"Tumuli....where they are regarded as the work of a Turanian people, the Indo-Scyths of history."
"Sangura again or Sagura was the name of a river in the country of the Khita or Hittites, according to the Assyrian inscriptions, and its ethnical character is apparent in its use as the proper name of one of the greatest Hittite monarchs, Snagara of Carchemish. Several native references to the Indian Sangala, as well as that of Isodorus Characenus, make it plain that its population was not Aryan, but Turanian or Indo-Scythic."
"Touran the Khatai"
"The mounds begin with the Tells of Syria , are followed on the west by the Lydian and other similar tombs of Asia Minor, on the east by the tumuli of the Caucasus India, Tartary, Siberia and Japan and on this continent give name to their otherwise unknown architects, the Mound Builders."
"Hamath, a Hittite word, yields its meaning only when we discover it in the native name of Japan which is Yama-to, the mountain door ; and this again explains the Bible expression "the entering in of Hamath". Hittite colonists, or Greeks who had dwelt with Hittites in Asia Minor, carried the word into Europe as Haemus and Hymettus. The Kathaei carried it with them to India, where it became on Aryan lips Himavat, afterwards to change to Himalaya. Among the survivals of the ancient name on this continent I may mention Yuma, that of a tribe in south-western California to which, with the other members of the family so designated, I shall have occasion to refer more than once, and Yemez the name of a Pueblo people of New Mexico. The languages of these two peoples are undoubtedly Khitan. Another group of Khitan names to which I can only briefly refer, as I have already directed attention to them in my paper on "Hittites in America" has been linked with the Kathaei by written on ndian antiquities."
The Hittites: Their İnscriptions and Their History: Vol i - Vol ii
Prof.John Campbell
The Hittites: Their İnscriptions and Their History: Vol i - Vol ii
Prof.John Campbell
"The Scythians are the Turks / Turanian"
....
A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian Or South-Indian Family
of Languages by Robert Caldwell
....My own theory is that the Dravidian languages occupy a position of their own between the languages of the Indo-European family and those of the Turanian or Scythian group- not quite a midway position, but one considerably nearer the latter than the former....page vii
.... In some particulars- as-might be expected from the contact into which the Sanskrit-speaking race was brought with the aborginal races of India-Sanskrit appears to differ less widely than the other Indo-European tnongues from the languages of the Scythian group. One of these particulars- the appearance in Sanskrit of consanants of the cerebral series- will be discussed fruther on in connection with the Dravidian system of sounds. Mr.Edkins in his "China's Place in Philology" has opened up a new line of inquiry in regard to the existence of Turanian influences in the grammatical structure of Sanskrit. He regards the inflexion of nouns by means of case-endings alone without prepositions in addition, as the adoption by Sanskrit of a Turanian rule.
He thinks alsı the position of the words in a Sanskrit prose sentence is Turanian rather than Aryan.
It is an invariable law of the distinctively Turanian tongues that related sentences precede those to which they are related. It is another invariable law that the finite verb is placed at the end of the sentence. In both these particulars Mr.Edkins thinks that Sanskrit has yielded to Turanian influences.
This certainly seems to be the case with regard to the vernaculars which have been developed out of the old colloquial Sanskrit; but in so far as the Sanskrit of literature is concerned, the Turanian rule is far from being universally followed. Mr.Edkins himself gives an illustration from a Sanskrit prose story (p315) which shows that a relative clause sometimes succeeds, instead of preceding, the indicative clause , and that the position of the finite verb is not always at the end of the sentence. Perhaps all that can be said with certainty is that in Sanskrit prose and in prosaic verse related sentences generally precede, and the finite verb generally comes last. Up to this point, therefore, it may perhaps fairly be held tahat Turanian influences have made themselves felt even in Sanskrit.
We are safer, however , in dealing with facts than with causes; for on this theory it might be necessary to hold that LATIN syntax is more TURANIAN than GREEK, and GERMAN more TURANIAN than ENGLISH.... page: 56
...I described the conclusion I arrived at as similar to Rask's, not the same, because I did not think it safe to place the Dravidian idioms unconditionally in the Scythian group, but preffered considering them more closely allied to the Scythian than to the Indo-European. In using the word "Scythian", I use it in the wide, general sense in which it was used by Rask, who first employed in to designate that group of tongues which comprises the Finnish, the Turkish, the Mongolian, and the Tungusian families.
All these languages are formed on one and the same grammatical system and in accordance with the same general laws. They all express grammatical relation by the simple agglutination of auxiliary words or practicles ; whilst in the Semitic languages grammatical relation is expressed by variations in the internal vowels of the roots, and in the Chinese and other isolative, monosyllabic languages, by the position of words in the sentence alone.
The Indo-European languages appear to have been equally with the Scythian agglutinative in origin; but they have come to require to be formed into a class by themselves, through their allowing their agglutinated acuwiliary words to sink into the position of mere signs of inflexion.
The Scythian languages have been termed by some the Tatar family of tongues, by others the Finnish, the Altaic, the Mongolian, or the Turanian; but as these terms have often been appropriated to designate one or two families, to the exculision of the rest, they seem too narrow to be safely employed as common desgnations of the entire group.
The term Scythian having already been used by the classical writers in a vague, undefined sense, to denote generally the barbarous tribes of unknown origin that inhabited the northern parts of Asia and Europe, it seemed to me to be the most appropriate and convenient word which was available.
Professor Raski who was the first to suggest that the Dravidian languages were probably Scythian, did little more than suggest this relationship. The evidence of it was left both by him and by the majority of succeeding writers in a very defective state. General statements of the Scythian relationship of the Drabidian languages, with a few grammitaical illustrations, occupy a place in Prichard's "Researches" and have been repeated in several more recent works.
Prichard himself wished to see the problem, not merely stated, but solved; but I believe it can never be definitely solved without previously ascertaining by a careful, intercomparison of dialects, what were the most ancient grammatical forms and the most essential characterstics of the Dravidian languages and of the various families of languages included in the Scythian group respectively.
It was not till after I had commenced to carry the first edition of this work through the press that I became acquainted with Prof.Max Müller's treatise : éOn the present state of our knowledge of the Turanian Languaes" included in Bunsen's "Outlines of the Philosophy of Universal History". Notwithstanding the great excellence of that treatise, I did not find my own work forestalled by the Proffesor's. His was a general survey of the whole field....page 65
...An excellent beginning has been made in Boller's treatises: "Die Finnischen Sprachen" and "Die Conjugatşon in den Finnischen Sprachen" , Schott's treatise: "Über das Finnish-Tatarische Sprachengeschlecht" and Castren's "De Affixis Personalibus Linguarum Altaicarum" ; in addition to which we have now Professor Hunfalvy's paper "On the Study of the Turanian Languages" in which he carefully compares the Hungarian, Vogul, Ostiak and Finnish and proves that the vocabularies of those four languages are of a common origin, and that their grammars are closely related....page 66
...It is also to be remembered that the Turkish, Finnish, Hungarian and Japanese languages though in many particulars distinctively Turanian, have become still more inflexional than the Dravidian....page 68
Professor Oppert holds that the people by whom this language was spoken were Medians, but agrees with Mr.Norris in considering the language Scythian- that is Turanian....page 69
and more:
A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian
Or South-Indian Family of Languages ,
Robert Caldwell
 |
| Sümer Uruk Şehri |
 |
| Taştık Türk Kaya Resmi |
 |
| New Mexico - Danimarka |
 |
| Beycesultan/Denizli - Hierapolis Müzesi |
 |
| Türkmenistan |
 |
| Hopi Amerika Yerlileri |
 |
| Alacahöyük / Güneş Kursu/Geyik/Koç |
KAPADOKYA ADI
Katpatuk, ya da KATA PATUKA şəklində bu yurdun isminə Daranın Behistun yazılarında rastlanır. Buradakı ilk söz KATA bildiyimiz Htht ölkəsinin ismidir. Hitit şəkli bibliyadan alınmış, və tahrif olunmuş şəklidir.
Assur, Mısır yıllıklarında bu ölkənin ismi KHİTA, KHATA gibi keçər. HATTİ şəklini də xatırlayın. Anlamı da "demir" və ya "demirçilər ölkəsi" gibi açıqlanır.
En eski erməni yazılarında İ.S. (5-6 yy.) Kappadokiyanın ismi GMAİR-K, yəni KİMMER-LƏR kimi keçir.
Bunu da o saxtakarlara ilətən olsa çox sevinirim.
Yəni ermənicədə KATPATUK denilən terim kaydlara keçməmiştir.
Elşad Alili / Bakü
YANİ ADI ASLINDA KAPADOKYA DEĞİLDİR, KHITA, KHATA 'DIR.
ANLAMIDA "DEMİRCİLERİN ÜLKESİ"DİR, ATLARIN DEĞİL .
İONYALILAR GREK DEĞİLDİR / YUNAN ALDATMACASI ANADOLU VE TÜRK TARİHİ
"Oysa tüm bilim dallarında olduğu gibi, antik tarih kaynaklarını da tarafsız ve önyargısız olarak araştırıp, incelenmesi gerekmektedir. Çünkü ―gün ışığına çıkarılanbilimsel bilgi ve bulgular” mevcut antik tarihin Türkler aleyhine saptırıldığını ortaya koymaktadır. Batılıların, yüzyıllardır Türkler aleyhine geliştirmiş oldukları düşünce ve tutumları, onların antik tarih yazılımına da fazlasıyla yansımıştır.
Şöyle ki, ―Türk adının, ya da Türklerle ilişkilendirebilecek adların kullanılmamasına ve bazı durumlarda da bu adların ustaca gizlenmesine özellikle dikkat edilmiştir. Aslında bu yanlı çalışmaları yapanlar açısından bakıldığında, bu davranışları gayet doğaldır, çünkü Türklerin antik tarihini ortaya koymak ve miras haklarını Türklere teslim etmek, Batılıların çıkarlarına ters düşmektedir. "
Tarihten günümüze gelinceye kadar, Türklerin pek çok haksızlığa ve zulme uğratıldıklarını göstermiştir. Bunların içinde en vahim olanı, Türklerin kimliğini, antik tarih ve atalarını öğrenmelerinin engellenmiş olmasıdır.
Bilhassa altı yüz küsur yıllık Osmanlı İmparatorluğu döneminde, zamanla Osmanlı yönetimine hâkim olan yabancı kökenli Hıristiyan eş, valide, akraba ve devşirmelerin, Türk kimliği, dili, dini ve tarihinin tamamen ihmal edilmesine ve Türk kimliğinin ―ümmet anlayışı” içinde eritilmesine neden oldukları belirlenmiştir. (Melting Pot Theory)
Tarih içinde Türklerin başına gelen tüm olumsuzlukların farkına varan, dile getiren Kaşgarlı Mahmut, Karamanlı Mehmet Bey vb gibi değerli insanlar elbette vardır.
Ancak bunların içinde Türk tarih, dil ve kültürüne en kapsamlı ilgi duyan ve bu yönde kalıcı çalışmaları çok önemli bir konu olarak gören Ne mutlu Türküm diyene diyerek özgüveni tam olması gereken yüce Türk milletinin ve cumhuriyetinin kurucusu Mustafa Kemal Atatürk‘tür. ...."
