tkh1283

[tkh1283]

#卍TENGRÎkutUluğBaşBuğAttilahun

5th-century ruler of the Hunnic Empire

"#Atilla" and "Attila the #Hun" redirect here. For other uses, see Attila (disambiguation), Atilla (disambiguation), and Attila the Hun (disambiguation).

#Attila (/əˈtɪlə/, /ˈætələ/;fl. c. 406–453), frequently called Attila the Hun, was the ruler of the Huns from 434 until his death in March 453. He was also the leader of a tribal empire consisting of Huns, Ostrogoths, Alans and Bulgars, among others, in Central and Eastern Europe.

Quick Facts King and chieftain of the Hunnic Empire, Reign ...

During his reign, he was one of the most feared enemies of the Western and Eastern Roman Empires. He crossed the Danubetwice and plundered the Balkans, but was unable to take Constantinople. His unsuccessful campaign in Persia was followed in 441 by an invasion of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, the success of which emboldened Attila to invade the West. He also attempted to conquer Roman Gaul (modern France), crossing the Rhine in 451 and marching as far as Aurelianum (Orléans) before being stopped in the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains.

He subsequently invaded Italy, devastating the northern provinces, but was unable to take Rome. He planned for further campaigns against the Romans, but died in 453. After Attila's death, his close adviser, Ardaricof the Gepids, led a Germanic revolt against Hunnic rule, after which the Hunnic Empire quickly collapsed. Attila would live on as a character in Germanic heroic legend.

Appearance and character

BildMór Than's 19th century painting of The Feast of Attila, based on a fragment of Priscus

There is no surviving first-hand account of Attila's appearance, but there is a possible second-hand source provided by Jordanes, who cites a description given by Priscus.

He was a man born into the world to shake the nations, the scourge of all lands, who in some way terrified all mankind by the dreadful rumors noised abroad concerning him. He was haughty in his walk, rolling his eyes hither and thither, so that the power of his proud spirit appeared in the movement of his body. He was indeed a lover of war, yet restrained in action, mighty in counsel, gracious to suppliants and lenient to those who were once received into his protection. Short of stature, with a broad chest and a large head; his eyes were small, his beard thin and sprinkled with grey; and he had a flat nose and swarthy skin, showing evidence of his origin.:182–183

Some scholars have suggested that this description is typically East Asian, because it has all the combined features that fit the physical type of people from Eastern Asia, and Attila's ancestors may have come from there.:202 Other historians also believed that the same descriptions were also evident on some Scythian people.

Etymology

BildA painting of Attila riding a pale horse, by French Romantic artist Eugène Delacroix (1798–1863)

Many scholars have argued that the name Attila derives from East Germanic origin; Attila is formed from the Gothic or Gepidic noun atta, "father", by means of the diminutive suffix -ila, meaning "little father", compare Wulfilafrom wulfs "wolf" and -ila, i.e. "little wolf".:386:29:46The Gothic etymology was first proposed by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm in the early 19th century.:211 Maenchen-Helfen notes that this derivation of the name "offers neither phonetic nor semantic difficulties",:386 and Gerhard Doerfer notes that the name is simply correct Gothic.:29 Alexander Savelyev and Choongwon Jeong (2020) similarly state that Attila's name "must have been Gothic in origin." The name has sometimes been interpreted as a Germanization of a name of Hunnic origin.:29–32

Other scholars have argued for a Turkic origin of the name. Omeljan Pritsak considered Ἀττίλα (Attíla) a composite title-name which derived from Turkic *es (great, old), and *til (sea, ocean), and the suffix /a/.:444The stressed back syllabic tilassimilated the front member es, so it became *as.:444 It is a nominative, in form of attíl- (< *etsíl < *es tíl) with the meaning "the oceanic, universal ruler".:444 J. J. Mikkola connected it with Turkic āt (name, fame).:216 As another Turkic possibility, H. Althof (1902) considered it was related to Turkish atli (horseman, cavalier), or Turkish at (horse) and dil(tongue).:216 Maenchen-Helfen argues that Pritsak's derivation is "ingenious but for many reasons unacceptable",:387 while dismissing Mikkola's as "too farfetched to be taken seriously".:390 M. Snædal similarly notes that none of these proposals has achieved wide acceptance.:215–216Criticizing the proposals of finding Turkic or other etymologies for Attila, Doerfer notes that King George VI of the United Kingdom had a name of Greek origin, and Süleyman the Magnificent had a name of Arabic origin, yet that does not make them Greeks or Arabs: it is therefore plausible that Attila would have a name not of Hunnic origin.:31-32 Historian Hyun Jin Kim, however, has argued that the Turkic etymology is "more probable".:30

M. Snædal, in a paper that rejects the Germanic derivation but notes the problems with the existing proposed Turkic etymologies, argues that Attila's name could have originated from Turkic-Mongolian at, adyy/agta(gelding, warhorse) and Turkish atli (horseman, cavalier), meaning "possessor of geldings, provider of warhorses".:216–217

Historiography and source

BildFigure of Attila in a museum in Hungary

The historiography of Attila is faced with a major challenge, in that the only complete sources are written in Greek and Latin by the enemies of the Huns. Attila's contemporaries left many testimonials of his life, but only fragments of these remain.:25Priscus was a Byzantine diplomat and historian who wrote in Greek, and he was both a witness to and an actor in the story of Attila, as a member of the embassy of Theodosius II at the Hunnic court in 449. He was obviously biased by his political position, but his writing is a major source for information on the life of Attila, and he is the only person known to have recorded a physical description of him. He wrote a history of the late Roman Empire in eight books covering the period from 430 to 476.

Only fragments of Priscus' work remain. It was cited extensively by 6th-century historians Procopius and Jordanes,:413especially in Jordanes' The Origin and Deeds of the Goths, which contains numerous references to Priscus's history, and it is also an important source of information about the Hunnic empire and its neighbors. He describes the legacy of Attila and the Hunnic people for a century after Attila's death. Marcellinus Comes, a chancellor of Justinianduring the same era, also describes the relations between the Huns and the Eastern Roman Empire.:30

Numerous ecclesiastical writings contain useful but scattered information, sometimes difficult to authenticate or distorted by years of hand-copying between the 6th and 17th centuries. The Hungarian writers of the 12th century wished to portray the Huns in a positive light as their glorious ancestors, and so repressed certain historical elements and added their own legends.:32

The literature and knowledge of the Huns themselves was transmitted orally, by means of epics and chanted poems that were handed down from generation to generation.:354Indirectly, fragments of this oral history have reached us via the literature of the Scandinavians and Germans, neighbors of the Huns who wrote between the 9th and 13th centuries. Attila is a major character in many Medieval epics, such as the Nibelungenlied, as well as various Eddas and sagas.:32:354

Archaeological investigation has uncovered some details about the lifestyle, art, and warfare of the Huns. There are a few traces of battles and sieges, but the tomb of Attila and the location of his capital have not yet been found.:33–37

Early life and background

Main article: Huns

BildHuns in battle with the Alans. An 1870s engraving after a drawing by Johann Nepomuk Geiger (1805–1880 ).

The Huns were a group of Eurasian nomads, appearing from east of the Volga, who migrated further into Western Europec. 370 and built up an enormous empire there. Their main military techniques were mounted archery and javelinthrowing. They were in the process of developing settlements before their arrival in Western Europe, yet the Huns were a society of pastoral warriors:259 whose primary form of nourishment was meat and milk, products of their herds.

The origin and language of the Huns has been the subject of debate for centuries. According to some theories, their leaders at least may have spoken a Turkic language, perhaps closest to the modern Chuvash language.:444 One scholar suggests a relationship to Yeniseian.According to the Encyclopedia of European Peoples, "the Huns, especially those who migrated to the west, may have been a combination of central Asian Turkic, Mongolic, and Ugricstocks".

Attila's father Mundzuk was the brother of kings Octar and Ruga, who reigned jointly over the Hunnic empire in the early fifth century. This form of diarchy was recurrent with the Huns, but historians are unsure whether it was institutionalized, merely customary, or an occasional occurrence.:80 His family was from a noble lineage, but it is uncertain whether they constituted a royal dynasty. Attila's birthdate is debated; journalist Éric Deschodt and writer Herman Schreiber have proposed a date of 395.However, historian Iaroslav Lebedynsky and archaeologist Katalin Escher prefer an estimate between the 390s and the first decade of the fifth century.:40Several historians have proposed 406 as the date.:92:202

Attila grew up in a rapidly changing world. His people were nomads who had only recently arrived in Europe. They crossed the Volga river during the 370s and annexed the territory of the Alans, then attacked the Gothic kingdom between the Carpathian mountains and the Danube. They were a very mobile people, whose mounted archers had acquired a reputation for invincibility, and the Germanic tribes seemed unable to withstand them.:133–151 Vast populations fleeing the Huns moved from Germania into the Roman Empire in the west and south, and along the banks of the Rhine and Danube. In 376, the Goths crossed the Danube, initially submitting to the Romans but soon rebelling against Emperor Valens, whom they killed in the Battle of Adrianople in 378.:100 Large numbers of Vandals, Alans, Suebi, and Burgundians crossed the Rhineand invaded Roman Gaul on December 31, 406 to escape the Huns.:233 The Roman Empire had been split in half since 395 and was ruled by two distinct governments, one based in Ravenna in the West, and the other in Constantinople in the East. The Roman Emperors, both East and West, were generally from the Theodosian family in Attila's lifetime (despite several power struggles).:13

The Huns dominated a vast territory with nebulous borders determined by the will of a constellation of ethnically varied peoples. Some were assimilated to Hunnic nationality, whereas many retained their own identities and rulers but acknowledged the suzerainty of the king of the Huns.:11 The Huns were also the indirect source of many of the Romans' problems, driving various Germanic tribes into Roman territory, yet relations between the two empires were cordial: the Romans used the Huns as mercenaries against the Germans and even in their civil wars. Thus, the usurper Joanneswas able to recruit thousands of Huns for his army against Valentinian III in 424. It was Aëtius, later Patrician of the West, who managed this operation. They exchanged ambassadors and hostages, the alliance lasting from 401 to 450 and permitting the Romans numerous military victories.:111 The Huns considered the Romans to be paying them tribute, whereas the Romans preferred to view this as payment for services rendered. The Huns had become a great power by the time that Attila came of age during the reign of his uncle Ruga, to the point that Nestorius, the Patriarch of Constantinople, deplored the situation with these words: "They have become both masters and slaves of the Romans".:128

Campaigns against the Eastern Roman Empire

BildThe Empire of the Huns and subject tribes at the time of Attila

The death of Rugila (also known as Rua or Ruga) in 434 left the sons of his brother Mundzuk, Attila and Bleda, in control of the united Hun tribes. At the time of the two brothers' accession, the Hun tribes were bargaining with Eastern Roman Emperor Theodosius II's envoys for the return of several renegades who had taken refuge within the Eastern Roman Empire, possibly Hunnic nobles who disagreed with the brothers' assumption of leadership.

The following year, Attila and Bleda met with the imperial legation at Margus (Požarevac), all seated on horseback in the Hunnic manner, and negotiated an advantageous treaty. The Romans agreed to return the fugitives, to double their previous tribute of 350 Roman pounds (c. 115 kg) of gold, to open their markets to Hunnish traders, and to pay a ransom of eight solidi for each Roman taken prisoner by the Huns. The Huns, satisfied with the treaty, decamped from the Roman Empire and returned to their home in the Great Hungarian Plain, perhaps to consolidate and strengthen their empire. Theodosius used this opportunity to strengthen the walls of Constantinople, building the city's first sea wall, and to build up his border defenses along the Danube.

The Huns remained out of Roman sight for the next few years while they invaded the Sassanid Empire. They were defeated in Armenia by the Sassanids, abandoned their invasion, and turned their attentions back to Europe. In 440, they reappeared in force on the borders of the Roman Empire, attacking the merchants at the market on the north bank of the Danube that had been established by the treaty of 435.

Crossing the Danube, they laid waste to the cities of Illyricumand forts on the river, including (according to Priscus) Viminacium, a city of Moesia. Their advance began at Margus, where they demanded that the Romans turn over a bishop who had retained property that Attila regarded as his. While the Romans discussed the bishop's fate, he slipped away secretly to the Huns and betrayed the city to them.

While the Huns attacked city-states along the Danube, the Vandals (led by Geiseric) captured the Western Roman province of Africa and its capital of Carthage. Carthage was the richest province of the Western Empire and a main source of food for Rome. The Sassanid ShahYazdegerd II invaded Armenia in 441.[citation needed]

The Romans stripped the Balkan area of forces, sending them to Sicily in order to mount an expedition against the Vandals in Africa. This left Attila and Bleda a clear path through Illyricum into the Balkans, which they invaded in 441. The Hunnish army sacked Margus and Viminacium, and then took Singidunum (Belgrade) and Sirmium. During 442, Theodosius recalled his troops from Sicily and ordered a large issue of new coins to finance operations against the Huns. He believed that he could defeat the Huns and refused the Hunnish kings' demands.

Attila responded with a campaign in 443. For the first time (as far as the Romans knew) his forces were equipped with battering rams and rolling siege towers, with which they successfully assaulted the military centers of Ratiara and Naissus (Niš) and massacred the inhabitants. Priscus said "When we arrived at Naissus we found the city deserted, as though it had been sacked; only a few sick persons lay in the churches. We halted at a short distance from the river, in an open space, for all the ground adjacent to the bank was full of the bones of men slain in war."

Advancing along the Nišava River, the Huns next took Serdica (Sofia), Philippopolis (Plovdiv), and Arcadiopolis (Lüleburgaz). They encountered and destroyed a Roman army outside Constantinople but were stopped by the double walls of the Eastern capital. They defeated a second army near Callipolis (Gelibolu).

Theodosius, unable to make effective armed resistance, admitted defeat, sending the Magister militum per OrientemAnatolius to negotiate peace terms. The terms were harsher than the previous treaty: the Emperor agreed to hand over 6,000 Roman pounds (c. 2000 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 (c. 700 kg) in gold; and the ransom for each Roman prisoner rose to 12 solidi.

Their demands were met for a time, and the Hun kings withdrew into the interior of their empire. Bleda died following the Huns' withdrawal from Byzantium (probably around 445). Attila then took the throne for himself, becoming the sole ruler of the Huns.

Solitary kingship

In 447, Attila again rode south into the Eastern Roman Empirethrough Moesia. The Roman army, under Gothic magister militum Arnegisclus, met him in the Battle of the Utus and was defeated, though not without inflicting heavy losses. The Huns were left unopposed and rampaged through the Balkans as far as Thermopylae.

Constantinople itself was saved by the Isaurian troops of magister militum per Orientem Zeno and protected by the intervention of prefect Constantinus, who organized the reconstruction of the walls that had been previously damaged by earthquakes and, in some places, to construct a new line of fortification in front of the old. Callinicus, in his Life of Saint Hypatius, wrote:

The barbarian nation of the Huns, which was in Thrace, became so great that more than a hundred cities were captured and Constantinople almost came into danger and most men fled from it. ... And there were so many murders and blood-lettings that the dead could not be numbered. Ay, for they took captive the churches and monasteries and slew the monks and maidens in great numbers.

In the west

BildThe general path of the Hun forces in the invasion of Gaul

In 450, Attila proclaimed his intent to attack the Visigothkingdom of Toulouse by making an alliance with Emperor Valentinian III. He had previously been on good terms with the Western Roman Empire and its influential general Flavius Aëtius. Aëtius had spent a brief exileamong the Huns in 433, and the troops that Attila provided against the Goths and Bagaudaehad helped earn him the largely honorary title of magister militumin 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 was Honoria, who had sent the Hunnish king a plea for help—and her engagement ring—in order to escape her forced betrothal to a Roman senator in the spring of 450. Honoria may not have intended a proposal of marriage, but 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 Honoria, rather than killing her. He also wrote to Attila, strenuously denying the legitimacy of the supposed marriage proposal. Attila sent an emissary 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.

Attila interfered in a succession struggle after the death of a Frankish ruler. Attila supported the elder son, while Aëtius supported the younger. (The location and identity of these kings is not known and subject to conjecture.) Attila gathered his vassals—Gepids, Ostrogoths, Rugians, Scirians, Heruls, Thuringians, Alans, Burgundians, among others–and began his march west. In 451, he arrived in Belgica with an army exaggerated by Jordanes to half a million strong.

On April 7, he captured Metz. Other cities attacked can be determined by the hagiographicvitae written to commemorate their bishops: Nicasius was slaughtered before the altar of his church in Rheims; Servatus is alleged to have saved Tongerenwith his prayers, as Saint Genevieve is said to have saved Paris. Lupus, bishop of Troyes, is also credited with saving his city by meeting Attila in person.

Aëtius moved to oppose Attila, 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 Orléans ahead of Attila, thus checking and turning back the Hunnish advance. Aëtius gave chase and caught the Huns at a place usually assumed to be near Catalaunum (modern Châlons-en-Champagne). Attila decided to fight the Romans on plains where he could use his cavalry.

The two armies clashed in the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains, the outcome of which is commonly considered to be a strategic victory for the Visigothic-Roman alliance. Theodoric was killed in the fighting, and Aëtius failed to press his advantage, according to Edward Gibbon and Edward Creasy, because he feared the consequences of an overwhelming Visigothic triumph as much as he did a defeat. From Aëtius' point of view, the best outcome was what occurred: Theodoric died, Attila was in retreat and disarray, and the Romans had the benefit of appearing victorious.

Invasion of Italy and death

BildRaphael's The Meeting between Leo the Great and Attila depicts Leo, escorted by Saint Peter and Saint Paul, meeting with the Hun emperor outside Rome.

Attila returned in 452 to renew his marriage claim with Honoria, invading and ravaging Italy along the way. Communities became established in what would later become Venice as a result of these attacks when the residents fled to small islands in the Venetian Lagoon. His army sacked numerous cities and razed Aquileia so completely that it was afterwards hard to recognize its original site.:159Aëtius lacked the strength to offer battle, but managed to harass and slow Attila's advance with only a shadow force. Attila finally halted at the River Po. By this point, disease and starvation may have taken hold in Attila's camp, thus hindering his war efforts and potentially contributing to the cessation of invasion.[citation needed]

Emperor Valentinian III sent three envoys, the high civilian officers Gennadius Avienus and Trigetius, as well as the Bishop of Rome Leo I, who met Attila at Mincio in the vicinity of Mantua and obtained from him the promise that he would withdraw from Italy and negotiate peace with the Emperor. Prosper of Aquitainegives a short description of the historic meeting, but gives all the credit to Leo for the successful negotiation. Priscus reports that superstitious fear of the fate of Alaric gave him pause—as Alaric died shortly after sacking Rome in 410.

Italy had suffered from a terrible famine in 451 and her crops were faring little better in 452. Attila's devastating invasion of the plains of northern Italy this year did not improve the harvest.:161 To advance on Rome would have required supplies which were not available in Italy, and taking the city would not have improved Attila's supply situation. Therefore, it was more profitable for Attila to conclude peace and retreat to his homeland.:160–161

Furthermore, an East Roman force had crossed the Danube under the command of another officer also named Aetius—who had participated in the Council of Chalcedon the previous year—and proceeded to defeat the Huns who had been left behind by Attila to safeguard their home territories. Attila, hence, faced heavy human and natural pressures to retire "from Italy without ever setting foot south of the Po".:163 As Hydatiuswrites in his Chronica Minora:

The Huns, who had been plundering Italy and who had also stormed a number of cities, were victims of divine punishment, being visited with heaven-sent disasters: famine and some kind of disease. In addition, they were slaughtered by auxiliaries sent by the Emperor Marcianand led by Aetius, and at the same time, they were crushed in their [home] settlements ... Thus crushed, they made peace with the Romans and all returned to their homes.

Death

BildThe Huns, led by Attila, invade Italy (Attila, the Scourge of God, by Ulpiano Checa, 1887)

Marcian was the successor of Theodosius, and he had ceased paying tribute to the Huns in late 450 while Attila was occupied in the west. Multiple invasions by the Huns and others had left the Balkans with little to plunder.[citation needed]

After Attila left Italy and returned to his palace across the Danube, he planned to strike at Constantinople again and reclaim the tribute which Marcian had stopped. However, he died in the early months of 453.

The conventional account from Priscus says that Attila was at a feast celebrating his latest marriage, this time to the beautiful young Ildico (the name suggests Gothic or Ostrogothorigins).:164 In the midst of the revels, however, he suffered severe bleeding and died. He may have had a nosebleed and choked to death in a stupor. Or he may have succumbed to internal bleeding, possibly due to ruptured esophageal varices. Esophageal varices are dilated veins that form in the lower part of the esophagus, often caused by years of excessive alcohol consumption; they are fragile and can easily rupture, leading to death by hemorrhage.

Another account of his death was first recorded 80 years after the events by Roman chronicler Marcellinus Comes. It reports that "Attila, King of the Huns and ravager of the provinces of Europe, was pierced by the hand and blade of his wife". One modern analyst suggests that he was assassinated, but most reject these accounts as no more than hearsay, preferring instead the account given by Attila's contemporary Priscus, recounted in the 6th century by Jordanes:

On the following day, when a great part of the morning was spent, the royal attendants suspected some ill and, after a great uproar, broke in the doors. There they found the death of Attila accomplished by an effusion of blood, without any wound, and the girl with downcast face weeping beneath her veil. Then, as is the custom of that race, they plucked out the hair of their heads and made their faces hideous with deep wounds, that the renowned warrior might be mourned, not by effeminate wailings and tears, but by the blood of men. Moreover a wondrous thing took place in connection with Attila's death. For in a dream some god stood at the side of Marcian, Emperor of the East, while he was disquieted about his fierce foe, and showed him the bow of Attila broken in that same night, as if to intimate that the race of Huns owed much to that weapon. This account the historian Priscus says he accepts upon truthful evidence. For so terrible was Attila thought to be to great empires that the gods announced his death to rulers as a special boon.

His body was placed in the midst of a plain and lay in state in a silken tent as a sight for men's admiration. The best horsemen of the entire tribe of the Huns rode around in circles, after the manner of circus games, in the place to which he had been brought and told of his deeds in a funeral dirge in the following manner: "The chief of the Huns, King Attila, born of his sire Mundiuch, lord of bravest tribes, sole possessor of the Scythian and German realms—powers unknown before—captured cities and terrified both empires of the Roman world and, appeased by their prayers, took annual tribute to save the rest from plunder. And when he had accomplished all this by the favor of fortune, he fell, not by wound of the foe, nor by treachery of friends, but in the midst of his nation at peace, happy in his joy and without sense of pain. Who can rate this as death, when none believes it calls for vengeance?"

When they had mourned him with such lamentations, a strava, as they call it, was celebrated over his tomb with great reveling. They gave way in turn to the extremes of feeling and displayed funereal grief alternating with joy. Then in the secrecy of night they buried his body in the earth. They bound his coffins, the first with gold, the second with silver and the third with the strength of iron, showing by such means that these three things suited the mightiest of kings; iron because he subdued the nations, gold and silver because he received the honors of both empires. They also added the arms of foemen won in the fight, trappings of rare worth, sparkling with various gems, and ornaments of all sorts whereby princely state is maintained. And that so great riches might be kept from human curiosity, they slew those appointed to the work—a dreadful pay for their labor; and thus sudden death was the lot of those who buried him as well as of him who was buried.:254–259

Attila's sons Ellac, Dengizich and Ernak, "in their rash eagerness to rule they all alike destroyed his empire".:259 They "were clamoring that the nations should be divided among them equally and that warlike kings with their peoples should be apportioned to them by lot like a family estate".:259 Against the treatment as "slaves of the basest condition" a Germanic alliance led by the Gepid ruler Ardaric (who was noted for great loyalty to Attila:199) revolted and fought with the Huns in Pannonia in the Battle of Nedao 454 AD.:260–262 Attila's eldest son Ellac was killed in that battle.:262 Attila's sons "regarding the Goths as deserters from their rule, came against them as though they were seeking fugitive slaves", attacked Ostrogothic co-ruler Valamir(who also fought alongside Ardaric and Attila at the Catalaunian Plains:199), but were repelled, and some group of Huns moved to Scythia (probably those of Ernak).:268–269 His brother Dengizich attempted a renewed invasion across the Danube in 468 AD, but was defeated at the Battle of Bassianae by the Ostrogoths.:272–273 Dengizich was killed by Roman-Gothic general Anagast the following year, after which the Hunnic dominion ended.:168

Attila's many children and relatives are known by name and some even by deeds, but soon valid genealogical sources all but dried up, and there seems to be no verifiable way to trace Attila's descendants. This has not stopped many genealogists from attempting to reconstruct a valid line of descent for various medieval rulers. One of the most credible claims has been that of the Nominalia of the Bulgarian khans for mythological Avitoholand Irnik from the Dulo clan of the Bulgars.:103:59, 142

Later folklore and iconography

Further information: Attila in popular culture

BildIllustration of the meeting between Attila and Pope Leo from the Chronicon Pictum, c. 1360

Jordanes embellished the report of Priscus, reporting that Attila had possessed the "Holy War Sword of the Scythians", which was given to him by Mars and made him a "prince of the entire world".

By the end of the 12th century the royal court of Hungaryproclaimed their descent from Attila. Lampert of Hersfeld's contemporary chronicles report that shortly before the year 1071, the Sword of Attila had been presented to Otto of Nordheim by the exiled queen of Hungary, Anastasia of Kiev. This sword, a cavalry sabre now in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, appears to be the work of Hungarian goldsmiths of the ninth or tenth century.

An anonymous chronicler of the medieval period represented the meeting of Pope Leo and Atilla as attended also by Saint Peter and Saint Paul, "a miraculous tale calculated to meet the taste of the time" This apotheosis was later portrayed artistically by the Renaissance artist Raphael and sculptor Algardi, whom eighteenth-century historian Edward Gibbon praised for establishing "one of the noblest legends of ecclesiastical tradition".

According to a version of this narrative related in the Chronicon Pictum, a mediaeval Hungarian chronicle, the Pope promised Attila that if he left Rome in peace, one of his successors would receive a holy crown (which has been understood as referring to the Holy Crown of Hungary).

Some histories and chronicles describe him as a great and noble king, and he plays major roles in three Norse sagas: Atlakviða,Volsunga saga, and Atlamál. The Polish Chroniclerepresents Attila's name as Aquila.

Frutolf of Michelsberg and Otto of Freising pointed out that some songs as "vulgar fables" made Theoderic the Great, Attila and Ermanaric contemporaries, when any reader of Jordanes knew that this was not the case. This refers to the so-called historical poems about Dietrich von Bern(Theoderic), in which Etzel (Attila) is Dietrich's refuge in exile from his wicked uncle Ermenrich (Ermanaric). Etzel is most prominent in the poems Dietrichs Flucht and the Rabenschlacht. Etzel also appears as Kriemhild's second noble husband in the Nibelungenlied, in which Kriemhild causes the destruction of both the Hunnish kingdom and that of her Burgundian relatives.

In 1812, Ludwig van Beethovenconceived the idea of writing an opera about Attila and approached August von Kotzebue to write the libretto. It was, however, never written.In 1846, Giuseppe Verdi wrote the opera, loosely based on episodes in Attila's invasion of Italy.

In World War I, Allied propaganda referred to Germans as the "Huns", based on a 1900 speech by Emperor Wilhelm II praising Attila the Hun's military prowess, according to Jawaharlal Nehru's Glimpses of World History.Der Spiegel commented on 6 November 1948, that the Sword of Attila was hanging menacingly over Austria.

American writer Cecelia Hollandwrote The Death of Attila (1973), a historical novel in which Attila appears as a powerful background figure whose life and death deeply affect the protagonists, a young Hunnic warrior and a Germanic one.

The name has many variants in several languages: Atli and Atle in Old Norse; Etzel in Middle High German (Nibelungenlied); Ætla in Old English; Attila, Atilla, and Etele in Hungarian (Attila is the most popular); Attila, Atilla, Atilay, or Atila in Turkish; and Adil and Edil in Kazakh or Adil ("same/similar") or Edil ("to use") in Mongolian.

In modern Hungary and in Turkey, "Attila" and its Turkish variation "Atilla" are commonly used as a male first name. In Hungary, several public places are named after Attila; for instance, in Budapest there are 10 Attila Streets, one of which is an important street behind the Buda Castle. When the Turkish Armed Forces invaded Cyprus in 1974, the operations were named after Attila ("The Attila Plan").

The 1954 Universal Internationalfilm Sign of the Pagan starred Jack Palance as Attila.

Depictions of Attila

Bild

Attila the Hun

Bild

Attila the Hun in an illustration in the Poetic Edda

Bild

A nineteenth-century depiction of Attila. Certosa di Pavia - Medallion at the base of the facade. The Latin inscription tells that this is Attila, the scourge of God.

Bild

Image of Attila

Bild

The Meeting of Leo I

and Attila

by Alessandro Algardi

(1646–1653 )

#FulinASTKHCLulinPiyi.🐺🌲🐉

[tkh1283]

"#卍Altaylar’ın ve #卍TanrıDağ’ın çevresindeyim.

#卍MerdânelikleŞöyleBakıpAyrılıklaraSonMenzilinHüzünDoluKâşânesindeyim.

#卍ArtıkVedâZamanınaPekFazlaKalmadı;

Yorgun ve kimsesiz ölümün bahçesindeyim."

#卍GBHNATSIZ.

#卍11Aralık1975BüyükTürkçüHüseyinNihâlATSIZ'ı Uçmağa varış yıl dönümünde saygı, minnet ve özlemle anıyorum.

[tkh1283]

#卍HİNT MİTOLOJİSİ VE KAYNAKLARINDA #卍TÜRKLER

"Ramayana, Mahabharata .Harivamşa"

#卍Türklerden ve #Hunlardan bahseden Hint metinleri daha cok milattan sonraki cağlara aittir.

Bunlar da “Purana” metinleri15, devasa buyuklukteki masal derlemesi olan “Kathasaritsagara”, Keşmir Kralları Tarihi olan “Racatarangini” ve Sanskrit dram olan “Raghuvamsha”’dır.

Unlu Hint Destanları olan ve tahminen M.O.200-M.S. 200 yılları arasında derlenip yazıya gecirilmiş olan Ramayana, Mahabharata (M.O.300-M.S.300) ve Harivamşa da dikkatle incelenmesi gereken metinlerdir.16

Ozellikle de Mahabharata Destanı’nda #卍Hunlardan bahsedilmektedir.17

Bundan başka Manu Kanunları veya Şathapatha Brahmana gibi Hindu metinler ile Buddhist ve Caynist kaynaklar da ayrıntılı bir şekilde incelenmelidir.

Başka bir eski Hint metinleri olup, destanlardan farklı olarak basit bir Sanskrit dili ile yazılmış ceşitli efsaneleri, oğretileri, kral şecerelerini, tarih, coğrafya, mitoloji gibi konuları icine alan Puranaların yazılış tarihleri M.S. 250 ile 1250 yılları arasındadır.

Hint Edebiyatında on sekiz buyuk Purana, on sekiz kucuk Purana vardır.

Bunların her biri farklı tarihlerde yazılmıştır.

Bu on sekiz Purananın isimleri ise şu şekildedir: Vishnu, Narada, Bhagavata, Garuna, Padma, Varaha, Brāhmanda,Brahmavaira, Markaņdeya, Bhavishya, Vāmana, Brahma, Matsya, Kurma, Liņga,Şiva, Skanda, Agni.18 Bu Puranalarda Hindistan coğrafyasından bahsedilirken,Hindistan’da yaşayan halklar ve civarındaki komşular sayılır zaman zaman.

Bu halk isimleri arasında Türklerin bulunduğu da saptanmıştır. Orneğin en eski Puranalardan biri olan Markendaya Purana’da Hindistan’ın kuzeybatısındaki halklar arasında Pallavalar (#Pehleviler), #Gandharalar, Sindhular ve bircok kavimle birlikte Sauviralar da sayılır ki bu eseri İngilizceye cevirip neşreden E.Pargiter bunların arasında

Hunların da bulunduğunun Kurma Purana’da yazdığını iletmektedir. Markandeya Purana da “Tarakshura” adı gecmektedir ki Pargiter bunun da Madhyadeşa denilen orta ulkenin batısında yer alan Türkistan adındaki ulkenin halkı “Türkler” olduğunu söyler.

Ayrıca Unlu Hint destanlarından biri olup, yazılış tarihi M.O. 300 ile M.S.300 arasında ve yazarı olarak da Vyasa gosterilen,19 “Buyuk Bhārata Soyu” anlamına gelen Mahābhārata Destanı’nda gecen “Tarkshyalar” ile bunların aynı olduğunu belirtir.

Yine Markaņdeya Purana’nın LVIII. bolumunde Hunların adı gecer ve Pargiter bunların “Ak Hunlar” olduğunu ve o zaman Sutlej ırmağının kuzeyinde kalan vadinin “Hundes” diye bilindiğini aktarır.

Bu halkın kuzeyde Çinlilerle komşu olduğunu bildirerek Mahābhārata’ ya gonderme yapar.20

Yine eski bir Purana olan Vamana Purana’da eski metinlerde Bharatavarsha diye de bildiğimiz fakat burada Cambudvipa adıyla adlandırılan Hindistan alt kıtasının dokuz bolgeden oluştuğu soylenir.

“Ortada İlavrita Varsha, doğuda Bhadraşva, kuzeydoğuda Hiranya, batıda Ketumala, kuzeybatıda Ramyaka, kuzeyde Kuruvarsha, kuzeydoğuda Kimpurusha Varsha.”

Bunların arasında buyuk mesafelerin olmadığı kutlu ve hoş yerler olduğu,

buralarda hic caba harcanmadan mutlu yaşantılar surdurulduğu belirtilir. Aralarında hicbir catışma cereyan etmeden yaşadıkları ve birbirinden sınırlarla ayrıldıkları vurgulanır. Daha sonraki beyitlerde yine bolgeler sayılırken Türklerin ve Yunanlıların isimleri gecer.

“İndradvipa, Kaseruman, Tamravarna, Gabhastiman, Nagadvipa, Kataha,Simhala, Varuna. Bu bolum denizle cevrelenmiştir, kuzey-guney genişliğinde yer alır ve Kumara adı verilir.

Doğu kıyısında Yavanalar (Yunanlılar) oturur.

Guneyde Andharalar, Kuzeyde de Turushkalar (Türker) barınır.”

Metinde Türklerden soz eden kısım bu kadardır.

Daha sonra Brahmanların, Kshatriyaların ve Vaişya ve Şudraların, karışık kastların dinsel toren, ic cekişme,ticaret ve diğer işlerle nasıl bir arada yaşadıklarından soz edilir.

Sonra bircok dağ ismi sayılır. Bunların arasında Mleccha ve Ari olmak uzere karışık halkların gruplar halinde yaşadıkları soylenir. Sonra nehirler anlatılır ve bunların kutsal oldukları,insanları gunahlardan arındırdıkları belirtiliyor. Bu sulak bolgeler arasında yaşayan halklar (canapadalar) sayılırken yine Yunanlılar (Yavanah), Barbarlar (Barbarah) ve Çinlilerin (Cinah) isimleri de gecer.21

Vishnu Purana’da22 da Hunlar’dan şoyle bahsedilmektedir:

“Hindistan’ın doğusunda yabancı kavimler, batısında Yunanlılar vardır. Orta ulkede ise Brahmanlar, Kshatriyalar, Vaişyalar ve Şudralar (Bunlar kast sisteminin sınıflarıdır) her tarafa dağılmışlardır. İndus’a komşu olan Sauviralar, Sindliler (Saindhavah), Hunlar (Hunah), Şalvalar (Şalvah), Sakalılar, Madralılar, Rama halkı (Ramayana Destanı’nın başkarakterlerinden olan Rama’nın halkı), Ambastha halkı ve Persler (Parasika) idi.”

Keşmirli yazar Somadeva’nın tahminen 1070’te derlediği Kathasaritsagara (Masal Irmaklarının Okyanusu) adlı eserde bildiğimiz kadarıyla, Türklerden iki yerde soz edilir.

Bunlardan biri “Devadasa Oykusu”icinde gecer ki burada şunları goruyoruz;23

“Kral Candramahasena, Padmavati ile karşılaştığında kendi kızını gormuş gibi sevindi. Ancak birkac gun dinlendikten sonra Vatsa’nın mutlu kralı, kayınbabasının ordularıyla desteklenmiş halde, batı bolgesine doğru ilerlemeye başladı.

Lata bolgesinin (Gucerat) kadınlarının gozyaşlarına bulanmış kıvrık kılıcı,onun yiğitlik ateşinin dumanına benziyordu.

Ağacları onun filleri tarafından ezilmiş Mandara Dağı, okyanusu calkalamak icin yine kendisini kullanacaklar diye korkusundan tir tir titriyordu. Onun guneşten bile parlak olduğu kuşku goturmezdi; o,batıda bile yukselen bir ihtişama sahipti.

Sonra o, Kailasa Dağının gulumsemesiyle guzelleştirdiği tanrı Kubera’nın yerinden ayrıldı ve Alaka’ya gitti. Orada Sindh

kralına boyun eğdirdi, ordusunun başında, Rama’nın Rakshasaları24 yok etmesi gibi Mlecchaları ortadan kaldırdı. Türklerin suvari birlikleri, dalgaların kıyı boyunca uzanan ağaclara carpıp durması gibi, onun fillerine carpıp kırılıyordu. Duşmanlarının bile takdir ettiği kahraman, tıpkı tanrı Vishnu’nun Rahu.’ya yaptığı gibi, Perslerin kotu kralının başını ucurdu. Hunları da savdıktan sonra onun unu dort yone yayıldı ve Himalayalardan ikinci bir Ganj gibi dokuldu...”

Kathasaritsagara’dan vereceğimiz ikinci ornek “Nişcayadatta Oykusu”icindedir.25

“Ucceyini kentinde Nişcayadatta adında bir tuccar oğlu vardır. Bu genc, bir gun Anuragapara adında bir peri kızına (Vidyadhari) aşık olur. Onunla evlenebilmesi icin gokyuzundeki ulkesine gelmesi gerekmektedir. Kız bu şartı soyleyip gokyuzune ucar gider. Oğlan ertesi gun yollara duşer ve kendisi gibi tuccar cocuğu olan uc gencle karşılaşır.

Birlikte dere tepe yol alırlar ve kuzeye, yabancı kavimlerin oturduğu yerlere varırlar. Yolda bir kısım Tacik onları yakalayıp başka bir Tacik’e satar. O da onları Muravara adında bir Türk’e(Turushka) hediye olarak verir.

Onları goturen hizmetkarlar Muravara’nın olduğunu oğrenince onları onun oğluna teslim ederler. Muravara’nın oğlu onları babasının dostuna ertesi sabah geri gondermek uzere zincire vurdurtur. Gencler tanrıca Durga’ya yalvarırlar ve tanrıcanın yardımıyla zincirlerinden kurtulup kacarlar. Diğer gencler bu yabancı halklarla dolu kuzey bolgesinde daha fazla kalmak istemeyip guneye, Dekkan’a doğru giderler.

Nişcayadatta ise, aşık olduğu peri kızı icin kuzeydeki yolculuğuna devam eder.Oldukca uzun olan bu oyku, kadınların sadakatsizliğini belirten bir sonla noktalanır.”

Racatarangini’ye (Krallar Nehri) bakacak olursak, burada Ak Hunlar ve Türklerden daha sık soz edildiğini goruruz. Keşmirli tarihci Kalhana bu eseri 10-11.yuzyıllarda yazmış olup 120 beyitten oluşmaktadır.

Burada 10. ve 11. yuzyıllar arasında yaşamış kral ve krallıklar anlatılmaktadır.26 Türklerin genel anlamda Hindistan iclerine girerken Keşmir’e uğramış olmaları, bu yakın coğrafyayı iyi bilen Hintli tarih yazıcısını bizim açımızdan guvenilir kılmaktadır.27

Racatarangini’de AkHunlar ile ilgili olarak, Mihirakula’dan onun Buddhistlere yaptığı baskılardan,Shiva’ya taptığından bahsedilir. Ayrıca burada Ak Hun devletinin Mihirakula’nın olumu ile sona ermediği, daha sonra yonetime Toraman’nın bir zamanlar kacıp saklanan kucuk oğlu Pravarasena’nın tahta gectiğinden bahsedilir.28

Racatarangini’de “Türklerin silahlarını sırtlarında taşıdıkları ve saclarını yarı traş ettikleri” yazar.

Samgaramaraca’yı (Keşmir Vadisinde 1003-1028 yıllarında var olan bir kral) anlatırken bir yerde “Türklerin savaşını tanımadıkca, tutkunuza hakim olup bu tepenin ucurumuna kendinizi koymalısınız” şeklinde bir ifade gecer.

Bu, buyuk ihtimal Gazneli Mahmud’un Hint seferleri ile ilgili olsa gerektir. Sonraki cumlede Hammira ismi gecer ki bu da Mahmud olmalıdır. Yukarıdaki oğudu veren de Hint racası Trilocanapala’dır.

Sonra “sabahleyin, savaş oyunlarında usta olan Türk ordusunun komutanı, tum savaşcı kimliği ile şiddetli bicimde cıkageldi” diye yazar.

Türklerle yapılan savaşlardan soz edilmeye devam edilir.

Racatarangini’de en cok dikkatimizi ceken kısım, buyuk kral Kanishka’nın,kuşkuya yer vermeyecek bicimde, Türk olarak tanıtıldığı yerdir.

Burada şoyle yazar:

“Bu ulkede Hushka, Cushka ve Kanishka adında uc kral kendi isimlerini taşıyan uc şehir kurdular (I,168)… her ne kadar Türk soyundan geliyorlarsa da, dindar işler yapan bu krallar Şushkaletra, Matha ve Caityalar vb. yapılar inşa ettiler.”

Hikmet Bayur, pek cok yerdeki saptamaları ile aynı noktayı eserinde29 irdeleyerek Kanishka’nın Türk olduğundan şuphe duyulamayacağını soyler. El-Biruni Kanishka’dan “Kanık” diye soz eder.30

Burada “Hinduların Kabil’de Türk kralları bulunduğu ve bunların Tibet’ten geldikleri, bunların icinde birincisinin de Barhatekin” olduğu yazılıdır.

Bayur, Turushka’nın Türk olması gibi Kanishka’nın da Kanık olması gerektiğini soyler.31

Nitekim “kanık” sozcuğu bugunku Türkçe’de32 de “elindekinden hoşnut olan, azla yetinen, tok gozlu, kanaatkar” anlamlarına gelir. Kim bilir belki de bu isim Buddhizmi benimsedikten sonra kendisine verilen bir lakaptır.

Gerci Kanık’ın İran’daki Mithra inancına (İran’da guneşe tapınılan inanc sistemi) eğilimi olduğunu soyleyenler varsa da onun Aşoka ve Ekber gibi farklı inancları bir arada tutmaya calışan bir kimse olduğunu duşunmek daha mantıklıdır. 33

Kanishka’nın geldiği kavimin Kuşanlar olduğu, bunların da (Cin kaynaklarındaki adı ile) Yueh-chilerin bir boyu olduğu ve bunların Türklüklerinden hemen hemen hic şuphe edilmediği duşunulurse, yukarıdaki duşuncelerin doğru olduğu ve Benares’e kadar uzanan devletin yoneticisi olan Kanishka’nın ( Kanık’ın) bir Türk olduğu da tarih sayfalarına gececektir.34

Kuşanların giysileri tipik Orta Asya tarzının bir yansıması idi35.

Giysi ile ilgili bir ornek, Michael Edwardes’in “AHistory of İndia” adlı eserinde36 bulunmaktadır.

Milattan sonraki ilk yuzyılda Kuşan devletini kuran kral Kadfises’in paralar uzerindeki adı “Kucula Kadfises”’tir37.

W.Ruben, “kucula” sozcuğunun “guzel” sozcuğune benzediğini bildirmektedir.

Ruben’in hem bu konuda hem de Kuşanlar hakkında soyledikleri şoyledir:

“Hindistan’ın kuzeybatısında Türkistan’dan gelen kuvvetli komutanların idaresi altındaki Kuşanların istilası ile bu devrin yeni bir safhası başlamakta ve milattan yetmiş sekiz sene sonra Vima Kadfises Hindistan’da egemenliği eline almış bulunmaktadır. Bazılarına gore bu donem Kanişka zamanına uymaktadır.

Kanişka devleti daha cok Orta Asya’da idi. Pencab bu devletin sadece bir guney eyaleti idi ve merkezi de Peşaver’de bulunuyordu.

Zaman zaman yapılan akınlarla devletin sınırlarının Patna’ya kadar uzanmış olması mumkundur ve şuphesiz Benares de bu sınırlar icerisinde bulunmakta idi. Kanişka ve hanedanının pek o kadar Hintlileşmedikleri anlaşılmaktadır.

Bu hukumdarlara ait heykeller kendilerini Orta Asya suvarilerine ait elbiselerle gostermektedirler. Bu kavimler kultur bakımından Türklere cok benzemektedir. Sikkeler uzerindeki yazıları vesaire ile taşıdıkları unvanlar ve coğu isimler eski Pehlevi dilindedir. Türkçe bir isim olan Kucula bu arada soylenmelidir. Avrupalı araştırmacılar bunları İskit, yani Hint-Avrupa kokenli olarak kabul etmiş bulunmakta ise de, bu etnologlar tarafından henuz uzerinde duşunulmesi gereken bir sorun olarak gorulmektedir. Fakat ne olursa olsun bu Kuşan egemenliğinin, Hint kulturu ve onun Orta Asya’ya yayılması bakımından onemi cok buyuktur.”38

Ak Hun/ Eftalitlerin gectiği bir başka Hint kaynağı unlu şair Kalidāsa’nın yazdığı Sanskrit bir eser olan “Raghuvamsha”’dır.

Bu eserin yazılış tarihi tam olarak bilinmemekle birlikte N.Mukhopadyaya tarafından 1880 yılında İngilizceye cevrilmiş olup bu eserin 4.bolumunun 68. beyitinde Hunların Amu Derya vadisinde yaşadığından ve kahraman Raghu’nun zaferini duyan Hunların eşlerinin yanaklarının kızardığından bahseder.39

Bana tarafından Kral Harsha’ya yazılan “Harshacarita”’da da Meşhur kral Harsha’nın babasının 7. yuzyılın başlarında Hunlara yenildiği anlatılır.40

Bu eserin Sanskrit dilindeki yazılış tarihi bilinmemekle birlikte 1897 yılında E.B.Cowell ve F.W.Thomas tarafından İngilizceye cevrilmiştir.

Bizim yaptığımız araştırma sonucunda Ak Hun/ Eftalitlerden bahseden son kaynak da Jaisalmer’in yazdığı bir Caynist kitap olan Kuvalayamala’dır.

Bu kitabın da yine diğer Sanskrit metinlerde olduğu gibi yazılış tarihi bilinmemekle birlikte C.Chojnacki ve U.Sauri tarafından 2008 yılında Fransızcaya tercumesi soz konusudur.

Burada da Hunlara ait yazıtlar, Hun yoneticileri, onların savaşları,

zaferleri ve yenilgileri anlatılıyor.41

AK HUNLAR TARİHİ UZERİNE TÜRKİYE VE DUNYADA YAPILAN

CALIŞMALARIN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Doç.Dr.Müslüme Melis CELİKTAŞ –KTÜ Tarih Bölümü /Trabzon

DİPÇE :

15 Aradi, a.g.m., s.6; Kaya, a.g.m., s.4.

16 Kaya, a.g.m., s.4.

17 Konukcu, a.g.t., 43; Bu metinlerde Vana Parva LI,1991; Bhishma Parva IX,373 gibi

aynı zamanda Sabha Parva XXXI,1194 ve I,1844’te Harahuna yani Sarı Hunlardan

bahsedilmektedir.

18 Kaya, a.g.e., s.88.

19 Kaya, a.g.e., s.87.

20Kaya, a.g.m., s.3.

21Kaya, a.g.m., s. 6-7.

22Aradi, a.g.m., s.6.

23Kaya, a.g.m., s.5.

24 Hint Destanlarında gecen “Rakshasa” “ifrit” demektir.

25Kaya, a.g.m., s.8.

26 M.A.Stein, Kalhana’s Rajatarangini, Vol. 1, Book 1-4, Edinburgh 1900, s.42.

27Kaya, a.g.m., s,9.

28Aradi, a.g.m., s.17.

29 Y.H.Bayur, Hindistan Tarihi, C.1, Ankara,1987, s.42; Kaya, a.g.m., s. 9.

30 E.C.Sachau, Alberuni’s India, Vol 2, New Delhi 2004, s. 11; Kaya, a.g.m., s. 9.

31 Bayur, a.g.e., s.71; Kaya, a.g.m., s. 9.

32 Turkce Sozluk, Ankara 2010, s. 423; Kaya, a.g.m., s. 9.

33 H.Kulke, D.Rothermund, Hindistan Tarihi, Ankara 2001, s. 123-124; Kaya,

a.g.m., s. 9.

34Kaya, a.g.m.,s.10.

35 Kulke, Rothermund, a.g.e., s.123; Kaya, a.g.m., s. 10.

36 M.Edwardes, A History of India, Thames and Hudson, London 1961, s.75-76.

37 Bayur, a.g.e., s.74.

38 Kaya, a..g.m., s.10.

39 Aradi, a.g.m., s.6.

40 E.B.Cowell, F.H.Thomas, The Harsha Carita of Bana, chapter 4, London 1897

s.101.

41Aradi, a.g.m., s.7.

KAYNAKLAR :

Akbulut, D.A. “İlkcağda Soğdia ve Bakteria ile Hindistan İlişkileri”, Tarihte Turk-

Hint İlişkileri Sempozyumu Bildirileri 2002, Ankara 2006.

Akbulut, D.A. “Maveraunnehir ve Horasan’da Turkler” Turkler Ansiklopedisi,

Ankara 2006.

Aksan D. Turk Dilbilgisi, İstanbul 1962.

Alram, M., “Huns and Western Turks in Central Asia and Northwest India”,

Glasgow 2009.

Altheim, F., Geschichte der Hunnen I, Berlin 1959.

Aradi, E., “The History of White Huns”, Mikes International, c.VIII, Den Haag

2001.

Aradi, E., “The Yue-chis, Kushans,Hephtalites”, Mikes İnternational, C.2,

Den Haag 2010.

Bayur, Y.H., Hindistan Tarihi, C.1, Ankara 1987.

Beal, S., Si-yu-ki, Buddhist Records or The Western World, C.I, Londra

1906.

Blockley R.C., The History of Menander The Guardsman, Ottawa 1985.

Biro, M., “Hunların Kafkasya’daki Varlığı”, Cev.S.Eğilmez, Ataturk

Universitesi Turkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitusu Dergisi,

Erzurum 2003.

Chavannes, E., Documents sur Les Tou-kiue (Turks) Occiedentaux, A Librairie

d’Amerique et d’Orient Adrien Maisonneuve, Quebec 2006.

Compareti, M., “Traces of Buddhist Art in Sogdiana”, Sino-Platınic Papers, USA

2008.

Cowell, E.B., F.H.Thomas, The Harsha Carita of Bana”, Londra 1897.

Csurgai, B., The Hsingnu-Hunnic Hungarian Language and History-Further

Analysis, Hungary 2010.

Czegledy, K., “Geschishte Der Hephthaliten”, Acta Antiqua, Tomus, 28, Budapeşt

1980.

Christian, D., A History of Russia, Central Asia and Mongolia, vol 1, Australia

1998.

Dani, A.H., “Eastern Kushans and Kidarites in Gandhara and Kashmir”,

History of Civilization of Central Asia, London 1996.

Deguignes, J., Hunların, Turklerin, Moğolların ve daha sair Tatarların Tarih-i

Umumisi, cvr. Hiseyin Cahid, C.II, İstanbul 1923.

De Saint Martin, V., Les Huns Balancs ou Ephthalites, Paris 1849

Dewing, H.B., Procopius, History of Wars , Book 1,Trans.H.B.Dewing, London

2005 .

Durak, N., “Hindistan’da Saka, Kuşan ve Ak Hunlar”, Tarihte Turk-Hint

İlişkileri Sempozyumu Bildirileri 2007, Ankara 2008.

Eberhard, W., Cin’in Şimal Komşuları, Cev. N. Uluğtuğ, Ankara 1996.

Edwardes, M., A History of India, London 1961.

El-Belazuri, Futuhu’l Buldan, Cev. M.Fayda, Ankara 1987,

Enoki, K., “The Origin of the White Huns or Hephthalites”, East and West 3,

Bellinghom/ Washington 1955.

Enoki, K., “On The Nationality of the Ephthalites”, Memories of the Research

Department of the Toyo Bunko, XVIII, 1959.

Enoki, K., “The Liang chih-kung-t’u”, Memories of the Research Department

of the Toyo Bunko, sayı 42, 1984.

Fleet, F., “The coins and history of Toramana”, The Indian Antiquary

XVIII, India 1889.

Fergusson, J., “On Indian Chronology”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of

Great Britain and Ireland C.4, London 1869.

Frye, R.N., “Selcuklulardan Evvel Orta Şarkta Turkler”, Belleten, c.10, sayı, 37-

40, Ankara 1946.

Gomec, S., “Boyla ve Baga Unvanı”, ODU Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu, Sosyal

Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, C.1, S. 1, 2010.

Gomec, S., Kok Turk Tarihi, 3.Baskı, Ankara 2009.

Gomec, S., Turk Kulturunun Ana Hatları, Ankara 2006.

Gomec, S., Turk Destanlarına Giriş, Ankara 2009.

Grousset, R., The Empire of the Steppes, Cev. N.Walford, New Brunswick

1970

Gunaltay, Ş., Mufassal Turk Tarihi, C.3, İstanbul 1339.

Harmatta, J., “Kidara and Kidarite Huns in Keşmir”, Acta Antiqua, XXVIIXXVIII,

1-4, Hungariae 1979-1980.

Harmatta, J., “Late Bacterian Inscriptions”, Acta Antiqua Scientariun Hungarica

17, Budapeşt 1969.

Harmatta, J., “Annexation of The Hephthalite Vassal Kingdoms By The Western

Turks”, History of Humanity, C. VI, Paris1996.

Indicopleustes, C., The Christian Topography of Cosmos, Cev. J.W.McCrindle,

London 2010.

İtil, A., Sanskrit Klavuzu, Ankara 1963.

Kaya, K., “Eski Hint Metinlerinde Turk”, Argos Gemicileri, sayı 10, Ankara

2003.

Kaya, K., Hint Mitoloji Sozluğu, 2. Baskı, , Ankara 2003.

Kaya, K. Okyanusun Kıyısında, Ankara 2003,

Kafesoğlu, İ., Turk Milli Kulturu, 4.baskı, İstanbul 1986.

Konukcu, E., “Ak Hunlar”, Turkler Ansiklopedisi, C.1, Ankara 2006.

Konukcu, E., “Kuşan ve Akhunlar tarihi”, Doktora Tezi, Ankara 1973.

Konukcu, E., “Halaclar” Turkler Ansiklopedisi, Ankara 2006.

Kulke, H.,D.Rothermund, Hindistan Tarihi, Ankara 2001.

Kumar, R., History of The Chamar Dynasty, India 2008.

Kushava, R.S., A Glimpse of Bharatiya History, Delhi 2003.

Le Strange, G., The Lands of the Eastern Caliphate, Newyork 2010.

Ligeti, L., “Atilla Hunlarının Menşei”, Atilla ve Hunları, Neş. G.Nemeth, Cev.

Ş. Baştav, Ankara 1982.

Litvinsky, B.A., “The Hephthalite Empire”, History of Civizilation of Central

Asia, vol. 3, Paris 1996.

Litvinsky, B.A. / Z.Safi, “The Later Hephthalites in Central Asia”, History of

Civilization of Central Asia, vol 3, Paris 1996.

Macartney, L.A., “ On The Grek Sorces Fort the History of Turks in the Sixth

Century”, Bulletin of the school of Oriental Africa Studies, 11/2,

London 1944.

Maenchen-Helfen, O., The World of Huns, London 1973.

Mangaltepe, İ., Bizans Kaynaklarında Turkler, İstanbul 2009.

Marshak, B., “Sughd and Adjancent Regions”, History of Civilization of Central

Asia, vol. 3, Paris 1996.

Marshall, J., A Guide to Taxila, Calcutta 1918.

Massom, V.M., “Archaelogical Cultures of Southern Siberia and Mongolia” History

of Humanity, c.IV, Paris 1996.

Mc Govern, W.M., The Early Empires of Central Asia, North Carolina 1939.

Melzer, G., “A copper scroll inscription from the time of the Alchon Huns”,

J.Braarvig(ed). Manuscripts in Schoyen Collection III, Oslo

2006.

Mingana, A., The Early Spread of Christianity in Central Asia and The Far

East, C. 9, Manchester 1921.

Minorsky, V., “Khurāsān at the Time of the Arab Conquest”, Iran and Islam in

Memory of the Late, Edinburg 1971.

Modi, J.J., “About the Huns who conquered India”, Journal of the Bombay

Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society , Bombay 1926.

117

Moravcsik, G., Byzantinoturcica II, cev.E.J.Brill, Leiden 1983.

Morgan, D., The Mongols, Singapur 2007.

Obrusanzky, B., “Late Huns in Caucasus”, Mikes International,Journal of

Eurasian Studies, Vol1, Issue 2, Den Haag 2009.

Ogel, B., “İlk Toles Boyları”, Belleten, C.10, Ankara 1948.

Ruben, W., “Doğuda ve Batıda Ortacağ Felsefesi”, Dil ve Tarih, Coğrafya

Fakultesi Dergisi., cilt 2, sayı 1, Ankara 1943.

Roux, J.P., Turklerin Tarihi, Ankara 2004.

Stein, M.A., Kalhana’s Rajatarangini, Vol. 1, Book 1-4, Edinburgh 1900.

Stark, S., Transoxanien nach dem Tang Huiyao des Wang Pu, Nordestedt

2009.

Samolin, W., “Hsiung-nu, Hun, Turk”,Central Asiatic Journal, New Jersey 1957.

Sundermann, W., Origin and Rise of the Chionities/Xyon/Huns, History of Humanity

Scientific and Culture Development, vol. 3, Paris 1996.

Skrine, F.H. - G.D. Ross, The Heart Of Asia, London 1899.

Smith, V., The Oxford History of India, London 1921.

Sinor, D., “The Establishment and Dissolution of the Turk Empire,” The

Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia, London 1994.

Sachau, E.C., Alberuni’s India, Vol 2, New Delhi 2004.

Stark, S., Transoxantan nach dem Tang Huiyao des Wang Pu, Norderstedt

2009.

Şeşe R., İslam Coğrafyacılarına Gore Turkler Ve Turk Ulkeleri, Ankara 2001.

Tezcan, M., “Kuşanlar, Ak Hunlar ve Eftalitler”, Tarihte Turk-Hint İlişkileri

Sempozyumu Bildirileri 2002, dizi XXVI, sayı 12, Ankara 2006.

Tezcan, M., “The Ethonomy Apar in the Turkish Inscriptions of the VIII. Century

and Armenian Manuscripts” Webfestschrift Marshak Ērān ud

Anērān Studies, Venice 2003.

Thapar, R., A History of India, C.1, London 1974.

Thomas, F.W., “A.Tohari (?) A.D. 400”, JSTOR, 1944.

Togan, A.Z.V., “Eftalit Devletini Teşkil Eden Kabilelere Dair”, Ataturk

Universitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakultesi Araştırma Dergisi, Ozel

sayı, Fasukul 1, S.13, Erzurum 1985.

Togan, A.Z.V., Tarihte Usul, İstanbul 1950.

Turkce Sozluk, Ankara 2010.

Watter, T., Yuan Chwang’s Travel in India, C. XIV, Journal of the Royal

Asiatic Society of London 1904

Wincent, A.S., “White Hun Coins From The Panjab”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic

Society of London 1907.

https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1471950

Şenol Soydan

[tkh1283]

#卍TÜRK MİLLETİNİN DİRENİŞ RUHU

#卍KUVAYİ #卍MİLLİYE

“Milli Mücadele’yi yapan doğrudan doğruya milletin kendisidir, milletin evlatlarıdır. Millet analarıyla, babalarıyla, kardeşleriyle mücadeleyi kendisine ülkü edindi... Milli Mücadele’de şahsi hırs değil, milli ülkü, milli onur gerçek etken olmuştur.” (#卍TENGRİkutUluğBaşBuğMKATATÜRK, 1925)

Kuvayı Milliye’nin önemi, Türk Milleti’nin; sarayın,sultanın veya başka birinin ağzına bakmadan kendi kaderini kendi eline alma iradesini göstermesinden kaynaklanır. Türk Milleti, Osmanlı sarayının suskunluğuna, hatta direnişi önleme çabalarına karşı düşmana direndi. Bu gerçeği çok çabuk gören Mustafa Kemal Paşa (Atatürk), Anadolu’ya geçer geçmez “Egemenlik kayıtsız şartsız milletindir” diyerek TBMM’yi açtı. Samet Ağaoğlu’nun ifadesiyle “Milli hakimiyet prensibi bir milli ruh halinden doğdu. O ruh haline Kuvayı Milliye Ruhu diyoruz... Bu ruhun kendini gösterdiği en büyük sahne Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi’ydi... O Meclis’in kullandığı yetki, yazılı hükümlerle ilgili olmayan bir kaynaktan doğuyordu. İşte o kaynak ‘Kuvayı Milliye Ruhu’ idi.” (Samet Ağaoğlu, Kuvayı Milliye Ruhu, s. 43). Atatürk, Kuvayı Milliye Ruhu’yla sadece vatanı kurtarmadı, Cumhuriyeti de o ruhla kurdu. Kuvayı Milliye; Ahmet Ağaoğlu’nun deyişiyle Namussuz ve esir yaşamaktansa namuslu ölmektir.” Atatürk’ün ifadesiyle “Ya istiklal ya ölüm” parolasıyla emperyalist işgale başkaldırmaktır. Falih Rıfkı Atay’ın deyişiyle, “Hiçbir işe yaramazsa bile namuslu bir adamın yastığı dibinde duran tabancadır; hiç olmazsa intihar etmeye yarar!” (Falih Rıfkı Atay, Niçin Kurtulmamak, s. 42)

Kuvayı Milliyeciler etnik kökeni, dini, mezhebi farklı diye kimseye saldırmadılar, Kuvayi Milliyeciler masum sivilleri katletmediler.

Türk Milleti’nin direniş ruhu Kuvayı Milliye, ÖSO’ya mösoya, HAMAS'a mamasa benzemez kardeşim.»

Kaynakça: Sinan Meydan'ın yazısından alıntıdır.

[tkh1283]

#卍TENGRİkutUluğBaşBuğMKATATÜRK’ÜN’ Yaşam Felsefesi:

“Bir insan, yaşadığı sürece büyük bir başarı kazanabilir. Ama yalnız onunla övünerek kalmak isterse, o başarıyla unutulmaya mahkûmdur. Onun için çalışmak, sürekli olarak başarı aramak, herkes için ilke olmalıdır.”»

Kaynakça: Atatürk Bilim ve Üniversite, Metin Özata, Sayfa 53

[tkh1283]

Rus Mezalimi neydi?

Çarlık Rusyasına isyan eden

#卍120binKırgızTürküKırgızistan’ın K. doğusundan Çin’e geçmeye çalışırken önlerine Tien Şan dağlarında Çar güçleri tarafından pusuya düşürüldüler. Ve 1916’da, Kırgızistan’da, tarihe adı “#卍Ürkün” olarak geçen o katliam yaşandı. Artık her yıl '#卍Ürkün Kurbanları' anısına Kırgızistan’ın K. doğusunda yer alan Barskun Köyü’nde ve Başkent Bişkek’te törenler düzeniyor.Kırgız #卍Türkleri atalarına vefa borcu olarak “Ürkün 90” adı verilen bir proje ile #卍KırgızTürk halkının hakları için ölen bu insanların dağılmış kemiklerini toplayıp anıt mezar olacak bir alana yeniden gömdüler.Kırgız halkının isyan etmesinin sebebi rejimin hak ve hürriyetlerdeki kısıtlamalarının hat safhaya ulaşmasının yanı sıra, Kırgız halkının I. Dünya Savaşı’na “Çar’ın askerleri” olarak #Türkiye'ye karşı katılmasının istenmesiydi.Yıllardır varı-yoğu sömürülen halkın bir de canı sömürülmek isteniyordu, hemde #Türklere karşı.

Savaşı Rusya kazansa bile sömürülen #Türkistan (Orta Asya) ülkelerinin hiç bir kazancı olmayacak, ölen askerlerinin adı da Türklere karşı savaşla anılacağı için nefretle anılacaktı.Sonuçta halk isyan etti ve bu isyan tarihte eşi benzeri görülmemiş bir şekilde bastırıldı.

Sayılarının 120 bini bulan Kırgız Türk'ü bugünkü Kırgızistan’ın K. doğusundan Çin’e geçmeye çalışırken Tien Şan dağlarında pusuya düşürülüp katledilmişti.'Ürkün' katliamından sağ kalanlar da, bu dağlarda 3000 metre yüksekliklere kadar çıkıp kaçmaya çalışırken can verdi. Şu an bu dağların etekleri, hala kemikleri dağılmış vaziyette yatan Kırgız Türklerinin mezarlığıdır.Hayret ve dehşet uyandıracak manzaralardan biri de 4000 metre yükseklikte bulunan Bedel Geçidi ile Çin sınırı arasında akan bir nehrin yatağının insan kemikleri ile dolu olması. Sovyetler dönemi boyunca, yaşanan vahşete tanıklık etmelerini önlemek için bu bölgeye Kırgızların girmesi engellenmiştir. Ürkün, Sovyetler dönemi kitaplarında da kayıtlı değildir. Hatta Kırgız aydınlarının olayı anlatmak için yazdığı kitapların basılması dahi.Kırgızistan’ın yeniden bağımsızlık tarihi olan 1991 yılına kadar engellenmiştir.

Ürkün Katliamı ancak 75. yıldönümü olan 1991’de, Ürkün ile birçok insanını kaybeden Asilbaş Köyü’nde bir tören ile anılabilmiştir.Ancak önemli bir gerçek şu ki; bu tarihten sonra çökmüş olan Sovyet Rusya, halkların bağımsızlık taleplerine çok fazla karşı koyamamıştır.11-Rusya, tarih boyunca Türkistan, Ukrayna ve Kafkas halklarına karşı yaptığı zalimlikler adına bugüne kadar üzgün olduklarını ifade eden bir ‘özür’ dahi dilememiştir.

Kırgız Türkleri, 1876 yılında Hokand Hanlığının yıkılmasıyla Rusların hâkimiyeti altına girdiler. Ruslar, bu yeni hâkimiyet alanlarında kontrol sağlamak için sömürgeci politikaları doğrultusunda bölgeye zamanla Rusya´dan getirdikleri Rus aileleri yerleştirmeye başlamışlardı.Bölgeye Rus aileler yerleştirilirken burada yaşayan halkın topraklarına el konuldu. Çok sayıda Rus köyü oluşturuldu ve bölgenin isimleri Rus isimleriyle değiştirildi.

Zamanla bölgedeki nüfusun %6'sını oluşturan Rusların eline, verimli toprakların %58'i verilmişti.Nüfusun %94 'lük dilimini oluşturan Kırgız Türkleri ellerinden bu toprakların alınması ve sulama kanallarına el konulması ile zor duruma düşürüldü.1914 yılında başlayan I. Dünya Savaşı'nda Rus Çarlığı'nın da yer alması Kırgız Türkleri için büsbütün felaketti. O güne dek toprakları ellerinden alınan Türkler, çoktan geçim sıkıntısına düşmüştü bile.Bir de bunun üzerine Rus yöneticiler tarafından savaş bahanesiyle vergiler ağırlaştırıldı, halkın hayvanlarının bir kısmına da el konuldu.İkinci sınıf vatandaş olarak görülen ve o güne kadar askere alınmayan 19-43 yaş aralığındaki bütün Orta Asya erkeklerinin, 1916 yılında Çar II. Nicolas tarafından askere alınması emredildi.Bu emir, Haziran ayında çıkarılmıştı ve zaten geçim sıkıntısı çeken insanlar hasat zamanında erkek gücünden yoksun kaldığı için iyice müşkül duruma düştü.

Bunun üzerine Türkler, Temmuz 1916'da amelelik emrine karşı gelmeye ve ayaklanmaya başladı.Polisle yaşanan çatışma bütün Türkistan'da duyuldu ve ayaklanmalar bütün coğrafyaya yayıldı. Rus ordusunun önemli bir kısmı isyanı bastırmak için görevlendirildi, bu da isyancıları silahlanmaya itti. Yerli halka karşı Rus köylülere de silahlar dağıtıldı ve iç savaş başladı.Rus generallere verilen emir doğrultusunda Türk köyleri yakılıp yıkıldı. Silahsız durumdaki çocuk, kadın ve yaşlılar da isyancılar gibi acımasızca öldürüldü. Kaçmaya çalışan insanların önü kesildi, direnip direnmemelerine bakılmaksızın hepsi vahşice öldürüldü.Bazı bölgelerde isyana katılmayan Uygur ve Kazak Türkleri de kurşuna dizildi.

Böylece bölgede etnik temizlik yapıldı. İsyanın başarısız olmasındaki en büyük etken, çok iyi silahlanmış Ruslara karşı ayaklanmaların bölgesel oluşu ve tek merkezden düzenli yönetilmemesiydi.Rus devlet yetkilisi

A. F. Kerenskiy, isyanın bastırılışını bir toplantıda şöyle dile getirir;

Cezalandırıcılar bölüklerden, piyadelerden, süvari ve topçulardan meydana gelmekteydi.Bölük komutanları köylerde karşılarına çıkan bütün insanların yaş ve cinsiyetine bakılmaksızın, kundaktaki bebekler, yaşlı dede ve nineler dâhil zalimce yok etmişlerdi.

Öldürülen Türklerin sayısı kesin olmamakla birlikte, en az 100-120 bin kişi olduğu tahmin edilmektedir.Bir asır önce yapılan bu soykırım, Kırgız Türkleri'nin sömürgeci Ruslara karşı verdikleri milli mücadelenin sonucuydu.24-Ürkün kelimesi Kırgız Türkçesinde “Bir şeyden korkarak toplu halde kaçma” anlamına gelir. 25-Doç. Dr. Füsun Kaya'nın bu akademik referanslı makalesinde ölenlerin rakamı 274 bin olarak verilmiştir.

(Ukraynada'da 1.3 milyon insanı açlığa terkeden Çarlık Rusyası hiç iyi anılmaz.)

#卍ÜrkünKatliamı

#Kırgızistan

Halil Said Adem

[tkh1283]

#卍17Aralık2016'da #卍KayseriKomandoTugayı'nı taşıyan otobüse düzenlenen hain saldırı sonucu Şehit düşen askerlerimizi saygıyla anıyoruz.

[tkh1283]

Muhabir;

- #卍SizGördügüm en büyük Irkcısınız.

#卍GBHNATSIZgülümseyerek yanıthyor

- #卍ÎltifatBuyurdunuz,tesekkür ederim.🐺

[tkh1283]

«#卍TENGRİkutUluğBaşBuğMKATATÜRK

Memlekete yabancı nüfuz ve hakimiyeti kısmen ve fiilen girmiştir. Padişah 2. Abdülhamid zevk ve saltanatına düşkün, her aşağılığı yapabilecek iğrenç bir şahsiyettir.

Millet zulüm ve istibdat altında mahvoluyor. Hürriyet olmayan bir memlekette ölüm ve yok oluş vardır. Her ilerlemenin ve kurtuluşun anası hürriyettir.

#卍TENGRİkutUluğBaşBuğMKATATÜRK - 1906

(Vatan ve Hürriyet Cemiyeti, Selanik Şubesi açılışı sırasında Atatürk'ün yaptığı konuşmadan...)»

Kaynakça: Atatürk'ün Bütün Eserleri 1. Cilt, s.32

[tkh1283]

#1283ĪÇĪMĪZDE.🐺🌲🐲

[tkh1283]

Beautiful.

BARBARA PALVIN via Instagram

[tkh1283]

Beautiful 🐺

Jennie x Jacquemus for Harpers Bazaar Korea

[tkh1283]

Beautiful 🐺

[tkh1283]

TENGRİkutUluğBaşBuğMKATATÜRK.🐺🌲

Eğilmez başımıza taç yaptık hürriyeti,

Zaferle kalbimize yazdık Cumhuriyeti! 🇹🇷

Cumhuriyetimizin ilanının 97’nci yılında Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’ü,aziz şehitlerimizi ve gazilerimizi saygıyla anıyoruz.Ruhları şad olsun

29 Ekim Cumhuriyet Bayramımız kutlu olsun.

[tkh1283]

TENGRİKUTULUĞBAŞBUĞMKATATÜRK.🐺🌲🐲

"Zafer, zafer benimdir diyebilenindir. Başarı ise başaracağım diye başlayarak sonunda başardım diyenindir."

-Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

[tkh1283]

TENGRİkutUluğBaşBuğMKATATÜRK.🐺🌲🐲

Harf Devrimi ile özdeşleşen bu resmin aslında Büyük Önder Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk'ün, yeni harfleri halka tanıtmak için Harf Devrimi'nden yaklaşık olarak bir buçuk ay önce çıktığı bir gezisinde çekildiğini kaç kişi biliyor?

[tkh1283]

#TENGRİkutUluğBaşBuğCENGİZHAN.🐺🌲🐲