Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Connection of Vikings and Turks

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387
  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Connection of Vikings and Turks
    Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 09:04
LOLLOLLOL Maharbbal, you are too cruel...
 
Cut him some slack. If he really wrote all this himself... respect. It's crap, true, but respect for the hard work anyway.

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 09:49
Originally posted by Maharbbal

The Viking were a proto-turkic tribe. Wink
 
Of course they areWink Cos' Adam and Eve was the first proto-TurksBig smile
 
Anyways, I think if there was ever a connection, it can be seeked in Khazar Turks or Turkic-Mongolic Khanates of Russia,beginning with Golden Horde...
 
And Varangian Guards and their families, what happened to them later? They hadn't always stayed as soldiers for their whole lives, and probably settled in Byzantine lands after retirement or getting wounded...But I assume that they were dissolved among Byzantines by the time.
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 10:25
Originally posted by Aelfgifu

LOLLOLLOL Maharbbal, you are too cruel...
 
Cut him some slack. If he really wrote all this himself... respect. It's crap, true, but respect for the hard work anyway.
 

Nah, he's not cruel, just what you said (disrespectful).

 
Yes, it's flattering that he thought I wrote all that. Embarrassed
 
He should've paid attention to wording before wasting time.  "There's some evidence that..." is not the same as "I believe that...".  There's some evidence that Hitler was also nice, but do we want to believe that?
 
Unimportant, but equally impressive, is they way he disputed the article:
 
1. Doesn't finish reading the article before passing judgment.
 
2. Goes off on tangents like "You mean Turkey like Rep of Turkey, the word invented aroud 1500 AD?" when it's clear that the author means Turkey as in the land that is known as present day Turkey.  That's just after reading the first sentence of the article, so it's no surprise he couldn't finish reading it.
 
3. Finding a sentence he agrees with and writing 2 sentences to say that this is old news.  Imagine doing that for an article that size!
 
4. Asking me if I can read Etruscan because the article alludes to Etruscan sources.
 
5. Saying that Merovingians & Scandinavians would've had to rely only on 'memories' alone for knowledge of past events.
 
6. Making incoherent & irrelevant statements.  What do these statements mean and/or how are they relevant in their contexts?:
 
"It as nothing to do with fairytale, it is a narrative supported by strong archeological descoveries ... not yet discovered"
 
"I do see a T but as well in Thailand, Tuscon, Texas, Tottenham, Toy Story, Terribly pedandic and inefficient demonstration, Ts are everywhere my friend"
 
"and the fish was good and the girls easy"
 
"gave the English dumb, bull and so on"
 
7. Implying that Herodotus of Halicarnassus was stupid.
 
8. Suggesting that the lands of (what is today) Ukraine were beyond the Roman scope of situational awareness.
 
9. Accusing the article of saying there is evidence Odin existed as a god.
 
After making above (and only above) statements, compliments himself with the best statement of all: THIS POST IS SO STUPID THAT A MEDIVAL DRUNK MONK WOULD HAVE BLUCHED WHEN WRITTING IT TO PLEASE HIS MASTER. IT IS A LOT OF NONSENSE AND YOU ARE MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF.
 
Thank You Marhabal Wink
 


Edited by Hellios - 16-Oct-2006 at 10:43
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387
  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 11:09
Ah, but he has some points there too, you know...
2. Goes off on tangents like "You mean Turkey like Rep of Turkey, the word invented aroud 1500 AD?" when it's clear that the author means Turkey as in the land that is known as present day Turkey.  That's just after reading the first sentence of the article, so it's no surprise he couldn't finish reading it.
 
This is not good enough. In a good, comprehendeble and reliable history article, references to names that are of later date and not commonly accepted as stable geographical indications should not be used. 'it is clear what the author means' is no excuse. Turkey was named after the Turks, and they were not there yet, so the name is wrong, and Maharbbal's comment, though not nicely put, is true.
 
4. Asking me if I can read Etruscan because the article alludes to Etruscan sources.
Well, again, he has a point. The Etruscan language has not been deciphered yet. There is a minimum amount of texts that is needed to translate old languages, and there is not enough Etruscan to attempt it. This not only makes it impossible (and ridiculous) to refer to Etruscan sources in such an essay, it also means that, considering how little there is, there most likely are no Etruscan sources on this subject.
 
5. Saying that Merovingians & Scandinavians would've had to rely only on 'memories' alone for knowledge of past events.
What else? The Merovinginas did not come into power until the 7th century, and the Scandinavian people did not even start writing histories until the 12th. Until then, even if they would have known anything about this, all they had to rememer is oral tradition. We know for a fact that in oral tradition, history is only preserved for about four generations until it starts to turn into legend.
 
"and the fish was good and the girls easy"
 
This is a joke, it refers to the Anglos Saxon Chronicles for the year 449:
"They then send to the Angeles, bidding them send more help, and informed them of the cowardice of the people and the exellence of the land" Of course, the ninth century chronicler could have known this no more than Pytheas could.
 
7. Implying that Herodotus of Halicarnassus was stupid.
 
Why not? Can you proof he was not? Wink No seriously, he is just implying Herodotus might not be a completely reliable source on the subject, and I agree with him. Just because his work was passed on to us does not make him infallibe.
 
8. Suggesting that the lands of (what is today) Ukraine were beyond the Roman scope of situational awareness.
 
Perhaps it was, perhaps not. But it is remarkable that there is no mention of how Roman sources manage to proof such a vage thing as 'a people being direct ancestors of the Trojans'. How on earth does one proof that?

9. Accusing the article of saying there is evidence Odin existed as a god.
Well, it is true that the existence of an Odin is suddenly taken as fact without any proof why....
 
 
Really, this article reminds me so much of another posted here on AE not so long ago... It tried to prove that the Danes were the biblical tribe of Dan, seemingly using the exact same arguments and sources as this one...  LOL funny really...
Here it is:

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 12:29
1. You skipped 1, so I guess we agree somewhat.
 
2. It's very clear the author is using the word "Turkey" to describe land that is known today as Turkey.
 
3. You skipped 3...
 
4. If the author mentions Etruscan sources and Marhabal wishes to question it, then he should've asked for the author's sources, which I have.
 
5. You're suggesting that Merovingians & Scandinavians didn't learn about 'world' history before themselves.  That's strange.  Most societies that could read quickly learned about 'world' history, mostly by traveling to places of higher knowledge & bringing it back home.
 
6. Good joke, & good knowledge on your part.  And the other statements?
 
7. Herotodus was stupid because it can't be proven he wasn't?  I don't agree.  He was right about enough things to be kept out of the "stupid" category.  Of course everybody is imperfect, did I say otherwise?
 
8.  I don't think they managed to "prove" anything.
 
9.  The article doesn't say Odin existed as a god.  It mentions a "theory" that Odin might've actually been a legendary person, and information got distorted over time, eventually resulting in him becoming known as a god.
 
Thanks for the link. LOL
 
If somebody wishes to dispute an article, great, but we shouldn't try to dispute something we haven't fully read, and (when disputing) we should try to respect each other!
 
BTW, I find all the controversy about what should & shouldn't be called Turkey very interesting.  I'm going to search for some threads on that topic...
 


Edited by Hellios - 16-Oct-2006 at 12:30
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8596
  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 13:10
I agree with Hellios that there is a right time and place for joking around. If Maharbbal wanted to respond with more courtesy then their wouldn't be an issue. However, he did and it flies in the face of the Codes of Conduct. In this case being disrespectful toward other members.

With that in mind go on with the conversation. Though the topic has been constructed in such a way as to be open to ridicule, let's respect those who have put in an honest effort into their posts instead of mocking them.
Back to Top
Maharbbal View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
  Quote Maharbbal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 14:12
God what a fuss.

Please let me make myself clear if you read what I've written I try to be disrespectful (indeed) but only to the post itself, never mention the writer. I do believe one intelligent human being can write stupid things.

That said I apologizes to Hellios if he or she felt offended by what I've written. Sorry.

Sorry but... One has to recognize the article is all but scientific jumping from one area to another, using as reference lingustic evidences we all know are weak to say the least and constantly quoting "an historian" or even worst "history". It has 0% of critic toward its source and makes no attention to simple good sense. So yes my opinion is this article is full of crap and I don't understand really why I couldn't say so (specially considering the writter is not among us).

Edit:

I've finished reading it: it gets worst and worst just enjoy the best slice:

Their descriptions mirror the physique, dress and armor of Trojan warriors? the Viking ancestors

No comment on that, it speaks by itself.

Well actually one comment. When you see the importance of such tales with scientific pretention in the formation of nationalisms in general and nazism in pareticular, it is suddenly much less fun. I reckon "myth of the origin" are dangerous and this forum should be careful with it.

I'm not saying Hellios is a fascist of anything, I'm just saying be careful and use your intelligence to critic pieces like that. Manipulated, history as we know all is dangerous and if this text is not a manipulation it may be manipulated latter...

Remember Figaro: Sans libert de blmer il n'y est pas d'loges flatteurs. (without freedom to mock there are no flattering praises)

Finally, one must admit that in front of so much selfindulgence it is very tempting to go on make a few jokes. I mean the guy responsible for that is stuck in 13th century historiography, it is almost miraculous some can even believe in that.

And last but not least, there is no link between this post and the thread.

So sorry again but I don't consider I was wrong.


Edited by Maharbbal - 16-Oct-2006 at 14:49
I am a free donkey!
Back to Top
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 14:44

Glad everything is sorted on the best of terms.

Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 15:53
Originally posted by Maharbbal

God what a fuss.
 
Fusses start when we begin using disrespectful statements (as you acknowledge doing) containing the word "you".
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

Please let me make myself clear if you read what I've written I try to be disrespectful (indeed) but only to the post itself, never mention the writer.
 
The statements are addressing me, not a third party.  You were using the word "you".
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

I do believe one intelligent human being can write stupid things.
 
If you think an intelligent person said something stupid, why not question them courteously?
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

That said I apologizes to Hellios if he or she felt offended by what I've written. Sorry.
 
Ok, me to.
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

Sorry but... One has to recognize the article is all but scientific jumping from one area to another, using as reference lingustic evidences we all know are weak to say the least and constantly quoting "an historian" or even worst "history". It has 0% of critic toward its source and makes no attention to simple good sense.
 
Yes, the article moves the reader from one place to another but if you finish reading it you'll see (if you allow yourself) that the big picture painted by the author has a certain degree of coherency.
 
Using as references linguistic evidence is something that even the most well known historians did & do.
 
Quoting historians is a generally accepted method for supporting a statement.
 
No, it doesn't have 0% criticism towards it sources.  It clearly states the nature of the sources as loose.
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

So yes my opinion is this article is full of crap and I don't understand really why I couldn't say so (specially considering the writter is not among us).
 
Again; your statements were addressing me, not a third party.  You were using the word "you".
 
If you think somebody's post is "full of crap" there are ways to express yourself that don't merit the intervention of a MOD and breach AE's codes of conduct.
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

Remember Figaro: Sans libert de blmer il n'y est pas d'loges flatteurs. (without freedom to mock there are no flattering praises)
 
Mocking will get you more fusses than praises.
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

Finally, one must admit that in front of so much selfindulgence it is very tempting to go on make a few jokes. I mean the guy responsible for that is stuck in 13th century historiography, it is almost miraculous some can even believe in that.
 
Constructive jokes are fine but this is a strange joke: THIS POST IS SO STUPID THAT A MEDIVAL DRUNK MONK WOULD HAVE BLUCHED WHEN WRITTING IT TO PLEASE HIS MASTER. IT IS A LOT OF NONSENSE AND YOU ARE MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF.
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

And last but not least, there is no link between this post and the thread.
 
The thread topic is "Connection of Vikings and Turks".  The post is about the possibility of a connection between people of Sweden and people who lived on land that is present day Turkey.
 
 
Originally posted by Maharbbal

So sorry again but I don't consider I was wrong.
 
Ok, me too.
 
 


Edited by Hellios - 16-Oct-2006 at 16:17
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387
  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 16:10
Quoting historians is also a generally accepted method for supporting a statement.
Yes, true, but that only counts when one states the name of this historian! If I would make references in my essays to 'historians, plural, no specification', and turned it in to my professor, I'd get flunked so fast you couldn't keep up with it! Come on, what this writer is doing is no better than using hearsay as proven evidence!
 
And just because there might (unlikely, but I repeate might) be a connection between the Trojans and the Swedes, this still has little to do with the topic, as Trojans were not Turks, and as your own post shows they had left Anatolia about a milennium before the Turks arrived there. That's not even a connection by association.
 
It is a nice little theory for sure, but lets face the cold hard fact that it is very very thin.


Edited by Aelfgifu - 16-Oct-2006 at 16:11

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Oct-2006 at 16:35
Originally posted by Aelfgifu

Yes, true, but that only counts when one states the name of this historian! If I would make references in my essays to 'historians, plural, no specification', and turned it in to my professor, I'd get flunked so fast you couldn't keep up with it! Come on, what this writer is doing is no better than using hearsay as proven evidence!
 
And just because there might (unlikely, but I repeate might) be a connection between the Trojans and the Swedes, this still has little to do with the topic, as Trojans were not Turks, and as your own post shows they had left Anatolia about a milennium before the Turks arrived there. That's not even a connection by association.
 
It is a nice little theory for sure, but lets face the cold hard fact that it is very very thin.
 
The author states the names of the historians he quotes.
 
Ok, thanks for getting the thread back on topic; yes, you're right, the connection is a big 'maybe'.
 
The Trojans lived on land that is modern day Turkey.  Just remember that.  I don't want to go any further on that specific matter because things get too political.
 


Edited by Hellios - 16-Oct-2006 at 16:41
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Oct-2006 at 12:05
author states the names of the historians he quotes


Actually it doesn't, it says the Romans wrote or smthg like that...
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Oct-2006 at 12:56
I noticed that a couple of times but in most cases he/she specifies the source.  Very far fetched but entertaining theory.
Back to Top
Grettir the strong View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 26-Jul-2016
Location: Portland Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4
  Quote Grettir the strong Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jul-2016 at 13:48
For sticking to first hand accounts the epic poem of Sigurd talks about his experiences with Huns.during this period in history the Turks (ethnically at least) were coming into Europe as part of Attila's (Atli in the saga, being like the other names adapted for old Norse) the woman Brynhildar was the daughter of Budli who was a Hunnish lord of some kind or at least very wealthy and being a Hun in what is now Germany (where this part of the saga takes place) Brynhildar may well have been a Turk. If not they still came into contact with them in that saga. By the way Sigurd was a Danish prince.
I know one thing that never dies; the judgement on each one dead.
Back to Top
tommy View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 13-Sep-2005
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 533
  Quote tommy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jul-2016 at 03:40
 Ibn Fadlan , an Arabian  traveler, had visited the Volga River, and he encountered Rus ( mainly Sweden Vikings) and the kazan Turks, at the same time, then it was so sue that there would be complicated connection( war, trade, peace, cultural exchange) between these two group of people.
(Of course Ibn Fadlan never fought against the  Homo neanderthalensis with the viking warriors)LOL
leung
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.