|
|
Post by BAWIR$AQ on Sept 3, 2006 8:57:29 GMT 3
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Sept 3, 2006 21:25:01 GMT 3
The Soviets were surely very good at reconsturcting faces. I wish we could use it just like they did.
|
|
|
|
Post by nisse on May 7, 2007 23:30:47 GMT 3
those pic look moore like indo-european than turkic, if you compare with todays kipchak, then dont look similar at all,
or maybe this dude have more indo-european features then others
|
|
|
|
Post by Atabeg on May 7, 2007 23:32:49 GMT 3
those pic look moore like indo-european than turkic, if you compare with todays kipchak, then dont look similar at all, or maybe this dude have more indo-european features then others accualy they look perfect kypchak high cheekbones round face , slighty high nose bridge They DON'T look anything INDO-european |
|
|
|
Post by nisse on May 7, 2007 23:52:44 GMT 3
maybe to you , but to me they look like a mix of indo-european,
maybe the person in question hasnt 100 % turks, its commonly among the upper class to marry from other factions and ethnicity to sterngth their own power,
the faces that have been unearth isnt from ordinary people, they must be from royal linage, and its common that the royal have mixed genes
|
|
|
|
Post by nisse on May 7, 2007 23:53:28 GMT 3
If i look closer, they look niether turkic or indo-euopean, they look like a mix of both
|
|
|
|
Post by Atabeg on May 7, 2007 23:56:12 GMT 3
Dude I'm not going to argue with you...
there is no pure ethnic Turkic race there hasn't been one for a long long time mabey there never was one(I mean there were Turkic tribes)
All Turks are a mix of 'Turkic' and caucasian but some more than others. Thats why we don't look like mongolians.
You clearly can see the difference between a Kazakh and a Mongol and there the closest you can get to eachother
|
|
|
|
Post by nisse on May 8, 2007 19:06:05 GMT 3
why not argue, this is what the forum is for, where people like you and me can debate about everything, thats the meaning of the forum,
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 9, 2007 0:26:08 GMT 3
maybe to you , but to me they look like a mix of indo-european, maybe the person in question hasnt 100 % turks, its commonly among the upper class to marry from other factions and ethnicity to sterngth their own power, the faces that have been unearth isnt from ordinary people, they must be from royal linage, and its common that the royal have mixed genes Interesting view. |
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on May 9, 2007 20:37:47 GMT 3
there is something about it, i heard that Kypchak princesses have been married to Russian princes and that the Russian nobility has a lot of Tartar blood. also, iirc they reconstructed some Russian nobles head and it had Mongoloid features.
|
|
|
|
Post by BAWIR$AQ on May 10, 2007 6:10:49 GMT 3
iirc they reconstructed some Russian nobles head and it had Mongoloid features. - anthropological reconstruction   A. Bogolyubsky (1111 – 1174) was a prince of Vladimir-Suzdal. He was a son of Yuri Dolgorukiy, and a grandson of Vladimir Monomakh. His mother was a Kipchak princess, daughter of khan Aepa Osekevich. I think his other grandmother was also a Kipchak. |
|
|
|
Post by nisse on May 10, 2007 15:36:49 GMT 3
he definetly looks like a kypchak, more than the pic above
|
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on May 10, 2007 20:28:19 GMT 3
Andrei Bogolyubsky - anthropological reconstruction A. Bogolyubsky (1111 – 1174) was a prince of Vladimir-Suzdal. He was a son of Yuri Dolgorukiy, and a grandson of Vladimir Monomakh. His mother was a Kipchak princess, daughter of khan Aepa Osekevich. I think his other grandmother was also a Kipchak. yes thank you dear Yabghu, thats what i meant  |
|
|
|
Post by nisse on May 14, 2007 21:06:38 GMT 3
that dude looks more russian than kypchak, except his eyes
|
|
|
|
Post by nisse on May 14, 2007 21:07:05 GMT 3
he has to much beard to be a kypchak
|
|
