Hello.
The Pechenegs were a unique population, so they should not be confused with another Turkish population, but only one of them.
Like there are several Latin countries, but they are all special. Like there are several Slavic countries, but they are all special. And so on
There are several types of Turks:
ccording to Wikipedia: (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_peoples)
587 AD - Göktürk
585 AD - the Great Turk Khan
584 AD - Türküt, Türk and Türük
481 AD - Beidi (an ancient Chinese chronicle, Spring and Autumn Annals)
43 AD - Turcae (written by Pomponius Mela)
23 AD - Tyrcae (written by Pliny the Elder)
922 BC - Togarma (Bible, Genesis 10: 3)
1792 BC - Turukku / Tukri written by the Babylonian king Hammurabi.
Surprisingly, the descendants of today's Pechenegs obtain a very small East Asian DNA: the Gagauz. The same thing happens to other people who have known Pecheneg ancestors and do these DNA tests. As well as people from villages bearing the name: Pecheneg, or other similar variants.
So, if the only ones who are still proud of being the descendants of the Pechenegs (because that's what their grandparents told them, who knew this from their great-grandparents, and so on) are these people who receive these results, they would we had to be guided more by them and not by people who didn't even know what "Pecheneg" meant until they searched Wikipedia.
But we must not confuse Central Asia with East Asia.
If we open Google Maps, and take a line or a pen and put it on the map, we see that from the farthest point of Central Asia (Caspian Sea) to the farthest point of East Asia (Japan) there is a greater distance. even greater than the distance to Portugal, Ireland, Norway, passing far beyond them, and about equal to the distance to South Africa.
All the more so if Eastern Siberia can also be classified in East Asia, and we examine the farthest point of Eastern Siberia. In this way, we can cover the whole of Europe twice, and Africa is much covered.
And if we calculated everything mathematically, in numbers, as is the distance in km between these two areas: Central Asia and East Asia or East Siberia, we would have a mathematical result that this place should be much more similar to South Africa. southern and northwestern Europe.
In fact, also mathematically, we see that we reach America if it leaves from the Eastern Caspian Sea to Europe, in the same measure in numbers and km in which we barely reach the end of Eastern Siberia, and also with this distance we can see not only that we reach America , but in South America even close to its South.
Everything I've written above is not about DNA, it's about helping us understand that it's amazing the great distance between East Asia and Central Asia.
Along with all this, we see that Central Asia once did not even speak Turkish. So, we must not confuse the turquoise Central Asia of today with the Central Asia of many years ago.
I'm not talking about myself, but I also have an argument, such as Andronovo Culture and an example of DNA, see: (
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...Dmatch-results).
F999947 / Andronovo-RISE500
Kit F999947
Eurogenes K13
Admix Results (sorted):
# Percent population
1 North_Atlantic 44.41
2 Baltic 38.28
3 West_Asian 15.04
4 South_Asian 1.59
5 Amerindian 0.59
6 West_Med 0.09
Single Population Sharing:
# Population (source) Distance
1 North_Swedish 12.86
2 Swedish 14.06
3 Southwest_Finnish 15.54
4 North_German 15.66
5 Norwegian 16.01
6 Danish 17.1
7 North_Dutch 17.51
8 East_German 18.09
9 Finnish 18.27
10 South_Polish 18.31
11 Polish 18.86
12 Austrian 19.06
13 Estonian 19.65
14 Irish 19.69
15 La_Brana-1 19.85
16 Hungarian 19.88
17 Orcadian 19.93
18 Ukrainian_Lviv 20.42
19 Russian_Smolensk 20.45
20 West_Scottish 20.6
Well, that's what one of the Central Asians might have looked like once.
South of Andronovo, there was also Oxus. Right where Turkmenistan is today. I don't want to make a mistake, I'm just saying that the name bears little resemblance to '' Oguz '' and I stop here, continuing what I really meant.
These two were followed by Proto-Iranian populations and then for a very long period by the Scythians.
In fact, even further east of these, Tocharieni appear, much further east even in today's Turkish countries.
Okay, I'm not going to list everything and write the whole story here, and if you really want to find out you can search for other populations yourself, and search for their DNA.
All these populations have lived for a very long time in Central Asia, and in the places where the Pechenegs will appear.
And amazingly, studies of Gagauz people and people with Pecheneg ancestors show a closeness to Turkmenistan, but a great distance from the rest of the surrounding Turkish countries. They are more like Iran than Kazakhstan or Uighur.
The Pechenegs are also speakers of the Turkish Oguza language.
These DNA tests can confirm that the Pecheneg language was certainly part of the Oguza Turkish language.
This miracle, the fact that Gagauz Turks along with people with Pecheneg ancestors in the Balkans sometimes get even lower results from East Asian and Siberian and even South Indian in their DNA, can show that the distance of Gagauz from Turkmenistan has become greater only because the fact that Turkmenistan, remaining in Central Asia after the departure of the Pechenegs, had an increase in East Asian and Siberian and South Asian DNA only after the departure of the Pechenegs.
Kangar Union, being a state founded by the Pechenegs, more precisely: Kangar was the nickname given to the Pecheneg tribes because they were stronger than the rest of the Pecheneg tribes. Kangar Union vassals were the rest of the Turkish nations that were part of the Kangar Union.
All these vassal nations, along with other nations, will attack the Pechenegs, leading to the disintegration of the Kangar Union in 750, and the migration of the Pechenegs from Central Asia to Europe.
Amazingly, there is also the fact that Oghuz Yabgu, founded in 750, appears after the dissolution of Kangar Union also in 750.
The Pechenegs will create an independent khanate that will bear their name in the North Black Sea. Different dimensions of these khanates can be found by searching on Google Images, as well as their location.
These Pechenegs will sometimes be called "Scythians" by the authors of the times.
Therefore, it is possible that they were also a part of the Scythians in Central Asia, as the Scythians stretched as far as Central Asia, and existed there long before the Turkification of space (see the map of the Scythians) that was Turkified.
Through DNA tests we can see that both Gagauz and the rest of the people with Pecheneg ancestors, even though they have almost non-existent East Asian and East Siberian DNA, still obtain an Ancestral Altaic DNA, along with an almost prominent amount of Caucasian and West Asian.
Therefore, they have ancestors in Central Asia and even in the Ancestral Altaics.
However, this is not due to the peoples of the Caucasus. They are as far away from the Georgians as they are from the Saudis or the Kazakhs [but twice as close to Turkmenistan].
Nor to other Cacao peoples, such as the Armenians. Armenians are probably even further away than Iranians. Also searching among the Caucasian peoples, the Chechens are also far more distant than Iran. However, they are closer to Azerbaijan. And yet, Azerbaijan is further away from them than Turkmenistan, but being in 2nd place. At almost equal distances from Azerbaijan is Tajikistan which could be in 3rd place although this may probably be caused by Turkmen who have migrated to Tajikistan in the last hundred for years.
Therefore, all the percentages of West Asia and the Caucasus, together with the DNA of the Ancestral Altai, together with their proximity to Turkmenistan as a country surrounded by other countries (even Turkish) for which they obtain great distances, show a very close connection.
And, following that the approach to Tajikistan (similar to Azerbaijan), of Iran, which is closer than the surrounding Turkish countries and than the Caucasus, shows that they did contain proto-Iranian elements.
Amazingly, with their arrival in Europe, they were not only called Scythians, and sometimes even: the ancient Scythians.
Other sources say that: Even they, the Pechenegs, proclaimed themselves to be royal Scythians.
Analyzing all this I sat and thought:
How can these people be Turks if they are as far away from the Mongols as they are from Africans in DNA tests.
And then, I read on the net about Turkish, that it could come from the same group of languages as Mongolian, namely: Altai.
And yes, they had Ancestral Altaic DNA but Mongolian DNA was missing.
And this, according to certain theories, that the Turks come from the Mongols would result in that they are not Turks.
And a paradox arose: The Turks come from the Mongols, or both the Turks and the Mongols have only the same father [Altai].
And, although there are studies that show that the Turks come from the east, both linguistically and in terms of DNA, I wondered:
If this linguistic coincidence between Turkish and Mongolian is only due to the fact that the Turks and the Mongols will live together, that the Mongols will convert to the God of the Turks (Tengrism), and many others?
And I found on the internet, the information that, following a study, it was shown that there are more Turkish words in Mongolian than Mongolian words in Turkish. The same study applied the same method to Korean and Japanese, and had the same result.
And I asked myself: Is there a probability that the Turks are a population that actually migrated from west to east, and not the other way around?
Because look:
DNA studies show that the Turks appear in eastern Mongolia. But don't some Turks have this DNA at all? What this means?
And the studies, I say like the Turkish language, also appear there. Then why have other studies shown that migration occurred in reverse?
Being mistaken by studies on the Turkish language and on DNA tests, some trying to prove a theory, and others the opposite, I said to look in history. The oldest possible information about the Turks.
And, from historical sources, I find out that the "Turks" from Eastern Mongolia were only seen as some, I quote: "foreigners" and, people who were even called: they are not originals from those areas. As they were, I quote "nomads" and there were also, I quote: "barbarians".
I said, "Incredible!" How could the original Turks in those areas be, if the people in those areas called them "foreigners" and "migrants"?
I told everything briefly, now I'm going to bring evidence:
And, we excluded "Turkish origins according to language and DNA", through "Turkish origins according to history".
Specifically, when do the oldest references to proto-Turks appear historically?
587 AD - Göktürk
585 AD - the Great Turk Khan
584 AD - Türküt, Türk and Türük
481 AD - Beidi (an ancient Chinese chronicle, Spring and Autumn Annals)
43 AD - Turcae (written by Pomponius Mela)
23 AD - Tyrcae (written by Pliny the Elder)
922 BC - Togarma (Bible, Genesis 10: 3)
1792 BC - Turukku / Tukri written by the Babylonian king Hammurabi.
1. Analyzing whether Turukku / Tukri are people of the Bronze and Iron Age of Mesopotamia and the Zagros Mountains in South West Asia. I said: They probably migrated to close to Korea.
2. Analyzing Togarma, they would be originals from where the world is divided, through Sem, Ham and Japhet. According to Genesis 10. And Togarma, being one of Japhet's 10 sons. According to the Bible, everyone spoke the same language, but then God created several languages. Japhet, it seemed similar to Japan. As well as Togarma with Turkey. This is reinforced by the Jews who claim that Togarma are the Turks, and that the resemblance I see in these names is affirmed by them and by Jewish traditions.
3 & 4. Analyzing Tyrcae and Turcae, It is amazing how in the 25s AD, not one, but two Romanian authors name the populations of the northern Sea of Azov: Turcae and Tyrcae. In that year, the Scythians lived in that place. So why are the Scythians called "Turks" in 25AD? And how, a few years later, the medieval Turks are called Scythians? Or '' Royal Scythians ''?
5. Analyzing Beidi: Finally, we arrive in East Asia only hundreds of years apart from the first possible historical sources: Beidi. Wow, I read about Beidi, on wikipedia, and I notice that they are just, I quote: "foreigners", "migrants", "nomads", "with unintelligible languages", "barbarians, mix Hu ''. Wow, were they: Scythians, of another language, with different aspects? The horses still quote: "with a lot of hair on their feet", somewhat Caucasian and West Asian aspects for the population there, which was not so hairy. They also had different traditions and cultures. Wait, what to continue: Everything was different, with these "Strangers". And I don't call them "Strangers" but the people of that area wrote that about them.
6. Orkhon inscriptions with The Bugut. Well, they are already hundreds of years away from the first sources. When these sources appear, hundreds of years have already passed since the formation of the Turks. They already existed, and in large numbers. Don't confuse: The appearance of those inscriptions does not mean the year in which the Turk appears! It would not have been written about 2, 3 people, but: It was already about a formed language, a formed population. Already, the Mongols were converted to their religion [attention, not the Turks were converted to the Mongol religion, but vice versa]: because Tengri, means: God of the Turks.
And I thought, can these people be just Beidi's descendants?
The nearest town / village, to the Göktürk museum where these Orkhon inscriptions are found, is called Bayan.
Could I have connected Beidi to Bayan?
Could I have connected Beidi to Bayan? And I saw that on the Google Map, although you wouldn't have me Beidi of the old maps, there is: Beijing.
So I said, yes, I can connect them. And the changes that could have occurred are: i = y = j, that is, although there are 3 different letters, they could have been one and the same.
And, there could have been similar ones. So, is that probably why studies say Beidi could have been Turkish?
And I was wondering, '' How can I find out? How can I find out? ''
And, walking on the map of Mongolia, I see that it is full of districts, villages and hamlets, which bear this name in different forms: Bay, Bayanchongor, Bajanchongor. In fact, there are too many, and everything only reinforces the fact that i = y = j.
Everything gets stronger, when wikipedia states that Beidi is also called Baidi. Ok, it's all clear: The closest village to Orkhon script is Bay, these are Baidi, and they also formed the villages in Mongolia that bear similar names: Bayan. And, if they also formed Bayan, they also formed the other Bajan villages. And, if there is a Bayanch, it means that the Bajanch is similar.
So could Beidi and Orkhon Script have the same origins? Then, those who wrote Orkhon Script are "foreigners" and are not original in those places.
So, how can the Scythians and the Turks be confused, while in East Asia they were clearly, very different and called "migrants, foreigners, of another language, different physically, different culture, etc."
Are there probably Chinese or East Asian sources who called the Turks "Scythians"? Because it could clarify the matter.
We only know that Chinese sources sometimes called them Hu-like. But, if we look for information about the Beidi people on wikipedia '' Although initially described as nomadic, they seem to have practiced a mixed pastoral, agricultural, and hunting economy and were distinguished from the nomads of the Eurasian steppe (Hu) who lived to their north ''.
So we see the distinction clearly: Hu, they were a bit like Beidi. But at the same time they were different. It's easy: Both Beidi and Hu were together, different from the original populations of the area, but if you want to know if Hu and Beidi were one and the same, you know that they were also different. Just more like the rest of the original people in those areas.
And, we know, Hu, they were like the Scythians. Also, even Hu can be similar to Hun. Another population that may be Turkish, and the same population that was confused with the Scythians, or even the medieval sources who called Hungary "the Land of the Turks". Although Hu and Beidi were different, don't forget that!
Specifically, Hu would have been much more northern and probably Uralic. While Beidi could be Turks. It might have seemed similar to both the Chinese and the Europeans. However, both reveal the differences between them when you want to look deeper. In fact, the same sources mention: "Their languages were not even mutually intelligible." So, could that mean anything?
Ok, this is already another topic. So we will not discuss the difference between Hu and Beidi here and now. But, we can clearly conclude:
1. Beidi are foreign, not original. They cannot be confused with the original population of that area. This is a clear difference.
2. The Turks and the Scythians are confused.
How can we know, though, if Beidi is a Scythian? It's simple: Sometimes, typing "Pecheneg" on google translate, it automatically translates to us in Beijing.
Pecheneg, they were royal Scythians, because there could have been several types of Scythians.
Some of them could have migrated to eastern Mongolia.
They are the same, which in the year 25AD were called Turcae / Tyrcae.
And they are the same: Which medieval writers called "Scythians" even though there were already Pechenegs, speakers of the Turkish language oguz. Yes, they continued to call them "Scythians."
The Arabs have several forms for the Pechenegs, and they say that their language is called "Ben-Ghazi." (
https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7...4%D8%A8%D8%AC% D9% 86% D8% A7% D9% 83% D9% 8A% D8% A9)
We only know that the Oghuz were also called Ghuzz. (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oghuz_Turks).
We also know that Oguz Yabgu appears fixed after the departure of the Pechenegs, in 750.
In other languages, they are called: Bajan, Bajanakh, Bajanach, Bayanch, Bajanch, Bay, Baj, Baja.
So, some forms have arrived in China. These strangers were called: Beidi.
Meanwhile, the Mongols have closer forms: Bayan (the first village near Orkhon Script).
And the Mongols have the rest of the names.
In time, what the Arabs called it differently. While the Persians called them differently, while the Tibetans called them differently, while the Greeks called them differently. I will not continue, and if you really care, you can search for yourself as they were called by each population, but, whatever they called them, they all referred to the same population.
So, this is proof, that no matter how you write Pecheneg, it is one and the same.
If you want to find out the purest form, use the form of the Oguz Turks, because that was their language. [Peçenekler veya Beçenekler].
If you want to know what they are called today, use the name: Gagauz. Because they are, Gök-Oguz.
If you want to know why the Gagauz are called Gagauzi, search the internet [24 Oghuz tribes]. Pecenek is a branch of Gök Han.
And Gök Han is the son of Oguz Khan. That is why he is also called Gök Oguz Khan. And the Pechenegs bear this name today. But if you want, stop calling them "gagauzi." Call them Pechenegs, or call them "Gök-Oguzi," or simply call them "Turks."
And, don't try to prove that they are not Turks, because they don't have East Asian DNA. They are Turks!
We do not know exactly if the Pechenegs were the Scythian tribe that migrated to East Asia, or other tribes such as Bayat.
Because in so many languages, they are simply translated "Baj, Bai, Bay" or "Bej, Bei, Bey".
Don't be afraid. No more so-called non-Turkish gagauz. They still have a wolf on the flag, and everyone who says they are not Turks does not have a wolf on the flag.
And don't be afraid. The descendants of the Gagauz still have the family name: "Wolf", while you do not have it!
Don't be afraid. It was not the Turks who converted to the Mongol religion, but the Mongols who prayed to our wolf. The Tengri. To the God of the Turks.
Don't be afraid: You can't say that the real Turks are the Chinese, the Mongols, the South Siberians, the Koreans, etc. Because none of them speak Turkish, and none of them will ever identify as "I'm a real Turk!"
Instead, the gagauz will do it with the greatest pride!
Oh Turks. When you do this, you will find your origins. You will unite. Then the Turk will become as he was in the beginning: One!
I told you what I had to say. It's your turn to continue.
Good luck!
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by RogueState
Bosna i Hercegovina
Bookmarks