Talk:Carians

Turkey Low‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Near East

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Greece Mid‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ethnic groups

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Turkish Name of the Caria

As most of the direct descendants of the Carians and other ancient anatolian civilizations currently speak Turkish but are mostly of ancient anatolian ancestry, the name of these civilizations should also be provided in Turkish language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lycianhittite (talk • contribs) 23:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uh-huh. Do you have any concrete evidence to substantiate your claims? If you do, then enlighten us. Deucalionite (talk) 14:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to scientific studies more than %85 of Turkey's population is formed of indigenous anatolians

1)..In the present study, the Central Asian contribution to Anatolia was estimated as 13%..

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117873906/abstract

2).. One study based on an analysis of Y-chromosomes from Turkey suggested that Central Asians have only made a 10% genetic contribution..

Rolf B, Röhl A, Forster P, Brinkmann B. "Genomic diversity: applications in human population genetics". 75–82 Kluwer Academic/Plenum

3)..Recent genetic research has suggested the local, Anatolian origins of the Turks and that genetic flow between Turks and Asiatic peoples might have been marginal..

Lycianhittite (talk) 00:27, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting sources. However, I don't see how these genetic studies have anything to do with the ancient Carians. If anything, the Carians were not an autochthonous population of Anatolia (see "Archaeological evidence"). As long as that is the case, there is technically no reason to insist on adding modern Turkish appellations to an archaic non-Turkish population. Deucalionite (talk) 01:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, there is no relevance to add the Turkish name. Turkish did not exist back then. _{El Greco}^(talk) 01:25, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i have an objection here, the Turkish population may not have a solid relationship with the ancient Carians, but the Turkish name can be added to the end after Carian and Greek for research purposes since the area is inside the borders of Turkey today. Elmalili (talk) 02:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between populational nomenclatures and geographical nomenclatures. In the case of the Caria article, adding a modern Turkish appellation to an ancient non-Turkish region that happens to fall within the geopolitical delimitations of the modern Turkish nation-state is perfectly fine. However, adding a modern Turkish appellation to an ancient non-Turkish population promotes academic anachronisms since the term "Carians" is non-existent in Turkish literature. Therefore, even adding the "Turkish variant of the term "Carians"" for something as benign as "research purposes" would not truly serve the interests of the overall article. Sorry. Deucalionite (talk) 03:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest we take the article Gauls as an example where you don't have appellations in various languages other than the English medium in use here hijacking the header. The intro there reads simply that they "were a Celtic people living in Gaul". I am trying to gradually provide more weight in the article for its subject matter, in its present state one is sarcastically tempted to find how fortunate it was that the article is on the Carians -this is not a criticism of inclusion of ancient Greek sources per se. It is not easy to find balanced statements. I know a specialist who was supposed to help me in this but like many others, probably waiting for Godot by now. Cretanforever (talk) 13:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I was told that no future excavation permits were going to be granted by the Turkish universities with competence and authority on the "ancient non-Turkish regions that happen to fall within the geopolitical delimitations of the modern Turkish nation-state", if the "Turkish variant of the term "Carians"" did not come just after the original Carian language name/term in wikipedia article intros (or also for that matter, original Lydian language or Lycian language names/terms) relevant to the subject matter. Cretanforever (talk) 18:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carians origin

It is written on this wikipedia subject that the carians doesn't seem to have anatolian origin and didn't follow the neolithic expansion. I have read recently in a popular book about Caria, (Karia, C.Canan Küçükeren. Ekin edition) this : "Renowned Professor Dr. Arif Müfid Mansel points out in his work entitled "The Aegean and Greek history" that migrations from Anatolia to Crete and the island as of 3000 BC were proven with philological evidence, and claims that this expansion reached as far as Italy and even Spain. She explains also that "Professor D.Stylianos Alexiou, who as dedicated his life to the promotion of the cretan culture, tells that so far no trace of human in Crete has been found dating back to pre-neolithic times and points out that the archaeology of Crete starts only after 2880BC, with the neolithic period". (and so on in the book). It could be interesting for the Carians wikipedia page to discuss about this, and maybe look at the sources. Kaplum33 (talk) 19:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Herodotus

Might it be worth mentioning at all that Herodotus, who was born in Caria, is quite often thought to be of partially Carian ancestry? 137.163.80.1 (talk) 09:09, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]