|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 29, 2009 1:09:50 GMT -5
Slav like me ;D?! Believe me - if I am to be called Turk its much more insulting. Why would I call you a Turk when you are not? Bolgar elite? If you read my post, I never said it. I said some Bolgar tribes moved toward west to ease the Khazar pressure, and tugged some Slav tribes together with them. I said we can not be sure of initial composition of the Slavs as the Bolgars started to move, but we can say that the Bolgars turned out to be some minority after centuries spent with the Slavs. ;D I do not get it. Why do you think that some chat with a friend should be a challenge?
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 29, 2009 0:52:00 GMT -5
Thracian if their was sour grapes between Armenians and Ottomans/Turkey it wasn't for no reason I mean there was a sequential lead up to it and the Armenians were not on their own as you know other christian groups...Greeks, Assyrian's had problems with Ottomans at that time too, so in a way I think you are over simplyfying the matter in your description and version of what happened and in your assigning blame only to one group. For sure, Greeks, Assyrians and Armenians had problems as the empire started to disintegrate, but this happened only after waves Muslim migrants coming from lost territories popped with horor stories about how the European Christians tried to exterminate them in masses. Between 1783-1922, more than 5 million Ottoman civilians were massacred in former Ottoman territories, and more than 6 million poeple fled to Anatolia or they were forced to leave their homes. Of course, you may like to skip this little detail, but you can not evade the truth on " European Aura".
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 29, 2009 0:39:47 GMT -5
I don't see the problem here. As Turkish history teaches us, there were only one or two Armenians killed, more by an accident, not because of any intentional deeds by the Turkish army. I did not know that you had your education in Turkey.
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 29, 2009 0:37:17 GMT -5
Is this going to affect hookah bars? Because one thing Im looking forward to doing when I travel to Turkey is to chill at a hookah bar and play Satranç. If there is a terrace or garden of the bar, then you oculd smoke whilst playing chess.
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 15:26:15 GMT -5
PS Was surprised to see more Bosniaks than Albanians in Turkey. Are they predominantly the descendants of muhacirs from the 1870s? After the 2nd Siege of Vienna, Bosnians started to emigrate to inner parts of the empire on various occasions. Bosnian migration continued even after 1923. A source I found states that a total of 270.000 people emigrated from Yugoslavia to Turkey between 1923 and 1960. www.obiv.org.tr/2005/Balkan/hoksuzl.pdf
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 15:09:40 GMT -5
Yes they do! They actually say they are Turkistanli - this is the Central Asian Turkic region. Stop trying to disassociate ourselves from each other! look thracian i cant be bothered to argue with you. Kazakhs Uzbeks etc dont call themselves Turks and certainly dont care for any kind of Turanian unionism. if you dont believe it fine Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan use Latin script like Turkey, and their relation with Turkey is quite fair and improving over the years. Kazakhstan and Kirghistan still use Cyrillic script and keep their distance a bit. Do they care for Turanian union? Perhaps Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan could be interested, but I am not sure about Kirghistan and Kazakhstan.
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 14:50:50 GMT -5
;D ;D Says Janny the Historian and Logic Master! ;D ;D Keep mumbling Janny. Keep calming yourself traitor. Still - just curiosity! Do you want to be a ninja Janny ;D ;D? Elite warrior like the Horsemen Slavs ;D ;D hahhahha. Oh man! You are such fun . Poor fellow ;D. Haahaha. It is good to know, you are having fun. You know what friends are for. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 13:48:11 GMT -5
The Byzantine annals relate Bulgars to Huns and Scythians. More precisely, for the Byzantines they were the same people. What you are taught in Turkey is another story but I doubt anyone is really interested in the enormous amount of claims regarding khaganates, empires, horse ridings and grass absence your history is full of. If the Turks like Bolgars and Khazars were seen as the descendants of the Huns and Scythians? I know nothing more than the prevailing number of evidence reveals. Which suggests assimilation of the Turkish character of the Danube Bulgars in line with the rise of Slav element. I agree. You are not related to the Bolgars if one excludes the name of the country you live in.
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 13:43:28 GMT -5
If you are not sure why are you posting with such confidence then? I said we can not be sure of the number of Slavs merged with the Bulgars by the times they were pushed by the Khazars. Turkic is a modern term. Turkic tribes (such as Bolgars and Khazars) were seen as the descendants of the Scythians by the Byzantines. I know what it means. They were defeated by the Bolgars. Slavs like you were used to draw attention. Visit Turkey, I can teach you better sports. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 8:51:56 GMT -5
The ancestors of modern Chuvashes, the Bolgar-Chuvash and Khazar tribes were the first Turks to migrate to the East Europe, Black Sea region, Lower Volga and Caucasus in the beginning of common era. They came as a part of Huns, founded the Great Bolgaria (Âlack Sea, Azov Sea regions and Northern Caucasus, V-VII centuries of C.E.), Suvar kingdom (Northern Caucasus, IV-VII centuries of C.E), Khazar kaganate (Caspian Sea region, Azov Sea region and part of Crimea, V-X centuries of C.E.), Golden Bolgaria (Balkan peninsula, VII century of C.E.) and Volgian Bulgaria (Volga-Kama region, VIII-XIII centuries of C.E.). Chuvash language and culture contain many language and culture antiquities, which help to reveal the historic particularities of ancient Turkic language community. Being the first Turkic tribes, who settled down for agricultural set-up, Chuvash entered into relationships with many ancient civilizations of China, Central Asia and Caucasus (Chinese, Sogdian, Greko-Baktrian, Horezmian, Agvanian and Tokharian), as well as with Bysance and Kiev’s Russia. Chuvash embroidery and dress, being one of the most interesting and beautiful, preserved a lot of ancient elements, are geometrized and pictographic, and contain a whole symbolistic language, linked to agricultural set-up and cosmogonic representations of ancients. Chuvash people were one of the few, who preserved their ancient culture, language and faith, coming from deep antiquity till 20-th century, that is why maintaining and preserving Chuvash culture, which is a relict, is an important task not only for the small Chuvash community, but for all nations. www.chuvashculture.org/?q=en/node/545
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 7:43:20 GMT -5
ARMENIANS PUT ASIDE THE PAST AND CHOOSE TURKEY FOR SUMMER VACATION Marianna Grigoryan 7/27/09 Some Armenians call it "a disgrace." Others put it down to price. Turkey’s popular Mediterranean resort town of Antalya ranks as Armenians’ number-one summer vacation destination, travel agents say, and no amount of controversy over Turkish-Armenian ties looks likely to reverse the trend. A view from TurkeyYerevan travel agency managers report that, amidst a grueling economic slowdown, Antalya’s reputation for low prices and high-quality customer service outweighs for many customers the fact that it is located within the borders of longtime foe Turkey. Tez Tour’s Armenia office director, Narine Davtian, estimates that by summer’s end her Russian-owned agency will have twice the number of Antalya-bound customers as the 8,000 who chose to travel to the Turkish town in 2008. Armavia’s four direct flights to Antalya each week from Yerevan, a service offered by Tez Tour, are regularly full, she said. "I am a patriot, but let’s not mix tourism and politics," Daytian commented. "No other country can provide the same range [of travel options] and quality. People want a good vacation and they get it." Other travel company managers echo that assessment. "We offer tours to different destinations -- Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Georgia, Jordan -- but the hottest tours are to Antalya in Turkey," said Flight agency manager Marine Ayvazian, who estimated that the town is the choice of 70 percent of Flight’s customers. The government has no data on the number of Armenians who travel to Turkey each summer. Armenian travel agencies, it says, will not share the information, and the lack of diplomatic ties with Turkey means no alternative option for the data exists. But while the notion of swimming in the Mediterranean Sea may appeal to many landlocked Armenians, posters promoting Antalya’s "delightful" sun-drenched beaches only bring to mind politics for others. A youth group associated with the nationalist Armenian Revolutionary Federation-Dashnaktsutiun has requested the Yerevan mayor’s office remove all street posters advertising Antalya and "to deal seriously" with the issue. The mayor’s office has not yet acted on the request. "Advertisements for a vacation in Antalya are springing up like mushrooms and, instead of spending their vacations in Armenia, people are leaving for Turkey. Is this normal?" complained Haroutiun Melikian, who runs an anti-Antalya protest campaign for the Armenian Revolutionary Federation’s Nikol Aghbalian Student Union. "The money that goes to arm and strengthen Turkey [via tourism] could remain in our country and contribute to our own strength," he added. To combat Antalya’s popularity, the Nikol Aghbalian Student Union has hung posters throughout Yerevan that declare that "Armenians who spend their vacation in Antalya are arming the Turkish army." Other placards focus on Ottoman Turkey’s 1915 slaughter of ethnic Armenians, on slain Armenian newspaper editor Hrant Dink or on Mount Ararat, a symbol of Armenian ethnic identity located within Turkey. "We decided to remind people of something they seem to have forgotten, to sober them up," explained Melikian. Some Yerevan residents heartily second that decision. "Turkey shouldn’t have won us over, since political pressures still persist and the word ’Turk’ is still a curse for us," 34-year-old actor Vahe Nersesian commented. Employees of several government ministries tell EurasiaNet that unwritten rules forbid state employees from spending their vacations in Antalya -- this despite the recent official push towards some form of rapprochement with Turkey. But the disapproval tactic does not always work. "If I have to choose between the high prices of Armenian resorts and an all-inclusive vacation at the seaside in Antalya, I’ll pick the sea for my family and me, especially when the difference in prices makes no sense," commented one Yerevan resident booking an Antalya trip in a travel agency. On average, travel agencies charge as low as $450 per person for a week-long package tour in Antalya, while a similar vacation at Armenia’s Lake Sevan, the mountain resort of Tsaghkadzor or the mineral water spa of Jermuk start at about $700. Yerevan State University psychologist Nelly Haroian believes that, lured by the attractive prices, Armenians are able to put aside misgivings about the past and feel "comfortable" visiting Turkey since "Turks are serving them." Given the crisis-friendly prices for tours to Antalya, expecting any other reaction is not realistic, commented sociologist Aharon Adibekian. "There are many questions linked to national self-esteem, but people are free to decide where to have a vacation and what to do," Adibekian said. The Armenian government says it plans to help with that decision - and beat the competition -- by promoting tours to the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabkah as an alternative to Antalya. "We have no sea, and this is a difficulty. We plan serious steps for developing domestic tourism to Nagorno Karabakh," said Mari Grigoryan, deputy director of the Ministry of Economy’s department of tourism and territorial economic development. "The prices will be reasonable and will counteract those of Turkish resorts," Grigoryan continued. "Travel agencies working in this direction will get serious benefits." She did not elaborate. But, while rich in mountain vistas and historical sites, Nagorno Karabakh, a favorite with Armenian Diaspora groups, has no resort hotels or seaside sunbathing on offer. That brings the question of a summer vacation back to the simple matter of individual choice, Yerevan travel agents argue. "We all are patriots," said Tez Tour’s Daytian. "And spending a vacation in Turkey does not mean being less Armenian." Editor's Note: Marianna Grigoryan is a freelance journalist based in Yerevan.www.eurasianet.org/departments/insightb/articles/eav072709.shtml
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 7:29:56 GMT -5
I have no source where the Bulgars are called Turkic. I know that a great amount of the linguists think that the old Bulgarian language we find on the inscriptions belong to the Turkic linguistic brunch. I do not think the Turks are Turkics genetically. Its obvious they are more related to the balkan nations, the middle eastern people and the arabs than to the uzbeks or other real turkic people. Turks are turkized natives, mainly Anatolians. One one hand, Turkic is a modern classification. For example, Byzantines used to relate the Turks to the Scythians, not to the Turkics. So did the Europeans until 19th Century. On the other hand, Turk is an ethnic definition whilst Turkic is a term used to define some degree of affiliation to the Turks. For example, I am a Karachay-Balkar, or in other words an ethnic Turk or Turkic. Do I look like the Turkics? As far as the racial classification is concerned, I have to admit that I look like one. ;D BTW, which one resembles you the most?
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 7:22:05 GMT -5
Janny - did you have a sun stroke? What are you mumbling about? Give a reasonable explanation. Don't just talk out of your arse. Atan, Atan, Atan, when are you ever going to learn to be kind when chating with friends?
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 7:19:18 GMT -5
Janny. Since I still can't believe you can say such pointless and senseless things I want to clear this confusion of yours. You say that the the small in numbers"Turkic" Bolgars dragged Slavs with them. Ok. Look now Janny: If the Bulgar elite was small - that means that the ones fighting the Byzantines and Khazars in the same time were Slavs. Ain't that right Janny? This is not what is mentioned by the Byzantines. We can not be sure of the initial composition, but we can say that the proportion of Slavs increased as they drifted toward West. Thus, Byzantine annals relate the Bolgars to the Khazars and Pazinaks, and it is not coincidence that the Byzantines call the "Turks as Gold Loving Nation in general." The Slavs were probably like the Bashibozuks of the Turkic-Bulgar elite in the initial stages. ;D Bolgars probably taught some skills to the Slavs they tugged, and those Slavs replicated those skills in tandem. Yes there was Turkic elite and they had Turkic traditions, but the Slavs did not have such traditions. That is why, the Danube Bulgars lost their Turkic identities when the descendants of the Eastern Bulgars (such as Chuvash, Kazan Tatars, Kumyks, Karachay-Balkars) did not. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 2:23:13 GMT -5
True as logical statement but irrelevant to Bulgarian case. Janny. Check my post above. We did not evade confrontation with Khazars. We were confronting them - from the day Khan Kubrat died until the beginning of the new centure (VII th). They pushed us back here. Khan Asparuh fought them and defeated them at last. The threat was eliminated. You did not? Atan, you are probably the descendants of the Slavs that the Bolgars tugged to Balkans, not the chieftains or boyars. Yes, some of the Bolgars found the Khazar pressure unbearable, and migrated to West to evade of confrontation. The rest of the Bolgars either retreated to the mountains of Caucasus or emigrated to Volga region.
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 2:05:27 GMT -5
Can Cyprus be a model for Middle East peace?By ABE SELIG As he toured a series of European capitals in May, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman told his audience at a dinner party in Rome that he believed Cyprus - which was divided between its Greek and Turkish citizens in 1975, after years of bloodshed - was a fitting model for ending the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Turkish soldier opens door in temporary wall by UN buffer zone on Turkish-Cypriot side of Nicosia."We're interested in this," Lieberman said. "In Cyprus, it was the same situation as in Israel. Greeks and Turks were living together, and there was friction and tension and bloodshed." Greeks and Turks did live together, for hundreds of years, on the island, but Ottoman and later British rule kept a lid on violence between the sides. When the British left in 1960, the groups united in what was then called the Republic of Cyprus. But in 1963, the Turks were pushed out of that government, and the following 11 years were marked by incessant violence. The Turks say that Greek actions in their towns and villages constituted nothing less than a coordinated campaign of ethnic cleansing. The first Greek Cypriots crossing from south to north show Turkish officials their ID cards after the opening ceremonyOn June 20, 1974, five days after a Greek Cypriot coup d'etat on the island, the Turkish army intervened - or invaded, depending on whom you ask - and pushed Greek forces back to the southern part of the island. A year later, the UN oversaw a population transfer - Greeks to the south and Turks to the north - completing the separation that lasts to this day. And it was precisely this separation, Lieberman said, which had brought about peace and prosperity there. Now, he claimed in May, the Netanyahu government was basing its approach on the model provided by Cyprus. But is Cyprus really a good example? While the Greeks enjoy stability and international recognition, they continue to view the north as "occupied territory" that was "illegally invaded" by Turkey in 1974. Their motivation for a comprehensive agreement has been less robust than the Turks', if only because they don't need an agreement as much as do their neighbors to the north. The Turkish Republic of North Cyprus goes unrecognized by every nation in the world except for Turkey, and has tough international restrictions on investors and developers that has local restaurants such as "Burger City" and "Pizza Hat" filling in for their original counterparts - since Burger King and Pizza Hut are not allowed to open branches, due to international embargoes. Greek Cypriots cross Ledra Street Greece continues to use its EU membership and international weight to prevent the Turkish Cypriots from gaining international recognition, which would, first and foremost, allow the Turkish Cypriots to open their air and sea ports to international flights, a development that would render North Cyprus a formidable competitor for the island's main source of income, tourism. As of now, every flight into the north must come from Turkey. Greek Cypriots are unsatisfied with the current situation, but have a Western standard of living that allows them to wait, while Turkish Cypriots decry their international isolation as unbearable. And while both sides have been negotiating a comprehensive agreement for years, it remains unattainable, for now. Therefore, another problem with Lieberman's argument is that Cypriots themselves view their situation as a temporary one. Separation is viewed as a means to achieving a final, comprehensive agreement, not the end of the conflict. While that agreement has historically been viewed through the prism of federation, an increasing number of Turkish Cypriots are awakening to the reality that such a deal could see Greek Cypriots return to the Turkish part of the island en masse, effectively ending Turkish autonomy there through demographics - an Israeli equivalent to a one-state solution. Speaking to The Jerusalem Post at a reception on Monday evening to commemorate the 35th anniversary of the 1974 Turkish "Peace Operation," Turkish Cypriot President Mehmet Ali Talat said, "Maybe your foreign minister was referring to the fact that there has been no violence here since 1974. "With that I agree with him. But the central goal in North Cyprus is federation." But when asked how Turkish demographic integrity would be maintained after federation, Talat said, "[Greek Cypriots] will be able to come here, but with restrictions. They will not be able to settle here freely." Not only are Cypriots' wishes regarding their political fate different from those of Israelis and Palestinians, their conflict remains unresolved. So could the Cyprus model be an example for Israel? And if so, is Lieberman referring to a 35-year-old military standoff as his vision for ending the conflict? Or is it simply a separation of two peoples, in which one is recognized, and the other is not? www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1248277895551
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 1:45:25 GMT -5
You wish Pyrros.... Agreed Donnie, the fact is Turks numbers were smaller back then, and they assimilated. The Bulgars evading confrontation with the Khazars tolled the Slav tribes with them on their way to Balkans just like Avars did. Most scholars believe that Turkic-Bolgar chieftains were nothing but some minorty elite by the time the Bulgarian Kingdom was established.
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 1:40:42 GMT -5
Its far from proven that Bulgars were Turkic (which by the way is not similar to Turkish). Most probably they were turko-iranian mixture, because there are lots of iranian words, names, even the title of the supreme ruler "kanasubigi" meant "ruler from god" in Persian. Its wrong to think that the Volga Bulgars and the Tatars are one and the same. Actually Volga Bulgars were overruled at some time by the Tatars and were assimilated by them. Thus the Turkic character there prevailed and the Iranian almost dissapeared. I agree with Pyrros about the turkic influence in both Russians and Serbs. As for todays Bulgarians, they are not the same with Bulgars. We, Bulgarians, are mixed nation, a result of mixing of Slavs, Thracians and Bulgars. No one can really say what the precentage of the 3 groups really was. I personally think that Slavs were probably most numerous because the language is deffinately slavic. It could be due to Boris policy and in this case the Thracians and the Bulgars could ve prevailed. After that probably the Thracian element was the second biggest: I think the proove is the fact that our folkore, our culture is totally Balkanic. Most of the dances, some of the traditions can be observed in the previously "thracian" teritory in Romania, Bulgaria, Northern Greece, fyrom. The fact that our grammer is similar to the preslavic balkan languages (Greek, Albanian, Romanian). What that Thracian element was is very doubtful too: were they Romanized Thracians (if so the slavization was taking place even in the second bulgarian kingdome - Assen, Peter, Kaloyan... The second generation was undoubtedly only Bulgarian) or only Thracians - there were such Thracians (Bessi) in 7 century in Rodopy mountain, there were probably more in the villages in the whole of Bulgaria. The Bulgar element is the most "not obvious" in our culture. It is so because we do not know alot about the culture of the Bulgars. What they left as typical Bulgar (the calendar for example) didnt left that big influence on us. But was that calendar Bulgar or was it borrowed from the people in Central Asia? We have some ruins of towns from the Bulgars... Its very hard to really know how much their cultural and ethnic influence meant for our formation as nation. What is undoubted about the Bulgars is this: we, as Bulgarians, today do exist because of them. They created the state, they fought the East Roman empire, they allowed for the creation of the Bulgarian culture, they made slavic official in Bulgaria. In a way, they were the most important element, because if it wasnt for them, we would ve end up Greek most probably. The fact that we know them so little is the reason why we do not know what their cultural or ethnic influence on us was. - Prevailing number of academic circles (including Turkish, Western and Russian ones) stresses the Turkic origin of the Bolgars. Unfortunately, you Danube Bulgarians has " some theories", but those are not taken for granted in any academic circle outside of Danube Bulgaria. - Even today, we have thousands of Iranian words used in modern Turkish, but that does not make us "Turk-Iranian Mix" at all. Thus, many scholars around the world interpret the Azeris as some Turkic-Iranian mixture, but the Azeris themselves identify them selves as the Azeri Turks. - Moreover, your points on Volga Bolgars are far from being correct. In fact, Volga Bolgars existed after the break up the Kokturk State and those Bolgar tribes controled the Volga basin until the Mongol Invasion. After all, the Mongol Empire did not even last for 50 years, and after that, the Turkic Volga Bolgars contiuned to exist as an independent force until 16th Century. - The Tatar is a definition used by the Russians to define the Mongol Yoke. After the break-up the Mongol Empire, Turkut Khanate centered at Kazan continued to collect tribute. That is why, even the Cuman, Ghuzz and Bulgar peoples of the Crimean Khanate were named as the Tatars by the Russian. - I am a Karachay-Balkar. In a sense, I am from the place at where Great Bolgaria was originally established. Interestingly, we do not have any doubts like yo do. Neither do the Kazan Tatars, Chuvash, and Kumyks.
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 1:14:08 GMT -5
cok uzuldum Aynen.
|
|
|
Post by Vizier of Oz on Jul 28, 2009 1:13:07 GMT -5
I agree with Desire that the Ottomans was a inter-cultural empire just like the Byzantines. However, this does not negate the fact that there were Turkish people living in the empire. And actually the Turkic people in Central Asia identity themselves as Turks. Indeed. After the break up of the Hun and Kokturk states, Turkic tibes like Avars, Bolgars, Ghuzz (Oghuz), Khazars, Cumans, Pechenegs kept on migrating to Caucasus, Balkans, Crimea, Volga Basin, Ukraine, Anatolia and Iran. Some massive wave of migration continued even in 16th and 17th Centuries. As of 18th Century, the migration pattern turned out to be toward Anatolia due to the Ottoman retreat. Such migration even continued in 19th and 20th Centuries. That is why, there is no single place on earth but Turkey, which is a home for Turkics more than any other place on earth.
|
|