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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedTurks = Mongoloid mix DNA shows

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Attis of Anatolia View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 20-May-2014
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Turks = Mongoloid mix DNA shows
    Posted: 21-May-2014 at 07:24
We have lot of ancestor :D Every our ancestor came from europe to india:))  we are mixed race people :D


people who live Anatolia, they become our ancestor like cimmerians, cimmerians stayed anatolia, we can have their gene...:D



Edited by Attis of Anatolia - 21-May-2014 at 07:26
Back to Top
Ollios View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 22-Feb-2011
Location: Diyar-ı Rum
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1130
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-May-2014 at 12:18
Originally posted by Attis of Anatolia

who are we? islamized Anatolians i believe :D


and Who is Anatolian? Big smile

Even Phyrgians or Hittites were foreign
http://www.karabakh.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/map_phrygian_invasion.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Mass_migration_of_Greece_and_Turkey_in_1900BCE.svg/800px-Mass_migration_of_Greece_and_Turkey_in_1900BCE.svg.png


Ellerin Kabe'si var,
Benim Kabem İnsandır
Back to Top
Attis of Anatolia View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 20-May-2014
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-May-2014 at 07:00
who are we? islamized Anatolians i believe :D
Back to Top
Ollios View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 22-Feb-2011
Location: Diyar-ı Rum
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1130
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2014 at 14:49
Ellerin Kabe'si var,
Benim Kabem İnsandır
Back to Top
Dazzarkel View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 30-Sep-2013
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2014 at 09:31
lol, does it matter who were turks mongoloid or european?)))) they proved themselves to be conquerors many times within history, other than that created bright civilisations many times, moreover their ancestors like hunnenreich etc, also proved themselves to be conquerors and as you know the proverb - "Civilisations never create war, but wars create civilisations", meaning their so much waged wars made world to look better as hunnenreich created what is now europe,nations got rid of rome lordship,JenguizHan and Tamerlane created continental unity,scythe and other nomads preserved eurasia from sinification, you see what is now north korea the sinicized country, even mongolia looks far independant and free from china))))
several times i observe europeans envy for nomads brilliant military past, this proves their narrowmindness
Back to Top
balisong5 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 05-Mar-2014
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Mar-2014 at 18:12
Were the ottoman turks the same as seljuk turks?  Seems to me both are half mongoloid when they first entered turkey
Mr Butler king maybe you can answer my question as you seem to be an authority on all things turk
Back to Top
JuMong View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 89
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Mar-2013 at 15:36
Development of human race is an interesting subject matter. 

There has been a great deal of research done in recent years because of our development of genetic science. Hopefully, we will be able to sort it out. One thing for sure... We all came out of Africa. 

PBS had an interesting 3 part series recently about the deveopment of human race. Search YouTube. You would find a lot of interesting series between History Channel, Nat Geo and PBS.

Research. :-) 


There was an interesting show on Nat Geo recently...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkexKLCak5M




Edited by JuMong - 16-Mar-2013 at 15:37
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2013 at 15:44
Again your assuming Turks were Mongoloid to start with. 

Being from the Eurasian steppe a Caucasoid/Mongoloid mix is to be expected, it's where the shift happens. 

If you look at descriptions of Gokturks they don't look like Chinese folk, in fact Chinese clearly said they have beards, coloured eyes and were different colours. 

The reason for this confusion IMO is mistaking the descendants of the Mongol Empire with the Turks which preceded them. 

The theory that people in Anatolia stopped speaking their native tongues one day and became fully fledged Turks the next is a preposterous theory which has just been accepted but rarely scrutinised. 

How could a few semi/nomadic Turks from Central Asia ride into Anatolia and have city folk at the drop of a hat become Turks. Especially considering there were no mass assimilation attempts, I mean Turks weren't even too bothered teaching Turkish and like to learn languages like Arabic and Persian themselves. 

Consider most city folk consider non city folk especially nomads especially in that era to be uncivilised savages why on Earth would there be such a mass identity change? and to mass convert religion! did the clergy go on holiday for a few centuries or something.

By the 1300's Europeans were describing Anatolia as Turchia - land of the Turks.  

It's much more plausible that Turks prior to the Mongols looked more like todays Turkmenistan/Oghuz Turks then Mongols. And that there were mass migrations into Anatolia of Turks fleeing. War especially that kind result in mass exoduses of people, it also explains why Turks would uproot and move West. 

Consider there are more Turks in Turkey/Azerbaijan/Iran then all of central asia put together.

 
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Ollios View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 22-Feb-2011
Location: Diyar-ı Rum
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1130
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2012 at 12:27
Originally posted by Vdkn67


Santa was once a real person: a Turkish bishop called Nicholas of Myra.


In this sample term Turkish is just for emphasizing his place origin, not ethnic identity. However as Nick said before term Roman chould be more proper.

Christmas is not widely celebrated in the Muslim nation of Turkey.



How can you be sure that you don't have any bias? We don't need to celebrate Christmas/Noel for Santa. Urban Turks celebrate new year as Christians celebrate Noel 24-25th December.

*The most turkey sells happen in December, because it is common new year dishes in cities.
*New year raffles are very common between classmates. They give presents each other.
*Lighting of streets are very popular in this time of year.
*I wish, I can able to send you a dwarf models pictures in one of the shopping centre in my city.
*A goverment advert in my city
"New year is the time of planting trees, not time of cutting". This is for prevent the illegal tree cuts
*I am not talking about my aunt plastic pine tree which was near 2 meters.
http://statics.magazinkolik.com/Images/news/e/v/emir_berke_noelbaba.jpg A turkish boy with Santa

http://i.ekolay.net/g/2012/5/6/Noel-Baba--taksim--beyo%C4%9Flu--y%C4%B1lba%C5%9F%C4%B1--polis_f39b3058-21ae-4757-83bd-a7affbe6e9fa_4_B4013E6D-1957-4112-BA6E-31B3B72E2F0F.jpg civil polices are making sample operation. They wil be Santa and catch the pickpockets

http://i.ensonhaber.com/resimler/diger/esh8119_6.jpg
but of course there are some protests agaist these acts


Ellerin Kabe'si var,
Benim Kabem İnsandır
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2012 at 19:31
Originally posted by Vdkn67

Originally posted by Nick1986

You've broken no rules so far Vdkn67, but in my experience, threads of this type often turn into flame wars. All members are reminded to respect each other, regardless of whether they agree or not

Ok, this is not my first forum, so I will answer quoting your another post:
Santa was once a real person: a Turkish bishop called Nicholas of Myra.

I am quite sure that this is sentence from daily papers in Great Britain, and it is main reason why I am sarcastic about "connection of this forum with history" This sentence on internet forum seems as propaganda for daily politic use, and has nothing with history learned anywhere in the world, except among "internet warriors"
See, first Oghuz Turks appeared in that region seven centuries later. During life of St. Nicholas that region was called Λυκία (Lycia),  and was populated by Indo-European speakers. (probably Greek or Lycian speakers). Not to mention that "Turkish bishop" is oxymoron: there are no "bishops" in Turkic religion of that time (Tengrism). There are no "bishops" even later, when they adopted Islam, at least four centuries later. So I can understand "Turkish shaman", or "Turkish imam" but I can not understand what is "Turkish bishop".
Now, we came to "disrespect of other co-forumers": How can I respect anybody who posts biased posts, without any respect to history? I am really sorry that I found ignorant quoting BBC articles or wikipedia  as reliable sources.
This search results could be example how ancient Myra was "Turkish"
https://www.google.com/search?q=myra+coins&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=gQu&tbo=u&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=fflb&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=VRrbUKXRI8XNsgaa0oDgCg&ved=0CFQQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=629
Now, if I was not clear about bias, this is quote from  more recent daily news, of course British :
He denies the request is aimed at boosting tourism for the region but says it is simply a human wish.Christmas is not widely celebrated in the Muslim nation of Turkey.


Even moderators make mistakes. Regarding the other topic on Santa Claus, i would change "Turkish" to "Roman" if it was possible, but the forum's software is designed to prevent members editing such old topics as this has been abused in the past
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2012 at 11:00
Originally posted by Nick1986

You've broken no rules so far Vdkn67, but in my experience, threads of this type often turn into flame wars. All members are reminded to respect each other, regardless of whether they agree or not

Ok, this is not my first forum, so I will answer quoting your another post:
Santa was once a real person: a Turkish bishop called Nicholas of Myra.

I am quite sure that this is sentence from daily papers in Great Britain, and it is main reason why I am sarcastic about "connection of this forum with history" This sentence on internet forum seems as propaganda for daily politic use, and has nothing with history learned anywhere in the world, except among "internet warriors"
See, first Oghuz Turks appeared in that region seven centuries later. During life of St. Nicholas that region was called Λυκία (Lycia),  and was populated by Indo-European speakers. (probably Greek or Lycian speakers). Not to mention that "Turkish bishop" is oxymoron: there are no "bishops" in Turkic religion of that time (Tengrism). There are no "bishops" even later, when they adopted Islam, at least four centuries later. So I can understand "Turkish shaman", or "Turkish imam" but I can not understand what is "Turkish bishop".
Now, we came to "disrespect of other co-forumers": How can I respect anybody who posts biased posts, without any respect to history? I am really sorry that I found ignorant quoting BBC articles or wikipedia  as reliable sources.
This search results could be example how ancient Myra was "Turkish"
https://www.google.com/search?q=myra+coins&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=gQu&tbo=u&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=fflb&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=VRrbUKXRI8XNsgaa0oDgCg&ved=0CFQQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=629
Now, if I was not clear about bias, this is quote from  more recent daily news, of course British :
He denies the request is aimed at boosting tourism for the region but says it is simply a human wish.Christmas is not widely celebrated in the Muslim nation of Turkey.

Back to Top
Ollios View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 22-Feb-2011
Location: Diyar-ı Rum
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1130
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Dec-2012 at 12:43
Originally posted by Vdkn67


Ottoman Empire was not national state of Turks.
 
After collapse of Ottoman Empire, on 24.July 1923. Turkey was recognized as national state of Turks.


Yes, but just for ottoman goverment, most of people in Ottoman didn't know Ottoman Turkish. Even there were two different literature cultures in same empire. one for goverment (Divan/Ottoman literature), one for Turks (Turkish folk literature). Ottoman Empire didn't become Turkish state just in one night or one day (24 July 1923). It has deep roots.

Originally posted by Vdkn67


Sultan was God`s agent on earth


Is it? Ottoman Sultans didn't have a power like Pope. They needed the confirmation of Shaykh al-Islām

Originally posted by Vdkn67


If this attitude insults anybody, then seems this forum is not right place for me.


Speaking on web is different than speaking face to face. People are easily becoming rude on net. Just your word ("I thought this forum is somehow connected to history") is unnessary and sarcastic but please don't stop let us know your ideas, we need all other opinions Wink

For example I don't know the date of 24 July 1923. We don't celebrate it. With your help, I know it now. It is date of Treaty of Lausanne. Big smile
Ellerin Kabe'si var,
Benim Kabem İnsandır
Back to Top
SultanHaluk View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 19-Sep-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Dec-2012 at 08:00
Very interesting. Where did these data come from? What were the sample sizes?

In Turkey I personally consider the majority of the people to be 'Turks of convenience' (no offence intended), the descendants of assimilated peoples who nowadays think they are Turks. The same point has already been made. Turkic types I notice, empirically, predominate in certain regions, which are as you would expect, centres of the Ottoman influence. Istanbul has many more "asiatic" types in evidence to my mind, than say, Izmir, and furthermore a particular "look" that says to me Ottoman. I can't quite describe it (perhaps look at Tolga Zengin, to see what I mean). I am not counting the immigrant Uzbeks and Turkmens (they are quite easy to spot), but perhaps 1 in 20/30 of the Istanbullus would not look out of place at a Tokyo street cafe, or an Almaty disco. Other types could easily pass for Native American. Other places where the type is quite evident might include Adyin, Konya, Bursa, parts of the east black sea coast. Among my own relatives are types that could be easily mistaken as Japanese (others as British!).

NB. Japanese specifically, because they are different of course to Chinese, SE Asians, etc., who look little like Turks, generally having flatter noses and rounder features.

By the same token, elsewhere I notice entire towns of fair-eyed, long-faced Balkan/Dinaric types, with not a suggestion of Asia about them.

So, if you could for the sake of argument, unravel the "real" Oguz-Osmanlis from the "Turks of convenience" that surround them (again, no offence intended) I believe you would find a tribe of a far more asiatic genotype than the data on the OP suggests. The point being, that at some point the Oguz that migrated to Anatolia with their pointy hats and steppe ponies, were of some asiatic predominance (with Persian mixture presumably), very close to the altaic types, and not some crazy mixture of Greek, Circassian and Albanian. They did suffer of course, from a weakness for exotic western beauties (still do!), and apparently cared little about preserving their "purity". Hence even these types are nowadays inevitably hybridised to some degree and the face of the original Oguz-Osmanlis may forever be gone.

I avoid using the word Mongoloid, because it confuses people who keep thinking Turks look mongoloid because of contact with Mongols. This surely did happen, but I am guessing that the actual Mongolian contribution to Turkey's gene pool to be rather negligible, since they were not there long, apparently did not settle in significant numbers and a great part of the "Mongol" armies were made up of Turkic vassals.


Edited by SultanHaluk - 24-Dec-2012 at 08:10
Truth is a matter of perspective.
Back to Top
MrButlerKing View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai

Banned

Joined: 15-Nov-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 100
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Dec-2012 at 23:33
It's not South Asian.

It originated from Pashtun, Burusho, Dardic ect people


Edited by MrButlerKing - 23-Dec-2012 at 23:33
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Dec-2012 at 14:05
You've broken no rules so far Vdkn67, but in my experience, threads of this type often turn into flame wars. All members are reminded to respect each other, regardless of whether they agree or not
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Dec-2012 at 13:37
Originally posted by Nick1986

Originally posted by Vdkn67

Originally posted by Ollios


The term Turk means mostly Anatolian Turks.

No, this was introduced in 1923, when Turkey decided to be national state of Turks.
I thought this forum is somehow connected to history.

There's no need for that sort of attitude Vdkn67. Ollios is a valued member here and deserves respect. If anything he says offends you (unintentional, or deliberate), don't insult him but notify the admins:
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6512&PID=681123#681123

What was insulting in my post???? What sentence showed my disrespect???
How did I insult him????
Let me be clear:
Ottoman Empire was not national state of Turks. Sultan was God`s agent on earth, his purpose was to defend and propagate religion. Theocracy. Inhabitants were differed by religion, Muslims and non-Mulsims (gyaurs, rayah).
After collapse of Ottoman Empire, on 24.July 1923. Turkey was recognized as national state of Turks.
By analogy, Arabs live all over north Africa, Middle East etc. Would it be false to say: "The term Arab means mostly Arab from United Arab Emirates".
If this attitude insults anybody, then seems this forum is not right place for me.
edited:
When you say Americans, we understand not all people of North and South Americans, just one nation.

Of course, I also spit on this sentence, as it means nothing. I can not imagine "American" nation, by any definition of nation last 100 years.


 



Edited by Vdkn67 - 23-Dec-2012 at 13:48
Back to Top
Ollios View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 22-Feb-2011
Location: Diyar-ı Rum
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1130
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Dec-2012 at 01:56
Originally posted by Vdkn67


this was introduced in 1923, when Turkey decided to be national state of Turks.


*Was it? Why people in Europe, use this idiom, "Mamma li Turchi". Is this idiom came from after 1923? No, people of Europe always accept Ottomans as Turk

*When you say Americans, we understand not all people of North and South Americans, just one nation. It is quite similar thing. You should use Kazaks or Kazak Turks, if you want to mean them. 

Originally posted by Vdkn67


I thought this forum is somehow connected to history.


This is not an acedemic forum. We all can have mistakes. Even you can also share your ideas.
Ellerin Kabe'si var,
Benim Kabem İnsandır
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Dec-2012 at 13:56
Originally posted by Vdkn67

Originally posted by Ollios


The term Turk means mostly Anatolian Turks.

No, this was introduced in 1923, when Turkey decided to be national state of Turks.
I thought this forum is somehow connected to history.

There's no need for that sort of attitude Vdkn67. Ollios is a valued member here and deserves respect. If anything he says offends you (unintentional, or deliberate), don't insult him but notify the admins:
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6512&PID=681123#681123
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Dec-2012 at 16:58
Originally posted by Ollios


The term Turk means mostly Anatolian Turks.

No, this was introduced in 1923, when Turkey decided to be national state of Turks.
I thought this forum is somehow connected to history.
Back to Top
balochii View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 699
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2012 at 12:58
Hi Mr butler, do you have the same chart for south asian populations from Pakistan/India?

I want to see all the south asian populations, I believe the Dark green is (ANI) Ancestral north indian, this component even though it;s called Indian, it really not.  It is found highest in afghan and northern pakistani populations like Pashtuns, but as you can see even central asians have a lot of it, this dark green component defiantly did not originate in south asia, maybe south/central asian region, but definatly not in what we call (India) today which is proper south asia


Edited by balochii - 19-Dec-2012 at 13:01
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

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 0.063 seconds.