Turks African admixture ( The result of mixture with slaves? )

[ButlerKing]

In a mtDNA study of Turks from Achilli et al. (2007)

From a study of 340 Turks found 6 samples with mtDNA L , a total percentage of 1.76%

This means almost 2/100 Turks have African admixture. In a few Turkish province the Sub-Saharan mtdna is even higher.

Now just imagine if we include slave genes from Circassian+Syrians, I think every modern Turk have a little bit of this slave blood in them. ( not to mention the Turkification of minorities and immigration of Caucasus,Balkans)



African slaves

As there were restrictions on the enslavement of Muslims or "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians), pagan Africa was a popular source of slaves. Black slaves were coming from East and Central Africa, mainly from areas such as Abyssinia, Sudan, Northern Nigeria and Chad. Black slaves were employed in households and in the army as slave-soldiers. Some could ascend to high rank officials but in general were inferior to European and Caucasian slaves.[22][23] Today, tens of thousands of Afro Turks, the descendants of the African slaves in the Ottoman Empire, continue to live in modern Turkey.



Sexual slavery


" Circassians, Syrians, and Nubians were the three primary races of females who were sold as sex slaves in the Ottoman Empire. Circassian girls were described as fair, light-skinned and were frequently sent by the Circassian leaders as gifts to the Ottomans. They were the most expensive, reaching up to 500 pounds sterling and the most popular with the Turks. Second in popularity were Syrian girls, with their dark eyes, dark hair, and light brown skin, and came largely from coastal regions in Anatolia. Their price could reach up to 30 pounds sterling. They were described as having "good figures when young". Nubian girls were the cheapest and least popular, fetching up to 20 pounds sterling.[5] Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, sexual slavery was not only central to Ottoman practice but a critical component of imperial governance and elite social reproduction.[6] Dhimmi boys taken in the devşirme could also become sexual slaves, though usually they worked in places like bathhouses (hammam) and coffeehouses. They became tellak, köçek or sāqī for as long as they were young and beardless.[30] "

[GrebluBro]

Overall, it's negligible..

[Kiyant]

Overall, it's negligible..

ButlerKing has a Asian and Black fetish so a combination of both is way too perfect for him

[GrebluBro]

ButlerKing has a Asian and Black fetish so a combination of both is way too perfect for him

http://img.spokeo.com/public/900-600/kimora_lee_simmons_2003_06_08.jpg


Whie/Asian/Black all at a time

http://hairstyles.thehairstyler.com/hairstyle_views/front_view_images/640/original/4058_Kimora-Lee-Simmons-d_copy_2.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Overall, it's negligible..


There is also contribution of North African y-dna

[Anatolian Eagle]

If we imagine that this happened and if we combine that possiblity with my assumptions, there's a chance that Turks might have that insignificant amount of African slave blood, therefore here's my thread.

Cool story bro

[ButlerKing]

http://img.spokeo.com/public/900-600/kimora_lee_simmons_2003_06_08.jpg


Whie/Asian/Black all at a time

http://hairstyles.thehairstyler.com/hairstyle_views/front_view_images/640/original/4058_Kimora-Lee-Simmons-d_copy_2.jpg


Damn I wonder if this women is a mixture of Turanid and Nubian slave.

A lot of Afro-Turks are quite pretty indeed

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lZujpGFEQF4/UJHCu7YMN4I/AAAAAAAAG10/acRRUE0dT3M/s640/Tugce-Guder.jpg


They are proud of their black roots. They faced discrimination aswell

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_1eAqeM1KdM0/SXWVYPsiePI/AAAAAAAACDw/Wz0gyS_s6Tc/s400/afro-turks-love-you-so-much-01.jpg

[GrebluBro]

There is also contribution of North African y-dna

May be some slutty Turk wife slept with a slave..

[LightHouse89]

May be some slutty Turk wife slept with a slave..

most of them are recent immigrants. Average turks are more mongol-Anatolian. afro-turks are like afro-Saxons.....just a cultural thing they are not real turks nor anglo-Saxons.

[ButlerKing]

If that and this happened and if we combine that possiblity with my assumption, Turks might have that insignificant amount of slave blood, therefore here's my thread.

Cool story bro

This isn't any story. THIS IS FACT.


Don't try to ignore documented history of millions of slavery, immigration to Turkey. Including documented history of Turkification of other minorities in their borders (which used to be belong to greek,Armenian,Kurd,Anatolian and countless minorities ect )

Original territory of seljuk of rum

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/Seljuk_Sultanate_of_Rum_1190_Locator_Map.svg/1440px-Seljuk_Sultanate_of_Rum_1190_Locator_Map.svg.png

[Methusalem]

http://img.spokeo.com/public/900-600/kimora_lee_simmons_2003_06_08.jpg


Whie/Asian/Black all at a time

http://hairstyles.thehairstyler.com/hairstyle_views/front_view_images/640/original/4058_Kimora-Lee-Simmons-d_copy_2.jpg

The interesting thing is that she looks fully Phillipino or Southeastasian.

[ButlerKing]

There is no way these are recent migrant. The guy just looks Turkish with nappy hair clearly the result of mixture during ottoman times.


Most of them are descendant of slaves. Why would their appearance look from Nubian to Turkish with nappy hair or even straight hair and slanty eyes




http://ahmetpolat.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/mustafa-bij-oma.jpg

[morski]

Turks are an extremely mixed people so this doesn't come as a surprise at all.

[Hayalet]

Turks are an extremely mixed people so this doesn't come as a surprise at all.
Turks are no more mixed than Bulgarians.

[morski]

Turks have like 3 times as many different haplogroups in their DNA samples. Bulgrians are basically inbred compared to Turks.:D

[Shah-Jehan]

Ottoman African slaves were mostly castrated in mainland Anatolia.

[Hadouken]

your obsession is funny

[StonyArabia]

May be some slutty Turk wife slept with a slave..

If there is North African Y lineages in Turks it would not come from slaves but from the expelled Morsicos who actually took refuge in Turkey when they were expelled from Spain. There also some Libyans who migrated there. Also some Turks do score minor North African in their autosomal which indicates Morsico roots, but the vast majority don't.

[Pentagram]

There is no such thing as Turkification. Turk existence did not start with 1071 in Anatolia. Religions, languages, cultures and identities were respected, preserved and they survived after centuries of Turk rule. This thread is just an insane trolling attempt. Trolls with no real knowledge of history always use the same old Turkification excuse. Turks "massacred" and "assimilated" all of the minorities they ruled for centuries but somehow millions of them still exist today Lol. If Turks wanted to convert, assimilate the tiny Greek, Armenian populations, it wouldnt be that hard.

Assimilation is not part of Turk culture. Greeks, Armenians were always minorities in Anatolia. They never had the demographic dominance and constant historical presence in the region. Turkification was a strategy of changing the demography of a newly conquered region through population exchange. Forced conversion, slavery were never traditional policies in Turk history. The devshirme system was only limited with-in the palace system and it has been exaggerated by many sources. The number of Janissaries was just 12-14.000 even during Sultan Suleiman's era which was the period that Ottoman Empire had it's largest borders. Janissaries were living under strict rules and they were not allowed to get married during their service.

Anatolia has been called Turkey since 12th century. The ethnicity gave the land it's name, not the other way around. Western sources always described Turks in terms of ancestry. Anatolia was never called Greece or Armenia. The only two historical nations in Asia Minor are Turks and Persians. Thats why go and learn real history first before you start spreading around non-sense. Also, Greeks have the highest African genetic admixture in Europe. Before posting Nubian slavery fantasies about Turks, focus to this genetic fact first Lol.

[Shah-Jehan]

If there is North African Y lineages in Turks it would not come from slaves but from the expelled Morsicos who actually took refuge in Turkey when they were expelled from Spain. There also some Libyans who migrated there. Also some Turks do score minor North African in their autosomal which indicates Morsico roots, but the vast majority don't.
*Morisco - Moors. Yes, a lot of Moors were given refuge in Ottoman domains some of which was Anatolia and of course the capital, Istanbul.

[Hayalet]

Turks have like 3 times as many different haplogroups in their DNA samples.
IIRC, not really. I suppose there are different measures of diversity. What I meant was that two randomly selected Turks aren't likely to be more different to each other in terms of autosomal genetics than two randomly selected members of most other ethnic groups.

[morski]

[B]There is no such thing as Turkification.

Yeah, right.:laugh:


The process of forced Turkification continued with the Turkish republic with such policies as:

Citizen speak Turkish! (Turkish: Vatandaş Türkçe konuş!) - An initiative created by law students but sponsored by the Turkish government which aimed to put pressure on non-Turkish speakers to speak Turkish in public in the 1930s.[45][46][47][48][49][50][51] In some municipalities, fines were given to those speaking in any language other than Turkish.[48][52][53][54][55][56]

Surname law - The surname law forbid certain surnames that contained connotations of foreign cultures, nations, tribes, and religions.[47][51][57][58] As a result, many ethnic Armenians, Greeks, and Kurds were forced to adopt last names of Turkish rendition.[57] Names ending with “yan, of, ef , viç, is, dis , poulos, aki, zade, madumu, veled, bin” (names that denote Armenian, Russian, Greek, Albanian, Arabic, Kurdish, and other origins) could not be registered, they had to be replaced by “-oğlu.”[59]

Animal name changes in Turkey - An initiative by the Turkish government to remove any reference to Armenia and Kurdistan in the Latin names of animals.[60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67]
Confiscated Armenian properties in Turkey - An initiative by the Ottoman and Turkish governments which involved seizure of the assets, properties and land of the Armenian community of Turkey.[68] The policy is considered a nationalization and Turkification of the country's economy by eliminating ownership of non-Turkish minorities which in this case would be of the Armenian community.[69]

Geographical name changes in Turkey - An initiative by the Turkish government to replace non-Turkish geographical and topographic names within the Turkish Republic or the Ottoman Empire, with Turkish names,[70][71][72] as part of a policy of Turkification.[73][74][75] The main proponent of the initiative has been a Turkish homogenization social-engineering campaign which aimed to assimilate or obliterate geographical or topographical names that were deemed foreign and divisive against Turkish unity. The names that were considered foreign were usually of Armenian, Greek, Laz, Bulgarian, Kurdish, Assyrian, or Arabic origin.[70][72][74][75][76] For example, words such as Armenia were banned in 1880 from use in the press, schoolbooks, and governmental establishments and was subsequently replaced with words like Anatolia or Kurdistan.[77][78][79][80][81]
1934 Resettlement Law (also known as the Law no. 2510) - A policy adopted by the Turkish government which set forth the basic principles of immigration.[82] The law however is regarded in academia as a policy of forceful assimilation of non-Turkish minorities through a forced and collective resettlement.[83]

Article 301 (Turkish Penal Code) - An article of the Turkish Penal Code which makes it illegal to insult Turkey, the Turkish ethnicity, or Turkish government institutions. It took effect on June 1, 2005, and was introduced as part of a package of penal-law reform in the process preceding the opening of negotiations for Turkish membership of the European Union (EU), in order to bring Turkey up to the Union standards.[84][85]
Varlik Vergisi ("Wealth tax" or "Capital tax") - A Turkish tax levied on the wealthy citizens of Turkey in 1942, with the stated aim of raising funds for the country's defense in case of an eventual entry into World War II. Those who suffered most severely were non-Muslims like the Jews, Greeks, Armenians, and Levantines, who controlled a large portion of the economy.[86] Though it was the Armenians who were most heavily taxed.[87] It is argued, a main reason for the tax was to nationalize the Turkish economy by reducing minority populations' influence and control over the country's trade, finance, and industries.
Turkification was also prevalent in the educational system of Turkey. Measures were adopted making Turkish classes mandatory in minority schools and making use of the Turkish language mandatory in economic institutions.[88]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkification

[StonyArabia]

*Morisco - Moors. Yes, a lot of Moors were given refuge in Ottoman domains some of which was Anatolia and of course the capital, Istanbul.

True many of the Morsicos who settled in Ottoman domains choose to settle in Istanbul and the western coast of Anatolia, and this would explain the North African minor elements present in Turks. They of course slowly melted into the general population, but even this day some people know of their Morsico roots.

[Shah-Jehan]

True many of the Morsicos who settled in Ottoman domains choose to settle in Istanbul and the western coast of Anatolia, and this would explain the North African minor elements present in Turks. They of course slowly melted into the general population, but even this day some people know of their Morsico roots.

They haven't had a great influence on Turks IMO.

[morski]

IIRC, not really. I suppose there are different measures of diversity. What I meant was that two randomly selected Turks aren't likely to be more different to each other in terms of autosomal genetics than two randomly selected members of most other ethnic groups.

What I meant was that Turks have input from twice or thrice as many sources as Bulgarians, which is only logical considering you had an empire stretching over three continents and assimilated all kinds of people that came across your path.

[StonyArabia]

They haven't had a great influence on Turks IMO.

True, I was just correcting the fact that North African elements that might present did not come from slaves nor North Africans are related to the admixture, but some people confuse the two. The North African elements are not important but they are indeed explained by Morsico settlements after they were expelled. However the majority went to North Africa where they settled in the coast and created important cities like Tangier in Morocco.

[Pentagram]

Yeah, right.:laugh:

Wikipedia is a safe haven for the average internet ignorant since they usually dont know much of what they try to talk about so they Google the word and post the first result as a "fact" and its mostly Wikipedia. By the way, Bulgarians are described as a Turkic tribe in many different sources.

[morski]

Wikipedia is a safe haven for the average internet ignorant since they usually dont know much of what they try to talk about so they Google the word and post the first result as a "fact" and its mostly Wikipedia. By the way, Bulgarians are described as a Turkic tribe in many different sources.

Trying to discredit Wikipedia is the last resort of the same internet ignorants.

There is a difference between Bulgars and Bulgarians and while the former might have had a Turkic element in their making, the latter have nothing to do with Turkics, Turkishness and Turansim.

[Pentagram]

Trying to discredit Wikipedia is the last resort of the same internet ignorants.

Wikipedia is a propaganda nest most of the time regarding the subjects of history and politics because it has been flooded with a lot of 19th century fabrications. Accepting everything Wikipedia says is just typical of an average internet illiterate. They dont even bother reading what other people post most of the time and just keep repeating. If I want to discredit Wikipedia propaganda, I can actually do it with facts, not with random Googling. There is also not much difference between Bulgar and Bulgarian since Bulgar is a proto-Turkic word which means mixed and Bulgarian is just the English translation of it.

[ButlerKing]

[B]There is no such thing as Turkification. Turk existence did not start with 1071 in Anatolia. Religions, languages, cultures and identities were respected, preserved and they survived after centuries of Turk rule. This thread is just an insane trolling attempt. Trolls with no real knowledge of history always use the same old Turkification excuse. Turks "massacred" and "assimilated" all of the minorities they ruled for centuries but somehow millions of them still exist today Lol. If Turks wanted to convert, assimilate the tiny Greek, Armenian populations, it wouldnt be that hard.


Now where is the record Turks massacred all the minorities? Assimilated yes because it shows in the vast majority of Turks DNA.

Genetic of Turks

Modern Turkish people largely descend from these ancient indigenous Anatolian groups,[72]k[›] but their ancestry includes neighboring peoples (e.g., Balkans and Caucasus) and Turkic peoples, albeit to a small degree.[73][74] They speak a Turkic language (the Turkish language), which was adopted by the local populations who predominantly had spoken Indo-European languages prior to a cultural transformation that took place after the invasion of a Turkic-speaking minority from Central Asia.k[›]


Turkification

Turkification (Turkish: Türkleşme when voluntary and Türkleştirme when involuntary) is the assimilation of individuals, entities, or cultures into the various historical Turkish states and cultures, especially the Ottoman Empire. As the Turkish states developed and grew there were many instances of this assimilation, voluntary and involuntary, including the Anatolian, Balkan, Caucasian and Middle Eastern peoples from different ethnic origins, such as the Albanians, Arabs, Armenians, Circassians, Greeks, Jews, Romani, various Slavic peoples, Iranian peoples such as Kurds, as well as Lazs from all the regions of the Ottoman Empire and Iran. An early form of Turkification occurred in the time of the Seljuk Empire among the indigenous peoples of Anatolia, involving religious conversion, cultural and linguistic assimilation, and interethnic relationships.


Assimilation is not part of Turk culture. Greeks, Armenians were always minorities in Anatolia. They never had the demographic dominance and constant historical presence in the region. Turkification was a strategy of changing the demography of a newly conquered region through population exchange. Forced conversion, slavery were never traditional policies in Turk history. The devshirme system was only limited with-in the palace system and it has been exaggerated by many sources. The number of Janissaries was just 12-14.000 even during Sultan Suleiman's era which was the period that Ottoman Empire had it's largest borders. Janissaries were living under strict rules and they were not allowed to get married during their service.

Anatolia has been called Turkey since 12th century. The ethnicity gave the land it's name, not the other way around. Western sources always described Turks in terms of ancestry. Anatolia was never called Greece or Armenia. The only two historical nations in Asia Minor are Turks and Persians. Thats why go and learn real history first before you start spreading around non-sense. Also, Greeks have the highest African genetic admixture in Europe. Before posting Nubian slavery fantasies about Turks, focus to this genetic fact first Lol.

[morski]

Wikipedia is a propaganda nest most of the time regarding the subjects of history and politics because it has been flooded with a lot of 19th century fabrications. Accepting everything Wikipedia says is just typical of an average internet illiterate. They dont even bother reading what other people post most of the time and just keep repeating. If I want to discredit Wikipedia propaganda, I can actually do it with facts, not with random Googling. There is also not much difference between Bulgar and Bulgarian since Bulgar is a proto-Turkic word which means mixed and Bulgarian is just the English translation of it.


And you dare speak of ignorance and illiteracy... :picard2:

Bulgars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars)
Bulgarians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarians)

[ButlerKing]

Wikipedia is a propaganda nest most of the time regarding the subjects of history and politics because it has been flooded with a lot of 19th century fabrications. Accepting everything Wikipedia says is just typical of an average internet illiterate. They dont even bother reading what other people post most of the time and just keep repeating. If I want to discredit Wikipedia propaganda, I can actually do it with facts, not with random Googling. There is also not much difference between Bulgar and Bulgarian since Bulgar is a proto-Turkic word which means mixed and Bulgarian is just the English translation of it.

And what about Turkish DNA conducted by your own Turkish scientist and claimed they are primary anatolian?


And what about DNA study that shows Turks carries from 5 - 18.5% Mongoloid admixture ( even 3 samples with 22% - 24.7% ). This fact alone proves the original Seljuks were Mongoloid or part Mongoloid. Because Turkic migration was a minority


Basically If nothing favours what Turkish people wants than everything is fake and propaganda basically.


AS FOR BULGARS

An examined population from an abandoned medieval cemetery showed mixed in anthropological terms with brachicranial Caucasoid type as the primary representatives followed by the Mongoloid admixed type. Women's were not significantly different from men but were more Caucasoid than men. Apparently, carriers of Mongoloid elements was a male part of the population that came to this territory as conquerors.[71] This finding is consistent with a model in which the Turkic languages were gradually imposed in Central Asia and East European Plain on Scythian and Uralic peoples with relatively little genetic admixture, another possible example of a language shift through elite dominance.


However there is too much evidence that shows Bulgars are related pamiri Tajiks, Iranic people who were Turkified

[Pentagram]

Bulgars
Bulgarians

So, proto-Turkic Bulgars evolved to Bulgarians after mixing with South Slavs and adopting Slavic language script? Lol.

[Smeagol]

Autosomally the Turks usually test to have like 0-0.5% African admixture. Haplogroup L doesn't really prove much, and it's likely prehistoric, and likely from North Africans.

[Smeagol]

There is no way these are recent migrant. The guy just looks Turkish with nappy hair clearly the result of mixture during ottoman times.http://ahmetpolat.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/mustafa-bij-oma.jpg

These two are afro-Turks, not ethnic Turks.

[Pentagram]

These two are afro-Turks, not ethnic Turks.

It is better not to give any response to the obsessed, repetitive troll above that started this thread. Because you wont go too far and it is a waste of your time Lol.

[ButlerKing]

These two are afro-Turks, not ethnic Turks.

I know they were afro-Turks that is why I claimed they weren't recent migrants:picard2:

[morski]

These two are afro-Turks, not ethnic Turks.

So if Islamized and linguistically Turkified Balkaners, Caucasians, Levantines and whatnot can be considered ethnic Turks why should the Afro-Turks be excluded?

[ButlerKing]

It is better not to give any response to the obsessed, repetitive troll above that started this thread. Because you wont go too far and it is a waste of your time Lol.


You properly sign up to this forum because of me ( knowing you're a Turk who just made a few post ).


A study involving mitochondrial analysis of a Byzantine-era population, whose samples were gathered from excavations in the archaeological site of Sagalassos, found that the samples had close genetic affinity with modern Turkish and Balkan populations.[74] During their research on leukemia, a group of Armenian scientists observed high genetic matching between Turks, Kurds, and Armenians.[144]

[Smeagol]

I know they were afro-Turks that is why I claimed they weren't recent migrants:picard2:

Okay, I misread what you were saying.

[Smeagol]

So if Islamized and linguistically Turkified Balkaners, Caucasians, Levantines and whatnot can be considered ethnic Turks why should the Afro-Turks be excluded?

I don't think the Turks consider them to be real Turks.

[morski]

I don't think the Turks consider them to be real Turks.

What? A random Islamized and Turkified Balkaner moved to, say, Izmir in the 17th century and married a local woman. His descendants are not regarded as ethnic Turks by today's Turks!?

[ButlerKing]

I don't think the Turks consider them to be real Turks.


Because they stand out too much

Besides they like being racist and making fun to the Blacks

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_zLznuQOQgo4/Sd-FzvdsH9I/AAAAAAAACDM/TgX2vkc9Je4/videod1463ac4eb44%5B2%5D.jpg?imgmax=800

[Smeagol]

What? A random Islamized and Turkified Balkaner moved to, say, Izmir in the 17th century and married a local woman. His descendants are not regarded as ethnic Turks by today's Turks!?

I was talking about the afro-Turks. I think they specifically are not considered Turks. Unlike Balkaners, Levantines, Circassians, etc.. the afro-Turks never really assimilated into the population, at least most of them didn't.

[StonyArabia]

I don't think the Turks consider them to be real Turks.

In Arabia you can never be seen as ethnic Arabian, even if you adopt the Arab culture, you need to belong to the Bedouin tribes and have a blood relationship or else you are not seen as one. This how in Arabia it works, and this regardless of religious or sectarian affiliation. For example a Yemenite Jew would be seen as an Arabian compared to a Muslim Bosinak who might have had adopted Arabic culture. This how in Arabia it works, I don't know in Turkey. This why many non-Arabs living in Arabia are referred to as citizens but never as ahal al bailad which means people of this nation.

[ButlerKing]

What? A random Islamized and Turkified Balkaner moved to, say, Izmir in the 17th century and married a local woman. His descendants are not regarded as ethnic Turks by today's Turks!?

They considered Caucasoid and semi-caucasoid as Turks

When I went to translated google to see what the Turks were talking about this Turkish reporter. They were asking if this guy was really Turkish or some Uyghur or central Asian Turk. Turn out he was full blooded Turkish and they still consider him 100% Turk



http://www.medyafaresi.com/f1/171_16e6b.jpg
http://www.demokrathaber.net/images/haberler/aksamdan_serdar_akinan_daga_cikti.jpg
http://skyturkvngenc.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/serdar-akinan.jpg

[ButlerKing]

I was talking about the afro-Turks. I think they specifically are not considered Turks. Unlike Balkaners, Levantines, Circassians, etc.. the afro-Turks never really assimilated into the population, at least most of them didn't.

I think it had more to do with their appearance.........

[Smeagol]

I think it had more to do with their appearance.........

Yes, the Turks wouldn't accept africans assimilating mostly.

[Şeyh Bedrettin]

I was talking about the afro-Turks. I think they specifically are not considered Turks. Unlike Balkaners, Levantines, Circassians, etc.. the afro-Turks never really assimilated into the population, at least most of them didn't.

^ this. at least %90 of turkish population even dont know if there are afro turks. they are too small in numbers and isolated.

[Dombra]

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?96252-Most-Negroid-Iberians-or-Turks

Maybe we outta revisit this thread :laugh:

[Pentagram]

What? A random Islamized and Turkified Balkaner

Which Islamized and Turkified? Which nation in the Balkans today calls itself as Turk? In which Balkan country Turkish is an offical language today? Muslim Albanians and Bosnians dont call themselves as Turks. Every nation in the Balkans is well aware of their language, religion, culture and identity today. Go and learn real history because you dont know what you are trying to talk about.

[morski]

Which Islamized and Turkified? Which nation in the Balkans today calls itself as Turk? In which Balkan country Turkish is an offical language today? Muslim Albanians and Bosnians dont call themselves as Turks. Every nation knows who they are in the Balkans today. They are well aware of their language, religion, culture and identity. Like I said, go and learn real history because you dont know what you are trying to talk about.

Should I understand your gibberish as a denial that hundreds of thousands of Balkanders, Caucasians, Levantines and various other people from other ethnicities than yours have been assimilated into your own ethnic group over the centuries?

[Siberian Cold Breeze]

Because they stand out too much

Besides they like being racist and making fun to the Blacks

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_zLznuQOQgo4/Sd-FzvdsH9I/AAAAAAAACDM/TgX2vkc9Je4/videod1463ac4eb44%5B2%5D.jpg?imgmax=800

This is a colloquial expression not related with Africans or skin color , reporter is making a word play on it..

Most Turks are curious about foreign people so they would stare at you if you have very blond hair , East Asian look or Afro Look .This can be annoying but not rude or insulting ..
Afro Turks usually complain when people think they are foreign, because not much people know about them..

Random Turkish person on street will be surprised first, but later he would say something like "God created him black " that's all.
No one thinks negative about blacks..We are nationalists but not racists.People learn about racism against blacks from TV and movies .

[PlanA]

Some Turkish men might really have some Afro admixture:
http://herewearegoing.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/big-penis-calvinkleins.jpg
@ButlerKing, does this knowledge make you feel insecure?

[ButlerKing]

Some Turkish men might really have some Afro admixture:
http://herewearegoing.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/big-penis-calvinkleins.jpg
@ButlerKing, does this knowledge make you feel insecure?

Lol what a stupid claim. East African penis itself are smaller than most almost all European and Caucasoid. Only 5.3 inch to 5.5 inches on average.

Besides I have a 9 inch erect penis..... I know you're not going to believe my size.

[Pentagram]

Should I understand your gibberish as a denial that hundreds of thousands of Balkanders, Caucasians, Levantines and various other people from other ethnicities than yours have been assimilated into your own ethnic group over the centuries?

My "gibberish" makes perfect sense unlike your Wikipedia non-sense because I know real history. Now answer me, which nation in the former regions where Turks conquered and ruled calls itself as Turks and has Turkish as offical language in their country today?

[ButlerKing]

My "gibberish" makes perfect sense unlike your Wikipedia non-sense because I know real history. Now answer me, which nation in the former regions where Turks conquered and ruled calls itself as Turks and has Turkish as offical language in their country today?


Those wikipedia are cited many well know historian. Yours history just comes out from your own ass man.

[morski]

My "gibberish" makes perfect sense unlike your Wikipedia non-sense because I know real history. Now answer me, which nation in the former regions where Turks conquered and ruled calls itself as Turks and has Turkish as offical language in their country today?

Your question is completely irrelevant to my statement. As far as your claim you "know real history", untill you substantiate it, it remains nothing but empty boasting.

[Pentagram]

Yuntill you substantiate it,

My question is perfectly relevant since it debunks your lies. If any type of assimilation took place for centuries, there should be results of it. Just like how Africa is today after centuries of Western colonization. They speak English, French as dominant tongue because the native languages, dialects in those regions are all vanished. Dominant local cultures, traditions all disappeared and people were forced to convert to Christianity. Thats why half of Africa is Christian today. If you have such examples about Turk rule, post them instead of spreading non-sense around. Otherwise, you should be silent. You call the non-sense you have been posting as history? I didnt even start talking history with you yet Lol.

[morski]

My question is perfectly relevant since it debunks your lies. If any type of assimilation took place for centuries, there should be results of it. Just like how Africa is today after centuries of Western colonization. They speak English, French as dominant tongue because the native languages, dialects in those regions are all vanished. Dominant local cultures, traditions all disappeared and people were forced to convert to Christianity. Thats why half of Africa is Christian today. If you have such examples about Turk rule, post them instead of spreading non-sense around. Otherwise, you should be silent. You call the non-sense you have been posting as history? I didnt even start talking history with you yet Lol.

Look, mate, you have so far proven that you are practically functionally illiterate or at least your level of reading comprehension is not particularly good. The fact that the modern Balkan nations exist does not invalidate what I said, namely that the Turks have bled dry those groups for centuries via the devsirme and the "dhimmitude" deal, which reduced non Muslims to a second class citizen status. So bottom line is Turks have assimilated/turkified tons of other people who lived in their empire, which was my original point in this thread(prior to your failed attmept at defocusing the convo with wikipedia bullshit and clumsily veiled personal insults). Now take a chill pill and bugger off.

[Pentagram]

Now take a chill pill

Another typical excuse of the average internet ignorant is devshirme system. Devshirme system was limited with-in the palace only. The recruited students were getting a detailed and a high quality education in schools called Enderun on religion, literature, languages, geography, state traditions, bureaucracy and social sciences. Still, Ottoman bureaucracy was not under total control of the recruited converts through devshirme system. Ottoman Divan council and provincial institutions were dominated by Turks. Starting from Sultan Suleiman era, Turks started to get recruited to Enderun schools too.

Janissaries were cultivated from Enderun schools. Their numbers were never hundreds of thousands or millions. During Sultan Suleiman's era which was the period that Ottoman Empire reached it's largest borders, the number of Janissaries were 12-14.000 at highest. Janissaries had to follow strict codes based on a tradition of military discipline and they were not allowed to get married during their service. After they retire, they had a chance for a palace career and reaching to the highest positions in the state such as becoming a Grand Vezier. Now go and learn some real history.

[Hayalet]

So if Islamized and linguistically Turkified Balkaners, Caucasians, Levantines and whatnot can be considered ethnic Turks why should the Afro-Turks be excluded?
Probably because you need at least a presumed common origin for an ethnic identity. Non-Turkish Balkanites/Caucasians/Levantines can blend in among Turks, but not Africans.

This being said, this 'Turkification' narrative is more fiction than fact. Turks certainly intermarried with non-Turkish Balkanites/Caucasians/Levantines, but it is not like there was some borg-like assimilation. Virtually all self-identifying Turks today have at least some ancestors that came from Central Asia in the last millennium.

[morski]

Probably because you need at least a presumed common origin for an ethnic identity. Non-Turkish Balkanites/Caucasians/Levantines can blend in among Turks, but not Africans.

This being said, this 'Turkification' narrative is more fiction than fact. Turks certainly intermarried with non-Turkish Balkanites/Caucasians/Levantines, but it is not like there was some borg-like assimilation. Virtually all self-identifying Turks today have at least some ancestors that came from Central Asia in the last millennium.

I'm not disputing this, I just find it stupid how Pentagram denies that any intermixing occured between Turks and the conquered peoples within the empire, it's hilarious. It happened, it is documented and it shows in your genetic studies. Turks are a diverse people both in appearance nad genetics.

[ButlerKing]

oi
Probably because you need at least a presumed common origin for an ethnic identity. Non-Turkish Balkanites/Caucasians/Levantines can blend in among Turks, but not Africans.

This being said, this 'Turkification' narrative is more fiction than fact. Turks certainly intermarried with non-Turkish Balkanites/Caucasians/Levantines, but it is not like there was some borg-like assimilation. Virtually all self-identifying Turks today have at least some ancestors that came from Central Asia in the last millennium.

Turkification is partially true (but's is also very true). Conquered inhabitants would have been turkified an than intermixed with purer Ottoman Turks


Turkification and partially intermixing by Seljuks and Ottoman is the real history of Turkish people

[Pentagram]

Pentagram denies

You can not even conduct a serious debate. After giving a few typical sentences as example, you are out of fuel. Just like how you ignored my response about the devshirme system. If you are wondering the reason of the diverse look among the Turk population today, you better learn who are Oghuz Turks first. They consist of 22, according to some sources, 24 tribes. Turks of Anatolia and Turks of Azerbaijan originated from Oghuz Turk tribes. Safavid Dynasty that ruled today's Iran was also an Oghuz dynasty. Safavid State accepted the Shia branch of Islam for the first time in history as an offical religion. Turks of Anatolia, Turks of Turkmenistan and Turks of Azerbaijan speak Oghuz Turkish with dialect differences.

Cultural and linguistic unity is solid. Turks of Anatolia and 40 million Azerbaijan Turks living in Azerbaijan and Southern Iran look very identical to eachother. Genetic test results do not necessarily prove such strict and solid results since many nations in large geographies share similar genetics in today's world. Considering the most common y-hablogroup in Europe today, R1b is also present in many Central Asian populations.

As for getting married with different ethnic groups, Alevi Turks since 13rd century, did not get married with different ethnic groups for 700 years because of their belief considering the fact that the condition for being an Alevi is to be born to an Alevi family. Nusayris with Turkmen origin, did not get married with different ethnic groups for 1100 years. You see, trying to explain thousands of years of history with a small devshirme system example is self-humiliation.

[ButlerKing]

Janissaries were cultivated from Enderun schools. Their numbers were never hundreds of thousands or millions. During Sultan Suleiman's era which was the period that Ottoman Empire reached it's largest borders, the number of Janissaries were 12-14.000 at highest. Janissaries had to follow strict codes based on a tradition of military discipline and they were not allowed to get married during their service. After they retire, they had a chance for a palace career and reaching to the highest positions in the state such as becoming a Grand Vezier.

Now go and learn some real history. It is obvious who failed.[/B]


The number of The Janissary Corps increased in the 18th century, to 113,400 soldiers, although most were not actual soldiers

[ButlerKing]

I'm not disputing this, I just find it stupid how Pentagram denies that any intermixing occured between Turks and the conquered peoples within the empire, it's hilarious. It happened, it is documented and it shows in your genetic studies. Turks are a diverse people both in appearance nad genetics.

Sultan Selim II gave janissaries permission to marry in 1566 and by the 18th century (1750) they had taken many trades and marriages. In the last hundred years of Ottoman there was a strict assimilation policy and encouraged Turkish nationalism.

Corps strength

From the 1510 there was 10,156 to 37,627 in 1609

In 1665 there was 51,478

In 1670 there was 49,868

In 1680 there was 54,222






Don't underestimate the numbers. The number of Janissaries would have been half of million if all numbers are added from the 1400 to 1750.

[archangel]

is this some kind of a joke

[RussiaPrussia]

:clap:

[Pentagram]

is this some kind of a joke

Yes, joke of the miserable Wikipedia copy paste trolls that know nothing about history spreading around the same old sentences they memorized. They dont even read what you post, ignore the facts you provide and they just keep parroting and posting random garbage they digged out of Google about subjects they have never even read anything about before. Turcophobia is the name of their illness.

[morski]

[B]You can not even conduct a serious debate. After giving a few typical sentences as example, you are out of fuel.

I'm just through with you, not worth the bother.

[ButlerKing]

Yes, joke of the miserable Wikipedia copy paste trolls that know nothing about history spreading around the same old sentences they memorized. They dont even read what you post, ignore the facts you provide and they just keep parroting and posting random garbage they digged out of Google about subjects they have never even read anything about before. Turcophobia is the name of their illness.

And what are your sources based from? no backup, no historian, no source man........

[Pentagram]

Year - Number of Janissaries

1480 10.000
1568 12.789
1609 37.627
1670 53.849

Sultan Mahmud II ordered the dissolution of Janissary Corps on 15th of June, 1826. Mahmud ordered Janissary barracks to get shelled with artillery and aimed to leave no survivors behind. The remaining Janissaries were executed on sight when they were spotted. Assimilation and forced conversions were not traditional Turk policies. Now go and learn real history.

[Pentagram]

I'm just through with you, not worth the bother.

Yes of course. You kept ignoring my posts, couldnt respond to my facts and lost the debate already. Because I debunked your devshirme system manipulation and the same old Turkification lie.

[ButlerKing]

Year - Number of Janissaries

1480 10.000
1568 12.789
1609 37.627
1670 53.849

Sultan Mahmud II ordered the dissolution of Janissary Corps on 15th of June, 1826. Mahmud ordered Janissary barracks to get shelled with artillery and aimed to leave no survivors behind. The remaining Janissaries were executed on sight when they were spotted. Assimilation and forced conversions were not traditional Turk policies. Now go and learn real history.

Do you have a source on the part where they were executed?

[Pentagram]

The dissolution of the Janissary Corps is a famous event in Ottoman history called "Vaka-i Hayriye, The Fortunate Event" which took place on 16th of June, 1826. Another evidence how good these trolls are at history class Lol.

[MINARDOWICZ]

ButlerKing has a Asian and Black fetish so a combination of both is way too perfect for him

black n yellow black n yellow... you know what it is!

[ButlerKing]

The dissolution of the Janissary Corps is a famous event in Ottoman history called "Vaka-i Hayriye, The Fortunate Event" which took place on 16th of June, 1826. Another evidence how good these troll are at history class Lol.


What a dumbass. Do you even read what people write? I said give me a source the part where they were executed

[ButlerKing]

Auspicious Incident

was the forced disbandment of the centuries–old Janissary corps by Mahmud II on 15 June 1826.[2][3] The Janissaries revolted against Mahmud II, and after the rebellion was suppressed,

In the ensuing fight, the Janissary barracks were set in flames by artillery fire resulting in 4,000 Janissary deaths, more were killed in the heavy fighting on the streets of Constantinople (the capital of the Ottoman Empire, and the center of the Janissary order). The survivors either fled or were imprisoned, their possessions confiscated by the Sultan. By the end of 1826 the captured Janissaries, constituting the remainder of the force, were put to death by decapitation in the Thessaloniki fort that soon came to be called the "Blood Tower" (but which has been, since 1912, known as the White Tower). Roughly 100 other Janissaries fled to Cistern of Philoxenos where many drowned.[6]


Some Janissaries survived by keeping a low profile and taking ordinary jobs.[1] Immediately following the destruction of the elite Janissary.


Regardless this doesn't prove anything. There was still hundreds of thousands of jannisaries who intermarried with the local population during 1556 up until the 1800 century

[Pentagram]

Lol what a foolish question. Janissary head-quarters was located in Istanbul. Write "Auspicious Incident" to Google and find it out yourself.

[Pentagram]

this doesn't prove anything.

Janissaries were not allowed to get married during their service. I already wrote that above. It can only be the result of a history illiterate mind to relate a 76 million populated country today with the number of a few couple of thousand elite military unit of the medieval era. I dont have any more response to give or any intention to keep arguing with a Turkophobic troll. It is no different than talking to a thick brick wall. By the way, why do you only pick the parts you like from the article?

*** Aftermath
The Janissary leaders were executed and their possessions confiscated by the Sultan. The younger Janissaries were either exiled or imprisoned. Thousands of Janissaries had been killed, and thus the elite order came to its end.

Who knows how you change, manipulate those articles to make them compatible to your view before you post them here Lol. Thats also how Turcophobic trolls edit Wikipedia pages.

[ButlerKing]

Janissaries were not allowed to get married during their service. I already wrote that above. It can only be the result of a mentally challenged mind-set to relate the population of a country today with a few couple of thousand populated elite military unit of the medieval era. Stop quoting me because I dont have any more response to give you or any intention to keep arguing with a Turkophobic troll. It is no different than talking to a thick brick wall. No wonder why you are a well known insane troll here that everybody laughs at Lol.

By the way, why do you only pick the parts you like from the article Wikipedia philosopher?

*** Aftermath

The Janissary leaders were executed and their possessions confiscated by the Sultan. The younger Janissaries were either exiled or imprisoned. Thousands of Janissaries had been killed, and thus the elite order came to its end.

Who knows how you change, manipulate those articles to make them compatible with your obsession Lol. Thats how Turcophobic trolls like you edit Wikipedia pages.

They were giving permission to marry in 1556. They can marry as soon as they quit or retired and that's enough. And it's a few hundred thousand for your info.

I had not idea about the execution of janissaries. I clearly didn't edit shit...... just look at the wikpedia date.

[Hayalet]

There are two periods for the Janissaries in this respect:

1. Pre-17th century Janissaries who were mostly drafted devhsirme (non-Turkish and non-Muslim in origin), relatively few in numbers and forbidden to marry or conduct trade.
2. Post-17th century Janissaries who were mostly volunteer Turkish Muslims, large in numbers, allowed to marry and conduct trade.

[Pentagram]

There are two periods for the Janissaries in this respect:

I have written facts about the highly exaggerated devshirme system, the recruitment and Enderun regulations in my previous posts in this thread but obsessed trolls with weak knowledge keep repeating the same old non-sense.

[Peikko]

This would explain why Turks are so swarthy. Makes sense.

[Gaston]

Autosomally the Turks usually test to have like 0-0.5% African admixture. Haplogroup L doesn't really prove much, and it's likely prehistoric, and likely from North Africans.

Or Neolithic Levant (mtdna L2a was found in Neolithic Syria).
But there is recent SSA admix in quite a lot of Turks (not the majority though). There is even a Cypriot Turk with known Sudanese ancestry who is a member here (or elsewhere).


This would explain why Turks are so swarthy. Makes sense.

No it doesn't make sense. Only some Europeans are very light-skinned. Eurasians from higher latitudes are usually swarthy. Even your northern Saami neighbors can be swarthy as fuck.
Turks are usually swarthy because they aren't Europeans but a West Asian population.

[Peikko]

Turks are usually swarthy because they aren't Europeans but a West Asian population.
Yeah, sure, but Turks are swarthy compared to some of their neighbors too.

[Pentagram]

Yeah, sure, but Turks are swarthy compared to some of their neighbors too.

Did anybody ask for your opinion miserable little rat?

[Yuffayur]

True, I was just correcting the fact that North African elements that might present did not come from slaves nor North Africans are related to the admixture, but some people confuse the two. The North African elements are not important but they are indeed explained by Morsico settlements after they were expelled. However the majority went to North Africa where they settled in the coast and created important cities like Tangier in Morocco.

Tangiers is older than Carthage... you're confusing with Tetouan (and even Tetouan existed before, but it was too small).
Istanbul has 5% M81, mainly from Algerians that settled there during Ottomans era.

[sql]

There is nothing wrong with being part black, but this just isn't true.

[Afshar]

True story

[bortbort]

Check the ARAB admixture of southern Europeans and tell me how high that is...
Bet it goes to nearly 20% or more in Greece and southern Italy.
BTW Portuguese are around 10% black African...