The contents of this thread actually exist in the Units subforum of CivIII Creation & Customization, but I decided to give it it's own thread. It might be a little bit confusing, but the chart might explain more.
First of all, the term Turk should not be confused. It:
a) refers to a group of tribes (hence, the name for the utopic unified Turkish states, Turan),
b) refers to the Anatolian descendants of the Central-Asian tribes.
A term does not come into existence out of nothing. It is true, that nationalist movements in Turkey have started during late 19th century, but the term Turk always existed in Anatolia to define the specific people speaking Turkish. A common identity was in place, and the distinction between a Turk (most heavily populated tribe in Anatolia during the Ottoman era), a Jew, an Armenian, a Slav (Bosniak, Serb, Croat), a Greek, an Albanian, a Persian and an Arab were obvious. The term Kurd, however, was not that common, and they were usually referred to as the "mountain Turks", which is indeed a politically incorrect way to put it. They are, on the other hand, relatives of the Persians, as their language is Indo-European.
The descendants were born in the Ural-Altai region. The initial split between them happened during the first Hun Empire. The Ural migrated to Finland. Therefore, the Fins are actually Uralic people. The Altaic people split, too, becoming the Tunguz, Mogol and Turks. The Tunguz migrated to Siberia, and the Mongol went to far eastern Asian steppes, crossing the Gobi desert.
The other half of the Ural people did not migrate to Europe until the Hun Empire split.
The Huns, which were initially formed in Central Asia, were referred to as the Xiong Nu by the Chinese; it's no way a word from the Ural-Altai language group. The Huns consisted both of Uralic and Altaic people, but mostly Altaic.
They were not referred to as Turks back then, but were distinctly different from the Mongols, as I have said before. Yet again, they were rivals to each other, although common raids to China by both these tribes are known.
After the split of the Huns, one half remained in Central Asia, whereas the other half, in the leadership of Atilla (Attila), invaded Europe, causing the great migrations. They mostly settled in the Hungarian region, bringing the other half of the Uralic people with them. However, among them were also Altaic people.
The ones who remained in Central Asia, however, evolved into the Turks. The term Turk was commonly used in Central-Asia, as the first nation to be born with the name Turk were the Blue Turks (modern Anatolian Turkish: Gokturk, ancient Turkish; Kokturk, even referred to as Kokturuk; all meaning "Sky Turks", since their gods (goktanri, koktengri) was the sky). I am referring to a time period of around 8th-9th century.
Several of them went to eastern China, forming the Uyghur tribe. After the fall of the Blue Turks, couple of more Turkish states came into existence, but the most distinctive thing was the great split among the Turkish tribes.
The Turks split in such a way, that there were brand new sub-tribes, all with extremely similar languages, but settled/invaded different regions. Kirghiz, Khazak, Uzbek, Ghuzz (Oguz), Altai, Tatar are some of them. They are in no way Mongols, though.
The term Altaic and Altai might cause some confusions here, too. Altaic refers to the people from the Altai tribes (Tunguz, Mongol, Turks), whereas the initial split between the Altaic people happened well before.
The Ghuzz then formed the Great Seljuks, following came the Anatolian Seljuks, the Ottomans, and at last, Turkey. Hence, I'd like to remind people that there's a country called Turkmenistan, where the Great Seljuks were first established.
A better and more detailed break-down of the Turkic Tribes:
A very simple breakdown of the Ural-Altaic people is represented in the chart below. The names are mostly generalizations. Keep in mind, that these tribes have mixed tremendously over time, even though they were separate tribes, they mostly coexisted in the same regions:
First of all, the term Turk should not be confused. It:
a) refers to a group of tribes (hence, the name for the utopic unified Turkish states, Turan),
b) refers to the Anatolian descendants of the Central-Asian tribes.
A term does not come into existence out of nothing. It is true, that nationalist movements in Turkey have started during late 19th century, but the term Turk always existed in Anatolia to define the specific people speaking Turkish. A common identity was in place, and the distinction between a Turk (most heavily populated tribe in Anatolia during the Ottoman era), a Jew, an Armenian, a Slav (Bosniak, Serb, Croat), a Greek, an Albanian, a Persian and an Arab were obvious. The term Kurd, however, was not that common, and they were usually referred to as the "mountain Turks", which is indeed a politically incorrect way to put it. They are, on the other hand, relatives of the Persians, as their language is Indo-European.
The descendants were born in the Ural-Altai region. The initial split between them happened during the first Hun Empire. The Ural migrated to Finland. Therefore, the Fins are actually Uralic people. The Altaic people split, too, becoming the Tunguz, Mogol and Turks. The Tunguz migrated to Siberia, and the Mongol went to far eastern Asian steppes, crossing the Gobi desert.
The other half of the Ural people did not migrate to Europe until the Hun Empire split.
The Huns, which were initially formed in Central Asia, were referred to as the Xiong Nu by the Chinese; it's no way a word from the Ural-Altai language group. The Huns consisted both of Uralic and Altaic people, but mostly Altaic.
They were not referred to as Turks back then, but were distinctly different from the Mongols, as I have said before. Yet again, they were rivals to each other, although common raids to China by both these tribes are known.
After the split of the Huns, one half remained in Central Asia, whereas the other half, in the leadership of Atilla (Attila), invaded Europe, causing the great migrations. They mostly settled in the Hungarian region, bringing the other half of the Uralic people with them. However, among them were also Altaic people.
The ones who remained in Central Asia, however, evolved into the Turks. The term Turk was commonly used in Central-Asia, as the first nation to be born with the name Turk were the Blue Turks (modern Anatolian Turkish: Gokturk, ancient Turkish; Kokturk, even referred to as Kokturuk; all meaning "Sky Turks", since their gods (goktanri, koktengri) was the sky). I am referring to a time period of around 8th-9th century.
Several of them went to eastern China, forming the Uyghur tribe. After the fall of the Blue Turks, couple of more Turkish states came into existence, but the most distinctive thing was the great split among the Turkish tribes.
The Turks split in such a way, that there were brand new sub-tribes, all with extremely similar languages, but settled/invaded different regions. Kirghiz, Khazak, Uzbek, Ghuzz (Oguz), Altai, Tatar are some of them. They are in no way Mongols, though.
The term Altaic and Altai might cause some confusions here, too. Altaic refers to the people from the Altai tribes (Tunguz, Mongol, Turks), whereas the initial split between the Altaic people happened well before.
The Ghuzz then formed the Great Seljuks, following came the Anatolian Seljuks, the Ottomans, and at last, Turkey. Hence, I'd like to remind people that there's a country called Turkmenistan, where the Great Seljuks were first established.
A better and more detailed break-down of the Turkic Tribes:
A very simple breakdown of the Ural-Altaic people is represented in the chart below. The names are mostly generalizations. Keep in mind, that these tribes have mixed tremendously over time, even though they were separate tribes, they mostly coexisted in the same regions:
:
Mongolia is part of Central Asia...
