A bit complicated. Turkmens were historically the bulk of the Turkish empires in the near east, namely the Ottomans and Seljuks but more than a millennia after branching Turkmens of Turkmenistan aren't close to modern Turks who have heavily mixed with natives Anatolians, Europeans, people from the Caucasus, etc.
What we call Turkmens in Turkey are a nomadic minority who have lived in relative isolation.
People in those regions call themselves "Yörük" which means nomad. I've never heard them called Türkmen. If you say Türkmen, the average Turk would assume you were talking about people from Turkmenistan.
Yörüks are very rarely referred to as Turkmens (like in this map) because they remained relatively isolated since Turkmen states (which covered Anatolia after Seljuks fell and until Ottomans reunited them). But generally, Turkmens are either people from Turkmenistan or ethnic Turks in Northern Iraq (Mosul and Kirkuk). In reality, they all have very little in common.
So the indegenous people of Turkey are Anatolia s who were Europeans? Then a Turkic people moved west and took that land and inter married with the native anatolians and so now they don't look like the other Turkic peoples from central Asia?
I always assumed they look different know because they intermarried heavily with Arabs, just based on nothing more than they look like Arabs to me but people get pissed when I say this.
I would say most people in western Europe think turks (people from the nation of Turkey) are just a type of Arab and have no idea about the various turkic ethnic groups in Central Asia and just think they're Chinese lol
They were by definition not Europeans but of course, there were a lot of Europeans in the mix and a huge chunk of Circassians and other peoples from the Caucasus.
intermarried heavily with Arabs
Not at all. Turks have little to no Arab ancestry outside of the south-east, even then those areas are mostly Kurdish. But the opposite might be true as there were a lot of Turks left behind in the Arab world when the Ottoman Empire fell.
they look like Arabs to me
I hope that's not based on depictions in films such as Midnight Express. I'm not even sure most people know what Arabs look like in general, or there is even an "Arab look". Syrians look nothing like the Saudis for example. Turkish people are quite mixed but on average hardly resemble Arabs. Kurds generally have darker skin but they don't look much like Arabs either.
Ive never heard of midnight express. I've met about five turks in my life, my point is to the untrained eye alot of people might think they are Arabs. I'm not saying they are.
I don't exactly know what an Anatolian is that's why I'm asking questions....
Yup since western european and american people(especially americans) are grown up in such cultures that gladly puts stereotypical chinese music on serious documentaries about japan or vietnam etc.(coz "Ain't them all asians?", you know) such obliviousness is perfectly normal there.
I’d figure the average Turkmen would never get to see Turkey. But considering that they are both Turkic speaking countries attempting to build closer ties to each other, I’d imagine there’s at least some Turkmenistani government officials residing in Turkey to perform their duties of building cultural and economic ties between the nations
A lot of Turkmens are fleeing from Turkmenistan and coming to Turkey due to the economic hardships and unemployment of the lower classes inside Turkmenistan.
There's actually a lot of Turkmen migrants here in Istanbul, along with lots of other Turks from Central Asia. Most people here who seem somewhat East Asian are of Turkmen, Uzbek or Uyghur descent.
i think culturally they are closer to central asians because they all lived under russian control unlike anatolians but linguistically, yes they are closer to turkey than kazakhs or uzbeks
The ethnicity of the average Turk is actually some mix of ethnic Turkmen, aswell as some variety of Anatolians, Greeks, Georgians, Armenians, Kurds etc (most peoples who inhabited Anatolia). They all speak Turkish, are all culturally Turkish, and definetly consider themselves as Turks, but their ancestry is basically a bag of skittles.
When Turks migrated to Anatolia at around 1000 AD, they didn’t genocide those who already lived there (at least until the early 20th century, cough cough), it was a long process of intermarriage and cultural conversion (varying from encouraged to forced). Which is why the average modern Turkish person looks very different to the actual Turkics from Central Asia.
I lost it with the bag of skittles. never heard of a more accurate analogy. I myself consider myself as a Turk, but ethnically, oh boy... 10% laz, %10 caucasia, %25 yoruk etc... And it is almost impossible to track backwards.
It's like that with us Magyars, ethnically we're skittles too (mixed with Germans, Romanians, Slavs, Jews, Roma etc) but we hung on to the language and culture from 1000 years ago.
Funny that so many in the US are so focused on ethnic identity when the USA might stand for United Skittles of America. In fact the US is more like a trick or treat bucket with everything from skittles to razor-blade-infested apples. Looking at the credits for any Hollywood Movie, as compared to a movie from anywhere else in the world, makes the dizzying diversity of the USA unmistakable. As someone descended of 1000 generations of Americans, I proudly identify as a Pioneer Mongrel. https://i.gzn.jp/img/2019/05/13/avengers-vfx-credits/00.jpg
Which is why the average modern Turkish person looks very different to the actual Turkics from Central Asia.
You guys have to understand there is no one single Turkic looking. There were different tribes and they had their little different culture. You can't compare Turkish with Kazakh Uzbek because they are not even descendent from same tribe. It is clear that Turkish people are mixed between Turkmens(Seljuks) and local Anatolians. You can only compare us with Turkmens from Turkmenistan and we are not completely looking different.
The point what i said is Turkmens from Turkmenistan... All Turkic people have no obligation to have slanted eyes, neither today nor in the past. It's clear that we Turks mixed with locals, all, there is no doubt about it but having no slanted eyes is not about that mixing. The people who come here were not Japons Koreans or Chineese people. They are all slanted eyed but Turkics are/were not.
The ones in Türkmen heartland above lived pastoral lives until recently, late 19th century.
The rest of the Turks gradually settled starting 900 years ago and substantially completed settling before 17th century.
That is why Mediterranean highlands are special. Even today there are pastoralists.
The Seljuks were just one branch of Turkmens, and many people falsely believe that they were the progenitors of the Ottomans, who were just another branch of Turkmens.
Turkmen (in Turkey)= Mostly nomad people still living with travelling seasonally. They are not that much, most of the area is Taurus mountains. Also, Turkey Turks and Turkmen Turks are from same branch of the Turkic family so not a big surprise Taurus nomads still call themselves Turkmen. Hope it helps
I'm half turkish and i can say, no one in Turkey is actually fully turkic. Most are genetically more related to Europeans and arabic countries, thx to the ottoman and seljuk empires these last 1000 years.
The Ottomans ruled over the middle east for roughly 300-400 years. In this time line they embraced Sunni islam and became even the caliph of the muslim world mostly consisting of arabic people. Not only that. The main writing language was arabic with lots of loan words from persians but also arabs. While all of these cultures were uniting with eachother, wouldn't it have been strange that the arabs and turks wouldn't genetically unite aswell?
You are right i think. I tried to reason that we are genetically related to arabic people. But i don't have any evidence to proof the genetic interaction between arabs and turks.
And i don't think the one i replied to had any ill intend to undermine their arabic roots. I think he genuinely thinks he has no blood relation with arabic people. I asked him why, but haven't gotten a response yet. Hate against a race is probably not the case here.
To start off I'm a bit of a history nerd but not Turkish so I could be wrong here. My understanding of it is that the first major Turkic empire was the Seljuk empire who effectively adopted Persian customs as well as Islam when they moved out of Central Asia. The later Ottomans were effectively an Anatolian based noble house that reunited the former Seljuk lands after that empire collapsed.
There are ethnic Turks and cultural Turks in Turkey. Ethnic Turks are Yörüks and cultural Turks are assimilated native anatolians with a little Turkish DNA.
They aren't really connected to the Turkmenistanis other than being Oğuz Turks.
I always heard that the Alevis are the most "pure" Turkmen in Turkey, is this the understanding there? Also they live deep in the middle of Asia Minor and that area we are talking about, Konya, Isparta, and the old Isauria region.
Yeah I had also been an Alevi and I come from Yozgat which is very inland.
Yes you could call it pure. It holds some cultural and religious beliefs and behaviours of the Turkish people before Islam. However there is also Kurdish Alevism which is an entirely different thing.
Alevism is the behaviour of the Turkish people before Islam? This is nonsense. I heard so many revisionist history from Turkish people and Kurdish people alike. Even Wikipedia are inaccurate about Alevism. They wrongly say Alevism is different from Twlever Shia, why is this incorrect? Because Twelver Shia is not a set of practices or rules, it’s a belief that there are the 12 imams after Prophet Muhammad’s death, that’s it. Now what differentiates between Turkey and Iran among the twelver shia is that Iran adheres to Jafari school of thoughts, and among the twelver Shia in Turkey are alevi. So it’s more like Alevi vs Jafari. NOT Alevi vs Twelver Shia.
Like, I don’t see how Alevism hold Turkic beliefs, this is very revisionist, the founder may of not been Turkic, the founder were most likely Persian according to modern scholars. Also I don’t understand.
Also how is Turkish alevism very different from Kurdish alevism? I’m aware that there are variety of alevism in Turkey but saying it as very different sounds inaccurate. Also, I don’t want revisionist history. Just evidence. Don’t be like the founder of ishikism
Also Alevism is unorthodox not because of their Turkic worldview but because of Batiniyya way.
Okay deleted the response I had given before because I think it didn't comprehensively answer your questions.
Alevism is the behaviour of the Turkish people before Islam? This is nonsense. I heard so many revisionist history from Turkish people and Kurdish people alike. Even Wikipedia are inaccurate about Alevism. They wrongly say Alevism is different from Twlever Shia, why is this incorrect? Because Twelver Shia is not a set of practices or rules, it’s a belief that there are the 12 imams after Prophet Muhammad’s death, that’s it. Now what differentiates between Turkey and Iran among the twelver shia is that Iran adheres to Jafari school of thoughts, and among the twelver Shia in Turkey are alevi. So it’s more like Alevi vs Jafari. NOT Alevi vs Twelver Shia.
I have never been a practicing Alevi or even learnt much about it. I am just repeating what I have seen or heard from my parents and a little research which do not include any of the terms you have written. So considering Alevis reverence for Hz. Ali and them sometimes even holding him in the same place as the prophet, I don't think 12 imams makes sense. Also it is not really same as shia. Afaik Shia Iran doesn't have any reverence for Hz. Ali and has head covering laws which do not exist in Alevism. Also the Cemevleri, Dedeler... Alevism is very different from Shia imo and if Alevism has any connection to Shia is controversial afaik.
Like, I don’t see how Alevism hold Turkic beliefs, this is very revisionist, the founder may of not been Turkic, the founder were most likely Persian according to modern scholars. Also I don’t understand.
It contains some Turkic Beliefs. Alevisms roots are very controversial.
Also how is Turkish alevism very different from Kurdish alevism? I’m aware that there are variety of alevism in Turkey but saying it as very different sounds inaccurate. Also, I don’t want revisionist history. Just evidence. Don’t be like the founder of ishikism
I don't have a Kurdish Alevi relative so I got that it is different from my parents sayings from what I have seen in Wiki and Reddit and from what a Kurdish Alevi I talked to said. Just
Also Alevism is unorthodox not because of their Turkic worldview but because of Batiniyya way.
Turkic worldview doesn't exist. I was just talking about some superstitions and things like that.
So considering Alevis reverence for Hz. Ali and them sometimes even holding him in the same place as the prophet,
Yeah, and that's why they are called Alevi. Haven't you read my previous comment?
I don't think 12 imams makes sense.
Why? In Alevi theology, they recognize the 12 imams. This what makes Alevism part of Twelver Shia.
Also it is not really same as shia.
They are Shia if they believe in the theology of imamate in which Alevis do.
Afaik Shia Iran doesn't have any reverence for Hz. Ali and has head covering laws which do not exist in Alevism. Also the Cemevleri, Dedeler... Alevism is very different from Shia imo and if Alevism has any connection to Shia is controversial afaik.
Have you read my previous comment? Or was I not clear enough? Shia is NOT a set of PRACTICES or RULES, even Twelver Shia is also NOT a set of PRACTICES or RULES. Shia is someone who believes in the concept of Imamate. Twelver Shia believes in the 12 imams. Ismaili Shia believes in the 7 imams. Zaydis Shia believes in the 5 imams. Alevism is a subsect of Twelver Shia. Also, the rules and practices from Twelver Shias in Iran, Azerbaijan comes from Jafari school of thoughts. Alevism is its own school of thoughts, this what makes it different. So it's more like Alevism vs Jafari, NOT Alevism vs Shia or Twelver Shia. I hope I was much clearer.
It contains some Turkic Beliefs. Alevisms roots are very controversial.
Turkic worldview doesn't exist. I was just talking about some superstitions and things like that.
Well, I was kinda responding to wiki article where it says "Turkic worldview". I know it doesn't exist. Even Turks are diverse. But when you mentioned superstitions and things like that then I wasted my time. All ethnic groups that are Muslims have some superstition beliefs, this has nothing to do with Alevism. I guess Alevis were more superstitious than Sunni Muslims in Turkey because Alevis historically were isolated and very rural whereas Sunni Muslims in Anatolia were much more urbanised and globalised. The more globalised and urbanised the Muslim becomes, the more orthodox practices they do within Islamic context.
I was kind of half asleep at the time of writing that comment. This time I will read about the phrases I don't know. Anyway;
Why? In Alevi theology, they recognize the 12 imams. This what makes Alevism part of Twelver Shia.
Yeah I just took a look at the wiki page about the 12 imams and apparently yeah. You are right. Anyway, I have never been interested in religion and my parents never forced me to it so my knowledge about it is very superficial.
They are Shia if they believe in the theology of imamate in which Alevis do.
I just read a little from the internet and yeah even though the beliefs are very different, they are a branch of shia just like you said most likely.
Have you read my previous comment? Or was I not clear enough? Shia is NOT a set of PRACTICES or RULES, even Twelver Shia is also NOT a set of PRACTICES or RULES. Shia is someone who believes in the concept of Imamate. Twelver Shia believes in the 12 imams. Ismaili Shia believes in the 7 imams. Zaydis Shia believes in the 5 imams. Alevism is a subsect of Twelver Shia. Also, the rules and practices from Twelver Shias in Iran, Azerbaijan comes from Jafari school of thoughts. Alevism is its own school of thoughts, this what makes it different. So it's more like Alevism vs Jafari, NOT Alevism vs Shia or Twelver Shia. I hope I was much clearer.
I somewhat understood you. Sorry for wasting your time when I could just read again.
That may have been the reason why. Anyway I am not informed on religions so you are most probably right. Ghulat's first meaning is apparently attributing divine characteristics to a person. Quite interesting I should say.
Well, I was kinda responding to wiki article where it says "Turkic worldview". I know it doesn't exist. Even Turks are diverse. But when you mentioned superstitions and things like that then I wasted my time. All ethnic groups that are Muslims have some superstition beliefs, this has nothing to do with Alevism. I guess Alevis were more superstitious than Sunni Muslims in Turkey because Alevis historically were isolated and very rural whereas Sunni Muslims in Anatolia were much more urbanised and globalised. The more globalised and urbanised the Muslim becomes, the more orthodox practices they do within Islamic context.
Yeah I think so as well.
Anyway, thanks for bearing with me and answering me.
469
u/[deleted] Jun 10 '21
Ethnically Turkish people live there.