Talk:Turcia gens

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

please inform me!!

Are there any studies on this subject? Can someone give me a link or something? Thanks, Uzunbacak Adem UzunbacakAdem (talk) 13:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of any studies focusing specifically on this family. They don't seem to have been very prominent in history, despite holding some high offices under the Empire. A cautionary note: just because the name resembles "Turkey" doesn't mean that there's any connection between them and Turkish people or languages. In fact it's fairly certain that there's no such connection—the similarity of the name is purely coincidental. P Aculeius (talk) 17:04, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

fairly certain? let us think that there is a Gens Grigeo or Gens Arabia. Would it be a coincidence, too? UzunbacakAdem (talk) 09:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC) Uzunbacak Adem[reply]

I was being polite—there is no connection between this family and Turkey: they existed centuries before anyone in Italy or the Roman Empire had ever heard of the Turks, who at this period were a nomadic people living in central Asia, and are not definitely mentioned under this name prior to the sixth century (earlier occurrences of a similar word probably refer to other peoples of distant lands, and some are perhaps scribal errors—see our article on Turkic peoples).

The Arabs were known to the Romans by the first century BC, since the Romans had involved themselves in the politics of Egypt and Syria, and acquired much territory from the Greek states of the region, but if there was ever a family calling itself "gens Arabia" it must have been quite obscure. Checking available epigraphy, I find a single instance of a grave of someone called "Arabius Lucianus" dating from the late second or early third century. But even assuming that the name was shared with other members of his family, it would have no bearing on a supposed etymological connection with the Turcii and the Turks.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with "Grigeo", as it's not Latin and not a Roman name at all; the only occurrences of the combination "grige" in epigraphy seem to refer to Agrigentum or persons from that town, with the single exception of a first-century soldier, probably a German auxiliary, named "Ogrigenus". But once again, even supposing a name derived from that of a foreign people, it would have no bearing on the fact that there were no Turks living at or anywhere near Rome or the Roman Empire during the Augustan era, which is when the Turcii first appear in history. P Aculeius (talk) 11:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

it is only a coincidence, yes, I see. There are many places with the name Turcia under: https://www.jstor.org/stable/497946?seq=1 . Of Course, a coincidence, too. The Greeks called Hungary after 1000 years in the same way: Tourkia. YOu can use the engine and look for Turc-Turcia etc. https://db.edcs.eu/epigr/epi.php?s_sprache=en . All coincidences, i know. But who were the people who gave their name to this region and most probably lived there longer?

Western scholar attitude: What may not be, can not be. Turk is a name that can not have been existed in that time. Ok. There should be a serious work and not only: it is not possible. Yes. But: TURK is not a name that we could find "accidentally" and "coincidentally" anywhere, either. UzunbacakAdem (talk) 10:55, 4 June 2023 (UTC) Uzunbacak Adem[reply]

This has nothing to do with "western scholar attitude". This was a local name borne by a small number of persons in Roman Italy hundreds of years before the first appearance of the words that would eventually become "Turk", referring to central Asian people in any source—and that apparently in Chinese history. A single family living in Italy would not have been named for an Asian people who would not even be calling themselves that for several hundred years; there is no plausible connection. There are only so many ways to combine a small number of sounds, and thousands of different names in the varied languages of Roman Italy. There is zero probability of a connection between a Roman named "Lucius Turcius" and the Turks of central Asia just because the names sound alike. P Aculeius (talk) 13:54, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]