Printable View
I love the study of origins. Whether it is where a word originated, how a city was established, or from what people that an ethnic group or nation was born.
I'd like to start this thread discussing the origins of the Turks and/or the establishment of Constantinople. If you would like to bring up other items for discussion after this one is discussed, feel free.
Who are the Turks?
Ok Bien, here's a cut and paste:
Bien, Constantinople fell to the Ottoman turkish empire in 1453, if I'm remembering my history. The turks were originally a people who migrated from central Asia (perhaps I think where Kazahkstan is now) and slowly settled in Asia Minor, what is now Turkey, I think around the 10th century. Slowly they took away what was the Byzantine Empire, especially Turkey and really could not take the city of Constantinople for quite a while. It's location was extremely difficult to sack it. I believe gun powder and the development of cannons which smashed down the Constantinople walls were the deciding factor. The last Byzantine emperor, I can't quite remember his name, decided to go down fighting with the city rather than escape. A fascinating history. Of course this is all by my memory, so go and look it up and let me know if I'm off with the facts somewhere.
Sorry, but I can be lazy. ;)
I'll let you off this time, but you have to visit this thread often...:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Since the topic of the Turks is up, what continent is Turkey technically a part of? I always think of it as the gateway between Europe and Asia, as it has elements of both.
Here's what Wikipedia has to say:
Quote:
Due to its strategic location astride two continents, Turkey's culture has a unique blend of Eastern and Western tradition. A powerful regional presence in the Eurasian landmass with strong historic, cultural and economic influence in the area between Europe in the west and Central Asia in the east, Russia in the north and the Middle East in the south, Turkey has come to acquire increasing strategic significance.
I would consider it the same as I would Russia. Back before the fall of the Romanov dynasty, the Czar line was related to the European royal families. Since inbreeding was a problem among the royal families (marrying common people was socially unacceptable), the royal families would cross national lines. While the majority of Russia was obviously in Asia, the heart of the leadership was tied to Europe. The architecture is very much linked to the other Asian styles. Where did the Russian people come from...and what similarities do Constantinople and Moscow have? Both seem to be bridges of the Eurasian gap.
Hopefully a Turk will show up and give us their thoughts.... http://planetsmilies.net/music-smiley-7515.gif
Constantine the 11th I believe his name was, the last Byzantine Emperor.
Refresh my memory if you can. Constantine (the 1st) was a Roman Caesar in about 325 AD...is that right?Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
This website goes further back but I figured this was what was being discussed:
http://www.turkishodyssey.com/turkey...y/history2.htm
Quote:
The Byzantine Empire is one of the longest-lasting empires in world history. Its name, which is derived from the name of the city of Byzantium, was given by 19C historians. Byzantines always called and regarded themselves as Romans. In 330 AD Constantine made Byzantium Rome's second capital, naming it Constantinople which meant "city of Constantine".
In 395 AD Theodosius I divided the Roman Empire into two, Eastern and Western. Culturally, the Western part was Latin and the Eastern part was Hellenistic. Soon after, in 476 AD, the Western Roman Empire collapsed and the Eastern Empire survived. The Eastern Romans were Christians and changed their language from Latin to Greek.
Justinian I's successful efforts to reconquer the West followed in the early Byzantine period.
The Middle Byzantine period (610-1081 AD) began with the triumph of Heraclius over the Persians and his subsequent defeat by the Arabs. After 634 AD Arabs seized Palestine, Syria and Egypt and raided deep into Anatolia.
In the 11C, a struggle started between the generals who were great landowners and the bureaucrats. Distracted by this struggle, the emperors were unable to resist the Seljuks, who began conquering Anatolia.
In 1204 AD the Fourth Crusade seized and brutally sacked the capital and established the Latin Empire of Constantinople.
In 1261 AD the ruler of Nicaea regained Constantinople and refounded the Byzantine Empire which had to face threats from Westerners and from Turks in the East. Gradually reduced in area, the Empire finally succumbed in 1453 AD to the Ottoman Turks, who pronounced Constantinople to be the capital of the Ottoman Empire.
In this final period, the landed aristocracy dominated all provincial and central administrative positions of the Byzantine Empire. The army consisted of mercenaries and a "feudal" levy based on government properties awarded to great landlords in return for military service. The Byzantine emperors repeatedly tried to reunify the Orthodox and Catholic churches in return for Western aid against the Turks, but their efforts proved futile.
[QUOTE=BeccaT;716340]Since the topic of the Turks is up, what continent is Turkey technically a part of?......QUOTE]
You're confused about Turkey - I'm confused about Egypt. I was fairly certain it was in Africa until I renewed my travel insurance after booking a trip to Egypt next year. 'Are you just going to Europe?' asked the insurance agent. Me: ' No, I'm going to Egypt - it was in Africa the last time I looked.' Agent, cheerily, 'Oh, that's all right, it's Europe as far as we are concerned....'
Can I throw further confusion into the discussion? I've always thought of Turkey as being in the Middle East, technically Asia, but not as Asiatic as, say, India or China. Or is India Asiatic - is it still regarded as a sub-continent of itself?
Borders are all arbitrary anyway... as is this grouping of countries into vast an generalized areas such as the "Middle East," the "Balkans", etc. Turkey, according to the way geography is set up right now (though borders have been fluid and will continue to be so, I believe) is part in "Europe" and part in "Asia." Even Istanbul is split in such a way... once you cross the Bosforous bridge you enter the "Asian" side. A lot of Turks, as far as I know, do not like to identify themselves as Middle Eastern, though sometimes because of the religion and culture they are deemed so, and would prefer to be considered as European. Though some do claim the Middle Eastern status.
And Egypt is in no way part of Europe. Not by location at least. But a lot of countries are considered as part of Europe in such a way, like Malta. Though I have never heard that about Egypt before...
Those are some interesting points. Too often we group nations and ethnic groups because of their location. I love to study the beginnings of a civilization. That tells a lot about a people.
- If the Turks were originally from the Mongol area, what has influenced them since their origin?
- Who are the Indians? What relates them (or separates them) from the other oriental peoples?
- Why has Egypt been disassociated from Africa?
The middle eastern area does seem as if it is the origin of all ethnicities, branching out in their own direction. What thoughts do you all have concerning the three sons of Noah?
Ham, who is thought by some to be the father of the African ethnicities.
Shem, the father of the Semitic peoples.
Japheth, who is thought by some to be the father the Caucasian/European peoples.
^__^ As for Egypt, even if the travel company classed it as part of Europe, geographically, it is definitely and without question a part of Africa.
You won't find easily (possibly you won't find) a way to converge science with .. myth. [According to science, man appeared in Africa.]Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
----
As for Turks, "Constantinople" (Constantinopolis, Byzantion) was first a Greek city, then a Roman one. The region was invaded by the Persians, since the Damascen sultan Salahad al Din began reacting against the Crusades.
So, one thing is the city (geography) and another is the people (culture) who came to take it.
The city has its history, and it isn't attached to one people, specially, as it's been said, in borderlands.
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
The Byzantine empire is technically the continuation of the Roman empire. The reason for the distiction I believe is that the official language of the Byzantines changed from Latin to Greek around the sixth century. Even after the fall of the western half of the empire in 476, the Eastern half spent a century and more trying to get it back. The great emperoro Justinian almost recaptured the western half in the sixth century. But even to the fall of the Byzantine empire in 1453, they still considered themselves roman, and used the term Romanoi to refer to themselves. I'm not sure they ever used the term Byzantine. That may have been a later term after their fall. If you haven't noticed, I'm a roman history buff. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
Oh I should mention the conquorer of Constantinople, a fine leader and general of the Turkish people, the Sultan Mehmed II. I couldn't remember his name earlier and had to go refresh my memory.
Oh technically Turkey is in Asia I believe, but it straddles both.
1. There is, still, Romania (somewhat north). Who still speak a variation of modern Latin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
2. The Greek name of the town was Byzantion, from the days of the Greeks (bC). So, there is a Byzantine identity before the Roman empire reaches Byzantion. And the name of the town was changed around the days of the fall of the Western half of the empire, so ... it's very Byzantine, all right. And it's normal that they call themselves Romanoi. It was good for the towns to be considered coloniae, prouinciae ...
3. Byzantion/Constantinopolis-Constantinople/Istanbul was a town either in Europe and in Asia, always were. The name of the Roman province that now is the country called Turkey was Asia (Asia, Asiae). By Roman days, by the way, only what we now call Turkey was Asia prouincia. Beyond Asia, there was Mesopotamia. Beyond Mesopotamia ... it was very distant a place!
:thumbs_up
This is the best I have ever seen people contribute to a discussion...
I've enjoyed everyone input.
In fairness to the Travel Insurance Agent, I'm sure she really knew Egypt is in Africa - she did say 'As far as we are concerned...' by which I think she meant that as far as insurable risks are concerned, the risks for a trip to Egypt are regarded as the same as for a trip to a European country, short-haul flight, etc. As long as the Travel Company knows where Egypt is, I think I shall be ok.....I think.....I'll let you know next February.
One more funny detail about the name of the city: Many Turks insist on "Istanbul" rather that the greek name "Constantinople", without knowing that "Istanbul" is also a greek word, actually three words: "Is Tin Poli", meaning "in the Town". Greeks have always refer to Istanbul as "Poli", an abbreviation of "Costantinoupoli" and a reflection of the importance of the only real "City". !!;)
Thank you...I was going to ask what the meaning and origin of the name Istanbul was...my next question for you, lupe, now is:Quote:
Originally Posted by lupe
How are you able to read my mind? And what else have you read while in there?
Next area for discussion: How does Egypt differ from the rest of Africa? And why does those differences exist?
The land mass that Turkey is a part of is classed as Aisa Minor. (I think) It is also in a separate techtonic plate.
Sorry to go so far back into the thread, but I,ve only just read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
There is a very strong link between Moscow and Constantinople, forged when the Russians chose the Byzantine version of Christianity over the Roman one.
The Russian Church probably had more power and influence over Russians than the Tsar, and it looked to Constantinople for its lead.
I hope you'd be satisfy to regard this as a pure coincidence...;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
As of Egypt: This country, as well as Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco are geographically in Africa, but have long been culturally, ethnically and politically separated from the other African countries. Sahara desert has constituted a barrier for many centuries, thus creating a clear distinction between the people living on either sides of it. This being said, there are African governmental organisations to which all the above countries are members.
At the time when the Russians converted to christianity (988 AD), the Byzantine Empire was probably the most powerful state around (I am talking about Christian states, so we won't talk about Cordoban khalifat), so it's logical that prince Vladimir decided to take the religion from them. By the legend, he actually took couple of Greek cities and then when the Emperor wanted to negotiate peace, he asked for his sister's hand. Obviously, the princess couldn't marry a pagan, so vladimir happily converted to orthodoxy.Quote:
Originally Posted by prendrelemick
Russian Patriarch only became officially independent after the siege of Constantinople. He was pretty influential during the Tartato-Mongol times, but you are mistaken to say that he had more influence than the modren tsars. Peter the Great created Sinod which is an organization in control of church, and since then the Russian church became much less influential.
Traditionally, Ural mountains are considered to be the border between Europe and Asia, so Russia is half and half. If we look historically, before the Tataro-Mongols, Russia was very much part of the european history. Let's say Anna, daughter of Jaroslav the Wise, married the French King and actually ruled France as a regent for couple of years. After Russia was invaded, there was a period when the links with Europe, were virtually lost. Then, since Peter the Great and until the revolution, Russia again became part of Europe. Obviously there was a lot of antagonism during Soviet times, so it's kind of a sinusoid function :)
And whoever was talking about Russian architecture being close to asian... I'd love them to point out one non European building in Saint Petersburg :)
Not to say that, since the Roman empire, there's a tendency to make a Mediterranean culture (Mare nostrum ...).Quote:
Originally Posted by lupe
New Question:
I assume that Mare (like the Spanish Mar) means sea...What does nostrum mean?
What does Mediterranean mean...(middle of the land, maybe?)???
*Clears throat.*Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
Istanbul was Constantinople
Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Now it's Turkish delight on a moonlit night
Every gal in Constantinople
Lives in Istanbul, not Constantinople
So if you've a date in Constantinople
She'll be waiting in Istanbul
Even old New York was once New Amsterdam
Why they changed it I can't say
People just liked it better that way!
So take me back to Constantinople
No, you can't go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works?
That's nobody's business but the Turks
Istanbul (Istanbul)
Istanbul (Istanbul)
Even old New York was once New Amsterdam
Why they changed it I can't say
People just liked it better that way
Istanbul was Constantinople
Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works?
That's nobody's business but the Turks
So take me back to Constantinople
No, you can't go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works?
That's nobody's business but the Turks
Istanbul ....!!!!
wondered how long it'd take for that song to get posted
Oh,.. sorry :DQuote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
Mare nostrum is "Our sea", as Romans called it, after they conquered all the lands around the Mediterranean.
And yes: (mare) medi-terraneum is indeed, a sea in the middle of the lands.
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Boris239
I guess I was just referring to the similarity between these building...maybe they are the exception and not the rule...:D Any input on this subject would be appreciated...
http://www.funonthenet.in/images/sto.../taj-mahal.jpg
http://www.gweep.net/~saki/albums/Ca...rrow.sized.jpg
Nostrum I believe means ours. Nostrum mare, our sea. Yes, mediterranean, between the lands.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
Well, I am not a specialist in Indian architecture, but the arhchitectural tradition of the medieval Russia obviously comes from Byzantium cathedrals. There are traditional golden domes in both cultures- sometimes it has three- for the Holy Trinity, sometimes five- for Christ and 4 authors of recognized Scriptures- i.e there can be variations. There were practically no links between Russia and China/India until modern times. I am just an amateur on the topic, so can't contribute much...Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
Wasn't St Petersburg a New Town, established from scratch by Peter the Great as his 'Window on the West'? He toured Europe, I believe, and took back a very definite idea of what he wanted his Brave New City to look like - as much like Versailles as possible - as well as how he wanted to haul the court into modern Europe, willy nilly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boris239
Perhaps the strongest link between Russia, China, India, Iran and Turkey was through Tamerlane the Great who held sway over all these territories in the 14th century. His center of power was at Samerkand which is right in the middle of this huge area.
For even earlier links there is the famed Silk Road connecting China with Central Asia, eastern europe and even Africa. There are accounts of Greek explorer/traders reaching China in around 200 BC.