Final topic about turkish origins

A short reply to the off topic subject: Both the names, Hellene and Grekos come from mythology. Hellene was the son of Deukalion and Pyrrha (the "first" couple) and Grekos was their grand-son. Greeks used both names in their history, after the foundation of the Greek state in the 19th century, there was a debate, and finally Hellene, and Hellas was settled upon.

As for Konstantinoupoli; in Turkish Xanthi and Komotini are still called Iskeche and Gumulcine and Alexandroupoli is called Dedeagac; so I don't think it's a big issue. While speaking Greek people use the name Konstantinoupoli, just like when people speak Turkish and refer to Xanthi, they say Iskeche. Best to keep in mind that the name Konstantinoupoli (rather Konstantiniyye) was only officially changed in 1930 to Istanbul.

Sorry for the off-topic intrusion, just wanted to clear up a few things. Actually, the use of the name Hellene has a very interesting past, but it would take too long to talk about it!

Now, in order to get a bit on-topic, here's my take on the ethnicity of Turkish people: DNA studies are still very young, I think it's best not to take them as scripture at this point, but they give very good ideas too. One thing is for certain, Asia Minor is a mixing point, and has been one since prehistorical times, not just recently. We know that there were many groups living under the Byzantine Empire, who were not "Greeks"; but that's the whole point about an Empire, it's not a Nation State, a Nation State is the creation of 19th century. When the Ottoman Empire took over, they took over these populations also. Today we don't have Empires as in the past and we look at things through the Nation State point of view; which doesn't work too well with such mixed populations, I think. The point is, the people of Turkey, whatever their ethnic background, are Turkish nationals. It's pointless to try to prove one is more Turkic than the other, it would get you nowhere. All of these people are a part of the Turkish State now, and no one group has precedence over the other.


Edited by Sirona - 25-Sep-2006 at 03:01

Originally posted by perikles And it is not nationalism. After all Istanbul is Greek name also. But i like Konstaninoupoli most. I leaned it that way. This is the real name. It is just the Turks that they change everything they found in the region. It is their policy. The whole world call us Greece they call us Yunan. What can i say?

What is the nonsense theory?

Originally posted by perikles After all Istanbul is Greek name also. But i like Konstaninoupoli most.

http://www.joshuaproject.net/ethne.php?es=6
(there is some errors in this infos,it show tatars,kirgizs,azeris etc who from T�rkic etnicity as minorities...)

And it is not nationalism. After all Istanbul is Greek name also. But i like Konstaninoupoli most. I leaned it that way. This is the real name. It is just the Turks that they change everything they found in the region. It is their policy. The whole world call us Greece they call us Yunan. What can i say?

Originally posted by perikles Nationalism is to love your country. It is not bad to love your country. .   Anyway. I ve been to Turkey several times. From KOnstantinoupoli to Erzerum and Diyarbakir. There are many races. Some looks like Europeans , some other like Mongols etc. They all live peacefully. They have a Turkic conciouness and that is that counts.   Everyone (Turk)that don't consider Turks Holy is against your country. What kind of way of thinking is that? You know in which century you live? You should escape from that rubbish way of thinking and start thinging how you make your country a republic, peacefull and strong (economy) and make your life better. You have potentials but... Turks origin is well known that are from Mongolia

Originally posted by mamikon Because they think their ethnicity is the best in any shape or form, that it is supreme and more important than any other ethnicities. Stupid isnt it...?

I think you have no idea about what these people think.

First of all, these people are racially very diverse, so they can be anything else but not racist.

Seconly, they did have glorious history, they are always proud of that, and they have this right as any other ethniticities do.

Tirdly, this type of topic is common because some other so called racially pure groups raise it, and try to seperate them, or distort their history.

Fourtly, this other sides don't know anything about central asia historically, what type of people lived there, what is the difference between the different groups there so on.

Now let's see who is stupid?


    

<<bastards>>.Only Hitler and Nazi racists theory about Aryan race mixed up  the blood and they were trying to find clean blood .

The issue is to KNOW the your really roots.
Not to try persuade yourself that your roots are what you want to have. There is no same to admit your (not you particular generally speaking) real roots. I ahve personal opinions for the turkish roots. There no need for complex anthropological tests and histories loosing among centuries. Sometimes you have to watch the characteristics of one tribe comparing with one another. I don't want to say my opinion because i am going to be called racist. I just wanted to point out this notification