Cyprus-Forum.com

[denizaksulu]

Thanks to the checks I did last week about the Turkish tribes, I can confirm the Turks we have as our neighbours to this day, are the bloodiest of the lot!... Derived from the Seljuk who did away with Hittites, Greeks etc who were there before them.

They have displaced the indigenous people and colonised Anatolia.

A very slow colonisation I'd say. From 1071 to 1923 and 1955? Nearly 900 years of colonisation and still going on. Unbelievable.

[YFred]

Thanks to the checks I did last week about the Turkish tribes, I can confirm the Turks we have as our neighbours to this day, are the bloodiest of the lot!... Derived from the Seljuk who did away with Hittites, Greeks etc who were there before them.

They have displaced the indigenous people and colonised Anatolia.

You are a biologist for god sake woman. Turks didn't kill everyone especially the women. Their genes must be in the present Turkish population.

[Nikitas]

They also forcefully adopted boys, the famed Janissaries, and their genes must also be in the population.

Makes you wonder about the communities that managed to survive apart, where they strong willed, lucky, or just plain ugly and were not chosen for the holy task of gene transfer?

[Oracle]

They also forcefully adopted boys, the famed Janissaries, and their genes must also be in the population.

Makes you wonder about the communities that managed to survive apart, where they strong willed, lucky, or just plain ugly and were not chosen for the holy task of gene transfer?

I thought they killed off the Janissaries? (25,000)

[YFred]

Thanks to the checks I did last week about the Turkish tribes, I can confirm the Turks we have as our neighbours to this day, are the bloodiest of the lot!... Derived from the Seljuk who did away with Hittites, Greeks etc who were there before them.

They have displaced the indigenous people and colonised Anatolia.

A very slow colonisation I'd say. From 1071 to 1923 and 1955? Nearly 900 years of colonisation and still going on. Unbelievable.

No its not
Everyones doin it.

[zmx]

Thesis : How elites of the new Turkish Republic in 1920s and 1930s tried to shape the society with “usable past” in order to shift the society from religious one to a secular one and while it was trying to create unity, “us” feeling, how this usable past formed the opposite concept “them-other.”


Fall of the Ottoman Empire & Rise of the New Turkish Republic
-The new Turkish state was militaristic and diplomatic success yet there was hardly a cultural unity.
-Society was a religious one (ümmet) more than a national one (millet).
-In order to succeed the shift from religious community to a western type secular nation, state has begun series of cultural policies which were aimed to erase the Ottoman and Islamic past of Turkey

Modernization movements of the Turkish Republic was influenced by Europe. One of the main aims of the republic – to reach the “stage of the modern civilizations”- which was European civilization

To answer these claims “Main Features of Turkish History” was prepared by Society for the Study of Turkish History in 1928. For the first time this book presented “Turkish History Thesis” which give shape the new Turkish history writing

The Turks of 10000 BC lived around a great inland sea, which occupied much of Central Asia between the Caspian, the Hindu Kush and the Himalayas. Here, they developed metalworking, domesticated animals and discovered techniques of settled agriculture. At the end of the Ice Age, however, the land started to dry up; lakes and swamps replaced the sea, north winds brought masses of sand and conditions became intolerable for the settled millions. Fortunately, the change in climate opened up routes out of the homeland and Turks emigrated in all directions.”

Claims of the Thesis :
-Turks as the contributor of great civilizations – Aztecs, Incan, Maya, Egypt, Sumer, Hittities
-Turks are not from yellow race, rather white race.
-In an interesting way, together with the boast of “we created the civilization”, the message of “we are also white like you! Don’t think of us as yellow’” is being sent to Europe. Thus reason of replying European theories was both to get rid of the inferiority feeling in order form self-confidence citizens, but at the same time in order to be a part of European civilization.

-To adapt western values such as secularism Kemalist ideology did not hesitate to loosen the ties between Ottoman Legacy, Islamic Past and new Turkish Republic.
-In order to secularize today, Thesis tried to create secular Turkish past by focusing on Central Asian and so-called Anatolian past rather than the Ottoman and Islamic past.

School book from the period :
-“Turks were a great nation even before they had converted to Islamic religion. After Turks had converted to this religion, this religion had no effect in terms of making Arabs, Iranians from the same religion and others like that to create a nation uniting with Turks. Conversely, it loosened Turkish nation’s national bonds, it numbs its national feeling, national excitement. This was natural because the ideology of the religion that Muhammed established was to create a religious community above and including all of the nations”


Turkish Hittities

-Showing Hittities as the descendant of Turks in Anatolia and making them as “us” was a total “invention tradition” which helped to accomplish several goals :
-Formation of feeling of Turkish continuity in Anatolia.
-Hittities as the pre-islamic secular past of the Turks.
-Hittities’ influences over Greek civilization.
-The statement that Hittities had been living in Anatolia long before the Greeks who had claimed a right on Western Anatolia and Armenians on east, suggested an idea of “the one who comes first has the right”

Turkish History Thesis – failure or success ?

Turkish History Thesis and Sun-Language Theory were weakened after the death of Mustafa Kemal and they were abandoned in 1940s. Failure in rural areas, more succesful in urban areas.

Starting from 1950s (two party regime was adapted), Ottoman and Islamic past put under the sphere of “us” once again. Even today, traces of Turkish History Thesis can be seen in popular literature and official history books which are supplemented with similar maps and similar claims about the greatness of Turkishness.

While the sun theory is a load of absolute garbage, the idea that the present day Anatolian Turks are descended from the Hittites and other aboriginal Anatolian peoples is true.

It is also true that the Hittites greatly influenced the ancient Greeks.

Are you for real? Are you a Turk perchance?

Did I say something wrong?

I am a bit confused!! Are you saying that when Alparslan defeated the Byzantines at Manzikert/Malazgirt in 1071, the Turks were already in Anatolia? Where were the Armenians and the Greeks when 1071 happened?
Please correct my history.
It reminds me of Nasreddin Hodja's story of the cat which allegedly ate the 2 okes/okka of liver which he had brought home for his wife to cook. Instead the wife cooked the liver and shared it with her neighbors. When the Hodja arrived home in the evening for his supper, the wife said, "sorry but the cat ate it". The Hodja caught the cat and weighrd it. Exactly 2 okes/okka. The hodja asks his wife, " well if this is the liver, what have you done with the cat"?

Where were the Greeks and Armenians in 1071?...add the Kurds as well, while we are at it?

After the battle of Malazgirt the Alparslan's Turkic warriors conquered the rest of Asia Minor, and went onto become the ruling class of the region.

What followed was the Islamization and subsequent Turkification of Anatolia's natives (Greeks, Armenians etc). The process is reffered to as "Elite dominance language replacement". The same process occurred when the Arabs of the Arabian peninsula conquered the Levant, North Africa etc and Arabized the local peoples. Nationalities like Syrians, Lebanese etc havent got very little real Arab ancestry but are primarily descended from the pre-Arab populations of those regions who were Arabized, the same applies to Anatolian Turks in regards to Turkic ancestry.

the Turkics themselves were relatively small in number when they entered Anatolia.

As can be seen in this genetic study the central Asian/Turkic influence amongst Anatolian Turks is very minor:

Analysis of 89 biallelic polymorphisms in 523
Turkish Y chromosomes revealed 52 distinct haplotypes
with considerable haplogroup substructure, as exemplified
by their respective levels of accumulated diversity at
ten short tandem repeat (STR) loci. The major components
(haplogroups E3b, G, J, I, L, N, K2, and R1; 94.1%)
are shared with European and neighboring Near Eastern
populations and contrast with only a minor share of haplogroups
related to Central Asian (C, Q and O; 3.4%), Indian
(H, R2; 1.5%) and African (A, E3*, E3a; 1%) affinity.

source:
http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/H ... 27-148.pdf

Anatolian Turks by in large are descended from native Anatolians primarily (this includes the Hittites) and Balkanians with influences from the surrounding regions i.e. the Caucasus, Mesopatamia etc.

as for your question regarding Greeks, Armenians and Kurds they were all present in Anatolia in 1071.

[zmx]

Thanks to the checks I did last week about the Turkish tribes, I can confirm the Turks we have as our neighbours to this day, are the bloodiest of the lot!... Derived from the Seljuk who did away with Hittites, Greeks etc who were there before them.

They have displaced the indigenous people and colonised Anatolia.

They would have had a hard time doing away with the Hittites as the Hittite civilization had long since died away with the descendants of the Hittites themselves absorbed into various Anatolian peoples by the time the Seljuks arrived.

[Get Real!]

I can’t believe they went through all that trouble just to conclude that Greeks, Slavs, and Turks, are all one and the same!

[Get Real!]

Cyprus still remains the only country in the whole region where continuity of Choirokitianhood is as pure as the finest local olive oil…

[zmx]

I can’t believe they went through all that trouble just to conclude that Greeks, Slavs, and Turks, are all one and the same!

You're not that wrong according to this study on Y-chromosome variations Greeks and Turks cluster strongly together:



the source is from a Greek anthropoligist by the name of Dienekis Pontikos:

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/01/ru ... somes.html

its surprising tho that Turks are paternally closer to Italians than Greeks are as you would expect the vica versa to be true due to geographical reasons.