today-s-Young-Turks-revere-Islam-not-NATO

But you are so much of a shithead you keep becoming a constant embarrassment in every section of this forum. If you can't keep your pants up in the Turkey forum why do you bother invading other forums with nonsense? Come around in the Turkey forum to discuss about Ataturk, and everybody shall be betting that I'm gonna fuck your brains out, like every regular day around here. Don't make me chase you around every subforum and thread...

Alexander56
08-08-2019, 12:32 AM
Turkic invasion only brought poverty, stupidity and Ignorance