A pure Mongoloid or pure Caucasoid can't be real/pure Turkic

[Dr_Maul]

Probably the first Turkic speaker was 100% Caucasian or Mongoloid

[reboun]

Probably the first Turkic speaker was 100% Caucasian or Mongoloid

Why do you think so?

[Dr_Maul]

Why do you think so?

There is a third option
If original Turk culture, civilization, peoples etc was created out of a combination of 2 different people groups, then its possible for the very first Turks to be mixed. Something like Proto/Altaic + ? (some Caucasoid) = Turkic.
But where is the proof for this?
Otherwise, it is simply following the traditional rules. A people group assimilates another, transmitting genetics, but the assimilation is coming from only one side (and thus the original).

[neclar]

Probably the first Turkic speaker was 100% Caucasian or Mongoloid

Very good

[Sora]

...

...

I advice you to read this: https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...-the-Scythians

[Dr_Maul]

I advice you to read this: https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...-the-Scythians

How is this even related? First Turk speaker was either Steppe MLBA (Caucasian) or MNG_N / Khovsgol type (full Mongoloid)

[Kaspias]

Recent articles suggest possibly earliest of ancestors of Turkic is around 80% East Eurasian birthplace being around Baykal River. Speculating it, there is one other theory that claims 100% East Eurasian origin birthplace being Yellow River. In addition, there are several claims that suggest Proto Turkic presence among Saka's but I would presume that it is thanks to the interaction between IE Saka and Asian(Baykal-connected) Sakas.

However, we do not know at what stage these people started to speak Turkic. Consider the fact that they started to identify as Turk in the early medieval - or in late Xiongnu in maximum.- Selçuk Bey, who directed his hordes to the Khorasan were not even identifying Turk until he discovers the fact that Persians call all those Asian nomads as Turk. This is thanks to the fact that Oghuz was seen as a rebellious formation within Turkic groups, and excluded from the common Turkic ethnogenesis. Some other factors such as the dissolution of Kimaks, famine in Western Siberia created a melting pot in the Eastern part of the Caspian Sea and led Oghuz to experience a population boom and eventually find themselves leading other Turkic groups.

At this stage I would like to speculate that Turkic surely has an Asian background, however, both language's itself(or directly inherited as an isolated language than neighbor languages?) and the ethnogenesis from a general perspective emerged with a mix between Steppe and Asian groups, later acquired BMAC also. In this sense, the Turkic culture, people who identified as Turkic, were actually emerged kind of late, thus we must take these Medieval populations as a reference while measuring how Turkic today's Turks. Otherwise, it would be like using a WHG/EEF calculator and claim that one is 20% Spanish(let's say) just because he comes up with the 20% EEF score. That's what Sora tries to point out, I believe.

[Hektor12]

Probably the first Turkic speaker was 100% Caucasian or Mongoloid

Its like first English speaker was %100 German or Danish.

[Dr_Maul]

Its like first English speaker was %100 German or Danish.

Yes

[neclar]

Turk are pure caucasoid.png
pecheneg.png
Romanian with Pecheneg DNA <3 Pure Caucasoid