2. leht 14-st

Postitatud: 20 Juul, 2008 21:29
Postitas Soobel
Muidugi et me siin eestalsed enam oleme, mitte sakslased, see on kaheldav: Minu andmetel kehtis siin ordu ajal esimese öö seadus ja enamasti juhtus, et pere esimene poleg oli poolsakslane ja temale pärandati kõik vara? See tähendab, et sakslased sigitasid põliseestlased siit välja?

Postitatud: 20 Juul, 2008 22:33
Postitas Janka
Olgu nende keelkondadega nagu on. Mul ja kindlasti paljudel teistel selle kohta oma arvamus, mida saab kuulutada ühes teises teemas.

Aga türklane Eestis siis... :roll:
Noh, elad siin ajutiselt ja õpid keelt juba seitse kuud kui õigesti aru saan.
Töötad kah kuskil? Mis ametimees oled?

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 7:30
Postitas turk
Janka kirjutas:Olgu nende keelkondadega nagu on. Mul ja kindlasti paljudel teistel selle kohta oma arvamus, mida saab kuulutada ühes teises teemas.

Aga türklane Eestis siis... :roll:
Noh, elad siin ajutiselt ja õpid keelt juba seitse kuud kui õigesti aru saan.
Töötad kah kuskil? Mis ametimees oled?
praegu ma ei tööta sest üldse ei ole tööd Narvas, ma elan Eestis oma sularahaga :wink: ma lõpetasin ülikoolis,minu elukutse on õpetajaks, ma olen töötanud 2 aastat Türgis kuidas õpetajana, Türgi armees olin, ma olin venemaal, azerbaidzhanis, iranis, praegu elan Eestis, tahan sõita avustralis,

kuidas ma räägin eesti keelt? sina saad aru mind kõik?

mina ei ela eestlasega, aga olin Tartus,Tallinnas

veel ma nägin teie saatejuht maire toompeale Tallinnas

mul on sõber eestlane raul, temaga ma käisin toompeale, nägin maire saatejuht, tervitasin talle, tema ka vastas mulle, veidi juttu rääkisime, pärast maire andis mulle oma telefoninumber ,kui probleeme on mul,et helistaks talle, hea inimene on,


ma räägin kõikiga Eestis, mul pole häbi, see tõttu ma saan aru sind mida sina kirjutad mulle, lihtsalt mulle on raske kirjutada eesti keeles õige, sest elan venelasega veel teil pole õpetajat et õpetada eesti keel selgeks..


Narvas ka ei ole Eestlased võib olla väga vähe, ma ei näinud,



:wink: aga kes sina oled? alati küsid minuks, veidi sina ka seleta endaks

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 7:57
Postitas kapral
tere.tahaks teada,et mis värk tyrklastel on.rates ja msn-is suhtlevad meie
naistega algul nagu söbrad,veidi aja pärast tahavad ennast alasti näidata.möni pakub ka veebikaamera ees onaneerimist.kas need on yksikud perverdid vöi on see rahvuslik eripära?

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 8:32
Postitas Frundsberg
Minu meelest hoopis väga tubli, et üks türklane on meie keele lühikese ajaga sellisel tasemel ära õppinud, et sellest on täiesti võimalik aru saada. Muidugi - täiesti korrektse eesti keele selgeks õppimiseni on veel pikk tee, aga olgem ausad, ka paljud meie foorumi liikmed kirjutavad vigadega, kuigi on "puhtad eestlased".

Vaatan, et oled lisanud oma postituste alla lingi armeenlaste kohta. Kuidas Türgis üldse praegu suhted armeenlastega on?

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 8:47
Postitas turk
kapral kirjutas:tere.tahaks teada,et mis värk tyrklastel on.rates ja msn-is suhtlevad meie
naistega algul nagu söbrad,veidi aja pärast tahavad ennast alasti näidata.möni pakub ka veebikaamera ees onaneerimist.kas need on yksikud perverdid vöi on see rahvuslik eripära?
Türgist kõik on Türklased?Türgis elavad kurdi,armeeni,arabi...30 tuhat eestlased sõidavad Türgis et puhata,mõned eestlased ka elavad Türgis,näiteks antalyas(kurort linna)

kõigil on oma ebanormaalselt inimesed,Eestis ka on ebanormaalselt inimesed,ei vaja rääkida kõiki eest paha,Türgis elavad 80 miljon inimest,veel euroopas 5 miljon Türklast elavad,,rates mitu türklast kasutajanimi?

internetis üldse palju ebanormaalselt on.....

ma tean neid,nad ka lisavad mind oma msn is, küsivad mind palju küsimusi :wink:

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 8:58
Postitas turk
Frundsberg kirjutas:Minu meelest hoopis väga tubli, et üks türklane on meie keele lühikese ajaga sellisel tasemel ära õppinud, et sellest on täiesti võimalik aru saada. Muidugi - täiesti korrektse eesti keele selgeks õppimiseni on veel pikk tee, aga olgem ausad, ka paljud meie foorumi liikmed kirjutavad vigadega, kuigi on "puhtad eestlased".

Vaatan, et oled lisanud oma postituste alla lingi armeenlaste kohta. Kuidas Türgis üldse praegu suhted armeenlastega on?
aitäh)))) 8) aga veel ma elan venelasega,,praktikaseerida pole eesti keele narvas et rääkida eestlasega
mina ka kirjutan oma emakeeles vigadega)))) :lol: gramaatika alati on raske ,sest pole oma emakeeles kirjutad,, mina loen iga päev ramaatut eesti keeles,
mina tahan saada üksi türklane ,mida teab eesti keelt maailmast


sul on õigus,muidugi õppimiseni on pikk tee,

mulle meeldib õppida eesti keelt,juba valdan vabalt eesti keelt,2 päeva tagasi oli narvas linnus rahvusvaheline baikfestival,mina rääkisin eestlasega eesti keelt narva linnus ,üks eestlane mees oli šokis,sest tema ütles mulle,üldse narvas mitte keegi ei räägi eesti keelt,sina oled veel välismaalane ja õpid eesti keelt ,,


kiiresti ei suuda õõpida võõrast keelt,sest vaja teha praktikaseerida palju kordi


Ma tean paljud inimesed Eestis..mida neil oN EESTI KODAkondsust,nad ei oska eesti keelt 8)


Armeenlasega suhtleme normaalselt,lihtsalt mõned armeenlased vastu Türklased,armeeni prezident kutsus meie Türgi prezident armeenis,,
Türgi tahab et armeenii saada normaalselt,sest armeenis venemaa armee asub,venemaa S300 raketi asub, Armeeni ja venemaa võttis karabag mägi, armeeni ja venemaa tegid okupatsioni ASERI maale,,


Tallinnas ka elavad armeenlased, väga naljakas armeenlased teevad meie KEBAB TALLINNAS, Turkish Kebab, Armeenlased varastavad Türklast KUULTURNO, kui sina lähed saksamaa ,näed palju Türklasi kööki, Eestis ka ei ole Türklasi, see tõttu armeenlased teevad meie kööki Eestis :lol:
veel ma olin šokis,

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 9:10
Postitas turk
ma kutsun teid kes tahab näha Narva Linna, mina hea meelega kutsun teid,ma tõlgin teile ,näitan Narva Linna,Narva linnas asub Eesti vabadussõjakalmistu,,,

aga juba ma tean kõik 8)

varsti hakkan õppima eesti keelt selgeks,

Türklane ma olen, me oleme teie sugulasi 5 tuhat aastat tagasi :wink:

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 13:31
Postitas Oma_Mees
Ma pole vist ainuke kes arvab, et türklased ja eestlased ei oma mingisugust sugulust, nii et ei tasu moosida :D

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 13:44
Postitas NAZIZ
Mõni üksik eestlane on veel Narvale truuks jäänud :wink:

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 19:17
Postitas Arheoloog
wudu kirjutas:Pealegi see, et meie esivanemad kuskilt Uurali tagant pärit on, on veidi kahtlane ...
Täitsa õige tähelepanek. Meil pole tõepoolest eriti palju ühisjooni nende kaugete idapool elavate soomeugrilastega. Läänemersoomlased on igasugu handide-mansidega seotud üksnes keeleliselt, kuid kindlasti mitte antropoloogiliselt. Viimasel ajal on teaduses võidule pääsenud nn. kultuurivahetusteooria (liikusid esemed mitte inimesed), mille järgi massilist soome-ugrilaste sisserännet siia Läänemere idakaldale tegelikult kunagi ei toimunud. Teatud põhjustel jäi millegipärast domineerima sisserännanute keel...Tõepoolest, oma välisilmelt sarnaneme me pigem omaaegsete Indo-Eurooplaste e. sõjakirveskultuuri kandjatega. Põhimõtteliselt võib püstitada järgnevagi hüpoteesi: Arvesse võttes seda, et mõningad meie keele sõnad pärinevad juba Kunda kultuuri aegadest, siis võib meid seostada ehk isegi Proto-eurooplaste järeltulijatega...Samuti pole me midagi nii segunenud kui tihtilugu väidetakse. Erinevalt venelastest ei saanud me tatarlaste käest endale etteulatuvaid põsesarnasid ja muid nilbusi ning seda vägagi lihtsal põhjusel: Ivan Julma teenistuses olnud koerakoonlased ei jätnud oma ohvreid lihtsalt ellu. Kui 17. sajandi esimesel veerandil ligemale pool sajandit kestnud sõjategevus lõpuks läbi sai, siis oli iga neljas elus olev eestlane saarlane ning just viimased asustasid Lääne- ja Kesk-Eesti tühjaks jäänud külad. Olukord oli selleks ajaks juba ka pehmelt öeldes kaunis kriitiline. Näiteks on 1615. aastal Koeru kihelkonna kohta andmeid, et seal ei elanud mitte ühtegi inimest...

Kokkuvõtvalt: Eestlased ei ole idapoolsete soome-ugrilastega antropoloogilises suguluses. Me räägime küll nende rahvastega "sarnast" keelt, kuid rassiliselt kuulume siiski selgelt Indo-Eurooplaste (Proto-Eurooplased?) hulka.

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 19:41
Postitas turk
Oma_Mees kirjutas:Ma pole vist ainuke kes arvab, et türklased ja eestlased ei oma mingisugust sugulust, nii et ei tasu moosida :D
tere kuidas läheb :lol: aga narvas ei ole Eestlased,, narva linnus oli rahvusvaheline baikfestival, eestlased ise rääkisid venelasega vene keelt, aga mina ka rääkisin eestlasega eesti keelt,,
sina jääd haigeks saksamaa eest aga saksamaa mitte midagi ei teinud ajaloos.... :wink:
sina kirjuta ATTILA the hun googles, HUNGARY VABARIIK sina tead? vaat Hungary ka võitus sinu saksamaa hitler, :lol:

Uurali-Altai rahvad on ja kõik inimesed hakkavad teadma seda, juba ei vaja jääda haigeks teisi rahvast eest,,

sinu venelased,sakslased elasid enne UURALI-ALTAI kuningast all..

härra TEIE INDO EUROOPEANLASED (venelased,sakslased,hispaanlased romanlased jne) elasid UURALI ALTAI rahvad all, enne ei olnud teie indo euroopeanlased venemaa :wink:
Pilt
Attila, King of the Huns
Reigned 434-453
Although he reigned almost 20 years as king of the Huns, the image of Attila in history and in the popular imagination is based upon two aggressive military campaigns in the last two years of his life which threatened to dramatically redirect the development of Western Europe.

Attila and his brother succeeded their uncle as leaders of the Huns in 434, with Attila in the junior role until his brother's death (perhaps at Attila's hand) 12 years later. The Hun kingdom was centered in modern-day Hungary. Attila embarked immediately upon a series of wars extending Hun rule from the Rhine across the north of the Black Sea as far as the Caspian Sea. From that base he soon began a long series of saber-rattling negotiations with the capitals of the Roman Empire at Constantinople in the East and Ravenna in the West.

Finally, Attila forged an alliance with the Franks and Vandals and in Spring 451 unleashed his long-threatened attack into the heart of Western Europe. After pillaging a broad swath of cities in his path, he was near obtaining the surrender of Orleans when the combined Roman and Visigoth armies arrived and forced Attila's retreat to the northeast.

Near Troyes the opposing forces joined battle at Chalons in one of the decisive battles of European history. Though the margin of victory was slim, the Western army prevailed, precipitating Attila's withdrawal back across the Rhine and avoiding a decisive shift in the course of political and economic development in Western Europe.

Attila's adventures in the West had not ended, however. In the following year he launched a devastating

Pilt
Pilt
Pilt
Attila the Hun

Attila the Hun (ca. 406–453 AD) was the last and most powerful king of the Huns. He reigned over what was then Europe's largest empire, from 434 until his death. His empire stretched from Central Europe to the Black Sea and from the Danube River to the Baltic. During his rule he was among the direst enemies of the Eastern and Western Roman Empires: he invaded the Balkans twice and encircled Constantinople in the second invasion. He marched through France as far as Orleans before being turned back at Chalons; and he drove the western emperor Valentinian III from his capital at Ravenna in 452. Though his empire died with him on the day of his marriage by choking on his own nosebleed, and he left no remarkable legacy, he has become a legendary figure in the history of Europe. In much of Western Europe, he is remembered as the epitome of cruelty and rapacity. In contrast, some histories lionize him as a great and noble king, and he plays major roles in three Norse sagas.



The Huns, led by Attila, invade Italy. From a painting by V. Checa.
The European Huns are often thought to have been a western extension of the, a group of nomad tribes from north-eastern China and Central Asia. These people achieved military superiority over their rivals (most of them highly cultured and civilized) by their state of readiness for combat, amazing mobility, and weapons like the Hun bow.

Attila was born around 406. Nothing certain is known about his childhood; the supposition that at a young age he was already a capable leader and a capable warrior is reasonable but unknowable. Following negotiation of peace terms in 418, the young Attila, at the age of 12, was sent as a child hostage to the Roman court of Emperor Honorius. In return, the Huns received Flavius Aetius, in a child hostage exchange arranged by the Romans. Most likely the empire schooled Attila in its courts, customs and traditions and in its luxurious lifestyle, in the hope that he would carry an appreciation of these things back to his own nation, thus serving to extend Roman influence. The Huns would probably have hoped that Attila would enhance espionage capabilities by the exchange.

By 432, the Huns were united under Ruga. In 434 Ruga died, leaving his nephews Attila and Bleda, the sons of his brother Mundjuk, in control over all the united Hun tribes. At the time of their accession, the Huns were bargaining with Theodosius II's envoys over the return of several renegade tribes who had taken refuge within the Byzantine Empire. The Huns, satisfied with the treaty, decamped from the empire and departed into the interior of the continent, perhaps to consolidate and strengthen their empire. The Huns remained out of Roman sight for the next five years. During this time, they were conducting an invasion of the Persian Empire. In 440, they reappeared on the borders of the empire, attacking the merchants at the market on the north bank of the Danube that had been arranged for by the treaty. Attila and Bleda threatened further war, claiming that the Romans had failed to fulfil their treaty obligations and that the bishop of Margus (not far from modern Belgrade) had crossed the Danube to ransack and desecrate the royal Hun graves on the Danube's north bank.

Attila and Bleda responded by renewing their campaign in 443. Striking along the Danube, they overran the military centers of Ratiara and successfully besieged Naissus (modern Niš) with battering rams and rolling towers—military sophistication that was new in the Hun repertory—then pushing along the Nisava they took Serdica (Sofia), Philippopolis (Plovdiv), and Arcadiopolis. They encountered and destroyed the Roman force outside Constantinople and were only halted by their lack of siege equipment capable of breaching the city's massive walls. Theodosius admitted defeat and sent the court official Anatolius to negotiate peace terms, which were harsher than the previous treaty: the Emperor agreed to hand over 6,000 Roman pounds (ca. 1,963 kg) of gold as punishment for having disobeyed the terms of the treaty during the invasion; the yearly tribute was tripled, rising to 2,100 Roman pounds (ca. 687 kg) in gold; and the ransom for each Roman prisoner rose to 12 solidi.



Atilla meets Pope Leo. Painting by Raphael.
Their desires contented for a time, the Hun kings withdrew into the interior of their empire. According to Jordanes (following Priscus), sometime during the peace following the Huns' withdrawal from Byzantium (probably around 445), Bleda died (killed by his brother, according to the classical sources), and Attila took the throne for himself. Now undisputed lord of the Huns, he again turned towards the eastern Empire. Attila demanded, as a condition of peace, that the Romans should continue paying tribute in gold—and evacuate a strip of land stretching three hundred miles east from Sigindunum (Belgrade) and up to a hundred miles south of the Danube. Negotiations continued between Roman and Hun for approximately three years.

As late as 450, Attila had proclaimed his intent to attack the powerful Visigoth kingdom of Toulouse in alliance with Emperor Valentinian III. He had previously been on good terms with the western Empire and its de facto ruler Flavius Aëtius—Aetius had spent a brief exile among the Huns in 433, and the troops Attila provided against the Goths and Bagaudae had helped earn him the largely honorary title of magister militum in the west. The gifts and diplomatic efforts of Geiseric, who opposed and feared the Visigoths, may also have influenced Attila's plans.

However Valentinian's sister Honoria, in order to escape her forced betrothal to a senator, had sent the Hunnish king a plea for help—and her ring—in the spring of 450. Though Honoria may not have intended a proposal of marriage, Attila chose to interpret her message as such; he accepted, asking for half of the western Empire as dowry. When Valentinian discovered the plan, only the influence of his mother Galla Placidia convinced him to exile, rather than kill, Honoria; he also wrote to Attila strenuously denying the legitimacy of the supposed marriage proposal. Attila, not convinced, sent an embassy to Ravenna to proclaim that Honoria was innocent, that the proposal had been legitimate, and that he would come to claim what was rightfully his.

Meanwhile, Theodosius having died in a riding accident, his successor Marcian cut off the Huns' tribute in late 450; and multiple invasions, by the Huns and by others, had left the Balkans with little to plunder. The king of the Salian Franks had died, and the succession struggle between his two sons drove a rift between Attila and Aetius. By the time Attila had gathered his vassals—Gepids, Ostrogoths, Rugians, Scirians, Heruls, Thuringians, Alans, Burgundians, et al.—and begun his march west, he had declared intent of alliance both with the Visigoths and with the Romans.



In 451, his arrival in Belgica with an army exaggerated by Jordanes to half a million strong soon made his intent clear. On April 7 he captured Metz, and Aetius moved to oppose him, gathering troops from among the Franks, the Burgundians, and the Celts. A mission by Avitus, and Attila's continued westward advance, convinced the Visigoth king Theodoric I (Theodorid) to ally with the Romans. The combined armies reached Orleans ahead of Attila, thus checking and turning back the Hunnish advance. Aetius gave chase and caught the Huns at a place usually assumed to be near Châlons-en-Champagne. The two armies clashed in the Battle of Chalons, whose outcome commonly, though erroneously, is attributed to be a victory for the Gothic-Roman alliance. Theodoric was killed in the fighting. Aetius failed to press his advantage, and the alliance quickly disbanded. Attila withdrew to continue his campaign against Italy.

Attila returned in 452 to claim his marriage to Honoria anew, invading and ravaging Italy along the way; his army sacked numerous cities and razed Aquileia completely, leaving no trace of it behind. Valentinian fled from Ravenna to Rome; Aetius remained in the field but lacked the strength to offer battle. Attila finally halted at the Po, where he met an embassy including the prefect Trigetius, the consul Aviennus, and Pope Leo I. After the meeting he turned his army back, having claimed neither Honoria's hand nor the territories he desired.

Whatever his reasons, Attila left Italy and returned to his palace across the Danube. From there he planned to strike at Constantinople again and reclaim the tribute which Marcian had cut off. However, he died in the early months of 453; the conventional account, from Priscus, says that on the night after a feast celebrating his latest marriage (to a beautiful Goth named Ildico), he suffered a severe nosebleed and choked to death in a stupor. An alternative to the nosebleed theory is that he succumbed to internal bleeding after heavy drinking. An alternate story of his death, first recorded eighty years after the fact by the Roman chronicler Count Marcellinus, reports: "Attila, King of the Huns and ravager of the provinces of Europe, was pierced by the hand and blade of his wife." The Volsunga saga and the Poetic Edda claim that King Atli died at the hands of his wife Gudrun.

Attila is known in Western history and tradition as the grim "Scourge of God", and his name has become a byword for cruelty and barbarism. Some of this may arise from a conflation of his traits, in the popular imagination, with those perceived in later steppe warlords such as the Mongol Great Khan Genghis Khan and Tamerlane: all run together as cruel, clever, and sanguinary lovers of battle and pillage. The reality of his character may be more complex. The Huns of Attila's era had been mingling with Roman civilization for some time, largely through the Germanic foederati of the border—so that by the time of Theodosius's embassy in 448, Priscus could identify Hunnic, Gothic, and Latin as the three common languages of the horde. Priscus also recounts his meeting with an eastern Roman captive who had so fully assimilated into the Huns' way of life that he had no desire to return to his former country, and the Byzantine historian's description of Attila's humility and simplicity is unambiguous in its admiration.

The historical context of Attila's life played a large part in determining his later public image: in the waning years of the western Empire, his conflicts with Aetius (often called the "last of the Romans") and the strangeness of his culture both helped dress him in the mask of the ferocious barbarian and enemy of civilization, as he has been portrayed in any number of films and other works of art. The Germanic epics in which he appears offer more nuanced depictions: he is both a noble and generous ally, as Etzel in the Nibelungenlied, and a cruel miser, as Atli in the Volsunga Saga and the Poetic Edda. Some national histories, though, always portray him favorably; in Hungary and Turkey the names of Attila (sometimes as Atilla in Turkish) and his last wife Ildikó remain popular to this day. In a similar vein, the Hungarian author Géza Gárdonyi's novel A láthatatlan ember (published in English as Slave of the Huns, and largely based on Priscus) offered a sympathetic portrait of Attila as a wise and beloved leader.
Pilt

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 20:39
Postitas Lemet
Kui juba Wiki peale läks, siis miks mitte sisse trükkida Şarlman(prantsuse Charlemagne, saksa Karl der Große, ladina Carolus Magnus
. Minu arust sugugi mitte väiksem tegija kui Attila. Pigem suurem.

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 22:15
Postitas krizz
Usu sa jah, et need mingi 5% sakslased jõudsid kõik eestlaste esiklapsed valmis treida. Neil oli ikka muid tegemisi ja muresid ka.

Huvitav muidugi, mida see geenivaramu projekt välja uurib meie geenide päritolu kohta.

Postitatud: 21 Juul, 2008 22:31
Postitas Frundsberg
Geneetika ütleb kahjuks või õnneks eestlaste kohta vaid üht - pole suuremat geneetilist erisust eestlase või Venemaa põhjaosa elaniku vahel. Muidugi võib siit teha ka julge oletuse, et venelased ongi tegelikult vaid oma keele ja kultuuri kaotanud eestlased :D.

Mis puutub n.n. "esimese öö õigusesse" ja selle reaalsesse kasutamisse, siis see jääb tihti siiski lihtsalt paljude kadakasakslaste soovunelmaks. Muidugi oleks ju tore, et igaühe meie esivanem oleks mõni parun või muidu "von", reaalsus oli aga tiba teine.