Jump to content

Talk:Baklava/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Comment

The first and third paragraphs contain somewhat redundant and sometimes conflicting material. The third paragraph is also non-grammatical. Possible solutions include merging them into one paragraph or creating two paragraphs: one on what baklava is and the other on how it is made. I don't know enough about this dish to be able to do this. --Ben James Ben 22:58, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)

Photo caption

Surely "American-style" is a mistake? Palmiro | Talk 23:28, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Baklava can be spelt Baklawa

creating redirect

Lebanese?

At least now the bizarre version with an "r" in it (where did that come from?) has been fixed. But as "Arab" is already mentioned, surely adding "Lebanese" is unnecessary? In addition, giving the Lebanese (and Syrian and Palestinian) version of the name seems unnecessary when we already have the fusha.

Really, the whole list seems over-long and redundant. Could we not just say "Middle Eastern and Balkan" and cut out all the nationalities and different languages? I think there is no very good argument for giving 15 foreign language names of a type of food. Palmiro | Talk 19:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

That would easily offend all the different countries that have developed their own subtle variations on what they consider their dish (shared among others). If it were a truly worldwide dish (like hamburgers or cornflakes) I could see the list being removed. But baklava is limited primarily to a (relatively) small geographical area that spans from Bosnia to Persia. However, if the list clutters the top too much, references to various national versions and their names can be placed further down. Additionally, the Arab identity of the Lebanese people is controversial, and (as would be the same case for Maltese topics) would deserve separate mention for those who do not regard (and would even be offended by the implication of) Lebanese tradition as being an Arab tradition. - Gilgamesh 02:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. Comparing the Arab identity of the Lebanese with the (non-existent) Arab identity of the Maltese, just because the latter speak an Arabic-derived language, strikes me as potentially even more controversial. What is the basis for the name given in Latin script after the citation of Lebanese?

I agree that if we have to mention all these variations then it should indeed be further down. Also, if we mention Lebanon separately then we should also mention Syria, Jordan and Palestine. Palmiro | Talk 18:14, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed on Syria, Jordan and Palestine, if they indeed have traditions of baklava. (Though I Googled "Palestinian-baklava" and got nothing.) Anyway, I got the help of a friend from Beirut. She suggested that "Arab cuisine" is far too broad and divergent (like saying "European cuisine" or "African cuisine") and we should stick to the individual cultures that have baklava. Different parts of the Arab world have all sorts of different kinds of cuisine, and baklava can't be described as a universal "Arab cuisine" any more than falafel or couscous, which (like baklava) are largely regional and shared with neighboring cultures. The mention of the Standard Arabic word is still relevant, however, as almost all the different languages' names derive from it anyway. But it's still important to note that although the modern words for baklava are Arabic, the origin of the food is older than the Arab presence in the region. - Gilgamesh 06:25, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I agree that "arab cuisine" is too broad a category, as there's only limited correspondence between, say, Moroccan, Syrian-Lebanese-Palestinian, and Yemeni cuisine (for example). There are even Yemeni restaurants here in Damascus, which appear to have a certain exotic allure (although it somewhat escapes me, as the choices on the menu amount to chicken and rice or meat and rice. Hope there are no Yemenis reading this and about to tear me apart for underappreciation of their culinary heritage). "Levantine cuisine" would be quite accurate. I can assure you that the Palestinians and Syrians have baklava, the Syrians in particular have some of the best in the world! Palmiro | Talk 19:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Really? Being from Yemen, I would know that rice and chicken is not the most popular dish in Yemen although it is good enough to eat everyday, don't know what problem you would have with that :); saltah is the national favorite. But, many Yemeni restaurants in Yemen and elsewhere do serve rice as the main choice because rice is universal as opposed to very "exotic" dish items like aaseed (cooked dough) with maraq (brown chicken stew) and saltah. Anyway, I agree that Arab cuisine is too broad of a catergory because Shami dishes are not usually made in Southern Arab coutries or North African countires, or not as much. Actually, while in Yemen I never seen a falafel, hummus, or baklawa; too bad they're missing out. --Inahet 09:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
And, I wonder if bakalawa has any "relation" to a very popular Yemeni pastry called sahn. Both consist of layers of thin pastry dough and melted clarified butter, and then topped with a sweet liquid (a little honey is used on sahn). Hmmm.... --Inahet 09:12, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
It's amazing how some people can turn a discussion about baklava into one about the Arab identity of the Lebanese. No offense, Gilgamesh. And about your friend's comment, if "Arab cuisine" is too wide of a descriptor, then "Lebanese cuisine" is much too narrow. I would suggest a "Levantine cuisine" category but that would be kind of original research. Yuber(talk) 20:25, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Levantine cuisine seems to be the way to go. It means there's only one place to argue about deletions of Israel and about Arab-identity questions. But that would mean removing every Levant country's entry from the cuisine page here and listing the spelling of it in each Levant country's language. (So we'll need Arabic, Hebrew, and Turkish at least.) The new look would be:
Thoughts? I'm not doing it yet, because this is clearly a sensitive issue. --Mgreenbe 13:56, 8 December 2005 (UTC) absurd mistake has been removed by the author 22:10, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
That's not Syriac, it's Armenian! Palmiro | Talk 17:37, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Whoops! Read Armenian as Aramaic. Not a good excuse. Edited my comment. --Mgreenbe 22:10, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I thought that was probably what had happened all right! But while Lebanese, Syrian and Palestinian cuisine bear enough similarities to be grouped together as Levantine cuisine, is this really the case of Israeli cuisine? I'm asking because I don't know at all, but I would have imagined a considerable European influence as well as Levantine elements. Palmiro | Talk 13:31, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

An excellent point; I've moved discussion to Talk:Levantine cuisine, as this no longer has to do with baklava. --Mgreenbe 23:50, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Butter, or what?

What is traditionally used as fat in making baklava? Most stuff of good quality here in Syria says on the box "made with pure animal fat", and I suppose that could refer to butter, but I'm not sure. I presume that cheapo versions use some sort of margarine. Anyone in a position to give an authoritative explanation? Palmiro | Talk 18:51, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

In Bosnia, we use margarine or vegetable fat called "maslo".
I'm a Turk and my grandmother cook it with olive oil too. 85.96.226.114 21:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Naming conventions

Inspired somewhat by the history of this article, I have made some remarks on Wikipedia_talk:Naming conventions which people here might have views on. Palmiro | Talk 17:32, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

History

The current history section traces baklava to the Assyrians and then the Greeks. What is the source for this? In Alan Davidson's 'Oxford Companion to Food', Charles Perry (called "the leading authority on early Arabic cookery") has a quite different story in the 'baklava' and 'filo' articles. He says that filo (yufka) is 'clearly of Turkish origin' and gives no indication that it existed before Ottoman times in Greece, Armenia, etc. Does anyone have better sources? (Note that cookbooks are usually 'terrible' sources for history, often repeating baseless legends....) --Macrakis 22:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Well the source of the Oxford Companion to Food is well researched and referrs to the "Divan-i Lugat-it Turk" which is a massive compilation of Literature written over 1000 years ago in Kashgar which is in the Uygur region of China so it is reliable and historical.

JohnStevens5

NOTE: no such user; actually posted at 22:03, 14 May 2006 UTC by 86.139.119.212 (talk • contribs) [1] ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I also think that 'filo' (thin leaf bread) is a member of Turkic cuisine. As a Central Asian, I can say that thin leaf pastry is popular in Central Asia, espesially when it comes to celebrations or weddings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.140.214.72 (talk • contribs) 11:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Baklava is not made out of Phillo pastry, this is incorrect it is made out of a special regional pastry of Damascus/Halab/GaziAntep.

The earliest record of baklava as we know it today locates it in Damascus, from which city it spread to Gaziantep and from there to the rest of Turkey. By the 17th century at least the fame of baklava had spread to Istanbul, since towards the end of that century baklava was being made by the palace cooks as a special treat for the janissaries in Ramazan. The janissaries carried the trays of baklava out of the palace in what was known as the Baklava Procession.

This desert is home to the region's I stated above, it is a speciallity. The reason for this is that there is a special type of Pistachio, it is called Antep Fistigi or Sham Fistigi in Turkey. This refers to GaziAntep Pistachio and Sham meaning Damascus region Pistachio.

It must be Fresh! not Dried, this is extremely expensive, the desert uses special regional spices and ingrediants, these can only be found with this taste in the region!

The price of real authentic Baklava of this region starts £15/20 a kilogram and rises depending on its quality.

Even in other area's of Turkey or the Arab World this desert cannot be made to the expertise of the region.

Everyone know's that the best Baklava can only be found in the three very close by area's I stated above this goes back to ancient Assyrian times!

The desert that is sold in other region's is not Baklava, I have visited other restaurant's this desert is not Baklava it is an imitation and would not be allowed in any kitchen of Antep/Halab/Damascus.

People fly this speciality dish over to their Wedding's and eat it on special occasions.

Sadly due to neglagence this food of the King's is being distorted and bastarsized into a cheap, non-cullinary dish in the West, which is a real shame to my home region.

However, the GaziAntepliler and Damascus and Halab/Allepo chef's will not allow this and we are on a mission to give you in the West the real Baklava and let you discover why it is the Food of the Sultan's.

I have a restaurant opening in London soon, my family has premises in Germany, the word baklava will become synomonous with GaziAntep.

AlpEren

NOTE: no such user; actually posted at 20:36, 14 May 2006 UTC by 86.139.119.212 (talk • contribs) [2] ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Official Objective Source for Baklava, Filo pastry and its origins

"Filo is the Greek name for a dough of many paper-thin layers separated by films of butter...Although known to Europeans and North Americans by a Greek name, the dough is clearly of Turkish origin. The medieval nomad Turks had an obsessive interest in making layered bread, possibly in emulation of the thick oven breads of city people. As early as the 11th century, a dictionary of Turkish dialects (Diwan Lughat al-Turk) recorded pleated/folded bread as one meaning of the word yuvgha, which is related to the word (yufka) which means a single sheet of file in modern Turkish. This love of layering continues among the Turks of Central Asia...The idea of making the sheets paper thins is a later development.The Azerbaijanis make the usual sort of baklava with 50 or so layers of filo, but they also make a...pastry called Baki pakhlavasi (Baku-style baklava) using ordinary noodle paste instead of filo...This may represent the earliest form of baklava, resulting form the Turkish nomads adapting their concept of layered bread--developed in the absence of ovens...If this is so, baklava actually pre-dated filo, and the paper-thin pastry we know today was probably an innovation of the Ottoman sultan's kitchens at Topkapi palace in Istanbul. There is an established connection between the Topkapi kitchens and baklava; on the 15th of Ramadan every year, the Janissary troops stationed in Istanbul used to march to the palace, where every regiment was presented with two trays of baklava. They would...march back to their barracks in what was known as the Baklava Procession." ---Oxford Companion to Food, Alan Davidson [Oxford University Press:Oxford] 1999 (p. 299)

http://www.foodtimeline.org/foodpies.html#baklava

Its a very reliable source, I think it should be included.

JohnStevens5

NOTE: no such user; actually posted at 17:56, 14 May 2006 UTC by 86.139.119.212 (talk • contribs) [3]


I am a user, Johnstevens5 what seems to be the problem?

My apologies, User:Johnstevens5, but the above posting with the supposed signature "JohnStevens5" was not made by a logged-in user called "Johnstevens5", but rather by an anonymous editor at IP address 86.139.119.212. Furthermore, another posting with a supposed signature of "AlpEren" was made from the same IP address. When this happens in a short time, especially during a controversy, it usually signifies naive editors who are trying to pose as multiple people and don't realize that we can see exactly who did edit a page. Two other problems support this less-friendly interepretation:
  1. The editor(s) of each of three similar edits did not know how to create a link for a user, instead linking the supposed usernames to non-existent Wikipedia articles "JohnStevens5" and "AlpEren".
  2. The supposed username "JohnStevens5" is not the same as your username, "Johnstevens5" (note the difference in case, which is significant in Wikipedia).
If you made these edits, I apologize for my brusqueness. However, I recommend you read some of the links I've provided on your talk page to avoid similar future problems, and always remember to check that you are logged in before you edit so that your edits are properly credited to you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Reading the current "History" section of the article, I thought the prose looked suspiciously like a copy-and-paste operation. Some quick Google searches show that the entire section is pulled practically verbatim from several sources:

This is plagiarism. When we write Wikipedia articles, we are required to use the sourced information to write in our own words, just like for any other essay, paper, or publication. Even a citation of the work, as has been provided for Oxford Companion, is not an excuse to plagiarize. (Verbatim excerpts are required to be quoted and properly cited, and must not be used as the essential text, only as an illustration.) I ask the regular editors of this article to do some quick writing to avoid having this article tagged with a {{copyvio}} notice. Thank you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

You are right. Anonymous users 86.139.119.212 and 192.210.10.253 have replaced a lot of documented and well-footnoted content with unattributed material. I have reverted a couple of times to the earlier version, and do not intend to enter into an edit war. My advice to you would be to revert to the last good version. --Macrakis 23:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


I am a user, sorry about the Copyright stuff, I'm new to Wiki goto get to grips with the rule's. --Johnstevens5

Source

The edit comment 2006-05-14 19:58:42 by user 192.210.10.253 claims: "references bogus. Looked up ISBN number and it is not the same book you stated." The ISBN number is correct and can be verified at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1860646034. --Macrakis 23:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I have confirmed that ISBN 1860646034 is registered to A Taste of Thyme: Culinary Cultures of the Middle East by the U.S. Library of Congress [4], Amazon, and Fetchbook.info [5]. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but the section that cites this work is still missing. See this comparison. I have abjured multiple reverts, so take a look and see what you think. The Assyrian material also seems to be a copyvio (not to mention, um, 'original' as a theory). --Macrakis 01:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I have also re-replaced some of the aforementioned copyvio material with the well-sourced text that preceded it. One line from the other text intrigues me:
The word baklava itself is derived from Arabic بقلاوة baqlāwaḧ, based on an Arabic word for nuts.
This statement, if true, would be quite relevant. But without a source, it is original research, which Wikipedia editors are not allowed to include in articles. (Even if the Arabic definition is accurate, that does not mean "baklava" was derived from it. Etymology is replete with false derivations from naive researchers, and people often forget to account for historical cross-language mutation when assuming derivations based on modern tongues. This requires serious research of old texts, not scarfing casual website info.) This statement may very well be true, but we need cited works to make such claims. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


I don't think using a Greek author on such matter's is very reliable or objective Vryonis (1971) Especially regarding the 70's were highly charged years for Greek Nationalism, not to mention a bias slant may be added and they are quite well known for pretty audacious claims.

Therefore, non Greek/Turkish/Arab etc author's should be used as their bound to have a slight nationlist bias or slant.

The other two sources are objective and have some strong sources and facts to back up the claims. It seems that Baklava originated in Central Asia. Johnstevens5

The article as written explicitly says that Vryonis's identification was challenged by Perry. So what's the problem? --Macrakis 17:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The problem is Vryonis is a Greek and therefore cannot be deemed objective or free of bias as he is taking Perry's objective work as some sort of challenge or attack while the author has simply researched and provided factual and very credible sources towards the matter.

Therefore Vryonis should not be used as a reliable source, it wouldn't be hard to find a Turkish or Arab author claiming the dessert to their own nation.

Its just Food Nationalism, very silly if you ask me and needless.

From the non-Greek objective source's there is a clear Central Asian link to Baklava and the Ottomans seemed to have had a Baklava Celebration day and created what is today known as the dessert mentioned, so there is a strong thesis to the Turkic origins of this dish.

Remember, this is an Encyclopedia its reliable source's and facts to back them up which matter not subjective opinions.

Regards

Johnstevens5

I agree entirely that food nationalism is very silly. But I ask that you re-read the text of the article. It says that Vryonis had a certain theory. It then says that Perry disproved the theory. Vryonis cannot have taken Perry's work as a challenge or attack because Vryonis's article was written before Perry's. As for Vryonis's credentials, after getting his Ph.D. at Harvard, he was a professor at UCLA then NYU. The cited book is a scholarly study. He was apparently wrong about baklava, but it is worth mentioning his book precisely so that people will understand which arguments have been refuted. --Macrakis 00:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Based on the recent EU debacle, food nationalism is clearly part of the history of baklava. Our responsibility is to provide a neutral summary of the material available. It would be nice if we had a neutral source, but it is acceptable to include likely non-neutral sources so long as (A) they are reliable by Wikipedia standards, which, very loosely speaking, means they are respectable enough for mainstream (not vanity) publishers; and (B) we make an effort to present all sides of the issue, citing these sources properly to allow readers to verify the information. Rather than simply delete properly sourced material, it would be better to add properly sourced balancing material. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


I totally agree Jeff about the need for neutral and objective analysis of the matter.

The methodology with which I approach the topic is that it seems that especially the Greeks or Greek Cypriots are using nationalism in regard's to food by claiming a dessert shared by a wide geographical area as soley their invention.

This is the reason why I'm sceptacal of Vryonis, as a Greek there is a motivation there for bias and to be a little economic with the truth to present the food as being their's.

However, from the non-Greek/non-Turk author's it is very clear that most material, source's and factual evidence points towards Central Asia as the origins of the dessert.

The origins therefore seem pretty clear.

The next point to be highlighted is that Baklava as it is known today reached this stage in the Ottoman Kitchen's.

Johnstevens5

Johnstevens5, nothing is clear without reliable sources. Claiming bias neither proves the bias nor invalidates properly researched material. This is not a "methodology" for uncovering fact. All you say above is personal attestation without evidence, which anyone can do, saying anything they want. That's why we (A) don't accept personal opinions and theories, and (B) require material from reputable publishers. I know it's easier to make arguments than it is to prove them, but we need all sides of controversial issues to put forth the effort to back up their statements with evidence. From the current text of the article (per Perry, not Vryonis), it looks like the Turkish claims are not quite definitive. Surely there are reliable sources to fill in this apparent gap in the Turkish-origin argument? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


All I'm saying is that non-Greek/non-Turk source's and material point to a Central Asian connection, similar recipies were written in the Diwan Lughat al-Turk written around a 1000 or more years ago and in Yuan Dynasty Chinease cook book in 1330 and seen as though the first Turkic/Central Asian migrations to Azerbaijan area where sometime Before Christ, this thin pastry making tradition may have been bought some time during the migrations as its called the missing link.

Perry does include many sources and alot of evidence for his claims in the book writting directly about the subject, I'll pick these out and present them.

Johnstevens5

Johnstevens5 -- I agree with you. Perry's argument is good, and it is reported in the article. So what is the problem? Part of the historiography of 'baklava' is Vryonis's statement, which is still believed by many people. It is better, I think, to include the Vryonis claim and show that it has been superceded than to ignore it and have people think Perry didn't address it. Remember, NPOV means reporting on different claims. --Macrakis 17:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

http://www.google.com/trends?q=baklava%2C+baklawa&ctab=2&geo=all&date=all —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.140.214.72 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


image

the image with "the different types of baklava" is hidding the word "best". i dont know how to fix this, so if anybody else knows, pls do it.--Greece666 03:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


since when???

since when turks knew baklava?? it was inrodused after the arab invasion to asia. mangolia where the turks or the ottoman presented. arabs roled the turks for more than 10 centures, and it was before the invasion of costantinapole or istanbul. as far as i know, assyria is the home land of arabs and we can say now the arabs knew it first. baklava widly known to turks and the rest of europe after the expansion of islam. same as other arabic food such as: mosaka'a(means:cooled in arabic), loqama(bit or swollow), halwa(means sweet in arabic), kanafa, tahene, etc. contains arabic meaning and not turkish or greek. as much as it has meaning in arabic language, then baklava arabic for sure. b.t.w all turkish and greek food is actuily :bayn nahrayn (mesopotamia) arabic food.

No, no, no. Baklava is either Turkish or Greek in origin. If it was Arabic in origin, then why is baklava and some of the other other dishes/items you named not an integral part of the cuisines of the Arabian Peninsula countries (the supposed native land of early Arabs)? And Arabs are NOT the originators of everything that comes from the Middle East. Let's lose the ethnocentric attitude, its offensive and instigative. --Inahet 04:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

not trying to make an insult for any nation. It is arabic origin and the dishes i presented are the typical arabic cuisine in all arabian peninsula, it is syrian, lebanese, iraqi, saudi, jordanian, pelasinian, Kuwait etc. arabs lineage came from assyria, phoenicia, palestine and other parts from mesopotamia. another thing, if baklava and many many other dishes has turkish or greek origin, then why those dishes has arabic names and arabic meaning. i have many turkish and greek friends. i have asked them if this cuisine names does mean anything in their languages. they say NO IDEA WHAT DOES thos names mean. but when i asked my arabic friends they told me the meaning and that what make me think so. useful web sites for arabic cuisine:

--194.54.223.9 14:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)Memo

Are you implying that Assyrians and Phoenicians are Arabs? They are not, they are seperate Semetic peoples who may have migrated from their native land in the Arabian Peninsula to the Fertile Crescent and the Mediterranean. But they had their own language, culture, etc. I believe Assyrian is still spoken today in some parts of the Middle East. My point is that their contributions cannot be attributed to the Arabs because they are simply not Arabs and never were.

But, you're right about the dishes having Arabic names with Arabic roots. The only explaination that I can think of is that perhaps Arabs popularized the Arabic names for the dishes and then eventually the original names died out. Also, I do think that some of the Middle Eastern dishes are Arab in origin, but also some are from Turkish, Greek, Assyrian, etc. --Inahet 22:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


i didn't mean that assyrians phoenicians are arabs, what i am saying is that arab are assyrians in origin, if we go further back in history. arabs and thier language origin came from assyria from petra( jordan nowaday) and petra was the first capital of arabs. that means we can call arabs as assyrian or the other way round. what i know all semetics are cousins, and their languages fairly similar. you may think arabs are yemenite, but in fact there are not, yemenite are mixed arabs. let's get back to our point. everything in this world is named after the people who invented it, and knew it first, and the name will never dies. i'll give you examples. i'll try to mention what could be turkish (dolma for example) it is turkish, and that due to the shape of dolma(more asian style), it look like more similar to japanese sushi, and it doesnt have arabic name. why didn't it changes to arabic name? how about greek food,feta is greek and the name feta is greek, why it not calling feta with arabic name? because it is not arabic. b.t.w all greeks beleive that all their food is turkish origin. why is that? due to the expansion of ottoman impire to greece, and no one can deny that. but what greeks may don't know that the ottoman was ruled by arabs for centureis , and no one can deny how arabs influenec turks in religion, culture, dressing, language etc. it goes like that, started from arabs then turks then greeks for. also from arabs then greeks then turks. arabs also borrowed turkish food such as dolma only. arabs borrowed feta only from greece, maybe i missed few, but the rest is arabic named food. starting from mezze's, main corse and ending up with dessert. as i said, everything in this world is named after the people who invented it, and knew it first, and the name will never dies. i know it's silly of talking about food nationalism but we all want to know the trueth. trueth can be figuered by studying history. --194.54.223.9 01:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)memo

The etymology of a thing (food or other) is one useful piece of information in studying its history. But only one piece. Anyway, since Wikipedia is not a place for original research, instead of making arguments like this, you should work on finding good published sources for your position, and cite them. --Macrakis 08:14, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

From what I know, Petra, the Nabataean capital, has nothing to do with Assyria or Assyrians. Petra was never part of the Assyrian realm. Although Assyrians and other Semite groups like Canaanites may have come from the Arabian Peninsula, it would be erroneous to call them Arabs because as I said before they have their own culture, language, history, so you cannot call Assyrians Arabs or Arabs Assyrians; see Assyria. You said that Arabs came from Petra -- well that is a new theory I never heard. Are you suggesting that Arabs originated in what is now West Jordan and groups of Arabs migrated south and eventually populated the Arabian Peninsula?

Anyway, it is suggested that Nabataeans migrated from Southern Arabia (Yemen) to what is now Wadi Musa, Jordan. So Nabataeans are (perhaps) Yemenites :D. Also, you say Yemenites are mixed Arabs yet some genealogists put Yemenites as the pure Arabs Qahtan and the north Arabs as Arabized Arabs Adnan. --Inahet 04:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


as i said, if we go further back in history, and to keep in mind, i need you to look more about the history in yemen and arab, just to remind you that qahtanite origin came from the land of aram but they sattled in yemen. and adnatite are defined to the arabs who descent of ishmaeal. so all of them has an origin from mesopotamia. in nowadays they are known as arabs. simply, all part of mesopotamia are the known as the ancient arabs and hebrew, as long as they have semetic languages they are known as arabs and hebrew :) i think the conversation was converted to racism way instead of food nationalism, i was expecting from you to talk more about the exaples of the real turkish food (dolma) and why it was named in turkish language and not arabic??? while the others dishes has arabic names :) --194.54.235.2 16:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)memo

What do you mean by racism??? Anyway I can't answer your questions regarding baklava and other dishes with Arabic names because I don't know the answers. You need reliable sources to back up your claims, as Macrakis suggested. The etymology is important but it reveals little of the development and origin of the dish in question. If you can find a good source, then you're welcome to make any additions to the article. --Inahet 20:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


hey guys, sorry for not replying for long, I was in a vacation, it was absolutely fantastic :> so where were we? ah, yeah ,first, what i meant by racism that our conversation was converted into race, and i've just suggusted to talk about the main subject.

now, i have some sources i want you to look at: this web site tells you the history of Arabs influence to the Turkish cuisine. And I've copied the article for you, and leave you to read it [6]:

Through trade and eventual warfare, Turks encountered the Arabs, and eventually converted to Islam. Through exposure to the Arabs, Persians, and their conversion to Islam the Turkish culture underwent a great change. Islam stressed the community of believers over ethnic or language differences. Moslems accepted converted Turks as brothers upon their conversion. Turks gained entry into a culture that was urban, unified, and highly developed culturally. In addition, the Turks were linchpins for the ancient silk roads, which introduced the spices and eating styles of the far east into Anatolia. On the one hand, Turks encountered the highly developed culinary court culture of the Arabs. Islam celebrated the senses, in contrast to Christian Europe which often taught that life was to be endured upon earth, celebration of the senses means the physical, sensual, and poetic enjoyment of food. Additional exposure to the remarkable cargo of the silk road, introduced even more culinary nuances through exotic spices from Asia. The Turkish style of eating by the time the Ottomans came to power was a combination of Arabic refinement and nomadic Asiatic eating style. Portable flat low tables define nomadic mobility, a dining style still common in eastern Turkey today. Handkerchiefs, napkins, perfumed water for washing hands, and elegant speech at the table are direct Persian and Arabic court influences. The exposure to Arabic culture and conversion to Islam had a profound influence upon culinary culture. Turks changed from hunters and pastoral people to an urban sensibility and lifestyle. Through Arabic cuisine, Turks learned about sugarcane cultivation, distillation of sugar, and confectionery. Sugar syrup in desserts, jams, sherbets and fruit drinks came into their repertoir You can check it out at : [7]

  • now since the arabs introduced syrup,sugar,spices and pestry to turkish, how come baqlawa is turkish in origin?
  • don't you agree that turkish are infuenced by arabic ciusine, culture, language etc?

Other sources to provide you with information I've talked about: Unique specialties of Turkish cuisine make souvenirs from a trip. "Lokum," a gelled sweet often mixed with hazelnuts or pistachios, is cut into cubes and rolled in powdered sugar. In the United States it is commonly called Turkish delight. Rose, banana, and eggplant liqueur are savored. Sweet hot red pepper paste, Muhammara, notes the Arabic influence.[8] other more sources for you about turkish food and how it was influenced by arabic. Ctrl+F and find arab in each: [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]

i did what you've asked me to do, check them out if you like. fair enough i guess. hope to hear soon from you. regards :) --194.54.235.2 17:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)Memo

Those sources are okay, but they mention nothing about Arabs being the creators of baklava. You could use those sources to justify the claim that Turkish cuisine has an Arab influence, but you cannot prove with these sources that baklava is of Arab origin. --Inahet 01:55, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


ok guys, I’ve found sources provides that baklava has an Arabic origin. I’ve been through loads of web sites but it never mentioned that Turks are the original creators of balkqlawa. [14][15][16][17][18][19] most of the web sites claims that baqlawa has a Syrian origin, and I don’t think that Syria is belong to turkey. It is more arabic and in is the place were arabs came from originally. Don’t you think those sources are enough? I need you now to explain to me what are your evidences of claiming baklawa is Turkish? Baqlawa has arabic name first of all, second, it has been known in the arab region since ancient time of Mesopotamia. Tell me which civilisation is older in history turk or mesopotamia? Please explain to me how baqlawa has Turkish origin, i’d love to know your evidences and figures. hope i've helped. regards--84.13.63.91 11:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I have tried adding a link to my chocolate baklava recipe page but have had it removed as "spam"? I think that the page adds value, is original, and has attracted local attention where it has been sold at a number of gatherings and garnered praise. I am fine if folks don't want it added, but I don't see how it is less of a contribution than the other recipe links. No problem either way, but thought I'd ask! --Dilip

Wikipedia isn't the place for pointers to original recipes, no matter how good they are. --Macrakis 23:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

BAKLAVA IS ASSYRIAN IN ORIGIN!

Why these pathetic sematics? It was Assyrian, it was brought to Constantinople by Greek sailors, and then appropriated by the Turks. No Greek will claim the food is of pure Greek origin, it is of Assyrian origin, this is the difference between Turks and Greeks, we do not ignore History.

Many groups claim Baklava as their own. However, a check of the history of baklava yields surprising results. It is widely believed that it is of Assyrian origin.

Around approximately the 8th century B.C., Assyrians baked thin layers of dough with nuts, poured honey over it, and enjoyed this sumptuous treat. Baklava was baked only on special occasions, usually by the rich who could afford such a luxury.

The history of Baklava changed with the history of the land. The Near and Middle East saw many civilizations come and go. Baklava and the recipe had spread to the Near East, Armenia, and Turkey. With the advent of the Grecian Empire, it spread westward to Greece. Phyllo dough is named after the greek word for "leaf", being "as thin as a leaf". The thickness (or for that matter, the thinness) of Phyllo gives baklava is delicious crispy taste.

So, when you eat a piece of baklava, you may want to think of Greece. However, the history of baklava reveals it came from farther East... Even so, various countries offer tasty variations and have loyal followings. The history of Baklava - as colorful as the History of the lands of the Mediterranean and the Middle East -- unsigned comment by User:86.137.172.220

i agree but don't you agree that costantinapole was occupied by assyrians before greeks and turks? -- Unsigned comment by User:217.35.116.227

The "Assyrian theory" keeps getting added to the article, but no one yet has provided solid sources for it. Please find good sources, and then we can add the theory to the article. --Macrakis 19:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The History of Baklava

Many groups claim Baklava as their own. However, a check of the history of baklava yields surprising results. It is widely believed that it is of Assyrian origin.

Around approximately the 8th century B.C., Assyrians baked thin layers of dough with nuts, poured honey over it, and enjoyed this sumptuous treat.

Baklava was baked only on special occasions, usually by the rich who could afford such a luxury. A poor man used to exclaim, "I am not rich enough to eat Baklava in my house." Things have changed over the years. Now, you can order baklava anytime and you do not have to be a millionaire to enjoy the great taste.

Ancient Romans and other cultures threw walnuts instead of rice at weddings because they believed walnuts held aphrodisiac powers. They also used in in fertility rites. On a side note, chick peas (garbanzos) are also viewed as an aphrodisiac for men. Chick peas are the main ingredient in hoummous (hummus) bi tahini. Pine nuts have also been viewed as an aphrodisiac for over 2000 years. Whether these three foods help you or not, they are a very tasty part of the ingredients we use to make our Lebanese food.

The history of Baklava changed with the history of the land. The Near and Middle East saw many civilizations come and go. Baklava and the recipe had spread to the Near East, Armenia, and Turkey. With the advent of the Grecian Empire, it spread westward to Greece. Phyllo dough is named after the greek word for "leaf", being "as thin as a leaf". The thickness (or for that matter, the thinness) of Phyllo gives baklava is delicious crispy taste.

So, when you eat a piece of baklava, you may want to think of Greece. However, the history of baklava reveals it came from farther East... Even so, various countries offer tasty variations and have loyal followings.

The history of Baklava - as colorful as the History of the lands of the Mediterranean and the Middle East. http://www.habeeb.com/about.baklava.html --iLLeSt 12:08, 16 October 2006

Problems with the Name section

If we don't make some criteria as to what languages should be here, people will only continue to add more and more to this list. Any suggestions? BTW, the Arabic name is listed 6 times... —Khoikhoi 00:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, sorry, where is the Arabic name listed 6 times? I didn't get it..
Kizzuwatna 00:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
As Baklava#Name, we have the it listed 6 times for the Egyptian, Lebanese, Levantine, Palestinian, Syrian, and Tunisian cuisines. —Khoikhoi 00:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I got it. But they're all related to their cuisines. That's because baklava is a widespread dessert in the Middle East. What I added was related with the etymology. And I gave the references concerning the addition.
Kizzuwatna 00:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm. I'm going to go ahead and change it to "Baklava in different languages", because as we know there are many other countries that speak Arabic, and listing them all would be endless. —Khoikhoi 01:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Scratch that thought, I need to think of a better idea. —Khoikhoi 01:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
If you think that some people will get here and try to add their languages to the categories section, you don't have to worry. The only language that can claim the ownership of the word along with Turkish is Arabic. And they have already done it.
Kizzuwatna 01:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Not the category, the list. See the general trend seems to be that it's getting longer, and longer, and longer. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a multilingual dictionary. —Khoikhoi 01:15, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I see, you're right. So, I can clearly state that I didn't make any addition to the name list :)
One more thing, I know it's out of our topic, but I just wanna learn whether you know anything about the reference section problem. Since yesterday, whenever I add more references in an article the related reference section doubles. Having saved the article I just click on the article link to view what happened, and see that the references in the reference section is displayed twice. Is it a general error in Wikipedia or am I doing something wrong?
Kizzuwatna 01:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Nope, it's another bug. :) Should be fixed soon. —Khoikhoi 01:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
So, this news made me at ease... Thanks a lot for the info. See you around.
Kizzuwatna 01:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Claim to Baklava as Turkish Origin

I can see why the name points to it, but I think such a claim needs atleast a source or citation of somesort.

"Though it has been claimed by many peoples, the best evidence is that, despite its Arabic-seeming name, it is of Turkish origin."

Those kinds of statements will need something to back it up, and I'm not seeing a source for it. --MercZ 04:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Read the following two paragraphs. --Macrakis 13:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


Surely Mesopotamian but not Turkish or Greek (??? who says that on which basis)

A word doesnt become arabic cause somebody says that it is arabic seeming or sounds like arabic? "Bakla" is the same in Turkish and arabic but arabic dictionaries refute the link between bakla and baklava. I am sorry for that.

thats the funniest thing i've ever heared. (Arabic-seeming name, it is of Turkish origin). how come? then why not coffee,sugar and cotton are arabic-seeming name with turkish origin?

why don't we talk about what was turkey before the arab alliance with the mangolians. arabs shared thier culture, food, spices, and evrything they knew to the ottoman. i could say the ottoman empire was built thanks to the arabs. come on everybody know that

p.s Mesopotamia is the home of the semetics (Arabs, Hebrew) including all mesopotamian people.

Alan 17:36, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Alan, welcome to Wikipedia. I see this is your first contribution. Wikipedia tries hard to find good-quality, ideally scholarly, sources for articles. The current baklava article references several scholarly sources on the history of baklava. These sources indicate that it is not originally Greek, but Turkic or Mongolian. If you have good sources for the theory that it is of Mesopotamian, Assyrian, or Arabic origin, please contribute them. Random Web pages are in general not good sources, especially since we currently cite scholarly material. --Macrakis 19:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

For anyone interested in amending the history section with scholarly material, The Oxford Campanion to Food by Alan Davidson has a section on the origin of baklava. -- Inahet 18:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

What does he say? —Khoikhoi 18:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I haven't looked into it, I found this source through this web site with excerpts from the book. --Inahet 18:26, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I have read the article in Davidson, and it points to the Perry article which is cited here. The random Web pages which keep getting referenced here (or plagiarized) don't have any scholarly foundation at all as far as I can tell. --Macrakis 16:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Arabic word /baqlah/ and /baqlaawa/

Etymology:(Arabic: بقلاوة: Baqlawa): Legume or Nut. From Arabic: (بقلة: Baqla ) (بقلاوة : Baqlawa): single bean' '. And its plural is: (بقول : Boqoul), (بقوليات: Boqouliyat).

The rule in Semitic languages of defining singular nouns is by Adding an (A) letter after the noun. Such example are shown below:

  • plural: (بقلاو: Baqlaw: legume) and its singular (بقلاوة: Baqlawa)
  • Plural: (حلاو: Halaw: Sweet or honey) and its singular (Halawa or Halwa)

Baklava is also known in Mesopotamia, as well as many other Mesopotamian walnut or legume dishes.

The word's Etymology and utterance of baklava are Arabic and derived from ancient Semitic languages of Mesopotamia including Ancient Aramaic, Akkadian in Assyria, Nabatean, Phoenician, etc.

The name Baklava is actually spelled and pronounced as Baqlawa. During the expansion of Islam in Persia, India and Anatolia, Arabic language expanded as well as their culture. There were some difficulties for Persian, Turk and some Indian tongues of pronouncing several Arabic alphabets, such as the arabic letter (و:W). It is replaced by ( ب: V in Persian language) and ( ف as V in Ottoman language). Both languages (Persian and Ottoman) replaced the original letter in order to use arabic Alphabets. Thus the Arabic name (Baqlawa) sounds more accurate than English (Baklava).


A long section was recently added to the article claiming that baqlawa is related to b-q-l, an Arabic root meaning 'sprout', 'greens', and 'bean'. This is certainly possible, but no references were given to support it. A long list of dictionaries given as 'references' doesn't help. And the rules of Arabic morphology aren't relevant here. Can we find a reputable source for the ancient Mesopotamian source of baklava? Can we find a reputable etymology connecting it to baqlah? Until we do, we should stick to the published sources we do have. --Macrakis 21:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

This is a snippet of some of the undocumented claims I removed from the article:

  • The history of baklava goes back to ancient times in Mesopotamia, as it was mentioned in a cook book of Mesopotamian walnut dishes in particular.

It was unsourced. --Macrakis 21:35, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I heard that Baklava is a legal trademark of Turkey, like Feta cheese is of Greece. If that's true then the argument goes moot. Miskin 21:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


i really can't understand why was the section removed. my references were scholar and those dictionaries were listed to prove of the word existence in Mesopotamian languages. and if you want to find the word try to get a dictionary called mokhtar al sihah, it will show you as well where the word come from.

The Walnut Cookbook, By Jean-Luc Toussaint. check it out. i did listed with the references before.

don't remove the section, some people may find this information are useful. i think everyone has his own theories, as well as nations like (Hebrew, Arabs, greeks and turks)they have their own theories. Let's make everyone happy by posting each nation theories. you can't say you're 100% sure it is turkish. another thing. look at the references provided in (Origin) and (Name) Sections, they are poor and some of them are not good to lay on as a reference. could you please correct my writing mistakes, because it's my first distribution. regards. Alan 14:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Alan, the question is not whether the root b-q-l appears in various Semitic languages -- there is no question about that. It has meanings related to 'sprouting', 'greens', 'beans', 'vegetables', etc. But the question here is about the history of a particular dish called baqlawa/baklava.

Your text says "The history of baklava is well goes back to ancient time of Mesopotamia, as it was mentioned in walnut cook book of Mesopotamian walnut dishes in Particular". Are you referring to the Toussaint cookbook? What evidence does he have?

Finally, this section goes into far too much detail on Arabic morphology, and on the phonetics of the other languages of the region. Yes, Arabic "w" coresponds to "v" in Persian, Turkish, etc. but we don't need generalities, but specific information about this word (and food) baklava/baqlawa. --Macrakis 17:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Macrakis, I do thank you very much for your quick reply. What i understood from the book is that baklava was known at the time of Assyrian empire and Mesopotamia. It has mentioned also that walnut cooking was widely popular since Babylon times. In addition from another source [20] Walnut groves were part of the famed Hanging Gardens in Babylon.

Well, if you 100% sure that baklava is of Turkish origin, this means it's of Anatolia and Mongolian origin, but find me a strong source of proving that baklava was named once as different name than baklava..

Perhaps As we all know that Assyrian Empire was once part of turkey before the Byzantine Empire. Many Assyrians stayed and many of them are still living in turkey.and they might kept their food untill the ottoman invation to costantinapole. It could be possible but it's widley long time to be depending on this theory. And this means that baklava was intoduced to the greeks before the turks if it was true. But this is far to be true. Don' t know really. Assyrians in Turkey

It is believed that in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and the rest of the middle-eastern countries that baklava was basically originated from ancient Mesopotamia.

Would you help me to find more about it please? And I'm thinking to post the article with regarding to all different countries theories (Mainly: Mesopotamian Arabs, Hebrew, Turkish, greeks and Cypriot), but I need your assistance. Good talking to you Alan 18:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Alan, unfortunately, cookbooks are really poor sources of historical information, so unless your walnut cookbook points to good historical sources, I don't think it will help us much. Of course, walnuts are grown in much of the region, as are other nuts used in baklava (such as pistachios). But that doesn't prove that the dish was invented in any particular place.

I am not "100% sure that baklava is of Turkish origin", and the Assyrians and others may have something to do with it. I really don't know. Anyway, it doesn't matter what I am sure of, since WP does not publish original research. It reports on the current scholarly literature, and as far as I can tell, the Perry article referenced in the article is the best scholarly reference on this subject. Of course, if you can find other good sources, so much the better!

Would you agree now that the detailed explanations of Arabic linguistics are out of place in this article? Thanks, --Macrakis 22:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Macrakis, I think I got your point. Thank you very much for your co-operation. I'll remove some parts of what I wrote (without mentioning it's origin) And drag it below the Content (Name). I will not mention baklava's history until I find a good source, and my point will be mainly about the word's etomology therefore ancient languages studies is part of my digree. Could you read it, and let me know if you have any inquiry about the content. Alan 17:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Alan, I don't understand why you re-inserted the Arabic language discussion. The possibility that baqlawa is from the root for 'bean' (b-q-l, same root as baqqal, a grocer) is already mentioned in the article. I don't see that more elaboration is needed on the detailed morphology, or the fact that the root b-q-l is shared by the other Semitic languages (like most roots), or on the well-known fact that Arabic /w/ is typically borrowed as /v/ in Persian and Turkish. --Macrakis 22:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


Dear Macrakis, In every article there is a bit of history, pictures and information. Our article here is food , and I can see all the information you are interested on is just history. When a person want to get information about baklava, this person want also to know other information than just history. Don't you agree? Have a click on fish and chips and see how articles is usualy made: [[21]]

Sorry, I didn't notice this comment before. I am not sure if you're referring to something in particular; more good information would certainly be a good thing. There are limits to the scope of WP, though; in particular, recipes belong in the Wiki cookbook, not here (see WP:NOT). --Macrakis 18:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


Earliest Sources

Can anyone find sources earlier than Athenaeus or al-Baghdadi that mention Baklava? John Kritivic

Provide accessible sources, I cannot just paste n'importe quoi in there. Also read the discussion above about the difference between the Byzantine food and the Turkic food. It has already been talked about. That's what I mean by not jumping into articles without knowing its background. Baristarim 07:25, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

The Athenaeus source is totally accesible to anyone who lives near a library. Someone else can provide more on the al-Baghdadi sources. John Kritivic

Then please give related citations from the source in question that you utilize. And please read the discussion and the main text and the sources mentioned at the bottom of the main text.
Chapultepec 19:49, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Look, I cannot simply say "Pyramids were built by the Martians" ref/ New York Times, 1917 ref/ and say "go check it in a library". Internet is bigger than any library in the world by now, and you should have a easier time digging up the sources in the Net itself than in a library. "Go to a library" doesn't cut it for disputed claims.Baristarim 20:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Hold on a second. Though I agree about this particular edit, I don't think it is reasonable (or Wikipedia policy) to require that sources be available on-line, though of course it's always nice when they are. I was hoping to find Athenaeus at Perseus, but apparently they don't have it. (I have 4 of the 7 volumes of the Loeb edition on my bookshelf, but not the right volume....)
Anyway, in this case, the issue is one of interpretation, not of looking up the text (that would be original research, anyway). Athenaeus obviously doesn't use the word "baklava", but some people have thought he was describing baklava when talking about gastris or koptoplakous. That is what Vryonis is referring to, and what Perry analyzes in the publications referenced in the current text. Perry is quite convincing that Vryonis's interpretation is incorrect, and as far as I know, no one has disputed him in print on this. As for al-Baghdadi, Perry has recently published his translation of al-Baghdadi into English, and he doesn't seem to think that baklava is described there. --Macrakis 04:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I have source from http://www.thegutsygourment.com, that states its Armenian, as it comes from the name of one of their old leaders Vartan Pakhklavouni who's ancestor long ago took the recipe and sold it as Pakhklava. Its worth it for everyone to check out —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.239.196.118 (talk) 03:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

No dude its Turkish cause there is a guy from the TV show "Ta synora ths Agapis" who's name is "Baklavacioglu" so Baklava is Turkish. But there is also a guy in Hellas who's name is "Baklavatzakis" so it's Greek. It can be chinese for all I care but Armenian? I dont think! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.166.27.226 (talk) 21:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


Origin

Baklava is a central part of the Turkish culture, it is the most valued desert and as far as in the Balkans it is only made by Turks and Muslims that have adopted the Turkish/Islamic culture (Albanians, Bosnians). Maybe Greeks are familiar with it to which is not surprisingly because many Greeks have lived together with Turks for a "thousand" years. Just hundred years ago millions of Turks lived in today’s Greece and millions of Greeks lived in today’s Türkiya.

The picture samples you have of Baklava are not good Baklava. /Cevair

People should stop editing the article to claim that Balkava is from one origin. There is a lot of evidence to point that it was created by a number of different groups, so we should just write that the origin is disputed rather than one side claiming that Baklava is "theirs." I mean it's just pitiful that there is an edit war going over something as trivial as "who's" is Baklava. It should be something that unites Near Easterners as it is a very ancient dish that draws from a breadth of cultural heritage. -Alexios Comnenus

Can you find scholarly support for your position? If so, please add it to the article. We can't just make up its "very ancient" history. --Macrakis 02:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I think I pionted this idea before , Alexiosis is right.as this article is not actauly part of wiki project turkey only. Keep in mind that many people from different countries totally dissagree with the information you provided regarding to baklava's origin. Baklava can't be originated from nomad civilisation, this is just not logical.

Second many contents were added to the article and with some reason it was deleted, we are all interisted in any information related to this article, therefore we all can justify it's real origin. or we can simply write it's origin is disputed as Alexios Suggested. Alan 15:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand the nature of Wikipedia. It doesn't matter that "many people from different countries disagree". What matters is whether serious, reputable sources disagree. As for me, I really don't care who invented baklava. I did some research, and found Perry's article in a very reputable collection. Perry is a serious guy with a Ph.D. in Arabic who has even translated al-Baghdadi, so he is not just making things up. Now, of course, he may be wrong (the way apparently Vryonis turned out to be wrong). If there is more recent serious literature (and I don't mean tourist brochures or cookbooks) about the origins of baklava, let's add it. But just reporting that the man in the street in Dimashq or Iraklio or Van disagrees is not very interesting.

As for "Wikiproject Turkey", I didn't add that and I have noing to do with it. All it means is that some group of editors (in this case those interested in Turkish history and culture) are interested in this article. If there is a Wikiproject Food History, that should certainly be added.... --Macrakis 22:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Any Vyronis is not serious? Vyronis is a Harvard educated Byzantinist. He reads Medaeval Greek and Ottoman Turkish, so we cannot discount his opinion. Naturally Perry, who is also a serious Cambridge educated historian who speaks Arabic and Persian, disagrees, but he cannot dispite Vyronis' work showing that the Byzantines ate Baklava, as Perry does not speak Greek and cannot analyze Byzantine sources. Thus the origin of Baklava is clearly disputed. It is not disputed just by the man on the street in Greece, Turkey or Syria, but by scholars from the greatest Western Universities.

Thus we must claim that the origins are disputed, at the very least. It is unfair for us to declare Perry's opinion correct and Vyronis' incorrect when they are both serious scholars. -Alexius Comnenus

I know exactly who Vryonis is, and have the greatest respect for him. And his position is reported in the article. Have you read Perry's article? It discusses Vryonis's position, and it seems quite convincing that Vryonis's interpretation is mistaken. I am not aware of a published rebuttal. Is there one?

As for the other claimed origins (Phoenician, Arabic, etc.), what evidence is there for them? I really am open to other positions, but where is the published literature?

And "the name is almost certainly Arabic", where is the evidence for that? That it contains the Arabic root b-q-l? That is interesting, but not proof of relationship; consider for example Arabic kiyluw [kīlū] 'kilogram' which looks an awful lot like the root k-y-l 'to measure'. --Macrakis 04:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Perry's refutation does not seem so strong, and he does not claim that Baklava is entirely of Central Asian Turkic origins-- http://www.peacereporter.net/dettaglio_articolo.php?idpa=&idc=44&ida=156&idt=&idart=5666

" Vyronis, according to Perry commits the same error, he fails to precisely identify explicitly what the layers of pastry are made from."

Obviously something very similar to Baklava was enjoyed in the Byzantine Empire, so to deny the Near Eastern origins of Baklava and claim that it is purely Turkish is unfair. It is unclear what the Byzantines used as layers, but Perry has no decisively proved that they did not use Phyllo or something similar. I would assume that Vyronis' has not published a response as he is a more serious historian and he has much better things to do with his time than waste it researching the origins of a pastry.

In regards to your comment about Arabic, I actually speak Arabic and can respond. Your analogy makes no sense as Arabic follows clear patterns based which date back to the classical period. There is no Arabic form which adds the letter waw to a root verb, so your analogy clearly does not make sense to anyone who knows anything about Arabic grammar. You know very well that Kilo is a borrowing from Greek, probably via French or English. Anyway, a name does not necessarily show the origins of a dish, but I think we can agree that strongest evidence points to the word Baklava being of Arabic origins.

I probably won't write much more as arguing about "ownership" of Baklava at it is a total waste of time, the dish is shared by many nationalities and should unite rather than divide them with petty squabbles. -Alexius Comnenus

I think you are right that for Vryonis the history of baklava is not a central concern, which is one more reason to believe he may have been mistaken. As for the relationship of the root b-q-l and baqlawa, it is certainly possible, we agree that "a name does not necessarily show the origins of a dish" but I do not agree that there is evidence that baqlawa < b-q-l. Cf. the Arabic words /fall/ ('cork', presumably related to Greek φελλός) and /fillah/ ('villa', presumably related to the word 'villa'), neither related to the root f-l-l, to dent. What would be the semantic relationship between baqlawa and bql?

Finally, we are not discussing "ownership" (whatever that would mean). Clearly the dish today is shared by many peoples. We are discussing its history, which is a completely different matter. Compare with chocolate: no one doubts that cacao/chocolate comes from Central America; but central America does not "own" chocolate, and Belgian, Swiss, etc. chocolate is excellent. --Macrakis 00:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

By the way, Wehr's standard dictionary of modern Arabic does not list baqlawa under the root b-q-l, but as a separate item. --Macrakis 00:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Central asian and Turkic doesn't belong there since most sources online are Assyrian indeed. History of Baklava like the origins of most recipes habeeb Nareklm 12:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
"The history of baklava, like that of many other foods, is not well documented. Though it has been claimed by many groups, the best evidence is that it is ultimately of Central Asian Turkic origin, but that its current form was developed in the imperial kitchens of the Topkapı Palace."
That sentence needs to be removed and than later it talks about the Assyrians but Assyrians have way more evidence than the Turkic origins what evidence? Assyrian baklava can be traced way back. Nareklm 12:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Removing Turkic and Assyrian would be much better and just putting Assyrian the sentences are wrong very wrong i can list Greek, Turkish, Armenian, etc i don't know why Assyrian and Turkic gets up there. Nareklm 12:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Unless you didn't know, South-East of Turkey, were around 'Baklava' is supposedly claimed to have been found, indeed was owned by Assyrians before the young turks (ottomans) had taken over. ILLeSt 11:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
There were and are many ethnic groups in what is now southeast Turkey. But the article only says that Gaziantep today is famous for its baklava. That's all. --Macrakis 13:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
The sources you provided doesn't seem so serious, only internet pages. You can find professional references at the bottom of the article page. Thanks.
--Chapultepec 12:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Wheres the sources on the Turkic and Assyrian ones do you have any online? All around middle eastern is much better. Nareklm 12:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Especially Charles Perry, you can see the references at the bottom of the page as I said before. And without asserting professional sources, do not change the tag please. Thanks.
--Chapultepec 12:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

First off i can change the tags and these sentences do not make sense read it yourself it needs to be rewritten. Nareklm 12:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, you change the text and I will wait, but if you change the meaning without giving any authoritative sources, I will have to revert accordingly.
--Chapultepec 12:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Is it finished?
--Chapultepec 12:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes. Nareklm 12:33, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
The article needs revising its not written well. Tone and Re-writing is appropriate but one is fine. Nareklm 12:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Ok, at first, Turkic is not Turkish. When we wrote Central Asian, we meant Central Asian Turkic mainly based on Perry's sources. So there is no meaning in separating them. And this is a referenced one, not a claim of our own.
If the article is not written in a well form, of course we can improve it. But to write it in a well form is far different than change the meaning. If you wanna change the meaning of the text you have to come up with professional sources.
--Chapultepec 12:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I know that, it states Turkic, Central Asian, Ottoman cuisine don't you think its confusing? Nareklm 12:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't think that it's confusing, the modern form was developed in Ottoman cuisine, but the initial forms were created in Central Asia, this is referenced, not a claim by us. And the references are visible in the article.
As far as I can see, besides improving the text, you made some changes that changes the meaning of the text. Do you have any authoritative sources, not ordinary internet pages, that support these claims? This is a serious question, because there had been lot of discussions here and the text is a compromised one based on the authoritative references. Thanks.
Professional sources please???
--Chapultepec 12:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
No the problem is the person who wrote that sentence barely makes sense how do i know those sources are reliable with no web links i can simply make them up also under a well known cook or historian many websites state its Assyrian but the information on this article really need to be revised. Nareklm 12:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
You can search on the Internet about their reliability, amazon.com is a good source for that, of course you won't be able to find all these sources since they're professional and not open to public view. You can easily buy them or go to a library and search there. But one thing is for sure, they're more reliable than you are. So, you have to come up with your authoritative sources to be able make such changes in the article.
--Chapultepec 13:00, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Last time i checked you cant have POV sentences or w/e like ....
Though it has been claimed by many groups, the best evidence is that it is ultimately of Central Asian Turkic origin
Or doesn't make sense
But Claudia Roden and Andrew Dalby find no evidence for it in Arab, Greek, or Byzantine sources before the Ottoman period. Nareklm 13:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Though it has been claimed by many groups, the best evidence is that it is ultimately of Central Asian Turkic origin
This is not a pov sentence, this is referenced. If it doesn't make sense to you, you should supply your sources as I said before.
But Claudia Roden and Andrew Dalby find no evidence for it in Arab, Greek, or Byzantine sources before the Ottoman period.
This is also not pov, if you take a look at the bottom of this discussion, you can see there that Macrakis explains the reasons very well, again based on the references.
--Chapultepec 13:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I am not a cultural anthropologist and I have not studied this issue. Whereas I think the origin may well be Ottoman Turkish or Arabic, or Greek, I doubt that it would be of "Central Asian Turkic origin." The Asian Turkic peoples were nomadic, and not likely to develop the immobile stone ovens necessary to bake a dish such as baklava. Kastellos (talk) 21:58, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Anyone who claims these pastries are exclusively of Turkish origin must present actual evidence of that. I have always known these as "Syrian pastries", but I realize that their invention and evolution probably occurred all over the Middle East, Asia Minor, Armenia and Greece.Wfgiuliano (talk) 02:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, "I know these as Syrian pastries" doesn't mean they ARE Syrian pastries. It just means you know that wrong. Actual evidence of what? You must be joking. --Ozguroot (talk) 09:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Baklava Turkish origin city of Gaziantep,Turkish cuisine — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.160.18.212 (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Baklava/Archive_1&oldid=1143741459"