Does the Runic and Gok-Turk monuments have the same origins?

Hi all,

The questioning of whether Gok-Turk alphabet and runic alphabet could possibly have a same origin put forward by me based on a research work as detailed in my first post on this thread has generated some discussion on this

However  I find the outcome of this discussion venture very  interesting and saddening.

I presented  findings and based my argument on   results of physical comparison  (ie the sameness/similarities of letters involved in the two alphabets), the grammatical make up of these inscriptions and how the runic inscpritions are decipherable in Gok-Turk alphabet, and the derived meanings been consistant with the monuments they are inscribed on via deciphering these runic inscriptions in Gok-Turk language  and also mathematical reasoning trying to show that  the pure chance of such sameness/similarities could be very very low as I outlined in my previous posts.

The point that makes this discussion even further interesting for me is the correspondence I have received from the �opposing side� who argue against my questioning and try to totally falsify it by an approach I can only state as �psychologically driven� personal attacks instead of been scientifically based and objective.

Let me document what I mean by showing some examples from the latest post uploaded onto this thread by Mangudai and Styrbiorn.

- Mangudai : he claimed that my argument as  �pseudo-science� without actually tackling the findings and reasoning I presented with solid arguments to counter mine.

-Mangudai : he stated that �you may believe the official translations from ancient norse or you may believe in this turkic nonsense� .
My Comment: a clear portrayel as to what is set thoughts, showing lack of obectivity and open mindness to argue, even agressive behavioural patterns where the holders of opposing thought are dismissed as �nonsense�. Whats further compelling is the racial valuation in deep psyche evident here where the �ancient norse� is held above the �turcic nonsense� an indication the bearer of these thought on his/her deep rooted beliefs of been superior racially above his/her counterpart.

-Mangudai : he wrote �elaborate mathematical mumbo jumbo�
My Comment: a reactionary form of behavior is evident here when one is faced with compelling facts that contradict the persons thought, an attempt to dismiss the opposing argument without giving it valuable credit, especially occuring in thought mechanisms that are set to a certain idea with out any possible intellectual flexibility.

-Mangudai : he noted �give me a break..�
My Comment: again a reactionary outburst given when one is felt under threat of ones personal thoughts, involving a mockery of the person with opposing thoughts, giving him/her no credit and trying to ridicule him/her.

-Mangudai : he claimed �the norse transliteration and translation of the Kyvler, Istaby and M�jbro-stones have been made by real archeologists, the �turcic translations� have never appeared in any academic book-simply because they are false�
My Comment : the interesting point here is the use of the words �real archeologists� and the attempt at lessening the importance of �turcic translations� (btw the real terminology is Turkish, Turkic is not correct), this is a portrayel of how one tries to uphold their current standing beliefs over other opposing ones by mentally labelling and categorising what he/she has been made to believe utmost true without doubt, and ideas or thoughts opposing his/hers is discreadible because they are of the �others� and not �ours�,indicative of intellectual inflexibility and perhaps agressive nationalism. The fact of the matter is that Norvegian antropologist Prof. Thor Heyerdahl (who was bestowed with as Norwegian National Hero by his governent for his works and a Norwegian Naval training ship was named after him in honour for this awarding), has partially supported these findings stands contrary to this claim. This comment above is further important as it shows an intellectual make-up which is formed and developed in closed societies where any thought or ideas generated �outside� their accepted culture is and must be false, especially those that originate from cultures as seen and accepted inferior to their own by themselves.

-Mangudai : he  admitted his lack of knowledge yet commented contrary to his lack of knowledge �I dont know ancient orkhon runes or their language, but I bet that anyone with knowledge in the Orkhun turcic language and writing can discard the translation as false�
My Comment: here we see an intellectual conradiction where the bearer of these thoughts are willing and capable of going to such extents as to claim on an issue which he/she admits to have no knowledge, this type of behaviour is very crucial to think seriously over, because this type of sub-psyche comments can show the extent and limits of moral reasoning of the person or the lack of it, been inclined to �play� with the truths to support his/her ideas.

-Styrbiorn: he commented about regarding the jewish attempts at deciphering these inscriptions in ancient hebrew which I commented were futile and not comparable to the Gok-Turk deciphering of the runic inscriptions : �ohh, so you know about it then?.....because AFAIK no non Swedish source on the Hebrew interpretation of these stones has ever been published�
My Comment: here once again the deep rooted �us� and �them� are visible, indicative of a thought that is predominant where no one else besides �us� has the rights to think or have knowledge on the matter been discussed. The sarcastic usage of �ohh, so you know about it then?� is a clear sign on the bearer not seeing his/her counterpart (me) equal to him/herself, a sign of superiority complex. To answer this; the matter of old inscpritions and those of runic and Gok-Turk were taken under study by a discussion TV programme in Turkiye, where the Jewish attempts and unsuccess of deciphering these inscriptions were disccussed by many scientist even referencing Nordic scientists works on the matter.

-Styrbiorn :commenting about my mathematical reasoning put forward to show that there is a  great sameness/similarity between these inscriptions, he made these comments;
�Splendid!� �..�I also advice you to stop writing �mathematical� before percentage-percentage is mathematical by definition-because everyhone who has the slightest knowledge about maths will immidiately understand you dont know much about it. Just a little tip.�
My Comment : in these comments it is clearly evident that been unable to come up with a valid argument the intellectual integrity of the person holding the opposing ideas (that is me) is been mocked and thus an attempt to disprove my questioning, reasoning and arguments is made. Afterall this is a method to dissimate the other readers concentration from the argument/contention put forward by me by trying to gather the readers attention  unto my intellectual well-beign. As they say a person who has nothing smart to say only attacks personally to his counterpart.

-Styrbiorn & Mangudai : �This rampant nationalism��..�One cant convince a fanatic who have decided in advance what to believe. But I�d love to hear from our fellow forumers which version they think makes more sense��
My Comment : here we see further vilification and demonizing of the person holding the opposing ideas (me), by personally attacking the opponent and labelling him(me) as a fanatic and a �rampant nationalist� and then trying subconciously to get the opposing person(me) mob linched by the community (the forumers). Clear evidence of a psychological structure where a trust on the mob is placed to vilifiy the opposition (this shows that the bearer of this thought has security and confidence he is amoung people of his �kind�, perhaps a reflection of the �us� and �them� structure within this setting, with prior witnessing/experiences of �us� and �them� mob conflicts having  possibly occured resulting in this sense of security and confidence when calling the mob for vilification).

-Styrbiorn :responding to Mangudai previous post where he attempted at personally attack and vilify me by �one cant convince a fanatic�,  Styrbiron  responded with �You just presented the Truth in this thread�
My Comment: a tag-team further attempts at mob vilification by supporting the person who has made personall attacks, therefore showing the rest of the mob(that is forumers) it is ok to assualt on me as a fanatic. A  great example of primitive mob-psychology where people would be label and intellectually alienate those with opposing thoughts leading to vilification/demonizing and mob lynchning of �different� person.

I present questions, comparitive findings, mathematical results, linguistic evidence and an argument without any degrading comment  to any of the people or their heritage involved and only state an assumption on the findings that the originators of Gok-Turk and runic inscprition monuments could have had the same origin and I am countered with these personal attacks and slander, this is too sad for humanity.

I have no further comment for now, beacuse I have 1) put forward my questions and argument concisely  2) supported my questioning and argument with research findings and various reasoning including historical,social and mathematical to my extent  3) however instead of a healthy discussion, I have encountered an attempt by those above to personalize the topic by getting vilified   4) so I will not do the same as they have  and lower the standard of the forum by personal vilification like they have instead of carrying on an intellectual discussion/argument and will  keep my rational contention/questioning and if deemed necessary, like  I have done above, show the motives behind such  behaviour if such personal attacks occur again.

Best Regards,

Tuman Yabgu

The truth is out there

Edited by Tuman Yabgu

Nice try with the psycho-analasys-thingy...

AFAIK Thor Heyerdahl was a marine-biologists and amateur-anthropologist, but did he never got an academic degree in anthropology. Nevertheless, his variety of un-orthodox hypotesises are generally viewed upon by schollars as wild and highly controversial. The books by Heyerdahl and Lilliestr�m "No borders" and "The hunt for Odin" have been discarded as pseudo-sciense both in Scandinavia and elsewhere. Here's a critical review on the latter book:

http://www.hf.uib.no/i/Nordisk/MaalogMinne/artikler/heyerdah l-v1.pdf 

Per Lilliestr�m is not a historian, and no "Nordic academics partners" have come to accept their wild hypotesises as Yagbu claims. And even if, supposedly, Heyerdahl's claims would have been correct, there were no turkic peoples in the Azov area or the Caucasus in the 1st century BC.

Hi everyone,

4 people who have a common interest and whos ideas were challanged by biologist, anthropologist, archaeologist Prof. Thor Heyerdahl do a scandelous book review in an unprofound attempt to falsify this great scientists findings is nothing but cheap propoganda. The views presented in that arcticle and your writings clearly show the jealousy and hatred some few have for Thor Heyerdahl due him scientifically challanging the grounds these people make their money, they cant even have the common decency and basic respect to mention his name and call him and make ridiculous comments about him with his surname initial �H� ! This is laughable !.

Prof. Thor Heyerdahl as a scientist, archaeologist and anthropologist did not only relly on traditional accepted views but had a broader view into looking into events,did numerous excavations revealing thousands of artifacts,indept expeditions, worked together with many Scandinavian and Russian and Turkish scientists and found radical results that challanged people like those you portrayed, with new found scientific evidence, of course many of those academically threatened by these findings dismissed him due to personal reasons. These people do not even have the basic decency and respect to talk of him or his name, classifiying Thor Heyerdahl as just a �H� !

�Borders? I have never seen one, but I heard they exist in the minds of most of people� Prof. Thor Heyerdahl

THOR HEYERDAHL (1914 - 2002) "Thor Heyerdahl is a world-renowned explorer and archaeologist. Thor Heyerdahl is the recipient of numerous medals, awards and honours. He has been a regular member of various scientific congresses, notably the International Congress of Americanists, the Pacific Science Congress, and the International Congress of Anthropology and Ethnology." http://gonorway.no/frameset.me?http://www.gonorway.no/go/hey erdahl.html

Thor Heyerdahl, Ph.D., 1914-2002
by
The FERCO* Scientific Committee
Daniel H. Sandweiss, President (dan.sandweiss@umit.maine.edu) 

Donald P. Ryan, Vice-President (RyanDP@plu.edu, )
James B. Richardson III (RichardsonJ@CarnegieMuseums.Org)
Madeleine Lynn (mf.lynn@verizon.net)

Prof. Thor Heyerdahl, intrepid Norwegian explorer, anthropologist and author died on April 18 in Italy. He was eighty-seven. http://www.ferco.org/thor_heyerdahl.html

University of Maine link about him http://www.umaine.edu/mainesci/heyerdahl.htm

Time magazine link on him http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901 020429-232502,00.html

NYTimes arcticle about him and his findings http://www.britam.org/now/now2.html

USATODAY about him http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/anthro/2002-04-19-hyerd ahl-theories.htm

He was named the in a may issue of Vanity Fair as one of "10 of the greatest living explorers" � together with people like Sir Edmund Hillary, the conqueror of Mount Everest, and Robert Ballard, the deep-sea detective who discovered the location of the Titanic. http://www.nationalreview.com/miller/miller041902.asp

He died at 18 April 2002 and was buried in a Norwegain Government ceremony as a great scientist and a hero.

http://www.norway.org/News/200202heyerdal.htm http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/04/18/print/main506633.s html

A brief examples of his work and findings:

Thor Heyerdahl �"demonstrated there were no technical reasons to prevent people from South America from having settled the Polynesian Islands�.In the Kon-Tiki Expedition, Heyerdahl and a small team went to South America�After a 101 day, 4,300 mile journey across the Pacific Ocean, it smashed into the reef at Raroia in the Tuamotu Islands on August 7, 1947, showing that pre-historic peoples could have traveled from South America�Heyerdahl was involved with many other expeditions and archaeological projects. However, he remained best known for.. his emphasis on cultural diffusionism*.. He.. demonstrate that Ancient Egyptians could have communicated with the Americas or transferredpyramid-building technology. His next boat Tigris was intended to demonstrate that trade and migration could have linked the Indus Valley Civilisation in India with Mesopotamia. Thor Heyerdahl also investigated the pyramidal mounds found on the Maldive Islands in the Indian Ocean. There, he found sun-oriented mounds and courtyards, as well as statues with elongated earlobes. Both of these archeological finds fit with his theory of a sea-faring civilization which originated in what is now Sri Lanka, colonized the Maldives, and influenced or founded the cultures of ancient South America and Easter Island. His discoveries are detailed in his book, "The Maldive Mystery." In 1991 he studied the pyramids of Guimar on Tenerife and discovered that they cannot be random stone heaps, but actual pyramids. He also discovered their special astronomical orientation. Heyerdahl advanced a theory according to which the Canaries had been bases of ancient shipping between America and the Mediterranean.

His last project was Jakten pa Odin, the search for Odin, in which he initiated excavations in Azov, near the Sea of Azov at the northeast of the Black Sea, to search for the possible remains of a civilizations to match the account of Snorri Sturluson in Ynglinga saga about the emigrating tribe of �sir with their leader Odin, who Snorri said came to Saxland, Fyn and Sweden and got the reputation of being a God". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor_Heyerdahl

*"The diffusion of ideas or artifacts from one culture to another is a well-attested and uncontroversial concept of cultural anthropolgy. For example, the practice of agriculture is widely believed to have diffused from somewhere in the Middle East to all of Eurasia, less than 10,000 years ago. Other established examples of diffusion include the smelting of iron in ancient times, and the use of cars in the 20^{th century.}

In 1962, Everett Rogers published his seminal book on Diffusion of innovations. The book is now in its fifth edition and Rogers is widely regarded as the father of studies into how and why cultures adopt new innovations. "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_%28anthropology%29

Accolades Thor Heyerdahl has been bestowed:

SCIENTIFIC HONORS AND AWARDS INCLUDE::

Retzius Medal, Royal Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography, 1950;

Mungo Park Medal, Royal Scottish Society for Geography, 1951;

Bonaparte-Wyse Gold Medal,Societe de Geographie de Paris,1951;

Bush Kent Kane Gold Medal, Geographical. Society of Philadelphia,1952;

Honorary Member, Geographical Societies of Norway, 1953, Peru, 1953, Brazil 1954.

Elected Member Norwegian Academy of Sciences, 1958;

Fellow, New York Academy of Science, 1960;

Doctor Honoris Causa, Oslo University, Norway, 1961;

Vega Gold Medal, Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography, 1962;

Lomonosov Medal, Moscow University, 1962;

Royal Geographical Society, Gold Medal London,1964;

Distinguished Service Award, Pacific Lutheran University, 1966;

Member American Anthropological Association, 1966;

Kiril i Metodi Award, Geographical Society, Bulgaria, 1972;

Honorary Professor, Institute Politecnica, Universidad Nacional, Mexico, 1972;

International Pahlavi Environment Prize, United Nations 1978;

Doctor Honoris Causa, USSR Academy of Science, 1980;

Bradford Washburn Award, Boston Museum of Science, USA, 1982;

Doctor Honoris Causa, University of San Martin, Lima, Peru, 1991;

Doctor Honoris Causa, University of Havana, Cuba 1992;

Doctor Honoris Causa University of Kiev, Ukraine, 1993;

President's Medal, Pacific Lutheran University, 1996.

NATIONAL DECORATIONS:

Commander of the Order of St Olav, Norway, 1951, and with Star, 1970;

Officer of El Orden por Meritos Distinguidos, Peru, 1953;

Grand Officer Orden Al Merito della Republica Italiana, 1968;

Commander, American Knights of Malta, 1970;

Order of Merit, Egypt, 1971;

Grand Officer, Royal Alaouites Order, Morocco, 1971;

Order of Golden Ark, Netherlands, 1980; Officer, La Orden El Sol del Peru 1975.

http://www.plu.edu/~ryandp/thor.html

 

He has a ship named after him :

"The ship was built in 1974 in the Aalborg shipyard in Denmark for DFDS, the oldest operational Danish ferry operator. It was christened the M/S Dana Regina. In 1990, the ferry went to Estline, which operated it as M/S Nord Estonia on line between Tallinn and Stockholm till 1992, from when on it was operated as M/S Thor Heyerdahl" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M/S_Vana_Tallinn

He has an asteroid named after him:

"2473 Heyerdahl is a small main belt asteroid, which was discovered by Nikolai Stepanovich Chernykh in 1977. It is named after Thor Heyerdahl the Norwegian explorer". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2473_Heyerdahl

 

An account by Professor J. Bjornar Storfjell of Thor Heyerdahl�s latets project:

"Investigating cultural connective links between the Caucasus and Scandinavia based on similarities he found between the petroglyphs in Gobustan near Baku and the petroglyphs in Scandinavia, especially those in Alta, Norway.Where the first seasons of the excavations brought to light more than 35,000 individual pieces of material cultural remains, which have now all been numbered and registered. Among the more significant finds were several fibulae - circular ring-pins used to fasten garments - which can be dated to the 1st-2nd centuries AD. They showed a clear affinity with fibulae from the Baltic region. Resulting in the "Jakten p� Odin" (In Search of Odin) which was published in Norway a few months later, in November 2001"http://www.azer.com/aiweb/categories/magazine/ai102_folder/1 02_articles/102_heyerdahl_storfjell.html

 

Extensive reasearch that is encoppassing a wide geography:

�Archeologist and historian Thor Heyerdahl, 85, has visited Azerbaijan on several occasions during the past two decades. Each time, he garners more evidence to prove his tantalizing theory - that Scandinavian ancestry can be traced to the region now known as Azerbaijan.

Heyerdahl first began forming this hypothesis after visiting Gobustan, an ancient cave dwelling found 30 miles west of Baku, which is famous for its rock carvings. The sketches of sickle-shaped boats carved into these rocks closely resemble rock carvings found in his own native Norway.

Years later, the explorer stumbled upon another correlation between Norway and Azerbaijan. Norwegian mythology tells that the Scandinavian god Odin moved with his people to Norway from a land called Aser, in order to avoid Roman occupation. A 13th-century historian's description of Aser's origination matches that of Azerbaijan: east of the Caucasus mountains and the Black Sea.

Heyerdahl first began forming this hypothesis after visiting Gobustan, an ancient cave dwelling found 30 miles west of Baku, which is famous for its rock carvings. The sketches of sickle-shaped boats carved into these rocks closely resemble rock carvings found in his own native Norway.

�In the meantime we have contacts with the Academies of Sciences in 11 nations. We do not want to leave anything out. The most surprising discovery was when we contacted Communist China. They had discovered blond-haired mummies in the Karim Desert deep inside China, so perfectly preserved in the cold climate and salty earth that you could see the color of the skin and hair. The Chinese archeologists were surprised because these mummies were not Mongoloids at all; they suspected instead that they were Vikings.

But it didn't make sense to me that Vikings should be deep inside the deserts of China. When the Chinese archeologists conducted radio-carbon dating, they determined that the mummies were of Nordic type dating from 1,800 to 1,500 years BC. But the Viking period started around 800 AD. It then became obvious that these mummies were not Vikings who had come to China. Here was a missing link. And again the Caucasus enters into the picture as a mutual migratory center.

But this is not the end of the story. These mummies were dressed in cloth that had been woven, and the colors and the woven pattern were of a very specific type. The Chinese themselves studied the mummies and then invited American experts to study the clothing who determined that the weave and coloring were typical of the Celts of Ireland. But this made no sense at all. Then we contacted Ireland to get their sagas, and their written saga says that their ancestors were Scythians. So, again, their roots come back here to the Caucasus.

This is only the beginning"

http://www.azer.com/aiweb/categories/magazine/82_folder/82_a rticles/82_heyerdahl.html

Furhermore research on to the findings of Prof. Thor Heyerdahl regarding cultural, linguistic links between ancient people of the Caucases and the emigrants to N.Europe who came from this region is augmented when we study the history of the Caucases.

Alans:

http://www.kafkas.org.tr/english/analiz/karacaylarin%20tarih i4.html

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/24Alans/WhoAreAlansEn.ht m

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/70%20Dateline/alan%20dat eline%20En.htm

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/24Alans/AlanianEtymology NotesEn.htm

http://depts.washington.edu/uwch/silkroad/texts/hhshu/notes1 9.html

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/24Alans/AlanChronologyOv erviewEn.htm

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/30%20Writing/Codex%20Eur oAsiaticDon%20En.htm

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/24Alans/AlanAndRomanLang uagesEn.htm

http://www.kafkas.org.tr/english/analiz/karacaylarin%20tarih i4.html

http://www.livius.org/arl-arz/arrian/arrian.htm

http://www.csen.org/BAR%20Book/02%20Part%201%20Theory.pdf#se arch='sarmatians'

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/27%20Scythians/EthnicRoo tsEn.htm

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/70%20Dateline/hun%20date line%20En.htm

Sources on the Alans by Thordarson, Fridik Publications

Turk Tarihi, Toplumlarin Mayasi, Uygarlik by Paksoy, H.B.

The Sarmatians 600 Bc-Ad 450 by R. Brzesinski, M. Mielczarek, G.Embleton

Furthermore, whatever Thor Heyerdahl was/is in view of a handfull of people who cant even have the common decency and basic respect to use/write/utter his name, the findings outlined in Turgay K�r�m�s research continues to uphold its scientific importance, bringing a big question on these ancient inscriptions with solid evidence to support it, that the creators of these inscription monuments have had a similar origin in some time before their existance on the face onf earth

Best Regards,

Tuman Yabgu

�Borders? I have never seen one, but I heard they exist in the minds of most of people� Prof. Thor Heyerdahl

The truth is out there!

 

Edited by Tuman Yabgu

What has this with runes and turks to do? Heyerdahl was a passionate explorer of the "old kind", but an academic schollar he was not. Nor do I find his arguments and hypotesises more plausible whether he's got a ship named after him or not...

The facts are these: the oldest runes found are from germanic northern Europe, not from the Caucasus or from turkic cultures in present day Mongolia/Siberia. The germanic rune-characters resemble northern italic characters used in the Roman Empire, with corresponding phonology - i.g. a runic "T" looks like an italic "T" and so on. Therefore, it's virtually verified that the germanic runes have been designed with influences from Roman writing

Originally posted by Alparslan There are thousdands of runic texts in the Russian steppes.

A few hundred at least. And they're Scandinavian. Some of them: http://home.no.net/ekerilar/ru-e-rusland.htm

This is a possibility and it can be a fact. But it is also a possibility that Turks came to Scandinavia and they have written something with their own language and with their own alphabet which was similar due to practicak reasons to Germanic runes.

Everything is possible, but you have to admit it doesn't sound very feasible. No sources talk of such a migration. No archaeological findings support it. Any why would they use ONLY the runes that existed in the Germanic futhark, ignoring all those who doesn't look the same (maybe I explain bad, but if you look on the Orkhon script sheet, there a many letters that doesn't exist in the Germanic runes - why weren't these used by the Turks that presumably got to Scandinavia).

Just look at a map of the Hun Empire. What do you see?

I see something that happened several centuries after the first runic inscriptions popped up in Scandinavia.

There are local traditions on the island of �land that some defeated Huns joined their allied comrades from that island and followed them home though.

Originally posted by Stybiorn I don't know ancient orkhon runes or their language, but I bet that anyone with knowledge in the Orkhon turcic language and writing can discard the translations as false.

In fact you are right that there is difference between Orkhun language and those runes' language found in Scandinavia. But this is very normal. Most probably they were some difference between the two language. On the other hand it can easily be understood that this langauge is Turkish.

[/quote]
It can be as easily understood that the language is proto-Norse as well. I have one question : in the original translation the words are written unbent, like dog-well-to charge- etc. That sound sextremely peculiar. Why would anyone write like that?


(I didn't write that btw, but I guess you just forgot to change the name in the quoting, so no biggie.)

I think these runes had been written by Huns. (If those claims are right since I cannot read and write in Orkhun letters) I wonder if our Hungarian forumers could understand something from the text�and are there any similarities with Hungarian?

How many other instances do we have that Huns have used runes? How many other instances do we have that Scandinavians have used runes?
Sorry, but I find this claim so unbelievable I have trouble grasping someone can support it. What do you think of the Kylver stone, which is just the alphabeth written down in order. Is that just a coincidence?

Edited by Styrbiorn

"Does the futhark alpahabet and Gok-Turk alphabet have the same origins?"

If there were any slight evidence of that I'd be interested. But none of the arguments presented here are convincing to me. Remeber: Extraordinary claims calls for extraordinary evidences...

Just look at a map of the Hun Empire. What do you see?

I see a 19th century or early 20th century map of what some people back then thought the empire of Attila might have lookes like, but it's clearly exaggerated since there are nothing to support the idea that the huns controlled Jutland for example. Here's a map I find more reasonable:

Nevertheless, there are no instances of the huns using runes, and as Styrbiorna said: Scandinavians used runes centuries before the huns arrived in Europe, so we can effectivly dismiss and forget the idea of the huns bringing the runes to Europe...

I'll repeat myself :

The facts are these: the oldest runes yet found are from germanic northern Europe, not from the Caucasus or from turkic or proto-turkic cultures in present day Russia, Mongolia or Siberia. The germanic rune-characters on the other hand strongly resemble northern italic characters used in the Roman Empire at the time, with corresponding phonology - i.g. a runic "T" looks like an italic "T" and so on. Therefore, it's virtually verified that the germanic runes have been designed by germanians in northern Europe or in Scandinavia with influences from Roman writing, sometime around the period 1st century B.C-1st century A.D

Prove me wrong!

Hi everyone,

Firstly I would like to once again  emphasize that we are not discussing any monuments found in N.Europe whose inscriptions are classified as �younger futharks� that we see widely on monuments that date from 700-900A.D. onwards, because these �younger futhark� alpahbets, presenting structural difference to the �elder futharks� -which it derived from- had a reduction of characters from 24 to 16 and were in time of evolution influenced by indegineous effetcs and other neighbouring alphabets in Europe. So with this in mind we can perhaps better see the discussion point.

Encyclopedia Wikipidea documents �younger futharks� which is very much changed form of the �elder futharks�. Younger futhark :

To get a background understanding lets read these information from the net. Its a Swedish site by the way so no chance of it been a �a rampant nationalistic, fanatic, turcic nonsense�! as Mangudai and Styrbiorn think of me when they cant think of anything better to say in face of the contention and facts I present. 

A Brief History of Runes in Europe:

"The earliest Runic inscriptions on stone are dated to the late 2nd century AD. The original Germanic Runic alphabet contained 24 letters. The first six letters of the alphabet spell out the word "FUTHARK", which is often used when referring to the Runes. When the Runes spread north into Scandinavia, some letters were dropped and the alphabet was simplified to only 16 letters. Sometime between 400 and 600 AD, three Germanic tribes (the Angles, the Saxons, and the Jutes) invaded Britain. Once in Britain, the Anglo-Saxon Runes were expanded to as many as 32 characters."

The Secrets Of The Runes:

"The source of the Germanic runes are uncertian. This kind of runes are called the "Germanic futhark" (from the first six runes in the alphabet), or the older futhark and consist of 24 different runes. Around 700 AD. the runes changed, probably following the change in language that had been. The use of runes also disappeared in many areas during this time or the centuries before, when the Germans became christened and started to use the Latin alphabet instead of the runes. Probably did the Christian priests forbid the use of the Germanic runes. Because they had a lot of religious meanings and where close related to the heathen Germanic religion. Anyway, the runes changed into what is called the younger futhark. Which consist of 16 different runesThe people who used this kind of runes where the inhabits of today's Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Iceland (which were colonised around 870-930 AD, mostly by people from Norway). Or in other words the Vikings". http://www.algonet.se/~fenri/runes.html

Ok now lets come back to our argument. Even though the scientific findings presented by Turgay K�r�m, Prof. Muharrem Ergin, Prof Gulchohra Mammadova, Dr. Sergey Lukiashko, Dr. Zaza Alexidze, Prof. J. Bjornar Storfjell, Prof. Thor Heyerdahl (plus many other scientiest), and my humble amateur mathematical reasoning clearly show striking results that could be taken to show that the Turkish inscriptions (of the Gok-Turk period) of C. Asia and N.European inscriptions known as early futhark alphabet as possibly having a same source of origin, all attempts are to falsify these findings.

One of the prominent arguments put forward by those involved in this thread so far is that the ancient futharks originate from anything else but other than Turkish scriptures, these namely been either Greek....or Latin(as used in the Roman Empire at the time)....or Phonecian....or ??? etc etc etc. However, this proposal is true partially, because in time the elder futharks went through evolution and resulted in the young futharks which further continued its evolution been effected by the above mentioned alphabets and/or their variations present at the time alphabets. But lets not forget we are talking of the elder futhark period and especially their origins and not the latter younger futhark period as they had lost their originality going through many evolutionary changes. 

Coming back to our argument, below is a comparison of all characters on the three inscription monuments accepted as the elder futhark sciptures, that is Kylver stone from Stanga (Gotland) Sweden, Mojbro stone from Uppland Sweden and Istaby stone from Blekinge Sweden. You can see their comparisons to Turkish (Gok-Turk) character equilavents and also how they stand in comparison to Greek, Latin and Phonecian alphabets that ther supposedly had derived from until recent findings.

Kylver:

Mojbro:

Istaby:

From what we can see graphically none of the alpahabets supposedly elder futharks had derived from have any affinity with the elder futhark characters. What makes it more compelling is that the elder futharks which are �supposedly� have derived from the others seem more �primitive� in shape then them! Anyway�. as clearly seen elder futhark characters (or germanic runes as called too) are perfect match with those of Turkish characters (Gok-Turk runes).

This physical sameness/similarities was called as been nothing more than nonesense and having no value by those opposing me in this thread. Also some suggested -even though they dont seem to believe it them selves and see the weakness of their argument- that maybe the Gok-Turk alphabet had deriven from elder futhark, of course this could all be easy taken as fact if we had not known what we know.

BUT ! like we have seen in the previous posts not only are the characters(runes) in two alphabets same, the elder futhark/germanic runes when attempted to been deciphered in Turkish rune alpahabet and laws success prevails even without changing the order of the characters, and taking them as they are written, falling perfectly correct with Gok-Turk alphabet and language system!

The elder futhark/germanic runes are decipherable in Turkish runes alphabet and its laws resulting in concise, precise meanings a result that hasnt been achieved when Scandinavians try to decipher them in  their way, the norse method cant be used to decipher the Turkish runes the Scandinavian way of deciphering elder-futhark inscriptions fails short, the Gok-Turk way of deciphering Turkish runes is a success AND the Gok-Turk language system works perfectly well on the elder futhark inscriptions!

With all respect I think calling these scientific findings �nonesense�  and seeing it of "no value" is a gross understatement and ignorance of extreme kind!

Like Mangudai reminded us by quoting from William of Occam � that the easiest explanation probably is the right one� he is right, the elder futhark alphabet not having any close similarities to what they allagedly have derived from, and having exact sameness and extreme similarities to Gok-Turk characters and been deciphered in its writing system is as SIMPLE an explanation can get!

Later again Mangudai reminded us �Extraordinary claims calls for extraordinary evidences..� Once again he is right, the decipherement of elder futharks in Gok-Turk alphabet that present concise and precise and relevant meanings is EXTRAORDINARY evidence as it can get!

Maybe the extraordinary thing here is how we close our eyes to simple facts and falsify them.

Anyway, thank you Mangudai for assisting me in my argument.

Btw Mangudai you said "Prove me wrong!", but I would like you to ask your self this "would I be comfortable with knowing that parts of my culture and heritage was built upon borrowed concepts from the Turks?" please ask your self that..and the answer?...no..you dont have to tell me, keep it a secret if you like, I want you to ask fror your self not me........nevertheless I can see it from the correspondence here perhaps more honestly than you might answer your self when you ask your self that question.

Best regards,

Tuman Yabgu

(PS: I have sourced amazing information from various scientists and universities reasearch that will shed more light on this matter, the common alphabet we can see used on the "elder futhark" monuments and Turkish monuments has an evolutionary period dating some 5000 years! Odin man of legend and man of controversy is found NOT to have been a Turk but a norseman who took many cultural aspects -including alphabet- from the Turks and established him self amoung Nordic people of Europe as a deity because of these....more to come)

The truth is out there!

"Borders? I have never seen one but heard they exist on the minds of most of people" Prof. Thor Heyerdahl

Edited by Tuman Yabgu

Hi everyone,

Although this post and the one before it by Yiannis is a bit off topic to what this thread is about, I will nevertheless respond in order to bring clarification and underline a complaint I think is well deserved.

Yiannis wrote "No need to resolve to cheap tricks" commenting about what I had written.

I find it interesting for you to interpret my questioning as a "cheap trick" while you have chosen to not comment to the many personal attacks and derogative labeling approaches that I received in the previous post that were anything but scientific. I hope this is just an ad-hoc occurance.

Now coming to the question I proposed Mangudai to ask himself which you commented as a "cheap trick" is actually anything but that, it is more a demonstration to show the hardships we humans have when intellectually comprehending and even worse accepting challanges and different thoughts about our self identity. An effective way to show how truth and reality can be clouded by feelings. A concise call to intellectual objectivity, and not a "cheap trick" as you name it.

As for me been asked a similar question? I would be comfortable AND honoured to have Scadinavian or any othher national heritage in me from A to Z just as I am of been Turkish heritage beacuse I see all nations as a small fragment to the miraculous thing humanity is.

I might be more open minded than some, but I do belive in the equality and value of all national heritages human kind has and make no national or class segregation.

Beacuse that is what I have been taught by others, that is what I learned by my self and more importantly that is how I get a better meaning to what life is.

Ok long romantic words but deemed necessary with your approach. Now what I would like to complain to you about is the closere of one of my posts which brought a completely new perspective on the issue of Cyprus conflict with a through analysis of the various political discourses used. The link to that post is http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=7404& ; ; ; ;PN=1

Sure there are many Cyprus related threads as Komnenos' reasoned to close it but the thread I had started was not on "who invaded who, who killed who" etc but rather a more indept look at the political discourses authorities have used on the Cyprus issue and what effect this had on this problematic islands near passed and current history.

I still hold the view that it would have been a distinct and a healthy thread on people discussing their historical thoughts and many forumers gathering a different perstpective to the near history of this deep rooted historical problem.

But then again remembering your comments on that thread I guess you arent the right person for me to complain about its closere as I would guess you are only happy with it been closed preventing the historical facts in that thread from been discussed. Who knows

Anyways, I hope I have cleared the misunderstanding you have gathered from my post and look forward to you scientifically contributing to this topic if you are interested.

With the hope of continuing to further dwel into the mysteries of futhark and Gok-Turk alphabets....

Best regards,

Tuman Yabgu

 

Edited by Tuman Yabgu

LoL Styrbiorn, this laugh sure goes well with the d�ner kebap I am having  right now on my lunch break

I will provide further posts some time in the next few days,

dont start "relaxing" because I'm not out of facts or to some nonesense yet...I got plenty more nonesense LoL

Time travel...hmm yeah I sometimes wish I was omnipresent, but then again nahhh I'd go crazy seeing all the illogical people not seeing truths, that would drive me mad, God sure is patient

...then again "he" is God!

Cheers for now...

Edited by Tuman Yabgu

Like Mangudai reminded us by quoting from William of Occam � that the easiest explanation probably is the right one� he is right, the elder futhark alphabet not having any close similarities to what they allagedly have derived from, and having exact sameness and extreme similarities to Gok-Turk characters and been deciphered in its writing system is as SIMPLE an explanation can get!

No it's not a simple explanation at all, it's highly complicated and far-fetched. As we have seen, the elder futhark do resemble northern italic writing, but has no similarities other than homomorpheus with the k�k-turk orkhon characters. The facts stand unmolested: An italic "T" correspond with a runic "T" and  so on, but a runic "T" have nothing in common with a orkhon "T" and vice versa - on the contrary a runic "O" looks like a orkhon "B" and  so on, which makes no sense. I can't believe I have to keep telling you this. Then, as Styrbiorn noted, there are numerous characters in the Orkhon-script - most of them actually - which doesn't have any equivilants in the elder futhark.

Then we have the time factor, whereas nothern italic writing clearly was in use before and at the time of the appearance of the elder futhark in the 1st century AD, we have no finds whatsoever of turkic runes from that period, but they appear centuries later. It's completely illogical, and therefore an unneccessarily complicated explanation. Applying Occam's razor - the simplest and thus most plausible explanation is that the elder futhark derrives from Roman italic script, and that the futhark and orkhon-runes have nothing to do with each other. Do you see the logic in this?

Later again Mangudai reminded us �Extraordinary claims calls for extraordinary evidences..� Once again he is right, the decipherement of elder futharks in Gok-Turk alphabet that present concise and precise and relevant meanings is EXTRAORDINARY evidence as it can get!

Since the translation is highly questionable I don't see any "evidences" whatsoever.

Btw Mangudai you said "Prove me wrong!", but I would like you to ask your self this "would I be comfortable with knowing that parts of my culture and heritage was built upon borrowed concepts from the Turks?" please ask your self that..and the answer?...no..you dont have to tell me, keep it a secret if you like, I want you to ask fror your self not me........nevertheless I can see it from the correspondence here perhaps more honestly than you might answer your self when you ask your self that question.

Just answer my question and prove me and Stybiorn wrong instead of playing cheap tricks to put the focus away from the real discussion 

Also, your arguments seem confused - sometimes you claim that the futhark and the turkic runes have a common origin, but now suddenly you change you mind and tell us that the futhark indeed is borrowed from a supposed ancient (1st century BC-1st c AD) turkic writing that we haven't yet seen of?

Yet you haven't manage to question this :

* The oldest runes yet found are from germanic northern Europe, not from the Caucasus or from turkic or proto-turkic cultures in present day Russia, Mongolia or Siberia.

* The germanic rune-characters on the other hand strongly resemble northern italic characters used in the Roman Empire at the time, with corresponding phonology - i.g. a runic "T" looks like an italic "T" and so on. Therefore, it's virtually verified that the first germanic runes (older futhark) have been designed by germanians in northern Europe or in Scandinavia with influences from Roman writing, sometime around the period 1st century B.C-1st century A.D

Prove me wrong!