To Janus Warlike & Peremptory
Submitted by Glafira (Russian Federation), Jun 17, 2009 at 18:41
I should confess, I haven't enough time and effort to read the article itself. But suddenly got into Janus' comment. And would like to share with the auditory the following:
"I have briefly done it. Prehistory knows no Turks. They emerge for the first time around B.C.300 as Hiung-Nu in Chinese documents. They stand on a very low level of civilizations. Due to internecine war , population pressures part of them migrates westwards and around A.D. 375 emerges as the Huns on the Volga. Around the Altai mountains the other primitive Turks undergo heavy influences from higher Iranian cultures from where they borrow most civilizatory vocabulary and their first Iranian alphabet which they use to write their oldes written monuments - the Orkhon and Yenissei inscriptions... Lev Gumilev is one of the most outstanding Turkologists. I'd suggest for every Turk to read him first before turning to the powerful ignoramus and obscurantist Kemal Pasha and inspecting his pseudo-historical forgeries and lullabies."
This argument is really out-of-date, whether one likes it or not. The studies show that the Turk civilization is maybe (with high possibility) as old as Sumeric and Egyptian ones. Bona fide linguists and turkologists admit now that one can weightily talk about Pre-Turks in Pre-History. By the way, such is the name of one of the exceptional linguistic studies by Mr. Suleymenov, Olzhas.
The relationship between Sumeric language and Turkish one is obvious enough.
Anyway, I would not refer and trust to Chinese sources due to the well known fact that each their dynasty or ruling house falsified the history to the benefit of the current ruler. It's the common tendency in written history, of which the historians are aware.
I join Janus in his evaluation of Gumilev's talent and bona fide, as well as his appeal to Turks to read Gumilev's works. I completely agree with him here.
Nevertheless, everything goes on and things develop, as we know. If Mr.Suleymenov's books are widely translated into English, everyone could follow his fascinating investigations and agree with most conclusions, including one that derives the Hebrew language from pre-Turkish one….Neither Mr.Suleymenov, no (moreover) me intends to offend Jewish people (I'm partially Jewish myself) – he just tries to objectively analyze the things. I trust his argumentation because he is almost the only one linguist in the world who knows equally in depth both Slavic and Turk etymology.
I would recommend in this regard the brief introductory materials from the International conference "First Great Migrations", which was held in Paris last year. (http://www.firstgreatmigrations.org/index.php). The profound studies are made by researches from Pennsylvania and Massachusetts Universities, US.
I would also recommend another Mr. Suleymenov's fundamental work "Language of writing" (I'm not sure whether it's available in English and Turkish). There, you would found out that the name of the ancient Egyptian god Osiris derives from the pre-Turk "eus" (soft "o"), though just like the modern Turkish "os", which means "grow" in ALL Turk languages (with this or that phonetic options). And, following the language logics, "Osiris" means "one which grows" or very close to that. In modern Kazakh, for example, they still say "osir" when want to use the imperative form of Indefinite "os": "Osir" a tree and it will give you a shade when you suffer from the sun….
And the pre-Turkish "Pir" gave the rich roots (directly or indirectly) in a lot of languages:
As everybody knows now, the Olympus Mountain from ancient Greek mythology is located in modern Turkey, not far from Kemer resort, and not in Greece. One of Mr.Suleymenov's versions is that the tradition of Olympic Games originates in those times when the pre-Turks or other ethnos who perceived their culture, used to elect in such way their Head (of kin, kingship, etc.). According to Mr.Suleymenov, Olymp is from "Olym" and "Pir/Pyr", which meant "Dead Lord"…When the Head left this world, his tribe or people arranged the competition to reveal the strongest, fastest, smartest, etc. guy…who then was elected as a Pir. Again, in Kazakh, they still say "ol" for "die". He "oldy" - he died, he's gone.
"Pir" also gave "bir" (one, first – in Turksigh languages), "pervy" (the same meaning in all Slavic languages) and …. "Pharaoh" as "The First, the Highest" (between others).
Some Iranian dialects still have this word with the same meaning – Master, Lord. One also can meat this word in Persian fairy tales.
The famous Norwegian traveler and researcher Tur Heyerdahl was droved also by this breathtaking possibility of pre-Turks drift from Asia to Americas. Nobody explains distinctly the origin of country name "Peru". One can find the well-reasoned explanation of this "pir-pira-pra-per-peru, etc." etymology nest in Mr.Suleymenov's studies.
Actually, Mr.Suleymenov suggested the revolutionary approach to the linguistic analysis – "etymologic nests which are deriving from pictograms and then hieroglyphs", opposite to still popular within the "old-school" narrow specialists "phonetic similarity" approach.
Mr. Gumilev knew about the close relationship between Turk languages and American Indians languages, including those of Maya, Aztec, Sioux-Dacota. He mentioned in one of his work that the Turkish word/title "Quaghan" (which then transformed into "khan") is directly linked to Sioux-Dacota "Waqan".
As to Mr.Suleymenov's story, he knew Mr. Gumilev very closely and the last one considered him as a son for maybe 2 reason's: first, Mr.Suleymenov's father (repressed Kazakh poet) was the cellmate of Mr.Gumilev (who was also repressed as a son of "people enemy"), in prison camp in Kazakhstan. Second reason, maybe more weighty: both were the like-minded persons. Mr. Suleymenov was almost the last person whom Mr.Gumilev received before his demise. And the Great Turkologist Mr.Gumilev believed (and publicly stated this) Mr.Suleymenov the outstanding Turko-Slavic linguist.
I would also refer to the revolutionary works in genetics (which is more close to my educational background and current occupation), particularly in DNA genealogy and Y-chromosome haplotype analysis by American, Israel, German, Hungarian researchers – one can find them if really interested in this information. From these studies, one can learn that:
- modern Tuscans and Umbrans who partially originates from ancient Etruscan, bear the R1a haplotype group which is known as Altaic.
- Modern Ashkenazim Jewish also bear the same Altaic haplotype group and the appearance of this group in Jewish genotype is dated as early as III AD – they obviously must have had time to move from Altay to Western Asia and it means they already were a civilized ethnos by that time (latest studies say even about 7 BD, Kir's epoch, when the mixture of genetic material could take place during Median invasion into empire and further exodus of Jewish people to Judea and constructing the first City of Jerusalem – but of course, this should be investigated impartially and using the latest technology and conceptual achievements)
- Modern Slavic people bear the Altaic haplotype group starting from about XV BD…
One should also take in account the following: the linguists already know that the Etruscan script can be deciphered with help of pre-Slavic and pre-Turk runic scripts. Just to remind - the Etruscan scripts are dated back to VII BD…
Going back to Chinese source, I would, again, refer to Mr.Suleymenov's study and investigation of how pictograms developed into hieroglyphs and then alphabet. Chinese hieroglyphs took a lot from pre-Turk runic scripts – I'm not a professional linguist but accept the logics of argumentation here. By the way, this was mentioned also by Dane Dr.Thompson who was the first to link the Orkhon-Yenisei petroglyphs to Turk runes.
Talking about Iranians let me remind that they are the close relatives to the Slavic ethnoses – they are branches of one great Aryan tree…one can make further conclusions.
To conclude, my (and not only mine, let me notice) impression is that the Turk (not just Turkish) history undergoes a crucial revision towards more ancient age and much greater influence on the human civilization in general, than it was considered earlier.
As to the current battles around modern Turkish ambitions – it's just the sign of the growing Turks self-identification (this process can be observed in all Turkish-speaking countries and communities throughout the world) from one side, and the resistance to this process from that part of the world community which believes this process to be threatening to certain ethnic or/and political groups interests.
What's going on is the new turn of the mankind evolution. And it is particularly Mr.Gumilev's merit that he analyzed and substantiated the inevitability of the historic processes and the great significance of the human factor (human dignity) in them. The collapse of the Khazarian khaganate was predicted due to the immoral basis of that society.
In some sense, the current economy crisis is the collapse of another Khazarian khaganate.
Sorry, for such a sudden conclusion.
And thanks for your patient…
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (529) on this item
Comment on this item
You can help support Daniel Pipes' work by making a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes