ren
Är
Posts: 20
|
Post by ren on May 3, 2005 4:44:40 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 4, 2005 21:33:22 GMT 3
Ah this is so interesting, thank you for sharing it with us As to your question; no, the Xiongnu were not the earliest Turkic people, there were surely other Turkic peoples who lived before them. Such as the Quanyi, Hongyi, Xunyu, Xianyun, Chi (Red) Di, etc recorded in the Chinese sources; as well as the inhabitants of various cultures like Okunevo, Karasuk, Tagar and Tashtyk.
|
|
|
Post by firdus on May 27, 2005 13:45:01 GMT 3
Ihsan , I am wondering if nowadays american indian has something to do with Turk?
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 28, 2005 20:29:56 GMT 3
There's an Italian genetics expert who published a book which claims that the American natives and some Siberian Turkics are geneticially the same. However, the Native Americans are too different from the Turkic peoples lingually. Yet their cultures, along with other Central Asian and Siberian peoples, seem familiar to each other.
|
|
|
Post by Kolaksay on Jun 4, 2005 23:10:35 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by kipchakhakan on Apr 10, 2007 23:43:06 GMT 3
Proto-Turks were always the inhabitants of Turkestan region from upper Caspian to Mongolia and Altai mountains to Kashmir. They all lived there for 40000 years and changed only by mutations and mixture of these mutated haplogroups. Let me clarify this: as some wrong information spreads around here like Turks were Mongoloids. This statement has no scientific base. Mongoloids are the descendants of haplogroup C which is mostly seen with some indians, australoids, southeast asians and some japanese/korean people. Mongolians and mongoloids concept are misunderstood. Mongolians have nearly %50 mongoloid genes, doesn't mean that they are mongoloids either. Also other mongoloid genes are limited to maximum 30 percent at other Central asian Turkic people. Caucasian genes are more dominant on all other Turkic people. www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdfOne important finding about Turks is: Dr Spencer Wells, the head of the world's most advanced scientific genetic research " Genographic Project" stated that a man named Niyazov who is a Kazak Turk lives at Kazakhstan by Kirgyzistan border, carries the same gene(M9, K haplogroup) which was not mutated and the same as the person from 40000 years ago from the same region. Today he is accepted to be the Eurasia's regional adam and fathers of most Europeans, all Eurasians, most Asians and Indians. He carries all the features of an Euroasian person which gives us a very good idea that how ancient or Proto-Turk looked like. The Asian and European race splitted from him and he also contributed to most of the Indian's look today. 90% of the world's population except Africans descended from the man who carried the same gene 40000 years ago from Central Asia or the area called Turkestan. Most of the Turkish people in Turkey are descended from M9 haplogroup as well. It shouldn't be surprising to anybody as ancient or today's Turks, in Central Asia or Turkestan, looked some like more European, some more Asian, some more Indian/Pakistani, or both, or all. www.turkgenealogy.com/content/TheJourneyofMan.htm
|
|
|
Post by aca on Apr 11, 2007 11:18:29 GMT 3
Hello Kipchakhakan, and welcome to SHF You said that "Proto-Turks were always the inhabitants of Turkestan region from upper Caspian to Mongolia and Altai mountains to Kashmir. They all lived there for 40000 years..." It is pretty strange for nomadic populations of the same stock to stay in the same region for such a long time, don't you think? Or maybe you think Proto-Turks weren't nomads at all? Anyway, there is not a single people on Earth (nomadic or sedentary) which occupies the same land for 40000 years - Not even Native Australians. One more thing, you are maybe right about genes percentage in modern Turkic populations, but it is a well known fact that aglutinative languages originated in East Siberia - far far away from modern Turkestan, and far far away from Caucasian populations
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2007 13:37:44 GMT 3
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2007 13:39:18 GMT 3
Proto-Turks were always the inhabitants of Turkestan region from upper Caspian to Mongolia and Altai mountains to Kashmir. They all lived there for 40000 years and changed only by mutations and mixture of these mutated haplogroups. Let me clarify this: as some wrong information spreads around here like Turks were Mongoloids. This statement has no scientific base. Mongoloids are the descendants of haplogroup C which is mostly seen with some indians, australoids, southeast asians and some japanese/korean people. Mongolians and mongoloids concept are misunderstood. Mongolians have nearly %50 mongoloid genes, doesn't mean that they are mongoloids either. Also other mongoloid genes are limited to maximum 30 percent at other Central asian Turkic people. Caucasian genes are more dominant on all other Turkic people. www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdfOne important finding about Turks is: Dr Spencer Wells, the head of the world's most advanced scientific genetic research " Genographic Project" stated that a man named Niyazov who is a Kazak Turk lives at Kazakhstan by Kirgyzistan border, carries the same gene(M9, K haplogroup) which was not mutated and the same as the person from 40000 years ago from the same region. Today he is accepted to be the Eurasia's regional adam and fathers of most Europeans, all Eurasians, most Asians and Indians. He carries all the features of an Euroasian person which gives us a very good idea that how ancient or Proto-Turk looked like. The Asian and European race splitted from him and he also contributed to most of the Indian's look today. 90% of the world's population except Africans descended from the man who carried the same gene 40000 years ago from Central Asia or the area called Turkestan. Most of the Turkish people in Turkey are descended from M9 haplogroup as well. It shouldn't be surprising to anybody as ancient or today's Turks, in Central Asia or Turkestan, looked some like more European, some more Asian, some more Indian/Pakistani, or both, or all. www.turkgenealogy.com/content/TheJourneyofMan.htmI saw this same progran I think, it was on PBS and called 'The Journey of Man'. But I think the Turk you're talking about was said to be an Uygur in Kazakistan. Doesn't matter anyway, either way he's a Turk.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Apr 11, 2007 18:20:01 GMT 3
Hello kipchakhakan, welcome to SHF!
|
|
|
Post by nisse on May 6, 2007 23:43:14 GMT 3
isnt the first turks dated back to 4000 years ago, I think there name is hongyi or something like,
they wandered south from east sibiera to mongolia, thats what I read
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Feb 28, 2008 1:53:21 GMT 3
Dear all There seemed to be as much curiosity and inconclusive debate on the origins of Turkic and Altaic people as there is of Sinic Chinese people. Firstly I come from a view point that some Turkic tribes were definitely Mongoloidal looking. I have seen paintings of Uighur people from the time of the Uighur Empire before that was based in what is today Mongolia in 9th century AD before a massive war took place which caused many Uighur people to move towards today's Uighuristan Tarim Basin area. The Uighur people definitely looked more Mongolic and Oriental looking than today's. I understand that many Altaic people believe they were once from Siberia. Some moved South / other moved West. The Turkic tribes branched off at some point. Some of the tribes got absorbed into China, some formed states like Mongolia and Korea. However, to support this theory do we have to take it from the stand point that there were at least 2 sources of Mongoloid people, There was a Siberic origin and one that was a Southern origin and possibly came from a South West source. The Southern Source became more the ancient Sinic / Chinese people. The North source were the Altaic/Turkic people. There was some mixing in Northern China. Or do most people lean towards this theory (I know this site may be sino-centric but this is talking about times way before any known Sinic civilisation) www.uglychinese.org/Mongols.htmlWhere all Mongoloids originated once from a Southern Source. One group went North Easterly and reached Siberia. By then this group had branched off from the Sinic branch who settled in central plains of China. They were Altaic-fied at some point and these form the ancestor of the Altaic ethnic groups. I have read through the anthropology section in CHF and seen various theories posted on the net but nothing seems conclusive www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showforum=90As a result there are even absurd theories posted by White Supremists after they latched onto the discovery of the Tarim Mummies. www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=17779www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=9598Equally ridiculous ideas that the populations of North East Asia were Negritized www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=8285These people claim that all Chinese and Mongoloidal cultures and civilisation came from the White man !!!!! lol However, what we may be able to think about is that these ancient people are also the ancestors of the modern Uighur people and equally possible some could have got into ancient Chinese before the Huaxia. Does anyone also want to add an opinion to where these mummies fit into the evolution fo the Altaic and Turkic tribes? Does anyone challenge these people are actually Proto Turkic of origin rather than the Indo-European/Tocharian initial conclusion?
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Feb 28, 2008 14:21:52 GMT 3
The earliest Turkic peoples were racially Mongoloid obviously. Racial mixing with the White Caucasoids happened when the Turkic peoples started moving westwards, but there were also some Caucasoid migrations eastwards too. Even today, most of the Turkic peoples are still Mongoloid, and even if you go to the villages in Turkey, you can still see that most of the Anatolian Turks preserve their Turkic look.
As for the Tarim Basin mummies. They are Tokharians, right? I don't think they have anything to do with the Turks.
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Feb 28, 2008 20:43:38 GMT 3
Since Turkic peoples had Mongoloid origins. Do people believe there were 2 major sources of Mongoloids in the ancient past?
The Tarim Mummies, yes they have been classified as Tocharians and speak an Indo-European langauge but these results can't be definitely and may be politically bias because the tests were all in Western European countries and in China.
I think there is a remote possiblity these people have some relationship with modern Turkic people. These people may had been the people that caused the ancient Turkic people to "Caucasian-fied" as some of the Turkic tribes moved westwards.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Feb 29, 2008 4:27:35 GMT 3
Since Turkic peoples had Mongoloid origins. Do people believe there were 2 major sources of Mongoloids in the ancient past? Uhm I have no idea I think there is a remote possiblity these people have some relationship with modern Turkic people. These people may had been the people that caused the ancient Turkic people to "Caucasian-fied" as some of the Turkic tribes moved westwards. Hmm yes, why not?
|
|