Roots of the term ARISTOCRACY
are from Turkish, Part-6
--- In historical_linguistics@yahoogroups.com,
Polat Kaya <tntr@C...>
wrote:
"ARACHNE"
("ÖRÜNCEH"), "ARISTOCRACY", Part-6:
(Continued from
Part-5)
In the EB citing
about COLOPHON, it is said that Colophon was
ruled by TIMOCRACY,
that is to say by many virtuous men. In the
definition of
ancient government forms, the Encyclopaedia Britannica
gives the
following: [25]
"Since the
days of Plato and Aristotle, governments have been
classified in a
great many different ways. The Greek philosophers
adopted a scheme of
classification which was compounded of a strictly
numerical criterion
and a very general value judgement. In doing
this, they
undoubtedly built upon an older tradition of which some
evidence survives,
such as the famous discussion of the Persian king
Darius, reported by
Hereodotus, and the work of the sophist Hippodamus
of Miletus. Plato
saw the several forms of politeia, or political
order, as corruption
of the ideal order which he delineated in the
Republic.. It has
often been overlooked that he adressed himself to
the order in the
polis (city) only; his classification is not supposed
to cover the
political systems of the barbarians, though broadly
speaking he
inclines, as most Greeks, to see these despots as
analogues to the
tyrant in the polis. Tyrannos was, of all the
politeias, the
worst and the most corrupt, with the tyrant himself
most unhappy of
men. It is the rule of one who is completely lacking
in virtue. Its
opposite is, relatively speaking, the best the rule of
one who is a man of
virtue. The same distinction holds for the other
four possible
political orders: if a few virtuous men rule, the
result is
aristocracy; if a few unvirtuous ones, oligarchy; if many
possesing some
virtue, timocracy; if many without virtue, democracy."
First of all , the
above explanation indicates that the ancient Greeks
called themselves
as "the civilized ones" and the rest of the Turanian
peoples who surrounded
them in every direction were labelled as
"BARBARIANS".
This self surving and racist definition had two aims.
When they are
confronted as to the validity of their racist
definition, they
would turn around and say that they do not mean
"Barbarians"
are savages, but rather "they are non-Greek peoples.
Thus the term is
used to distinguish Greeks from others, "that is, the
Tur peoples".
Of course, this was not an honest explanation. It was
rather a slippery
escape explanation. The fact was that they used the
term as a put down,
as used by the westerners at present, of the
Turanian peoples.
The term
"barbar", supposedly meaning "foreigner or non Greek" comes
from the fact that
Turanians believed the sky-god concept of "BIR O",
that is "ONE
GOD" but the ancient Greeks did not. Additionally, on
the battle field,
the Turanians would shout "BIR BIR BIR ...", calling
their sky-god to
help them in the fight. When an army of Tur soldiers
going into battle
shout "BIR BIR ..." in unison, it becomes a source
of mental courage
for the TUR/TURKS and a source of fear for the other
side. The same was
done in the form of "ALLAH ALLAH ALLAH ..." during
their Islamic
times. This use of "BIR BIR ..." by the Turanians must
have been distorted
by the Greeks into a put down expression as
"BARBAR"
and thus "Barbarian". This was the case for the term
"tyrant"
as well.
The term Tyrannos
initially did not mean "tyrant" as it is understood
presently. Tyrannos
is said to be Lydian in origin. The term acquired
its pejorative
meaning after philosophical writers being malcontent
with the autocratic
habits of Alexander the Great, gave "tyranny" the
pejorative sense it
still bears today. [26] Thus the "put down"
aspect of the term
is added later on in describing some of ancient
Greek's own despots.
But the Greek term
Tyrannos bears unusual resemblance to the Turkish
word
"TURANNU" (Turanlu) meaning "one from Turan" which has
conceptually no
relation with the concept of "tyrant" or "tyranny".
Yet this Greek term
Tyrannos cunningly blackens the name of TURAN and
the people from
TURAN (i.e., TURS/TURKS) as tyrants - which they are
not. The word
"tyrannos" being Lydian in origin and also being
Turkish in the form
of "Turannu" makes Lydians and Turs/Turks
"Turannu"
and therefore kin to each other as they both would be
Turkish speaking
TUR peoples. Actually we will see much more evidence
pointing to this
Lydian and Turkic kinship in this study.
While the put down
embedded in the word "tyrannos" is directed at the
native Tur peoples
of ancient Greece , i.e, the so-called
"barbarians",
superficially meaning those who were not "Greek"
implying the native
Pelasgians and all those who identified themselves
with the Pelasgian
(Tur/Turk) peoples, it is ironic to note that the
real
"tyrants" were the Greeks themselves. This is quite evident from
the Greek
historical writings relating the interrelations that took
place between the
Ions (Ay-Hans, Yunans) of Athens and the Greeks
(Rums, Gypsy) of
Sparta. While the Atheneans, that is, Ionians
(Pelasgians,
Ayhans, Yunans) were much more peaceful and reasonable
and democratic in
their behaviour, the Spartans were agressive and
merciless (i.e.,
tyrants).
As one reads the
ancient Greek history, one finds many evidences that
the concept of
"democracy" was by the Ions (AY-HANS, Yunans), that is,
by the Turanians,
rather than the Greeks. The ancient Greeks, however,
were very skilled
at usurping many concepts that did not belong to
them in the first
place or did not originate with them. Greeks, like
the other
wanderers, after subjugating a native group from within,
went into the shell
of the conquered people, thus, taking over their
civilization and
then claiming it as their own. In doing so they made
sure that they
assimilate the conquered group and alienate them from
their roots. By
another name, they "Hellenized" them.
Thus, this citing
is important for the analysis of some of the
following political
system definitions in terms of their Turkic
linguistic
counterparts. The presence or non-presence of "virtuosity"
seems to have
played an important role in these definitions of
political orders.
With this background information, let us now examine
the structure of
the names defining various political governing orders
of the ancient
times.
ARISTOCRACY:
The Webbster's
Collegiate Dictionary (1947) the etymology of the term
ARISTOCRACY as
being: from Greek ARISTOKRATIA made up from greek
"aristos"
meaning "best" plus "kratein" meaning "to be strong,
rule".
Thus it defines the
ploitical system as: 1. Rule by the best; hence,
government by a
relatively small priviliged class; also the ruling
body of such a
government. 2. Any form of government in which the
ruling power is
vested in a minority consisting, presumably, of those
best qualified to
rule; also a state having such government. 3. The
nobles or chief
persons in a state; a privileged class; losely, those
regarded as
superior to the rest of the community, as in rank, wealth,
or intellect.
In short, it is a
form of governing in which the upper rich and
so-called
"noble" privileged few rule the rest of the society.
The Greek term
"ARISTO", when decrypted as "AR IST O", is an anagram
of the Turkish
expression "ER ÜST O" or "ÜST ER O" meaning "he is the
top man". The
Turkish term "ÜST" means "the very top", "the
best",
"above
all". This explains clearly the source of the Greek term
"Aristo".
Somehow neither the dictionary nor the Greek scholars
themselves make any
reference to the true Turkish source of this
"Greek"
word. Either they do not know, most likely most of the
sincere and honest
linguists are in that category, or those who do
know would like to
keep quite about it.
The Greek term
"KRATEIN", when decrypted as "ITAREKN", is an
anagram of Turkish
word "ITAREKEN" (idaregen, idare etmege aliskin)
meaning "he
who is used to rule" or alternatively, "a ruler or someone
who knows how to
rule". This Turkish meaning is also the same as the
given meaning of
the given Greek term "kratein". Thus again the
source of the term
is Turkish. Turkish word "idare etmek" means "to
rule" and the
suffix -KEN/-GEN makes the word to mean "habitually to
rule".
Hence, the
so-called Greek term ARISTOKRATIA is actually an anagram of
the Turkish phrase
"O IDAREGEN ÜST ER" meaning "That ruler is the top
man" or
"rule by the best". So the source of the word is pure Turkish
although it has
been conveniently anagrammatized, that is, broken,
shuffled and
disguised, into a Greek word. World has been conned
completely.
Alternatively, when
the Greek term ARISTOKRATIA is decrypted as
"KORIS-AT-ITARA",
it is found to be the anagram of the Turkish
expression
"KURUSh-Ata ITARA" (Kurush-Ata idaresi, para-baba idaresi)
meaning "The
ruling by the money-fathers (rich man)." In this anagram,
Turkish
"kurush" means "money" as "kurush" was the
monetary unit of
Turkish money
system since ancient times. This is again in line with
the definition of
the term ARISTOKRATIA and hence, ARISTOCRACY.
In fact, even the
word ARISTOCRACY, when decrypted letter-by-letter as
"CORS-ITARACY"
with the first "C" as "K", first "S" as
"Sh" and the
second
"C" as "S", and read phonetically as in Turkish, it becomes
evident that it is
an anagram of Turkish expression "KURuSh ITARASU"
(kurush idaresi,
para idaresi) meaning "ruling by money." In this
anagram, Turkish
"KURUSH" meaning "money" and "ITARASI" (idarasi,
idaresi) meaning
"the ruling" have been manupulated into the English
word ARISTOCRACY.
As noted above,
Aristocratia is the political system in which money of
the rich talks.
This concept was known to the ancient world
everywhere and was
not Greek in origin. Greeks only anagrammatized the
Turkish expression
and made a word for themselves. Related to this
word is the term
ARISTOCRAT meaning "lord, nobleman, prince, member of
the ruling class,
etc.."
The term ARISTOKRAT
(aristokratis) when rearranged as "KORIS-ATA-RT",
is an anagram of
the Turkish phrase "KORUS-ATA-eRTu" (KURUSh-ATA ERDI,
pul-ata erdi)
meaning "He is money-father man", that is, he is a very
rich man. Thus with
this Turkish expression the actual source of the
term
"ARISTOKRAT" is also explained in Turkish. Surely, attributions
such as
"lord", "nobility", "princehood", etc. come along
with the
wealth.
This analysis show
how the Greek terms "aristokratia" and
"aristokratis"
and the English terms "aristocracy" and "aristocrat"
were formed from
Turkish expressions, and it also shows why the
political ruling
system "aristocracy" is related to rich men.
It is interesting
to find the Turkish word "kurush" embedded in the
word
"Aristocrat" defined since Plato's time. "kurush" was the
monetary unit in
the Turkic monetary system probably since the times
of Lydians or
earlier in Anatolia. The reason for the "kurush"
connection of
Turs/Turks with the ancient Lydians of Anatolia is the
fact that Lydians
had a ruler whose wealth was proverbial in his own
time. He was the
Lydian king CROESUS [27] voiced as "KURUSH" as in
Turkish. He minted the
first Lydian gold coins known by his own name.
Thus, the King
CROESUS (KURUSh) being a ruler and also a very wealthy
man was himself a
"MONEY-FATHER" ("KURUSh ATA"). This would make him
an aristocratic
ruler.
The Greek word for
"golden" is "XRUSOUS". When we factor the bogus X
character into its
KH components, we get KHRUSOUS. But KHRUSOUS, when
rearranged as
"KURUSHOS", is nothing but an anagram of Turkish
expression
"KURUSHUS" meaning "we are money". In Turkish monetary
system, "100
kurush made one Turkish Lira". But golden coins, i.e.,
KURUSH was the
monetary system in ancient times.
All of this brings
to mind the question of relation between the
ancient Turkish
monetary unit name "KURUSh" and the Lydian King's name
CROESUS
("KURUSh"). They have the same meanings and phonology. This
kinship can only be
explained if ancient Tur/Turk peoples and Lydians
were related people
with the same ancient culture. There are
evidences that they
were the same peoples. Historical and linguistic
connections between
the Turkic peoples and Lydians and Phrygians who
also inhabited the
Anatolian geography, are somehow broken by
intentional
alterations and deceptions. Otherwise, the affinity
cannot be due to
coincidence.
A similar rich man
of ancient times, i.e., "money father," was PLATO
as his name
indicates. In one meaning of the name PLATO, it is an
anagram of Turkish
phrase "PuL ATA" meaning "Money-Father". "PUL" was
the general Turkish
term meaning "money". PLATO was an extremely rich
man both from the
father's side and also the mother's side. PLATO is
also known by the
name "EFLATUN" in Turkish which is an anagram of
Turkish phrase
"EFE ALTUN" meaning "Gold Man". So in his time he was
a rich man - not
only with wealth but also with knowledge. Thus the
Turkish source for
his "Greek" name PLATO and also his Turkish name
EFLATUN verify each
other. Both are manufactured names from Turkish
expressions.
Additionally, in a
second meaning of the name PLATO is an anagram of
Turkish "PiL
ATA" (Bil Ata) meaning "knowledge Father" which Plato was
according to
history. Similarly, the Turkic "EFLATUN", when
rearranged as
"FELATUN" with F/B translation, would be the anagram of
"BIL
ATUN" ("bil adun") meaning "your name is knowlege"
which again
verifies its
secondary meaning. Thus the title given to or taken by
PLATO has its roots
in Turkish.
Those truth
searching linguists who wish to know the root of the
so-called
Indo-European languages cannot ignore all of these
correspondences
between the Greek terms and what I call their Turkish
source expressions.
What I give in these comparisons provide a solid
explanation for the
formation of Indo-European languages from Turkish
by way of
anagrammatizing. When a source text is anagrammatized, that
is, encrypted and
disguised, the original message is not lost but
rather preserved in
a confused form. The ancient Greek
anagrammatizers,
and together with them their Indo-European and
Semitic
collaborators, preserved the ancient Turkish words and
expressions by way
of anagrammatizing them into words for languages
that they called
their own. When old sources refer to the confusion of
"languages"
in Babylon, they, in a nebulous way, refer to the
confusion of
"Turkish", i.e., the "Oguz language, which was most
likely the world
language of the ancient times. It is no wonder that
the Turks had the
saying "if one knows Turkish, one could travel
anywhere in Asia,
Europe and the Middle East."
Linguists and
historians of the ancient world should have the courage
to question the
notion that "the European civilization is solely based
on ancient Greek
and Semitic civilization." While its dark, secretive
and deceiving
aspects can be traced to these sources, the rest comes
from the ancient
Turanian civilization. The fact of the matter is that
the ancient world
civilization was based on Turanian Sky-God Religion
(Sky-Father-God
(Gök-Ata-Tanri, BIR-O), Sun-God (Gün-Tanri) and
Moon-God
(Ay-Tanri)) together with its widely spoken Oguz Language,
that is, the Tur
(Turkish) language. Those who brought forth new
religions in the
first millennium B.C. used the tenets of the ancient
Turanian religion
(e.g., its moral behaviour laws, its understanding
of good and evil,
its trinity concept of God, the duality nature of
God, the wisdom of
God, the uprightness and justice of God, ...) and
made sure that they
obliterated that Turanian world civilization by
way of deceptions
of unimaginable magnitude. That Turanian world
civilization was
destroyed for political and economic gains and for
controlling the
world peoples for exploitation.
REFERENCES:
[25] Encyclopaedia
Britannica (EB), 1963, Vol. 10, p. 560Ac.
[26] Peter Green,
"A Concise History of Ancient Greece to the
close of the
Classical Era", Thames and Hudson, 1981, p. 69.
[27] Graham Speake,
"A Dictionary of Ancient History", Blackwell
Publishers, Oxford,
UK, 1994, p. 183.
Best wishes to all,
Polat Kaya
December 30, 2003