Turkish knife

Rivkin · 19th November 2005, 11:46 PM

Jew-likes is something more similar to turkish denmeh than to karaites - while the latter ones are a sect in judaism. Jew-like (zhukty) means someone who descends from a jew, preferrably on their male line.

The reason for their existance is that until very recently religious identification for most of caucasians was rather vague. People lived by clans, sharing the same male ancestry. Female ancestry did not account for anything (since women were almost in 100% taken from clans or nations different from that of the father).
As a result, clans were identified by their founder - chechens of georgian ancestry (gurj), georgians of chechen ancestry, abaza of svan ancestry etc.
Similar to this jew-like clans (for example Bagrations) are defined as the ones that were founded by jews.

I don't think this sword has much to do with them...
Concerning shashkas - unless this is the same shashka being resold over and over again, I've seen quite a lot of those.

erlikhan · 20th November 2005, 09:21 AM

Ah got it now. Like Sabetaists (donme) in Turkey. Anyway, if you think the sword has not much to do with them, then let's put point to the ethnical side of the subject as I 've learned continuing ethnical conversations in the forum mean increasing potential of unexpected trouble

.

Tim Simmons · 20th November 2005, 09:54 AM

It would be helpful if some buff could come up with a list or map of the trench systems on the various fronts, then find which troops fought there that might use such national emblems. Then we could avoid raking embers. Tim

ariel · 20th November 2005, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erlikhan

Ah got it now. Like Sabetaists (donme) in Turkey. Anyway, if you think the sword has not much to do with them, then let's put point to the ethnical side of the subject as I 've learned continuing ethnical conversations in the forum mean increasing potential of unexpected trouble

.

I do not think we shoud shy away from these discissions as long as they are helpful to the educational purpose of the Forum in terms of weapon/military discussions and do not degenerate into nationalistic/racist accusations.
Karaim and Donmeh are two different stories altogether.
Karaim are a purely Judaic sect that believes only in the written Torah (Pentateuch) and rejects later books and Rabbinical authorities such as Talmud (G'mara). Their ethnic origin is obscure. Some claim purely Jewish roots and their Turkic language a reflection of the point of their spread from the Crimea where they lived next door to the Tatars. Others suggest their descent from the Khazars (Turkic tribes living north of the Caspian and Black Seas) that converted to Judaism sometimes in the 9-10th century and spread west to Crimea and subsequently to Poland/Lithuania or east to North Caucasus (Tats, Nogais, Karachai etc). In both localities they maintained very militaristic way of life (see Trakai Castle in Lithuania). The Khazar origin is dubious because Karaim were present in medieval Spain in 10-11th centuries. Nevertheless, they were viewed as non-Jews by the Westerners to the point that Russian Tsars were very protective of them and the Nazis did not touch them at all.
Donmeh are the descendants of the real Jews: the followers of Sabbetai Zvi, a 17th century Jew who proclaimed himself a Messiah but converted to Islam as soon as the Ottoman Sultan offered him a choice between that and immediate decapitation. Donmeh in Turkey never were militarily oriented and stuck to trade/crafts. By the way, they supported Ataturk and that gave a ground to his enemies to claim that his mother must have been Jewish ("Not Mustafa, not Kemal and not even a Turk").
As Rivkin pointed out, the Royal Georgian Bagratid dynasty (Batonishvilis) claimed descent from a man named Smbat who was allegedly a leader of the Jews brought to the Caucasus (Armenia, mainly) by the Babylonians in 6th century BCE, after the destruction of the First Temple (the original Lost Tribes). True or not is unknown as the equally aristocratic Orbelianis claimed Chinese descent and Abashidzes, Abyssinian.
I went into this historical digression simply because it is impossible to understand the history of weapons without knowing the history of men who carried them. Quick example: ancient Kievan Russians carried typically Viking swords but their armour had major "Tatar" influence. Only by knowing that the Vikings were the earliest rulers of the Rus and that Kiev was established by the Khazars (Ki-ev means "place by the water" in Tats language) can we understand this strange and beautiful mix.

erlikhan · 20th November 2005, 09:55 PM

ariel, I have heard the reverse about ww2 period from a Karaim (only one I have met in fact). He claims descending from Hazars, but i know that Judaism didnt spread among all Hazar nation, just the ruling dynasty and close environment of them. The community was multi religional, Shamanism, Christianity, Islam and Judaism on a big land. Perhaps that can explain Karaim's having small population but I didnt know their settling in Spain.
Donmes have always been the "men of every period" and estimating the upcoming wind and rotating their sails through that direction in close history ( perhaps not so unethical and not blaming for this). Their supporting Ataturk must be evaluated just inside this frame. One family from them has even a very fundementalist Islamic imaged holding of companies. I don't know any government against which they have seemed to fall into opposition .
And if we return to the symbol , according to me Rivkin's approach about the Kabardins is highly possible, -if their tribal symbol is a 6 p. star within a crescent, and the same symbol is seen on several shashkas-, it seems very acceptable to me. I will count points on shashka stars more carefully from now on

ariel · 20th November 2005, 11:26 PM

Khazars, just like Ghengiz Khan Mongols, were remarkably tolerant in terms of religion. You are right: Khazar kingdom had virtually every kind of religious belief practiced freely. Something we all can learn from.

Rivkin · 21st November 2005, 04:21 AM

Those who want to read about "blood ancestry" in the region I would refer to the following articles:
http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/Nasidze_2003.pdf
http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/caucasus.pdf
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJH...013033.web.pdf
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJH...023927.web.pdf

erlikhan · 21st November 2005, 09:08 PM

What Khazars succeeded is admirable in Middle age, but before the middle eastern religions with single god spreaded around all world, every nation was quiet respectful to each other's religion, and as far as I know, no famous war occured becuase of trying to force some people to change religion, or no collective jihad or crusade was formed against members of another religion in the era when each tribe had their own gods and religions. That is called "primitive" today but it is interesting how sociologically "final step of religious evolution" described today's religions which claims brothership and united humankind practically means the brothership of huge fan groups involved in a neverending fight against other groups by the certain order of these religions and dramatic increase in religion based wars. In "primitive" times no religion had so big ambitions and hunger for all world, and did not use its followers for such ideas, not? Not related to subject but just wanted to write as I always have found it interesting. Evolution or devolution if the subject is the happiness and comfort of humankind??

20th November 2005, 09:55 PM	#5
erlikhan Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Istanbul Posts: 452	ariel, I have heard the reverse about ww2 period from a Karaim (only one I have met in fact). He claims descending from Hazars, but i know that Judaism didnt spread among all Hazar nation, just the ruling dynasty and close environment of them. The community was multi religional, Shamanism, Christianity, Islam and Judaism on a big land. Perhaps that can explain Karaim's having small population but I didnt know their settling in Spain. Donmes have always been the "men of every period" and estimating the upcoming wind and rotating their sails through that direction in close history ( perhaps not so unethical and not blaming for this). Their supporting Ataturk must be evaluated just inside this frame. One family from them has even a very fundementalist Islamic imaged holding of companies. I don't know any government against which they have seemed to fall into opposition . And if we return to the symbol , according to me Rivkin's approach about the Kabardins is highly possible, -if their tribal symbol is a 6 p. star within a crescent, and the same symbol is seen on several shashkas-, it seems very acceptable to me. I will count points on shashka stars more carefully from now on Last edited by erlikhan; 21st November 2005 at 08:37 PM.

19th November 2005, 11:46 PM	#1
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Jew-likes is something more similar to turkish denmeh than to karaites - while the latter ones are a sect in judaism. Jew-like (zhukty) means someone who descends from a jew, preferrably on their male line. The reason for their existance is that until very recently religious identification for most of caucasians was rather vague. People lived by clans, sharing the same male ancestry. Female ancestry did not account for anything (since women were almost in 100% taken from clans or nations different from that of the father). As a result, clans were identified by their founder - chechens of georgian ancestry (gurj), georgians of chechen ancestry, abaza of svan ancestry etc. Similar to this jew-like clans (for example Bagrations) are defined as the ones that were founded by jews. I don't think this sword has much to do with them... Concerning shashkas - unless this is the same shashka being resold over and over again, I've seen quite a lot of those.

20th November 2005, 09:21 AM	#2
erlikhan Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Istanbul Posts: 452	Ah got it now. Like Sabetaists (donme) in Turkey. Anyway, if you think the sword has not much to do with them, then let's put point to the ethnical side of the subject as I 've learned continuing ethnical conversations in the forum mean increasing potential of unexpected trouble .

20th November 2005, 09:54 AM	#3
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,843	It would be helpful if some buff could come up with a list or map of the trench systems on the various fronts, then find which troops fought there that might use such national emblems. Then we could avoid raking embers. Tim

20th November 2005, 11:26 PM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Khazars, just like Ghengiz Khan Mongols, were remarkably tolerant in terms of religion. You are right: Khazar kingdom had virtually every kind of religious belief practiced freely. Something we all can learn from.

21st November 2005, 04:21 AM	#7
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Those who want to read about "blood ancestry" in the region I would refer to the following articles: http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/Nasidze_2003.pdf http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/caucasus.pdf http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJH...013033.web.pdf http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJH...023927.web.pdf

21st November 2005, 09:08 PM	#8
erlikhan Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Istanbul Posts: 452	What Khazars succeeded is admirable in Middle age, but before the middle eastern religions with single god spreaded around all world, every nation was quiet respectful to each other's religion, and as far as I know, no famous war occured becuase of trying to force some people to change religion, or no collective jihad or crusade was formed against members of another religion in the era when each tribe had their own gods and religions. That is called "primitive" today but it is interesting how sociologically "final step of religious evolution" described today's religions which claims brothership and united humankind practically means the brothership of huge fan groups involved in a neverending fight against other groups by the certain order of these religions and dramatic increase in religion based wars. In "primitive" times no religion had so big ambitions and hunger for all world, and did not use its followers for such ideas, not? Not related to subject but just wanted to write as I always have found it interesting. Evolution or devolution if the subject is the happiness and comfort of humankind??