Race of Turkish people

Can we use the word "ethnicity" instead of the word "race" - since races don't exist, the American Anthropological Assossiacian came to this conclusion in 1994:
"...In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species...." http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

This aside, the Turks in Turkey have only like 13 % Asiatic genes, so this means that only a small group of Central Asian people came to Anatolia, and in time Turkefied everyone there. Therefore, the Central Asian contribution is small, and not in teh scale of massive emigration - rather, the Turks assimilated linguistically and culturally whoever was there. Here is a wiki artucle that can be used as a start of a research on the topic.

"...It is difficult to understand the complex cultural and demographic dynamics of the Turkic speaking groups that have shaped the Anatolian landscape for the last millennium.^[103] During the Bronze Age the population of Anatolia expanded, reaching an estimated level of 12 million during the late Byzantine Empire period. Such a large pre-existing Anatolian population would have reduced the impact by the subsequent arrival of Turkic speaking groups from Seljuk Persia, whose ethno-linguistic roots could be traced back to the eastern coast of the Caspian Sea basin in Central Asia.^[104][105] The Seljuk Turks were the main Turkic people who moved into Anatolia, starting from the Battle of Manzikert in 1071.^[106][107] Around 1 million Turkic migrants settled in Anatolia during the 12th and 13th centuries.^[108]

The question of to what extent a gene flow from Central Asia, via Persia, to Anatolia has contributed to the current gene pool of the Turkish people, and the role of the 11th century invasion by Seljuk Turks, has been the subject of several studies. A 2010 publication by Prof. Inci Togan and co-workers based on mitochondrial and Y-chromosome DNA estimated a 13% Central Asian genetic contribution to Anatolia.^[109] A 2011 study reveals the impossibility of long-term, and continuing genetic contacts between Anatolia and Siberia, and confirms the presence of significant mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome divergence between this regions, with minimal admixture. The research confirms also the lack of mass migration with correlative archeological, historical, and linguistic data, and suggests that it was irregular punctuated migration events that engendered large-scale shifts in language and culture among Anatolia's diverse autochthonous inhabitants.^{[110]..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_people}

I try to be very careful with the name "Caucasian", because it has been much misused; but talking in general,  yes, the Turks are Caucasians. Now there are Turkic peoples, living in Central Asia, like the Uyghurs in China
the Uzbeks,

 Kazaghs

who have more or less Central Asian phenotypes - but they are not to be mixed with the Anatolian Turks, Turks in Turkey, or Turks on Balkan countries like Bulgaria. In Bulgaria /for which I can personally account/ one cannot make a difference between Bulgarian and Turk, they are both Mediterranean phenotypes; some Turks are with blue eyes, and in Rodopa Mountain area - even with blond hair.

HLA-DRB1 allele frequencies


HLA-A, - B, -DRB1 and DQ allele frequencies

@DonQuixote: I have seen somewhere another study which reckoned a 30% central Asian contribution to Anatolian peoples. This, in the scale of things is quite enormous, when you consider: Anatolia was fertile, civilised and well populated before the Turks arrived, the distances these people had travelled, overland, and the world population was much lower in the 12th century. (1m then was probably worth about 30m in today's money). The Ottomans made an industry of importing people from the Balkans and the Caucasus though, and this has probably weakened their predominance.

@OP: The question I am afraid is flawed. By Mongolian you must mean Mongoloid i.e East Asian. White itself is a poor ethnic category, implying as it does a western/northern European type. Turkey, being such a melting pot, contains caucasian types such as Armenians who can be quite dark and Persians  too, Balkan Slavs, Greeks, Syrians and Circassians and Kurds. So, no such homogenous race exists in Turkey. There may, in 10 or 20 generations time...
In the purest ethnological terms the population overall would have to be categorised majority caucasoid/minority mongoloid. Approx 87:13, if the data are correct, although I have seen reports it may be as much as 70:30. Negroid, Australoid, Capoid can all be considered so negligible as absent.

Honestly, people are so diverse in Turkey you can have a group of siblings, one looking Irish, one Japanese, one Iranian and one Greek. It's kinda crazy.

As to whether the Seljuks Mamluks and Ottomans were of the same race, I think it is fair to say that at some point they shared common ancestry. Whether that was in northern Iran, central Asian steppes or Altai mountains I could not guess. Possibly all three.

The Mamluks seem to have existed right through the Seljuk and Ottoman periods (which were in succession). I would say that the Mamluks and Ottomans, both contained or assimilated Caucasus peoples as well as Turks, and so were of a similar stock recipe. The Seljuks were probably more Persian/Turk as their homeland was in Persia. However, the Mamluks, being based in Egypt will certainly have had interesting interactions with Arabs, Berbers, Bedouins, and Negroids, over time creating a much divergent caste from the Anatolians I would guess.

The recipes, as far as I can tell go like this:

Seljuk: Oguz Turk + Persian (and eventually Anatolian natives)
Ottoman: Oguz Turk + Persian + caucasian (and eventually Europeans and Arabs)
Mamluk: Kipchak Turk + caucasian (and eventually Africans and Arabs)





Edited by SultanHaluk - 24-Dec-2012 at 19:32

Here to give an idea, take a look at this photo of Turkish people picked randomly from the net. Note: this is taken in Belgium, not Turkey.

I have numbered a few of the characters and underneath list what I consider they could pass as or possibly are.

1. A Balkan type. Could be Greek, Albanian, Bulgarian or mixture of all.
2. Persian type, possibly Kurd. Could also pass for Afghan or Pakistani though...
3. What I call a Turkmen type (not necessarily from Turkmenistan though)
4. Syrian/Arab predominantly, though it's very likely she has some Turkic/Persian/Armenian micture too.
5. Could pass for a Bolivian mestiza. Judging by the Turkish flag she's wearing she is not though. Very much altaic Turkic type I would say. Note: Altaics are reckoned to be closest old-world relatives of native Americans, ethnologically and genetically.
6. Interesting. My money is on Georgian, Caucasian, or Laz mixture. Probably from Black Sea.
7. Is typically Iranoid to my mind, although a type also common in Turkmenistan.
8. Has that "stereotypical Turkish" look. Probably a mixture of all kinds of Balkans, Turks, Iranian going on there.
9. A type found very commonly in Turkey. I hesitate, could be Balkan or Black Sea Anatolian.
10. Somewhere between Greek and Persian (that's where Turkey is!)

I might also add that the lady next to number 4 reminds me somewhat of the Crimean Tatars I have met, but honestly she could be anything and quite possibly the mother of number 3.

Hopefully this gives an idea of how diverse Turkish people are, and that there is no definable Turkish race. What is funny is however accurate I may be, these people may have radically different ancestors in their gene pool and parents/siblings that look wildly different. In any case, I don't think you can seriously lump these people in with Spaniards, Italians and Greeks and call them "southern European types". That's just part of the story.

Also, I am guessing from the flags, that nearly all these people self-identify as "Turks", while many of them clearly have little or no Turkic lineage. This highlights the nonsense of demographic statistics of Turkey which list 80% Turkish, 20% Kurd. It's totally unrepresentative and ignores all the other ethnicities.





Edited by SultanHaluk - 24-Dec-2012 at 20:38

Originally posted by Menumorut As from other of your guessings, I think that most of these types existed in Anatolia before the Ottomans.

Yes, I guess so and even before the Seljuks. I believe Armenians, Kurds/Iranians, Anatolian Greeks, Laz, Galician Celts, Byzantine Romans and Assyrians were all knocking around before then.


Edited by SultanHaluk - 25-Dec-2012 at 06:40

Originally posted by tentionfree "Ethnicity" is a better term. Races do exist, but the term applies more generally to groups of vaguely similar ethnicity and culture: Whites, Blacks, Semites, Native Americans, Polynesians, Asians, and Mongoloids

I know of the human race, what other races are there?

Edited by TheAlaniDragonRising - 15-Jan-2013 at 23:59

Originally posted by Venkytalks I wonder when we will leave our obsession with ethnicity behind.

Was it because of human egoism in Babylon? It is curse which came from God as legends say. I am sure that if there will be a world which was cleaned from all ethnic problems, there will be another problems like political polarization. It is hard to believe a totally peace future. Even we can fight for football.


Edited by Ollios - 16-Jan-2013 at 11:10

Originally posted by Nick1986 A "race" comprises several ethnicities with similar blood, physical appearance, or culture: Blacks (Africa, southern India, Australia) Whites (Mediterranean, Nordic, Slavic, Semitic, Turkish, Iranian, Pakistani) Native Americans (Northern and Southern America) Far Eastern (Chinese, Japanese, Southeast Asian) Mongoloid (Mongols, Tatars, Siberians)

Those looking at it from a scientific point of view might beg to differ

I beg to differ. That races don't exist is a genetically proven fact; and that people love to falll in love and enthusiasticaly engage in all kinds of sex with people from different ethnicities is a fact old as the world.

There are some cultural and political restraints to such love stories, which doesn't mean nothing else but that traditional cultures are quite affected by different varieties of bias, which is a result not of natural divisions, but of human cultural ones.

Of course as long as there are people to defend this bias it will exist, most lamentably.