ignoring your turkowankery, i think its a form of turrets you have (turr from turk, ets meaning to continuously sprout bullshit form ones mouth IE: turkowankery= turrets.
so according to your theory? you mean the theory of looking at history and archeology and the actual facts in front of you. that's a great a theory!! and course Rome became more Germanic, there was shit loads of incursions and invasions, plus they paid/hired border tribes to keep other tribes out. even a circus monkey could of told you that, you word that i use to describe you which i can not any more coz its mean.
i have a theory the sky is above us... an we can see it with our eyes.. thats my theory, you bullhole licker.
and here goes just for fun, germans are not turkic, dickhead i know according to you we are all turk, but the germans were in place long before the turks were even crawling out of their mommas vaginas, you fool of a turk! plus there not any evidence not even from your own anoos of any link between the german tribes and the central asian tribes, cept the intermingling of the visigoth and ostrogoth mirgrations with other tribes moving out of the forsaken lands.
they were probly migrating to get away from you.. i ******** would
Well the word "turret" is related to Turkic "türet< türe et" meaning "replicate, multiply, pervade, ..." and also Turkic "tarat< tara et" meaning "sweep, rake, ..." That's all you need to know about this subject. I'm sure there are many people who know Turkish reads this like most of my other posts. The things they will think is as follows: astonishment - ponder over ; at this point the result of entrainment kicks: doubt - think himself like he is better than me - reject
Apart from this, just know that those people wanted to forget about their "Turkness" because they were wronged and they also did very bad things themselves. Think of the concept of "Germanic" as some kind of trauma. Actually the word itself is probably related to this trauma; being turned away from being Turks.
I take it that in your mind Turk is only some kind of Asian looking human?I take it that in your mind Turk is every kind of human looking human?
You are a bright fellow. You thought that I was thinking of something different?
ancalimon, I just want you to compare the methodology of information is presented and justified in that insane website (http://www.nationofturks.com), and the way it is presented here:
Please tell me you can see the difference. Of special note is actual sources! Amazing right.
Turkic speakers and R1a
The present-day inhabitants of Central Asia, from Xinjiang to Turkey and from the Volga to the Hindu Kush, speak in overwhelming majority Turkic languages. This may be surprising as this corresponds to the region where the Indo-Iranian branch of Indo-European speakers expanded, the Bronze-Age Andronovo culture, and the Iron-Age Scythian territory. So why is it that Indo-European languages only survives in Slavic Russia or in the southern part of Central Asia, in places like Tajikistan, Afghanistan or some parts of Turkmenistan ? Why don't the Uyghurs, Uzbeks, Kazakhs and Kyrgyzs, or the modern Pontic-Caspian steppe people (Crimean Tatars, Nogais, Bashkirs and Chuvashs) speak Indo-European vernaculars ? Genetically these people do carry Indo-European R1a, and to a lesser extent also R1b, lineages. The explanation is that Turkic languages replaced the Iranian tongues of Central Asia between the 4th and 11th century CE.
Proto-Turkic originated in Mongolia and southern Siberia with such nomadic tribes as the Xiongnu. It belongs to the Altaic linguistic family, like Mongolian and Manchu (some also include Korean and Japanese, although they share very little vocabulary in common). It is unknown when Proto-Turkic first emerged, but its spread started with the Hunnic migrations westward through the Eurasian steppe and all the way to Europe, only stopped by the boundaries of the Roman Empire.
The Huns were the descendants of the Xiongnu. Ancient DNA tests have revealed that the Xiongnu were already a hybrid Eurasian people 2,000 years ago, with mixed European and North-East Asian Y-DNA and mtDNA. Modern inhabitants of the Xiongnu homeland have approximately 90% of Mongolian lineages against 10% of European ones. The oldest identified presence of European mtDNA around Mongolia and Lake Baikal dates back to over 6,000 years ago.
It appears that Turkic quickly replaced the Scythian and other Iranian dialects all over Central Asia. Other migratory waves brought more Turkic speakers to Eastern and Central Europe, like the Khazars, the Avars, the Bulgars and the Turks (=> see 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe). All of them were in fact Central Asian nomads who had adopted Turkic language, but had little if any Mongolian blood. Turkic invasions therefore contributed more to the diffusion of Indo-European lineages (especially R1a1) than East Asian ones.
Turkic languages have not survived in Europe outside the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Bulgarian language, despite being named after a Turkic tribe, is actually a Slavic tongue with a mild Turkic influence. Hungarian, sometimes mistaken for the heir of Hunnic because of its name, is in reality an Uralic language (Magyar). the The dozens of Turkic languages spoken in the world today have a high degree of mutual intelligibility due to their fairly recent common origin and the nomadic nature of its speakers (until recently). Its two main branches Oghuz and Oghur could be seen as two languages about as distant as Spanish and Italian, and languages within each branch like regional dialects of Spanish and Italian.
Proto-Turkic does not originate in Mongolia and Mongolian is a totally different language than Turkic. Some people even think that they don't belong to the same language group.
Turkic languages belong to "Altaic" &
The home of Turks between Northern a Southern Ural mountains. At least that's what have been found so far. We don't know "for certain" what they were doing before that.
Turkic did not replace Scythian language because royal Scythian was itself a Turkic language. On the other hand, the opposite of it happened and "farmer Turks" became Persianised while the Persians that migrated to places where Turks lived became Turkified. That's how maybe more than half of the words in Persian and Turkic languages are completely same. Actually Persian is like a bizarre dialect of Turkic. The thing is that Persians lived a savage life while the Turks mainly lived a barbaric life. Persians just like the Chinese kept migrating to lands controlled by Turks to live like Turks. Simply accept it. Life as a barbarian was much better than life as a savage because the barbarians were more advanced people while life as a barbarian was not an easy one. The only people that kept being savages were weak people and they were eventually conquered by barbarians all over the world including Europe and even China at some point.
Turkic languages did not survive in Europe because of what the clergy did there and Bulgarian was a Turkic language. Even their alphabet was the Turkic alphabet. They are Slavic because of the clergy. The Slavs were used as a tool by the clergy to create a buffer to protect themselves. The Turks in Russia were tried to be Slavicized but it backfired at them because their culture was a strong one. they were simply lucky but it didn't stop them from changing the identity of those people by using dirty tricks.
Magyarország is a geography which was first settled by Turks in history. Their neighbours always knew these people as OGUR. OGUR are the same people as OGUZ (the people that started Ottoman Empire). So basically you can think of Hungary as "Western Ottoman Empire".
Magyars became Christian and became the rulers of Hungary. That was the law. Magyars were half Finn half Oguric people.