Template talk:Tengrism

This template has a half-moon style cross. Actually cross was used as a symbol of Tengrism in the ancient times, long before Christianity. Tengriism cross was equal-armed cross as opposed to the elongated crosses of later Christianity. True Tengrism cross looks like a plus "+" sign. It also reminds the top opening of a Yurta or Ger(Altaic tent). However the cross illustrated in this brown template looks like something Islamic, it does not belong to Tengrism. No half moon may represent Tengrism, especially since Tengriism suffered most from Islam. Reference to Tengrian cross: http://www.americancollegeofheraldry.org/cross.htm --Samdilya (talk) 19:28, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The cover of this book uses the crescent symbol, and it's very common among Russia's Turkic populations, such as the Yakuts, who were never Islamised. It's shown also at the top of this temple they have built. You can find other examples of this symbolism. The cross you make reference to is this symbol. --Schwert von Feuer (talk) 19:47, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response! Very interesting points. At the same time, if some people ever used the crescent relating it to Tengrism, that does not make it correct symbol for it anyway. THe examples you mention seem to be quite modern attempts. People can make mistakes. Equal armed cross is historically relevant to this belief: it was used since ancient times, it makes some obvious sense too - that is how the sky looks from the inside of a Ger or Yurta (ancient Altaic tent). However, there is no any significant meaning or common historical use of the crescent as a symbol of Tengrism. I believe using the crescent as a symbol of Tengrism is a mistake. The Yakut temple is an interesting example. Does it exist in reality or is that just a picture? They seem to get it correct in most of their towers - the crosses, but that one crescent seems to be a mistake on their end. Well, people make mistakes, and that is the whole idea of Tengrism - the absolute truth is inconceivable to humans.--Samdilya (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

this was almost unsalvageable. Apparently, somebody tried to create a "sidebar" template for "all kinds of ethnic revivalist movements of Altaic flavour"? It is open to question whether the suggestive grouping of hardcore chauvinist / ethnic nationalist movements in Turkic Central Asia with laid-back Estonian neopagans makes sense just because they are "Altaic", but fwiiw, I tried to clean this up. This isn't to say this has any conceivable encyclopedic use. Perhaps you should make it about Turkic ethnic nationalism exclusively and explicitly. --dab (𒁳) 12:13, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

also, to Samdilya, it is pretty obvious that user "Schwert von Feuer" is to be treated as purely a primary source, not as an encyclopedic contributor. Also, the above attempts to substantiate the use of the alleged "crescent and pole" symbol for Tengrism by pointing us to a bunch of images that look nothing like the alleged symbol should be enough to establish that the image cannot be used encyclopedically. --dab (𒁳) 12:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)  [reply]