Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Were the Turks oriental looking?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
NJ Chutzpah View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 30-Aug-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote NJ Chutzpah Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Were the Turks oriental looking?
    Posted: 30-Aug-2007 at 22:19
were the turks oriental looking
Back to Top
elenos View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
  Quote elenos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2007 at 22:24
Try asking a Turk!
elenos
Back to Top
Byzantine Emperor View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Kastrophylax kai Tzaousios

Joined: 24-May-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1800
  Quote Byzantine Emperor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2007 at 22:28
Originally posted by NJ Chutzpah

were the turks oriental looking
 
I am sure, if you used the search function (Search%20The%20ForumSearch), you would find a thousand different perspectives on this question.  Did you in fact use the search?
 
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8596
  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2007 at 22:50

Good reminder BE. Search will lead to many of these kind of topics.

In short,
 
In regards to racial features of the ancients we most likely would rely on old manuscripts. Those, in turn, are often written about in books and found in artistic representations left today.
 
When it comes to european Hun's we most likely have the widest possiblity for speculative assumptions. That being said, and I don't have my references handy at the moment; Most Chinese depictions of Mongols, for instance, have them with oriental features. Recently I saw a book with artwork from the sub-continent. The early Moguls had Indian features. Yet, wood cuts from westerners had Kublai Khan looking Caucasian. Kublai wore a beard. Genghis had red hair. Means nothing yet something.
 
Huns, Mongols, and Turks had asiatic features. They also were at midpoint between China and Iran; Europeans and Middle Easterners were also added to the genepool depending on location. Thus a mixture is most likely.
 
Today's Turkmen and a large portion of Turkey Turks will have more Caucasian features then a Kazakh. Is that because the western Oughuz Turks mixed with Caucasians more or because thats how those Turks looked in the old days? Even Uighers, in China, have Caucasian features. Yet Turkmen, Turk and Uigher all share very obvious Asian features as well. High cheekbones and slanted eyes to some degree comes to mind. Another way to look at the Kazakhs is to view their history. Why are they more Asian in appearance? Perhaps due to being actually Turkified Mongols or was/is it due to living in the east? You be the judge. This is a never ending question and the speculation will continue.


Edited by Seko - 30-Aug-2007 at 22:55
Back to Top
kamran View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 10-Aug-2007
Location: Pakistan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote kamran Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2007 at 08:57
What do you mean by "were"????
 
Most of the central Asian Turks are still "oriental" (i.e.,  Chinoid in facial and physical features).
Back to Top
barbar View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 10-Aug-2005
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 781
  Quote barbar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Sep-2007 at 13:08
Most of the central asians aren't "Oriental" looking, instead they are Central Asian looking.  Turanid should be the right term. About Chinoid you should check the antropological books.
 
Only among the groups among which there was strong Mongol assimilation happen (which is the known fact to all historians)  you can find Tungid influence.   
 
Either make a history or become a history.
Back to Top
kamran View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 10-Aug-2007
Location: Pakistan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote kamran Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Sep-2007 at 08:35
"instead they are Central Asian looking"
 
What is the difference in facial features between a Kazak and a Korean???
What sets an Uzbek apart from a Japanese or Chinese???? Tell me sir.
Back to Top
DayI View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
  Quote DayI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Sep-2007 at 08:38
their looks.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Sep-2007 at 09:14

some turks mixes with mongols espeacially in time of cengiz han and later tamerlan

Back to Top
kamran View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 10-Aug-2007
Location: Pakistan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote kamran Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Sep-2007 at 03:04
Originally posted by DayI

their looks.
 
 
That is exactly what I asked. What is the difference in looks between a Chinese and a Kazak?????
Back to Top
kamran View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 10-Aug-2007
Location: Pakistan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote kamran Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Sep-2007 at 02:32
What is the facial difference between a Yakut Turk and a Tibetan.  Ostesibly no. Both are "rounded.'
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613
  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Sep-2007 at 05:36
Originally posted by kamran

"instead they are Central Asian looking"
 
What is the difference in facial features between a Kazak and a Korean???
What sets an Uzbek apart from a Japanese or Chinese???? Tell me sir.
You can certainly can tell the difference between a Uzbek and a Japanese or any other east Asian person.

Can you tell me the difference between azeri an Vietnamese? or a (Anatolian) turk and a Burmese?Clown
Back to Top
kamran View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 10-Aug-2007
Location: Pakistan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote kamran Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Sep-2007 at 03:11
An Azeri looks like any West Asian -- Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian etc.,whereas a  Vietnamese has rounded featues like a Chinese, Korean etc. with a touch richer complexion.
 
An Anatolian Turk again looks like any Syrian or Iraqi with typically long West Asiatic face; whereas a Burmese has rounded features like a Japanese,  or  Chinese.


Edited by kamran - 15-Sep-2007 at 03:22
Back to Top
Byzantine Emperor View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Kastrophylax kai Tzaousios

Joined: 24-May-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1800
  Quote Byzantine Emperor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Sep-2007 at 20:56
Originally posted by kamran

What is the difference in facial features between a Kazak and a Korean???
What sets an Uzbek apart from a Japanese or Chinese???? Tell me sir.

Originally posted by kamran

That is exactly what I asked. What is the difference in looks between a Chinese and a Kazak?????

Originally posted by kamran

What is the facial difference between a Yakut Turk and a Tibetan.

Either you are using the Socratic method, trying to make a rhetorical statement, or both, by asking so many questions.  Please try to make the topic more meaningful by adding more to the discussion.
 
What is the purpose of this thread anyways?  There must be a thousand of these topics in the Ethnic History forum.  Every one of them asks the same "question" about Turks and we get the same predictable arguments over and over again.
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2008 at 06:38
I am from japan. i have met uzbeks and seen kazakhs living here many times.
This is my personal opinion.
 
As a person from east asian point of view. i think many of the kazakhs look identical or similar to any japanese alive today. Well theres also many kinds of japanese appearances (from southeast asian, to northeast asian look, some japanese even look latinamerican indians.) But in particular  the pale skined and small eyed type of japanese look like identical to pale and small eyed type of kazakhs. There are also those kazaks who look like they are a half-white/half-asian. or a quarter white. some kind of asian/white mix like that.  In any case just lookin at our common facial features, as an east asian I realize that we are "asian genetically" in common with kazaks. Kazaks
 
As for uzbeks i felt that they have more white features compared to kazaks, but still looked to me like a "mixed white/japanese" looking face. 
 
There is also some turkish from turkey that were famous in japan. the soccer player Ilhan was very popular here and he was recruited to join Kobes team, but quit. Many Japanese people think Ilhan looks like a half white/half japanese mixed guy and he was considered very good looking by the japanese girls.
 
I guess the further you go westward the Asian faces become more mixed with White features. But I clearly notice Turks and Mongols are our "Asian brothers" in  general sense.
Asashoryu is a Mongolian wrestler who became sumo champion in Japan. And we all agree his face looks totally Japanese. In the distant past, before Turks and Mongols existed the many of the Japanese ancestors came from ancient Altaic roots which is the origins of Turks and Mongols too. So thats why many of us Japanese, Koreans, Mongolians, Turks look identical physically.
Back to Top
Sukhbaatar View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 28-May-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Sukhbaatar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2008 at 16:53

I am Mongolian, living in australia. In this multi-ethnic society I've come in contact with central-asians, east-asians, and south-east asians. I have to say the difference is very visible, it's so obvious and for me it's very easy to tell a chinese or korean fella from a filipino or an altaic (turk/mongol).

I see similarities sure, but the diversity is there and it's obvious at least for me and if you meet enough of them. On topic I do not agree in any of these opinions. 17th century European classifications of race has already been proven skeptical, further attempts to class subsections of the "Mongoloid race" is also controversial and debates are made to this day.
 
As my family and I are central-asian, myself mixed with Mongolic/Slavic/Turkic/Tungid blood, I see both East-Asians and Westerners pulling us to one side or the other due to the diversity of our family. We hate it, and heck we see the same thing in Altaic history especially if you look at Turkey, and we hate it too.
 
With stuff like "You are Mongoloid", "You are Caucasiod", "You are mixed Mongoloid and Caucasiod", "You're not pureblood Mongoloid" etc etc - and it's so damn annoying.
 
Why do we have to side with one or the other? We are Altai, to hell with foreign thinking. We are who we are, forget this stupid "tug of war". Central-Asia is the home of many nomads, and hell even some believe that our ethnic traits are native, not as a result from grand intermixing with others (excluding Turkey)
 
According to racialist philosophy, my father sure looks mixed "Mongoloid and Caucasoid" due to my slavic grandma, but her heart was 100% Altaic as a Tatar descendant. I consider myself pureblood Altaic, and reject both foreign Western or Eastern attempts to claim us. Meh, just my two cents.
Back to Top
omshanti View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 02-Nov-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 429
  Quote omshanti Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2008 at 17:45
I don't think any body is trying to claim you.
Looking at an animal and trying to identify its origin, breed or mixture doesn't mean that you are trying to claim it. It is just that with humans,  personal emotions, inferiority/superiority complex and political correctness become involved and people can not look at the issue with a certain distance and objectivity as they do with other species.
Regarding the topic at hand. I am half Japanese half Iranian and I certainly do look ''Central Asian''.  When I was in Iran people always thought that I am either a Hazara Afghan or a Turkmen. In Japan people simply thought I am half European half east Asian. In Europe or America people thought that I am Latin American.
Saying that a people of a region are a mix, does not imply that they are not native, it simply means that the region they inhabit is (in the case of central Asia) a border-region between different types of humans  and therefore the people are the results of mixing between those different types of humans.  It is like two branches of a tree fusing with each other in one part of the tree.

Back to Top
Sukhbaatar View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 28-May-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Sukhbaatar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2008 at 18:21
Unlike animals, we are not breeds or species. Our features may vary - but it does not make us more or less the person we are as individuals. This is an issue perhaps - but an issue the majority of NON Central-Asians seem to share, no offense but it's just from experience.
 
I'm tired of the racial classifications that people give us pulling us to one side or the next when we just want to be who we are. I hope you can understand this. And why just two branches and not a third? Why are we classed into either just two categories and us being "blurred" - we don't have a branch of our own, we are considered 'mixed', and it's irritating.
 
Just so you know as well - recessive genes can come out generations later, not just on the immediate generation. Pureblood Mongolians are sometimes born with rather contrasting features from their immediate parents. This is genetics, it's a science I support, but not racialism - as that "science" doesn't even make SENSE for our people. Peace
Back to Top
Efraz View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2008
Location: Istanbul
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 151
  Quote Efraz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2008 at 18:39
If you mean "Asian looking" by oriental. Yes some Turks still have that look, some have lost it.  Some have less, some more... Originally Turks should have had an Asian look.

But it's not very reasonable to look for pure DNAs in nomadic cultures. There are blond Turks that you can not discern from a Swedish man, and there are Arabic looking, and Tartaric looking Turks even solely in Turkey.  I know these rich patterns are valid in most Turkish and Turkic nations and groups.

Today you can discern a Turk by language. Which is a healthy approach.

Nothing to make a big fuss about.
Back to Top
Sukhbaatar View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 28-May-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Sukhbaatar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2008 at 18:47

It's important to note too that our nomadic nations including gokturk and mongol empires traditionally were never founded by the way we looked but by spirit and lifestyle. The heart makes a person not the blood, unless of course you are descendant of the great Khaan heh

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.