Turks in the balkans???
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: Archaeology & Anthropology
Forum Discription: Topics on archaeology and anthropology
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=29135
Printed Date: 25-Apr-2024 at 16:05
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Turks in the balkans???
Posted By: OSMANLI2011
Subject: Turks in the balkans???
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2011 at 03:06
|
Hi me my self are from the former republic of macedonia, and my elders, im tolded that our ancestors are turkic, and it always has been me a big question which part of the worldmap did the turkic tribes came to the balkans? ------------- Nadi |
Replies:
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2011 at 03:31
|
read this first and think about!Migrations are eternal,have nor start point neither end one. http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24256 and make your personal search about this.Origin of name Turk is very suspicious and speculative in same time.Different terminology for same object,a bird common around the Mediterranean areas.We have at least one more country that have derivation of same name. |
Posted By: OSMANLI2011
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2011 at 04:37
|
I wrote wrongly.. i ment instead Macedonia, former republic of yugoslavia.. now after reading the article you sent, that you mean afterall are not turkish, epirus are linked with the albanian and teh greeks. One of our elders say that we our ancestors are so called " pomak" turks, but where did they came from, why did they came in the balkans? surely we speak turkish at home but we have a lot of common words used in the slavic language, and no one can explain it can be. ------------- Nadi |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2011 at 06:52
|
What did If they were there?Are you with Islam confession also?I believe people share same past,but history was written to separate them.Religions also.I know what are pomaks.Also Torbesh or Gorans. Once we shared same language and practice same religion i believe.My personal approach is:Stand in front of the mirror.Look the features of your face.You can find mongol,persian,"Egiptian" influence even there. During the Rome hate was basic tool that divides same people against themselves.It works until today. |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2011 at 08:09
|
Who did became minority all around Empire after fail of Rome!?!This premise explain all European and World history after? |
Posted By: OSMANLI2011
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2011 at 09:37
|
wow what a great answer. It may be possible, but still im wondering how we speak turkish if my ancestors are from Epirus. Its crazy like you mentioned how easy it is to manipulate people with history, ofcourse, its not important where you from but where you are going. but for my part its important because you get quit confused, some say that it was during the ottoman era but as my elders tooled me that they were in nowadays Macedonia(FYROM) before them, and thats why i investigate how the ended there. where are you from? ------------- Nadi |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2011 at 10:04
Near by You!?! So you already have readed that three rulers ruled together all known ancient world.They even used similar language."DeReDzE","PeNDzeRe",etc.are words (among lot of others)shared by lot of national official languages today on Balkans.Asia Minor is crossroad of civilizations similar with Macedonia, so called "Catena Mundi" ="The Link Between the Worlds".Allusions we share together, even if no one history do not work alone. |
Posted By: OSMANLI2011
Date Posted: 12-Mar-2011 at 08:31
|
So You are a Christian Bulgar? I have written that the the name " Bulgar" are originally from a turkic tribe in asia "Bolghar" The people migrated on todays Bulgaria, so there must be more than migrations from asia to the balkans. I know that its hard to define "pure blood" as whole balkans has been " dzorba" mix of etnich groups And i think that our differences are good so we can learn more from eachother. ------------- Nadi |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 12-Mar-2011 at 10:17
|
Bulgar comes from Vulgar...social class in Byzantine Empire.This one started with "beta".Than language of vulgars was recreated."Beta" was used for "B=Buki".So part of population of Balkans still use this name. Bulgars.This name means "uneducated","simple","raya"..ordinary people that served their masters, Romans!Their masters,called themselves Romeians or Romei...Just search further and we would be maybe relatives!?! |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 12-Mar-2011 at 10:44
| I was searching for truth and i found that "nadenaywemo" we were!Maybe you also! |
Posted By: ETL_Guy
Date Posted: 12-Mar-2011 at 15:54
|
Hello, You guys are right about European ethnic groups being all mixed up from ancient migrations, invasions, etc. What nation you are from is not a good indicator of your ancient heritage, especially in the central parts of Europe. Too many tribes and empires over the course of history came through there. You can get DNA tests that might help you narrow down your heritage. Or it may only lead to more questions and confusion. Here's a link to European Y-DNA results by country. http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml Even though my most distant known paternal ancestor came from England to North America in the 1600's, his DNA is Haplogroup G, which is only 1.5% of people in England. It is found in larger numbers in southern Europe, Caucasus, and Central Asia, and is strong in some Turkic and Persian speaking peoples. I also suspect the Roman Empire activities since they recruited a lot of eastern people and sent them as soldiers etc. to Britain, but there's no real way to know. It could have happened earlier, or later. Language is not always a good indicator either, since people get assimilated and learn new languages. They also change their surnames to match their new language. |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 12-Mar-2011 at 16:06
|
Yes and this was done by me also.R1A1A...My reasons to be Denaywe are based on piece of text on stone. |
Posted By: OSMANLI2011
Date Posted: 19-Mar-2011 at 09:58
|
If Bulgar come from vulgar so how can it be that there Bolgarians tribe in central asia speaking turkish? nadenaywemo?? whats that? I fully understand with assimilation and with the languange but you can identify by simply looking at people´s faces, Look at polish people, you see slavic faces and germanic faces in them. look at turkish people, you see persian and arabic kind faces but when you see in the balkans you cans see thousand type of faces.. ------------- Nadi |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 19-Mar-2011 at 10:25
|
Yes Byzantine Empire was complex society consisted of ancient population of conquered nations.We are talking about (1453a.c. to 30b.c) at least 1500 years of slavery/feudalism for those people.Their masters called them Vulgars.After the rebellions against their masters this was sacral name for them!Empires were melting pots of masses.Freedom was everlasting desire for all of them.Identification was social class:vugaris,(beta=Buki in slavic),bulgaris,bulgari,bolgari..etc...This do not have nothing with their ancient nationality.Info about people i belong to,consist inside,your "Turkey"...Misir...People of Pharaohs! |
Posted By: OSMANLI2011
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2011 at 13:46
|
It is very true it was a complex society and how devolpment and progress was made throught christianity but rulers got to gready and used the faith to control people and made they there true identity in the back. In the start of Byzantium the true goal was to spread christianity and make peace through east and the west empire and only way you can gather people are asimilimation.. Then the pope or ruler got to gready thinking about his own wealth when his people was getting poor and then automaticly people started to focus on there own identity.. saying im a albanian im macedonian and whatever and that caused the fall of the byzantium empire like a story was tooled then later on ww1 that 2 brothere got 2 different nationalities.. one was macedonian other was bulgarian so it is hard now to know what you really are and second Ottoman empire had sorted this out regarding assimilation, they had planned the collaps of byzantium one took rumeli ( roman part) and ( i-stan-bul) which means to the city on old greek7turkish languange... They wanted to minimize the rebelions and by doing that they had dervishes and dönmehler or TORBESH maybe you know who where slavic converts. Most of them islamize the balkans and most of them mariied to turks which gavea new race REMEMBER people from balkans where from the arian race, blue eyed and blond haired and it proven by dna seen it in Discovery. The turks where black eyed and dark skinned, and one man livin in the byzantium era wrote that they saw the turks as beast, different coloured. Take for instance Serbia... it os proven that through dna that 6 out of 10 had ottoman genes when i write ottoman because there were also arabs and persian s in there army. When it comes to bulgaria it is divede because it is a real CORBA.. You can define which are turk or Bulgarian.... becaus it has been forced from both sides.. once turks did turkishized bulgarian and then did bulgarians bulgarized the turks.. Turks are not arabs if it thats you claim.. They just have been arabized by the centuries... ------------- Nadi |
Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2011 at 05:09
|
of course, there were assimilasions in the past but also there were some forced immigrations from anatolia too. After the Karamanid dynasty was conqured by Ottoman, many people forced to immigration to Balkans. some turks were placed Skopje(üsküp) and Gostivar http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makedonyadaki_T%C3%BCrkler - http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makedonya'daki_Türkler (turkish) i am turkish guy whose family have come from central bulgaria on the paternal side. according to family history, they went there from Karamanid dynasty for pomak look at here http://www.pomak.eu/"> http://www.pomak.eu/  |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2011 at 00:44
|
Most possible variant would have been your ancestors just have changed their religion(but they were born natives)!Do you know meaning of star and crescent on your flag today?!?This sign was ideology those days. First in usage was during Perseus,last king of Macedon!?! |
Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2011 at 16:22
|
the figures of crescent and star are older than all ancient greek culture. Crescent is realited with moon cult in mesopotamia (check vikipedia). however star was added on turkish flag very lately, so i am not sure about it. |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2011 at 00:33
|
Moon Crescent was symbol in Egypt(Part of Osiris body).Star was symbol in Persia(evening star Venus, Inanna,Ishtar).Persia and Egypt were enemies.But after Alexander had conquered most of ancient world he tried idea for "one nation" as it looks now.Many rulers after would have copied&pasted the same idea. |
Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2011 at 08:02
|
Although true or not true, yours is a pretty store (medenaywe). I love it so I will use it. but also we should remember that, people could have lost this meaning and gave another meaning to these symbols too or people could have found same meaning in the same time, in different places. Also it is really interesting moon is female in greece, mesopotamia cultures, but it is male in turkic and ancient eygpt cultures. |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2011 at 08:34
|
Read this about the moon:(Very scientific facts we have there!) http://www.archive.org/stream/TheLunarContextOfTheHekatFractions/Abstract5#page/n3/mode/2up - http://www.archive.org/stream/TheLunarContextOfTheHekatFractions/Abstract5#page/n3/mode/2up here your bird(Turkey?) people came from in ancient times,at least part of them!  |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 22-Aug-2011 at 23:36
I had never heard anything like this. "Bulgar" came with the Old Bulgars, who came from Volga Bulgaria, here on the map: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db/Map_of_Old_Great_Bulgaria.svg"> Supposedly this word came from the Mongolic "bulgarac", meaning "to split off", hence "the separated tribe" - because one tribe with Kubrat as a leader left and went West, eventually crossing the Danube in 7th century AD. The word has nothing to do with "vulgar"; btw, "vulgaris" in Latin means "common", not with a negative connotation. ------------- |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 22-Aug-2011 at 23:48
AFAIK the "pomaks" are the forcefully converted to Islam Balkan people. They are not Turks by ethnicity, by genetics; they accepted Islam and Turkish as language to make their lives better in the Ottoman Empire. There are many Pomaks in Bulgaria. So, the Pomaks didn't come to the Balkans, there were already here, the Turks came and conquered the Balkans and whoever they converted became a Pomak. I suppose the Pomaks living now in Bulgaria are converted Bulgarians, those living in Macedonia are converted Macedonians, those living in Greece are converted Greeks, etc. This is a genetic research on Greek Pomaks: "...HbO-Arab mutation originated in the Pomak population of Greek Thrace HbO-Arab emerged about 2,000 years on a rare haplotype, characteristic of the Greek Pomaks. Its frequency increased as a consequence of high genetic drift within this population, and it was dispersed throughout the Mediterranean basin and Middle East with minor variations of its haplotypic pattern. haematologica 2005; 90:255-257 (http://www.haematologica.org/journal/2005/2/255.html)..."http://www.haematologica-thj.org /cgi/reprint/90/2/255.pdf From which what I gather /if I understood it right, that is/ is that they are Greeks with a little bit of Arab mixture, due to mixed marriages, I suppose. ------------- |
Posted By: OSMANLI2011
Date Posted: 27-Aug-2011 at 05:00
|
OLLIOS: Im very aware of the karamanogulu dynasty and have written about the whole phase of karamanid empire. It is my first thought that we possibly are derived from there but a lot of data has been lost about the migration from anatolia to the balkans regarding the karamanids, if you possibly can find some books regarding karamanids i would apreciate. When speaking migration to macedonia/ bulgaria it is hard to tell, because there have been turkic migrations on several centeruries, first the huns, Avars, karamanids, then the kumans and last the ottomans. Just remember that anatolia was vast land without population in the heart of anatolia, the migration to anatolia prehappend when the collaps of Chengiz khans klans collaps, people were frightened about the caos the Chengiz khan made in central asia so people from Turkistan, Khazak, nowadays Iran migrated to turkey. So how many decentens from those dynasties are left? almost none, by asimillation and nationalism may people forget there true identity. Nobody asks to them selfs" what a hack does turks do in the balkans when its slavic dominated area" well thats the answer" total migration mixed with asimillation" but theres no investagators to take this big question up because it can raise other questions like" before creation og SFR" social federation yugoslavia" there livede 2 million turks only in macedonia, most of them was forced to migrate back to turkey, if they had stayed in macedonia, macedonia had ben a turkish republic, same with bulgaria, greece but not only balkans, there was turks in early german states, look at this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MKWom0ujLc quarter of the population of the german states were turks of origin, thats means just of few decade it had been af turkish states ------------- Nadi |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 27-Aug-2011 at 15:02
There were "people exchange"projects under covered of Western world&Russia those days!Mostly after Balkans wars and WW2.Lot of humans sufferings and war disasters.In Balkans wars relatives died cause of "wrong written" front line,fought one another.Balkan have always been place with invented virtual version of false history. |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 27-Aug-2011 at 15:20
The Avars weren't Turkic, but either Mongoloid, either Caucasian, or mixed. As for the Huns, apart of them being Central-Asiatic, I'm not sure what they were; supposedly their language was Turkic, but I'm still to be convinced in that; the Old Bulgars were Central-Asiatic too, but they weren't Turkic. Cumans weren't Turkic either, they were Caucasians http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuman_people - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuman_people I'm not aware of any Turkic migrations to the Balkans prior to the Ottoman conquest. As for a quarter of the population in the German states being Turkic in origin, can you give me some sources on that, without counting the Huns? ------------- |
Posted By: eaglecap
Date Posted: 29-Aug-2011 at 15:21
I am not sure about your ancestry but most likely it is mixed like everyone in the Balkans. I know the Bulgars were originally Turkic but over time they mixed with the Slavic majority and other pre-existing groups. I would say that the majority of people with Turkic ancestry probably came with the Ottoman Turks. The Ottoman's occupied that region for a long time. I would venture to say that your ancestors are more than just the Turkic tribes from Asia. As far as I know the original Turkic tribes came from north of China near Mongolia and they were related ethnically to the Mongolians. It seems logical that as they migrated west the intermixed with other groups such as the Slavs, Persians and others. I saw many faces in Turkiye when I was there. I think if you yahoo or Google it you will find a lot of information about the Turkic tribes. ------------- Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 29-Aug-2011 at 19:20
The theory that the Bulgars were Turks is questioned now by DNA results: "...Bulgarian genes are very close to those of people living in the Pamir region, the scientific expedition Tangra concludes. The explorers collected genetic samples from residents of Afghanistan and Tajikistan, and the DNA analysis had proved Bulgarians came from Pamir not from western Siberia as previously believed. Slavyan Stoylov, member of the expedition, says the DNA proof refutes three main theories, generations of Bulgarians had studied in school – that Bulgarian people are genetically very diverse; that they came from western Siberia, and that they are very close to Slaves. The expert-explorers further point out the theory of the Huns' origin of Bulgarians from Siberia and Altai had been adopted by official history only on the basis of some hypothesis, but add the DNA analysis from Pamir is in an initial stage and there is a need for more and larger-scale studies. [...]..."http://thearchaeologicalbox.com/en/news/dna-analysis-reveals-pamir-origin-bulgarians Not enough is left from the proto-Bulgarian language to classify it, and it used to be accepted that was a Turkic language because of 3 /to my best knowledge/ Turkic words that were used in in Bulgarian epigraphy, but now this is questioned too. I personally grew up with the hypothesis that the Bulgars were Turkic people, but based on what I see now I don't dare use a more specific definition than "Central Asians". There are studies on the net about that, but lamentably they are in Bulgarian, so it won't do any good to post links to them. ------------- |
Posted By: OSMANLI2011
Date Posted: 12-Mar-2014 at 03:41
|
Hi,
Do you know if there any non-turkish sources about karamanid empire? I will really apreciate. I will make an investigation about this and will write a book about this on Danish, I will thank you iin my book if you can provide me some information? ------------- Nadi |