Is Mythology the turth disguised as a Tale? or a Tale to disguise a Turth?
- Thread starter ancalimon
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I missed this thread. 
Temujin said:
In case you didn't notice:
ancalimon said:Couldn't find anywhere else to post this nonsense to. Have fun
I just found your use of language quite strong for this case, quite uncalled for. And again, in this case, he was partially right. I don't know if the translation to Turkturk is correct(
) but those cases in Greek writings were true. I have encountered some in sources in Uni. Caucasus meant literally White Mountain, hippos(not hippa) means horse and such. I don't know where they came from, I don't have the faintest idea, but they are there. 
Some of these words like for example Kafkas, were initially things related with real world. They later were converted into myths in many different cultures by the elite Turks (who many people would identify with evil) who wanted more power for themselves and less for the common Turks (Turk meaning the simple rest of the people in the world). They literally wanted to hide reality from their slaves.
The Greek word for horse is an amalgam of two Turkic words meaning "man-horse" aka: centaur from kentaur from Turkic KenTur meaning "he-it himself-itself is a Tur"
For example the Caucasus was turned into Kaf Mountain. https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaf_Da%C4%9F%C4%B1
So in my opinion, some people were eager to hide the "turth" by turning parts of it into some kind of myth. I have many ideas about why they did this. I was curious about your ideas when I started this thread, but I had difficulty convincing you that reality wass converted into myth because people suddenly turned into "Turks could not have done that", "Turks do not belong in ancient history", "I don't even like turkey in my sandwich", etc. So I wasn't able to convince anyone:
Reasons
1: The Turks who were doing the above (Turks could not have done that, Turks were never civilized in the past, Turks did not exist in the past, Turks are not even from Earth, etc) were not good at Turkic languages and they lied about anything I wrote making it seem like I was lying (since nobody trusted me which resulted in everyone trolling each other (I was trolled the most. Some people are very good at it)) about many different words. This is common in Turkey for some time. It's called inferiority complex reaction. There are certain weird clueless people in Turkey who think they can move small mountains, who like to glorify Turkey because of their Ottoman heritage and some of the people who are normal (in my opinion only better than them) like to make fun of them by attempting to scorn "Turkness". This action gains support of Europeans and also people who see Turks as their arch-enemies. (Iranian , Armenian, Kurdish, Greek, Arabic) I'm guessing that the Turks who are against my ideas here are not familiar enough with the subject and confuse me with one of those people.
2: I exaggerated some of the patterns to reach some conclusions.
3: People thought I was a nationalistic person who wasn't after the turth but who was trying to glorify his nation's past. (I still think it's not wrong to do this although I'm not one of those people)
The result is this thread.
The Greek word for horse is an amalgam of two Turkic words meaning "man-horse" aka: centaur from kentaur from Turkic KenTur meaning "he-it himself-itself is a Tur"
For example the Caucasus was turned into Kaf Mountain. https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaf_Da%C4%9F%C4%B1
So in my opinion, some people were eager to hide the "turth" by turning parts of it into some kind of myth. I have many ideas about why they did this. I was curious about your ideas when I started this thread, but I had difficulty convincing you that reality wass converted into myth because people suddenly turned into "Turks could not have done that", "Turks do not belong in ancient history", "I don't even like turkey in my sandwich", etc. So I wasn't able to convince anyone:
Reasons
1: The Turks who were doing the above (Turks could not have done that, Turks were never civilized in the past, Turks did not exist in the past, Turks are not even from Earth, etc) were not good at Turkic languages and they lied about anything I wrote making it seem like I was lying (since nobody trusted me which resulted in everyone trolling each other (I was trolled the most. Some people are very good at it)) about many different words. This is common in Turkey for some time. It's called inferiority complex reaction. There are certain weird clueless people in Turkey who think they can move small mountains, who like to glorify Turkey because of their Ottoman heritage and some of the people who are normal (in my opinion only better than them) like to make fun of them by attempting to scorn "Turkness". This action gains support of Europeans and also people who see Turks as their arch-enemies. (Iranian , Armenian, Kurdish, Greek, Arabic) I'm guessing that the Turks who are against my ideas here are not familiar enough with the subject and confuse me with one of those people.
2: I exaggerated some of the patterns to reach some conclusions.
3: People thought I was a nationalistic person who wasn't after the turth but who was trying to glorify his nation's past. (I still think it's not wrong to do this although I'm not one of those people)
The result is this thread.
Aha, I thought we were finally seeing some honesty from you in regards to your overall research methods. 
But rather it seems you meant you meant you exaggerated in regards to generalizing about nationalists, non-nationalists, and Euros in your "Reasons" section.
But rather it seems you meant you meant you exaggerated in regards to generalizing about nationalists, non-nationalists, and Euros in your "Reasons" section.
Finally.. A 5000 year old Turkic grave (kurgan) saved from treasure hunters and work machines in Silivri - Istanbul.
http://www.dailysabah.com/istanbul/2016/05/16/rare-5000-year-old-kurgan-type-tumulus-from-the-bronze-age-unearthed-in-istanbul
http://www.byegm.gov.tr/english/agenda/5-000-year-old-eairn-type-grave-found-in-istanbuls-silivri/95007
Now.... Let's start talking again.
Turks in Istanbul in 3000BC.
http://www.dailysabah.com/istanbul/2016/05/16/rare-5000-year-old-kurgan-type-tumulus-from-the-bronze-age-unearthed-in-istanbul
http://www.byegm.gov.tr/english/agenda/5-000-year-old-eairn-type-grave-found-in-istanbuls-silivri/95007
Now.... Let's start talking again.
Turks in Istanbul in 3000BC.
Mage246
At no point does it say that this person was Turkish. Same old ancalifail.
Mage246 said:
Of course I was wondering where you have been. It must be an Arabic Turkic grave then or maybe a British Turkic grave?
Why would the Turks bury someone who is not a Turk in a Turkic grave? That does not make sense. What would you do if I buried you after plugging your butthole with cotton and a date in your mouth facing Kaaba muslim style? Oh right nothing.
Quite interesting. But those domed tombs(θολωτοι τάφοι, kurgan, tumuli, kyprah etc.) were extremely popular in a wide area across Europe and Asia from the early Copper Age even to Dark and Middle Ages(Sutton Hoo was a mound tomb). So, the person buried there could be of any nationality imaginable, why an Ancient Turk? From what I know, during that time(6th-5th millenium BC) the wider area of Thrace was occupied by a bunch of dudes that cannot be compared to a modern nation (with a reaaaally ****ed up stretch you could say most of them formed the later Illyrian and Thracian/Odryssian kingdoms), but yeah, speculations, which are the dread of History.
But it is certainly interesting, a nice find. My only trouble is that I could find anything in any non-Turkish newspaper/site.
EDIT: Also, wut? That dude had the trademark warrior burial, Islam wasn't even in the slightest of notions founded or even though of back then.
But it is certainly interesting, a nice find. My only trouble is that I could find anything in any non-Turkish newspaper/site.
EDIT: Also, wut? That dude had the trademark warrior burial, Islam wasn't even in the slightest of notions founded or even though of back then.
Antonis said:is certainly interesting, a nice find. My only trouble is that I could find anything in any non-Turkish newspaper/site.
It's a conspiracy. They don't want you to know.
Anyone with a bit of professional knowledge knows that these grave types are signatures of Turks. So it's better if professionals are not aware about this. Because well you know... that makes mainstream history a joke and no one wants other people to know that their life was spent on a joke.
I will disagree with you there, brother. That type of burial was described in detail by many and various sources, incl. Homer, Vergilius, a bunch of Jewish writers and so on give the full process with detail. Those dudes weren't Turks(right ? ). Celts weren't Turks, the people of modern day Russia, Greece and the Wider Balkans weren't Turks. Well, some are. I am Greek and I am 1/4 Turk from my grandmother, but with close to 400 of occupation, that's a bit natural, I suppose. Also, sidenote to the point at hand, but what the ****? That documentary solved what nobody could and declared Etruscans Turks?
I was so far informed by Thucydides, Herodotus and Strabo that they were associated with Pelasgians and later claims(I think post 2000) show a link with the Villanova people. Turks, though?
). Celts weren't Turks, the people of modern day Russia, Greece and the Wider Balkans weren't Turks. Well, some are. I am Greek and I am 1/4 Turk from my grandmother, but with close to 400 of occupation, that's a bit natural, I suppose. Also, sidenote to the point at hand, but what the ****? That documentary solved what nobody could and declared Etruscans Turks? I was so far informed by Thucydides, Herodotus and Strabo that they were associated with Pelasgians and later claims(I think post 2000) show a link with the Villanova people. Turks, though?
Swissky
Do you really actually believe yourself when you spout this ****?ancalimon said:
Mage246
He can't help it. All that cotton up his butt means that he hasn't pooped in months. He has the poop madness.
Swissky
Etruscans were actually Sub-Saharan settlers. Learn your history, scrub.Antonis said:Eh, one dude in the comment section of this video claims Etruscans were Basque.
Similar threads
