The Race of the Original Turks

I won’t be able to do that as I sit on the peer review board of a journal of Turkic linguistics out of Turkey. I also have a chapter coming out in a new book about Turkic linguistics. In the chapter, I mostly talk about language, but I did talk a lot about history and origins too.
It’s pretty clear the original Turks from Northern Kazakhstan/the Altai were probably not White people, though that is probably in dispute. The later homelands, around the Altai where China, Mongolia, Russia and Turkey all come together were probably much more Asiatic. If you look at the Siberian Turkic speakers like Siberian Tatars, the Altai, the Chulym, the Shor and the Khakas, those are probably a good bet for what the original Turkics looked like. A good way of describing these people is half-Asiatic (Mongolic) and half-Caucasian.
This group also was apparently the base for the Amerindian populations as well. The Amerindians are fully Asiatic. So the people who birthed the Asiatics later birthed the Turks. However, there was some Caucasoid mixing in between with groups such as the Caucasian Tocharians. Later, Iranic groups mixed heavily with Turkics in the Stans.
The Tuvans also look like a very early Turkic group, and they are very Asiatic (Mongolic). The real pure Turkics from the Turkic homeland appear to be at least 50% Asiatic. The only reason they look Whiter as the get further west is that the Turkic Muslims conquered many of these people in Islamic jihads. These conquered Caucasians were then converted to Islam in the usual manner.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

0 thoughts on “The Race of the Original Turks”

  1. I don’t wanna write the same things over and over again, so I quote the important parts here:
    ”The handicap that western people have is that you overlook the fact that turks are not only ‘muslims in anatolia’. Turks are everywhere. There are also christian turks (like moldovian, bulgarian and more) as well as jewish turks (today’s jewish in eastern-central europe, even in the USA, all of whom are descendants of Khazaria). However, they are originally shaman.
    ..yes, they came from Asia through Siberia and also southern ways as well, but racially they had nothing to do with mongol and chinese. The mongols followed them forever, though, until europe and anatolia while mixing with them partially (chinese kept on mixing with the ones left behind).
    Religionally, on the other hand, it is believed that turks come from Yafes (or Japhed) who is son of Noah and the father of white race, whom turks call Olcay, a very important figure along with Kayra, the main god in their mythology. There are so many research on this as well.
    There are so many secrets and traditions that they brought to europe which are being uncovered now. So, they are mystical people.
    ”Turks encountered with these semitic people when they entered anatolia and mesopotamia (this was via sümers, long ago before they entered to anatolia). Greeks are from the same roots with armenians and kurdish, so their middle-eastern brown look along with the that of arabs started to change slightly the white look of real turks through mixed marriages.
    That is the only reality; real Turks are white and that is why they took the phenotype of the people they mixed with! (asian typology in asia and middle-eastern typology in anatolia and mesopotamia)
    You guys have another handicap: You still tend to believe turks only entered to Europe with Ottomans. Wrong! Turks were already there when ottomans showed up! On the contrary, Ottomans were the empire with less turkic characteristics. Turks migrated to europe long, long ago, as I have pointed out before, with the migration of tribes but the migrations took place several times in history. It didn’t happen all in once. Recall Atilla, his presence in europe was just one reason that started one channel of the migration of tribes. There are several other routes that turks followed earlier. They settled to northern and central europe, then to western europe as well. Shall I write the names of the clans? Are you ready for it really? I don’t think so. I have already written so much more than I intended to, but seeing your lack of knowledge but insistence on claims that are no longer valid, I felt an urge to write. That they turned to christianity from shamanism don’t make them another nation, they still have the same blood in their veins.”

  2. I need to add insistently that; if greeks, armenians, kurdish, persian, asyrians, arabs, even semitic jews didn’t mix with Turks (especially kipchacks-cumans), they wouldn’t have any white/fair characteristics (that they have very little) at all. They are all semitics, just like their brothers arabs.
    I dearly recommend you to follow R1 turc-gene !! Then you will find it will take you back further to Siberia and northern-inner Asia where turks started their journey to west. Northern, central and eastern europe was empty until then, only warm southern europe, mesopotamia and anatolia were full of semitics. Then they started to mix with the new-comers, Turks, along with their pagan beliefs and traditions. Their arrival wasn’t only at one time, it took several times and several places in history!
    New research and findings show that the tribes arrived in different times were Cumans, Celts, Germens, Varegs, Gots, Alans, Avars, Bulgars, Sarmatians, Skithians, Cherkess (ukranian) and some more in addition to Huns !!! Some authors like Murat Adjiev and Sofi Semenova from Russia are putting some of them under the name ‘Kipchack’ only, which make sense as they all have the same typology: whitest skin, blue eyes and blonde-red-brown hair.
    Russia is definitely made up of different tribes of turks, but mostly Cumans. They also started to accept it. I told you, turning christian did make us apart, but not that apart. Race is thicker than religion.
    You will not like to hear this but many americans (maybe even you) might be descendants of turks (like Bob Dylan) as you have migrated from europe 2-3 hundreds years ago. But it doesn’t make us sisters or brothers (psychologically), I dont take it that way

  3. Turks were believed to be an off shoot of ancient Huns (not the modern Hungarians).
    I’m not familiar with Europe history, don’t know when did Huns and Turks appear in Europe history. But their wars with China were well recorded.
    The Huns were destroyed in the mid-1st century after about a hundred years of war with China. Whether or not these Huns were the same Huns of Attila 300 years later, Chinese history has no record.
    After the Huns, Turks began to appeared in Chinese history, grew strong in 6th century. Same story with the Huns, after years of war Turks lost in mid-7th century.
    There were many tribes in Central Asia, after the wars, some tribes left and some stayed and made peace with China. A hundred years later, the Arab came and won a war against China.
    Ottoman Empire appeared 600 years after. Not sure if they were the same Turks that warred with China.
    If they were, then they originated from north of the Altai Mountains, upper stream of Yenisei River(border area of Kazakhstan Mongolia China today), and gradually expanded east to Mongolian Plateau. Therefore, they were probably Caucasian originally, mixed with Mongolic later. Chinese history described Huns and Turks “deep eyed and hairy”.
    4000 year old mummy from Lob Nor, Xinjiang

  4. Turks were the steppe people…..just like the Huns…..with PROBABLE origin in the same region as the Huns………it is possible they were the same as the Huns……….who stayed back a little longer and never really made it beyond TURKEY.

  5. I spent a day in Istanbul once. Turkish look like Syrians or Lebanese no different from the rest of the Levant. Absolutely nothing Asian about their appearance.
    Hungary was invaded by Huns from Western China and there is still a community of “ethnic Huns” in Hungary.
    To the degree that Turkic-Mongol genes remain in the West it would be in Eastern Europe and not the Turkey.
    Slavic people look vaguely Eurasian and its hard to tell somebody with Slavic features like Charles Bronson from a Eurasian.

    1. There was hardly anything ASIAN about the HUNS either but they did originate somewhere in China before drifting into CENTRAL ASIA….the same probably is the case with the Turks.

  6. Not quite, they still have a small ethnic community in Hungary and the Ukraine but after 1,000 years of intermarriage only their names differentiate them from other Caucasians.

  7. YEE
    No they were not but they administrated Hungary for several centuries after conquering the country.
    Also Ukraine. They are only identifiable by their names as a separate ethnicity after 1500 years of white ancestors.
    The Huns also intermarried with Central Asians and although the original tribe originated in China they were quite a hybrid by the time they reached Eastern Europe.

    1. The original tribe was probably Caucasian. See that photo above? The mummy was 4000 years old. She certainly look Caucasian. But she was probably a Tajik.

  8. YEE
    Even the Manchus look vaguely Caucasian. Our perception is that Chinese all look Han.
    Of course your country stretches from Boten on the Laos border where I have been all the way North to Siberia and West to Kashmir. There is a great deal of variation there.

  9. YEE
    One thing is that Americans tend to think of Han Chinese as being how everyone in China appears because of course most Americans are Han Chinese or from the Fuji Province.
    This is a Western ignorance.
    The American perception of China is its East-Hong Kong skyscrapers and bamboo forests full panda bears.

      1. YEE
        Chinese poverty in Manhattan Chinatown as bad Sichuan? Of course not and these new arrivals to the United States probably DO think American poverty is paradise. It seems bleak to white Americans from the suburbs of course.
        Chinese-Americans who have been in America for 100 years really do not demonstrate a great deal of concern for the new arrivals in Chinatown.
        I would say that Chinese more or less rose out of poverty at the same rate as Europeans. Comparing whether European or Chinese immigrants had a more brutal experience in the late 1890’s is sort of pointless as well.

      2. YEE
        There is no system on earth where money and influence do not give the rich or politically-connected some degree of unfair advantage.
        Corruption is going to exist in every government.
        As for Chinese poverty in America it is limited to new arrivals. And I am sure that if you are from the Sichuan Province that US poverty is not really that brutal to cope with.

      3. YEE Chinese Poverty in America
        Rural migrants. An article was written by a San Francisco journalist that Sichuan migrants were using a communal bathroom in some apartment building. This seems horrendously awful to whites but the apartments were reasonably large. Nothing like, well, the Sichuan poverty.
        Arrested sex workers. If you look at the faces of the Chinese Northeaster women running massage parlors they look like they’ve been selling sex since they were 8 years old and arriving at 40 to run what whites call a “Happy Ending Massage” is not going to ruin their morality.
        Drugs and gangs. This seemed to be a Communist-era thing during which it was really hard to be a violent criminal in China. Criminal types now seem to find opportunity in China itself.

      4. YEE
        These days a common or garden laborer might have a better living standard in Hong Kong than the United States.
        The other assumption of Chinese is that America is nothing but white people-a sort of similar race of Eurasians. The Chinese often find themselves around urban populations that are not white.
        American is poor but not as poor as the Sichuan poverty you might see. It is more a matter of violence and racial conflict that imperil the Chinese immigrant to the United States.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)