Unveiling Iran’s Turkic Legacy: A Reassessment of National Identity and Historical Narratives

Introduction: Re-evaluating Iranian Identity Through a Multi-Ethnic Lens

Iran, a land celebrated for its rich tapestry of ethnic and linguistic groups, has long seen its diverse history overshadowed by singular narratives. [1] Before the 20th century, Iranian identity was not exclusively Persian but rather supra-ethnic, with political leadership predominantly held by Turkic peoples from the 11th century onwards. Both Turkic and Persian cultural elements profoundly shaped the nature of various regimes and the country’s overall culture, reflecting significant diversity across different Iranian empires. [1] Even the evolution of “Persian identity” itself was influenced by external factors, as seen in the Shu’ubiyya movement, which emerged as a response to Arabization to preserve Persian culture. [2]

This report offers a comprehensive analysis of Turkic contributions to Iran, presenting a counter-narrative to Persian-centric viewpoints. It aims to demonstrate that modern-day Iran is, in many respects, a “Turkic legacy,” thereby scientifically refuting exclusive nationalist claims. This analysis relies on authoritative Turkish and Azerbaijani academic sources. Key among these are articles from the Turcological project “Turkic Varieties of South Anatolian and West Iranian Contact Areas in their Relationship to Normative Centres,” featuring works by Lars Johanson and Peter B. Golden. [3] Prominent Turkish historical institutions, such as the Center for Iranian Studies (IRAM) in Ankara [4] and the Oriental Research Center (Şarkiyat Araştırma Merkezi) in Istanbul [5], actively engage in Iranian studies, emphasizing shared historical and cultural heritage. From an Azerbaijani perspective, Leila Rahimi Bahmany’s work on “Azeri Turkish Narratives in Twentieth-Century Iran: Resisting Monolingualism” [6] and statements by Isa Habibbayli, President of the Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (ANAS) [7], [8], [8], [8], provide crucial insights. Academic journals like “Tarih Dergisi” (Turkish Journal of History) [9], [9] and the “Routledge Studies in the History of Iran and Turkey” series [10], [10] further highlight the active scholarly discourse on these intertwined histories.

The deliberate selection of these sources underscores an underlying academic and political contest over historical narratives. This choice is not merely a preference for specific data but a strategic directive to frame the historical narrative from a particular, distinct, or challenging perspective to internal Iranian historiography, which is often perceived as Persian-centric. The act of choosing these sources, in itself, acknowledges the existence of a contested historical space. Turkish and Azerbaijani academic institutions actively research and publish on Turkic-Iranian relations. Their focus often highlights Turkic contributions, challenging dominant narratives. By adhering to this source constraint, this report becomes an active participant in this academic and political discourse, aiming to legitimize and reinforce a specific historical interpretation. This is crucial for understanding the report’s purpose beyond mere information dissemination, positioning it as a contribution to the re-evaluation of Iran’s national identity.

I. Turkic Dynasties: Shaping the Iranian State for Centuries

A. Early Turkic Influx and the Seljuk Era (11th-12th Centuries)

The arrival of large numbers of Oghuz Turkic nomads from Central Asia into the Islamic world, particularly the Iranian plateau and Anatolia, initiated a profound demographic, linguistic, and political transformation around the 11th century. [10], [11] This influx led to the establishment of a “clear Turkic majority” in historical Azerbaijan and the ethnic unification of both North and South Azerbaijan under Seljuk rule. [1] The Great Seljuk Empire, also known as the Seljuk Sultanate of Iran, was founded by Tughril Beg, a Turkic ruler who established his capital in Isfahan. [11] This powerful medieval Muslim empire dominated a vast territory, including Iran, from the 11th to the 12th century. [11]

H2. The Seljuk era represents a foundational period of Turco-Persian symbiosis, where Turkic political and military dominance coexisted with the patronage and expansion of Persian culture. Evidence suggests that the Seljuks were Turkic nomads who adopted Persian as the language of culture, promoted Sufism and madrasas, and simultaneously increased Turkification. [11] Their rule involved centralizing power through Turkmen tribes and a bureaucratic system. [12] This illustrates a dual process: the establishment of Turkic political and military power alongside the continuation and even active support of existing Persian cultural and administrative elements. It was not a simple replacement of one culture by another, but a profound synthesis. Turkic rulers, despite their nomadic origins, pragmatically embraced and promoted aspects of sophisticated Iranian administrative and cultural traditions (e.g., the use of Persian for bureaucracy and architecture, as noted in [13] and [14]). Concurrently, their presence led to the Turkification of populations and the emergence of Turkic as a significant spoken language. This dynamic became a hallmark of the “Turco-Persian tradition” [13], [14], where Turkic groups provided military and political strength, and Persian often served as the cultural and administrative vehicle. This recurring pattern of Turkic dynasties ruling over a Persian-speaking realm is a persistent theme in Iranian history. This complex historical reality challenges any simplistic notion of a fixed, singular Iranian identity and demonstrates how it was dynamically shaped by the integration of Turkic elements at the highest levels of governance and culture for centuries.

B. From Ilkhanids to Qara Qoyunlu and Aq Qoyunlu (13th-15th Centuries)

The Mongol Ilkhanids, whose armies were largely composed of Turkic tribes, further solidified Turkic influence in the region. [1], [15] The Turkmen dynasties of Qara Qoyunlu (“Black Sheep”) and Aq Qoyunlu (“White Sheep”), often headquartered in Tabriz, Southern Azerbaijan, further cemented Turkic political presence in Iran in the 15th century. [1], [7], [7] These dynasties continued the Turco-Persian tradition, with rulers like Jahan Shah (r. 1438–67), the Qara Qoyunlu ruler of Iran, being a prominent poet who compiled a diwan under the pen-name “Haqiqi.” [16], [17], [17]

The continuous succession of Turkic dynasties for centuries established a deeply rooted political and military structure that was Turkic in leadership but often Persianate in its cultural expression, particularly in bureaucracy and high culture. Multiple Turkic dynasties (Seljuks, Ilkhanids, Qara Qoyunlu, Aq Qoyunlu) successively ruled Iran for several centuries. [1], [7], [7], [10], [11] This indicates a prolonged period of Turkic political hegemony over the Iranian plateau, not a series of isolated invasions. This extended rule led to the development and consolidation of a unique “Turco-Persian tradition.” [13], [14] The ruling elites were predominantly Turkic, and their military forces were often Turkic (e.g., the Qizilbash for the Safavids [18], [19]). However, these Turkic rulers adopted and patronized Persian as the language of administration, literature, and high culture. [13], [14] This demonstrates a pragmatic adaptation by Turkic dynasties to leverage existing Persian bureaucratic and cultural systems, rather than a complete imposition of Turkic culture. This pattern of Turkic “throne” and Persian “pen” became a defining characteristic of the Iranian state for centuries. Therefore, Iran’s political and administrative legacy is inextricably linked to these Turkic dynasties, making the claim that modern Iran is solely a “Persian legacy” historically incomplete and misleading.

C. The Safavid Dynasty (16th-18th Centuries): A Turkic Foundation for Modern Iran

The Safavid dynasty, founded by Shah Ismail I in Tabriz in 1501, is widely considered the genesis of the modern Iranian state. [7], [20] Shah Ismail hailed from the Safavid family, which had Turkic roots (likely of Oghuz descent), and his military elite and followers, the Qizilbash, were predominantly Turkic-speaking tribes. [7], [18], [21] The Qizilbash were a coalition of mainly Turkic-speaking tribes: Rumlu, Shamlu, Ustajlu, Afshar, Qajar, Tekelu, and Zulkadar. [18]

The Safavids established Twelver Shi’ism as the official state religion, which became a core element of Iranian identity. [2], [22] They adopted and promoted an absolutist kingship model that incorporated Perso-Islamic notions of authority and bureaucracy. [21], [22] Azerbaijani Turkic held significant importance in Safavid Iran; it was not only the official language of the court and army throughout the Safavid period, but was also widely spoken and written, even by renowned poets who typically wrote in Persian. [23] Shah Ismail I himself was a prolific poet under the pen name “Khata’i,” contributing greatly to the literary development of the Azerbaijani language, with his diwan being almost entirely in Turkic. [24], [24], [25], [21], [26]

The Safavid era marks the zenith of Turkic influence on the formation of the Iranian state, where Turkic military and political power not only founded the modern state but also profoundly shaped its religious identity (Shi’ism) and elevated Azerbaijani Turkic to the status of a court language, forging a complex, multi-layered national identity. The Safavid dynasty, founded by Shah Ismail with Turkic roots and supported by the Turkic Qizilbash, established modern Iran. [7], [18], [21], [20] They made Shi’ism the state religion [2], [22], [19] and Azerbaijani Turkic was the official language of the court and army. [23] Shah Ismail himself wrote extensively in Azerbaijani Turkic. [24], [24], [25], [21], [26] This establishes a direct and fundamental link between Turkic agency and the core characteristics of the modern Iranian state: its territorial unity and its defining religious identity. The Safavids’ success in unifying Iran and institutionalizing Shi’ism, was intrinsically tied to their Turkic Qizilbash base and leadership. This means that crucial aspects of what today is considered “Iranian” (such as Shi’ism as the state religion and territorial boundaries) were solidified under a Turkic-led dynasty that employed Azerbaijani Turkic at its administrative and military core. This directly supports the user’s claim that “modern-day Iran is a Turkic legacy” with tangible historical facts. The fact that Shah Ismail, the founder, composed his poetry predominantly in Turkic [24], [24], [25], [21], [26], further highlights the deep penetration of Turkic culture at the highest levels of power, challenging the notion of Persian as the sole language of high culture in historical Iran. This suggests that “Iranian identity” in the early modern period was not merely a continuation of pre-Islamic Persian identity, but a new synthesis profoundly shaped by Turkic political and cultural elements. Consequently, the later attempts by the Pahlavi dynasty to “Persianize” this identity [27], [7], [16], [6], [28], [29], [28], [30], [31] can be seen as a deviation from a long-standing multi-ethnic reality, rather than a return to an ancient, pure form.

D. The Afshar and Qajar Dynasties (18th-20th Centuries): Continuity of Turkic Rule

Following the Safavids, Turkic dynasties continued to rule Iran. The Afshar dynasty (founded by Nader Shah Afshar, from the Turkic Afshar tribe) and the Qajar dynasty (from the Turkic Qajar tribe) governed Iran until 1925. [7], [7], [32], [32] The Qajar family played a pivotal role in the unification of Iran (1779–1796), re-asserting Iranian sovereignty over large parts of the Caucasus. [32], [32] Like virtually every dynasty that ruled Persia since the 11th century, the Qajars came to power with the backing of Turkic tribal forces, while utilizing educated Persians in their bureaucracy. [32], [32] This maintained the Turco-Persian administrative model.

The continuity of Turkic rule through the Afsharid and Qajar periods reinforces the argument that Turkic political leadership was not an anomaly but a defining characteristic of the Iranian state for nearly a millennium, directly preceding the modern era. Turkic dynasties (Afsharid, Qajar) successively ruled Iran until 1925. [7], [7], [32], [32] This represents an unbroken period of nearly 900 years of Turkic rule over the Iranian plateau, spanning from the Seljuks (11th century) to the Qajars (early 20th century). This prolonged period of Turkic governance, extending into the Pahlavi era, fundamentally shaped Iran’s administrative, military, and even cultural landscape. [32], [32] Therefore, the transition to the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925 [29], [33] represents a significant break from this long-standing Turco-Persian political tradition, rather than a natural or organic evolution. This provides strong historical backing for the claim that “modern-day Iran is a Turkic legacy” and sets the stage for understanding subsequent “Persianization” policies as a modern, politically motivated phenomenon, not a return to an ancient, pure form. The shift from multi-ethnic empires with Turkic leadership to a Persian-centric nation-state in the 20th century was a deliberate political project, highlighting the constructed nature of modern national identities.

Table 1: Major Turkic Dynasties Ruling Iran (11th-20th Centuries)

This table clearly illustrates the continuity and extent of Turkic political dominance over the Iranian plateau for nearly a millennium. By adding the “Key Contributions/Impact” column, the table visually links Turkic rule to fundamental aspects of contemporary Iran. This directly validates the “Turkic legacy” claim with tangible historical facts, making the argument more compelling and aligned with the user’s request for “scientific logic.” It also serves as an immediate and understandable reference point for the reader to grasp the scale and longevity of Turkic political influence.

II. Azerbaijani Cultural Footprint: A Symbiotic Heritage

A. Language and Literature: A Rich Interplay of Turkic and Persian

Azerbaijani Turkic has a long and significant history of widespread use in Iran. During the Safavid era, this language was not only the official language of the court and army, but was also widely spoken and written, even by renowned poets who typically wrote in Persian. [23] Some Azerbaijani academics argue that for centuries, Azerbaijani Turkic, not Persian, was the primary language of communication in Iran. [7], [7]

Despite its historical prominence, Azerbaijani Turkic faced severe suppression and marginalization in the 20th century, particularly under the Pahlavi monarchy. State projects aimed at eradicating the language, viewing monolingualism as a prerequisite for a unified, Persianized nation-state. [27] The Azerbaijani language was banned in official spheres and schools [16] and even today, its instruction in high school and university is reportedly prohibited, despite constitutional guarantees for minority languages. [28], [31]

Many prominent poets of Turkic origin made significant contributions to Persian literature, demonstrating a deep cultural intermingling. Rulers like Jahan Shah Haqiqi (Qara Qoyunlu) and Shah Ismail Khata’i (Safavid) were accomplished poets who composed in both Turkic and Persian. [16], [17], [17], [24], [24], [25], [21], [26], [34]

Mohammad-Hossein Shahriar (1906-1988) is a pivotal figure who composed works in both Azerbaijani and Persian. His most famous work, “Heydar Babaya Salam,” written in Azerbaijani, became a pinnacle of Azerbaijani literature and gained immense popularity throughout the Turkic world and was translated into over 30 languages. Shahriar’s decision to write in Azerbaijani was partly prompted by his mother’s inability to understand his Persian poems, making the work a “sound flag of the Turkish language.” [27], [35]

The suppression of Azerbaijani Turkic in the 20th century, despite its deep historical roots and literary contributions, signifies a deliberate, state-led effort to homogenize Iranian identity, rather than a natural linguistic evolution. Azerbaijani Turkic was historically a prominent language, even an official court language in the Safavid era. [7], [7], [23] However, under the Pahlavi era and beyond, it was systematically banned in official spheres and schools. [27], [16], [28], [31] This indicates a clear and abrupt break in language policy, driven by political objectives rather than organic linguistic shifts. The prohibition and suppression are direct evidence of “forced monolingualism” and “institutionalized assimilation policies.” [27] This was not merely a linguistic shift, but a deliberate political act aimed at eradicating a significant portion of Iran’s cultural diversity in pursuit of creating a “homogenized, Persianized Aryan nation.” [27] The existence and persistence of Azerbaijani Turkic literature [27] and the unparalleled popularity of works like Shahriar’s “Heydar Babaya Salam” [27], [35], demonstrate powerful resistance to these policies and the enduring ethnic identity of Azerbaijani Turks, indirectly alluding to “racism” or discrimination. This also suggests that the “Persianization” project was a modern invention of nationalism, not a historical continuity. This situation reveals a fundamental tension between Iran’s historical multi-ethnic reality and the modern nation-state’s attempt to impose a singular identity, leading to cultural trauma and ongoing struggles for linguistic and cultural rights among minority groups.

Table 2: Prominent Turkic Poets and Their Linguistic Contributions

This table directly responds to the user’s request for “Turkic poets who composed in Persian,” showcasing a bilingual and bicultural literary heritage. It visually demonstrates that individuals of Turkic origin were not only patrons of Persian literature but also active contributors, often writing in both languages, undermining the idea of a solely Persian literary tradition. These individuals are tangible examples that linguistic boundaries were fluid, and Turkic identity did not preclude mastery or significant contribution to Persian literature. This table clearly, concisely, and impactfully introduces these figures. By explicitly stating their Turkic background alongside their Persian literary output, any implicit or explicit claim that Persian literature is ethnically “Persian” is directly refuted. This powerfully illustrates the “Turco-Persian tradition” in the literary sphere, showing how Turkic rulers and individuals were instrumental in its flourishing. The story of Mohammad-Hossein Shahriar, especially with “Heydar Babaya Salam,” is a poignant example of the pressures of Persianization and the enduring vitality and resistance of Azerbaijani Turkic literary expression. This table provides compelling empirical evidence of the deep and rich intermingling and mutual enrichment of Turkic and Persian cultures at the highest levels of artistic expression, supporting the report’s overall argument for Iran’s multi-ethnic and symbiotic heritage.

B. Art, Architecture, and Music: Shared Expressions

Azerbaijani culture itself is a rich blend of Iranian, Turkic, and Caucasian elements, influencing its various art forms. [40], [16] Turkic and Azerbaijani influence in Iranian architecture, particularly during the Seljuk and Safavid periods, is clearly evident. The Seljuks introduced innovations such as the symmetrical four-iwan layout in mosques, advancements in dome construction, and the early use of muqarnas. While the four-iwan plan had roots in ancient Iranian architecture, it was adopted and popularized by the Seljuks, becoming the “classic” form of Iranian Friday mosques. Seljuk minarets also adopted an “Iranian preference for cylindrical form with elaborate patterns,” distinguishing them from the typical square-shaped North African minarets. [41] Similarities are observed between Seljuk-Ottoman and Seljuk-Safavid architecture, indicating mutual influence and shared heritage. [42], [42] Safavid architecture, seen in structures like Isfahan, often emulated Timurid art, reflecting a continuity of earlier Turco-Persian styles. [43] Even Qajar architecture, despite Western influences, retained traditional Iranian elements under the patronage of a Turkic dynasty. [44], [45]

Azerbaijani music, although distinct, is “tightly connected to the music of other Iranian peoples such as Persian music and Kurdish music, and also the music of the Caucasian peoples.” [16] Iranian music itself has influenced Turkic and Arabic cultures, indicating a long history of mutual musical exchange. [46]

Architectural and artistic styles in Iran during Turkic rule were not simply Turkic or simply Persian, but rather demonstrated a dynamic synthesis, indicative of a shared cultural evolution rather than a simple imposition. Early evidence shows Seljuk architecture introducing “innovations” in Iran like the four-iwan plan and new dome constructions. [41] Safavid architecture drew inspiration from Timurid models. [43] Azerbaijani culture is a blend of Iranian, Turkic, and Caucasian elements. [40], [16] This points to a continuous process of cultural exchange, adaptation, and innovation, not a one-sided cultural imposition. The architectural examples show that Turkic dynasties adopted, adapted, and innovated upon existing Iranian forms (e.g., the four-iwan plan, despite ancient Iranian roots, was popularized and became a canonical form under the Seljuks [41]). This indicates a reciprocal relationship where Turkic rulers patronized and integrated elements of local culture while also introducing their own distinct features (e.g., specific minaret forms [41]). The “Turco-Persian tradition” [13], [14] is clearly evident in these artistic expressions, where Turkic patronage fostered a rich blend of styles. This contradicts any simplistic view of cultural purity or singular origin. Iran’s cultural landscape, particularly during centuries of Turkic rule, has been characterized by a rich and continuous process of synthesis and mutual influence, making it impossible to disentangle “Turkic” from “Iranian” elements without acknowledging their deep symbiosis. This historical reality underscores the multifaceted nature of Iran’s cultural heritage.

C. Culinary Traditions and Social Customs: An Intertwined Identity

Iranian cuisine has both influenced and been influenced by Turkic cuisine, reflecting centuries of historical interactions and migrations. [47], [48] For instance, Turkish culinary culture has been shaped by interactions with Iranians and other groups. [47] Azerbaijani cuisine itself is a blend of Turkic, Iranian, and Eastern European culinary traditions, featuring shared dishes and terms with Turkic origins like “kebab” and “bastirma.” [49]

Customs and traditions in Iranian Azerbaijan reflect a deep symbiosis and mixture between native and nomadic elements. [16] The historical familiarity between Turkic peoples and Iranian culture facilitated the exchange of language, culture, religion, rituals, and traditions along the Silk Road. [50] The identity of Azerbaijani Turks in Iran is complex and marked by “identity confusion.” [51], [52] Their compact settlement, the long rule of their Turkic ancestors in Iran, and their pivotal role in the widespread adoption of Shi’ism, integrate them into the broader Iranian identity. Simultaneously, their distinct language and separate historical narrative prevent their full assimilation into a solely Persian-centric Iranian identity. [51], [52] Early Turkic beliefs were also influenced by Persian religions like Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism, indicating a long history of cultural and religious interactions. [53]

Cultural practices, from cuisine to everyday customs, demonstrate the tangible reality of deep integration and mutual influence between Turkic and Iranian elements, challenging any rigid separation of identities. Culinary practices [47], [48], [49] and general cultural expressions [16], [40], [50], [53] show clear influences from both Turkic and Iranian traditions. This indicates a long history of interaction and intermingling at the societal and everyday life level, not confined to elite or political spheres. “The symbiosis and mixture between native and nomadic elements” [16] is a continuous and organic process that has shaped the daily lives, traditions, and cultural expressions of Azerbaijani Turks. The “identity confusion” [51], [52] that Azerbaijani Turks experience is a direct result of this deep historical intermingling, where religious ties (Shi’ism) and historical connections (long rule of Turkic ancestors) bind them to a broader Iranian identity, while their distinct language and separate historical narratives foster a unique ethnic consciousness. This inherent complexity refutes simplistic nationalist claims that seek to define identity solely through a single lineage or language. The cultural fabric of Iran, especially in regions like Azerbaijan, stands as a testament to centuries of shared evolution, where Turkic contributions are not merely additions but integral and fundamental components of the overall cultural heritage.

III. Challenging Monolithic Narratives: Discrimination and Pan-Nationalism

A. The Rise of Persian Nationalism and its Impact on Turkic Identity

The 20th century marked an ideological turning point in Iran, particularly with the rise of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925, which actively promoted a centralized, Persian-centric national identity. [1], [2], [54], [54] This new form of Iranian nationalism, fostered under Reza Shah Pahlavi, sought to create a “homogenized, Persianized Aryan nation.” [27]

This policy led to forced assimilation measures, including the systematic suppression and prohibition of non-Persian languages, especially Azerbaijani Turkic, in official spheres and educational institutions. [27], [7], [7], [16], [28], [31]

These policies have resulted in systematic discrimination and a sense of marginalization among Azerbaijani Turks, despite their significant demographic presence (estimated between 25 to 40 million, making them Iran’s largest ethnic minority) and deep historical roots. [29], [28], [31] This has led to “identity confusion” [51], [52] and a struggle to overcome discrimination, as exemplified by the Tractor-Persepolis football rivalry serving as a platform for ethnic expression and reflecting societal fault lines. [31]

The modern concept of an exclusively “Persian” Iran is a 20