Gokturks

File: mustafa_kemal_ataturk_ve_gokturk_bayragi_by_hansarts-d8edz4z.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

Also are they related to Turkey at all or is it just Wewuzing?

>>2714928
because they controlled nothing of value

>>2714935
Turkey as a name is a wewuzing thing. Gokturk are basically proto-mongol, on rather Gokturk are remnants of the Xiongnu confederate. You can consider both of these proto-mongol since their seat of power was in mongolia/inner mongolia today.

>>2714937
they should have spent all their mana on major trade route provinces desu.

File: Spurdo the pop scientist.jpg (52KB, 457x752px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 457x752px

Alternatively i've heard they are the forefathers of Bulgarians, hungarians and Tatars. true?

>>2714944
But wouldn't mongols be different since the Gokturks are descendants of those that moved west. Aside from eyes, tatars for example barely look like mongols

>>2714957
The Gokturk empire was basically controlled from what is mongolia today.

Like how the mongols operated during their empire, the seat of the power probably went with the proto-mongols. The tartars, the bulgars, the many other turkish tribes were simply occupying the role of soldiers/raiders for the ruling clan.

Its most likely possible that these ruling clan settled in western regions as they got more used to the power over there, but its pretty much a proto-mongol empire.

>>2714935
the oghuz turks introduced their language into the middle east via the seljuq empire, which eventually managed to replace Greek as the language of anatolia while not really changing the population a whole lot except for the rulers (which is why turks from anatolia don't look asian like turks from central asia)

Are the Mongolian languages at all close to the Turkic languages? The two peoples seem to be completely linked throughout history, yet their languages are from different families

File: language.png (139KB, 968x453px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 968x453px

>>2715069
Unrelated as far as modern classification goes.

>>2715093
Do they share similar grammar?

>>2714928
Here's a small history, Gokturk and the Tibetan empire once allied with one another to take on the Tang dynasty of China.

>>2715109
well did they win?

>>2715333
temporarily ofcourse, as you see with history

>>2714928
Fuck you. I made an almost identical thread like 10 days ago.

The khaganates obviously included a lot of different groups. Even the Turkic groups they included would have spoken divergent Turkic languages. Old Central Asian history is a bit of a mess and it's quite hard to track some movements and groups.

Look at the history of the Huns or the Avars and the attempts to track it East to West.

I suggest "The Turks in World History" for a quick overview of the early history.

>>2714935
Well, sure, ultimately the Seljuks are Oghuz Turks who originally appear northeast of the Caspian. Anatolian Turks are only partially originally Seljuk but of course they speak an Oghuz language.

>>2715098
Oldest known "turkic" language was dated around 7th century CE.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Turkic_alphabet

Accordingly it states that either the proto-"Turk" were using Sogdian scripts or were influenced by them. So they're probably influenced by the Aramiac language.

Meanwhile mongol language is probably an alternative evolution from the oracle bones script whom which the Chinese also share similar tree.

So they're two separate family all together.

>>2717554
Stupid fucking post confusing scripts with languages. And those are the oldest Turkic inscriptions we have which post-date the split in Oghur and Common Turkic, and so obviously proto-Turkic.