|
Post by hellboy87 on Dec 5, 2007 13:58:07 GMT -5
ahristos is one unique character.would really like to see how he looks like.
Jan! jeez!!!
your postings say the Chuvash are indigenous people who speak a Turkic language and are Turkic in culture.
Also,I have said BEFORE that Turks,did arrive in Anatolia and they mixed with Anatolians.
What I keep saying is that most Anatolian Turks are NOT descended from original Turks.
|
|
|
Post by alabama on Dec 7, 2007 1:11:07 GMT -5
I'm insisting again that Turks are a little little minority in Turkey. We do accept that there were Turkish migrations and controlling old Anatolian kingdoms but both of the Turkish migration population (about 400.000) cannot assimilate the whole Anatolia (about 10million).
If you still do not accept that Anatolia is not Turkish, then you must bring us the documents of these questions to prove us wrong:
• Was the official government language of Ottoman Empire Turkish? • Did Ottomans speak Turkish in their castles, and kingdom? • Were there any of the bureaucrats in Ottoman Empire that were Turkish? • Were any of the scientists in Ottoman Empire Turkish? • Why did not Ottomans get married with Turks? • Why did not Sultans in Ottoman Empire call themselves Turkish? • Did not the start of Ottoman Empire begin with slaughtering all those Turkish tribes? • Why is the Ottoman literature full of swearing at Turks? • Why did not the Ottoman Empire accept any Turks? • Why did they prohibit to allow Turks into their empire?
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Dec 7, 2007 3:14:14 GMT -5
I'm insisting again that Turks are a little little minority in Turkey. We do accept that there were Turkish migrations and controlling old Anatolian kingdoms but both of the Turkish migration population (about 400.000) cannot assimilate the whole Anatolia (about 10million). As usual, the figures and the notions that you presented are not backed up by anything reliable. Almost half of the Byzantine Army defeated in 1071 were already the Turks who settled in the Byzantine territories earlier, and when those left the battlefield, the Romans got quickly defeated. Accompanying Romanus was Andronicus Ducas, an odd choice as Ducas was an old enemy of the emperor. Romanus left his best general, Nicephorus Botaniates, at home, suspecting his loyalties (although he was certainly more loyal than Ducas). The army consisted of about 5000 Byzantine troops from the western provinces, and probably about the same number from the eastern provinces; 500 Franks and Normans mercenaries under Roussel de Bailleul; some Turkish, Bulgarian, and Pecheneg mercenaries; infantry under the duke of Antioch; a contingent of Armenian troops; and some (but not all) of the Varangian Guard. Turkish sources give the number of troops to be closer to 200 000. Other sources estimate them to be around 40 000. Gibbons claims it was the largest army ever fielded by the Roman Empire, East or West.www.thelatinlibrary.com/imperialism/notes/manzikert.htmlAnatolia was subject to massive Turkic migration for many centuries, and such emigration did not lose pace even in the 20th Century. 1. Official language of the Ottoman Empire was Turkish. 2. The Ottomans were Oghuz Turks who were settled into Anatolia by the Seljuks, but the founder of the Seljuk Empire was an army commander in the Khazar Army (another Turkish state that gained power in Eastern Europe after Gokturks), which suggests that they emigrated from Caucasus. 3. The Ottomans spoke only Turkish and communicated and corresponded in Turkish written in Arabic script. 4. Yes, there were, the Janissary system was introduced in 1360s and then it was abolished in 1640. Before, during and after, there were always Turks around, Giray dynasty of Crimea was the substitute dynasty of the Osmanli. Most importantly, the Sipahi and Eyalet systems enabled local governors and peoples to become viziers and soldiers, which mostly included the Turks. 5. There were many Turkish scientists and scholars of the Seljuk and the Ottoman Empire, but that is another topic. 6. Turks were the only competitors of the Osmanli family since the empire was based upon the Turkish dynasty, but later on Osmanlis considered themselves as the ruler dynasty of the whole Muslim Millet (Nation), rather than the Turks, that is why, they did not appreciate anyone who claimed a different identity before the Muslim one, and they avoided marriage with the Turkish dynasties in order to secure their thrones, and that is why, they created a servant class that used to live with them in their palaces. 7. It did not. After the break up of the Seljuk Empire, the Turkish tribes who settled in Anatolia quickly established small khanates, and some of those (Such as Karamanlis ;D) started to gain power over others. In early stages, the Ottomans preferred to union with the Turkish khanates by marriage, but then they gave up this practice as their dominion became apparent. 8. There is no such thing like swearing on Turks in Turkish literature. What you describe is the literature produced by some of the Ottoman Royal members or royal servants who did see themselves as the Muslims or convert to Muslims, and who preferred to promote the idea of Islamic Identity instead of the Turkish one. The Ottoman Empire was not only a place in Topkapi Palace. Hence, Turks were also the Muslims, and they also took advantage of the privileges given to Muslims. 9. Ottoman Empire accepted millions of Turks/Tatars emigrated from Caucasus, Crimea, East shores of Khazar Sea, Volga Region, and Iran, and such migration lasted for centuries. After 1750s, the Ottomans received more than 7-10 million migrants from Crimea, Caucasus, and Balkans, and those masses surely included the Turks, such as my forefathers who were the Karachay-Balkars emigrated from Caucasus in 1860s. Today, it is believed that at least 5-7 million people in Turkey have Crimean Tatar ancestry (I have partially have some), and those are the descendants of the people who mostly arrived to Turkey after 1783. 10. Previous answer also explains this one, I believe.
|
|
|
Post by hellboy87 on Dec 7, 2007 4:44:29 GMT -5
Turkic migration to Anatolia started in the 11th century.
There were no mass migration of Turkics to Anatolia.
There were sooo many Indo-European tribes who went to Anatolia and established themselves:Lydians,Phrygian,Carians,Hittites,Goths and others.
Yet most people in Turkey look like Arabs.This says that the Indo-Europeans who came to Anatolia were small in numbers.
Same story goes for the Turkics.Thats why most people in Turkey still look like Arabs or Middle Easterners.
Jan! alabama has listed the wives of the Ottoman Sultans.They were all European women,Christian and Jewish.
No Turkic women were their wives!
Grand Viziers of the Ottoman Empire included Turkicized Anatolians and Balkanians.
The Ottomans were not into their Turkishness.
The Ottomans spoke Osmanlica:Turkish,Arabic and Persian mixed language.They spoke others too.
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Dec 7, 2007 4:56:38 GMT -5
Turkic migration to Anatolia started in the 11th century. There were no mass migration of Turkics to Anatolia. Yes there were, even in the 20th Century, more than 2 million people (mainly Turks) emigrated to Turkey from Crimea, Caucasus and Balkans. and Turks were probably related to the Sumerians. That is naive generalization as usual. Even the Arabs of Hatay do not resemble the Arabs of Egypt or Saudi Arabia, and most importantly, there is nothing wrong about looking like an Arab. How many times have you been to Turkey? and how many Turks have you met in Turkey? Ottoman Sultan mostly married with the servant classes in order to prevent the claims of other Turkish families such as Giray dynasty of Crimea, Germiyan Dynasty of Western Anatolia, or Karaman Dynasty of Konya There were for sure. Those included Muslims including Turks and other members of the Ottoman Muslim Millet. Yeah, they promoted Islam since they used to see themselves as the Muslims before anything else. Even "Osmanlica" is Turkish. ;D
|
|
|
Post by alabama on Dec 7, 2007 6:22:38 GMT -5
Okay, as far as I can see; this guy is a really arrogant, uneducated person.
- Ottoman language is not Turkish you idiot. It is a language that is a mixture of Persian and Arabic. This language was abolished and Ataturk set up TDK (Turkish Language Institution) to have a language reform in 1920s and 30s.
- If Ottomans were Turks, then why do they get married with Europeans? I think they thought that those Greeks, Bulgarians, were much closer to their families and culture than retard Turk barbarianism.
- You still think that Ottomans were speaking in Turkish and communicating in Turkish, I have got nothing to tell you but just to advise you to at least graduate form primary school.
- The Janissary system never ever NEVER EVER allowed any of those weak/ugly Turks to get in their army. Also you saying that thye included Turks and this and that, then why don't you give us some proof? names? books?
- There were 0 Turkish scientists because those Turks were really really had no idea about human nature and science. If you know any of Turkish scientist then you better let Ankara know about it, because they do not know any!
and rest of the stuff that you tried answer is just rubbish. You need to get rid of the veil in front of your eyes to see reality.
Turkey's situation is just like Iraq during Saddam Husein. Saddam told the world that there were only Sunnis in Iraq but when Americans went there, they saw Kurds and Shia as well as Sunni minority.
As I said before, I don't care what you write unless you bring me documents. Go and check out a history book in D&R about (Turk Divan Edebiyati Tarihi) and just have a look at it. You will see all those swearings at Turks! The Sultans of Ottoman Empire swore at Turks many many times such as Fatih Sultan Mehmet and Yavuz Sultan Selim.
You can dream on by thinking the turkishness in Turkey but it won't change the reality.
hellboy87 is right at everything he is talking about. Considerable amount of Anatolians today do look like Arabs especially in South East as well as in the Middle (Ic Anadolu).
I would like to continue my forum with documents my friends:
Some of the examples from Ottoman literature:
Baki who is one of the Ottoman poets gave his poem to Yavuz Sultan Suleyman. Here is the poem:
Oh, dear father, the societies who are from Turk roots are rude, A Turk does not have the gens and honour to become a sultan.
"Her taç yoksulluk ve yokluk ehline baş tacı olamaz. Ey hoca Türk toplumundan olanın başı kabadır. Türk, sultan olma yeteneğinden yoksundur."
Another Ottoman poet Nef’I says that “God forbid the heaven for Turks” - "Tanrı, Türke irfan çeşmesini yasaklamıştır".
Hafiz Hamdi Celebi (another Ottoman poet) wrote Divan-I Humayun poems in 1499, says “Kill the Turk even if he is your father” - "Baban da olsa Türkü öldür". However, he also notes that these valuable advices are from Hz. Muhammed the prophet. Let me give you more pieces from his poems:
“Don’t ever think a Turk as a human being, Never be with a Turk even if it is for a second, If a Turk holds honey on its hands, then that honey will become posion, Never have a mercy when you cut off a Turk’s head, Even if a Turk is your father”.
SAKIN TÜRK'Ü İNSAN SANMA BİR AN BİLE OLSA TÜRKLE OLMA TÜRK ELİNE ŞEKER OLSA,O ŞEKER ZEHİR OLUR TÜRK'ÜN BAŞINI KESERKEN SAKIN GAM YEME BABAN BİLE OLSA TÜRK'Ü ÖLDÜR.
|
|
|
Post by greek1234 on Dec 7, 2007 7:02:50 GMT -5
I would have to agree with Alabama. The Original Turks were of Mongoloid Stock similar to the Mongols and Chinese... The only reason they look Mediterranean, Balkan or Middle Eastern is because they mixed with the natives of Anatolia such as the Armenians, Greeks of Asia Minor (In the Western Parts), Caucasus Albanians,Syrians and other Anatolian people such as the Lydians and Hittites respectively. Not forgetting the people of the Balkans and South Europe such as the Greeks and Southern Slavs. (Who are of Slav/ Thracian, Agrian and Illyrian mixture)
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Dec 7, 2007 10:17:29 GMT -5
Okay, as far as I can see; this guy is a really arrogant, uneducated person. I do not think that you can really see. It might disappoint you, but it is Turkish that had adapted words from Persian and Arabic languages. Most of those words were not in use after 1930s since the words with Turkish origins are replaced intentionally in line with the public education campaigns. They had their European subjects (Turks, Arabs, Kurds, or Iranians were free and privileged peoples of the empire where as Christian Europeans were not), and they used these people as servants, and very seldom did they marry with any of those converts, but instead they kept them in their harems. Yeah, I do since I could read the Ottoman poems and documents as much as I could read Azerbaijani Turkish. The Ottoman Turks never used anybody else, but the Turks to form the major troops of their army. Janissaries were only the Sultan private security forces, but main the Ottoman troops were Sipahis and Tatars. . Is that the reason why the Ottoman Army was the first to introduce the fire arms and cannons in Europe? Is that the reason why the first naval battle that included usage of the cannons was won by the Ottoman Turks? Is that the reason why the Ottoman Turks has the first professional army in Europe? Is that the reason why Hazerfan Ahmet Celebi was the person who flew (with man made machine) between two continent centuries before the Europeans? Is that the reason when the Turks had the largest observatory in the world, the Europeans used to focus on witch hunt? Is that the reason why the Ottoman Turks did win consecutive battles against the Europeans for centuries? Is that the reason why the Ottoman Turks used to treat smallpox when the Europeans used to die like bugs in the 17th Century? You have such a good sense of humor. I have no clue what you talk about. You talk about the Sultans right? Sultans were the Muslims, and promoting Turkish identity could have been the last thing they would have done. It is you who keep on dreaming about some Turkish identity, in my opinion. ;D How many times you have been to Turkey and how long have you been in these regions you refer? ;D Baki is well known for his exaggeration in his poems. So, that is a style he uses. During this period, the Ottomans were challenged by the Turks of Persia, and as the poet of the Sultan, he promoted the idea that the (Iranian) Turks can not be the Ottoman Sultans as they were not really Muslims (since they were mainly Shia and Alevi Turks). Hafiz Hamdi Celebi is another poet who was very conservative and religious. Since the Turks were mainly Alevi, Sufi, Bektashi until 16th Century, it is no surprise to see him saying such things. Those all promoted the idea of Sunni Islam and hated anything that did not promote Muslim Millet. That is why, those were promoted by some of the Ottoman Sultans who also shared similar perceptions about the world. As I told you my favorite is still the founder of Ottoman Empire, namely Osman Khan... ;D ;D ;D Osman, son of Ertughrul One of the Gagauz Turks A humble slave of the Lord Conquer Constantinople, and make it A rose-garden.
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Dec 7, 2007 10:20:40 GMT -5
I would have to agree with Alabama. The Original Turks were of Mongoloid Stock similar to the Mongols and Chinese... The only reason they look Mediterranean, Balkan or Middle Eastern is because they mixed with the natives of Anatolia such as the Armenians, Greeks of Asia Minor (In the Western Parts), Caucasus Albanians,Syrians and other Anatolian people such as the Lydians and Hittites respectively. Not forgetting the people of the Balkans and South Europe such as the Greeks and Southern Slavs. (Who are of Slav/ Thracian, Agrian and Illyrian mixture) Dear WOG; I am sure you love to agree with Alabama, but that does not change the fact that even the prime minister of Greece is one descendant of those Mongol Turks whose forefathers converted to Christianity during the Byzantine Era. ;D
|
|
|
Post by greek1234 on Dec 7, 2007 12:02:02 GMT -5
The name Karamanlis means A Greek Orthodox Christian who speaks Turkish. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karamanlis That doesn't necessarily mean his is a Mongol after all 'Turks' are Turkicized Anatolians. Even if it was true i wouldn't have a problem with it....
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Dec 7, 2007 12:29:08 GMT -5
The name Karamanlis means A Greek Orthodox Christian who speaks Turkish. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karamanlis That doesn't necessarily mean his is a Mongol after all 'Turks' are Turkicized Anatolians. Even if it was true i wouldn't have a problem with it.... He is a descendant of Karaman Turks who converted to Christianity like the Gagauz (Gok Oguz) Turks of today's Moldova. I am sure you like that. ;D After the Battle of Malazgirt in 1071 a large part of Anatolia including Konya was captured by Seljuk Turks, and the dominance of the Eastern Roman Empire began to disappear. Süleyman shah, the Anatolian Seljuk Sultan, declared Konya the seat of his empire in 1076. In 1080 Iznik was made the capital and 1097, once more, Konya was declared the capital of Anatolian Seljuk empire, staying that way until 1277. Karamanoglu Mehmet Bey took over the rule of the Karamanogullari State. The Ottoman Sultan Murat II captured Konya in 1442 and ended the Karamanogllari rule. Konya enjoyed many years of esteem, making for her self a notable reputation during the Ottoman reign. Konya was the halting place of Yavuz Sultan Selim during his jampaigins to Egypt and Persia. Süleyman the Magnificent and Murat IV halted in Konya on their way to Baghdad. The city grew larger an developed rapidly after 1923. The considerably rich background of Konya has been enough to make her seen as an open - air Museum, with numerous historical sites and a large number of works of art. The Karatay, Meram and Seljuk districts are up the Konya Metropol. These three districts have a total population of 584819 and govern 92 villages and towns.www.angelfire.com/ky2/konyam/konyatarihi.html
|
|
|
Post by greek1234 on Dec 7, 2007 12:40:36 GMT -5
The origins of this family is widely debated.... But is a good example of a 'Semi Turkisized' Anatolian.
"Karamanlides are the direct descendants of indigenous Anatolian peoples who had adopted the Greek language, Greek culture, and the orthodox religion. After the Battle of Manzikert, and the subsequent invasion of Anatolia by Turkish peoples, they adopted the language and customs of the aristocratic overlords, but maintained their Christian religion. This would not have been uncommon in ancient Islamic empires, as the people of the book were allowed to remain Christians. Evidence suggests that because they spoke the Turkish language, but wrote it with Greek characters, and the fact that under Ottoman Sharia law conversion from Islam was illegal and punished by death, that they were actually of Greek heritage."
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Dec 7, 2007 12:45:35 GMT -5
The origins of this family is widely debated.... But is a good example of a 'Semi Turkisized' Anatolian. "Karamanlides are the direct descendants of indigenous Anatolian peoples who had adopted the Greek language, Greek culture, and the orthodox religion. After the Battle of Manzikert, and the subsequent invasion of Anatolia by Turkish peoples, they adopted the language and customs of the aristocratic overlords, but maintained their Christian religion. This would not have been uncommon in ancient Islamic empires, as the people of the book were allowed to remain Christians. Evidence suggests that because they spoke the Turkish language, but wrote it with Greek characters, and the fact that under Ottoman Sharia law conversion from Islam was illegal and punished by death, that they were actually of Greek heritage." Karamanlis whose main characteristic for being envisioned as a collectivity have been to speak Turkish and write it in Greek letters. One of these historical accounts is that of Dernschwam’s travel notes speaking of Karamanlis as ‘the Caramanos’ for instance. Having traveled in Istanbul and Asia Minor extensively between the years 1553-1555, Dernschwam provides that these people knew no Greek and spoke Turkish; originated from Karaman and some, were resettled by Sultan Selim I to Istanbul, concentrating between Yedikule and Samatya mahallas ( Dernschwam 1992:78 )Again, ‘De Planhol transfers knowledge from Evliya Celebi, stating that Celebi as late as 17th century wrote about the Rums 6 in Antalya speaking only Turkish’ (De Planhol 1958:111 cited in Faroqhi 2005:92).
There are six volumes, listing all Karamanli printed material that have come under the attention of researchers and compiled to date by the combined efforts of the below-mentioned three author/editors and those that have assisted them. To recap, these volumes are composed of a listing of all material in Karamanli inscription that are known to the researchers. However, these are ongoing efforts. The first three of these compilations, have been compiled by Sévérien Salaville and Eugène Dalleggio and include 333 printed material in Karamanli inscription printed between the years 1584 to 1900 (Salaville 1958, 1966, 1974). Following suit, Evangelia Balta made additions to the material compiled by S. Salaville and E. Dalleggio (from 1584 to 1900) with a similar effort and published them in 1987(Balta 1987b). The same year, Evangelia Balta published another compilation, this time composed of material published in the 20th century, the latest with a print-date of 1935 (Balta 1987a).
Evangelia Balta published another compilation in 1997 (Balta 1997). This volume was the result of an ongoing project, the initial results of which she had published in 1991 in a journal published by the Centre for Asia Minor Studies (Balta 1991). In her compilations Balta also included brief information about each printed material, such as the date of print, -where available- other editions, where it was printed, name of the print house and brief information about the content of the material. All six of these volumes are available at the Centre for Asia Minor Studies5. These six volumes leave us with 757 books, brochures and other material all in Turkish, written in Greek characters (Balta 1991). However, to regard all these as Karamanli books, brochures, pamphlets or not depends on the criteria over the definition of the term ‘Karamanli’.portal.ku.edu.tr/~mirekoc/reports/2005_2006_elif_renk_ozdemir.pdf ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by greek1234 on Dec 7, 2007 12:57:15 GMT -5
This still isn't enough to say they where of Turkish/ Mongoloid stock..... They wrote in Greek and and practised Christianity.... Anyways like a idiot once said 'Stop with the smoke screens' this still doesn't mean that 'Turks' aren't Turkicized Anatolians.
|
|
|
Post by kartadolofonos on Dec 7, 2007 18:00:20 GMT -5
Fallmerayer' was a big LIAR
The Ottoman Empire was not Turkish Ottoman under the leader Yavuz and Kiouyitzoy Murat killed 150.000 Turks. The great Vezir Priminister of Karamania of Greek descent Muhamed of Porthiti has killed all the turks in the city but let the kids alive. The Ottomans said that a turk can never become a grand Vezir
Karamania: Greek Priminister Kostas Karamanlis have no turkish roots.
Karamanlides is the name given to the Turkish speaking Greek Orthodox people who are of Greek descent wrote Turkish with Greek Alphapet.
«Ðïëëïß Ô/ê áñèñïãñÜöïé áöéÝñùóáí ôï ôåëåõôáßï äéÜóôçìá óôéò óõæçôÞóåéò ðïõ ãßíïíôáé óôçí Ôïõñêßá ãéá ôçí êáôáãùãÞ ôùí Ôïýñêùí ìå áöïñìÞ ôéò äçëþóåéò ôïõ Æáê ÓéñÜê. ¸íáò áðü áõôïýò åßíáé ï Ìðåñáôëß, ï ïðïßïò áöïý åðáíáëáìâÜíå é üëá üóá åßäáí ôï öùò ôçò äçìïóéüôçôáò ãéá ôéò ìçôÝñåò ôùí óïõëôÜíùí êáé ãñÜöåé: «Óôçí Ôïõñêßá ôïõ óÞìåñá åßíáé äýóêïëï íá ðñïóäéïñßóåéò ôï ðïßïò åßíáé Ôïýñêïò. ¢ëëïò éó÷õñßæåôáé üôé åßíáé áõôüò ðïõ Ý÷åé ôçí ôïõñêéêÞ éèáãÝíåéá, Üëëïò üôé ðñüêåéôáé ãéá Üôïìá ðïõ Ý÷ïõí êáôáãùãÞ ôïõñêïìÜíùí, Üëëïò üôé åßíáé ïé ðñüóöõãåò ðïõ ôïõò ðåñáóìÝíïõò áéþíåò åãêáôáóôÜèçêáí óôçí Ì. Áóßá áðü ôïí Êáýêáóï êáé Âïõëãáñßá. Óå ðïëëÝò ðåñéðôþóåéò áðïêáëïýìå «Ôïýñêïõò» êáé áõôïýò áêüìç ðïõ ðáñÝìåéíáí óôïí Êáýêáóï êáé Âïõëãáñßá Üó÷åôá áí ïé Üíèñùðïé áõôïß Ýìáèáí ôçí ôïõñêéêÞ óôá ó÷ïëåßá ôçò Áíáôïëßáò. ÐïëëÝò öïñÝò ïíïìÜæïõìå Ôïýñêï, üðïéïí âñïýìå ìðñïóôÜ ìáò. ¼ðïéá êáôçãïñßá êáé áí åðéëÝîåôå, ôï óßãïõñï åßíáé üôé äåí ìéëÜìå ãéá Ôïýñêïõò. Åî Üëëïõ êáé ïé ßäéïé ïõäÝðïôå äÝ÷ôçêáí üôé åßíáé Ôïýñêïé... Áí èåëÞóåôå íá êÜíåôå ëüãï ãéá åèíéêü êñÜôïò êáé ðñïóðáèÞóåôå íá áðïêñýøåôå üôé ïé Ïèùìáíïß Ýóöáîáí ôïõò Ôïýñêïõò, ôüôå èá Ý÷åôå ðÝóåé óôçí ðáãßäá ðïõ åóåßò óôÞóáôå. Ôï ïèùìáíéêü êñÜôïò äåí Þôáí ôïõñêéêü ü÷é åðåéäÞ ôï ãåíåáëïãéêü äÝíäñï ôùí óïõëôÜíùí äåí Þôáí «êáèáñü» áëëÜ ãéáôß ç ïñãÜíùóç êáé öéëïóïößá ôïõ äåí åß÷å ó÷Ýóç ìå ôïõò Ôïýñêïõò. Áêüìç êáé ïé ðñùèõðïõñãïß äåí Þôáí êáèáñüáéìïé. ºóùò 5 ìÝ÷ñé êáé 10 ôï ðïëý íá Þôáí Ôïýñêïé. Ôï áõôü éó÷ýåé êáé ãéá ôïõò âåæßñçäåò (õðïõñãïýò). Ï Ìðáãéáæßô ï ´óå öéñìÜíé áíáöÝñåé: Äåí åßíáé äõíáôüí Ôïýñêïò íá ãßíåé âåæßñçò.¼ôáí ìåôÜ áðü ìéá ìÜ÷ç ï Ãéáâïýæ ïíüìáóå âåæßñç Ýíáí Ôïýñêï, åîåãÝñèçêáí ïé ãåíßôóáñïé ôçò ÁìÜóåéáò. Íá ðù êáé êÜôé áêüìç: Ïé Ôïýñêïé óôñáôéþôåò ÷ñçóéìïðïéïýíôáí áðü ôïõò Ïèùìáíïýò ãéá ôçí åìðñïóèïöõëáêÞ. Áõôïß óêïôþíïíôáí ãéá íá áðïäõíáìþóïõí ôïí å÷èñü êáé óôç óõíÝ÷åéá ôç ìÜ÷ç ôçò óõíÝ÷éæáí ïé Ïèùìáíïß" ÅêðëÞóóïìáé üôáí áêïýù üôé ïé Ïèùìáíïß Ýóöáîáí ôüóïõò ¸ëëçíåò ôüóïõò ÁñìÝíéïõò, ôüóïõò Âïýëãáñïõò, ÓÝñâïõò. Ãéáôß ìÝ÷ñé óÞìåñá êáíÝíáò äåí åßðå üôé ïé Ïèùìáíïß Ýóöáîáí 150.000 ÔïõñêïìÜíïõò ìüíï åðß Ãéáâïýæ êáé Êéïõãéôæïý ÌïõñÜô. Ï åëëçíéêÞò êáôáãùãÞò ðñùè/ãüò (ìÝãáò âåæßñçò) ôïõ ÌùÜìåè ôïõ ÐïñèçôÞ Ýóöáîå óôçí Êáñáìáíßá üëïõò ôïõò ÔïõñêïìÜíïõò, åêôüò áðü ôá ðáéäéÜ.
|
|
|
Post by alabama on Dec 7, 2007 22:58:35 GMT -5
I would like to continue to give some more documents:
Galatasaray high school was built in 1481. Sultan Abdulaziz re-opened the high school in 1868. The education in the school was taught in French and Turkish was prohibited. Greek, Armenian, Latin, French, German, Persian and Arabic were taught to the students. Turkmens never allowed to submit or study in this high school since it was built. As you see, although all those European languages were taught, Turkish was never taught.
All the poems from Fatih Sultan Mehmet were collected by Prof. Dr. Muhammed Nur Doğan from Istanbul University Turkish language and literature faculty.
Here is a poem from Fatih Sultan Mehmet, read it carefully and see what he says: (I am not giving the Turkish translation of this Ottoman poem and see if any of those (Turks) can understand it since they think they can understand Ottoman.
"Bağlamaz firdevse gönlünü Kalata'yı gören Servi anmaz onda ol serv-i dilârâyı gören Bir firengî şîveli İsayî gördüm onda kim Lebleri dirisidür der idi İsâ'yı gören Akl u fehmin dîn ü îmânın nice zabt eylesün Kâfir olur hey müselmânlar o tersâyı gören Kevser'i anmaz ol içdiği mey-i nâbı içen Mescide varmaz o varduğı kilisâyı gören Bir Frengi kafir olduğunu bilürdi Avniya Belün ü boynunda zünnari çelipayı gören.
The one who sees Galata will not care about a garden in heaven, The one who is in love with a person who has the sense of Galata will not see any other lovers, In Galata’s identity, I saw Jesus with a Christian tongue, Your lips will become a holy place if you see Jesus’s human world, Understanding of religion and mind should be holded firmly, Otherwise, those barbaric Muslims can be ones who sees that church, The one who drinks wine from Galata will not remember the taste of Heaven wine, The one who sees a church in Galata will not go to any other mosques again ever, Fatih’s avniya would know if you were a Christian, If you wore the cross on your neck and a belt on your dress.
|
|
Kanaris
Amicus
This just in>>>> Nobody gives a crap!
Posts: 9,587
|
Post by Kanaris on Dec 7, 2007 23:29:27 GMT -5
Guys...this is an interesting thread.... but let's be a little bit more civil... and keep the adjectives to a minimum..
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 8, 2007 17:00:55 GMT -5
firearms were introduced to Europe by the Muslim Arabs centuries before the Ottomans came into existence. Canons we]ere also used in the 100-Years War and earlier in Italy.
In fact, the Ottoman weapon superiority only lasted for about a century and a half or so. Btw, the engineer who built those nice canons for the Ottomans was a Hungarian.
The Romans had a professional army; as well as the Byzantines. By the time of the Ottomans, Europe started to finally centralize enough so as to bring back the wealth necessary for a prof army. If the Ottomans had a superiority in this also, again, it was short. By the later 16-17th century Europe was moving ahead of the Ottomans.
Btw, Celebi was using the works of Da Vinci as a basis for his achievement.
|
|
|
Post by depletedreasons on Dec 9, 2007 4:04:43 GMT -5
Ala-booma,You have to check your resources, really. Galatasaray High School was designed to teach European languages to the Ottoman citizens, and it had French and Turkish prep class from the first day it was opened. Most importantly, other languages like Arabic and Persian were also taught. I did not read that poem of Mehmed II previously, but from the Ottoman Turkish, I could tell you that your translation is not complete. Mehmed II is being hyperbolic about the consequences of a possible love affair with some very attractive, but an infidel beauty. That is a classic plot in Ottoman poetry. Toskaliku711,First of all, Da Vinci was probably an Arab who was inspired by the Islamic scholars, most importantly he could not fly like Hazerfan did. Thus, Ottomans also have Lagari Hasan who successfully flew with a rocket. ;D The cannon was not built by the Hungarian engineer, but by the Ottomans. He was only one of the engineers who designed and built this revolutionary dismantling cannons. Moreover, I am aware that even the Spartans used to have professional units trained as soldiers before the Romans. Before talking about the the Ottoman practices in Military, I must stress that I talk about the modern warfare when I refer to infantry troops (like janissaries), the fire armed navy ships (like the ones defeated the Venetians in 1499), as well as the tactical use of cannons, and professional auxiliary troops. As one might know, the usage of tanks by the Germans during the WWII differs from the ones used by the British in WWI. Some reading related to the issue: A number of common themes emerge from the above analysis. Perhaps most basic of these is the powerful influence of geography in shaping the development of institutions and technologies and influencing strategic and operational outcomes. Examples include the geographic peculiarities which fostered the development of an effective and highly specialized Mediterranean system of commerce and warfare al sea which, however, possessed inherent limitations which doomed it over the long run; the importance of Iberia’s location in fostering the fusion of Mediterranean and North Atlantic methods of shipbuilding and navigation; and the logistical advantages to the Ottomans of the Danube river system. On a more superficial level, the ability of Spanish fighting men to deal effectively with strange and unexpected terrain, climates and comestibles in Mexico and the Andes provides a commentary on their logistical competence we would not otherwise have.
The second theme is the importance of social structures in fostering or inhibiting military innovation. If, as I have argued elsewhere, the causes of war are deeply imbedded in the social fabric.114 the causes of victory are no less so. At first blush, this observation seems a statement of the obvious. But if the case studies have produced more questions than answers in this area, they have given that statement additional depth. We cannot say why, but it is evident from our examination of the Spanish in Italy, Mexico, and the Andes, and the Portuguese in the Indian Ocean, that the Christian societies of Iberia produced combatants with truly unusual capacities for technical and tactical innovation and for adaptability cohesion and initiative in combat. Similarly, our examination of Ottoman military operations during their period of supposed decline points to a powerful underlying resilience and solidarity in their military institutions that few nonspecialists, at least, would have suspected. From the eve of the capture of Constantinople until their failure before Vienna in 1529, the Ottomans were highly receptive to military innovation, but then seem to have lost that capacity. The reasons for that failure are problematic, but, as with the reasons for Western success, were surely woven deeply into the social fabric.
The case studies highlight the importance of tactical and technological innovation, but in ways which emphasize the role of broad societal factors in fostering and adopting innovation. Why did it take root where it did and not elsewhere? The obvious hypothesis is the stimulus of defeat, a hypothesis given additional weight by the surprising capacity for tactical adjustment shown by Amerindians in fighting the conquistadors. That hypothesis fits English tactical innovations at the beginning of the Hundred Years War and the French development of siege artillery at its end; it clearly applies to the development of the trace italienne fortress and to Spanish developments in battlefield tactics in the Wars Of Italy. But the Iberian Muslims showed neither tactical nor technological innovation in resisting their Christian neighbors; nor, initially, did their North African co religionists. Indeed, the latter had to be shown the use of heavy ordnance by the Turks. I could go on, but these observations return us to the importance of the shaping role of the social fabric.
Finally, my analysis highlights the role of chance in shaping the Military Revolution. At any number of pivotal junctures the course of the Military Revolution was changed, in some cases dramatically so, by the decision of an individual or small group, by an unanticipated event, or by the outcome of a battle. I would argue that the outcomes in question were by no means pre-ordained and might have been very different. Consideration of “What ifs?” is fascinating and addresses my own objection that my schema is structured by knowledge of the outcome. But we need not consider only the “What ifs?” to make the point. The decisions by Charles VII of France and Sultan Mehmed II to commit resources to the development, construction and use of heavy siege guns heavily influenced the course of the Military Revolution. Charles VIII’s decision to invade Italy and Ferdinand of Aragon’s decision to intervene in response may have had inconclusive strategic results, but their impact on the Military Revolution was enormous. Indeed, if we were to pick a single motivating impulse which set the course of the Military Revolution during the period with which we are concerned here, it would be that which emerged from those two related decisions. But that invasion might have come a decade earlier, and from the southeast rather than the northwest. To be more precise, it did come, but was not sustained. In 1480 Mehmed II threw an invasion force into Apulia and seized the nominally Byzantine city of Otranto. Mehmed died unexpectedly the following year and in the turmoil of the succession struggle the garrison was abandoned and forced to surrender. The throne fell to Bayezid II, who was forced to adopt a non-aggressive policy in the Mediterranean until the death in 1495 of his brother Gem, who had fled to the west after being defeated.115 Without going into the laws and customs governing the Ottoman succession, this outcome appeared to be among the least likely. In almost any other scenario, the Turks would have maintained themselves in strength at Otranto and moved to expand their foothold, though how aggressively we can only guess. The first serious encounters of Spanish armies beyond Iberia would thus have been with the Turk rather than the French and Swiss, and Italian engineers would have had to adjust their fortress designs to Turkish rather than French methods. I leave consideration of likely outcomes to the reader, but with the reminder that the Imperial troops who faced down Suleiman I’s army before Vienna in 1532 did so on the basis of lessons which Gonsalvo de Córdova and his men had distilled from hard experience fighting the French and Swiss.www.angelfire.com/ga4/guilmartin.com/Revolution.html
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 9, 2007 13:18:15 GMT -5
Da Vinci was an Italian from Florence; and secondly, historical research doesnt work by probables. Hazerfan clear Da Vinci influences. The only thing is that Da Vinci did not have the resources to put his drawings to the test. and as per the engineer: Pride of place was taken by the huge cannon constructed by the Hungarian engineer Urban. It had been brought from Adrianople on a carriage drawn by 60 oxen and manned by 200 soldiers. coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~fisher/hst373/readings/nicol.html
|
|