When did costantinapolis' name change as İstanbul ?
Topic: When did costantinapolis' name change as İstanbul ?
June 20, 2019 / By Blanch Question:
this is my presentation question . plz help me do my homework.
@lazarus , the video you wrote is null, can you rewrite it , I am really curious about it , always history pays my attention.thank you .
Best Answers: When did costantinapolis' name change as İstanbul ?
Ainsley | 2 days ago
Many people have already answered about the name. The name was changed into Istanbul after about 1933 (?).
I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THE 'KING OF NOTHING' THAT IT IS AN INSULT IN GREECE TO CALL THE CITY 'ISTANBUL'!
It is not insulting, it is just odd, it is like calling 'Londino' with it's english name as 'London', when I'm speaking in Greek or 'Edimvurgo' as 'Edinbourgh', understand?
It is also like calling 'Athina' (Athens in Greek) as 'Athinai', the old name, ancient and in formal greek speech of 19 and even 20th century!
About toponymes, i don't find it tragical to be changed.
1. The 'wave' of purification in every country in the 19th century, this includes, Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Italy etc.
2. The fact that old names were more difficult to be pronounced by the local populations.
And Blunt, I don't find anything wrong with the name of a Roman Emperor, still used by Greeks, as this man is one of the leading Saints in our Church.
And we have said many times that Greeks understand themselves as a continuation of the Byzantine Empire, all of the present day's Greece was part of the Byzantine Empire after all. It is the most logical to think this way about our history.
(Please don't tell me that Byzantine Empire was spleated in 1204, because then I ll have to ask you if Seljuks were Turks also- they weren't Ottoman's right?- and also if the Sultan of the Ikonium was Turkish, Ottoman, Seljuk or what...this is judging with the same messures. All of the above groups, Turkish or Byzantine-Byzantine Empire, Empire of Nikaia etc, were participating exactly in the same culture, had the same values, languages etc).
👍 132 | 👎 2
Did you like the answer? When did costantinapolis' name change as İstanbul ?
Share with your friends
Originally Answered: President elect Obama; was the change candidate.how will he manage his "change" with insiders in his cabinet?
That is the change. Barrack is what I would call an extreme Democrat, and that is the change that he has promised. We are going to have an all Democrat Govt and they will rule all 3 depts. President, Judicial, and Congress.
I think that he is lining up to do what he promised and that is change from Bush (republican) to Barrack (democrat) and I see that he is doing it. He promised the full term abortion and he seems ready to comply with that and other promises.
I don´t see his actions as strange or out of order from what he promised..
He did not promise to change parties, and these people are Democrats that will support Barrack and his programs, and with the rest of the Govt. Democrat he will be able to push through laws, and constitutional changes with an ease that was never possible with Bush. Bush was the Republican balance in there and the majority of the people did not want him in office, so now he isn´t.
If I understand correctly his use of presidential power, he is planning on changing some laws in the first month and quickly.
Abortion is in immediately
Coal fired plants are out.
not sure of the other things, but he has his ducks lined up..
We will know a lot by may or june.
first of all, I might desire to declare I thoroughly consider Deniz. Ottoman government did not exchange that is call, they known because it Konstantiniyye for an somewhat long term (it extremely is the Ottoman version of Constantinople and Konstantiniyye skill the city of Konstantin) yet all those years even the government known because it Konstantiniyye, the city individuals have been calling it ?stanbul, ?slambol, ?stambol and another variations beginning up with "ist", it extremely is, wager what, lower back a Greek be conscious or expression. (a misspelled Greek be conscious, shall we are saying) i don't comprehend the wonderful time of the oficial exchange from Konstantiniyye to ?stanbul. yet whilst the government of the hot republic somewhat had to ERASE the city's Byzantine previous, they might have extremely got here upon a Turkish be conscious perfect for the city like BO?AZKENT or YED?TEPE. So there is somewhat no clarification for any resentment right here. Greeks are very wanting in charge Turks for this project, they might desire to think of two times or a minimum of make their study till now accusations.
👍 50 | 👎 -5
As TB said, teh name did not change after 1453. The Sultans kept Constantinople as the official name. The name changed by Kemal Ataturk, in the 20th century.
As for TB's question, I don't care if a name is Greek or Turkish or Latin or Slavic. I disagree with the change of many Slavic toponymes into Greek ones, in Greece, and I also disagree with the change of the name of Constantinople even to a purely Greek one. This city was glorious by that name, within the Byzantine and the Ottoman Empire. The Slavic toponymes showed some part of the Greek history. It is wrong to alter history, no matter what interests this alteration serves. Istanbul is a misunderstood sound of an expression. I believe this city deserves more than that.
👍 49 | 👎 -12
My friend Keyser,
In Greek language is Konstantinopole just like in your language you still call Thessaloniki as Selanik and just like you call Greece as Yunanistan.
What's the problem of calling it this way.When its about to talk with foreigners we will call it with its international name just like our country.We don't say Ellada which is the right one, but we say Greece.
You can't judge us for calling the city in Greek language.Especially when , officialy the name changed in the early 1900s
👍 48 | 👎 -19
The name change took place in the 1490's when the turks overthrew the remains of the Bizantine Empire.
👍 47 | 👎 -26
Originally Answered: Do you know the science of global warming, climate change? Are you willing to change, learn?
The question is: Are you willing to learn?
Recent research indicates global warming is not the problem we thought it was. The IPCC claims the Earth warmed by .74C in the last century, but it now appears up to half of the observed warming is an artifact of instrument error from poorly sited weather stations. Anthony Watts is leading an effort to photograph and document the quality of weather stations around the globe. They have photographed 1/3 of the stations in the US and found that only 15% meet the minimum requirements of the NOAA. The other 85% have a significant warming bias.
Watts presented his research at UCAR and the scientists there gave him a good reception. See his presentation here:
You say my data is off but you do not say what is wrong. If you can question a specific statement, I will be happy to provide you with a link to prove the data is correct. The point I was making above has nothing to do with models and everything to do with instrument error due to poorly sited stations. Evidently, you did not bother to read the information I provided.
Steve McIntyre did a temp reconstruction of US temps using only the 15% of stations known to be good stations and the warmest years on record were 1934, then 1921, then 1998 and 2006. The recent warming has not exceeded previous natural warming.
I would also advise you to read http://climatesci.colorado.edu the website of Dr. Roger Pielke, the most prolific and respected climatologist in the field. He is convinced man is affecting climate but mostly from land use/land cover changes, not greenhouse gases. This means that any warming will not be catastrophic.
You should also read the peer-reviewed paper by Dr. Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Laboratory. He has published a new estimate of climate sensitivity of doubled CO2 and found it to be much less than previously estimated.