tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post9060786266195944834..comments2023-10-16T21:11:28.700+03:00Comments on Dodecad Ancestry Project: 600 membersDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-61142910896522868042011-05-20T06:41:13.951+03:002011-05-20T06:41:13.951+03:00Intermarriage with native Iranians/Turkmen and Ana...<i>Intermarriage with native Iranians/Turkmen and Anatolians as well as Greeks and Armenians didn't change this fact. Ours was the dominant culture</i><br /><br />Culture, religion and language are three separate things. Turkic invaders brought their language to Anatolia, but their culture had a very insignificant effect on Anatolia and was quickly marginalized to some fringe regions. In Islamic rules only two cultures dominated Anatolia: the dominant (especially at folk level) native Anatolico-Byzantine culture(s) and the Persian culture of the Seljuqs (only at high culture level). The Anatolico-Byzantine culture(s) was/were the strongest culture(s) as it was/were the folk (whether Muslim or Christian or Jew) culture(s). Islam spread through the Persian cultural sphere of the Seljuqs but was modified to and strongly influenced by the lax native Christian Anatolian culture(s) and traditions.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-78394027741416459072011-05-20T02:08:22.849+03:002011-05-20T02:08:22.849+03:00We have been speaking Turkish for a minimum of 1,0...<i>We have been speaking Turkish for a minimum of 1,000 years in my family.</i><br /><br />Do you have a family tree that goes back 1,000 years? Such a long family tree is extremely rare among Turks (most Turks cannot trace their ancestry back more than 5 generations), and such a long and at the same time reliable family tree is almost nonexistent among Turks.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-21847828269346769602011-05-19T19:58:15.512+03:002011-05-19T19:58:15.512+03:00anatolian turkmen, the ones that invaded india wer...anatolian turkmen, the ones that invaded india were altaic but not turks=>they were mongols from the Mongol chingizid(genkis khan)lineafe and that's why they were killed mughals<br />the word khan is yenisseian not turkic<br />the word yabghu is iranic not turkic<br />up to 90% of anatolian turkish's vocabulary and up to 70% of central asian turkish languages' vocabulary are not turkic[mainly iranic](the 20% difference is because ottoman turkic integrated many -very literary-words from arabic as well as the greek+armenian words etc...but if we exclude the imported literary arabic words;the ratio of non turkic vocabulay will be around 70% as well)<br />On the other hand very very few(a couple of dozens)of turkish words made their way to urdu&persian(most of them are slang words and not cultural words)while in arabic you will find 0 turkish words in the dictionnaries like lisan al arab(wich contains more than 5 mln words)however in arabic dialects there are a handful of turkish slang words that made their way there like "gezdir"(notice that they are not cultural words but slang ones that have their native counterparts in hindustani,persian and arabic)<br />Very few aramean and assyrian words appear in anatolian turkish(words such as "çelebi","balta","kömür","natır"...)howver there are around 1000 armenian words(mostly cultural words used by the folk)please see the book below<br />http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=aFWQTBm35m0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=armenian+loanwords&source=bl&ots=C0wd72Hqh4&sig=ZIOAeFYJnQ8RSKAkYlgdRNfTtSQ&hl=tr&ei=14ItTfSROMjusgaW_4GLCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false<br /><br />as well as around 2500 greek words please see below<br />http://anthrocivitas.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7301<br /><br />btw the 450 mln spanish speakers can be up to 60-90% autosomally from caucasoid spanish+have spanish culture+their language is the same<br />however the 130 mln turk speakers dont share turk legacy(autosomally+hg speaking)+lack a turk culture+their languages are different and often intelligible(kypchak branch is not intelligible with the oghuz one)<br />In other words we can speak of spanish folks but cannot speak for turkic folks(whose single common point is an unnatural, unwanted, warfare+devshirme+enslavement droven tiny[around 1% mongoloid altaic turk]input)+much of the vocabulary+the alphabet are not turkic<br />it's even worse than portuguese speaking brazilians and angolans since those ones do have an important european portuguese cultural+linguistic contribution<br />There are 130 mln turkic speakers not 250, khorassan was from day one and is till iranian by culture,race etc...despite the arab and turk invasions and its name is iranic(land of the sunrise in iranic)<br />"After leaving Siberia if we Anatolian Turks have retained 6% Yakut that in and of itself is amazing."<br />hahaha in wich planet do you live, the anatolians did not came from siberia and that 4(and not6)% is an unwanted, unnatural, through warfare input you cannot call yourself turk for 4%mongoloid and 0 turk culture when an angolan with 10%caucasoid and nearly 50%portuguese culture dont call himself portuguese also why you use "we" you can only talk about yourself and your short 70-80 years life!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-60842177581830501262011-05-19T15:29:38.400+03:002011-05-19T15:29:38.400+03:00After leaving Siberia if we Anatolian Turks have r...<i>After leaving Siberia if we Anatolian Turks have retained 6% Yakut that in and of itself is amazing.</i><br /><br />Where is that 6% Yakut in Anatolian Turks?<br /><br /><i>The Central Asian impact genetically speaking is at the minimum 1/7 according to Dienekes' calculation but I maintain that this is a minimum estimate.</i><br /><br />It is not minimum. Dienekes calculated it based on Uzbeks, a substantially Iranic admixed population (in fact, Uzbekistan was predominantly Iranic speaking until at least the Mongol conquests of the 13th century, its linguistic Turkification began even later than Anatolia!). <br /><br /><i>Khorasan has been culturally Iranian long before there were any Turkic speakers there.</i><br /><br />Yes, Korasan has been culturally and linguistically Iranic long before there were any Turkic speakers there.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-58728453133158722002011-05-19T15:04:01.766+03:002011-05-19T15:04:01.766+03:00Khorasan may be culturally Iranian today but in th...<i>Khorasan may be culturally Iranian today but in the past it wasn't.</i><br /><br />Khorasan has been culturally Iranian long before there were any Turkic speakers there. Do you really think that Turkic speakers predated Iranian speakers in Khorasan?Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-86017076047428447612011-05-19T05:39:49.284+03:002011-05-19T05:39:49.284+03:00Khorasan may be culturally Iranian today but in th...Khorasan may be culturally Iranian today but in the past it wasn't.<br /><br />Since I am confident in my Turkish identity there is no Stockholm syndrome.<br /><br />After leaving Siberia if we Anatolian Turks have retained 6% Yakut that in and of itself is amazing.<br /><br />However the fact that there are today 250 million Turkic speakers, born out of half a million Yakuts, is a testament to how friendly, encompassing and universal our Turkish culture has been.<br /><br />The Central Asian impact genetically speaking is at the minimum 1/7 according to Dienekes' calculation but I maintain that this is a minimum estimate.<br /><br />We will continue to be Turks no matter what anyone says. Our genes are testament to our long journey.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-85583540027722734102011-05-19T04:11:14.896+03:002011-05-19T04:11:14.896+03:00@ Lars I totally am in agreement with you. This is...@ Lars I totally am in agreement with you. This is the problems that empires create. Just because the brits conquered a quarter of the world's population and English is the most important lingua franca of the world, this does NOT mean that the brits REPLACED the genetic material of the conquered people. They remained a small elite that left a disproportionate cultural impact on a native population. The same can be spoken of Rome and the same can be spoken of a lot of empires. The Turkish empire is no different. Turk is largely a social construct. Break your illusions and set you mind free.Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17656563742645201926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-73133155218157590572011-05-19T02:32:05.393+03:002011-05-19T02:32:05.393+03:00the others are majoritly descending(up to 80%) fro...<i>the others are majoritly descending(up to 80%) from the native caucasoid indo-european(indo-iranian,armenogreek and slavic)speakers farmers of central asia, western asia and volga region</i><br /><br />I the case of Turks in Turkey, the native Caucasoid input (excluding the Central Asian Caucasoid input) should be more than 80%.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-63860680899991558672011-05-19T02:18:43.201+03:002011-05-19T02:18:43.201+03:00if Turkish becomes the language of administration ...<i>if Turkish becomes the language of administration and trade and a prestige language (Turkish had all these qualities during the beylik and Ottoman eras), it can quickly spread among the populace.</i><br /><br />And it really did.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-52980385703874594512011-05-19T01:08:03.518+03:002011-05-19T01:08:03.518+03:00mr anatolian turkmen, your posts are an example of...mr anatolian turkmen, your posts are an example of "devshirme+stokholm syndrome" psychology=>stucking to an identity wich is not your because of a tiny 2-3% unnatural,recent,warfare resluted input of invader of your ancestors(and with no cultural or religious legacy of the invaders)[typical of brainwashing in the devshirme(or caucasoid native christians)process]<br />"In an era when there was no mass education, when Ottomans didn't even have high schools in the larges of Anatolian towns as late as 1920 Turkification couldn't have happened without a massive Turkic migration into Anatolia"<br />What do you say for angolans shifting to portuguese, or gaule celts shifting to latin with nearly 0 migration of portuguese and latins, turks as nomadic folk cannot reach such higher populations and there cannot be a migration of more than 200 k turks into anatolia.<br />There is no 250 mln turk speakers but around 130 mln and only the yakuts are the continuation of the original turks living in the turkic homeland the others are majoritly descending(up to 80%) from the native caucasoid indo-european(indo-iranian,armenogreek and slavic)speakers farmers of central asia, western asia and volga region.<br />It's the same as nowadays 450 mln spanish speakers(however in this case many of them are really spanish descendants since much of argentinians and other south-americans are up to 90% caucasoid-legacy of spanish-but in the case of the turk invading hordes the input is unnatural,coming through warfare and very tiny[around 2%]and different than spanish speakers in the fact that there was no Turk cultural input in western,central asia and volga region contrary to spanish culture in south america)<br />The asian huns are yenisseians not Turks(the european ones are slavic-germanic)<br />By 1000 there was not oghuz or chaghatay turkic, at that time turkic did not yet split-developp to oghuz and chaghtay<br />broadly speaking oghuz turkic is turkic spoken by choresmian iranians(see th and dh in turkemnistani)while chaghtay turkic is turkic spoken by soghdian iranians<br />Central asia was and is iranian(by population+culture+race+much of the language's structure+punctuation and lexicon)and the turk nomadic hordes that came by the 8 th century were very few to live a great racial+genomal input(and very primitive to leave a cultural input)<br />The few turk invader hordes that came to central asia,volga and west asia merely disappeared by dilution into the caucasoid indo-european speaker native(peacefully+naturally colonising those areas)original population's cultural+racial+autosomal pool<br />The seljuk were persian speaking and iranian by culture and fought the turkmen beylik rulers that were illetrate in persian and that's how turkic became the lingua franca between anatolian greeks and armenians(be them muslim or christian)<br />East asian is sinic not altaic turkic, northeast asia is altaic turkic and it's presence in pakistan and india is geographical(not a legacy of turko-mongols)since those areas are close to east asia and siberia(and that east asian could be found even amongst isolated endogamous kalash and burusho)<br />Khorassan is culturally+racially+autosomally iranian(the ones that came to anatolia from there were persians like mevalana and haji bektashi)Turk input is at best 1%(autosomally speaking)but racially and culturally is 0,you dont see angolans identify with their portuguese invaders(with much more caucasoid portuguese input than that)yet,contrary to turk one,there does exist a strong portuguese cultural input into angola.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-91959348620086332542011-05-18T20:39:14.908+03:002011-05-18T20:39:14.908+03:00In an era when there was no mass education, when O...<i>In an era when there was no mass education, when Ottomans didn't even have high schools in the larges of Anatolian towns as late as 1920 Turkification couldn't have happened without a massive Turkic migration into Anatolia.</i><br /><br />The largest of Anatolian towns certainly had high schools before that date. But for a simple thing like teaching Turkish to non-Turkish speakers, there is no need for any schools; if Turkish becomes the language of administration and trade and a prestige language (Turkish had all these qualities during the beylik and Ottoman eras), it can quickly spread among the populace. Also, do note that madrasas (Islamic schools) were very widespread down to the small village level in the Ottoman Empire and the Ottoman education system was centralist, just like the Ottoman bureaucracy, jurisprudence, religious system and military system.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-49164253225218170752011-05-18T18:53:02.780+03:002011-05-18T18:53:02.780+03:00Anatolian Turkmen, nearly all your claims are inac...Anatolian Turkmen, nearly all your claims are inaccurate but there is no space to answer them here, here below some ones<br />The caucasoid in central asian turkic speaking predates turk and oghuz and is a legacy of iranians.<br />Turkish has around 1000 armenian words and around 2500 greek words but few armaic ones.<br />Very few turks came to anatolia and central asia and most of them died during battles.<br />oghuz turkic is strictly close to chaghtai, the difference is strictly areal=>oghuz turkic is turkic spoken by west asian persians while chaghtay turkic is turkic spoken by soghdian iranians.<br />mr dienekes 2 of my comments dont appear(I think technical problem)I will post them later(not to break the 2 post limitation rule)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-79962212255373482252011-05-18T18:39:30.899+03:002011-05-18T18:39:30.899+03:00ANGOLANS SHIFTED TO PORTUGUESE WITH ONLY ABOUT 400...ANGOLANS SHIFTED TO PORTUGUESE WITH ONLY ABOUT 400 HUNDRED PORTUGUESE FAMILIES THAT ARRIVED IN THE 15 TH CENTURY it was the same case for anatolia with angolans standing for angolans however while angolans received much cultural input from portugal, the turkic one in anatolia is near 0<br />"2. We have been speaking Turkish for a minimum of 1,000 years in my family. Intermarriage with native Iranians/Turkmen and Anatolians as well as Greeks and Armenians didn't change this fact. <br />Turkish was first attested in the 13 th century in anatolia, and even(much of)christian armenians and greeks of anatolia were native turkish speakers(of course cultural words were not turkic but native ones)also angolans were portuguese speakers for more than centuries but this does not make them turk/portuguese.<br />"Ours was the dominant culture"<br />There was not turk cultural input into anatolia, and there is no need for a military domnination for a folk shift to another language.<br />To be able to write"our turk identity" one should be-predominantly northeastasian autosomally speaking+have a pure siberian altaic culture otherwise he/she is merely a native anatolian(same as angolans are not portuguese despite speaking portuguese for nearly 5 centuries+in their case yet there was a real portuguese cultural input into angola contrary to anatolia)<br /><br /><br />3.Turks of turkey came from kazakistan and uzbeks too are racially+culturally+much of the language iranians as the turk invasions to central asia was very recent but did not bring turk culture and but few genes(you cannot compare irano-turks mixing for some 8 centuries with original 12 th century turks)<br /><br />4again false,the migration of turks were very rapid and they did not bring culture,race or language change(other than islam wich is not turk-originated)much of those warrior turks died during turko-turkish, turko-mongolian and turko-crusaders wars.<br />the modern day turks are merely armenians+greeks+kurds who shift to islam(by fear/by free will/to take advantage of tax facilities)and then adopted turkic of the rulers as a lingua franca and with time it became the native tongue(however cultural words+conjunctions+structure+literary paradigmas+even many basic words such as numerlas and body organs are non turkic,and "real official anatolian turkic"'s vocabulary was up to 90%non turkic"[there are nearly 1000 armenian and nearly 2000 greek words-most of them cultural words-in anatolian turkic and add to it many thousands of iranic words)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-81942830289485573292011-05-18T15:26:13.093+03:002011-05-18T15:26:13.093+03:00Onur, don't start triple posting again.
Sorry...<i>Onur, don't start triple posting again.</i><br /><br />Sorry.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-40342133361999748342011-05-18T14:46:07.321+03:002011-05-18T14:46:07.321+03:00Onur, don't start triple posting again.Onur, don't start triple posting again.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-11273381299882704452011-05-18T14:24:40.822+03:002011-05-18T14:24:40.822+03:00@ Anatolian Turkmen
"Look at Assyrians who a...@ Anatolian Turkmen<br /><br />"Look at Assyrians who are pure Anatolians."<br /><br />Northern Mesopotamia (~ N Iraq and NE Syria) is close, but it is not, in my opinion, Anatolia. The reason many of us sought refuge in the mountains of Hakkari:<br /><br />"When during the 14th century the Church of the East was virtually exterminated by the raids of the Turkic leader Timur, Nestorian communities lingered on in a few towns in Iraq but were concentrated mainly in Kurdistan..."dok101https://www.blogger.com/profile/13206091188143667035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-69619735315569550272011-05-18T07:20:58.742+03:002011-05-18T07:20:58.742+03:00BTW, Anatolian Greeks are genetically almost surel...BTW, Anatolian Greeks are genetically almost surely somewhere between Armenians and Balkan Greeks, just as the Caucasoid part of Anatolian Turks is.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-42147462008151074502011-05-18T05:36:30.627+03:002011-05-18T05:36:30.627+03:00Because you claim that Khorasan and Turkmenistan a...<i>Because you claim that Khorasan and Turkmenistan are also "destinations" for Turks.</i><br /><br />The 11th century Seljuq migration that brought Turkic people to Anatolia, Iran and Transcaucasia, also brought Turkic people to Khorasan and what is now Turkmenistan. Before that, there was almost no Turkic people in Khorasan and Turkmenistan. I say almost, because then in many Islamic regions as far as Northern Africa there were a small number of Turkic slave soldiers, but of course they were negligible in number. <br /><br /><i>For which Turks? If we eclude Turkmenistan as a source of Turkic people then the only places left are the Altay mountains and Siberia to find Turks.</i><br /><br />Haven't you read what I have been writing all the time? Before the 11th century Seljuq migration, almost all of Turkmens (the specific Turkic group which would invade Anatolia together with what is now Turkmenistan, Khorasan, Iran, Trancaucasia, Iraq and Levant during the 11th century with the Seljuqs) were living in what is now Kazakhstan. So your Altai-Siberia reference is nonsensical.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-43548642987675530132011-05-18T05:31:36.296+03:002011-05-18T05:31:36.296+03:00This comment has been removed by the author.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-23746687703151995932011-05-18T05:06:29.864+03:002011-05-18T05:06:29.864+03:00Because you claim that Khorasan and Turkmenistan a...Because you claim that Khorasan and Turkmenistan are also "destinations" for Turks.<br /><br />For which Turks? If we eclude Turkmenistan as a source of Turkic people then the only places left are the Altay mountains and Siberia to find Turks.<br /><br />Dienekes: Turks, Armenians, Assyrians all have huge genetic impact from the original Anatolian expansion. It looks like we Turks have gained a lot of Sardinian from Greeks but it is on par with Armenians. Other than the Sardinian I don't see any other Greek impact on Anatolia in terms of genes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-31951781694477429142011-05-18T05:06:00.716+03:002011-05-18T05:06:00.716+03:00Turkish language today has more Assyrian words tha...<i>Turkish language today has more Assyrian words than Greek ones.</i><br /><br />How many of those Assyrian words entered Turkish directly from Assyrian rather than through Persian/Arabic? <br /><br />Dieneke, sorry for the triple posting.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-90301681277401468722011-05-18T05:00:27.518+03:002011-05-18T05:00:27.518+03:00To Onur: Khorasan and Iran as well as Turkmenistan...<i>To Onur: Khorasan and Iran as well as Turkmenistan are source populations of Turks in Anatolia.</i><br /><br />There is no point in discussing with you, as you not only ignore genetics but also history. <br /><br /><i>Otherwise the only Turks are the Yakuts. This is what these claims come down to.</i><br /><br />How you come to that ridiculous conclusion from anything I say is beyond me.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-60861718993715643772011-05-18T04:53:57.294+03:002011-05-18T04:53:57.294+03:00I would say it is YOUR calculation that fits your ...<i>I would say it is YOUR calculation that fits your ridiculous agenda. You pick ONE group out of all of Turkey's neighbors that has the minimum Northern European component, so that you can maximize the perceived impact of Turkic speakers.</i><br /><br />Yes. Greeks, who are Turkey's neighbor too, have a Northeast European component percentage of 11.7% (more than both Turks and Assyrians), but Anatolian Turkmen somehow neglects them.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-2734666645327663372011-05-18T04:50:46.248+03:002011-05-18T04:50:46.248+03:00Are you seriously going to argue that Turks are mo...Are you seriously going to argue that Turks are more likely to have Assyrian than Greek ancestry? This discussion is over.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6533996127304587865.post-25050789005847402832011-05-18T04:42:36.676+03:002011-05-18T04:42:36.676+03:00Are you sure Assyrians peripheral? Turkish languag...Are you sure Assyrians peripheral? Turkish language today has more Assyrian words than Greek ones.<br /><br />To Onur: Khorasan and Iran as well as Turkmenistan are source populations of Turks in Anatolia.<br /><br />Otherwise the only Turks are the Yakuts. This is what these claims come down to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com