1. Firaxis celebrates the "Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month", and offers a give-away of a Civ6 anthology copy (5 in total)! For all the details, please check the thread here. .
    Dismiss Notice
  2. We have selected the winners of the Old World random draw and competition. For the winning entries, please check this thread.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Old World has finally been released on GOG and Steam, besides also being available in the Epic store . Come to our Old World forum and discuss with us!
    Dismiss Notice

Turkey in europe

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Italian Celtic, Dec 17, 2007.

  1. Quildavyr

    Quildavyr Man of sick jokes!

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,283
    Location:
    Konstantinople
    Impale is right word.
    Our sources say,he impaled Bulgarians,Turks,Greeks.Mehmet II punished him.
     
  2. Mirc

    Mirc Not mIRC!!!

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    15,825
    Location:
    Düsseldorf, ->Germany, E.U.
    Impaled Bulgarians, Turks, Greeks? Maybe. He wasn't impaling based on nationality. He was impaling spies, criminals, and his enemies in war (which were mainly Turks). That's a bit of a one-sided view, what you've got there. :)
     
  3. Quildavyr

    Quildavyr Man of sick jokes!

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,283
    Location:
    Konstantinople
    He was impaling the ottoman crew;) Is this mention ok?:)
     
  4. Verbose

    Verbose Deity

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    10,787
    Location:
    Sweden / France
    Oooh, you guys have so nicely planted your foot in it!:goodjob:

    This kind of historical bickering is precisely why defining Europe with reference to past history is a crap idea. European history, there's too damn much of it, everyone has a version of their own, and they're all at cross puposes with each other.

    So, Winner can come up with a Grand Version of the point of European history which serves his purposes. Fine. It looks pretty consistent. Too bad it's an arbitrary delineation of things, like all history. Others can do that too, according to some other paramentes. Which means anyone who tries it needs to be aware that he will be attempting to ram his version down the throat of some other nation or group of nations. The EU catch-phrase of "United in deversity" is there for a reason.

    And attempst at fiddling with a superhistorical definition has already occurred. The French (oooh, the French again!) tried to include an official European history in one of the treaties. And would you believe it, it read almost exactly like a French history! It started with Charlemagne...
    At that point the Danes, who can be quite witty, put out their own "official" version of "European history", this time beginning with "Gorm the Old", legendary iron-age king of Denmark.:lol:

    In this thread alone, if in a joking fashion, we have established that the Swedes and the French are "traitors" for historically consorting with the infidel Turk. And it's extendable. It might as well include most the protestant nation. So then the British, the Scandinavians, the north Germans, the Dutch (dunno' abiut the Belgians, maybe not) are out as well.
    And what do you know, we end up with a kind of "European history", at least the one we supposedly should count above all the other options, which pretty much divvys the place up along then lines of the entire mess cause by the dismembering of Charlemagnes inheritence! We can call the remaining in-crowd "the Habsburg Group" or somesuch.:)

    And I do realise that the conflict with the Ottoman empire is still accorded present day relevance in a certain part of Europe. I'm just saying that if I would latch on to my historical Swedish roots in a similar fashion, I should be all about riding into battle alongside my honourable Turkish allies to kill all of you darn heretics!:crazyeye:

    Which would be totally daft.

    And what about the division between Christian west and Muslim east? That would seem natural and necessary right? Except of course that there's this set of circumstances which fascinate intellectual historians.
    For all the religious conflict, Europe and the Middle East from the inception has a perfect historical record of seeing eye to eye in the basic philosophical world view. The religious issues are just foam on the surface by comparison to the legacy of the ancient Greeks and Romans, with a large chunk taken from the old Hebrews thrown in for good measure.
    By that standard the Christian and Muslim world form a historical unity. By such a count the border appears with sub-Saharan Africa, India and China (and even then it's blurred). The actual divider between Europe and the Middle East then is recent, and has to do with the rise of a secular scientific world view in the last three or four centuries.
    I'm not saying it's a less arbitrary choice of putting an historical cleavage point as to what might go into European vs. non-European, but it's not a more arbitrary choice than to draw it between Christian and Muslim either.

    Becuase, face it, history is much too open-ended to provide a definition which is not in the end arbitrary. The meaning of history is the one we provide, here and now.

    History is not a reason for defining who's in and who's out here. It's an excuse.
     
  5. Italian Celtic

    Italian Celtic real european

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    533
    Location:
    Italy the the land of sun in E.U.
    Scuse me

    are we speaking about Vlad Dracula or is a impression? :rolleyes:

    1) Turks and Mongolian have the same origins. The population of central asia and mongolia have the same look (yellow skin and small eyes). Ancient Huns and Turk were racially related with Mongolians but they mixed with other people and they take the modern look. The only trace of their origins is the same Altaic language (which is differnt from uralic language). Bulgarians, Macedonians, Ukrainians and the majority of Eastern/Central europe people have a genetic link with mongolian people too.

    2) Hungarian are proud to be Hunns. I heard the story of some hungarians wanted EU to recognize thier status of Attila's descendants :crazyeye:


    However stop with this historyjacking.
     
  6. Mirc

    Mirc Not mIRC!!!

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    15,825
    Location:
    Düsseldorf, ->Germany, E.U.
    No. Vlad Dracula is an imaginary character.


    Some Hungarians are proud to be Huns, some Englishmen are proud to be Vikings, or Romans, or Celts, that doesn't mean it's true. Not at all, actually. If you want, I can present you tens of articles where (Hungarian, among other) historians prove that this is a totally false myth.
     
  7. Italian Celtic

    Italian Celtic real european

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    533
    Location:
    Italy the the land of sun in E.U.
    Post them!!!
     
  8. Mirc

    Mirc Not mIRC!!!

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    15,825
    Location:
    Düsseldorf, ->Germany, E.U.
    Haha, I don't have the patience right now to look for too many, but here are some quick examples:

    http://www.oszk.hu/kiadvany/hsr/2000/notes.htm (Hungarian site)


    http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-34784/Hungary
    Britannica Online Encyclopedia


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


    http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/hunspir/hsp56.htm
    (Hungarian site, again)


    http://www.everyculture.com/Ge-It/Hungary.html


    http://www.applet-magic.com/hungary.htm


    http://www.statoids.com/uhu.html


    http://www.gotohungary.co.uk/article/118/A-Potted-History


    http://nation.com.pk/magazines/splus/2007/4-nov/lighterside.html


    http://mek.oszk.hu/01900/01993/html/index6.html


    http://www.palinstravels.co.uk/book-4404


    http://www.canadiancontent.net/profiles/Hungary.html


    Do you need more?
     
  9. Italian Celtic

    Italian Celtic real european

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    533
    Location:
    Italy the the land of sun in E.U.
    No thanks!!!!!

    My only mistake was "some Hungarians" because like wikipedia says

    Spoiler :
    Because the Huns who invaded Europe represented a loose coalition of various peoples, it is possible that Magyars were part of it.


    Magyars is the real name of Hungarians and their language confirm their common origins with huns/turks!!!

    The blonde hair of some hungarians is the effect of a large racial mix, and doesn't mean they are european.

    The blonde hair doesn't make a people "european"

    Do you need more?
     
  10. TheLastOne36

    TheLastOne36 Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    14,045
    Of course blonde hair doesn't mean european. Blonde hair evolved as a way to attract the other sex. It is common throughout the world including europe, Lebanon, Iran, native Australians, central africa, and a few other dozen places.

    the mongols/huns/onogurs/turks/ at that time that lived near the black sea and mixed with the hungarians could've had some blondes to.

    Edit:

    Here's a blonde boy from Vanuatu, a pacific island.

    Spoiler :

     
  11. Italian Celtic

    Italian Celtic real european

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    533
    Location:
    Italy the the land of sun in E.U.
  12. TheLastOne36

    TheLastOne36 Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    14,045
  13. ohcrapitsnico

    ohcrapitsnico Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,267
  14. Quildavyr

    Quildavyr Man of sick jokes!

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,283
    Location:
    Konstantinople
    I think,Verbose's opinion about history is right.It is an excuse:)
     
  15. Mirc

    Mirc Not mIRC!!!

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    15,825
    Location:
    Düsseldorf, ->Germany, E.U.
    In which link it clearly says it is fiction.... :rolleyes:

    Spoiler :


    "Large racial mix" meaning they mixed with someone that now makes up about 90% of their population. Of course blond hair doesn't make someone European, but they obviously are. Ask ANYONE.

    I'm not going to debate any more of this totally flawed history, so I'm out of this discussion. Sorry but I'm not going to get banned over getting angry on a silly discussion like this.
     
  16. Pannonius

    Pannonius Reconquistador

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,611
    Location:
    Caliphate of Europistan
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlad_Dracula
    I consider Vlad III. to be one of the great heroes of Romania, of SE Europe region, and of whole Europe. His "nom de guerre" means "son of the Dragon", a reference of his fathers membership in the prestigious Order of the Dragon. To me, prince Vlad is the inspiration and a model knight. God bless him.
    It is sad that he is made into a monster by a certain elements in the West Europe. He was no crueler than the average european prince of the period, and most certainly a saint compared to the Ottoman hordes. To voivode Vlad III.::salute:
     
  17. Quildavyr

    Quildavyr Man of sick jokes!

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,283
    Location:
    Konstantinople
    I cant understand your hatred.If you were mishandled by a Turk,get yourself a psychologe.No offence,just try to help.
     
  18. Pannonius

    Pannonius Reconquistador

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,611
    Location:
    Caliphate of Europistan
    So having respect for a european hero is hatred now?
     
  19. Bill3000

    Bill3000 OOOH NOOOOOOO! Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    18,464
    Location:
    Quinquagesimusermia
    No, but your moral relativism is hypocritical.
     
  20. Mirc

    Mirc Not mIRC!!!

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    15,825
    Location:
    Düsseldorf, ->Germany, E.U.
    I agree, and I can't see for the life of me how that post is hatred. But what I wanted to point out is that Dracula has never existed. Even your link redirects to "Vlad III the Impaler", his Romanian name was Vlad Ţepeş (pronounced "Tsepesh"). The name you are speaking of, which means "of the dragon", (since his father was member of the Order of the Dragon, as you said) is Drăculea, while "Dracula" is simply an invented name to make him look devilish. :)
     

Share This Page