Polat Kaya wrote

> Polat Kaya: And I explained that Turkish "ACELE EDER" (ECELE EDER)
> could not possibly have been anagrammatized from
> English "ACCELERATE" or even Latin "ACELERO" because Turkish is a
> much more ancient language than Latin, with roots going back to at
> least the Sumerian and Masarian times.

This is doubtful. The earliest direct evidence of "Turkish" broadly
speaking goes back to the Orkhon "runnic" inscriptions of the early
8th century CE, and we know that that language, usually called Old
Turkic, was already dialectally differentiated into at least three
dialects. To suppose an earlier incursion of Turkic languages into
Central Asia or the "Ancient Near East" is anachronistic. This
language was centered not far from Lake Baikal and well antedates the
Turkic incursions into Western central Asia and the Near East (pace
the early incursions of the western, Chionite and Hephtalite Huns
(Attila and Heftal) and the later Bulgars -- these were however not
Turkic proper in the most restrictive sense but "Macroturkic"
or "Turkochuvash".)

> I gave a complete answer to your question. So what is your point in
> the above comment? I see it purely as a distraction from the main
> topic - which is, that I am claiming that many English, Latin,
> Greek and other IE words have been manufactured by anagrammatizing
> Turkish words and/or phrases.

This theory is not supported by most reutable comparative or
historical linguists. They argue that Turkic is the western most
member of the Altaic family, whereas English Latin and Greek in fact
derive from Proto-Indo-European (PIE), which was a sister language
group, within the Nostratic Macrophylum to Altaic.

> Polat Kaya: The Turkish form of ACELE, as I pointed out in my
> previous response, is ECELE which does meet the Turkish "vowel
> harmony rule". This form is used in eastern Anatolia and
> Azerbaycan. It is very likely that "ECELE" is Turkic and it is
> very likely that "Arabic" got it from Turkic as many Turkish words
> and phrases have been anagrammatized into Arabic and then portrayed
> as Arabic words. In this forum, I have given many samples of
> Arabic words that have been anagrammatized from Turkish.

Polat, this "Anagramatisation" rule of yours seems sufficiently
flexible to make almost any language derivative of Turkish. For
instance it can be shown, using this rule that the Nyungar Aboriginal
lnaguage of Perth, Western Australia, where I live, by this means s
the original language from which English comes. It seems to be the
kind of "rule" which can derive anything from anything.

> Polat Kaya: On many occasions, I have said over and over that the
> ancient world was a Turkish speaking world in Asia, Europe and at
> least in North Africa. Similarly their Sky God religion was the
> dominant world religion. Thus the Anatolians were Turkic speaking
> peoples. The Anatolian language was Turkic before it was altered by
> the Greeks after Alexander the Great conquered Anatolia, the Middle
> East and ancient Masar.

This is not so. Anatolia was the homeland of at least four or five
major languages, none of which have been shown to be Turkic. Hattic,
the original language of Cappadocia, has been shown to be in fact a
NW Caucasian language, related to the Abkhazo-Adyghian language.
Hurrian, the language of Eastern Turkey is shown to be part of an
early Hurro-Urartuan family of languages, probably related to the NE
Caucasian language of Proto-Nakh. In the Taurus Mountains, the
language of Tabal was a Kartvellian tongue related to modern
Georgian, whilst in the West we find the Proto-Tyrsenoi, who later
emerged as Etruscans in Italy, who spoke a language which seems to
have developed from a very early "split" off the line that links to
PIE.

> Additionally, the Eastern Europe that you refer to has the name
> "BALKAN" and "THRACIA". BALKAN is a Turkish word, and THRACIA is an
> anagram of Turkish "TURUK OYU" (TÜRK ÖYÜ) meaning "The house/land of
> Turks". These names clearly tell you that so-called Eastern Europe
> was already inhabited by Turks for thousands of years.

This is what is called a FEM - False Etymological Method.
Unfortunately it is quite common amongst a certain type of
linguistics, in which etymological origins are improperly compared
and soincidental similarities are given a pre-eminence that is not
warranted.

You wrote

> However, it is the Altays and the rest of Central Asia that was
> their homelands. Over thousands of years they spread out of that
> motherland in all directions (e.g., other parts of Asia, Europe,
> Anatolia, Middle East, Northern Africa). All Turanian migrations
> towards Arabistan peninsula and North Africa, whether by south of
> Caspian Sea (i.e., through Iran) or North of Caspian Sea (i.e.,
> through Caucasus mountains and through Eastern Anatolia) meet
> at this point, that is, Eastern Anatolia and Mesopotamia.

It is true that the Turks did spread out in the fashion you describe,
but this was only in the period after the collapse of the Hsiung-Nu
Empire in Eastern Eurasia when Turkic started to replace Iranian as
the language of the people of the steppes.

> 5. Regarding the ancient Masarians when I called them TUR/TURK
> peoples, Mark Hubey said:
>
> "These people would be the Hyksos. And they did have a city called
> Abaris (Avaris) and they could be connected with the Turkic Apars.
> But the movement could have been from the Mideast to the steppes.
> There is much that is unknown."
>
> Polat Kaya: No they were not the Hyksos. What I am saying is quite
> different. The HYKSOS were much later incoming Turkish groups and
> were not the original Tur Masarians who established the longest
> living Tur/Turk state in human history, that is, the MASAR/MISIR
> (so-called "EGYPT"). HYKSOS constituted only a short period of
> that very long-lived TUR MASAR Empire (the XIV to XVII dynasties
> inclusive i.e., 1786 to 1567 B.C.. The original ancient Masarians
> were the ones that came from Central Asia.

Misr comes from the Assyrian word meaning "frontier". It was applied
to Egypt because they were the epople exiting to the South West
Frontier of the Assyrian Empire, over the "brook of Egypt". There
was no Masar Empire as you describe it. In fact the Egyptians of
this period referred to their land as KMT ("Kemet" meaning the "Black
Land" from the deposit of fertile silt left every year from the Nile
Flood).

> Most likely they were the SAKA group (about 3300 B.C.) which is
> also obvious from the name SKA (SAKA) of the second king of the
> ancient MISIR/MASAR.

Firstly the Saka did not exist 3,300 BCE. As a tribe of the Iranian
people on the steppe, they only arrived in their vacinity when the
Indo-Aryans moved from Transoxania into Afghanistan and India, circa
1,500 BCE. They only became known under the name Saka just before
the period of Cyrus, probably around the time of the Median Empire.

When you say the "second king of ancient Egypt was SKA, this too is
in error. The second king was Hor-Aha ("Fighting Falcon") son of
King Narmer.

> SAKA Turks are also known to be the ancient Turkish people and
> ancestors of Turks. The name is still preserved in the name of
> SAKA (Yakut) Turks in Asia.

Saka in fact were not Turkish speakers, but Iranians. It was only at
the end of the period when Kushana and later Hephthalites moved into
the region that the Partho-Saka's moved into Western India and Modern
Pakistan. Findings of the coinage of these kings clearly
demonstrates that they were not Turkic.

> Even the name "SCAMANDER" of TROY in Homer's Iliad is nothing but
> the Turkish name "SAKAMAN DERE" meaning "The Brook of Sakaman".

This is another FEM. the *-Andas" at the end of Scamander in fact
refers to an Asianic prefix, similar to the Greek *-inthos, probably
meaning something like the "place of", (as in Korinthos = place of
Kore) and is found underlying place names from the Caucasas to
Southern Italy.

> Of course the name TROY is nothing but the Turkish "TUR-ÖY" meaning
> the "House of TUR".

This is another FEM. In fact Troy is the Anclicisation of the
Ancient Greek Troas, which appears in the Ancient Hittite archive as
the territory of NW Anatolia. It seems to have been the homeland of
the TRS (Egyptian "Teresh" who were amongst the peoples of the sea
who attacked Egypt in the 13th century BCE. It also appears
Etymologically related to the name Tyrsenoi, the people later known
to the Greeks as Tyrrhenoi or to the Romans as Etruscans, who
according to Herodotus originally came from this region.

> You are right in connecting the name of Hyksos with the name of
> Turkish "APARS/AVARS" peoples, because of the fact that they built a
> city by the name "AVARIS" in lower Egypt as you also pointed out.
> Their remnants AVARS went all the way to Eastern and Central Europe
> and established the Turkish AVAR Empire. The name "BAVARIA" in
> Germany is named after them.

The Turkish Avar Empire, came from the westward spread of the Juan
Juan north of China, in the 8th century CE. We are hear talking of
the 17,00 BCE period, thousands of years before the existence of the
Avars. Once again on a FEM based around the Egyptian 'VRS (From
which Egyptologists reconstruct "Avaris") you are making a faulty
reconstruction.

> For everyone's information, Hyksos also built the city
> of "Jerusalem" ("Kudus", coming from Turkish KUT + US
> meaning "Sacred Wisdom" and referring to the ancient Turanian Sky-
> God - which is probably why the place is regarded as such a holy
> site [Encyclopaedia Brittanica (EB) 1963, Vol., 12, p. 9
> under "Hyksos"].

Just goes to show how out of date that version of Encyclopedia
Britannica is. In fact Jerusalem appears as Urusalimu in the archive
of Ebla, from 2,300 BCE, long before the arrival of the Hyksos. As
for the claim that Jerusalem was earlier called Kudus, this does not
appear in EB as far as I know.

> The name Hyksos has many Turkish meanings embedded in it.
> Embedding the name or attributes of Sky God in a title was the
> Turanian tradition in ancient times. HYKSOS were OGUZ people as
> their name indicates ("OGUZUS" meaning "we are the OGUZ people),
> The Greek letter "H" is actually Greek "eta" (pronounced s I) and
> Y is really a U, thus forming the name "IUKSOS", which when
> rearranged as "OKUSIS" becomes the Turkish phrase "OKUSIS"
> (OGUZUS). The HYKSOS are also known as the "Shepherd Kings".

In fact the name Hyksos comes from a Greek translation of the ancient
Egyptian word HEKU SHASU meaning lierally "Shepherd Princes" as
Josephus explains. In fact the real Hyksos of Egypt were not called
Hyksos at all but HEKT KHESET, meaning "Foreign Rulers".
Unforetnately the Greek expression prevails, giving Polat the chance
to make his FEM with the Oghuz Turks who did not exist for millennia
later. It seems that Polat is not the only one who makes FEM's.
Josephus and Manetho in this case made a big one.

> Polat Kaya: As I stated many times, the term "proto" is an anagram
> of Turkish "Bir-Ata". Many words IN ENGLISH starting
> with "pr", "pre" and "pro" are related to the Turkish word "BIR"
> (PIR). BIR is the name of number 1 in the Turkish numbering
> system. Similarly names like "primary", prima, prime, parma, etc.
> are all derivatives of Turkish "BIR" meaning "ONE" or "first in
> line". They are all related to the name of the ancient Turanian
> creator Sky-Father-God "BIR O" meaning "He is the only ONE". The

This is not so. Once again *pir in PIE is related to the English
first (OE = fyrst, from Germanic = *furistaz). "Pre" comes from the
Latin , "prae" meaning before. "Prime" comes from the Latin "primus"
again meaning first (also derived from the PIE *pir. The PIE *pir
may be related to a proto-Altaic *bir? as they were both members of
te Nostratic family of languages.

> Etruscan numeral name for "1" is also "PR" from Turkish "PIR/BIR".
> The Latin name for ordinal numeral 1 is PRIMUS which is again from
> Turkish word for ordinal number 1 "BIRIMSI" (BIRIMCI, BIRINCI). The
> Egyptian Kings (so-called PHARAOHS) deified themselves with the
> title of "PERU" (BIR-O). Additionally their palace was called "PIR-
> OY" (BIR-OY) meaning "the first house" which is pure Turkish.

In fact the mname was PR-O meaning "Great House" or rather "House
Great" as the Egyptians put the noun first and the Egyptian PR (most
probably pronounced *PAR was the word for house. Bir-oyu may be
Turkish for first house but again it is a FEM when considering the
Afro-Asiatic language of Ancient Egyptian.

> When TUR Masarians, so-called ancient "Egyptians," called their
> creator sky-god by the name "AMEN" they named it in Turkish
> meaning "O-MEN" ("He is Me" and also "I am Him"). When we replace
> the A in AMEN with its numerical value of 1, we get Turkish "BIR
> MEN" which again describes the Sky God. For the Pharoah, "BIR MEN"
> was expressing his highness in rank in Turkish - which was their
> language.

Again this is a FEM. The Egyptian God whose name is sometimes written
in English Amen, Amon or Amun, was pronounced in Ancient Egyptian
something like amOOn, with the emphasis on the second sylable.

Polat, I hope you don't take offence at my many corrections of your
post, but I couldn't let these errors go by un-commented upon. The
Turks have a glorious history of their own, without needing
to "steal" the history of the entire Ancient Near East through sloppy
linguistics.

Hope this helps

Regards

John