Felsefe

The 300 Spartans: International Scholars Identifying Turkic Roots in European Languages (So far, 214 authors from outside Türkiye – more to come.)

Kaan Arslanoğlu

28 May 2025

 

Dedicated to Anton Perdih

Dedicated to Bill Lipton

 

This article was previously published on academia.edu: https://www.academia.edu/129610934/The_300_Spartans_International_Scholars_Identifying_Turkic_Roots_in_European_Languages

 

Until the early 20th century, global scholarship largely accepted that the roots of European languages lay in the Turkic or Turanian language family, in short, in Turkish. At the very least, the vast majority of scholars recognized and wrote about the deep Turkic influence in European languages going back thousands of years. However, over time, expressing this truth became politically and ideologically inconvenient. Many significant scholars who naturally expressed such views were systematically ignored. Key works of the past were forgotten, treated as if they had never been written. A scientific mediocracy was tasked with branding every perspective outside the official narrative as “unscientific.” Today, even the most basic truths are targeted by this terror of mediocrity. This majority—Gugul-minded, Wiki-spectacled—blindly repeats clichés under the guise of science, disregards fundamental sources, avoids questioning, and refuses to investigate... Yet somehow, claims to know everything in just a few recycled sentences.

In what follows, you will see a quick overview of various scholars, writers, and works from ancient times to the present—those who voiced core truths shaped by the reality of life itself. These are the most valuable scholars of their time and today.

These people did not write these things because they loved the Turks. They did so out of scientific responsibility, objectivity, and because it was their duty as scholars. Many of them did not even like the Turks; some outright hated them. Likewise, it’s not some starry-eyed love affair with Turkishness that motivates me, but rather a deep commitment to truth. When truths are deliberately obscured, and even the tiniest spark of knowledge or insight is attacked by conditioned minds like programmed robots, my passion only grows stronger.

The scholars listed here wrote these things out of a deep longing for truth—a trait often crushed throughout history—and from a relentless curiosity. Fortunately, despite all the suffocating mediocrity, there are still people who burn with such passion.

Why is Turkish a root language—perhaps the oldest, or among the oldest languages? Let me summarize this in eight points:

I have demonstrated the Turkic origin of more than 15,000 words in European languages, as well as the Turkic origin of over 500 so-called Proto-Indo-European roots. Many of these also overlap with words from ancient languages such as Sumerian, Hittite, Akkadian, and Etruscan. These similarities are not just phonetic but also semantic and conceptual. The probability of mere coincidence is absolutely zero. The volume and systematic nature of these examples demolish the “coincidence” argument. When a distinct group of related Turkish words also appears in Sumerian, Hittite, or Akkadian, the possibility of randomness is eliminated.

When we find similar correspondences in Native American languages—languages that diverged from Eurasia some 20,000 years ago—it becomes clear which language is the root. For instance, if a word exists in Latin, Greek, and Turkish, the typical knee-jerk reaction is: “Latin and Turkish borrowed it from Greek.” But if that same word also exists in a Native American language with the same meaning, the real common root must be Turkish. There are Turkish words with no cognates in Indo-European languages but with clear parallels in Native American tongues. Doesn’t that prove Turkish as the source language? Native Americans never interacted with Greeks or Latins, but they were either in contact with Turks or were Proto-Turks themselves. In our studies, we also present thousands of parallels with Sanskrit.

The case becomes even stronger when we identify and demonstrate the sound-change laws that governed the transfer of Turkic roots into other languages. When we show 7–8 examples of such systematic changes, claiming “it’s just a coincidence” becomes absurd. And we have over 30, 40, or 200 examples for certain laws.

The maps and timelines of ancient human migrations, based on genetic studies published in the last 20–30 years, support the same conclusion. The most advanced and comprehensive of these is the work of Anatole Klyosov. These publications confirm the same structural codes we uncover in linguistic studies. Our evidence, in turn, supports theirs.

These same commonalities exist in cultural codes, legends, religions, monuments, carpets, clothing, music, symbols, and more.

A significant portion of Turkic words shared across Western languages also appear across many Turkish dialects, spoken thousands of kilometers apart and in entirely different countries. These words evolved within a conceptual unity both within and across dialects, forming clusters. This kind of internal consistency and branching pattern is rare in other languages, supporting the argument that these are originally Turkish words.

Like other ancient languages such as Sumerian and Hittite, Turkish is agglutinative. Agglutinative languages precede inflectional languages in linguistic evolution. Latin, for example, functions almost like a Turkish dialect—it strongly resembles Turkish syntax and could be considered agglutinative. In one of my studies, I demonstrated how many aspects of Turkish grammar persist within so-called Indo-European languages. In another, I showed how Turanian and Turkic structures are deeply embedded in English and German.

The similarity between the Old Turkic Orkhon alphabet and both the Etruscan and Latin alphabets... the perfect compatibility of the Latin script with Turkish pronunciation... the unique phonetic alignment in Turkish that is unmatched in other languages. For example, the vertical sharpness of the letter ‘i’ and the dominance of ‘o’ in words expressing roundness. Finally, consider this: the world’s earliest script—Sumerian—is filled with Turkish words.

Heroes of Science

Alinei / Mario Alinei (1926-2018) who was considered one of the most important linguists in the world in the middle of the last century and was the president of many international linguistic associations, was suddenly excommunicated and forgotten when he wrote the book “Etruscans were Turks”. One of those who talk about the Turkic roots of the Etruscans was Mario Alinei, in his book “Etruscan: an archaic form of Hungarian”. His next very important work is: Gli etruschi erano turchi: dalla scoperta delle affinità genetiche alle conferme linguistiche e cultura - 2013 (Etruscan were Turk)… Mario Alinei begins by citing genetic studies to prove Etruscan-Turkish kinship. Vernesi et al. (2004); Achilli et al. (2007); Pellechia M, Negrini N, Colli L (2007); the publications of Alberto Piazza, Antonio Torrini (2007) made one thing clear: The Etruscans were most closely related to Anatolian Turks.

Gönül Yektaş Biancat wrote an article about his book. I’m just quoting from her: “He developed the Paleolithic Continuity Theory in his two-volume work Origini delle lingue d’Europa (The Origins of European Languages), which he wrote between 1996 and 2000. With this hypothesis, he suggested that Indo-Europeans have been indigenous to Europe since the upper Paleolithic period and that their language emerged during this period. According to the author, the homeland of the Indo-Europeans was Africa. Finno-Ugric and Altaic peoples came to Europe during the Mesolithic period and mixed with the Indo-Europeans. The first to come to the West may have been Altai (Turkish-Mongolian) communities, because they had do mesticated the horse for the first time. This allowed them to travel long distances. Contrary to common claims, Alinei suggested that the Kurgan culture is of Proto-Turkic rather than Indo-European origin. Based on his Continuity Theory, he published a book (Etruscan: An Archaic Form of Hungarian) in 2003. In his book, in which he argued that Etruscan is a mixture of Ural-Altaic Turkish and Ugor languages, Alinei showed the great similarities between these languages. (…)”

“In 2013, he published The Etruscans Were Turk: From Discovery of Genetic Affinities to Linguistic and Cultural Verification, a continuation of his work. It was confirmed by research conducted in 2004 that the Etruscans were not Indo-European and migrated from Anatolia to Italy. As stated in the American Journal of Human Genetics, ‘The Turkish component in the Etruscan gene pools is three times higher than in other populations, and their genetic similarity with today’s Turks is 98%’ ”

“In the introduction to ‘Gli Etruschi Erano Turchi’, written after genetic validation studies, Alinei briefly explains five ancient theses on the origins of the Etruscans. He then deals with the four modern theses that preceded genetic discovery. Among these, Adile Ayda’s work, a Turkish diplomat and academician (1912 - 1992), ‘Les Étrusques Étaient-ils des Turcs?’ (Paris 1971), which was published in French and Turkish, was especially one which he focuses on. Alinei mentions that his hypotheses are compatible with her theory. In the first chapter of the book titled Turkish and Etruscan Similarity in the Light of Genetic Studies, the author criticizes the general point of view that begins the history of the Turks’ first arrival to the West with the Battle of Manzikert (1071).

“In the second chapter, titled Linguistic Closeness of Turkish and Etruscan, he defends similar views by referring to Adile Ayda’s linguistic theories. (…) He re-analyzes some Etruscan texts he read with Hungarian key with the help of Turkish”  “In the third chapter, titled Turkish-Etruscan Cultural Relations, the author talks about the striking similarities between the two cultures regarding religious beliefs, rituals, and myths, including wolf legends…”

“The fourth chapter deals with the history of the Etruscans. (…) Based on archaeological data of Proto-Villanova culture he mentions the possibility that this culture is the ancestor of Etruscans and Turks”.

So, I also presented the broad summary of the work published in Turkish by a scientist named Aref Esmail Esmailnia, who translated a 25-page section of the book into Azeri Turkish. In this work, Alinei mentions the Turkish diplomat writer Adile Ayda, who made the same determinations before him, respectfully and with great importance. He points out that he benefited greatly from her work.

Alinei then quotes a Greek historian Herodotus. In this excerpt, Herodotus describes the migration of the Etruscans from Lydia to Italy. Among the names mentioned here, the Lydian king ‘Atys’ is asso ciated with the Turkish ‘ata’ (father, ancestor). His son Tyrheneo evokes ‘Turk’. Influenced by the name of this son, the Lidis changed their name to ‘Tirren’. According to Roman historians, Etruscans came from Anatolia. 

According to Alinei, the arrival of the Etruscans from Anatolia to Italy dates from the beginning of the Copper Age (4 thousand BC) to the 1st millennium BC. Those who came are the Altaic tribes. (…) The first to say that Sredny Stog belonged to the Turks, and even to announce that the Turks first rode horses during this period, was Valentyn Stetsyuk. He was followed by Marcel Otto, a prehistorian from the University of Liège, linguist Jean le Du from Brest University, prehistorian Alexander Hausler from Halle University, Henry Harpending from the University of Salt Lake City, Paolo Galloni from the University of Rome, linguist Philippe Dalbera from the University of Nice, and linguist Michel Contini from the University of Grenoble. Mario Alinei from Utrecht University followed them... 

The creator of the Paleolithic Continuity Theory, Mario Alinei, says: Today, the entire terminology of Europe’s horse, horsemanship, and horse breeding comes from Samoyed, Ogur, and Slavic, proving that its origin is Neolithic Turkish. It was the Hungarians, a member of the “kurgan” people, who brought this technical knowledge to Europe... 

Who is Mario Alinei?  Linguist (University of Utrecht) Professor emeritus (University of Utrecht); honorary member (and former President) of the International Society for Dialectology and Geolinguistics; President of the Societas Linguistica Europaea (1989); founding member of the Società Linguistica Italiana; co-founder and President (from 1982) of the Atlas Linguarum Europae (UNESCO sponsored); founder and Emeritus Editor of the international journal “Quaderni di Semantica”; senior member of the Royal Academy Gustaf Adolf, Uppsala; member of the Accademia Peloritana…   

Lagerbring / Sven Lagerbring, (1707-1787) the father of Swedish historiography, wrote clearly and with very specific expressions in his work “The Similarity of Swedish to Turkish”, written in the form of a “Letter to Ihre”, that Odin was Turkish and that the Scandinavians were of Turkish ancestry. 1700’s. In writing these, he relied on his own research and was influenced by the writings of Snorri Sturluson.

Sven Lagerbring: “Our ancestors, Oden's companions, are Turks. We have sufficient evidence on this subject... Our leaders easily portray our ancestors as Turks and Tatars. But I know that some honest people and even noble people are outraged by this. They do not find this origin honorable enough. The foremost guide and aim of a historian is truth: it is much better to gain honor in this way. To deceive oneself and one's followers with lies; This is actually a strange dishonor. And who can say that Turks are a more dishonorable people than other people? If victories and conquests are seen as conditions that provide honor, which is roughly what is done; There are not many people who fulfill these conditions as much as the Turks and Tatars…”

Sven Lagerbring: “Let's say it without worrying about whether it is honorable or not, Oden and those with him were Turks. If we accept this sentence as it is, or at least see it as possible, it is inevitable that we will see similarities between Swedish and Turkish as a result..." “Turks, like many other related peoples, were nomads. That's probably why they were called schyther (Scythians), inspired by the Hebrew word schut, meaning ‘wandering nomad’ ... Oden first stopped in Germany. From there he passed through Holstein to Denmark and stopped in Sweden… This is Sturluson's own narrative and gives full reason why German, Danish and Swedish are essentially the same language. The origins of the Anglo-Saxons, the ancestors of the English, likewise date back to Oden. Their language is also a branch of the language of Asians and Turks.” (Quotes from Abdullah Gürgün)

Sturluson / Snorri Sturluson (1179-1241) is the father of the Icelandic sagas. Like his master Are Frode, he wrote that Odin was Turk, and that Northern Europeans (including the British) were descended from Turks (1100s and 1200s.). In fact, the word “saga” is Turkish (Turkish söyle > say root, Turkish ‘sagu’), and the word “Odin” is also Türkik (Turkish ‘od’: fire). Sturluson says the following in his Edda (Saga- Sagu): “Near the middle of the world, the most magnificent structure was built and a dormitory was established in the place we call Turkland, 'Turkish Country'. This place was called Troja. This place was enlarged much more than others, emphasis was placed on handicrafts, regardless of the cost. There were 12 kingdoms and one king of kings..."

Snorri wrote: “Oden continued his way north, arriving in the country we now call Sweden. The name of the king there was Gylfe. Hearing that the Asians, called Aces, were coming, Gylfe acted immediately and went out to meet them. He bowed to Oden and offered the sovereignty of his country... Wherever they passed, this happiness continued and happy years and peace came to these places. Everyone thought they had control over things like peace and happiness. The reason was that the elders saw that they were completely different from others in both beauty and bravery... Oden chose a beautiful castle city for himself, now called Sigtuna (near Stockholm). There he established an order with his lords similar to the one in Troy. He placed 12 lords in the city to rule according to the laws of the country. He brought everywhere a justice in accordance with Turkish traditions and similar to that which existed in ancient Troy. Then he set off towards the north (to Norway)… With Oden was his son Yngve, a descendant of the current Swedish king… The language of the Asians became the spoken language in all these countries…”

Saga of Hervarar (Dwarf Blacksmith) from Snorri: “At that time, Asians and Turks came from the east and settled here in the north. Their leader's name was Oden. He had 8 sons. They all became great and powerful men..." (All quotes are from Abdullah Gürgün) (All northern mythology is full of Old Turkish concepts, words and names.)

Frode / Are Frode left a work called "Turkish King Yngve" (Odin's son) in 1122 and described the Turkish lineage in Iceland and Scandinavia.

Lenormant, Oppert, Wooley / In the mid-19th century, Julius Oppert (1825-1905) and François Lenormant (1837-1883), two of the greatest archaeologist historians of the time, wrote separately that the Sumerian language and script were Turanic and Turkic. Great panic among colonialist European ideologists! How could barbarian Turks establish the world’s first and greatest civilization? Later Leonard Woolley (1880-1960), great archaeologist, wrote that Sumerian is Turkic. F. Lenormant, based on Trogue-Pompee and Justin, says that the Sakha (Scythians) language belongs to the Altaic racial family: L’histoire Ancienne de L’orient, 1881 … Oppert, I have mentioned above the famous Assyriologist says that the Medes are Turanians: Le Peuple et la Langue des Medes, 1957, s. 534

Bronkhorst / Author Frans Bronkhorst stated (in academia.edu): “Kaan Arslanoğlu’s article is another nail in the coffin of the outerspatians, said in some quarters to have come from out there to bring civilization to earth in the Mesopotamian flatlands. Reading the author’s linguistic comparisons between the Sumerian and Turkish languages, it becomes clear that the Sumerians must have been the Mesopotamian offshoot of the Turkish speaking peoples.”

“These linguistic facts fit in neatly with the ruins of majestic Turkish civilizations from over ten thousand years old, unearthed during the last decennia. Until recently, the greatest city of ancient civilization was believed to have been Uruk, flourishing between the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers some six thousand years ago. We know, because the Sumerians were the first to have left written records of their myths and their history. The comparison of Sumerian and Turkish names also offers different perspectives on the personages we know from Mesopotamian literature. One example is the figure of Humbaba, the guardian of the Cedar Forest, depicted as a monster in the Standard Babylonian version of the epic of Gilgamesh. We are informed that in Turkish he is known as Kum Baba, a name meaning ‘sandy grandfather.’ … ”

Lipton / Bill Lipton (William Lawrence Lipton) / Author of the book “Grandpa Was a Deity”.  https://www.amazon.com/Grandpa-Was-Deity-Assertion-Created/dp/1462053041

In one of the discussions here he says: “It was asked: ‘How can that magnificent Greek language, which founded the entire European civilization, be compared to the paltry Turkish... ‘ But think of this... is the person challenging that the very delicious Fruit cannot come from a tree whose roots are in the mud?  Especially when the focus is on the mud and roots rather than the trunk, branches, and flowers, that were part of the process. Modern knowledge began with Turkish and Sumerians 6000 years ago.  While they attribute their knowledge to another civilization of Gods -- modern findings indicate their culture came from a highly civilized garden-based city population to the Northwest of the Black Sea Basin before it was flooded. Middle Eastern, Indian, and even Chinese cultures derived from the Sumerian.  But for our purposes, it is the westward move that produced the Greeks and other Europeans.

Turkish language and Sumerian intellect seem to have been the origin of much of what we are today.  The Greeks and Hebrews codified many things -- Greek codification of philosophy and Hebrew codification of medical science (though few recognize those laws as modern science). Both had their roots in the Black Sea region. In our modern era, Germanic tribes provided the basis for European language. Language is a tree. Turkish seems to be the trunk, Sumerian the point where it joins the roots... and those roots appear to be the agriculture-based Trypillia culture.

There are too many contributors with the dominant one being the more culturally advanced and that provides a basis for making it ancestral when it is simply adopted because of its technology.  Your statement about the Greeks is tied to their philosophical intelligence and it influence thinking -- but not really the language.  The language that promoted the science and was carried by the R1a and R1b remains Turkish to Sumarian to the civilization the Sumarians credited for their existence.”

Perdih / Anton Perdih is one of the authors who thinks that the Old Turks belong to the R1b haplogroup. On these pages he wrote: “Do not evade taking into account that the Altaic speaking Y chromosome haplogroup R1b people intruded the Eastern and parts of Central and South Europe several times until about 6,000 years ago. Then they advanced south to Mesopotamia, Egypt, Central Africa. And across the North Africa about 4,800 years ago to Western Europe. Then they conquered the western and parts of the central and northern Europe, where their descendants are now the major part of the male population and were the bearers of most ‘Western’ actions. So, from the above point of view is looking for Turkish-like words in ‘Western’ languages an appropriate action. What will be the result, that’s another question.”

I would primarily recommend the following works by this author: https://www.academia.edu/38851472/Continuity_of_European_Languages_from_the_Point_of_View_of_DNA_Genealogy

https://www.academia.edu/79050507/Origin_of_Europeans

Klyosov / Anatole Klyosov is the first greatest experts in genetic mapping of humanity’s ancient migrations. He states that European peoples were predominantly created by the R1b gene carriers that migrated from Asia. He says that Proto-Turks are also in this group. Of course, saying this is reason enough for him to be excluded from the “scientific” community. Klyosov calls these peoples the Arbin people and their language the Arbin language (due to the R1b gene).

According to him, it is quite natural that there is a very intense Proto-Turkish in European languages. The publications of Anotole Klyosov, which showed revolutionary discoveries on the genetic characteristics, migration and language of the tribes, support my views in many points. According to Klyosov, the R1b haplogroup is proto-Turkic. It is the human carrier from Asia to Western Europe. R1b is predominant in many European nations, mainly in Basques and Celts. Therefore, it’s normal for the “Arbin” language (proto-Turkish) to have a significant influence on European languages.

According to the same esteemed author, the primary contributor to what is called Indo-European languages is R1a, primarily Slavic genes. Therefore, if a core is sought for Indo-European languages, it should be Slavic. Some even accuse this prominent scientist of being racist and a Slavic nationalist, even a pseudo-scientist because of this view. However, this view, compared to the classic Indo-Europe an fallacy, is like a peak of reality, almost is the opinion of “Proleterian Internationalism” compared to Indo-European racism. Meanwhile Klyosov has been writing since long ago that there were also R1a communities speaking Turkic languages. But according to him, in R1a, the dominance is given to the Russians (IE); and in R1b, the dominance is given to the proto-Turks. Do not get it wrong. So Klyosov is not saying that there are no Turks with R1a. To read this author’s views in-depth: “DNA Genealogy” in English DNA Genealogy (scirp.org) in 2018.

https://www.scirp.org/book/detailedinforofabook.aspx?bookid=2581 https://www.academia.edu/72572431/Discussion_with_Anatole_Klyosov_on_an_article_I_wrote_about_Proto_Turkish_at_the_root_of_Western_languages

Kisamov / Norm Kisamov is an independent linguist and Turkologist living in America. He encouraged me to publish my work internationally. He also has important studies on Turkish migrations thousands of years ago and the influence of Turkish in Europe and European languages, especially through the Turkic Scythians. Thus, he greatly contributed to my progress in this field.

Kisamov claims that fifty percent of the most used words in daily speech in languages spoken in Europe today have Turkish roots. Kisamov is against the concept of “proto” in linguistics. Because he says that it is not possible to show how, where, and through what stages a language passed from the “proto” to the original language. Therefore, to say “proto” is meaningless. Languages   tend to mix, change and renew with each other since their first emergence. This is a natural process. All languages   are mixtures, amalgams. Turkish also is an amalgam that started to form tens of thousands of years ago. Instead of the concept of language families, he prefers to use the German concept “Sprachbund”: Language unions.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/41TurkicInEnglish/EnglishTurkicLexiconEn.htm

Smith / George Smith (1840-1878) wrote that the Sumerians spoke Turkish: “It is generally supposed that Babylonia was peopled in early times by Turanian tribes (tribes allied to the Turks and Tatars) and that these were conquered and dispossessed by the Semites...” page 34 … George Smith (Assyriologist, British Museum), Ancient History from the Monuments - The History of Babylonia, Cambridge Pr. 2014

Müller / Max Müller (1823-1900) is one of the founding figures of European linguistics, had mentioned that in the areas where the societies known as Indo-Europeans emerged and lived, there were previously Turanian societies. Max Müller had developed a racist theory, the so called “Aryan” theory. However, the realistic aspect of his personality led him to utter statements that align with the arguments I am currently defending. Is it a divine whisper? Or should we say, ‘Behold, this is humanity, a mix ture of falsehood and truth’?

The transition from agglutinative languages to inflected languages is not progress but rather deterioration and regression. Max Müller was advocating the following theses in summary: Turanian languages constitute a broad group that spans a vast area, with distinct but noticeable common characteristics. Two of the most advanced forms are Finnish and Turkish. Tungusic, Mongolian, Turkish, Finnish, and Samoyedic languages form the northern group; Tamil languages, dialects of Tibet and Bhutan, Thai languages (dialects of Siam), Malay, and Polynesian languages constitute the southern group. These languages are agglutinative and are in the second stage of development, they cannot reach the third stage. Despite this, they possess significant structural advantages and provide linguistic conveniences.

There is enough data to support the claim that Aryan languages developed from these stage, so they should be carefully examined. According to Max Müller, Semitic and Aryan languages, while representing a certain level of development, also demonstrate ‘decay’ and ‘corruption.’

Max Müller demonstrates the similarity of Sanskrit and Latin syntax to Turkish syntax by providing examples. As a result, Müller has definitely stated three things in his works: Turkish provides ample opportunities in terms of expression, as if it was created by a "superior mind". Before the birth of Indo-European languages, there were Turanian languages ​​in those regions. These agglutinative languages ​​were the ancestors of later inflected languages.

He said: Yet I did not call the last chapter of my Essay, “On the Necessity of a common origin of Language,” but “On the Possibility;” and, in answer to the opinions advanced by the opposite party, I summed up my defence in these two paragraphs: Nothing necessitates the admission of different independent beginnings for the material elements of the Turanian, Semitic, and Aryan branches of speech;—nay, it is possible even now to point out radicals which, under various changes and disguises, have been current in these three branches ever since their first separation.” Lectures on the Science of Language, 1861

Hommel / Fritz Hommel  (1854-1936) is a German historian and professor at the University of Munich. In his 1915 work “Zweihundert sumero-türkische Wortvergleichungen als Grundlage zu einem neuen Kapitel der Sprachwissenschaft” (Two hundred Sumero-Turkic phrases as a basis for a new chapter in linguistics) singled out in Sumerian texts 200 words coinciding with the Turkic lexemes. He wrote that Sumerian was most similar to Turkish. Noah Kramer later expressed the same truth.

Kramer / Samuel Noah Kramer (1897-1990) is one of the world's leading Assyriologists and a world-renowned expert on Sumer and the Sumerian language. Noah Kramer, in his publication “Sumerians, Their History, Culture and Character”, discussed the Sumerian-Turkish relationship extensively in 1963.

Neumark / Fritz Neumark (1900-1991). German professor of economics. He immigrated to Türkiye from Hitler's Germany in 1936 and joined Istanbul University as a faculty member. He remained in Türkiye until the beginning of 1952. He said: “Turks are not very aware of it, but Europeans are aware of this fact: If Turks are removed from history, there will be no such thing as history left.”

Payne / Edward John Payne (1844-1904). This important historian wrote that the Turanians were absolute dominant in the civilized world of Europe and Asia in prehistory. Edward John Payne posited that 6,000 years ago, the world was divided between blacks and Turanians, and that the modern world remains under Turanian control. A History of the New World called America, in two volumes (1892–1899)

Drozdov / Yuri Nikolayeviç Drozdov, an important Russian scientist and writer states with certainty that the Scythians spoke Turkish and that the northern peoples of Europe were Turkic. He describes Turkish in ancient Europe: “All ancient and most early medieval written sources concerned with European history exist in one of two languages: Ancient Greek or Latin. Neither one was much used in ancient times on the European land mass as vernacular, and after Late Antiquity they effectively fell into complete desuetude. According to relevant historical written records, compiled in the period between Antiquity and the Early Mediaeval period, on the European land mass were more than 2,500 names of tribes and peoples. None of these names are derived from Ancient Greek or from Latin, but from some other European languages. (…)

What were these languages? Who spoke them? What is the relationship of their speak ers to today’s European peoples? How and why did their languages change to those we hear today? The earliest European ethnonym to be found on the pages of ancient written sources is that of the Cimmerians. A semantic and etymological analysis of this word shows that it has been of typical Türkic tribal nomenclature. Ancient sources provide detailed information that the Cimmerians belonged to the Scythian people who were later called the Huns. 

Modern opinion holds that the Scythians inhabited a vast territory stretching from the Urals to Vistula. Other names for them were Sarmatians or Savromatians. Analysis of their tribal ethnic names shows that they all were Türkic-speaking; indeed the works of numerous contemporary scholars and specialists demonstrate convincingly that the Scythians were a Türkic-speaking people, and this is directly confirmed by the Western European Middle Ages documentary evidence of the written records. And in anthropological terms the Scythians were predominantly of the Caucasoid type. (…)

The original location of the Scythian tribes in Europe, including Huns, Avars, Bulgars and others, was the Middle Volga and Kama river basins, where they probably appeared no later than the third millenium BC. (…)

At a later date these Türkic-speaking peoples from Middle Volga and Kama basins also began migration, via the banks of the Sea of Azov and Black Sea, to Southern, Central and Northern Europe. Apparently, from earliest antiquity the dominant peoples in Europe stemmed from the Türkic-speaking tribes.” Drozdov did not mention the southern branch of Turkish and its influence on European languages through Greek and Latin, but we did it in our works.

Kurmaev / Kurmaev M.F. wrote an excellent and comprehensive article named “From the Ancient Sumerians to the Ancient Turks” 2019. He He proved that the Sumerians were Turkic with cultural, mythological, religious and linguistic evidence. Edited and translated by Norm Kisamov

Gerey / Begmırat Gerey … In his book “5000 Yıllık Sümer – Türkmen Bağları - 5000 Years of Sumerian-Turkmen Ties” he examines the Turkic roots of the Sumerians. In his book “Büyük Türk Part Devleti - The Great Turkish Parthian State” he reveals the Turkic and Turanian roots of the Iranian people. 

Süleymanov / Olcas Süleymanov … He wrote down the Turkish roots in Sumerian, Russian and many Western languages. Olcas Süleymanov, who wrote important works, some of which were banned during the former Soviet Union, says in his book “Yazının Dili: The Language of Lettering” in a nutshell: Before language, there was writing. What is meant by ‘writing’ is shapes, symbols and then hieroglyphs. Humanity first poured many concepts into figures from their minds. Later, words and language emerged to express them. In this respect, in order to understand the development of language, it is necessary to examine the shapes and hieroglyphs well. In linguistics, ‘Structuralist Theory’ says that random words, random letters are chosen to express concepts. However, language developed not by chance, but by causality. The dominance of structuralism uprooted linguistics.

As a related issue: Turkish has influenced other languages from its roots. All words have a historical, causal origin; most of them have root commonalities. In line with the ‘Nostratic Theory’, these facts began to emerge. His another work is “Az İ Ya”…

Adji / Murad Adji … With his book “Türklerin ve Büyük Bozkırın Kadim Tarihi –Kipchaks, Ancient People of the Turks and the Great Steppe” he revealed the traces of the Turkish Kipchaks in Europe. Turkish words, place names, cultural remnants in Europe.

Bikkinin / İrek Bikkinin … He published an extensive list of words with Turkish -Kipchak roots in English.

NOSTRATİC LINGUISTICS / Holger Pedersen, author of the 1903 article “Türkische Lautgesetze”… Vladislav İllic-Svitych, Vladimir Dibo, Aaron Dolgopolski, Sergey Starostin… Their Nostratic theory is the result of an environment away from racism and the objective scientific method becoming dominant again. Allan R. Bomhard, with his original opinions, is currently the strongest advocate of this point of view in linguistics.

The Indo-European theory is the theory of the colonialist-racist side of Europe. It represents the dark period in science. Nostratic theory represents enlightenment. Proponents of the Nostratic Theory try to extend the narrow family of Indo-European monopoly by saying that many languages come from common roots belonging to a bigger language family. They are largely right. In doing so, they add Altaic languages to this extended macro family. Without saying too much about Turkish. Because it’s unfavorable. Turkish is considered an ordinary member of the Altaic language family. It is not even clear whether it is related to the Uralic languages.

Alexei Kassian, Mikhail Zhivlov and George Starostin are also writers in same school. Despite all its flaws and limitations, Nostratic theory made a significant contribution to the development of linguistics. It somehow showed that Turkish was among the root languages. It also greatly benefited my work.  

Allan Bomhard; A Critical Review of Volumes 1 and 2 of ILLIČ-SVITYČ’s Nostratic Dictionary  / Allan R. Bomhard, The Nostratic Origin of Afrasian III: Anatomy of Humans and Animal / Aaron Dolgopolsky, Nostratic Dictionary (Allan Bomhard - 2012)

Alexei Kassian, Mikhail Zhivlov and George Starostin; Indo-European-Uralic Comparison from the Probabilistic Point of View; from academia.edu

Telezhko  / George Telezhko … Researcher, writer, who participated in the discussions of some of my articles which I published here, I think he is close to the Nostratic theory in linguistics and the views of Anatoly Klyosov. So, he pointed out an article and asked my opinion about this view. That article belonged to Alexander Kozintsev. In accordance with the Nostratic Theory, he revealed that the Indo-European languages were related to the Uralic and Altaic languages, and therefore there were strong ties between them. He argued that, of all other languages, the Semitic languages were the closest group to these related languages. In my answer, I said that I am close to this view, but I have some objections about it (I wrote these extensively).

George Telezhko wrote this: “You have done a huge work, and I need much more time to examine it thoroughly. Therefore I try to avoid commenting hastily. But I do agree with the idea of close contacts of ancestors of speakers of Latin, Celtic, Arian and German languages with those of Proto-Turkish language. These contacts could have occured to the South of Caucasus and to the East of the Caspian Sea within the Bronze Age some 5000-3000 ybp, according to my research.”

Marr / Nikolay Marr is the founder of “Yafetic Theory”. Although he died in 1934, his ideas and work formed the language policy of the Soviet Union until 1950. According to Marr, Caucasian, Basque, Semitic and Hami languages come from a common root with Indo-European languages. Turkish is also a member of this family. It was separated from Chuvash, which is a branch of the great mother family. So they have common roots. Also Turkish made a significant contribution to the development of Greek and Latin.

He worked in Türkiye for more than a month in 1933 to support and contribute to the Turkish Language Revolution. Marr’s views in the field of linguistics, in some aspects, were driven beyond scientific logic by excessive political and ideological impulses. On the other hand, this theory had completed its own political life. The theory, which was based on Caucasian languages and brought Turkish to the stage, was no longer useful to Stalin. Stalin switched to a new language policy, using the theory’s scientifically weak points as an excuse. One way or another… Since such an important theory was based on Caucasian languages. Since Turkish was a bit important in the big family, too... Marr quotes an Armenian rumor as well, according to which the Sakas are Turks (Nikitin). In addition, according to him, Chuvash Turkish is the closest living relative of the Sumerian language.

Geoffrey of Monmouth / In his book on the history of the kings of Britain he wrote that both the kings of Britain and Caesar were of Trojan origin. His book is full of Turkic names of the kings of Britain. Historia Regum Britanniae, completed c. 1138, contains the first narrative account of Arthur’s life. This work is an imaginative and fanciful account of British kings from the legendary Trojan exile Brutus to the 7th-century Welsh king Cadwallader… This person is saying dangerous things: English Kings are descendants of Troy (and Etruscan) lineage. This is another form of confession of these Turkic roots. One of Brutus’ sons is named ‘Kamber’. This is a Turkic name, and the name of the Cambria region originates from him. Another individual from the royal lineage is named ‘Gurgustius,’ which is also a common Turkish name, ‘Korkut’. Brutus comes from the lineage of the Trojan hero ‘Aeneas’. This also aligns with Turkic ‘Eney’ (Ç. Garaşarlı) and again Turkic Arabic names ‘Enis’, ‘Enes’. “Druids”… According to Western sources, it means permanence and solidity, derived from the tree. Durable, tree... Turkish ‘dur’: to be permanent, stable. Durable < durabilir; tree < terek… Geoffrey of Monmouth, Historia of the Kings of Britain, Tr: Aoron Thompson, Rev: J. A. Giles, Parantheses Publication, Cambridge Ontario, 1999

SCYTHIANS … TROJANS / Cardinal Piccolomini, known as Pope Piu II, reignited the hostility towards Turks. Pope Piccolomini was shouting that the Turks were barbarians of Scythian descent and that they should be expelled from Europe. (Çağıl Çayır). In the past centuries, there was no doubt in Europe and the scientific community that the Scythians were Turk. What an irony that the situation changed again after the Indo-European theory emerged. Scythian dominance over “Indo-European” languages was very evident. The Scythian language was considered one of the ancestors of European languages. But on one condition: the Scythians were no longer Turks and they did not speak Turkish!..

Until the 20th century, significant scientists of the Western world acknowledged and wrote that in the early ages, the dominant ethnic groups in Europe and Asia were primarily the Turanian (Turkic) peoples... (Sturluson, G. Monmouth, Tafur, Florentine, Leon Cahun, James Fergusson, Boxhorn, Tordesillas, Dallaway etc.) There was no doubt that the Scythians were Turkic. Nicole Gilles claimed that the Trojans were of Turkish descent… Andrea Dandalo … Dominican priest Antonius the Florentine, and Spanish historian Pedro Tafur wrote same thing: Trojans were Turkic.

Boxhorn / Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn (1612-1653), the renowned Dutch linguist, not only wrote that the roots of European languages were Scythian but also turned this into a linguistic theory. 

Fergusson / James Fergusson  (1808-1886) He wrote that many names of European peoples coming from the name Saka: Saxon, Scots, Ashkenazi (exact); Scandinavia (likely) … The Declaration of Arbroath 1320, the Scottish declaration of independence sent to the Papacy. James Fergusson translated this into English in the 1800s. He was an architectural historian. The Scots claimed that the name “Scots” came from the Scythians, and their lineage was based on the Scythians. This man named Fergusson also wrote in his books that Dolmens were not Celtic but Turanian (Turkish) works. He claimed that the monumental and burial kurgan culture in Europe was Turanian. Then he argued that the Irish people also considered themselves Turanian and they boasted about it! Also the concept and word “Kurgan,” which forms the basis of the Indo-European theory, are thoroughly Turkish. James Fergusson, Rude Stone Monuments in All Countries, London, 1872

NATIVE AMERICANS – INDIANS / Abrar Karimullin, Otto Rochrig (1819 1908), Stig Wikander (1908-1983), Benigno Ferrario (1887-1956), Georges Dumezil (1898 - 1986), John Josselyn (1638-1672), John Macintoch (1844), Rolando Araujo Solis (1965),  Robert Gordon Latham (1812–1888), Karl Julius Platzmann (1832- 1902) wrote that Native American languages shared significant similarities with Turkish.

USA’s founding president Thomas Jefferson also insisted on the same thing.  Thomas Jefferson thought American Indians were Turks and Tartars coming across the Bering Sea from Asia. (See Boorstin, Daniel J. The Lost World of Thomas Jefferson, Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1993.)”

A recent book-review article might give you a first-hand idea: “AMERICAN INDIANS AND TURKIC PEOPLE SHARE DEEP ANCESTRY, 2012. Old world roots of Cherokee resume book we’ve known or suspected as much for a long time. American Indians and Turkic peoples of the Altai region of southern Siberia share common ancestors. American scientists Thomas Jefferson and Constantine Rafinesque were the first to demonstrate this genetic similarity, long before the days of DNA. Now an article in American Journal of Human Genetics has clenched the argument with mitochondrial and Y chromosomal DNA studies. The groundbreaking citation is: Matthew C. Dulik et al., MITOCHONDRIAL DNA AND Y CHROMOSOME VARIATION PROVIDES EVIDENCE FOR A RECENT COMMON ANCESTRY BETWEEN NATIVE AMERICANS AND INDIGENOUS ALTAIANS, AJHG 90/2, 229-246.

From OLD WORLD ROOTS OF THE CHEROKEE, by Donald N. Yates. 

Abrar Karimullin, Turkic and American Indian, 1995: http:// s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/67Amerind/KarimullinPrototurks1En.htm …

I have published a very extensive dictionary of Turkish roots in Western languages, including nearly a thousand Native American words. I compiled them from 9 Indians dictionaries. What do all these prove? Turkish is a language that is at least 20-25 thousand years old. If there is a commonality between Turkish and the "Indo-European" languages, Turkish is the root language.

Parker / Edward Harper Parker (1849-1926), especially as a specialist in Chinese history, published a book called “The Turko-Scythian Tribes”.

Ewald / Heinrich G. Ewald (1803-1875) wrote about the morphological similarities between the Altaic languages ​​and the Indo-European and Semitic languages.

Caldwell / Robert Caldwell (1814-1891) The founder of Dravitology, he suggested that the Dravidian, Altaic and Sami languages ​​​​derived from a common language, which he called the "Saka" family. Saka = Scythian

TURANIANS / Starting with Aristotle, Plato, and other ancient scholars, almost all of them were aware of and somehow wrote about this Turanian issue. Initially, Babylonian historian Berosus (3rd century BC) and, especially in the 19th century, Western scientists who deciphered Persepolis and Assyrian inscriptions, such as E. Norris, Fr. Lenormant, Sir H.C. Rawlinson, J. Oppert, I. Taylor, N L. Westergaard, F. de Saulcy, and M. S. Zaborowski, demonstrated that the Medes’ language, religion, and race were Turanian (Scythian, Tatar, Turk). Rawlinson wrote that the Parthians were also Turanian with cultural analysis. H. C. Rawlinson and C .W. Watson in the Encyclopedia Britannica wrote that the Gutians were a Turanian people. Bernard Carra de Vaux and others agreed on this. Rawlinson also wrote that the Kurds was a Turanian people. This information was included in Britannica between 1875-1911. Later, this information and fact was deleted.

In Zend Avesta it is said that “Medes are Turanians”. Also, according to this source, Feridun divided the World among his three sons: Ir, Airya, Tur (Turca). According to Jewish, Christian and Islamic genealogical tradition, the Turks originated from Noah’s son Japheth. They are the ancestors of many nations. In the Zend Avesta, Afrasyab is mentioned as the Turani king. Efrasiyab is mentioned in the legendary history of Iran as a terrible warrior and a great commander. Afrasyab represents the deceitful and evil type of man in the Avesta and is also shown as the main enemy of the Iranian race. He is actually a Saka, a Turkish hero and ruler. He is the same person as the legendary hero of the Turks, Alp Er Tunga. The famous historical writer, poet named Ali Şir Nevai (1441-1501) also has the same opinion.

The American Encyclopedia, V. 18, p. 534: Medes was Turanians.

Matlock / Gene D. Matlock … “He presents the proofs of the correctness of his claim in his book ‘O People of the World, You Are All Turks’. The interesting thing is that the owner of this thesis is not Turkish, but an American: Gene D. Matlock. In his book, published also in Turkish, Gene D. Matlock states that the first humans originated with the Turks and then dispersed across the world, that the first spoken language was Turkish, and that science and civilization also have their roots in ancient Turkish culture.

Cahun / Leon Cahun (1841-1900) French traveler, orientalist and writer of Jewish origin. Leon Cahun, who presented a report to the International Congress of Orientalists held in 1873, confirmed Fergusson’s findings, explained 30 pages of new evidence and said that “Turanians lived in Europe before the Aryans.” In an article published in the “Revue Oriantale Americaine” magazine in 1876, it was written that the language spoken in France before the Aryans was Turanian… Leon Cahun proposed that the Aryan language dialect in France had Turanian roots.

Arne / T. J Arne (1879-1965) archaelogist. He attended the Turkish Language Revolution meetings in the 1930s. He wrote that civilization in Asia declined after the migration of the Turkish people to the West. In the same article, Arne made negative criticisms of Atatürk's Sun-Language theory.

Radloff / Wilhelm Radloff (1837-1918) He wrote very valuable works on ancient Turkish history and culture. One of them is a four-volume dictionary of Eurasian Turkish dialects. Here and in his other writings, he of course presented the Scythian language as a Turkish dialect.

Koestler / Arthur Koestler (1905-1983) World-famous literary figure and thinker and Hazar Jewish Turkic State… The first and largest Jewish state in history after Christianity. AD 651 – 965. In his book titled “The 13th Tribe” Arthur Koestler wrote that Eastern and Northern European Jews descended from this lineage. Not only that. Many writers have noted that Ashkenazi Jews are of Turkish Sakha (Scythians) origin. In a discussion I opened on this topic on academia.edu, participating author Dimitris Michalopoulos said: “Κaan, you are totally right; and far mote important is that Constantine Paparrhogopoulos, Greeks' National Historian, agrees with you! (And me.)”

Rasanen / Martti Rasanen (1893-1978) In his dictionary of Turkish dialects, he indicated many words that overlap with Turkish words in languages ​​such as German, Finnish, and Hindi. However, he did not theorize this commonality. Versuch Eines Etymologishn Wörterbuchs der Türksprachen, Helsinki 1969, Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura

HOW OLD IS TURKISH ? / Samuel E. Martin, Roy Andrew Miller, Nicholas Poppe, Karl. H. Menges… Authors who calculated the age of Turkish in the past and claimed its antiquity. According to Martin and in other article according to Miller, Turkish must have born 8400 years ago. According to Poppe Turkish is older than Indo-European languages. According to Menges Turkish is older than Altaic languages. According to the research of Martine Robbeets and her colleagues, the origin of the Turkish language is at Far East Asia and this language community is 8500-9000 years old.

Rasonyi / L. Rasonyi (1899-1884) Hungarian Turkologist L. Rasonyi: The core of the Hungarians is not Slavic, but Turks and Ogurs. The father of the Hungarians is Turkish, and the mother is Ogur. ( ? - Interestingly, the name Ogur is also Turkic, related to 'Oğuz'.)

Byzov / Indarbi Byzov: The Basque language is similar in structure to Caucasian languages. This structure shares common features with the Semitic Hamitic languages, as well as Sumerian, Hurrian, and Urartian languages. It is clear that these languages are a sub-branch of Lingua Turka.

Goetze / Albrecht Ernst Rudolf Goetze (1897 – 1971) was a German-American Hittitologist. According to him, the Hurrians were Turanians; a branch of the “Subars” (Asiatic Turkish tribe) (1946). Hethiter, Churriter und Assyrer, Oslo, 1936. P. 33 and others  … B. Hrozny also touched upon the similarity and closeness of Turkish and Hurrian languages. (Mehmet Bayrakdar)

Copeland / Mel Copeland … Linguist Copeland does not accept that Turkish is a founding language, but writes in his studies that it shows important commonalities with “Indo-European” languages. Copeland’s works is a treasure not only in terms of its scope, but also because it does not ignore Turkish. His Hittite, Akkadian, Etruscan language dictionaries and comparative dictionaries are particularly valuable. In these, many old words can be seen to be in common with Turkish words.

Rouard / Xavier Rouard … Linguist Rouard wrote solid articles for revision of Indo-European theory. He shows the root relationships of Indo-European with a Eurasian macro family, including Turkish. One of his works: Did Indo-european languages stem from a trans-eurasian original language? An interdisciplinary approach; Scientific Culture, vol. 8, no 1, (2022), pp. 15-49

Agziaabhir / Gabra Agziaabhir JR. / Author Gabra Agziaabhir JR. unquestionably accepts Turkish as one of the languages belonging to Indo-Germanic group.

Kampouris / Panagiotis L. Kampouris, a Greek Orthodox scholar of religious texts, wrote in one of the discussions here: “It is clear that the Hittite language is also related to Turkish.”

Ahlgren / Jadranka Ahlgren is a valuable writer on architectural and cultural motifs. In one of the discussions here, she noted: “I agree with you. The Navajo Indians have Turkish rug patterns, the Mexicans have them, the central plateau of Argentina has them... Rugs are part of the culture... Proto-rugs... I don't think this came about. The patterns in Argentina are Turkish... Culture is not mathematics and grammar, it is poetry, myth...”

Magnúsdóttir / Guðrún K Magnúsdóttir … The famous Icelandic writer Guðrún K Magnúsdóttir welcomed many articles with appreciation and enthusiasm, especially those we wrote on the Turkic origins of Scandinavian and Icelandic legends. What could be the main theme of Magnúsdóttir, who has more than 130 books and many awards: Mythology, of course. This important author of Icelandic literature has been sincerely supporting my theses in the field of language, history and culture for a while.

Borzęcki / Konstanty Borzęcki (Mustafa Celalettin Paşa) (1826-1878) Ottoman general of Polish origin. His book on Turkish words that had passed into Western languages ​​was published in French in France, than in Türkiye in 1869. Mustafa Celalettin Paşa, Les Turcs Anciens et Modernes, 1869

Keresteciyan / Bedros Keresteciyan (1840-1909) Armenian, Ottoman high bureaucrat and writer. His dictionary of Turkish words in Western languages ​​was published in French in London in 1912. Bedros Efendi Keresteciyan, Dictionnaire Etymologiqu de la Turque, 1912

Kimball / Jeannine Davis-Kimball traced the prehistory of “Amazon” cult in her work in Kazakhstan. She compared the DNA of women in the tombs, which are thought to be Amazon women’s tombs, with the DNA of the Turkic people in the region, and found a great deal of harmony. She published these findings in the September-October 1997 issue of the American journal of Archeology and later published it in a book. Jeannine Davis-Kimball, Amazon Warrior Women, Warner Books, 2002

Pankova, Simpson / John Simpson, Svetlana Pankova … Their book describe the Scythians as the predecessors of the Turks and Huns. Scythians: Warriors of Ancient Siberia – November, 2017, Thames&Hudson

Sykes / Sir Percy Sykes (1867-1945) The branch of the Medes, the Magi and the Buddhis, are Turanic, he wrote. The language of the Elamites is Turanic, he wrote: A History of Persia, 1915  

Herodot / In Herodotus, the Medes king Astyages “Afrasyab” is mentioned as a Turanian king. Some authors, based on Herodotus' data, wrote that the Scythians and Ertusks were Turks (Alinei, Kisamov etc.)

Malcolm / Sir J. Malcolm (and A. Andreas) experts in Iranian history, wrote that the Sakas are Turanians. Histoire des Perse, 1821, pp. 324-27

Samothrakes / A. Th. Samothrakes Ancient Greek scientist wrote that The Scythians is Turk.

Wilber / D. N. Wilber wrote that the Parthians are a tribe of the Sakas. (Iran: Past and Present, 1955)

Laing / Samuel Laing (1812-1897) wrote that Sumerians, Hyksos, Elamites definitely Turanian. Human Origins, 1892

Strabo / Ancient Greek geography writer Strabo: Medes and Scythians are the same, Sarmatians are their continuation (Geographica).

Forrer / E. D. Forrer wrote that Hurri language is Turkoid. Eine Geschichte des Gütterkönigtums aus dem Hatti-reiche, 1936

Coulardeau / Jacques Coulardeau talks about the same issues. He is an important historical linguist, he has interesting books. He says “Basque Turkish”, he says “European Turkish languages”… I mentioned that this important critic and linguist wrote an article about my last book. This writer does not accept that Turkish is the main root, but says that it was the most widespread language in Europe in a very old period. Therefore, it is normal that there are traces of Turkish in Indo-European languages, he says. However, he currently limits it to Basque, Hungarian, Finnish and a few other languages. Georgian, Estonian… Coulardeau bases his claim that Turkish was the dominant language in Europe for a period of time (before the so-called Indo-European languages ​​became dominant) on the work of another author. This author's name is Theo Venneman (1970).

Shuke / Galina Shuke This valuable author has studies and works on the Latvian-Turkish partnership. Galina Shuke, Latvians, Were They Turks? (The Phenomenon of the Turkic Language Substratum in the Baltics).

Kenanidis / Ioannis Kenanidis … A scientist who has recently addressed the Turkish Sumerian connection.

Winters / Clyde Winters defines the Sumerians as “Black Turanians” in his articles and books. He argues that the Sumerians are a Turanian, agglutinative, Turkic language, finding Rawlinson and Oppert right. However, the antecedent of this is the agglutinative language of the blacks. The Sumerians, Elemites, Akkadians are black people.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/42TurkicAndSumer/WintersBlackMessopotamiansEn.htm

Cevanşir / Babek Cevanşir has studies on the Turkish-Persian connection. He finds that the influence of Turkish on Persian is greater than the influence of Persian on Turkish.

Csöke / Sandor Csöke has studies on the relationship between Sumerian and Altaic languages. For example, one of them is: The Sumerien and Ural-Altaik elements in the Old Slavic Language, Muenchen, 1979 

Vaux / Bernard Carra de Vaux (1867-1953) According to the author, the similarities and commonalities between the Aryan languages ​​and the Turanian languages, and between the Aryans and the Turanians are intense. It is not possible to determine the real origin of many words. La Langue Etrusque, 1911

Boillet / J. Nicolas Boillet wrote: The Eastern Scythians, who grew up with the participation of the fugitive nomads of Asia, attacked the empire of the Goths under the name of the Huns (376) and thus prepared the great Barbarian invasion. In the 7th century, when the Slavic, Avar and Bulgar races divided the country among themselves, the name of the Scythians disappears from history. The Scythians seem to be of the same race as the Finns, which also included the Turks or the Tatars. Volume 12, p. 400

Dictionnaire universel d'histoire et de géographie; author: N. Boillet, Chief Inspector of National Education, Doctor of Letters, Winner of the Institute Prize; revised and completed by: A. Chassang; Paris – Hachette – 1884

Barenton / Hilaire de Barenton (1864-1946) a monk, linguist and historian of Middle Eastern languages. He argued that all languages ​​derive from a common Central Asian root, a paleontological "proto-language". Not only the Turkic languages ​​spoken in Central Asia and Türkiye, but also Mayan (in Mesoamerica) and the extinct Sumerian would be related.

Rohrbach / Paul Rohrbach (1869-1956) This racist author describes such things that what they call Indo-Germans, Sarmatians, Turanians, Scandinavians... all together, one structure. “In the period after the Ice Age, living conditions in Central Europe were improving day by day. As a result of the drying up of Lake Turan, the people had to move in all directions and far away. Some Turanians who were engaged in animal husbandry and agriculture must have migrated westward through the wide road between Kalpi and Ural… The new researchers were looking for the homeland of the Indo-Germanic people in the whole region starting from Pontus and the north of the Balkan Peninsula. In short, they were looking for the region where the Indo-Germanic people were formed as a certain race… It is truly extraordinary that the Indo-Germanic people conquered Iran, advanced up the Indus to the Upper Euphrates, found a passage from Southeastern Europe to Anatolia, at the same time filled the Turanian steppes and the Sarmatische Plain, occupied the middle of our continent and the Apennine Peninsula, and themselves went to Scandinavia. Although the Turanian migration tribe was of the Aryan race in the past, the Iranian epic mentions the hostility between the Iranian and Turanian states that arose from the cultural differences dating back to the ancient times. This was a war between light and darkness.” Die Geschichte der Menschheit, Leipzig, 1914

KUSHANS / S. Lévi, Friedrich Hirth, Hultzsch, Konow, Kennedy, Chavannes, Kashmiri Kalhana, Poussin and El Biruni… They wrote that Kushans were Turkic. The Kushans were a Turkish dynasty known for their cultural and religious civilization that dominated India in the 2nd century BC. This information is important to prove that the racist Indo-European theory is a fabrication.

Edouard Chavennes (1865-1918) said that the “12-animal calendar” is Turkic and shows that Turks lived in certain regions of India.

Poussin / Lois De La Vallee Poussin (1869-1938): Yue-tchis are Turk, Kushans are Scyt … “We used to think that the Yue-tchis belonged to the Turko-Mongol language family.” (Ind-Ant. 34, page 84; Stein, old Khotan, page 50, note) … Volume 17, page 162 (Accepting this means accepting that the Indo Kushans are also of Turkish origin, and the author puts forward views in this direction.): “The Kushans' clothing contrasted with that of the Chinese, Persians and Indians, but was not very different from that used in Tibet and the mountains of Central Asia. This clothing did not have local characteristics. Their type was really similar to the Schytes, they made the Constantinople vases like the Greeks; they were shaved, dressed in wide-sleeved cloaks, and wore large felt boots, wearing high fur headdresses (börk - my note) or crowns resembling the papal tiara. If we assume that the Kouchans are definitely descended from the Kadphises and Kanishkas, they are therefore Schytes.” P. 163, 164; L'Inde au temps des Mauryas et des Barbares, Grecs, Scythes, Parthes et Yuetchi

TİBET / Behr (1994), Bazin and Hamilton (1991). These authors wrote in two separate sources that the country name "Tibet" comes from the Turkish "tepe" (hill, mountain). I would like to add to them that the English word "top" also comes from "tepe". In the Native American language it is "tepek".

Franke / Otto Franke (1863-1946) historian. He wrote: In China, Chu dynasty was Turk (1050 BC ). In his opinion the core of the Huns and Scythians are Turks.  

Guignes / Joseph de Guignes (1721-1800) historian. He tells the legend that the Turks and Huns are descendants of Noah's son Japheth... According to him, the Hun Turk state must have been founded in 1200 BC.  

Groot / J.J.M. Groot (1854-1921) historian. He wrote: The Turkish phenomenon, which we encounter under different names such as Saka (Scythian) and Hun, is probably older than the Chinese phenomenon. The Chinese Chu dynasty is proto-Turk.   

Eberhard / Wolfram Eberhard (1909-1989) historian. He wrote: Turkish influence is evident in the Chinese Chu dynasty (1050 BC).  

Edlinger / August Von Edlinger German linguist. I couldn't find his biography.  Yet another valuable scholar wiped from the pages of literature by a mediocre academic establishment and the empty-headed Turkophobes of the Indo-European sect. He wrote about "Ancient Relations of the Turkic Languages ​​with the Indo-European Languages" (1912). He wrote that: “In her article entitled: ‘The Origin of the Non-Germanic Parts of the Germanic Languages’ published in Vienna,  Mrs. von den Velden says; -Indo-European languages ​​can never be understood correctly without going back to the Ural-Altaic languages.” (from Necdet Keleş)

And than: “In my own work, Über die Bildung der Begriffe, I showed the same declensions and conjunctions in Turkish and Indo-Germanic and compared a number of Turkish words with their Indo-Germanic equivalents. And even earlier, in a presentation in Bamberg, I had the courage to explain the kinship of the Turkish and Indo-Germanic languages.” “It should not be underestimated that the relationship between the Indo-Germanic language family and other language families should be determined. Once upon a time, the Indogerman native language was formed and separated from other neighboring root-language families…” (Necdet Keleş)

Montexano / Georgeos Diaz- Montexano … He continues to produce solid publications that demonstrate the identity of the Iberian indigenous language with Turkish. You can also access his publications on the academia website. https://www.academia.edu/123167258/Trans_Eurasian_Altaic_origin_especially_turkic_of_some_basic_basque_verbs

Lopez /  Juan Lopez … The author Juan Lopez follows all my articles on academia.edu pages, sending documents and expresses his sincere support.  

Wiesner (?) states that the Scythians were Turanians, based on the skull depictions of Hippocrates. (M. Bayrakdar, Togan) 

ELAMITES / A. Barton G. A. : The Elamites are of Central Asian origin, 1934; Schmidt W. : Similarities in belief between the Elamites and the Samoyed Turks... 1931; Koppers W: Possible relationship between the Elamites and the Altai culture...

Quatremere / Etienne M. Quatremere (1755-1840) in his book “History of the Mamluk Sultans” says that the Tulb troops among the Ayyubid soldiers are Turkish Guz, then he calls the Guz as Kurds and the Kurds as Guz… H. A. R. Gibb also shares the same opinion (1962).

Németh / Gyula Németh (1890-1976), Hungarian linguist. In the 30s, he participated in the Turkish language revolution in Türkiye. He supported the fact that Turkish was the root language by signing the final declaration of the Güneş-Dil commission. One of the foreign scientists who signed the same declaration was A. Samoylovich. Nemeth wrote that the name of the Turkish Oghuz tribe in Bulgarian is "ogur". This is another proof of how Turkic the Finno-Ugric language branch is.

Eberhard / Wolfram Eberhard, an expert on Chinese history. He states that the Turks lived in northern China in the 3rd millennium BC. In ancient Chinese history, the Turks are shown as both the closest northern neighbor and a people who lived in China for many periods. This writer, and the other Chinese history experts I mentioned here, say this. They established dynasties in China for many periods. At the same time, many Turks held important positions in the Chinese administration. This proves that the Turks also had a share in the very important Chinese contributions to the civilization. The invention of paper and printing is attributed to the Turks.

Hrkal / Eduard Hrkal (18??-1948 Vienna) linguist. He wrote that the Etruscans came from the Turanian and Altai tribes. Established a connection between the Etruscan and Altai languages. Revealed the similarities in terms of legends and religious beliefs. One of his works: Der etruskische Gottesdienst: Dargestellt nach den Agramer Mumienbinden (Ch' culte étrusque: Erprésintè d’apré ches loyens des Agramers) - Mumienbinden mit einer grammatischen skizze und uebersetzungen der bis jetzt analysierbaren inschriften, Gerold & Co, Wien (1947)

Niebuhr / Barthold Georg (1776-1831) He was a Danish-German statesman, banker and historian who was Germany's leading historian of Ancient Rome and one of the founding fathers of modern academic historiography. Etruscan script, like Greek script, is of Asian origin and is the origin of European script, he wrote. He stated that the Scythians were Tatars or Mongols. The History of Rome (1827)

Brook / Kevin Alan Brook … He wrote a book about the Jewish Khazar Turks and their state. Another document supporting the Turkic Scythian roots of Ashkenazi Jews. K. A. Brook, The Jews of Khazaria, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009

THE INSCRIPTION IN THE ISSYK KURGAN / A.N. Garkavets (2018), O. Süleymanov (1970), K. Akişev - A. Mahmudov (1971), A.S. Amancolov (1971, 1984), G.A. Musabayev (1973) … The runic inscription on the Scythian drinking cup (From the 4th-5th century BC) found in the Esik Kurgan was read in Turkish by them, proving that the Scythian language was Turkish.

Franz / Christian Dr. Franz … The esteemed author Franz who participated in our discussions, wrote the following about how Mario Alinei was excommunicated after his book "Etruscans are Turks": “Its´clear conspiracy. I wouldn´t say that Etruscans were Turks, but it´s evident that their language had close correlations to Turkic languages and to a less larger extent to Finno-ugric languages. After years of research I found elements in Etruscan similar to those in modern or acient Turkic languages, especially to Chuvash. Latin words without indo-european ethymologie can often be explained by Turkic ‘cognates’. In addition there are / were other authors, too, like Brandenstein and recently Ch. Garasharly (Çingiz Karaşarlı) to share the same opinion.”

Brandenstein / Wilhelm Brandenstein (1898-1967) Austrian linguist and Alpinist. Head of the Department of Comparative Linguistics at the University of Graz between 1941 and 1967. Participated in the Turkish Language Revolution meetings in 1937. In his works titled "The Present Situation of the Etruscan Question" and "The Origin of the Etruscans" he showed the Turkic roots of the Etruscans. His  article titled "Language Studies on the Earliest History of the Etruscans and Tyrrhenians" published in Belleten in 1937 also has similar claims. Stating that the similarities between Etruscan and Turkish are too many to be considered coincidental, the author claims that the Tyrrhenians came from Central Asia.

Maki / Sirkka Maki … In a discussion here (academia.edu) the author, she noted: “Here we have come to the roots of a shared problem - the West-Siberian-Scandinavian Nostratic group has common seeds of speech in the  Mother group that consisted of IE-Turco-Korean-FUs-Tung. That paloelithic area had connections both in south and east. Thus we can find the seeds both in Africa and Asia. There exist both common grammatical formants and a set of the most primitive words. To find out what is common in both Turkish and IE, is thus possible. Of interest is that the principal form and idea of language was born in a very early times. The seeds probably emerged some 50 000 years ago, and the fully developed pattern of language some 25 000 years ago, as an erudite guess (that is, during the Weikselian interstadial of 50 000 - 25 000 BP). There is some knowledge of the early core grammars within the Nostratic western European Mother language. Similarities are found in orgPIE,  Fu, Turoc-Korean and Tungus languages, and also references to Dravidian in the vocabulary. There are also some primitive common words. These all reflect the contacts that the early speakers had had. So there are to be found common words in orgPIE and Turkic. Instead of just comparing words in Turkish in Turkey, the material should, of cource, be taken from the Turco-Korean etymologies.”

Pajevic / Vladimir Pajevic … In a discussion here (academia.edu) the author, he noted: “My contribution is just a couple of questions that arise from curiosity, not a comment dictated by sharing or denying the author's thesis. From the abstract that I was able to read, one would almost say that the whole construction is born along the lines of Mario Alinei's theory. Although I am not an authoritative arbiter in the field of the evolution of languages, I have the impression that it is often rather the problems of terminological conjecture regarding the origin of the hippothetic protolanguage in base of all the others in use today, than of possible different sources from which this protolanguage would be born. Calling it prototurco or using any other name, would not change the substance, that is ideal research for the archaic language that the ancestors used for communication and that in its continuous and constant evolution spread in modern languages (this approach would replace the now obsolete theory of the arrival of the Indo-Europeans). With this assumption, also the theory of Alinei was born, and moreover, with the same parameters and values it is exposed in his book The Etruscans were Turks…”  

Lee / Joo-Yup Lee: The R1a1 gene is common in Altai Turkish communities. In some Altai groups, it reaches up to 60%. Inner Asia vol. 19 No 2 2017 p. 197-239  

Gumilev / Lev Nikolayeviç Gumilev (Gumilyov) (1912-1992) He considers that the Scythians, Huns, Kipchaks, Cumans, Mongols, Tabgachs, the Chinese Han dynasty, etc. among the tribes that separated from the Turks after 3000 BC. So, they are Turk.

Grote / George Grote (1794-1871) Greek history expert. He mentioned the similarities between the customs and traditions of the Scythians and the Turko - Tatars.

Kiepert / Heinrich Kiepert stated that the customs and traditions of the Scythians who came from Central Asia to Southern Russia were in line with the nomadic lifestyle of the horse-riding tribes, and claimed that they were of Mongolian or Turko-Tatar race (Kiepert 1878: 343).

Nagy (Geza?) also states that the Scythians are Turkish. (Begmırat Gerey)

Mordtmann / Andreas David Mordtmann (1811-1879) historian, graphologist. He stated that the Scythian cuneiform texts were in Turkish.

Kuun / Geza Kuun linguist, philologist, orientalist (1838-1905). According to him, the collective name Scythians includes different Turkic races.

A LITTLE MORE SCYTHIANS / Huntignford also accepts that the Scythians were of Asian origin and belonged to the Tatar or Mongol race (Huntingford 1935: 785). Rusben, on the other hand, after stating that even if the language of the Scythians was Iranian, their customs described by Herodotus were not Iranian customs, emphasized that Herodotus described their belief in a being resembling a Cyclops, as in Dede Korkut, and that the stories about the blind slave were included in the Köroğlu epic (Ruben 1942: 698), and believed that the Scythians were Turks. (Begmırat Gerey). Ellis Minns evaluating written sources and a large number of archaeological materials, accepted that the Scythians were not an Indo-European people, and therefore belonged to the Ural-Altaic race. Meyer, although he generally sees the nomads as Iranians, expresses the idea that the Sakas, who lived around the Oxus and Jaxartes and a little further north of these places, may have been of Turkish origin (Meyer 1926: 905). Von der Osten, although he considered the Scythians to be Iranians, accepted the existence of Turkish communities among the Scythians, saying, "It is clear that groups belonging to other races always formed a wave of migration with large movements within the Eurasian steppe belt. In this case, Turkish communities must also have been involved" (Von der Osten 1956: 71). Also H. Triedler and B. Lufer accepted that Scythians were Turk. (B. Gerey)

Conder / Claude Reignier Conder (1948-1910) English soldier, explorer, orientalist writer. According to Conder, the language of the Turkish Yakuts is the closest relative of Sumerian. (B. Gerey)

Pirniya / Hasan Pirniya (1871-1935) Iranian historian. After reviewing the various conflicting views on the Sakas, the Iranian historian Hasan Pirniya argues that the Sakas (Scythians) were composed of both Turanian (Turkish) and Indo-Germanic tribes. (Gerey)

Vambery / Arminius (Hermann) Vambery (1832-1913) He made studies showing the commonality between Turkish and Hungarian. He wrote that the Sakas (Scytihans) were probably Turks and the Byzantines also accepted them as Turks. The Scythians must have been Turkish nomads. .

Muhammed Taki Zehtabi an expert on Iranian history. According to him, most of the Saka (Scythian) personal names are Turkish.

Muhammed Hasanhan İ’tümadü-s Saltana (1843-1896) historian, writer, statesman. According to him, Scythians are Turks, Tocharians are Scythians. The name Parthian is a Turanian word, meaning immigrant, refugee. Ashkanis (Eshkanids) were a branch of Scythians and conquered Iran as Turanian Turks… Today’s Turkmens are the remnants of the Parthian tribe…  

Rosliakov / N. Rosliakov … Russian historian: He wrote in his book “Origin of Turkmen” that: Massagetae and Sarmatians - a branch of Scythians - are the ancient and main ancestors of the Turkmens.   

Högström / Karl O. Högström … He has a book called “The Huns and Their Allies in Scandinavia”. The foreword was written by Obrusánszky Borbála. Obrusánszky Borbála is also an author of books such as “A hunok öröksége” and “Atilla unokái - Successors of Attila”. Karl O. Högström is the director of the DNA genealogy research group in Stockholm, Sweden. I have read three of his recent publications. He confirms the Hunnic origin in the Scandinavian peoples based on DNA data. He also examines the role of the Goths in this relationship. Högström also mentions Lotte Hedeager, who was one of the first to write about the existence of the Hunnic origin in Scandinavia: “Hedeager published an article in the Norwegian journal Norwegian Archaeological Review about Hunnic presence in Scandinavia… In 2011, Hedeager published a book titled Iron Age Myth and Materiality: An Archaeology of Scandinavia AD 400–1000 where she further developed her hypothesis.”  

https://www.academia.edu/87950565/The_Huns_in_Scandinavia_A_new_approach_centered_around_modern_DNA

Alili / Elşad Alili wrote an article titled “Turkish Marks in Akkadian and Bonds Between Akkadian and Turkish”.  And another: Elşad Allili, Osman Çataloluk; Similarity Between Turkish & Akkadian Based on Rules of Inflective & Agglutinative Languages; Advances in Language and Literary Studies Vol. 5 No. 4; August 2014

Garaşarlı / Çingiz Garaşarlı wrote a book titled “Trojans and Etruscans Were Turks”.  

Dyakonov / Igor Mikhailovich Diakonoff (1915 – 1999) … Kurmaev wrote this: “After studying the works of a Russian Assyriologist and Sumerologist I. M. Dyakonov, particularly 1967 “Languages of Ancient Asia Minor”, I uncovered a Turkic “genetic” base of the Sumerian language, and ancient borrowings from the widespread Mesopotamian languages of that time (ancient Hebrew, Akkadian, Ugaritic, Berber, Chadic, etc.). All similarities found I broke down into groups. And a first group is for pronouns.”

Koppers  / Wilhelm Koppers (1886-1961 – Viyana) / He was a Roman Catholic priest and cultural anthropologist who advocated a comparative, historical approach to understanding cultural phenomena and who theorized about the origin and development of society through her studies of hunting and gathering tribes. (Britannica). Koppers wrote that: " The sociologies of the early Turks and the early Indo-Germans are so similar that there can be no doubt about their genetic relationship." (W. Koppers, "Tarihî Etnoloji, İndo-Germanistik İlmi ve Türkoloji", Belleten, cilt 4, s. 472, Türk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara 1941)

Lehmann / Edward Johannes Lehmann (1862–1930) He wrote that the ancestors of the Iranian Medes were the Sakas (Scythians). That is why the Greeks did not call the Persians Medes. Lehmann: "Les Perses", Manuel d'Histoire des Religions, Paris, 1904

Ebul Gazi Bahadır Han (1603-1663) In his work called Secere-i Terakime, he wrote the following based on the Zend Avesta: Feridun divides the world among his three sons. He gives Iran (Ir) to one of them, the other is called Tur (Turca), from him come the Turani nations; the name of the third is Sairma, from him come the other nations. In other words, the Iranians (Aryans) and the Turks are brothers, brothers from the father.   

Taylor / Isaac Taylor (1829–1901) In his work "Etruscan Researches" (1874), the English philologist and theologian Isaac Taylor argued that the Etruscan language may belong to the Ural-Altaic language family. One of his work is “The Etruscan Language”

Ellis / A. Robert Ellis (1820–1885) The Asiatic Affinities of the Old Italian Race (1861). Ellis connected the origins of some peoples of ancient Italy (Etruscans, Pelasgians) to Asia, especially to the Turanian races. “The term ‘Turanian’ was a broad umbrella term covering peoples speaking Ural-Altaic languages ​​in the 19th century. Ellis associated some of these peoples with the Turks.

Mayani / B. Zacharie Mayani (1899–1982) Les Etrusques commencent à parler (1961). He suggested that the languages ​​of the Etruscans and Pelasgians could have “Asiatic” and “Turkic” characteristics. Mayani made efforts to establish a connection between the Etruscan language and the Turkic languages.

Bayley / A. Harold Bayley (1867-1940) The Lost Language of Symbolism (1912). Bayley seeks to establish symbolic connections between Central Asia, the Turkic peoples, and the ancient Mediterranean world while searching for relationships between symbols, language, and mythology.

Fischer / Johann Eberhard Fischer (1697–1771)German historian and language researcher. In his work “Qvaestiones Petropolitanae, De origine Ungrorum”, published in 1770, Fischer put Hungarian into a group of kindred peoples and languages which he called 'Scythian' (distinct from van Boxhorn's concept of Scythian). He considered the Ugric peoples (he called them 'Jugors', these are the Khanty and Mansi) the closest relatives of Hungarians, actually as 'Magyars left behind', and originated them from the Uyghurs, who live on the western frontiers of China.

Schott / Wilhelm Christian Schott (1802-1899) … By the early 19th century, connections with further languages were perceived by Rasmus Christian Rask, Wilhelm Schott and Matthias Castrén, who included the Finno-Ugric languages as a part of a larger hypothesis today known as Ural-Altaic. The German linguist and Orientalist Schott was a proponent of Finn-Turk-Hungarian kinship, and considered the Hungarians a mixture of Turks and "Hyperboreans".

Janhunen / Juha Janhunen wrote that: “What is, however, an undeniable fact is that the Uralic languages belong to a single trans-Eurasian belt of agglutinative languages together with the so-called Altaic languages, including Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Korean (Koreanic), and Japanese (Japonic). In this case, typological parallelism is accompanied by areal adjacency, allowing us to speak of a distinct Ural-Altaic language area and language type. Characteristic features of the Ural-Altaic language type include a modifier-before-headword word order both in the sentence (SOV) and within the nominal phrase (GAN), suffixally marked agglutinative morphology both of the noun and the verb, as well as polysyllabic root structure with simple phonotactic patterns and no suprasegmental distinctions. Deviations from the prototypical Ural-Altaic language type occur in the individual branches and languages, especially in the west (Finnic, Saamic), north (Northern Samoyedic), and east (Koreanic, Japonic), but the basic typological orientation is nevertheless observable throughout the transcontinental belt.” (from Eduard Selleslagh-Suykens)

Janhunen, Juha: Proto-Uralic - what, where, and when? in The Quasquicentennial of the Finno-Ugrian Society 258, Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia = Memoires de la Societe Finno-Ougrienne 258, Helsinki 2009. 57–78. (sust258_janhunen.pdf on www.academia.edu)

Eduard Selleslagh-Suykens … This author draws a connection between the Basque language and the Uralic and Altaic language families. Another author, Michel Morvan, holds similar views. They also point to a relationship between Basque and Native American languages. However, for some reason, both of these authors attacked me quite rudely in the discussions I initiated on academia.edu. My views seem too radical for today’s mediocre-minded mainstream academic circles. Yet, even though their views are not as radical as mine, they are quite close to mine.

Despite this, I can't understand the reason for their hostility. Suykens resorts to direct insults, while Morvan attacks my language examples. He accuses me of knowing nothing about linguistics. The numerous word explanations I give him have no effect. Even detailed etymological analyses of individual words and their roots don’t help. These gentlemen, despite not knowing the millennia-old Turkic roots, somehow claim to know linguistics better than I do. Even though I provide many examples from Native American languages and PIE roots, they claim superiority in linguistics and belittle me. Even when I show the sound-change laws between Turkic and PIE, they disregard them.

I feel helpless in front of them. For this reason, for now, I don’t have the courage to call them heroes of science. They are merely candidates for that title. J They are older than I am, and in our culture, respecting one’s elders is essential.

Suykens,  Iberian and the Urals / Iberian and Basque as descendants of the eastern PIE-related ancestor of Paleo-European in the Eurasian steppes / A completely reconsidered view of the genesis of Iberian

Michel Morvan … “Morvan was definitely not the first to suggest or imply a Uralic relationship or partial origin for Basque, - and even a much longer-range relationship (as far as Siberian and Amerindian) - but he certainly provided the strongest evidence, e.g. in relation to the first and second person singular pronoun and/or possessive suffix (and ‘zero’ for the third person). That would also apply to Iberian, since, in my scheme, the grandfather of PIE and PE was in close contact with the Eurasian peri-glacial belt of the nomads’ agglutinative languages. It should be noted that in M. Morvan’s etymological dictionary of Basque, completed with my own investigations, the number of Altaic roots outweigh the Uralic ones two-to-one among the words he and/or I consider identifiable as derived from Proto-Uralic or Proto-Altaic roots…” (from Eduard Selleslagh-Suykens) Morvan, Michel: Les origines linguistiques du basque, Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux, 1996

 

Final Note: You can find much more detailed explanations and documents on this subject in my book which I show you below, where I explain all this.

amazon.com

https://www.amazon.com/Turkish-Founding-Language-Indo-European-Concealed/dp/B0D9S7BXJW/ref=rvi_d_sccl_1/145-7925286-2298828?pd_rd_w=h8WSU&content-id=amzn1.sym.f5690a4d-f2bb-45d9-9d1b-736fee412437&pf_rd_p=f5690a4d-f2bb-45d9-9d1b-736fee412437&pf_rd_r=FHJQ1PPTQVVDH2XWY6RQ&pd_rd_wg=T4fIS&pd_rd_r=aa381af2-fb27-46b6-af74-b2b53e178b2b&pd_rd_i=B0D9S7BXJW&psc=1

kitapyurdu.com (only for Türkiye)

https://www.kitapyurdu.com/kitap/turkish-as-the-founding-language-of-indoeuropean-/687326.html&filter_name=kaan+arslanoglu

 Kaan Arslanoğlu