Trojan Civilization

[Unome]

Who were the Trojans and what was their civilization?

I learned that Trojans were beaten by Greeks at Troy; then the Trojan people were displaced and later became Roman people. Is this true?

[Pjeter Pan]

No it's all myth

[justme]

Who were the Trojans and what was their civilization?

I learned that Trojans were beaten by Greeks at Troy; then the Trojan people were displaced and later became Roman people. Is this true?
It's complicated.. Some say they became romanized after they went to present day Italy..
Others say there is also evidence they seeked refuge and shelter in Illyria, a city named Butrint, which looks identical to Troy...it's also sometimes known as "Little Troy"

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Who were the Trojans and what was their civilization?

I learned that Trojans were beaten by Greeks at Troy; then the Trojan people were displaced and later became Roman people. Is this true?

Probably so. After bronze age collapse anatolia was completely wrecked and that's when the migration period started.

[Anglojew]

Who were the Trojans and what was their civilization?

I learned that Trojans were beaten by Greeks at Troy; then the Trojan people were displaced and later became Roman people. Is this true?

Yes. This is true to an extent. Trojan refugees founded Rome.

[Anglojew]

In Greco-Roman mythology, Aeneas (/ɪˈniːəs/; Greek: Αἰνείας, Aineías, possibly derived from Greek αἰνή meaning "praise") was a Trojan hero, the son of the prince Anchises and the goddess Aphrodite (Venus). His father was the second cousin of King Priam of Troy, making Aeneas Priam's second cousin, once removed. He is a character in Greek mythology and is mentioned in Homer's Iliad, and receives full treatment in Roman mythology as the legendary founder of what would become Ancient Rome, most extensively in Virgil's Aeneid. He became the first true hero of Rome.

Aeneas had an extensive family tree. His wet-nurse was Caieta, and he is the father of Ascanius with Creusa, and of Silvius with Lavinia. Ascanius, also known as Iulus (or Julius), founded Alba Longa and was the first in a long series of kings. According to the mythology outlined by Virgil in the Aeneid, Romulus and Remus were both descendants of Aeneas through their mother Rhea Silvia, making Aeneas progenitor of the Roman people. Some early sources call him their father or grandfather, but considering the commonly accepted dates of the fall of Troy (1184 BCE) and the founding of Rome (753 BCE), this seems unlikely. The Julian family of Rome, most notably Julius Cæsar and Augustus, traced their lineage to Ascanius and Aeneas, thus to the goddess Aphrodite. Through the Julians, the Palemonids make this claim. The legendary kings of Britain trace their family through a grandson of Aeneas, Brutus.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeneas

Here are various ways (at least 5) the Queen is descended from the Julians and therefore from Aeneas and the ancient Trojans;

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread779618/pg1
http://www.angelfire.com/ego/et_deo/empire2britain.wps.htm

[louisk]

What language did the trojans speak? was it greek?

[aherne]

Yes. This is true to an extent. Trojan refugees founded Rome.
This legend perhaps reminded the migration of Etruscans from Aegean basin, which occurred at dawn of Western history (cca 900BC). However, its main goal was to place Rome, a fledgling civilization into Greek cultural sphere...

[Anglojew]

This legend perhaps reminded the migration of Etruscans from Aegean basin, which occurred at dawn of Western history (cca 900BC). However, its main goal was to place Rome, a fledgling civilization into Greek cultural sphere...

They thought Troy was a legend itself until Schliemann found. Latin people (Roman) were different from Etruscans;


According to the Roman foundation myth as relayed by Livy, the Etruscans, led by King Mezentius allied with King Turnus of the Rutuli, attacked the Latins and the exiled Trojans, led by Latinus and Aeneas respectively. The Latins and Trojans were victorious, although Aeneas was killed in the battle. Peace was afterwards concluded on the basis that the river Tiber would be the common boundary between the Etruscans and the Latins.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman-Etruscan_Wars

[Peyrol]

Who were the Trojans and what was their civilization?

I learned that Trojans were beaten by Greeks at Troy; then the Trojan people were displaced and later became Roman people. Is this true?

That's the legend but isn't proved.

It's proved, on the other hand, the connection between wilusan (troian) language and etruscan/rhaetian language:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrrhenian_languages

[Hoca]

Etruscans/Trojans were basically from Turkic stock:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jun/18/italy.johnhooper

[aherne]

They thought Troy was a legend itself until Schliemann found. Latin people (Roman) were different from Etruscans;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman-Etruscan_Wars
Neither Romans nor Greeks thought it was a legend and no sane person would have ever believed the story was fabricated. Initially, Rome's population was multilingual and multiethnic, incorporating an Etruscan minority. The very name of Rome is Etruscan.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Only reason it's not considered historical fact was until recently troy was considered a myth. But I see it as close to 100% reliable. Troy would have been closer to their times than rome is to us.


Etruscans/Trojans were basically from Turkic stock:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jun/18/italy.johnhooper

Etruscans were similar to ethnic swiss of today, from lichtenstein. G is was main y-dna clade. So they are not turkic, and also they have probably been in area a very long time.

[Rudel]

Yes. This is true to an extent. Trojan refugees founded Rome.
Rome was as much founded by Trojans as Paris was by Chinese. Taking the word of Roman archaic myths of origins makes no sense. Read Georges Dumézil and the likes for further information.

What was the culture in Troy at the time of the wars described (with a heavy coating of myths) by Homer is very shady, and whatever it might have been it wasn't exclusive to Troy.

[Scandalf]

I'm waiting for "BasqueAtlantide" to pop up somewhere in this thread...

[Anglojew]

Etruscans/Trojans were basically from Turkic stock:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jun/18/italy.johnhooper

Can you read? The article doe not say they were Turkic. It says there related to modern day Turkish people because Turkish people remain mostly Anatolian with small Turkic ancestry. It is the Anatolian they're related to not the Turkic. Turkic people are unrelated which is the reason the Etruscans don't match Turkic populations with no Anatolian admixture eg in Central Asia.

The article also says they're related to people from a Greek Island.

[Hoca]

Can you read? The article doe not say they were Turkic. It says there related to modern day Turkish people because Turkish people remain mostly Anatolian with small Turkic ancestry. It is the Anatolian they're related to not the Turkic. Turkic people are unrelated which is the reason the Etruscans don't match Turkic populations with no Anatolian admixture eg in Central Asia.

The article also says they're related to people from a Greek Island.That is speculation. There is a reason ONLY Turks have identical DNA to Estruscans/Trojans. They were Asiatic peoples. Not European peoples. Otherwise Europeans would cluster with Trojans/Etruscans. They do not. Turks are the only people who are related to Trojans/Etruscans. This is not speculation. This is scientific work done by Italian University.

[louisk]

There were no turks at that time how could etruscans be turkic LOL.

[Hoca]

There were no turks at that time how could etruscans be turkic LOL.

They were proto-Turks. Similar language, similar genetics, similar culture. For example the Etruscan wolf myth is similar to the Grey wolf myth. Also if you look at Etruscans painting/statues you can see they have asiatic eyes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Etruscan_sarcophagus.jpg

[Peyrol]

They were proto-Turks. Similar language, similar genetics, similar culture. For example the Etruscan wolf myth is similar to the Grey wolf myth. Also if you look at Etruscans painting/statues you can see they have asiatic eyes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Etruscan_sarcophagus.jpg


I made a thread about etruscans, with their paints and their language some times ago:


do you see any similarity with modern turk?

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?60289-Etrurian-Etruscans&highlight=etrurians

[Anglojew]

Only reason it's not considered historical fact was until recently troy was considered a myth. But I see it as close to 100% reliable. Troy would have been closer to their times than rome is to us.



Etruscans were similar to ethnic swiss of today, from lichtenstein. G is was main y-dna clade. So they are not turkic, and also they have probably been in area a very long time.

Great points.

[Anglojew]

That is speculation. There is a reason ONLY Turks have identical DNA to Estruscans/Trojans. They were Asiatic peoples. Not European peoples. Otherwise Europeans would cluster with Trojans/Etruscans. They do not. Turks are the only people who are related to Trojans/Etruscans. This is not speculation. This is scientific work done by Italian University.

Turks from Turkey not from Central Asia for a reason.

I really wonder about the shortcomings of the Turkish education system when so many Turks fail to grasp relatively basic concepts.

[Anglojew]

They were proto-Turks. Similar language, similar genetics, similar culture. For example the Etruscan wolf myth is similar to the Grey wolf myth. Also if you look at Etruscans painting/statues you can see they have asiatic eyes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Etruscan_sarcophagus.jpg

Almost every northern country has Wolf myths.

They don't look Asiatic and beside we don't know how realistic these sculpture are anyway.

Their DNA doesn't match Turkic populations only the areas near Troy that Turks later colonized and Turkified.

[Hoca]

It is obvious you are jealous. They didn't test central-Asian populations, they only tested European peoples and Turks. Guess who was closer? The Turks. DNA doesn't lie. If they test Central-Asian Turkics they would be close to Etruscans too. I mean look at that statue especially the eyes..

[Anglojew]

It is obvious you are jealous. They didn't test central-Asian populations, they only tested European peoples and Turks. Guess who was closer? The Turks. DNA doesn't lie. If they test Central-Asian Turkics they would be close to Etruscans too. I mean look at that statue especially the eyes..

How am I jealous? I have a Turkic haplogroup. I bet you don't though because its unlikely you have much real Turkic ancestry.


Are you really saying no one's genetically tested Central Asians?

They match present day Anatolian populations because they were related to ancient Anatolian populations eg Troy. This is the continuity. It has noting to do with Turkic people other than they took over the area a few hundred years ago.

[Peyrol]

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?60289-Etrurian-Etruscans&highlight=etrurians

[Hoca]

How am I jealous? I have a Turkic haplogroup. I bet you don't though because its unlikely you have much real Turkic ancestry.


Are you really saying no one's genetically tested Central Asians?

They match present day Anatolian populations because they were related to ancient Anatolian populations eg Troy. This is the continuity. It has noting to do with Turkic people other than they took over the area a few hundred years ago.
You have Turkic haplogroup because of Khazars who were Turkic people with Judaism as religion. Etruscans/Trojans were Nativa Anatolian people but they came from Central-Asia too. That is why they are not related to Europeans or Middle-easterners such as Persians who are native.

[Hoca]

DNA doesn't lie:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/200...aly.johnhooper

"The DNA samples from Murlo and Volterra are much more highly correlated to those of the eastern peoples than to those of the other inhabitants of [Italy]," said Alberto Piazza of the University of Turin, who presented the research. "One particular genetic variant, found in the samples from Murlo, was shared only with people from Turkey."

[Anglojew]

You have Turkic haplogroup because of Khazars who were Turkic people with Judaism as religion. Etruscans/Trojans were Nativa Anatolian people but they came from Central-Asia too. That is why they are not related to Europeans or Middle-easterners such as Persians who are native.

I think it's Scythian not Khazar ancestry.

[Peyrol]

DNA doesn't lie:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/200...aly.johnhooper

"The DNA samples from Murlo and Volterra are much more highly correlated to those of the eastern peoples than to those of the other inhabitants of ," said [I]Alberto Piazza of the University of Turin, who presented the research. "One particular genetic variant, found in the samples from Murlo, was shared only with people from Turkey."


Lol...i know this guy in real life...amazing.

[Scandalf]

How am I jealous? I have a Turkic haplogroup. I bet you don't though because its unlikely you have much real Turkic ancestry.


Are you really saying no one's genetically tested Central Asians?

They match present day Anatolian populations because they were related to ancient Anatolian populations eg Troy. This is the continuity. It has noting to do with Turkic people other than they took over the area a few hundred years ago.

You're both WRONG!

"The newest mtDNA study confirms that the Etruscans were not related substantially to the Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherer populations of Europe, and also showed no similarities to populations in the Near East. Another earlier DNA study performed in Italy however, partly gave credence to the theory of Herodotus, as the results showed 11 minor mitochondrial DNA lineages extracted from different Etruscan remains occur nowhere else in Europe, and are shared only with Near East people.
The latter hypothesis gives credence to the main hypotheses which state they are indigenous - probably stemming from the Villanovan culture or from the Near East."

Ok, it's from Wikipedia, but I skimmed through the most recent studies and it seems they (Etrurians) were indigenous...

[Peyrol]

No they aren't indigenous. I don't believe in this possibility, especially after having studied pre-roman italian history.

[Hoca]

Wikipedia.......... :picard2: ........... the domain of the butt hurt and jealous. If there is no reliable source from reliable university it is non-information.

[Scholarios]

Yes. This is true to an extent. Trojan refugees founded Rome.

I doubt there is any truth to this. It was a myth used by Roman elite to establish the antiquity of their race- as the Brits later used the same myth to establish their "Romanity"

Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome (http://books.google.co.kr/books?id=B0B1lebMbWwC&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=trojan+roman+connection&source=bl&ots=OwC6XLSTUx&sig=LyrG7Lol4SIhLTXjdpg0weodQzw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cwCGUtTLNMLEkwXXz4GIDw&ved=0CGIQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=trojan%20roman%20connection&f=false)

[Peyrol]

Rome's foundation was etruscan.

[Hoca]

Rome's foundation was etruscan.
That is why they don't want to accep the truth.

[Scipio Africanus]

Secondo me aveva ragione Dionisio riguardo agli Etruschi,erano nativi della penisola

[Hoca]

"Year 1995: After a week-long meeting in Italy (Florence), Prof. Dr. Giovannangelo Camporeale, one of the most authoritative scientists regarding Etruscan studies, agreed to the fact that ancient Etruscan insriptions were written in Turkic tounge." (Prof. Dr. Turgay Tüfekçioğlu, Etruscans, Orkun Publishing)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"That the Etruscans were Turanians, and that they belonged to the North Turanian or Altaic branch of the Turanian stem, cannot be denied." (Victoria Institute (Great Britain), Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, Or Philosophical Society of Great Britain, Band 10, BiblioBazaar, 2009, p.200)

"Working with linguistic evidence and etymological "method", Georgiev asserts that the Etruscans were none other than the Trojans, the legendary founders of Rome." (Philip Baldi, The foundations of Latin, Walter de Gruyter, 2002, p.111)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Etruscans originated from Central Asia. Anatolia was home to Etruscans at least in 5000-6000 B.C., and later in 3500 B.C. to the Sumerians and the Cimmerians in later periods. The Etruscans migrated over the Caspian Sea and later arrived to Insburg, Austria. Before Etruscans settled to Italy, they lived in the area of Glozel (France) in 4000 B.C. In 1500 B.C. the Etruscans arrived to the Po Valley in northern Italy. From there they settled to Etruria (Toskana).

In 743 B.C. Rome was established by "Romulus" (in Turkic: 'People of Rome'). This plot is concering the foundation of Rome, similar to the Genesis of Altaic Peoples from Central Asia (see: Asena-Legend/Ergenekon Legend). The highly civilized Etruscans dominated from the Po Valley to the northern part of todays Rome.

In 600 B.C. the power of Etruscans reached their climax until the Etruscan dominance ended in 100 B.C. They neglect their language, got assimilated by Celtic and Latin peoples, and finally lost their power to their Latin rivals, who were called "Barbarians" by the Etruscans.

[Hoca]

"It should also be noted that all these divinity names such as "Sais, Zeus, Ais, and Ayas or Ak Ayas, represent the Sky God in the Pelasgian, Etruscan, Hellenic and Turkic Saka and Central Asiatic Turkic shaman cultures. The name of this divinity must have been brought all the way from Central Asia to the Balkans and Mediterranean coasts by the Turkic speaking SAKA peoples and their ancestors." (Polat Kaya, Reading of the Lemnos Island Inscription, A preliminary report, 1997)

It is also worth mentioning that modern Tuva, a Turanian people, call their shamanic protector spirits érénï - a cognate term for the ancient Hellenic erinnyes, which were dark "Fury" spirits that punished and pursued sinners (see: "Shamanism" by Mircea Eliade, p.498)

"Unless a great substratum of the inhabitants of Greece belonged to the Turanian family, their religion, like their language, ought to have presented a much closer affinity to the earlier sriptures of the Aryan race than we find to be the case. The curious anthropic mythology of the Grecian Pantheon seems only explicable on the assumption of a petential Turanian element on the population, [...]." (James Fergusson, Tree and serpent worship, or, Illustrations of mythology and art in India in the first and fourth centuries after Christ: from the sculptures of the Buddhist topes at Sanchi and Amravati, Asian Educational Services, 2004, Reprint London 1873 edn., p.13)

[Hoca]

And in 2007 the genetic link between Etruscan/Trojan and Turks were confirmed by Italian Univeristy.

[Peyrol]

Secondo me aveva ragione Dionisio riguardo agli Etruschi,erano nativi della penisola

No i don't think this.
Their language wasn't indoeuropean and was related with ancient Rhaetian (not modern rhaeto-romance languages as forlan or ladin, obviously), Lemnians and Wilusians (Trojan).
Their culture was totally unknown in the Peninsula, it's impossible they developed from vollanovians or even from the celts of North Italy, which arrived later (even if there were some mixing in the Emilia, obviously).

[Hoca]

Fuck I just realized that: "Romulus" means from Rome in Turkish. "Romu"- is rome and -lu in Turkish means "from".

[Anglojew]

You're both WRONG!

"The newest mtDNA study confirms that the Etruscans were not related substantially to the Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherer populations of Europe, and also showed no similarities to populations in the Near East. Another earlier DNA study performed in Italy however, partly gave credence to the theory of Herodotus, as the results showed 11 minor mitochondrial DNA lineages extracted from different Etruscan remains occur nowhere else in Europe, and are shared only with Near East people.
The latter hypothesis gives credence to the main hypotheses which state they are indigenous - probably stemming from the Villanovan culture or from the Near East."

Ok, it's from Wikipedia, but I skimmed through the most recent studies and it seems they (Etrurians) were indigenous...

Newsflash; Anatalia is in the Middle East

[Scipio Africanus]

No i don't think this.
Their language wasn't indoeuropean and was related with ancient Rhaetian (not modern rhaeto-romance languages as forlan or ladin, obviously), Lemnians and Wilusians (Trojan).
Their culture was totally unknown in the Peninsula, it's impossible they developed from vollanovians or even from the celts of North Italy, which arrived later (even if there were some mixing in the Emilia, obviously).

La lingua non era indoeuropea ma questo non vuol dire che non potevano essere autoctoni,l'Etrusco è considerata una lingua isolata.
Per quanto riguarda Lemno è più probabile che sia stata colonizzata dagli Etruschi che altro,erano molto attivi in quelle zone.
Il Retico,gli Etruschi colonizzarono la pianura Padana e quando i Galli scesero dal nord separarono la parte più settentrionale dell'Etruria Padana dall' Etruria,questo potrebbe spiegare la somiglianza tra le due lingue. Gli ultimi studi di Barbujani sembrerebbero dare ragione a Dionisio.
Scrivo in Italiano perché in Inglese sarebbe un problema,se vuoi possiamo scambiarci qualche idea in pm.

[Anglojew]

Fuck I just realized that: "Romulus" means from Rome in Turkish. "Romu"- is rome and -lu in Turkish means "from"..

What about the "s?"

Meaning of Romulus: "citizen of Rome"

[Peyrol]

La lingua non era indoeuropea ma questo non vuol dire che non potevano essere autoctoni,l'Etrusco è considerata una lingua isolata.
Per quanto riguarda Lemno è più probabile che sia stata colonizzata dagli Etruschi che altro,erano molto attivi in quelle zone.
Il Retico,gli Etruschi colonizzarono la pianura Padana e quando i Galli scesero dal nord separarono la parte più settentrionale dell'Etruria Padana dall' Etruria,questo potrebbe spiegare la somiglianza tra le due lingue. Gli ultimi studi di Barbujani sembrerebbero dare ragione a Dionisio.
Scrivo in Italiano perché in Inglese sarebbe un problema,se vuoi possiamo scambiarci qualche idea in pm.

Usa pure il mio vecchio thread sugli ettruschi che ho linkato in questa discussione, oppure se preferisci l'italiano aprine uno nuovo in sezione it.

[Scholarios]

"]Year 1995: After a week-long meeting in Italy (Florence), Prof. Dr. Giovannangelo Camporeale, one of the most authoritative scientists regarding Etruscan studies, agreed to the fact that ancient Etruscan insriptions were written in Turkic tounge." (Prof. Dr. Turgay Tüfekçioğlu, Etruscans, Orkun Publishing)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"That the Etruscans were Turanians, and that they belonged to the North Turanian or Altaic branch of the Turanian stem, cannot be denied." (Victoria Institute (Great Britain), Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, Or Philosophical Society of Great Britain, Band 10, BiblioBazaar, 2009, p.200)
.


http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/arts/2007/05/17/office460.jpg

[Anglojew]

"Year 1995: After a week-long meeting in Italy (Florence), Prof. Dr. Giovannangelo Camporeale, one of the most authoritative scientists regarding Etruscan studies, agreed to the fact that ancient Etruscan insriptions were written in Turkic tounge." (Prof. Dr. Turgay Tüfekçioğlu, Etruscans, Orkun Publishing)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"That the Etruscans were Turanians, and that they belonged to the North Turanian or Altaic branch of the Turanian stem, cannot be denied." (Victoria Iinstitute (Great Britain), Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, Or Philosophical Society of Great Britain, Band 10, BiblioBazaar, 2009, p.200)

"Working with linguistic evidence and etymological "method", Georgiev asserts that the Etruscans were none other than the Trojans, the legendary founders of Rome." (Philip Baldi, The foundations of Latin, Walter de Gruyter, 2002, p.111)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Etruscans originated from Central Asia. Anatolia was home to Etruscans at least in 5000-6000 B.C., and later in 3500 B.C. to the Sumerians and the Cimmerians in later periods. The Etruscans migrated over the Caspian Sea and later arrived to Insburg, Austria. Before Etruscans settled to Italy, they lived in the area of Glozel (France) in 4000 B.C. In 1500 B.C. the Etruscans arrived to the Po Valley in northern Italy. From there they settled to Etruria (Toskana).

In 743 B.C. Rome was established by "Romulus" (in Turkic: 'People of Rome'). This plot is concering the foundation of Rome, similar to the Genesis of Altaic Peoples from Central Asia (see: Asena-Legend/Ergenekon Legend). The highly civilized Etruscans dominated from the Po Valley to the northern part of todays Rome.

In 600 B.C. the power of Etruscans reached their climax until the Etruscan dominance ended in 100 B.C. They neglect their language, got assimilated by Celtic and Latin peoples, and finally lost their power to their Latin rivals, who were called "Barbarians" by the Etruscans.


Turanian is a controversial term[1] that has been used in reference to diverse groups of people. It has currency in Turkish nationalism, Turanism, Turanian Society and Pan-Turkism.
Many of the uses of the word are obsolete. It may be:
An Iranian ethnic group mentioned in the Avesta, see Turan.
Any historical people of Transoxiana or present-day Turkistan.
Any historical Ural–Altaic people, in particular:
The Turkic peoples during Turkic expansion.
The Huns described by the Europeans and Chinese.
The Mongols, who are distantly related to the Turks.
Some sources have mentioned the Japanese people.
The Sami or Lapps of northern Scandinavia.
Finno-Ugric peoples like the Finns, Estonians and Hungarians.
The Dravidian people of southern India and Pakistan are theorized to have Turanian ancestors.
Speakers of Caucasian Languages.
Non-Semitic and non-Indo-European peoples of the Late Bronze Age were theorized to have Turanian ancestors, see Hurro-Urartian and Etruscans.
The Basques of western Europe (northern Spain and southwest France) were theorized to have Turanian ancestors.
Turanianism promotes the idea of Turanians are the oldest ethnocultural groups of humanity, and how East Asians, sub-Saharan Africans, white Caucasians or Indo-Europeans (Aryans), and indigenous peoples of the Americas are theoretic descendants of a former Turanian race of the last ice age.
The term formerly used for the Caucasian Avars.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turanians

[Scandalf]

Newsflash; Anatalia is in the Middle East

Just trollin' around, I didn't even read what you and the Turk wrote. I read something somewhere in this thread that Etrurians were like modern day Swiss! Seriously!?!

[Hoca]

AngoJew................ wikipedia :picard1: .....................nuff said ..... domain of the butt hurt and jealous.... please provide academic sources like I did.

[Scholarios]

AngoJew................ wikipedia :picard1: .....................nuff said ..... domain of the butt hurt and jealous.... please provide academic sources like I did.

How can you criticize him for wikipedia and then post some study with zero peer review that says Etruscans were Turanians? Wikipedia is x100000 times more reliable if sourced properly.

[Hoca]

How can you criticize him for wikipedia and then post some study with zero peer review that says Etruscans were Turanians? Wikipedia is x100000 times more reliable if sourced properly.

Wikipedia is not a source moron. Wikipedia is just an outlet from butt hurt and jealous people. Everybody can write there. Even a moron. I didn't post anything that was non-academic:

-Victoria Institute (Great Britain),
-Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute,
-Philosophical Society of Great Britain,
-The foundations of Latin, Walter de Gruyter
-Alberto Piazza of the University of Turin

[Scandalf]

Wikipedia is not a source moron. Wikipedia is just an outlet from butt hurt and jealous people. Everybody can write there. Even a moron. I didn't post anything that was non-academic

Holy crap! Chill out man!!!

Here you go:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002-9297(07)61106-9
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/health/03iht-snetrus.1.5127788.html?_r=0

[Scholarios]

Wikipedia is not a source moron. Wikipedia is just an outlet from butt hurt and jealous people. Everybody can write there. Even a moron. I didn't post anything that was non-academic:

-Victoria Institute (Great Britain),
-Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute,
-Philosophical Society of Great Britain,
-The foundations of Latin, Walter de Gruyter
-Alberto Piazza of the University of Turin

You didn't post ANYTHING of the sort. You copied and pasted from a Turkish/Pan-Turanian website. Give me direct links to his article on JSTOR or similar search engine. If it's not in JSTOR, it's not real. I'm waiting....

Even I can post Hellenas stuff that says Greeks have special DNA and there is a book to support it. I mean you should post real books- not kiosk literature from near Iznik local kebab stand. (http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiosk)

[Rudel]

If it's not in JSTOR, it's not real. I'm waiting...
That's an extreme stance, JSTOR only references recent works in English, that evacuates a shitload of valid academic work.

[Scholarios]

That's an extreme stance, JSTOR only references recent works in English, that evacuates a shitload of valid academic work.

Almost every important data is stored or translated in English.(JSTOR provides lots of non-English content as well though and has articles going back decades or even a century) But okay- neither here nor there- provide me any peer-reviewed article or book that supports such a theory -post 1890 in any language. Of course, I cannot read Turkish, so it's of limited value, but I'll do my best to google translate it, if it is peer reviewed.

So far we got Hoca copying and pasting from Turkish nationalist websites and youtube videos. Why single out JSTOR as not acceptable?

[Rudel]

But okay- neither here nor there- provide me any peer-reviewed article or book that supports such a theory -post 1890 in any language.
I couldn't provide you with such stuff, but for example if I was to speak about Medieval history (which is much more "my thing"), it would be hard to draw from JSTOR because Anglo-Saxon research in this domain is utter shit (as in philology, compared mythology, semiotics etc.).

[Scholarios]

I couldn't provide you with such stuff, but for example if I was to speak about Medieval history (which is much more "my thing"), it would be hard to draw from JSTOR because Anglo-Saxon research in this domain is utter shit (as in philology, compared mythology, semiotics etc.).

fair enough.

[McCauley]

I couldn't provide you with such stuff, but for example if I was to speak about Medieval history (which is much more "my thing"), it would be hard to draw from JSTOR because Anglo-Saxon research in this domain is utter shit (as in philology, compared mythology, semiotics etc.).

The most well-known philologist in the world is English.

[Rudel]

The most well-known philologist in the world is English.
Tolkien isn't strictly speaking known as a philologist (although I personally think his literary works are an academic experience, research by practice if you will).
But the world of Humanities go beyond a single man.

[McCauley]

Tolkien isn't strictly speaking known as a philologist (although I personally think his literary works are an academic experience, research by practice if you will).
But the world of Humanities go beyond a single man.

Yeah, he only ever really focused on Anglo-Saxon and various Germanic dialects, but he was definitely a master in his chosen area of expertise. I guess when you think of him "philologist" isn't the first thing to come to most people's minds, true.

But I agree that his fantasy writings are a comprehensive study in the English language.

[BarcelonaAtlantis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTKvPCZJdvU

Busting imposters.

[Peyrol]

Tolkien was also an estimator of some romance languages, specifically italian and catalan.
Telerin language (the language of the Third Eldar House) was largely influenced by both the languages.

[Wild North]

What language did the trojans speak? was it greek?

Bump.

Yeah, were the Trojans a Greek tribe?

[Unome]

Bump.

Yeah, were the Trojans a Greek tribe?
Trojans were nemesis of Greeks, but probably comprised of mostly the same ethnic/racial composition, yes.