Trachians

Of course, they were not Turks, as these originated in Northern Central Asia, where they share linguistical traits with Mongolian people. In those days, Asia Minor was more influenced by Indo-European groups.

Στον Ποσειδώνα

Αρχαία Ελληνικά. Έλληνες ήταν οι Τρωες

Troy might’ve been the Alexandria before Alexandria in Anatolia.

U

Greetings from Prishtina, Dardania 🇦🇱

HYDE CLARKE entitiled "THE TURANIAN EPOCH OF THE ROMANS, AS ALSO OF THE GREEKS, GERMANS, AND ANGLO-SAXONS, IN RELATION TO THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE WORLD", published in "the Transactions of the Royal Historical Society", Vol. VIII, 1880, p. 172 -222. Let me cite just one paragraph from the research of Hyde Clarke: "My own researches, as laid in detail this year before the Philological Society, fully establish the character of the Etruscans as a Turanian language, belonging to one great group, or family of families, allied to the languages of all the nations of early culture, the pre-Hellenic, Thracian, Phyrigian, Lydian, Carian, Georgian, Canaanite, the Akkad of Babylonia, and Egyptian. Among modern languages the analogues are with Basque, Ugro-Altaic, Georgian, many languages of India and Further India, Japanese, Coptic, and the languages of higher culture of Central, Western, and Southern Africa, and many languages of North, South, and Central America." This revelation is a mouthful. Here we observe that the writer Hyde Clarke also referring to many Indian Languages being from the family of Turanian languages. Both the historians and linguists should take note of it. It is surprising to see that the worlds historical and linguistic writers ignored this Turanian fact of the ancient world so far and in fact intentionally buried it into darkness. In view of the above citing, when I say that the ancient world was a "House of OGUZ", I am absolutely correct! After all, I base my conclusions of my studies on a lot of different sources as I have indicated in my writings. Polat Kaya.

part 3) The Origin of the Turks and Troy" The reasons for this change of view are complex: On the one hand, the development of the concept of freedom in Europe with the Enlightenment, and on the other hand, the distance between the Ottoman Empire and the deterioration of the order gradually widened. However, at the same time, to the extent that the Ottoman state, which fascinated Renaissance intellectuals with its power, lost its power, the admiration of the West turned into disdain and even hatred. As a result, Renaissance intellectuals trying to get rid of religious schemes did not only look at Turks in terms of Christianity and Islam. Going back to our example, "The Life of Muhammad", which forms the introduction to the first edition of Sansovino's Historia Universale, is omitted in the third edition, after being re-added in the fourth edition, it disappears in the next editions. Thus, instead of marginalizing the Turks within the framework of an insurmountable opposition, the way of examining them by introducing them into the historical and ideological patterns of the West was preferred. Therefore, the Roman model, which represents absolutism together with military and administrative power, was easily adapted to the Ottoman state. Geopolitics also played an important role in this, because the Ottoman was the product of the same geography, especially the East Roman Empire. However, by doing this, the West reaches the point of renouncing the Roman heritage, which it regards as the origin of its culture and history, especially in the Renaissance period, and risks losing this legacy to the most important adversary of the period, the Turks. In the Enlightenment period, starting from the second half of the 17th century, when the state and power model based on military and purely political power, whose most important representative was Machiavelli, gradually began to give place to the concepts of freedom and human rights, the concept expressing the Ottoman order was admired. He left the Roman "as a force, to the Eastern despotism, which would be presented as a counter-model by thinkers like Montesquieu." As can be seen, what has happened since that day is not that the "West" "recognizes" Turks or "fails to recognize them", but its interpretation according to the models it has produced. As for the Turks, before their time of Westernization, they could have remained unaware or at least indifferent to these debates and comments. However, since the process of Westernization starting from Tanzimat until today expresses the integration with the Western way of thinking in the final analysis, it also brings the necessity of adapting to the way the West perceives Turks. Prof. Dr. Stefanos Yerasimos Social History Journal, Issue 118, October 2003 Notes: 1 “Chronica per extensum descripta”, published by E. Pastorello Rerum italicarum scriptores, Bologna, 1932, c. XII. 2 Andanças e viajes de Pero Tafur por diversas partes del mundo avidos, Madrid, 1874, p. 168. 3 History of Mehmed the Conqueror by Kritovoulos, trans. Charles T. Riggs, Princeton, 1934, p. 181-182. 4 The manuscript was purchased by the French ambassador Girardin in 1687 and is today in the French National Library; see. Julian Raby, "Mehmed the Conqueror's Greek Scriptorium", Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 37/1983, p. 20-21. 5 La Cronica dell'anno 1400 all'anno 1500, Florence, 1984, p. 127-128. 6 Discorsi sulla prima Deca di Tito Livio, first edition 1531. The quote is from the French edition (La Pl’iade, 1974, p. 511). 7 Eugenio Alberi, Le relazioni degli ambasciatori veneti al Senate durante il secolo decimosesto, III. serial, Florence, 1840, c. 1 second

part2)Origins Troy. This trend of thought will reach its peak with Francesco Sansovino. His father, the famous architect J. Sansovino, came to Venice to build the San Marco library and his son settled in this city. Francesco earned his living as a writer and editor, compiled and published hundreds of volumes. Among them, he has seven books on Turks, the most important of which was published in 1560. The year 1560 is a turning point in terms of the progress of the Turks in the Mediterranean: That year, the Spanish navy was defeated in the Battle of Djerba and the West Mediterranean road was opened for the Turks. Sansovino thinks to compile and publish articles on the Turks; for such a corpus has not been produced, at least in Italy, until then. There is nothing directly related to the Turks in the collection of travels published by Giovanni Ramusio of Venice in three large volumes in the 1550s. Since the Turks, who are close neighbors, are not considered part of the travel literature aimed at promoting the newly discovered countries, it is up to Sansovino to fill this gap in the field of publication. The aim of the writer-publisher is to respond to the expectations of his current readers and to synthesize what is known and thought about Turks. Ramusio's synthesis for distant countries before that falls into the type of geography in which travel literature forms a part. There are places to go, see and buy here. The countries held by the Turks are part of a common past, and the knowledge about Turks is concerned about a common future. For this reason, "Turkish knowledge" goes into history, not geography, and Sansovino will compile a history book. The title of the book is "On the Universal History of the Origin and Empire of the Turks" (Dell'Historia Universale dell'Origine et Imperio de 'Turchi). It is necessary to dwell on this name. As we mentioned above, Sansovino offers a history book; however, this is a "universal history" and yet it is not a general universal history, but a universal history of the Turks. More precisely, it is declared that the universal history belongs to the Turks. The word imperio also refers to this; because the word we translate as "empire" actually means "absolute power" and hence imperium is one and cannot be shared. As the Eastern Roman, that is, Byzantine emperors, Charlemagne and his successor Holy Roman-Germanic rulers did not want to recognize the imperial qualities, the Ottoman sultans also continued this tradition and especially in the years when the Historia Universale was written, Suleiman the Magnificent, Charles Quint did not become the German emperor. he insisted on recognizing it only as the king of Spain. Starting from the third edition of the work, the word "della", which we translated as "subject", which makes the statement relative, will be removed from the title and the subject will be determined as "the universal history of the Turks" in a way that will not raise any doubts from now on. In the introduction to the first edition of Historia Universale, published in three fascicles between 1560-1561, Sansovino describes the purpose of the book as follows: Among the states of the world for which we have enough knowledge, I always thought that the Turkish ruler deserves the most respect for his state, because of the great obedience of his people and the happy fortune of the entire Turkish nation. It is astonishing to see in what form and how easily it grew and gained such fame and fame in such a short period of time. If we investigate their origins and carefully examine their internal and external affairs, we can say that indeed the military discipline, obedience, and fortune of the Romans passed to this race after the collapse of this state. The word fortuna, which we have translated as "fortune" here and mentioned twice, actually corresponds to the old and noble meaning of the word "state", which is used only in terms such as "state bird" in Turkish today, and is equivalent to the concepts of "welfare", "happiness" and "blessing". Used twice with Fortuna, obbedienza, or obedience, gives the two keys to the success of the Turks, as well as the axis of similarity and continuity between the Roman and Turkish empires. However, the "state", which is a divine blessing, was achieved through the obedience of the Turks to their chiefs and the military discipline used as an equivalent. In his introduction to Annali Turcheschi, which was first published in 1571 and contains a chronological breakdown of Turkish history as an appendix to the Historia Universale, Sansovino further clarifies this issue:I have always argued that the greatness and strength of the Turkish nation deserves great respect, because when looking at the army and civilian orders that have existed for a long time, it seems that they are not rude in their situation, but precious people. In terms of the army, I cannot see who of ours could be more disciplined than the Turks and closer to the Roman order. As the inheritors of the aforementioned Romans, they settle for little during the expedition, are very patient in hard work, obey their chiefs, follow the goals of conquest stubbornly, are masters of war tricks, and as a result carry out military affairs with such steadfastness that they do not give up any difficulty to win and dominate. As for the things of the peace order, they please their people with this form of absolute justice, by breaking all the tricks of the case that arise from the confused minds of the quarrelsome people and by quickly resolving the conflicts of others in their own interests. Therefore, a few years ago, I gathered what they had done in a fairly accurate book called The Universal History of the Origin and Empire of the Turks. My goal is for the world to learn the basis of their power by seeing and reading them, and therefore to find a cure to their unbridled chaos that advances like a steppe fire and will henceforth bring calamities to us and burn the last remnants of Christianity. At the same time, in this text published in the third year of a new Ottoman-Venetian war, the year of the Battle of Inebahti, Sansovino could not be expected to be a "Turkish friend"; And what could "Turkish friendship" mean in 16th century Venice? Sansovino is a Renaissance intellectual who believes only in the necessity of a good and correct recognition of his adversary, but when this effort for recognition reaches a level of admiration, this admiration was expressed openly even during the days when two nations fought on a frontier from the Dalmatian coast to Cyprus. is not an obstacle. Likewise, the Venetian sledgehammer Marcantonio Barbaro, who would spend most of his time as an ambassador in Istanbul, was sent to the senate upon his return to his hometown after the Ottoman-Venetian peace in 1573, which left Cyprus and a significant part of the Dalmatian coast to the Turks. He concludes in his report: Great prince and unique seers, since by God's will, the Ottoman emperor conquered so many provinces through constant victories, bound so many kingdoms to himself, and thus earned him a dreadful reputation all over the world, it would not be foolish to consider the possibility of his eventually reaching the universal kingdom. . The second edition of Historia Universale is published in 1564 and the third edition in 1568. Now it has become a classic about Turks and its effects are beginning to be seen. The French philosopher Jean Bodin, who published his The Method of History in 1566, handles the same theme: How can the ruler of Germany attempt to compete with the sultan of the Turks, and who can claim more absolute royal titles than this last? Indeed, if there is a power somewhere that can bear the name empire or a true absolute kingdom, that power is in the hands of the sultan. It is best to consider the sultan of the Turks as the heir to the Roman Empire; Because, after capturing Byzantium, the capital of the empire, from the Christians, he conquered the Babylon region from the Persians and added the countries beyond the Danube to the Dniester river to the former provinces of Rome, and all these regions today constitute the largest part of the lands in his possession. The aim of the French writer, whose hometown is far from the Turkish danger and whose main enemy is the German emperor, is more political. The main benefit of declaring the Ottoman sultan as the heir of Rome, who had been the ally of France against Germany for thirty years, was to withhold that title, which was the basis of his power, from the German emperor. However, this behavior of the author is proof that the Ottoman state has been a part of European policy ever since. Taking advantage of the Ottoman-Venetian peace in 1573, Sansovino Historia Universale published the fourth edition and the second edition of Annali Turcheschi. The seventh and final edition is published more than half a century later in 1654, in the midst of a new and long Ottoman-Venetian war. Its volume is divided into two, as it can no longer fit in a single volume. The second consists of 522 pages, and this is added Annali Turcheschi, or Ottoman history, brought to the end of the reign of Sultan Ibrahim. The 25-year Ottoman-Venetian war, which resulted in the conquest of Crete, will also end the comparison of Romans-Turks developed by Renaissance thinkers and spread by Sansovino. Venetian sledgehammers, who came to Istanbul after the peace signed in 1669, will persistently embroider the motif of "Eastern despotism" and this theme will quickly spread across Europe.

part 1) The Origin of the Turks and Troy" During the Renaissance - or roughly from the invention of the printing house until 1600 - thousands of books and brochures on Turks were published in major European languages. Although the reason for this is that the Turks are perceived as a threat by the Europeans, the aim was not only to denigrate them or to search for ways to eliminate them, but to evaluate and understand the Turks beyond these initial reactions, and thus to accustom themselves to this dangerous neighborhood. In addition to a large literature that tried to exclude "barbarism" and "infidelity", an important and distinguished section of the Renaissance intellectuals tried to tame the Turks by drawing them into their own mental universe and by examining them with the historical and ideological perceptions of the West. European historians, who encountered the Turks during the Crusades and knew that they were of Central Asian origin, will seek a new origin for them in the 14th century. The Venetian doge and historian Andrea Dandolo, who died in 1354, when the Ottomans crossed into Europe, writes: The homeland of the Turks is behind the Caucasus mountains, its roots go back to Turkos, the son of Troilos, the son of Priam, the king of Trojans. After the conquest of the city, Turkos took refuge in these regions with most of his followers.1 From now on, Renaissance scholars will register the Trojan origins of the Turks. The Turks were not only "one of us" by being tied to the Greek mythology, which is the origin of Western historical fiction, but also those who would take Constantinople, the last remnant of the Roman Empire, were related to the founder of Rome, Aeneas. Thus, the empire did not disappear, but remained within the same family. Since the Middle Ages and starting with the kings of France, many European dynasties have sought to attach themselves to the heroes of the Trojan war, thus competing in the West with the German princes at the head of the Holy Roman-German Empire, regarded as the continuation of the Roman Empire; however, it is not the Turks who associate their Trojan origin here, but the Europeans themselves. The situation is actually even more complicated because Troy was famous for the war between the Greeks and the Trojans. In this war, the Trojans were defeated, but a group of survivors formed Rome with Aeneas, and Rome expanded over time, defeating the Greeks and avenging Troy. However, after the Roman Empire lost to the east and made Constantinople its capital, it became Greek, and the power passed to the Greeks again. This time, another Trojan group, the Turks, who took shelter in the depths of Asia, will return and take their second revenge. Before the conquest of Istanbul, we see that this interpretation was settled among the last Byzantines. Catalan Pero Tafur, who came to the city at the end of 1437, notes a saying that everyone speaks here: "The Turks will avenge Troy." The Trojan-Greek war also constitutes the first core of the struggle between East and West, Asia and Europe. The return of the Trojan-Turks heralds the victory of the Asians. According to Fatih's historian Kritovulos, such an interpretation was also adopted by the sultan. II, who went to besiege Lesbos in 1462. Mehmed stopped in Troy and searched the graves of the heroes mentioned in Homer and said: God has given me the revenge of this city and its inhabitants, even after many years. Thanks to me, the children of the Greeks, Macedonians, Thessalians, and Moraeans who destroyed this city in the past have received the punishment they deserve for the injustices they often inflicted against us Asians at that time and after that, after many years. It is natural that this rumor, which has been circulating between Venice and Istanbul for two centuries, has come to the ears of Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror and adopted by him. He has known this culture since his youth and wanted to be one of its heroes. During his visit to Troy, he had a Greek copy of the Iliad built for his library, 4 the following year, the Florentine Benedetto Dei, who met him in Istanbul, said, "also Alexander and Xerxes, Carthaginian Hannibal and African Scipion, Pyrhus and he told me that he wanted to be in the power of the thousands of past rulers. Thus, the emergence of the Turks and their conquest of Anatolia and Ancient Greek lands was interpreted by the Renaissance Europe as the return of the Trojans. However, the advance of the Ottoman state into Europe and west of the Mediterranean left the Trojan analogy inadequate. This new branch of the Trojans was not content with taking revenge on the Greeks, but on the way to become the continuation of Rome by establishing a new empire like their older brothers, the Romans. The Italian thinker Niccol Machiavelli, who wrote commentary on the work of the Roman historian Titus Livius between 1513 and 1519, says: Despite the absence of an empire that would fully retain Roman possessions, at least it was among the nations that lived in the beautiful virtue of these lands. it was seen that these lands were shared among the nations that lived in a beautiful virtue. The empires established by the Franks, Turks, the Egyptian sultan and the peoples of Germany today are among them. At the time of these lines, indeed, the Turks are only one of the candidates who could be the heirs of the Roman Empire. But in the meantime, they would eliminate one of Machiavelli's other candidates, the Mamelukes in Egypt, and they would have eroded the doors of Vienna in 1531, when the author's notes were published. The word "virtue" in Machiavelli's quote above is equivalent to the concept of "asabiyyet" developed in Ibn Khaldun's Muqaddimah, and the ability of one community to seize power and rule other communities and to establish a state or an empire. It expresses its ability. Thus, as long as Turkish pressure increased in Europe, alongside an anti-Turkish, propaganda-oriented literature aimed at large masses, it was the possibility and ability of the Turks to reunite the lands once dominated by the Roman Empire, which were of interest and almost enchanted the elite.

part2) Bulaşığlar(Peleasg), Akalar (Achaean Greek Achaios) and Turlar/Tur's (The Dorians/Dōrieîs/Dōrieús) Camera Translation. However, the newly established Hill tabernacle was short-lived. The city khanates, which were fighting each other, eventually weakened, "Macedonian" inn II. It fell into Bilip's palm and Bilip He subjugated the whole country within the year. He then subjugated all the Yiwu/"Thrac" tribes in the Balkans. Thus, with Bilip's subordination in 339 BC, the old period ended and the "Macedonian" period began. in 146 BC In this period, the "Macedonian" period came to an end and the Roman period began. Before the Roman period, Early Turkish was spoken in today's Greece and the lands of Western and Central Anatolia. Bulaşuğ, Akas, Tur's, "Friks/Phrygian", "Lydians" etc. These Early Turkish society's, consisting of the sum of the total, started to see themselves as Romans during the Roman period and gradually adopted the Roman language. After the division of the Roman Empire, the Romance language During the Roman period, it changed into the Romeyka language. This language is what Westerners call "Ancient Greek" today. There was no language called "Ancient Greek" before Roman times. Because there is no "Ancient Greek" inscription from the pre-Roman period. The only inscription from that period is the Limenian stone, but that is also Early Turkish. Eastern Anatolia, which is called Armenian, is Roman. it did not come under the rule of ParthianTurks For this reason, Romanic and later Romeyka languages could not affect Anatolia and the spoken language remained as Old Turkish in Eastern Anatolia, as in all the lands of the Parthian Khaganate. When the Seljuks entered Anatolia, Old Turkish was spoken in Eastern Anatolia, while Old Turkish and Romeyka were spoken in Central and Western Anatolia. Until the years when it gained its independence from the Ottoman Empire, the language spoken in Greece was the Romeyka language, which has now changed considerably. After the founding of Greece, the torluk (official) language of the country was called "Katharevusa", which means "the language of memory". This language is a resurrected form of Romeycan. Katarevusa is a form of Romeyka that has been eroded and simplified in the process, and has reached that day and has been simplified. In addition to this, while the independent Greece was being established, words that entered Greek from foreign languages were discarded and replaced with words from Romeyka or new words were derived from old roots. Only this language was used in schools and official institutions. However, since society does not understand this language, Community Greek (Demotiki) to be spoken on the streets are the ones.continued. When some deteriorations began in the Demotiki language, it was in vain (permitted) to teach Demotiki in schools in 1964. This bilingual status lasted until 1976 and with a law made in 1976, Katharevusa being removed from being the language of Demotiki torluk, it became a language.was brought. Thus, in schools, institutions and home spoken language was made one. The person who gave the Greeks the name "Helen" is a German.German historian J.G. Droysen, mid-19th centuryhis "Geschichte des Hellenismus" (History of Hellenism)without knowing the meaning of the word "Helene",coined the name, and then this name began to be widely used Helene, which comes from the word hel, which means 'to bow' in Turkish, means 'bent on' / 'lower oneself'.It also has a meaning like 'delight' (lust). Thus, at the end of the 19th century, Helen became the national renamed. However, until that time, the Greeks a part of balkan called themselves Romey (Roman). Here, it is necessary to consider the origin of the word Anatolia. Romeyka ávatoln anatolí, 'ascending'; vatolac anatolás also means 'east'. (However, in Greek, àvartoAn anatolí acquired the meaning "east".) Old Turkic commemoration †→agmak, 'to rise' / 'to be born';To commemorate means to 'raise'; from this root derivation purified †→ lamented, elevated' / 'rising' and monumental†→lament also means 'ascension. As you can see Romeyka anatoli with Old Turkish monument and Romeyka anatolia and Old Turkish memorial words, evolved from Early Turkish Romeyka and the different pronunciation in Old Turkish. Limni taşı/Lemnos Stone. Lemno Stone, from the 6th century BC It was built on the wall of a church on the island in 1885. found as This is what's left of the Bulaşığs (Pelasgs) The inscription has not been translated correctly so far. However, there was much speculation about this inscription, because those who tried to translate the inscription tried to do it with the Latin languages, Slavic languages, Albanian or Turkish spoken today. Attempts to translate this language with any European language are futile, because this language is an early Turkic language. However, trying to translate this inscription into today's Turkic languages is also a futile effort. The Turkic languages of that period were quite different from the Turkic languages spoken today. Therefore, it is unscientific to try to translate the early Turkish inscriptions with fabrications, similes and guesses. When I finished "The Real History of the Turks" that I wrote in 2014, I translated this inscription only in Turkish (Etrus). However, some of the Turkish words whose meanings are known meaning is misunderstood. In this respect, I saw that there were mistakes in my previous translation. This time I made the translation together with Turkish and Old Turkish. Therefore, some words whose meanings were misunderstood in Turkish were corrected with the help of Old Turkish. The first line written in capital letters is in Bulaşig, and the second line is in Old Turkish. The difference between the Türükük (Etruscan) language and the Bulaşığ (Pelasg) language. The distinction is only a dialect distinction. The O form not found in the in the Bulaşığ/pleasgian alphabet has letters. The Türüks also wrote the O sound in the U shape. In addition, in the Bulaşığ alphabet, the F form is read as V, as in the Türük alphabet, and the S, Ş and Z sounds are written only in the S form. The translation of the inscription into modern Turkish is as follows: "The dead man lying in the kurgan is Yarush Bay. The dead is lost. Change is eternal. To the dead whose service (service) is wise eternity has come true. Dignity is wealth. His reputation is great. His (service) wise [and] most it was good. [Let there be] eternity to the dead. The dead is [a] life lost. [This] is a commemoration of Race Bay. Behavior-weary deadly big [get] well-being. Contract up, good luck! dead really [a] bagaturdu (hero), his well-being is great. he sleeps (his service) was wise. Infinity is happening. Let it shine." Its English is as follows: "The dead person lying in the grave is Maras (Yarus) Bay. Dead is lost. Change is eternal. Eternity has come true to the dead whose service was wise. Prestige [and] wealth are maturation. feeling reputation [and] inspiration were great. His service was wise [and] the best. [Let there be] eternity to the dead. The dead is [a] life lost. [This] is a commemoration of Maras (Yarus) [May peace be] to the behavior-weary dead. Agree with the sky, agree with luck! The dead was [a] really a hero, his inspiration was great. His service was wise. His eternity is realized. Let him shine.

Part 1) Bulaşığlar(Peleasg), Akalar (Achaean Greek Achaios) and Turlar/Tur's (The Dorians/Dōrieîs/Dōrieús) Camera Translation. Some of those who came from Central Asia with great immigration; a part of them settled in the Balkans and the lands of today's Greece. The first inhabitants of the territory of present-day Greece were the "pelasglar/Pelasgians" (Romeican: Helaoyoc Pelasgós). The Sumerian word bala means rule, 'subordination' (dominance) and 'to riot, to stir up', 'to overtrow'. This word has evolved into Old Turkish as bula/bulga, which means 'to find', 'to mix', 'to anger', 'to overturn'. Derived from this root, the practice of contagious/bulgash (verb) means 'confused'. means to be'/'to be in a confused state'. Old Turkish bulaşıg/bulgaşıg derived from this practice The forename also means 'fighter', 'warrior'. Therefore, the name Romeyka Пelaoyoc Pelasgós has been transformed from the Old Turkish name of Bulaşı. Herodotus states that all the lands of present-day Greece was concured by Pleasgians And that it was originally called "Pelasgia". Lemnos writings; that the "Pelasgs" were Athenians who came to hold (conquer) the island. According to Homer, the "Pelasgs" were allies of the Turuyans who fought against the Achaeans in the Trojan wars. According to Thucydides, Deucalion's son writes that before the Hellenic period, the country took the name of the "Pelasgs". Ephorus states that the "Pelasgs", who led a military lifestyle, gave their name to the whole country and colonized Crete. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Pelasgians in present-day Greece were the real societies of his land, and first of all he writes that they settled in the Peloponnes. As can be understood from all this, this society is the oldest and its name is Bulaşığ's Later, Akalar/Achaeans (Axatoi Akaii) and Turlar/Turs (Ampuis Doris) from the old Turkish tribes in Europe migrated to the Greek lands and gradually mixed with the Bulasugs. The Sumerian word aga means 'crown', 'ruler'. This word is in the Old Turkic language aka/Ağa, in today's Turkish language. Old Turkish Tor/Tur also means yigit/'bagatur' (hero). It is not known exactly where they came from to todays Greece Since the great migration that started from Central Asia in the 7th millennium BC lasted for several thousand years, the period when the Bulaşığ's (Pleasg's) reached these lands is It should be around 5,000 BC This period is the first developed civilization in the lands of today's Greece with the established city khanates, writing order and uzuş (art) works. The "Dark Age", which the Westerners claim to have started with the "Doric invasion", is a random name. Other than that, the period of the "Macedonian" Khanate has nothing to do with "Helen". Hellen is a person's name. Aka period begins after the Bulaşığ (Pleasgian) period in Greece. It is claimed that the Aka/Achaeans migrated from the north to presentday Greece in the 1800s BC. Homer in the Iliad for Greek society today uses the name Akali (Achaean) as a general term. Homer here describes the period that is now called "Mycenae" (ca. before 1150). However, there is no evidence that Greek society in the "Mycenaean" period used this name to describe itself. "Mycenae" is a name made up by Westerners. In the past, a society called "Mycenae" never existed. The Turlar (Turs/Dors), who spread to the territory of present-day Greece after the Achaeans, formerly lived in the northern mountainous regions of today's Macedonia and Epirus. The poor conditions they were in caused the Turs (Dors) to migrate south to the Peloponnese and several Aegean islands and Crete. Thus, the Turs gradually went to Western Anatolia and Crete and spread to many islands, including Rhodes. For example, Sparta is a city founded by the Turs. Therefore, in the territory of present-day Greece in ancient times society did not have a permanent elgin (ethnos) name. The society was usually named after the dominant tribes, and accordingly, due to the descriptions of the ancient historians, there was a false impression that there were many separate ethnos in the region. Western historians also made use of this epic (mythological) history and made up different ethnos and put the business into an inextricable situation. From clan names such as Bulasuglar, Akalar, Turlar they created a progenitor and invented an upside-down culture. Western historians describe the history of Greece as the "Mycenaean Civilization" between about 1600-1100 BC. The "Dark Period" between 1100 BC and 800 BC, 800 BC - 490 BC "Archaic Period", The "Classical Period" between 490 BC and 323 BC, The "Hellenistic Period" is the period between 323 BC, when Alexander the Great died, and 146 BC, when the Roman rule began. They call the period after 146 BC the "Period of Harmonization with Rome". This is naturally an inaccurate chronology and makes it even more confusing It is not a nerse (thing) other than mak. In fact, the period hitherto ended in 339 BC, when Alexander's father Bilip (Diumnoch Filippos) entered the territory of Central Greece. Thus, the period from 339 BC to 146 BC is the "Macedonian" period. Bilip means "informed" (Wise man) / "knowledge" (Elderly / scholar). The Lelantine War (710-650 BC) is the oldest documented war. This war was fought in Chalcis [Kalik: sky, upper floor], which were important urban khanates on the Lelantine plain of Euboea and Eretria [Eret/Erat: community]. Both cities suffered a collapse as a result of the long war, but Kalik won the war. With the introduction of money in 680 BC, a pottery vessel (merchant class) emerged. The noyans (aristocrats) of the urban khanates They began to be affected by the wealth of the oppressors. Noyans, starting from 650 BC, in order not to be overthrown. they had to fight. Increasing karachu (population) and scarcity of land, many cities a contradiction between the poor and the rich in his khanate created. At that time, "helot" [hel in Hebrew means "bend"- The subjugated society known as Sapartida (Enápra Spárta) was a farmer. Old Turkish saparti/saperti means 'saplatmuş / "added" / . Every Devastated male citizen is a permanent çeri (soldier). He became a soldier of the Saparte army. The Noyans also had to live and be educated as cherries/Çeri's (Jani-Sarry) This partnership neutralized the social conflict between rich and poor citizens. The person who carried out these communist and militarist oriented onargalan (reforms) was Sapartih Ala Kurguş (AUKOüpyoç Lykourgos). Alaca, which is also mentioned as a person's name in old Uyghur documents, is 'Alaca'; fright/fiction means 'fear'. Atan (Aerva Athina), a late 7th century BC suffered a land and agricultural crisis, which led to internal strife. caused. Old Turkish at t - eden; means 'good', 'saghkh', 'solid'. The moderate onargalan (reforms) of Salan (Zoov Sólon) in 594 BC improved the condition of most of the poor, bringing a rift (stability) to the Atan, but also firmly entrenched naïveté (aristocracy) into uda (power). Old Turkish salan means 'who brings to a state. In the 6th century BC, many cities such as Atan, Saparti, Koruntu (Kopivbos Kórinthos) and Tepe (Oñßat Thibe) emerged as effective urban khanates. Old Turkic corout/korut means 'fenced place. Each took control of the surrounding countryside and the smaller sazak (town). The cities of Atan and Koruntu became sea and bad (trade) powers. During the 8th and 7th centuries BC, the rapidly increasing karachu (population) resulted in many emigrating to establish colonies in Southern Italy, Sicily, Western Anatolia and further afield. Migration ended in the 6th century BC. However, these cities unable to control the colonies they established later on. came, and they kept only their virtuous (commercial) ties with them. This migration process also brought the urban khanates of present-day Greece into prolonged conflict with the Syracuses in Sicily and the Carthaginians in North Africa. These conflicts lasted from 600 BC to 265 BC. In order to get rid of these conflicts, Rome formed alliances with the scavengers (merchants) working for the Syracuses and Carthaginians. Thus, Rome became a new dominant power in the region. The First Punic War began in 264 BC. Elam khan Tarigh (Aapeios Dareios) conquered Atan in 490 BC. He formed a navy to capture it. Tang, which means 'ancestry', 'seed' and 'past' in Old Turkish, is also mentioned as a male name in Old Uyghur documents. Although the Elamites were outnumbered, the Elamites withdrew when the Athenians, supported by the other urban khanates, defeated the Elam army at the Battle of Marathon. Ten years later, Tang's son Kur (Kopoch Kins) launched a second attack. Old Turkish kur means 'rock'. Some urban khanates surrendered without resistance to Kur's army. However, the unity of the city khanate, including Atan and Saparti, resisted the Elamites. Then, Atan and Sapartı fell against each other, and a long period of war began between them. They made a thirty-year peace that finally ended the conflict in 445 BC. However, they started war again in 431 BC and made peace again 10 years later. Thus, the country entered the 4th century BC under the rule of Saparta. In 395 BC, the cities of Atan, Argu (Apyoç Argos), Tepe and Koruntu opposed the Saparte subordination and started the Coruntu War (395-387 BC). Old Turkish argu means 'between two mountains' / 'cliff'. Later Saparti BC He was defeated by Tepe in 371.

part 1) Celtic Language as a Primary Branch of Ancient Japhetic or Turanian Language .　　　　　　　　　　PREFACE 　　　　　_ "In the ancient world the typical TURANIANS were the Egyptians; in the modern, the CHINESE and JAPANESE, and perhaps the MEXICANS. The TURANIANS existed in the valley of the Euphrates before the SEMITIC or ARYAN races came there (...) Of this family, the oldest people in Europe are the PELASGI and THE ETRUSCANS (Herodot, who wrote his "Historia" in the 5th century B.C.). The race also appears in the MAGYARS, FINNS, AND LAPPS, but ultimately they were everywhere OVERPOWERED by the ARYANS who drove them into remote corners." Moses W. Redding, Illustrated History of Freemasonry, Kessinger Publ.1997, p.194 The PELASGIAN LANGUAGE was not understood by the Achaeans. Herodot was Achaean himself (he was born in the Ionic city of Halicarnassus), but he wrote: "...We can conclude that Pelasgians spoke a barbarian language... Even now the citizens of Creston and Plakias speak another language, different from their neighbors'... But what about Hellenic tribes, to my mind, they always spoke one language." (I, 57-58.) That means Herodot could not understand Pelasgian and considered Pelasgian to be BARBARIAN LANGUAGE, together with LYDIAN, PHOENICIAN or THRACIAN. _ Pointing to the similar political systems used by the TURKS and the ETRUSCANS and that there is a substantial connection between the ETRUSCAN 'Fanum Voltumnae' (yearly political assemblies) and the 'Kurultay' of the TURKS. Ref. Deguines, De Groot and Klaproth : + J.Deguines "Histoire des Huns, Des Turcs et des Mongols" Paris ,1856 +De Groot , "Die Hunne der vorchristlichen Zeit" Berlin, 1921 + H.J.Von Klaproth, "Memoire sur l'identite des Toukiou et des Hioung-Nou avec les TURCS", Paris 1925 -- THE ETRUSCAN LANGUAGE - Isaac Taylor Putting aside the languages of such impossible races, the languages of Europe and Asia divide themselves into THREE GRAND DIVISIONS:- I. The ARYAN (JEPHETH) or Indo-European LANGUAGES, -such as SANSKRIT, PERSIAN, GREEK, LATIN, GERMAN, RUSSIAN, OR WELSH. II. The SEMITIC (SHEM) languages,-such as Phoenician, Hebrew, Arabic, and Assyrian. III. The TURANIAN languages, comprising the various FINNIC, TURKIC, MONGOLIC, DRAVIDIC, and MALAYIC dialects. But if it is admitted, as it must be, that the ETRUSCAN NUMERALS are decisively TURANIAN, I think, without further evidence, that the ETRUSCAN BELONGS to the TURANIAN FAMILY of languages. 　　　 "The Year 1995: After a week-long meeting in İtaly (Florence) Prof. Dr. Giovannangelo Comporeale, one of the most authoritative scientists regarding Etruscan studies, agreed to the fact that ancient ETRUSCAN INSCRIPTIONS were written in TURKIC TOUNGE" (Prof.Dr.Turgay Tüfekçioğlu, Etruscans, Orkun Publishing) (...) the ETRUSCANS appear to be an original TURANIAN race which formed the underlying stratum of the population over the whole world, and which cropped up, like the BASQUES in SPAIN, in that part of ITALY and ETRURIA." (Hodder M.Westropp, Handbook of Egyptian, Greek, Etruscan and Roman Archeology, Kessinger Publishing, 2003, p.482) 　　　　　DEFINITION OF JAPHETIC (Entry 1 of 2) 1: relating to or derived from Japheth who was a son of Noah -used vaguely as an ethnological epithet for the Caucasians of Europe and some adjacent parts of Asia 2: of, relating to, or constituting a group of early non-Indo-European languages in Europe and western Asia assumed by some TO FORM ONE FAMILY WITH THE CAUCASIAN LANGUAGES and INCLUDING BASQUE, ETRUSCAN, MINOAN, AND SOMETIMES SUMERIAN AND ELAMITE - compare Asianic JAPHETIC NOUN Definition of Japhetic (Entry 2 of 2) 1: the Japhetic languages 2: a Japhetic language ~ Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary. PAPER: THE ORIGINAL TURANIANS THE ORIGINAL TURANIANS were an Iranian [Allworth, Edward A. (1994)] [Diakonoff, I. M. (1999)] [Gnoli, Gherardo (1980)] tribe of the Avestan [religious texts of Zoroastrianism Boyce 1984, p.1] age (“2900 BC or more recent”]. The term is of Iranian origin:  [1. Encyclopedia of Islam (First ed.). an Iranian term applied to the country to the northeast of Iran.]  [2. van Donzel, Emeri (1994). Islamic Reference Desk. Brill Academic. p. 461. Iranian term applied to the region lying to the northeast of Iran and ultimately vaguely indicating the country of the Turkic peoples.] “THE LAND OF TUR”. The Tur Abdin region is the name given to the geographical area between the Euphrates and Tigris rivers by the ancient Greeks and Romans. This region was named Al-Jazeera by the Arabs CELTIC LANGUAGE AS A PRIMARY BRANCH OF ANCIENT JAPHETIC OR TURANIAN LANGUAGE Aygun Kosayeva, Department of Linguoculturology, Azerbaijan University of Languages, Baku, Azerbaijan Refs: pdfs.semanticscholar.org/.../4fc494150d1f132b660f... ABSTRACT This article reports on a study of word affinity in IRISH, AZERBAIJANI, and OTHER TURKIC LANGUAGES. In spite of Irishmen’s migration from the territory of ancient Azerbaijan to Asia Minor and further to the British Isles, they could preserve not only culture but also their language in a new motherland.  The present paper discloses semantic similarities and etymology of several words in IRISH, GAELIC, WELSH, and other TURKIC languages. The celtic language was a PRIMARY BRANCH OF ANCIENT JAPHETIC OR TURANIAN LANGUAGE because the meaning of several words in Celtic and Turkic languages proves kinship between Celts and Turkic nations. KEYWORDS: Celtic, Turkic, Saca, Japhetic, 1. INTRODUCTION THE HISTORY OF LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT is closely connected with a history of people’s progress. Therefore, it is impossible to study the formation and development of this or another language in separation from deep studying of the history of the development of state and people. [History: pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi...] Agglutination - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agglutination  CELTIC LANGUAGE FAMILY INCLUDES Irish, Scottish, and Manx (Gaelic languages) and Welsh, Breton, and Cornish (Brythonic languages).  The Celtic language family is a branch of the larger Indo-European family, which leads some scholars to a hypothesis that the original speakers of the CELTIC PROTO-LANGUAGE MAY HAVE ARISEN IN THE PONTIC-CASPIAN STEPPES. 2. MATERIAL STUDIED Refer to pdfs.semanticscholar.org/.../4fc494150d1f132b660f... 3. AFFINITY BETWEEN CELTS AND ANCIENT AZERBAIJANIS There are several facts indicating an affinity between Celts and ancient Azerbaijanis.  Moses of Kalankatuyk, an author of “History of Albania” wrote in his work that GOMER WAS A SECOND RULER OF CAUCASUS ALBANIA (ancient Azerbaijan) AFTER HIS FATHER JAPHET (Tunchay, 11). Canon Bourke supposed that:  Gael or Irish are sons of Japhet, and consequently Turanians (Bourke, 7).  Hebrew, Christian, and Muslim sources unanimously accepted that Turks are descendants of Japhet, son of Noah. Mahmud al-Kashgari wrote that:  “Turks have 20 branches. The race of each reaches Prophet Noah’s son Japhet, his son Turk”. Written sources, archeological and ground monuments indicate the territory of Azerbaijan as a place where Prophet Noah lived. Indisputable and basic evidence is the tomb of Prophet Noah in Nakhchivan (Azerbaijan). Ptolemy mentioned that  Noah lived and died in Naxouana, i.e. Nakhchivan (36). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakhchivan_(city) Pezron, an abbot of La Charmoye in France wrote:  “Japhet was the eldest of Noah’s three sons. This patriarch’s eldest son was Gomer, the founder of a people, and who they could be but the Gomarians, from whom, ACCORDING TO JOSEPHUS, the Celtae or Gauls descended.  And if Gomer is the true stock of the Gauls, as I have already made out by so many proofs and authorities, they must have a language quite different from other people and that was the Celtic tongue.  But to carry this name no farther, which indeed properly appertained to no other than the European provinces towards the west, it was at FIRST THE LANGUAGE of the GOMARIANS IN ASIA, then of the SACAE, afterward of the TITANS, and also of the CIMRI or CUMMERIANS. After all, that is a series of many ages, it became, at LAST, THE LANGUAGE of the CELTAE, who was better known by the name of GAULS” (Maclean, 27-28).

All mankind, however, do not reverence their dead to the same extent. The peculiarity is most characteristic of the earlier underlying races, whom we have generally been in the habit of designating as the Turanian races of mankind. But if that term is objected to, the tomb-bailding races may be specified - beginning from the East - as the Chinese (Read Turks); the Monguls (Read Turks) in Tartary, or Mogols (Read Tatars/Turks), as they were called, in India; the Tartars in their own country, or in Persia (İlyas Şimşek's note Persians never existed in History, only after 1925; Persian language is created in Tatar/Turkish palaces In Özbekistan/Tacikistan/Sasanid Empire; Persians have no legacy. All those monuments are created by Turanians (Turks); sinds Persians (Turks) seem to be fakely classified as Arian/İndo european language) the ancient Pelasgi (Read Turks) in Greece; the Etruscans (Read Turks) in Italy ; and the races, whoever they were, who preceded the Celts (Read Turks, spoke Turkish) in Europe. But the tombbuilding people, par excellence, in the old world were the Egyptians (Read Turks). Not only were the funereal rites the most important element in the religious life of the people, but they began at an age earlier than the history or tradition of any other nation carries us back to. The great Pyramid of Gizeh was erected certainly as early as 3000 years before Christ; yet it must be the lineal descendant of a rude-chambered tumulus or cairn, with external access to the chambers, and it seems difficult to calculate how many thousands of years it must have required before such rude sepulchres as those our ancestors erected - many probubly after the Christian era - could have been elaborated into the most perfect and most gigantic specimens of masonry which the world had yet seen. The phenomenon of anything so perfect as the Pyramids starting up at once, absolutely without any previous examples being known, is so unique* in the world history, that it is impossible to form any conjecture how long before tiiis period the Egyptians tried to protect their bodies from decay during the pro- bationary 3000 years.' Outside Egypt the oldest tumidus we know of, with an abso- lutely authentic date, is that which Alyattes, the father of Crousus (Turk), King of Lydia (Turk), erected for his own resting-place before the year 561 B.0, It was described by Herodotus,' and has of late years page 30-31 Buddhism is the religion of a Turanian race, (page 506) using that word, as used by its inventors, in the broadest possible sense. The Persians say Iran and Turan, and Iran and Aniran. terms equivalent to our Aryan and non-Aryan ; and Buddhism is not and never was, but exceptionally, the religion of the Aryan race, and is not now professed by any Aryan people in any quarter of the globe. ........... Page 506 After, however, a thousand years of apparent supremacy, the old faith came again to the surface and Budhism disappeared from India, but still remains the only faith of all the Turanian nations around it and wherever the Aryan races never seem to have settled. If any Turanian blood remained in the veins of any of the various races who inhabited Europe in the middle ages, it is easy to understand how the preaching or doctrines of any Buddhist missionaries or Turanian tribes must have struck a responsive chord in their heartn, and how easily they would have adopted any new fashion these Easterns may have taught. As we have had ...... to point out above, the dolmen-builders of Europe certainly were not Arjan. Nor, if we may trust M. Bertrand and the best French antiquaries, were they Celts; but that an old pre-Celtic people did exist in those parts of France in which the dolmens are generally found appears to me indisputable. Though the more active and progressive Celts had commenced their obliteration of this undemonstrative people at the time when written history first began in their country, there is no reason to suppose that their blood or their race was entirely exterminated till a very recent period, (He does not know or does not dare to say 'those who did not convert/forced to Chistianity: exterminated!'. Others; Who did convert: lost their Turkisness, language, customs, and ofcourse believessystem/faith, legacy. A total Transformation/Reset!) and it may still have been numerically the prevalent ingredient in the population between the fourth and the tenth centuries of our era. Of course, it is not intended to assert or even to suggest that the Western nations first adopted from the East the practice of using stone to accentuate and adorn their sep.... Page 507. Furthermore it says: all toponymy ending with AK/Ack in France is not only Turanian but (Finally) admitting that it is Turkish. I will do an other separate section about the toponomy tracing back to Turkish language. archive.org/details/rudestonemonume01ferggoog/page/505/mode/2up?view=theater

Western linguists called the language "Old Latin" between the 3rd century BC and 75 BC; "Classical Latin", the language between 75 BC and the 3rd century AD, "Late Latin", the language between the 3rd and 6th centuries "Medieval Latin", the language between the 6th and 15th centuries, 15th to 18th century language "Renaissance Latin" and the language after the 18th century as "Contemporary Latin". However, this classification is wrong. Relics from "Old Latin" for Western linguists It is an "incomprehensible" language. There is no sharp distinction between Old Latin and Classical Latin. The written language used by educated elites by scaling (standardizing) is called "Classical Latin" today. The language that is today called "Vulgar Latin" is also colloquial language. Therefore, the "vulgar" language spoken until the 3rd century is the evolution process of an Early Turkic language, Türük (etruscans/tü-rü-şük-çe-nin), and has changed considerably from its original structure in this process. The language scaled by the educated elite is the torluk (official) Roman language, and it has now transformed from Early Turkish and has become a separate language from Old Turkish. From the language called "vulgar Latin" Latin languages were formed. Old Turkish, which evolved from Early Turkish, also underwent its own evolution and changed considerably from its original structure. This change is seen in the inscription reading I made below. Thus, Turkish and Latin languages became separate languages. But their origins are one. After the division of the Roman Empire into East and West in 395, the Western Roman Empire collapsed in 476. Thus, starting from the 6th century AD, the Romance language began to evolve into what is now called "Latin". Pages from Turkolog/linguist Arif Cengiz Erman's book Real History of Anatolia A BUİLD UP İN TURKİSH OF THİS TEXT İS AVALİABLE AND A ENGLİSH TRANSLATION OF İT in the copy below Batılı dilbilimciler MÖ 3. yüzyıl ile MÖ 75 yılları arasındaki dili "Eski Latince"; MÖ 75 ile MS 3. yüzyıl arasındaki dili "Klasik Latince", 3. yüzyıl ile 6. yüzyıl arasındaki dili "Geç Latince", 6. yüzyıl ile 15. yüzyıl arasındaki dili "Ortaçağ Latincesi", 15. yüzyıl ile 18. yüzyıl arasındaki dili "Rönesans Latincesi" ve 18. yüzyıldan sonraki dili de "Çağdaş Latince" olarak adlandırmaktadır. Ancak bu kabillandırma (sınıflandırma) yanlıştır. "Eski Latinceden" kalan yazılar Batılı dilbilimciler için "anlaşılmayan" bir dildir. Eski Latince ile Klasik Latince arasında ise keskin bir ayrım yoktur. Eğitimli seçkinlerin ölçekleştirerek (standartlaştırarak) kullandığı yazı dili, bugün "Klasik Latince" olarak adlandırılıyor. Bugün "Kaba Latince" olarak adlandırılan dil de, günlük konuşma diliydi. Dolayısıyla 3. yüzyıla kadar konuşulan "kaba" dil, bir Erken Türk dili olan Türüşükçenin evrim sürecidir ve bu süreç içinde özgün yapısından oldukça değişmiştir. Eğitimli seçkinlerin ölçekleştirdiği dil ise torluk (resmî) dil olan Romak dilidir ve artık Erken Türçeden dönüşerek Eski Türkçe ile birbirinden ayrı bir dil durumuna gelmiştir. "Kaba Latince" olarak adlandırılan dilden, günümüzdeki Latin dilleri oluştu. Erken Türkçeden evrilen Eski Türkçe de kendi evrimini geçirerek özgün yapısından oldukça değişti. Bu değişim, aşağıda yaptığım yazıt okumasında

Trojan language was not certainly an Indo-European language such as Greek nor Hittite. Probably related to Sumerian.

1.00 min of listening still waiting to hear the Trojan Language, we don't need your futile introductions, get straight to the point or we refuse to prosecute the video.

Etruskia means have no brain, dionis means knows and parted in albanian.

Aleksander means is born like a dream in albanian. Find what it means in greek?

Troje in albanian means land for building purpose. And arë land for planting. In italian and english arare means to work rhe field like in albanian.

They spoke a celtic type language wich could be understud by the etruscans. Thracian, less greek. Alexander its not even a greek name. Its barbarian celtic, Alaksandu.

i think piyamaradu is achillies and alexander is paris of troy hes second name. Atras like atreus in greek is agamemnons father lol. and etiocles is a prince of thebes in bronze age. maybe homer give piyamaradu a greek name cuz hes fighting with the aceans. and hector a fantastik character to be more dramatic

MEDES >no diff

Most of you would not be able to distinguish 1500 BC Mycenean from 1500 BC Minoan but yeah... you talk of "different civilisations there". Hilarious! The "minoan civilisation" was invented overnight by a British spy and agent who was sent there as an "instigator" - yes I talk about Arthur Evans, this british prick who was not a historian, not an archaeologist but a spy. The site of Knossos was not found by him, not even excavated by him first, but by local Greek Minos Kalokairinos the son of a rich merchant from Chania whose house Turks raided, killing his brother and stealing the collection of Linear B and A and Hieroglyphics (he was the first to make the distinction), and then next year the collection was found in the hands of Arthur Evans. Go figure.... Perfidious Albion at its best. Arthur Evans was hell-bent to call Crete a non-Greek island at a time the British Empire coveted Crete as a Cyprus No2. Let us not forget that the British refused the Greek identity to Cypriots and tried their everything to keep the island out of Greece, including trying to instill in them a separate ethnic consciousness, to no avail of course. In the same line of though, Evans' project was to kickstart that process of de-hellenising Crete and how better to do it by claiming a more ancient non-Greek past calling Greeks there as "invaders". By all means, Evans called the "Minoan civilisation" as non-Greek on the basis not of Hieroglyphics (2100-1800 BC) Linear A (1700-1500 BC) but really on the basis of Linear B (1500 - 1200 BC). As long as he lived he was attacking anyone saying the opposite. And attacking them viciously. Any Greek historian would be called by him "a nationalist" and any foreigner "a non-expert fool" if he dared proposed a Greek language for the Linear scripts. It was only after WWII (Evans died during WWII of old age) that people started openly suggesting a Greek provenance and of course in no time architect Michael Ventris and professor John Chadwick deciphered Linear B as Greek. However its Greek nature was showed already by American linguistic expert Alice Kober in the 1920s which had received Evans' vicious attacks - with Evans saying "Linear B is anything else apart Greek!" Just ask yourselves how on earth would anyone preclude that it was no Greek but any other language when it was found on Greek soil? Wasn't there a motive? Yes there was, I just stated it above. Now you need to note this : Minos Kalokairinos who had already divided the Linear scripts into A and B (not using these names though), as well as Evans himself (who just called them "non-Greek"), Alice Kober who showed Linear scripts' relation to IE languages "like Greek", as well as Michael Ventris, all took for granted that Linear B was just an evolution of Linear A and that both scripts carried the same language with 2-3 centuries apart. In fact, when Michael Ventris finished his official presentation of Linear B in 1955 he announced he had already done works for Linear A and that in the next 2 years he would pusblish its decipherment - openly stating of course that Linear A just like Linear B was Greek.....and then Michael Ventris died in 1956 in a freak accident in an empty road in North London when a truck went out of its way really to cause his car to fall in it. Tragic accident for sure, but the case ended there which is mysterious in the least. See... the dirty secret of archaeology is that everyone knows Linear A carries Greek. But they do not want to admit it. When Linear B was proven Greek the whole western European and north American established academic system (not talking about genuine academics but about the "networked ones", you know what I am saying, the establishment) they hated it, they hated Ventris, like Evans hated Alice Kober and "those nationalist Greeks" (LOL! in fact most Greek archaeologists were anything but nationalists, most were socialists, but really, whateever). And hence they try to deny the Greek nature of Linear A using as basis: 1) the higher % of ideograms and abbreviations which of course cannot be deciphered - note that even in Linear B plenty of ideograms andd abbreviations are not yet deciphered, some 15% of Linear B is not deciphered yet. In Linear A ideogramms and abbreviations may be anything up to 60% of the script, the rest is syllabic. 2) the considerably lower number of texts, having fewer words, fewer phrases. Still.... Linear A in its syllabic parts bears the exact same grammar and syntax as in Linear B and there are Greek words that can be read which would be impossible if there was no Greek language in those texts. In fact on the very few syllabic parts of earlier Hieroglyphics that predate Linear A if using Linear B values, we find Greek and so in positions of signifier-signified. The insistence on the alleged non-Greek nature of Minoans is thus a huge propaganda that goes on for 130 years now since the late 19th century when British agent Arthur Evans placed his foot on the island of Crete sent by his British agency. If you think it is the only such ongoing propaganda you are sorrily mistaken. Take the Steppe, Aryan, Kurgan, Yamnaya circus which takes a known steppe invasion from eastern to central-western Europe to elevate it as the "root of all IE languages" contrary to every linguistic and archaeological and even genetic element we have at hands.

What kind of RACIST Turkish propaganda is this bullshit, again? The Trojans of the war described by Homer were an Aeolian GREEK colony, with the same Greek religion, same Greek culture and Greek customs, same Greek dress, same Greek architecture, and same Greek language, evidenced through several archeological findings of Linear B shards and pottery everywhere which are the same as the Mycenaean language, clearly Greek. The fact that the Hittites call the Trojans from Ilion "Welusa", in their own Hittite language, is ingongruous and irrelevant. What the previous inhabitants of Troy may have been two thousand years before the Trojan war, and who were assimilated into the Greek Aeolian colony of Troy (layers of Troy 5, 6 and 7.. and maybe even Troy 4), is not "what the true language of the Trojans was". This is the same bullshit Turkish propaganda being spilled around masqueraded as "neutral theory" in order to claim a disconnection of Troy from it's Greek antecedents. Even in Trojan mythology, the Greek God Apollo is the God of the Trojans. The Trojans claimed that Poseidon established the Trojan walls. King Minos sent a contingency colony the before the war. ZEUS, the God of the Greeks supported the Trojans. Would a nationalist poem by the Greeks give their supreme God the role of supporting some non Greek people? It was a civil war been Greeks and only in the last ten years so we see this bullshit spreading across the Internet, flooding everywhere this propaganda, for the westerners who are all so uneducated they only get their information from Wikipedia and pretend "neutral" is "always in the middle" instead of the truth itself. All the Trojans have Greek names, Greek toponyms. And what's even more sinister is how the Pelasgians are being presented as "non Greek", even though they were a Greek phylum. The fact the Luwian and Hittite languages were also spoken in the vicinity, doesn't mean there is necessarily any correlation. But it would be convenient for antihellenic propaganda masquaraded as "information".

Το sum up : 1) Homer and all other Epics mention Troy and Troyans as bearing Greek names only, having Greek gods, Greek customs even Greek nick-names and distinguish them explicitly from their non-Greek allies coming from the interior. Mythology also mentions that Troy was founded by Arcadian Greeks. 2) Hittites referring to Wilusa (i.e. Ilion, the city of Troy) mention 2 of its leaders Alaksandu (which sounds very much the Greek name of Alexander) and Piyama-radu (which sounds very much like the Greek name Priamos), both names mentioned in the Epics (Alexander was the birth name of Paris, Paris was his nick name, Priamos was the nickname, his birthname was Podarkes). 3) Archaeology unearthed a city that looked like a Mycenaean citadel. and of course.... 4) Other than occasional trade items coming from the East as one would expect and which were a small minority of the local Greek stuff found in there, nothing non-Greek was found linked with the city of Ilion. Hittites themselves never claimed to have established there. Lydians were not yet there in western Minor Asia (e.g. Homer does not even refer to them - their ancestors Luwians were still in eastern Minor Asia). Modern "specialists": Troy was Hittite!!!! No!!! It was Luwian!!!!! LOL!

Apaliunas perfectly lithuanian name :D like Tarhunz - Parkuns ( Perkunas ) old lithuanian gods. About Wilusa - i could say any indoeuropean languahe, but not greeks. And not turks who were sitting in mongolianat that time

Up

Troy is in Shkoder , Albania . today is called Rozafa Castle .

Its been a long time since I've read the Illiad, but I think Homer said Troy was colonised by Greeks. In the Illiad the Greeks & Trojans have no problem talking to each other. Artifacts described by Homer, such as the boars' tusk helmet "worn by young gallants" & the silver bowl with four handles, with a small bird on each one leaning towards the wine & water mixing bowl, have been found at Mycenaean sites. Homer also mentions Achilles giving a prize of "rare iron" at Patroclus' funeral games. These things & many others show the author had a thorough knowledge of these times. Homer also mentions Achilles receiving a written message, of "deadly signs", which shows he was literate. I think the Illiad was originally written in Linear B, on papyrus in Mycenaean times. There is another piece of circumstantial evidence that gives some support for this. There is one word that doesn't fit the poetic verse, but the older version of the word in Mycenaean Greek does.

Luwian 🙃

Trojanët flasin Shqip Les Troyens parlent Albanais

Truvalılar traklardı, öyle biline vesselâm 🎉

Trojanet flusnin shqip

Darda😅 IST Albanische 🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱♥️👑

I was always convinced during the war it was some kind of Greek used among the elites. The commoners might have spoken several other more or less local languages of various origins.

Trojans spoke same language as Etruscans and left behind written monuments written in runic script, which is Turkic Orkhon-Yenisei runic script, therefore Etruscan texts are read using modern Turkic languages, this is language and writing of pre-Indo-European (pre-Indo-Iranian) population of Europe who lived and is living there, thousands of years before appearance of Hindus and Iranians from whom most of modern European peoples arose, all these things are carefully hidden and hushed up by European scientists, since Indo-Iranian-speaking population does not have deep roots in Europe and at time of builders of mounds and bronzes there were no Indo- There were no Iranians in Europe yet, so English Indians have been falsifying and writing false history for hundreds of years

David Rohl, in his 2007 book THE LORDS OF AVARIS, concludes that the 10-year Trojan War happened c. 874-to-864 BCE (in his 'New Chronology')), not c. 1194-to-1184 BCE as the standard 'Old Chronology' has it. Whether he's right or not, I'm not a specialist/expert on the topic to say, but I like his books and, as a layman, think he may well be onto something, even if he's only partly right. Rohl's re-dating of the major events in question, of course, calls into question the language(s) that would have probably been spoken by Trojans and Danaans.

Aeneas was a direct ancestor of Brutus of Troy, who founded the mighty Britons!

Unsolvable problem for the present. Without written evidence, its all speculation based on theory. One opinion is as valid as another in this situation.

Homer (or the poets named Homer) writes (really sings) many centuries after the Trojan war. Probably he (or they) changed the Trojan names in Greek. Trojan culture was related to the Anatolian (Hittite) world. The Hatti were the ancient inhabitants of central Anatolia, before Hittites' arrival, and probably spoke a non indoeuropean language (protokatvelian?). Trojans perhaps spoke Luwian or also a protokartvelian language or another ancient language forever unknown.

Recently, we have concluded so far that Troy is not necessarily "Troy", that is, there is less proven evidence that what we thought was the site of "Troy" in the Iliad may not have been. Then, there is the problem of the language. If we don't have the site, where there could be inscriptions, then what was the Trojan language really? ;)

From Romania : Latins (Thracians/Pelasgian)/Romance 😉 Forța Enea ! Forța Italy frații noștri ! 😉

The language of Troy was Welsh. The ancient Britons came from Troy after the Trojan war under the leadership of Brutus of Troy. The Welsh language is the Trojan language. That's why the island is called Britain, and it's people Britons, they were named after Brutus. The old name for the city of London was "Troia Nova", which means "New Troy", which was later bastardised to "Trinovantum" up until Lludd ap Beli changed it's name to London after himself. There was a big dispute over this at the time. That is also why the tribe around London at the time of the Roman invasion were called "Trinovantes". Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett did a tonne of research and literature on the history of the Britons and the Trojan war.

TROJET TONA OUR LAND IN ALBANIAN 🇦🇱

They were Illyrian Troj mean Land in🇦🇱

Trojans where the Romans called them later,Dardani di Iliri, they were Dardanian of the Illyrians , DNA results today still the same people exist in Kosovo and Albania and Macedonia, Montenegro and Dalmatia Today they’re called Albanians in the past they were in different provinces of ancient Illyria the only way to get the truth in history is with local people DNA test that will give you the honest truth

Their names were Greek, their nobles wanted to marry each other, their gods were the same but the Trojans themselves must have been Chinese...

the trojan names are greek the relegion is greek , the culture is greek , the trojan war is civil war greeks vs greeks