The fabricated story of Gadesiyyeh
The enemies also want to count Gadesiyyeh as a place of defeat for the Iranians and hit several targets with the same arrow; first of all say that Iranians are several different nations and very weak and vulnerable and secondly claim that they easy turn against each other, are treasonous and beatable etc and thirdly say that Islam entered Iran not through culture but by force, wars and blood and many such claims. About Gadesiyyeh it is said that "Rustam came forward.....and resided between Hira and Silhein for four months without taking any action against the Muslims.....Moshrekan (the Iranians) numbered around one hundred and twenty thousand and had thirty big elephants and flags.....the Muslims numbered between nine to ten thousand...." (Blazi- Futuh Al Baladan). Therefore the Iranian army was much better equipped than that of the Arabs and it also outnumbered them. Considering the possibilities of the time, the weapons could not have been but swords, spears and bows and arrows. Two armies that fight against each other with such weapons must stand close to each other, one cannot fight from a distance using swords and spears. The only available weapon which could be used from a distance remains as the bow and arrow. The best archer with the best bow and arrow of the time could have thrown the arrow no longer a distance than 40 or 50 meters and if the enemy's body is to be pierced this distance needs to be reduced. Before this war they prepare the ground and say that the situation of religion and morality in Iran was weak at the time and the Sassanid were also weak. I refrain from repeating such lies as they are easily accessible to anyone.
One example of such lies; Abu Rajah Farsi quoting his father who in turn quoted his father as saying "I took part in the battle of Gadesiyyeh and at the time I was a fire worshipper. As the Arabs threw arrows at us we would say arrows! arrows! Those arrows would continue to land on us and we were finished off. Sometimes one of the men would throw an arrow from his bow and it would land on someone's clothes and do nothing but sometimes one of their arrows would pierce the heavy double layered shield of our men (Blazi- Futuh Al Baladan). In this story the unreal account of events is evident; one should not take such nonsense as history, think and analyse then investigate. How is it possible for an army of ten thousand men or an unreal figure like that destroy an army of one hundred and twenty thousand? Let us assume that the ten thousand men or a similar number of the nomads mentioned or in any case ten thousand Arab fighters line up on a straight horizontal line and each man occupies half a meter on ground, this line would have a length of between 5 to10, 000 meters. The Iranian army on the other hand with 120,000 men whichever way they line up against the enemy, would be impossible to beat using arrows and bows knowing the effective distance for an arrow. Even if the Iranian army arrange themselves in 10 lines of 12,000 men with a distance of one meter between two rows, the distance created would make it impossible for the Arab army to be victorious. Whatever other line up would have the same consequence. It is simply impossible for the Arabs to have resisted for long against Rustam's men. If we suppose that after a period of throwing arrows the two sides eventually enter a fight against each other man against man, the only possible weapons would be swords, clubs, axes or spears and the battle is inevitably man against man, who could imagine that each Arab beating 12 better equipped Iranians?! Please think a little, you can and you must throw away the enemy's lies.
Armies and Wars throughout history
According to research done by fake scientists, one of the reasons for the victory of the Arabs over the Iranians was their lightweight and rapid speed of action. This justification is radically wrong. Even if we accept this hypothesis, an Arab runner must overcome 12 men of the Iranian army who are standing against him, considering the human abilities even if this Arab runner were a champion runner he would be exhausted before reaching the last line. What has left over as history cannot be but an amalgam of stories full of bragging and a justification of divine destiny in the mind of its editor. One should doubt the truth in such stories and try and decipher the real history from such tales by scientific and analytical investigations, something that has not yet attracted anyone's attention. Anush Raavid invites you to be vigilant and review history and social history and uncover the lies of the enemies.
The liars say that Rustam Farahzad was not interested in fighting! Why? Why did Rustam camped against the Arabs for three months and refused to fight? Camping for three to four months in the desert necessitates being in constant touch with the capital. An army of 120,000 men must be constantly provided for, food, water and psychologically. Therefore a sane mind tells us that the sooner the war starts the better and Rustam can't not have known this. However, the stories tell us that he hesitates to start the war and has no hope for victory, why? Lies, lies and more lies. The reason for such act does not become apparent to us unless we doubt the figures and the tales told. In the stories of this war and for Ctesiphon like in the fabrication of Alexander of Macedonia where they called Persia a treasure in order to glorify their lies, they fabricated lies too.
The lies they have written about the war: on the first day the Arab horses escaped from the elephants that were keeping them leash. It appeared that the victory was to be of the Iranians but later when a group of archers attacked the elephants, the mounted men from the Arab army escaped danger and set back the Iranians. They write simply and for simple people who lived prior to the 21st century, not knowing that the people of this century analyses events and do not simply accept whatever they are told. On the second day the auxiliary army of Syria entered the scene. A man to man battle pursued between the heroes of the two armies. On the third day again the elephants entered the battle but the head of the auxiliary forces that had come from Damascus blinded the eye of a huge white elephant with spear. Another man did the same with a second elephant. Eventually the elephants returned causing mayhem in the Iranian army. The moral of the Arab army was raised when more forces arrived from Syria and overnight they had better moral than the Iranians. Dear friends, the stage designing of the battle is very simplistic and comical and was written for the people of the past centuries. There is no real explanation and description of events and it is all too clear that reality lays elsewhere. Two commanders of the Muslim army separately attacked the Iranians at night and the battle continued throughout the night. They call this night "Lile Al Harir" because as they have written there were sounds like howling of foxes and dogs filling the air from the injured. On the fourth day, i.e. on the last day of war the Arab army rattled the heart of the Iranian army. At this point a strong wind began to blow and threw a lot of sand over the head and eyes of the Iranians but the Arabs whose backs were to the direction of the wind escaped untouched. Rustam Farahzad was standing next to Derafsh Kaviani and was leading the Iranian army. In this mayhem one of the Arabs threw Rustam's baggage over him and injured the commander. He threw himself into a small stream in order to save himself but an Arab went after him in the water and killed him. This event frightened the Iranian men so much that they threw themselves into the water by the thousands and were drowned. The victory achieved by the Arabs in this battle severely dented the morale in the Iranians. The lying storytellers, in order to finish their tale seek assistance in the wind. The writer is not aware that at that time of the month there were no winds and there is no wind due to the position of the moon so they appeal to the hidden hand and tell their lies in whatever way they can in order to finish the result their way. They want to conclude that Islam was forced onto the Iranians who were weak and cowards and the Arabs are blood thirsty enemies of the Iranians.
If we assume that Iran had internal problems and was in a chaotic situation and that the Sassanid court did not take the Arabs seriously, it seems improbable that in a situation like this a gathering of a 120,000 man army by Rustam would have been deemed necessary. In any case there would have been no need to fight rebellious Arabs with such a force. It is all too clear that the Iranians never used to take the Arabs seriously but it has been written that Yazegerd insisted that Rustam went into war and Rustam's biggest worry was the chaotic situation of the Madain and that the Arabs were of little concern of Rustams.
This story cannot be true because prior to the lie of Gadesiyyeh the Iranians according to the same lying historians lost a hundred thousand men on another fictitious war?!(the battle of Buyeb).
The continuation of the lies that the liars have copied from one another: after Khosrow Parviz the Sassanid court becomes gripped with mayhem and the kings do no last long. In the cities rivalry worsens the chaos to a point where there is war between the army of Rustam and that of the Firuzan. In the meantime the Arabs have invaded the border areas of Savad (today's Iraq) and taken the people to the capital Madain also known as Ctesiphon. In Ctesiphon no one takes the Arabs seriously. The Sassanid capital does not even have a king. The elders warn Rustam, "the Persians tell Rustam and the Firuzan who were the chief of the people of Fars said: what are you doing? Your differences have weakened the Persians and the enemy has its eye on them. Your respect is not so that the Persians accept the status quo for long, you are destroying the Persians, after Bagdad, Sabat and Tekrit it will be Madain's turn, unite yourself before the enemy.....( quoted from the book Tabari History, before I have written about the lies of this book)
In their lies they have written; the Sassanid government was rotten, corrupt, all the Iranians were against each other, Madain was close to the Arabs, and the king was no good, and hundreds of such stupid reasons for their lies without the slightest of reasoning or analysis and without presenting single evidence, whereas at the time the socio-cultural evolution of the Greater Iranian society was taking its natural course. We should analyse events scientifically and with the possibilities that the 21st century provides us.
If we accept the rottenness of the society as some believe it to be true, then the quote from Tabari must be a lie because a rotten and corrupt society cannot be corrected rapidly and solely by the coming to power of one person. In this quote from Tabari, there is a very important point and that is" the tribal head were competing against each other in obeying and assisting him", this shows that rivalry that existed to the point of animosity before has continued and now shows itself to be close to the "young king". In these circumstances, gathering of 120,000 men does not look likely and if it were it would be difficult to keep them in a desert for four months and after all neither Rustam nor other commanders took the Arabs that seriously.
If we add up the number of the fallen, according to Tabari or others, from the invasion of the Arabs until the complete conquest of Iran, I am certain that we would come to an astronomical figure which considering the smallness of the population at the time seems unrealistic. Before the battle of Gadesiyyeh there were other skirmishes one of which was called the battle of Buyeb between the army of Mehran the Iranian commander and Masni Ibn Harse, the Arab commander. "Those who have seen it estimate that there were the skeletons of one hundred thousand men" (the lying Tabari). In these histories, figures given are in my opinion none right; they simply quote from written or oral history that they receive without editing any.
The same exaggerated figures are given about Heraclius and the Roman army in the" Syrian war" and every few months Heraclius would loose one, two or three hundred thousand men in the fight against the Arabs. In many cases astronomic figures are seen, figures such as "one thousand, thousand, thousand" (a billion) or larger figures which are all exaggerated especially when we consider that these stories are narrated by the Arabs and they could not count larger than a thousand especially in multiples of 10 or 100, amongst them there were few who could read and write. In which day and month did the lie of Gadesiyyeh take place and how was the weather at the time?
There is much to be said and more are the limitations, decide for yourself like an intelligent person and do not believe whatever you read or hear, analyse thoughtfully and scientifically not like Saddam Hussein who took Gadesiyyeh seriously and was destroyed.
Due to the sensitivity of Gadesiyyeh in history, much can be written but I shall tell you one and you deduct the rest for yourself.
In order to gather one thousand men in Saudi Arabia and Jordan, the Lawrence of Arabia had a hard time and it was deemed impossible because all the Arab tribes had animosity against each other and all they knew was to kill each other for no reason. For their unity there was no hidden hand involved and it was not due to their awareness either, it happened only by the agents of the British at the beginning of the 20th century, by creating an atmosphere and mentality that was necessary for colonization.
The battle of Malazgirt yet another lie
The articles written on history by Anoosh Raavid are from direct and real observations of socio historic evolutions and the science of history-geography which is presented using the 21st century knowledge and technology. The articles evolve with the institution of future predictions and are somehow re-written from time to time. I do not use history books that tell lies nor do I use religious texts, of course those books that do not contradict natural and social evolutionary laws of history are used. I would recommend those interested in history and social evolution to read them and view then from an anti-traditionalist and anti classic point. One should view each people and rulers in all parts of the world according to the thinking and behavior of the times they exist and bear in mind this important factor that most of our information about history stems from the colonial and imperialist era. One should view history as it is and not as Hollywood wants to portray it.
Note, - all those with extreme nationalist or religious view please refrain from reading or leaving a comment. To go to the main blog please click here.
The battle of Malazgirt yet another lie
The paper battle of Malazgirt in which according to Westerners, Colonialists and the Church the Byzantine army was destroyed by the Seljuqs was undoubtedly one of the most defining battles of history. They say that after the battle of Malazgirt nothing could stop the march of the Muslims, the Turks, the Kurds and the Fars who were immigrating to Asia Minor and were intended on entering Europe. In fact they talk about a battle after which the Muslims, the Turks entered Bosporus and Europe and Asia Minor and by doing so are denying a vast area of the historic geography of greater Iran. Our historians with their eyes and ears closed only say that whatever the enemies have said are true and busy themselves with religious chants and grandiose ideas about the history of Iran. There is no reference to this paper battle in any historic text books and those who invented this lie have only managed to write a few lines about such an important event and relying on 20th century storytellers have sexed up the lie. Please refer to the links for more detailed analysis. I shall now analyze the paper battle paragraph by paragraph and invite only those specially involved with history read them.
Paper battle -- Year 1063 Alb Arsalan the powerful Saljuqi sultan accompanied by his military and court entourage entered Armenia with the aim of fortifying his borders. The emperor of Eastern Roman empire Romanovs Euoganos whose empire had been successful in preventing the entry of the invading Muslims including Turks and Fars from its frontiers took advantage of the small number of the Saljuqi and blocked the way for the men of Alb Arsalan. In the plains of Malazgirt which lies in Turkey, the agile Saljuqi army led by the Sultan himself while they had transferred all the tents and stables to the back lined up against the army of the Eastern Roman empire. The lightly armed mounted men of the Saljuqi army attacked the heavy armed men of the Roman Empire and tore their hearts. With the destruction of the heart of the army of eastern Rome defeat came about and they started retreating and the little after the eastern Roman Empire was overrun by the Saljuqi Turks.
Anoosh Raavid, - In the 11th century all of Asia Minor (Turkey) and Iran Minor (Caucuses) was historic land of Iran and the territory of the Saljuqis. Borders were defined by the tribes and not as in the geopolitics of the colonial era. The colonialists talk about the invading Muslims, Turks Kurds and Fars alike in order to say that in the land of greater Iran Iranians did not exist and have only just arrived here! They underestimate the huge Religious and tribal institutions which were very well formed. They invent battles without having any idea about armies and wars in different historic stages and defeat an imaginary Empire by the Turks!
Paper battle, - The capture of the Roman emperor by the Turks after centuries of war and bloodshed were a defining point in the history of Islam. It was soon after this battle that the court of Constantinople agreed to pay an annual fee to the court of Isfahan in return for the emperor. Nezam Al Molk the minister of Alb Arsalan received the Romans who had come to pay the fee in the city of Kashgar in order to show off the greatness of his empire. Today Kashgar lies in the Chinese province of Chuan Kiang.
Anoosh Raavid, - By saying “centuries of war”, they want to give geographical legitimacy to the Church. The annual expenditure of a country in return for their emperor is a giveaway which diminishes the importance of their capital or perhaps they had other reasons to say this which I shall see into in the future. In the mid colonial era when they wrote so much such nonsense they really confessed to the vastness of greater Iran.
Paper battle, - The battle of Malazgirt was a beginning for the fall of the fortified walls off the eastern Roman Empire against the Muslims. From then on Muslim Turkish tribes who migrated from Central Asia armed the Ghuzz systematically and penetrated deep into the territory of the Roman Empire which eventually caused a reaction by the Romans. The reaction of the Romans was a propaganda war in the Christian world,- that if no action was taken then the Muslims would open the doors of Europe by occupying Constantinople and the whole Christian world would be invaded by the Muslims. It was exactly at this time that a deep division in the Christian world appeared. Eastern Christianity separated itself officially from Catholic Christianity as “Orthodox”. The announcement of this separation offended the Pope and he reluctantly accepted this bitter reality. Defeat in Malazgirt and advance in Anatolia was faced with propaganda by a priest called Petros in the West who talked of the atrocities of the Muslims over the Christians.
Anoosh Raavid,- They wrote the main points of this paper battle to create borders for the Church and hence talk of the invading Muslims crossing these borders afterwards and started the historic propaganda war amongst the religions, however they hide the true important religious facts behind the paper battle.
Paper battle, - Because of these propaganda and the call for assistance by the Eastern Roman emperor Europe was emerged in much excitement. Pope Urban the second towards the end of the 11th century in a gathering in Claremont issued the order to attack Muslim lands especially Palestine in order to free Christian lands from the Muslims. After the order was issued Europe was inflamed and unemployed knights, rich feudals, also European monarchy and their peasants all declared themselves ready for war. The order of the Pope was the beginning of a two hundred year bloody war that was to engulf the Mediterranean coast on the Muslim side.
Anoosh Raavid, - As I have said in the structure of social evolution, Europe was passing through the last stage of Feudalism and there was talk of the new Bourgeoisie era and the Church was afraid of that fact so one of the tricks was to declare the Crusades and such and write a few lines about the paper battle of Malazgirt.
Paper Battle, - the first attack of the Christians on the shores of Asia Minor who intended on Aras Moghadas was repelled by their massacres by Gholeij Arsalan one of the heads of the clans living there. In total, eight Crusade wars were fought and even Constantinople the capital of Eastern Roman Empire was captured by the Crusaders who kept if for 5 years. At the time of the offensive of the Crusaders onto the Islamic lands, the Saljuqi Turks ruled almost all the Mediterranean Sea to its most eastern point. As a result of these wars one of the most powerful military governments of the Islamic world came to existence which was the Ayyubids. The founder of this dynasty, Selah Al Din Ayyubid by seeing the political languor of the Fatimid did away with their rule and founded his own dynasty. By conquering towns and cities along the Mediterranean Sea coast the Christians established feudal style governments and continued towards Jerusalem which fell soon afterwards. The Islamic Jihad headed by the Ayyubids which took over the whole Muslim world placed as its main aim the freeing of the lost lands. In the 200 years that the eight Crusade wars lasted many famous European kings participated such as Richard the Lion Heart. Although the historians believe that the Crusades wars ended in 1298 by the capture of the last Crusaders stronghold by the Egyptian rulers according to Catholic encyclopedia however these wars lasted until the establishment of the Ottomans, the capture of Constantinople and their offensive into the heart of Europe. The Christians were driven out of Palestine after 200 years of war.
Anoosh Raavid, - I will soon write about the fabricated Crusades. Them who talk about the powerful governments of Greater Iran are the new age military elite; the inventors of the Crusaders and call the sporadic attacks of bandits, the conquest of Jerusalem. They also fabricated the Islamic Jihad and the invented Lion Heart. As evidence to their lies they swear to the Catholic encyclopedia and write about Palestine being the birth place of Christianity so that they can come back to those lies in this day and age.
Paper Battle, - The Byzantine empire under direct threat from the Turks saw fit to take measures. Empress Eulogia wanted to marry someone who could put an end to the repeated attacks of the Turks so accepted the proposal by Roman Diogin one of the Byzantine royals and handed him the Empire. The new emperor who was an experienced commander once in power started gathering and organizing troops from Macedonia, Thrace and Greece. Moreover he made use of Turkish Ughuz (Turkmens) and Pachanghs, even with the help of the Normans, French, Slovaks, Germans, Armenians and Abkhazians expanded his group. His aim was to kick out the Turks from the lands of the Roman Empire and the occupation of Islamic land. Up until then the Turks had managed to capture Galaharjish, Malazgirt, Éclat and Manbij and defeat the emperor´s army hence a third war would be crucial and defining destiny. The emperor Roman Divgen before mobilizing his troops appeared in Sofia´s church before a golden cross and prayed and on the 13th of March 1071 the troops began moving. The Roman´s gears were carried by 3000 carts of which 1000 were carrying arms and military equipment.
Anoosh Raavid,- for the simple minded they create fairy tales in order to distract them and repeat the same kind of stories as they did for the Greeks and the Moguls but have no options as to confess that they were constantly defeated. And in order to glamorize the story further they call the Sofia´s mosque a church and the troops in stead of practicing tactics are put behind a golden cross in order to pray but at the same time in order to save face they mention 3000 military carts.
Paper Battle, - In the troops there was the biggest stone canon in the world which was being carried by 1200 men and was capable of projecting stones weighing 400 to 500kgs.The emperor was so certain of his victory that he had appointed representatives in the Islamic lands and had ordered the destruction of mosques and the erection of churches in their place. At this time Sultan Alp Arsalan was in Damascus and was preparing for a trip to Egypt when the ambassador of Byzantine called into him and asked for the return of Malazgirt, Éclat and Arjeish. In fact this gesture was intended for fooling the Sultan Alp Arsalan because the Roman troops had already begun their movement prior to the ambassador calling.
Anoosh Raavid,- They made the biggest impossible cart and ordered the destruction of mosques on paper, note that such rhetoric about destroying mosques belongs to the first stage of bourgeoisie colonization and this mentality simply did not exist at the time of the paper battle. When the story tellers realized that they had said so much nonsense they also added at the end that it was to “fool” the emperor.
Paper battle, - the Roman army advanced as far as Sebasteia and the generals did not see wise to advance any further so the Roman emperor decided on staying put and fighting the Islamic troops wherever they were confronted so he sent a 30 thousand men army to Éclat and himself headed towards Malazgirt and conquered the fortress there. The 30.000 men army which was also carrying the Golden Cross was defeated by Emir Sonduk and even the men sent to gather information on their fate were eliminated. The Golden Cross was sent to Alp Arsalan which he forwarded to the Caliphate in Bagdad.
Anoosh Raavid,- by reading the above sentence one realizes the emptiness of the whole saga, 30.000 men and those sent afterwards all disappear and there is no talk of the Cross then suddenly a Cross appears and is sent to Bagdad and Malazgirt is captured!!! The author has not described any military operation and was probably a priest with a middle ages mentality.
Paper lie,- Sultan Alp Arsalan on the 27th of April 1027 leaves Damascus on hearing the advance of the Roman army and by crossing the Euphrates river enters Azerbaijan and anchors in Khoy. This trip was made so quickly that the Roman emperor could not have imagined. Sultan Alp Arsalan arranged for his wife and family and the treasury to go to Tabriz by his minister and in order for the Turkish lands not to come under attack, he left Khoy and headed westwards and anchored in the plains of Malazgirt.
Anoosh Raavid, - In the new century in Europe people had heard many stories told by drunken seamen who claimed to be captains and globe trotters who used to gather people around them and tell such strange stories in order to make money for their drinks, one of them was Marco Polo and some of these tales made their way into travellers book. The author of the battle of Malazgirt creates ministers and treasury for a government that belonged to the tribal religious period of social history.
The paper battle, - With him there was an army of 54.000 men which were supposed to confront 200.000 men of Byzantine and although it was a difficult task nevertheless with a brave commander like Sultan Alp Arsalan and commanders like Suleiman Shah, Mansur, Poursogh, Bussan, Savtakin, Aytakin, Taren Igloo, Deylamaj Igloo, Ahmad Shah and Dodo Igloo it was not impossible. One of the finer tricks of the Turks was that they had captured all the strategic hilltops and in order to avoid being left without water they controlled all the small water streams of the area. After some time the Roman army reached that area too and set up camp in a distance of 5-6km away.
Anoush Raavid,- The numbers they talk about require huge logistics and by mentioning a few strategic hilltops and heroes names they pretend to portray a military side to their story but what they do not know is that with such unimportant facts the story is not militarized.
The paper battle,- Although war seemed inevitable nevertheless Sultan Alp Arsalan sent two ambassadors to the Roman empire to suggest Khoy as being agreed to be the frontier city between the two empires( Khoy would remain part of the Saljuqis territory and its western part would belong to the Roman empire. Firstly a peace agreement would prevent bloodshed of thousands of men which was national and religious custom of the Turks and secondly sufficient information would be gained from the Byzantine army. For this task ambassador Caliphate Ibn Al Mahlaban and Savtakin the Conqueror of the Caucasus were chosen.
Anoush Raavid,- They aim to push back the frontiers with the church as far back as Khoy using words from an Iranian ruler so that they can make geo-political use of it in the future and to lose track add a few red herrings too.
The paper battle, - The Roman emperor received the men of Sultan Alp Arsalan with ridicule because it showed his fear of war. For this reason he said they could talk about peace in Rome and I will not retreat without conquering Islamic land and take revenge on what came over the Byzantine lands and by saying so showed his confidence in winning the war.
Anoush Raavid, - Yet another emphasis on frontiers which did not exist at the time because people lived in tribal societies and the fact that Muslims were cruel.
The paper Battle, - hen by asking whether Isfahan was more beautiful or Hamadan and hearing that Isfahan by Ibn Al Mahlaban, he continued: (I had heard about the cold weather I Hamadan, we will therefore stay in Isfahan and the horses in Hamadan). Savtakin facing such derogatory comments replied: (The fact that your horses will stay in Hamadan is certain but I am not sure where you will stay!) After the return of the men from the Turkish army, Sultan Alp Arsalan together with his commanders and the great Imam Bokhara walked up a hill and viewed the Roman army and then consulted his men. The Imam by saying that they were fighting for Allah and that God was behind them emphasized that the war started the day after as it was a Friday and Fridays are sacred days for Muslims.
Anoush Raavid, - Conversations that are rife in old stories and have no documentation and are only said in order to sweeten the tales.
The paper battle, - That night no one slept in the camp, the mounted Turkish soldiers attacked the Romans in order to weaken their morale. The sound of the war drums and horns were heard uninterruptedly and this was particularly annoying to the Romans although they too were preparing for war the day after by dancing and celebrating. On Friday the whole army stood for the Friday prayers with military uniform and the great Sultan gave this speech: my commanders and soldiers although we number few and they number more than us, that is not important as all the Muslims are now praying for our victory so I want to go for the enemy, I am either victorious and achieve our objective or I am killed, made a martyr and go to Heaven. Those who agree follow me and those who do not go away wherever they wish. Today there are no people who give orders and no people taking orders, today we are all the same, I am one of you one of the worriers. Those who follow me and are made martyr go to Heaven and those who survive get their hands on the prize. Those who do not follow me are burnt in Hell and are not honored in this world either.
Anoush Raavid, - This too is said to sweeten the story and there is nothing historically substantial or substantiated according to geographic or historic perspectives.
The paper battle, - When the Sultan´s speech finished all the soldiers expressed their support for him by shouting and yelling! This sent shivers down the spines of the Romans. Then Alp Arsalan threw aside his bow and arrow and picked up his sword and said that in this way he would fight in the front line. He tied the tale of his horse and his commanders followed suit he was wearing white clothes and as his last words he said: this is my martyrdom clothes, if I am killed in battle then bury me with this clothes and my son Malak Shah will inherit power may you all obey him).
Anoush Raavid,- as if the liar who told this tale only knew bow and arrow, he did not know that tying the horses tail was a custom that belonged to the Hones a thousand year prior to this date and hat the kings never appointed successors in the battlefield.
The paper battle, - After this speech the Turkish commanders attacked the infidel enemy and their soldiers followed suit. The plains of Malazgirt were covered in dust and the Great War had begun….In this war the Tiran tactic was also put to practice. For this reason the head of the command was the Sultan, in his right flank Suleiman the son of kutalmish and the felt flank Amir Sundook. The rest of the army was split into four sides and hide behind the hills. The Byzantine army was also well equipped. The right flank was under the command of general Aliyantsin and the Uz were on this side. On the left flank general Byrinius was the commander and the Pahang’s were fighting on his side. The central command was under the Emperor himself. The reserves were under the command of the Emperor´s son Andronick.
Anoush Raavid,- The author of these lies repeats what he has heard form the lying travellers of the time about Iranian battles without referring to anything specific and in no way this story reflects a war between two societies at different stages of socio-cultural evolution.
The paper battle, - With the attack of the Turkish army into the heart of the byzantine troops, they too were drawn into the battle. After a little resistance the Turkish army started withdrawing steadily. The Romans started chasing after them and the Turkish reserves saw the opportunity to launch a surprise attack on the Romans. When Alp Arsalan realized that his men had gone far enough outside their base ordered their return and the attack and so by doing the enemy was encircled and destroyed. The right and the left flanks of the Romans when faced with being surrounded started a counter attack. The Ozughs and the Pachanghs understanding the language of the Turks left the Roman army and joined Islamic army on the opposite side. The battle that had started in the afternoon was over by the evening and the huge Roman army was destroyed with all its military equipment and many were dead and many taken hostage, Greater Manjigh was taken over by the Turks.
Anoush Raavid,- So what happened to all those 200.000 men, the biggest stone throwing cart, the commanders, the 3000 carts that had travelled so far in order to be destroyed with one single attack. The lie was so big that at the end they resorted to saying that the troops fancied each other! The most stupid of all military lies.
The emperor Roman Divgen was arrested by a soldier called Hassan and was taken to Alp Arsalan. Hassan was a soldier who was almost expelled from the army by Nezam Al Molk in Tabriz because of his physical weakness and was allowed to stay on by the request of Guar Aeen who jokingly said that “he might just bring us the Roman emperor”, and in fact this is precisely what happened. Sultan Alp Arsalan due to his kind Turkish and Islamic character this time too forgave the Roman emperor and only after signing an agreement with him released him back into Constantinople.
Anoush Raavid. - The authors of these line were not only stupid themselves but also assumed the readers to be so too. In a battle field where there are 250 thousand soldiers and thousands of carts, a so called Hassan is found to arrest the emperor!!!
The paper battle,- The agreement was such that the emperor would pay a million and a half dinar of gold and also pay annually a sum of 360.000 gold pieces as taxation. In addition the Muslims would be free in Byzantine and as and when needed the emperor would help the sultan with military aid. Malazgirt, Urfa, Manbij, Antakya and the eastern part of Isqil Irmak would belong to the Turks.
Anoush Raavid, - An agreement was made up so that one day they could reclaim it all.
Chaldran, yet another lie
The battle of Chaldran is the key to the mystery of colonization, if we understand this battle; we shall know the reasons behind other lies in history. Anush Raavid invites you to think and analyse and not just accept whatever you hear or read unconditionally. It would be simple of us to think that whatever historic event or wars have occurred without preconditions in the evolution of social history. One must accurately analyse each event and consider what is important such as the change of generations and the birth rate, the hidden and the apparent interference of others, the setting of the political and economic stages and the potential of people's understanding of events at the time. We need planning, opportunity and patience together with 21st century knowledge to remove the dirty paws of colonization that has gripped the world for the past 500 years. The story of Chaldran is the beginning of the fabrication of history and geography by the colonizers, with the invent of this story they considered the western part of Iran separated from the rest of the country and for the first time in history they created a frontier in the Greater Iran, and for affirming the existence of such frontier they included it in the textbooks. In the 15th century three social historic civilizations collided with one another, the tribal institution, feudalism and bourgeoisie. Each of these three had and continues to have its own particular religion, culture, population growth and economy over which the natural geography of their environment has an influence. The tribes thought about their past, the feudalism about getting bigger and bourgeoisie about having more money.
The background to the battle of Chaldran
After the crusades, the Europeans became familiar with the East. This war was between the European feudalism and the eastern tribal system and although Europe lost that war, over a century, however, they experienced the knowledge and the trades of the east. This experience served to create the newly appeared bourgeoisie continuing the evolution of social history. With the fall of the most important feudal religious obstacle in Constantinople, this newly appeared bourgeoisie that was a product of the end of the crusades signified the end of the Middle Ages. Prior to this date the Europeans were unconditionally enslaved by feudalism and their knowledge before the crusades was much less than that of the people in the East, in the times of colonisations they always hid this fact. At that time East was ruled by tribal system which was very different from feudalism and that was beyond the comprehension of the European historians and therefore the two used to become confused. The tribal system in Europe had become extinct by the Romans centuries before and in Iran after the Achaemenidae the tribalism took a new shape to what it was after the last Neolithic tribal system. The crusades familiarized the Middle East with feudalism and within two or three centuries divided it into two main parts: the tribal part with its own particular religion and economy and the feudal part again with its own religion and economy that survives to the present day, and I shall come back to this point later on. In the 14th century the Popes, bishops and the Churches were against each other apparently for religion but in reality for money. Since the beginning of 14th century, ships from Venice and Geneva controlled the Mediterranean trades. In the 15th century the economy of Western Europe grew rapidly. In the new world economy and acquisition of taxes of the bourgeoisie, Italy was leading in Europe and the Popes happy to be right at the centre of it. In these circumstances, the Popes and Italy could not tolerate a rival Byzantine that was still in the Middle Ages and had no intention of entering the new century. After the fall of the Eastern Rome, contractors hurried from Europe to Constantinople to convert Churches to Mosques so that the Vatican would become rival less sooner. The newly appeared bourgeoisie of northern Italian towns were able to function as independent governments by the means of their financial strength. They managed their budget in a new way and set a tax target of a million Ducats per capita per year. No agricultural or feudally structured government could reach that target. At the same time the newly appeared bourgeoisie of Holland was the intermediary in the sale of British and others' manufactured products. Therefore the northern Italian towns and Holland were becoming richer by the day, the new monetary and financial economy had come to Europe and the darkness of the Middle Ages were gone. Within a 200 year period, Europe woke up, of course in the form of a bourgeoisie that weighed everything and measured everything as being stable or unstable. Rapid developments necessitated new planning which are important to discuss but are out of the scope of the present article and I shall leave them to a separate writing in the future. In this period we see many travelogues by people from Europe and especially northern Italy to Iran which demonstrates a broad activity of the newly appeared bourgeoisie to find new markets and trade and or espionage. Few of these travelogues were scientific, logical and practical and most were intended for propaganda and marketing which survive to the present day.
Since the beginning of the 16th century many lands and countries in the world became occupied by colonizers, however, none of the countries constituting the Greater Iran which included Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, the Caucasus, Tajikistan, part of Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan became occupied. In the Greater Iran due to a splendid historic background life continued with much enthusiasm and love for the nation and the people. Knowledge, comprehension and health were at high levels and there was much abundance. With a plan that needs analysis, the Ottomans were created within 50 years and they conquered much of Europe within 50 years without leaving much real impression in these hundred years. In order to glamorize and abuse history, bourgeoisie created stories from small and unimportant tribes such as the Turkmens with black and white sheep which gave much excitement to historical stories, they created many great battles for the Ottomans on paper in order to absolve themselves, in the eyes of the religious world, from the destruction of the churches of Eastern Rome.
In the absence of writings and cities of Russia, they created the Khans with the golden tents, placed much importance to the fighting of small and simple tribes for reasons that I shall come back to in the future. They want to create the impression in the mind of the reader that without historic background and social history wars occur and kings send their armies around. In these stories, their principal objective is oppressing the most historic and liveliest of nations amongst which Iran is at the top. They always write that the Iranians lost wars against foreign invaders and only defeated each other in their internal fighting and in this way the enemies, in the historic stories change a dynasty with another and shape history against the Iranians. In these stories they assume the Iranians to be as stupid as them and use simple analysis, for example they say that Iranians used to consider the use of firing weapons to be against manliness.
The telling of the fabricated battle of Chaldran
They say that Sultan Salem the 1st was very important and powerful, in fact there is no mention of this so called Sultan in any early 16th century book from Anatolia or Iran, Anush Raavid has not been able to find a single reference to his name in historic works and will continue his search and if anyone finds a mention please let him know. In reality this false Sultan could be a simple Sheikh in the hand of the European bourgeoisie in order to implement its plan. The stupid enemies of the history of Iran really were very simple and thought everyone to be so and that no one would be found to divulge the lies. They talk of a one hundred thousand man army that was beyond the 6 or 7 million population of the Ottoman territory; half of this population was Christian belonging to two different churches and the other half Muslims belonging to two different sects and each of these belonging to quite different social and geographic groups which in itself was a huge obstacle in gathering forces and a big war. Gathering such a force requires a booming economy based on productivity and tax collection and has to leave much evidence. Such an economy requires a solid social historic background which was not present in the 14th century Ottoman. In the 21st century and with such available technology if anyone believes such lies without research and analysis must be very gullible and easily lead by the enemy. They write about a thousand kilometre distance between the Ottoman capital and the war zone and the passing of such a huge force, a distance that was unimaginable to be passable up until a hundred years ago, a most arduous and difficult stretch to traverse. This huge force would have required a logistics which with the simplest of estimates would come to a half a million men which in turn needed an organization that would leave much evidence behind such as roads, bridges, accommodations, none of which is evident in history or the region.
At the time of the battle of Chaldran and other wars we see that the armies that fought real wars in Europe and left evidence behind in history, never exceeded 20 to 30,000 men because a higher number was not possible. They wrote the stage of the war in a place that could be a good geographical point for historic separation, in the whole region of Chaldran not a single gun or canon has been found, no single historic evidence has been uncovered.
They used fallacy and misleading language in their story telling of historical events in order to play tricks on simple minds, they have written "in the heart of the Iranian soldiers there was no agitation, they resisted until the moment of death against the well equipped Ottomans". They have written many such things; "the main reason for the victory of the Turks was their fiery weapons which the Iranian army did not possess". Elsewhere they have written that the aims of the Sultan Salem the 1st of invading Iran was to: "halt the spread of Shiite sect believing in the 12 Imams which had been declared the official religion of Iran and the stopping of Ottoman Shiites joining the newly formed Safavid dynasty of Iran, annexation of the north western Kurdish regions and the place of residence of the Turkmens in eastern part of today's Turkey and north eastern Iraq that was of the Ak- Koyunlu, Kara-Koyunlu and the remaining of the Seljuqs to their territory and the spread of Iranism that had raised its head once again by the crowning of Shah Ismail of Safavids". There are a lot of such false quotes in the story of Chaldran. Can you analyse and explain these lies? It is the best test for you in finding the real truth behind these stories.
Study the history of canons and guns and do not accept unconditionally whatever nonsense as history. Do not believe the fiery weapons in the battle of Chaldran to be like the weapons of the Napoleon era in the films "The Battle of Waterloo" and "War and Peace". At the beginning of 16th century the canons and the guns of the ottomans were wicked and matchlock and had a maximum range of 300 meters, they had to ignite the wick, charge the canon and then fire. On firing, a black smoke would fill the surrounding, and many balls would explode in the air or would not reach their intended target. Every 4 or 5 minutes they could prepare a canon to fire. A mounted soldier galloping at least 30 km per hour would run a distance of 500 meters in a minute hence bypassing the canons that were difficult to mobilize and attacking their operators. This fiery weapon was used in the 16th century for attacking fortresses and not for open battles in fields. Matchlocks could fire every 2 minutes so mounted soldiers could attack the enemy in less than a minute and even if the first line of soldiers were killed by the guns the second line could easily reach and attack the gunners. For the aesthetics of the story they talked of the huge numbers of the Ottomans and the bravery of the Iranians, the fiery weapons and the superiority of the Ottomans and the disagreement of the Iranians with such weapons. With such words we are reminded of the negative advertising of Capitalism that said "don't buy IRAN tires"
Anoush Raavid / IRAN /
* Campaign for erasing the lies from the history of Iran *
* Campaign for the removal of lies from Iran's history *
The above article in full written in Farsi: The attack of Alexander of Macedonia, the biggest lie in history.
Iran's invasion by the Arabs, the second biggest lie in history.
Iran's invasion by the Moguls, the third biggest lie in history.
In order to understand the truth about history read all the articles in Anoush Raavid’s web logs:
Revelando las mentiras de la historia
En la historia y en la historia social hay muchas mentiras, mentiras que han influenciado el destino de la humanidad y desviado la planificación y el futuro, mentiras como las siguientes:
La invasión a Irán por Alejandro de Macedonia, la mentira más grande de la historia;
La invasión a Irán por los Árabes nómadas, la segunda mentira más grande de la historia;
La invasión a Irán por Chengiz el mogol, la tercera mentira más grande de la historia;
Mentiras significativas como la guerra de Gadesiyyeh y la batalla de Chaldran;
Mentiras sobre las culturas, como el helenismo…
Análisis e investigación de todas las mentiras de la historia en el blog:
Movimiento para erradicar las mentiras de la historia de Irán.
Únase a este movimiento y vea el mundo desde una perspectiva distinta.
Tour de Irán: visite todos los lugares históricos e interesantes, a muy buen
precio y con un excelente servicio.
Tour of Iran: visit all the historic and interesting places, competitive prices and excellent service, please contact :
The lies of history, Ancient history, Aryan history, The history of ancient Persia, the history of the art, the history of Alexander, the history of Hellenism, the history of the Arabs, the history of Genghis Khan and the Mongols, the history of the Uzbeks, the history of democracy and the revelation of the lies of history.