|
Post by balamir on Jan 10, 2007 17:39:16 GMT 3
My question is for Mongolian members, Most of the Mongols ý spoke in Internet was thinking Turks are a Iranic nation and only living in Turkey,also they are not steppe.
In Mongolia,history lessons show us as Iranian? :-/I always wondered about this.
|
|
|
Post by Atabeg on Jan 12, 2007 0:43:34 GMT 3
Hmm when did you went to school on mongolia?
|
|
|
Post by balamir on Jan 12, 2007 17:37:19 GMT 3
Hmm when did you went to school on mongolia? I didn't go ;D,ý meant could Mongolian members who went to school in Mongolia answer my question?May be my english is problem?
|
|
|
Post by altaicmongol on Jan 30, 2007 12:53:52 GMT 3
My question is for Mongolian members, Most of the Mongols ý spoke in Internet was thinking Turks are a Iranic nation and only living in Turkey,also they are not steppe. In Mongolia,history lessons show us as Iranian? :-/I always wondered about this. I only lived in Mongolia for four years, so I do not know much about the education system. But most intelligent, well-educated Mongolian historians know that Turks are the progenitors of Mongols, just like the Hunnu were the ancestors to the Turk confederation and the later Mongol confederation. Most Mongolians are very ignorant, much like most people in the world, and think that Turk is a different kind of strange people from the west who practice Islam and speak some strange alien tongue. I am not like most Mongolians, so I know that Turk is not a race, or even an ethnic group! It was a confederation, much like the Huns, to unite the people of the steppes to claim supremacy over the civilized people. Since the GokTurks were the most powerful and influential steppe confederations, most Altaic people speak a Turkic language. Most Turks adopted Islam after the Mongols lost the war against the Muslims in the Middle East. The Turkic nations of Kazakstan and Kyrgyzstan are our direct cousins. They are the descendents of Genghis Khan's soldiers who invaded Central Asia and solidified the Chagatai Empire. Anatolian Turks are basically post-Byzantine people who were annexed by the Ottoman Turks, an Altaic people who imposed the Turkish language, culture, and Islamic religion of the people of the former Byzantine Empire. This is the main reason why Turkish people differ greatly from the original Turkic steppe people in Central Asia. They are Europeans who have adopted Altaic language, culture, and traditions and have converted to Islam. Turkic is no longer a confederation as the military steppe times are over. Since the Turks were numerous in number and highly mobile, their presence is everywhere in Eurasia and people influenced by the Turks speak a Turkic language. This is why the Turkic world is so genetically diverse but they all speak a similar language, much like the Anglosphere.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 30, 2007 13:03:07 GMT 3
Anatolian Turks are basically post-Byzantine people who were annexed by the Ottoman Turks, an Altaic people who imposed the Turkish language, culture, and Islamic religion of the people of the former Byzantine Empire. This is the main reason why Turkish people differ greatly from the original Turkic steppe people in Central Asia. They are Europeans who have adopted Altaic language, culture, and traditions and have converted to Islam. This is not very true.
|
|
|
Post by altaicmongol on Jan 30, 2007 13:23:58 GMT 3
Anatolian Turks are basically post-Byzantine people who were annexed by the Ottoman Turks, an Altaic people who imposed the Turkish language, culture, and Islamic religion of the people of the former Byzantine Empire. This is the main reason why Turkish people differ greatly from the original Turkic steppe people in Central Asia. They are Europeans who have adopted Altaic language, culture, and traditions and have converted to Islam. This is not very true. Think again. "The expanding waves of Altaic-speaking nomads involved not only eastern Central Asia, where their genetic contribution is strong, as is shown in figure 7d but also regions farther west, like Iran, Iraq, Anatolia, and the Caucasus, as well as Europe, which was reached by both the Huns and the Mongols. In these western regions, however, the GENETIC CONTRIBUTION is low or undetectable (Wells et al. 2001), even though the power of these invaders was sometimes strong enough to impose a LANGUAGE REPLACEMENT, as in Turkey and Azerbaijan (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994). The difference could be due to the population density of the different geographical areas. Eastern regions of Central Asia must have had a low population density at the time, so an external contribution could have had a great genetic impact. In contrast, the western regions were more densely inhabited, and it is likely that the existing populations were more numerous than the conquering nomads, therefore leading to only a small genetic impact. Thus, the admixture estimate from northeast Asia is high in the east, but is barely detectable west of Uzbekistan." www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v71n3/023927/023927.html?erFrom=-6182819269366451666GuestPlease, this is the 21st century. Let us use modern science rather than propaganda and religious lies.
|
|
|
Post by altaicmongol on Jan 30, 2007 13:35:48 GMT 3
Anatolian Turks are basically post-Byzantine people who were annexed by the Ottoman Turks, an Altaic people who imposed the Turkish language, culture, and Islamic religion of the people of the former Byzantine Empire. This is the main reason why Turkish people differ greatly from the original Turkic steppe people in Central Asia. They are Europeans who have adopted Altaic language, culture, and traditions and have converted to Islam. This is not very true. Alas, more proof, scientific proof. Flawless. "Analysis of 89 biallelic polymorphisms in 523 Turkish Y chromosomes revealed 52 distinct haplotypes with considerable haplogroup substructure, as exemplified by their respective levels of accumulated diversity at ten short tandem repeat (STR) loci. The major components (haplogroups E3b, G, J, I, L, N, K2, and R1; 94.1%) are shared with European and neighboring Near Eastern populations and contrast with only a minor share of haplogroups related to Central Asian (C, Q and O; 3.4%), Indian (H, R2; 1.5%) and African (A, E3*, E3a; 1%) affinity. The expansion times for 20 haplogroup assemblages was estimated from associated STR diversity. This comprehensive characterization of Y-chromosome heritage addresses many multifaceted aspects of Anatolian prehistory, including: (1) the most frequent haplogroup, J, splits into two sub-clades, one of which (J2) shows decreasing variances with increasing latitude, compatible with a northward expansion; (2) haplogroups G1 and L show affinities with south Caucasus populations in their geographic distribution as well as STR motifs; (3) frequency of haplogroup I, which originated in Europe, declines with increasing longitude, indicating gene flow arriving from Europe; (4) conversely, haplogroup G2 radiates towards Europe; (5) haplogroup E3b3 displays a latitudinal correlation with decreasing frequency northward; (6) haplogroup R1b3 emanates from Turkey towards Southeast Europe and Caucasia and; (7) high resolution SNP analysis provides evidence of a detectable yet weak signal (<9%) of recent paternal gene flow from Central Asia." Less than 9% of the Turkish people descend from the original Central Asian warriors. Last time I checked, that does not count for a majority at all.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 30, 2007 21:16:05 GMT 3
That is a biased, un-thrustable and un-scientific anti-Turkish work which I will not take as a valid evidence. There are too many historical sources prooving that there were mass migrations and mass settlements of Oghuz Turkic clans all over Anatolia, especially in the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries. Areas like Qars, 'Arz-ï Rûm (Erzurum), Diyâr-ï Bäkr (Diyarbakýr which is now mostly Kurdified), Bayburt, Rize, Qastamonu, Anqara, Qonya, Qaraman, Qayseri, Adana-Chuqurova (Cilicia), Marash, Taurus Mountain (Antalya-Mersin), Afyon, Area of Lakes (around Ïsparta), Menderes Valley, Balïkesir-Ida Mountains, Bursa-Biläjik, etc are the regions where entire clans of Türkmens settled down; of course there are more regions, these are just a few examples.
Besides, Christians, Muslims and Jews rarely married with each other during the 11th-18th centuries. As Prof. Dr. Ýlber Ortaylý points out, even Armenians or Greeks with different sects did not marry with each other (like Gregorians, Catholics and Protestants), whereas Armenians, Greeks and Jews also disliked each other quiet a lot. It was starting from the Tanzîmât Reforms Period (1839-1876) when people with different ethnic and religious groups starting mixing. Before the Tanzîmât, marriages between different religious groups were also happening but it was on a low amount because of socio-religious reasons.
On the other hand, there is another fact which is un-known to many Turks: as Prof. Dr. Zeki Velidî Togan points out, during the Mongol Ilkhanid period, thousands of Iranian (mostly Persian) peasants were forcily moved to Anatolia where they settled down and later got Turkified in the urban areas.
|
|
|
Post by altaicmongol on Jan 31, 2007 2:02:03 GMT 3
That is a biased, un-thrustable and un-scientific anti-Turkish work which I will not take as a valid evidence. There are too many historical sources prooving that there were mass migrations and mass settlements of Oghuz Turkic clans all over Anatolia, especially in the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries. Areas like Qars, 'Arz-ï Rûm (Erzurum), Diyâr-ï Bäkr (Diyarbakýr which is now mostly Kurdified), Bayburt, Rize, Qastamonu, Anqara, Qonya, Qaraman, Qayseri, Adana-Chuqurova (Cilicia), Marash, Taurus Mountain (Antalya-Mersin), Afyon, Area of Lakes (around Ïsparta), Menderes Valley, Balïkesir-Ida Mountains, Bursa-Biläjik, etc are the regions where entire clans of Türkmens settled down; of course there are more regions, these are just a few examples. Besides, Christians, Muslims and Jews rarely married with each other during the 11th-18th centuries. As Prof. Dr. Ýlber Ortaylý points out, even Armenians or Greeks with different sects did not marry with each other (like Gregorians, Catholics and Protestants), whereas Armenians, Greeks and Jews also disliked each other quiet a lot. It was starting from the Tanzîmât Reforms Period (1839-1876) when people with different ethnic and religious groups starting mixing. Before the Tanzîmât, marriages between different religious groups were also happening but it was on a low amount because of socio-religious reasons. On the other hand, there is another fact which is un-known to many Turks: as Prof. Dr. Zeki Velidî Togan points out, during the Mongol Ilkhanid period, thousands of Iranian (mostly Persian) peasants were forcily moved to Anatolia where they settled down and later got Turkified in the urban areas. Dude, this is the classic example of denial and delusion. If the Turks who invaded Anatolia were so huge in number, why did they have to recruit Janissaries from the local populace? How is this unscientific, do you know how DNA works? Are you one of those people who think evolution is BS?
|
|
|
Post by Atabeg on Jan 31, 2007 2:07:07 GMT 3
I'm from the south of the caucasus were Georgians & Turks have alongside eachother for hunderds of years.
First there were aproximetly 40.000 kypchak warriors(and family) settled by the georgian king. Later after Ottoman rule alot of Turks immigrated to that area They are called te Ahiska or meskheti Turks and also Terekemes azeri-speaking semi-nomadic people.
My family is a verry diverse one when it comes to appearance.
Some have blue eyed blond hair(mostly fmale members and small childern "there hair mosly turns darker")
Relativly dark skin with currly hair(Only male members few) but some have even collored eyes.
Most of my family has light skin dark hair and brown & collored eyes(including myself)(Some of my family members show CA charasteristics 'mostly women from mothers fathers side")
My mothers family is verry large they're with 11 childern at home.
(I also want to say most turkish childern have verry asiatic features but they dissapear when they hit puberty or earlier (most childern show this because the nose bridge hasn't devolpet so the have Epicanthal fold(wich means single eye lid)
What I wanted to say is Turkey and other Turks who migrated to the west have intermixed in some degree but most people think the ratio between CA genes & western genes are verry different(According to studies only 15% of Turkey shows CA heritage and only 30% of it) I think this is way higher and yes there are some people who are assimilated but you can't say that specific region are only assimilated europeans.
Massmigrations + Low population + fleeing of local people doesn't equal assimilated europeans.
I think I will take pictures of my Family and post them in order (I wanted to do this for quite a whille and it will take me some time)
EDIT: I must say the western Turks are of the Turko-persian stock since I don't know according to some Xiongnu periode you know Kurghan graves and after the seljuks you can pe pretty shure)
|
|
|
Post by altaicmongol on Jan 31, 2007 2:35:14 GMT 3
I'm from the south of the caucasus were Georgians & Turks have alongside eachother for hunderds of years. First there were aproximetly 40.000 kypchak warriors(and family) settled by the georgian king. Later after Ottoman rule alot of Turks immigrated to that area They are called te Ahiska or meskheti Turks and also Terekemes azeri-speaking semi-nomadic people. My family is a verry diverse one when it comes to appearance. Some have blue eyed blond hair(mostly fmale members and small childern "there hair mosly turns darker") Relativly dark skin with currly hair(Only male members few) but some have even collored eyes. Most of my family has light skin dark hair and brown & collored eyes(including myself)(Some of my family members show CA charasteristics 'mostly women from mothers fathers side") My mothers family is verry large they're with 11 childern at home. (I also want to say most turkish childern have verry asiatic features but they dissapear when they hit puberty or earlier (most childern show this because the nose bridge hasn't devolpet so the have Epicanthal fold(wich means single eye lid) What I wanted to say is Turkey and other Turks who migrated to the west have intermixed in some degree but most people think the ratio between CA genes & western genes are verry different(According to studies only 15% of Turkey shows CA heritage and only 30% of it) I think this is way higher and yes there are some people who are assimilated but you can't say that specific region are only assimilated europeans. Massmigrations + Low population + fleeing of local people doesn't equal assimilated europeans. I think I will take pictures of my Family and post them in order (I wanted to do this for quite a whille and it will take me some time) EDIT: I must say the western Turks are of the Turko-persian stock since I don't know according to some Xiongnu periode you know Kurghan graves and after the seljuks you can pe pretty shure) Dude, we can talk bs all we want, but when it gets to the bottom of it, DNA tells the truth. You can tell me all sorts of unsubstantiated claims and theories or corrupted historical accounts, but if it does not match with the DNA evidence, then it is all pretty much bunk. Also, the former Byzantine Empire had a low population? Please tell me this is a joke. And if the original Turks were so great in number, why did they have to recruit Janissaries from the local populace?
|
|
|
Post by kokturk on Jan 31, 2007 4:27:30 GMT 3
Janissaries were not the main force of the Turkish army. They were few in number and their mission was guarding the emperor. They were chosen among the non-Muslim people, because the main threat to the throne was supposed to be from the Turkmens.
Main army of the Ottoman Empire was called "Týmarlý" and all of them were Turkmens.
|
|
|
Post by altaicmongol on Jan 31, 2007 5:31:11 GMT 3
That is a biased, un-thrustable and un-scientific anti-Turkish work which I will not take as a valid evidence. There are too many historical sources prooving that there were mass migrations and mass settlements of Oghuz Turkic clans all over Anatolia, especially in the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries. Areas like Qars, 'Arz-ï Rûm (Erzurum), Diyâr-ï Bäkr (Diyarbakýr which is now mostly Kurdified), Bayburt, Rize, Qastamonu, Anqara, Qonya, Qaraman, Qayseri, Adana-Chuqurova (Cilicia), Marash, Taurus Mountain (Antalya-Mersin), Afyon, Area of Lakes (around Ïsparta), Menderes Valley, Balïkesir-Ida Mountains, Bursa-Biläjik, etc are the regions where entire clans of Türkmens settled down; of course there are more regions, these are just a few examples. Besides, Christians, Muslims and Jews rarely married with each other during the 11th-18th centuries. As Prof. Dr. Ýlber Ortaylý points out, even Armenians or Greeks with different sects did not marry with each other (like Gregorians, Catholics and Protestants), whereas Armenians, Greeks and Jews also disliked each other quiet a lot. It was starting from the Tanzîmât Reforms Period (1839-1876) when people with different ethnic and religious groups starting mixing. Before the Tanzîmât, marriages between different religious groups were also happening but it was on a low amount because of socio-religious reasons. On the other hand, there is another fact which is un-known to many Turks: as Prof. Dr. Zeki Velidî Togan points out, during the Mongol Ilkhanid period, thousands of Iranian (mostly Persian) peasants were forcily moved to Anatolia where they settled down and later got Turkified in the urban areas. Historical accounts are not as accurate as DNA test studies and many of those historical claims are not validated. But good news for you, the most liberal studies put the genetic contribution of Central Asians at 30%. While I still consider this a pissant amount, it is much better number than 9% for sure. The question is, why do you want to prove your Central Asian genetic lineage so bad? Most Turks I talk to hate being called descendants of Central Asian people and consider themselves as European whites.
|
|
|
Post by Atabeg on Jan 31, 2007 10:00:37 GMT 3
The Turks goy lazy the Tribal Turkmen chieftains only would fight for booty. Thats why the Jannisaries were applied
|
|
|
Post by Atabeg on Jan 31, 2007 16:16:24 GMT 3
Most Turks I talk to hate being called descendants of Central Asian people and consider themselves as European whites. Who are those people I bet white washed european thinking city folk I realy hate those people. I can't say forshure how much of Turkeys population is of CA descent but those who are I think are consentraded in areas well it use to be. people lost track of there familynames (....oglu was used to describe Clans of Turkmen origin if i'm nor wrong)
|
|