1
Thanks! Great answer!
Yeah that's what I was thinking. But being part of the same tribe for centuries also suggests most people in it are related somehow by now even though there are different paternal origins, as wifes were primarily taken between the tribes of the larger "confederation" or however one wants to call it.I doubt it's related to it. Surname culture among Turks is not tribal, and just because you share the same surname you are not necessarily relative even if you're living in the same village. I'm sharing the same surname with like 5% of Western Thrace, but I do not have one single relative from my paternal grandfather's line. You might be a relative from your father's maternal side, or grandfather's maternal side, etc. and the surname might be either coincidence or a sign of being historical companions. The tribe system of Turks was not like Serbs, for example, which suggests a common paternal origin. In this sense, surnames were replaceable at any time. But it is still great information related to your tribe, as it probably suggests the same origin even though not being relative.
The surname only exists once in Iran though. It's a name thats exclusively related to our small tribe that's why It strongly implies relation. It's not just a random surname. However I suspect that the split of the larger tribe were more geographical or occupational related rather than a split by male line. That's true.
Bookmarks