
India and Turkey's crossed connections in food and history
At Misir Carsisi, Istanbul's spice market, Indians can be startled to see powdered spices labelled 'Bharat'. This isn't desi masala, but a Middle Eastern blend also spelled as 'Baharat'. It seems symbolic of Indo-Turkish relations which, even when not as bad as they are today, have always appeared off-kilter.India and Turkey share a history through the Turkic tribes of Central Asia. One branch, the Ottomans, fought their way west towards Europe from the 11th century CE, ultimately conquering Byzantium, the Eastern Roman Empire.Turkey is described as where Europe and Asia meet, but a more accurate description, especially for food, would be that it is where Central Asian and Mediterranean worlds meet.In the 16th century, another branch, the Mughals, fought their way over the Himalayas to conquer north and central India. The Ottomans and Mughals were aware of each other, and might even have dreamed of conquest, but were realistically too far apart to achieve this. Both brought elements of Turkic culture to their domains, like a love of stews and flaky breads, including the stuffed one called sambusak or samosa . Both combined these with existing culinary cultures that were strongly vegetarian for religious reasons (Byzantium's Orthodox Christianity imposed many meatless fasting days), with added protein from pulses in India, and fish in Turkey.Arab traders traded commodities like sugar and spices from India, and nuts and dried fruit from Turkey. The Turks loved sweets, and in Turkish Cuisine in Historical Perspective , Deniz Gürsoy quotes a story where a pastry maker says, 'I have sweetened it with the sugar of the sugarcane rather than pure honey because it is more delicious.'India was the original source of cane sugar, until the Arabs took it to places like Egypt, where huge amounts were grown and refined for the Ottoman court.The Ottomans used sweeter spices, like cinnamon, and regional Turkish food embraced chillies when they came from the Americas. But Turkish food, especially Istanbul's court cuisine, avoids pungent flavours.It's notable that 'Misir Carsisi' means 'Egyptian Bazaar' and Aleppo in Syria was the main terminus of the spice trading routes. Rather than lavishly using spices themselves, the Ottomans preferred to profit from overseeing their trade through their control of Mediterranean ports .This explains why the closest contact between Turks and Indians took place when a third party, the Portuguese, appeared in the Indian Ocean to threaten the spice trade. In the early 16th century, as the Portuguese established settlements like Goa and Diu, the Turks created a navy based in the Red Sea and sent emissaries to the sultans of Gujarat to try and defeat the European threat. A number of naval battles were fought between the Portuguese and Ottomans around the Arabian Sea coast, leading to sieges of Diu in 1538 and 1546.But naval warfare was not an Ottoman strength and they were unable to repulse the Portuguese.Seydi Ali Reis, appointed admiral by Suleiman the Magnificent, suffered a particular disaster in 1554 when his fleet was hit by what he called an 'Elephant Typhoon'. He was blown to Gujarat, where his sailors encountered an unexpected enemy. In his memoir, Mir'at ul Memalik (Mirror of Countries) , Seydi writes that this took the form of palm trees that exuded a sweet liquid which 'by exposure to the heat of the sun, presently changes into a most wonderful wine'. This was toddy, and after getting drunk on it, many of his sailors refused to set sail again, preferring to take employment with local rulers.Seydi had to find his way to the court of Humayun, who received him well and helped him return overland to Istanbul. The Ottomans settled for controlling the overland trade, leaving the sea routes to the Portuguese. From then until now, India and Turkey seem destined to be two sides to an equation that never works out.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Economic Times
8 hours ago
- Economic Times
Understanding India's cultural representation: The impact of Operation Sindoor
As Shashi Tharoor's articulation in Victorian-era Wren and Martinese continues to bowl over the civil service examinee that lies inside each one of us, I was reminded of my elucidation of 'sindoor' a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. In the hoary 80s before Operation Bluestar, when googol was just a number - 1 followed by 100 zeroes - and General Zia-ul-Haq was Pakistan's president, I went to school in a small New Zealand town called Whakatane. My mother must have dropped me off once. A classmate later asked me, 'What's that red mark on your mum's head?' Now, one of my virtues as an 11-year-old was to paint a pretty picture of where I had come from - the thriving megalopolis of Calcutta. In the course of answering many queries of a distant land in those pre-Google days, I would dress up some facts with elaborate explanations. For instance, I told my classmates that I actually was a very ordinary student 'back home' and most young Indians of my age were quite brilliant. We also lived in large multi-storied buildings all to ourselves where house help was abundant. As you can make out, these were not really lies, but slight exaggerations to correct misrepresentations of India - especially Calcutta - abroad. In a similar vein, I had explained to my culturally curious classmate that the red mark on my mother's head - and she wore just a fine line of a comb-end dipped in sindoor - was called 'shidur' (I used the Bengali word for it) and was a streak of my father's blood that Ma freshly wore every week to signal that she owned him. I don't know what my friend made of that explanation, but she was suitably satisfied with my exposition of Indian matriarchic customs that treated married men as married women's chattel. Explaining cultural behaviour and practices to people unaware of them is as important as explaining political action and positions to them. So, in that sense, I get what the Indian version of the Harlem Globetrotters' 14-day explanatory mission to various capitals of the world was about. It was about highlighting India's stand on terrorism following Operation Sindoor. To anyone who was listening. As a travelling exposition, though, I wonder whether it succeeded in doing what it set out to do. Now, I'm not part of the crowd that believes that taxpayers' money was spent for MPs to have a nice 'world tour'. Public money has been worse spent on matters less measurable. And this travelling gig was more than just about explaining Operation Sindoor - it was about showcasing Indians who live India and updating their image from the land of 'Ghandi' (sic), Mother Teresa and customer service line voices to something modern, modular, and muscular. But what left me scratching my stubble were two things. One, in this day and age of much more enhanced avenues of communication, having outreach teams - one of them fronted by a gentleman's whose USP seems to be speaking in impeccable Jeeves-Wooster English in these multiculti times - seemed very Nehruvian. Two, our boys and girls calmly fingerwagging in foreign capitals to no one in particular barring Indian news outlets like ANI and PTI seemed to be in a different universe compared to the thunderbolt and lightning, very, very frightening here in India. The venerable home minister, for instance, saying earlier this week that Mamata Banerjee had opposed Operation Sindoor to placate her 'Muslim votebank' was doubly odd. After all, Trinamool general secretary and Didi's nephew Abhishek Banerjee was part of the MP delegation trotting about Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Indonesia (the country with the world's largest Muslim population), and Malaysia as part of the Sindoor tour. In effect, our Harlem Globetrotters were globetrotting to impress us sitting here in India. Much in the same vein I would return to India just before Kapil Dev would lift the World Cup and tell my new schoolfriends - and some 40 years later, tell you, my dear reader - how I served to upgrade the image of India to a world that needed it to be updated. Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. The answer to companies not incurring capex may lie in stock markets We are already a global airline, carry the national name and are set to order more planes: Air India CEO How Uber came back from the brink to dislodge Ola Banks are investing in these funds instead of lending the money. Why? Sebi, governing markets for 3 decades, in search of governance rules for itself F&O Radar | Deploy Short Strangle in Nifty to benefit from volatility, Theta Stock picks of the week: 5 stocks with consistent score improvement and return potential of more than 28% in 1 year These large- and mid-cap stocks can give more than 30% return in 1 year, according to analysts


Time of India
19 hours ago
- Time of India
Extreme poverty in India sees sharp decline! Number dips from 344.47 million to 75.24 million; poverty rate down to 5.3%, says World Bank
The number of people living under extreme poverty in India dipped from 344.47 million to 75.24 million. (AI image) The number of people in India living in extreme poverty declined sharply in the last decade, from 27.1% to 5.3%, as per latest data estimates released by the World Bank. According to the World Bank's global poverty update, from 2011-12 to 2022-23, the number of people living under extreme poverty in India dipped from 344.47 million to 75.24 million. This means that approximately 269 million people came out of poverty during this time period. The World Bank's latest assessment reveals this substantial poverty reduction despite implementing a stricter measurement criteria, which includes raising the poverty benchmark to $3 daily consumption from the previous $2.15, whilst incorporating the 2021 Purchasing Power Parities (PPPs). Five states - Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh - which previously had 65% of India's extreme poor in 2011-12, were responsible for two-thirds of the total reduction in extreme poverty by 2022-23. World Bank Poverty Estimates for India According to the previous $2.15 poverty threshold (calculated using 2017 prices), the proportion of Indians experiencing extreme poverty decreased to 2.3% in 2022-23, compared to 16.2% in 2011-12. This significant decline translated to a reduction in the number of people living in extreme poverty from 205.93 million in 2011-12 to 33.66 million in 2022-23. This improvement indicates that 172 million individuals rose above the specified poverty threshold during this timeframe. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Зачем на ночь сжигают лавровый лист? Undo The World Bank has adjusted its lower-middle-income category poverty threshold to $4.20 per day, increased from $3.65 (2017 prices). According to this revised measure, the proportion of Indians below this line decreased significantly from 57.7% in 2011-12 to 23.9% in 2022-23. Also Read | Explained in charts: India to become 4th largest world economy soon. What's the road ahead to No.3 spot? During this 11-year period, the absolute number of people under the LMIC threshold reduced substantially from 732.48 million to 342.32 million. Following these World Bank revisions, the global extreme poverty rate for 2022 was adjusted upwards from 9% to 10.5%. Consequently, the count of people living under the international poverty line increased from 713 million to 838 million individuals. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now


Economic Times
a day ago
- Economic Times
Between pedestrian and pedantic
When my very first bylined article was printed over 35 years ago, a senior colleague whose command over English remains an inspiration to us remarked, "Not bad, lass, not bad at all." A fellow newbie, however, took umbrage on my behalf. "Not bad? It's very good!" she remonstrated. "Not bad means very good in English," he replied, with a twinkle in his eye. She was not very sure whether he was joking or serious, and many Indians today may not be either. Lack of comprehension of a sentence comprising mostly words of no more than four letters but nationwide admiration for the polysyllabic eloquence of Shashi Tharoor encapsulates the dichotomy and dilemma of English in India today. Add to that countless social media reels advising people to substitute simple, short words with complicated ones to appear "more intelligent", and it seems Indians are labouring under the delusion that size matters in English. It does not. Or should not. A thesaurus is not a prerequisite for eloquence. Our Anglo-Indian teachers dinned into us that short sentences and lucidity are always preferred over convoluted compositions with too many punctuation marks. They became very cross indeed if anyone showed off by inserting sesquipedalian prose into an essay. "A word to the wise is sufficient, my girl," my favourite teacher would admonish. Another was even more succinct: "Less is more." My own acquired wisdom since then has been that when thoughts are clear, the words to express them are sparklingly simple. That goes for any language, of course, but particularly so for English with its penchant for understatement over hyperbole. That is why 'not bad' means 'very good'. Jargon and pedantic prose are just tools for those who seek to divert attention from the merit of their ideas to their knowledge of technical terms or the length of their words. In that context, Tharoor is a victim of his own success. He tends to stick to the time-tested 'keep it simple' rules of English that I learnt in school, as he certainly does not lack erudition or clarity. But because a nation whose understanding of classic English has been steadily declining for decades was captivated by some long, arcane words he had probably uttered in a moment of school-boyish impishness, he is now India's undisputed Tsar of is little doubt that many Indians' use of English today is very literal; irony, sarcasm and understatement are lost on many desi interlocutors. Definitions and usage have also changed, because English words are now often seen through the prism of Indian languages, which have different allusions and associations. So now, there are enthusiastic but poor imitators of what they think is Tharoorian articulation, and there are practitioners of purely perfunctory welcome trend of translating more books in Indian languages into English adds another dimension to this curious divergence. Good translations retain the cultural nuances of the original works, which obviously precludes using familiar idioms of another language. So, Heart Lamp, the 2025 winner of the International Booker Prize translated from Kannada. uses English that bears no resemblance to, say, even the prose of the most revered Indian writers in English. In fact, the English translation in that book echoes the way many Indians use it today. It is truly plain Indian English, as the language is just a medium of communication without any literary or even syntactic connection to the oeuvre of Chaucer or Shakespeare, Twain or Dickens, RK Narayan or Vikram Seth, Salman Rushdie or Amitav Ghosh-or even that of the 'real' Tharoor. Never make the mistake of saying "not bad" in India now if you mean "very good".