Author: Piling » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:23 pm
I never say that Ottoman came from Anatolia but in Anatolia. They were only a part of these Oghuz rulers bound to Seljuks.
When Oghuz arrived in Anatolia, after 1071, surely they did not immediately praticed inter-mariage. But in 12th, 13th, 14th, most of "Turks" were mixed with many other migrants, for example Persians, Khwarizmi, refugees of Khorasan (as Jalaj al Dîn Rumi) and indigenuous populations; Moreover, considering the christian population in Anatolia before the arrival of Turks, and considering that, at this time, Turkish rulers were civilized and did not exterminated population, we could mathematically estimated that after many centuries, there are a large part "Greek, Armenian, Syriac, Arab, Jewish, Kurdish and so on" origins in a current Turk. The demography is not the same in 11th century than 3 hundred years later.
And if we consider the origin of Ottoman harem, the origin of their vizirs and officials (coming from devshirme), "Oghuz genes" should be largely dissolved at Topkapi, and more in common people.
it does not mean that current Turks are not "Turks" by culture, language, etc. Anatolian regions were partly invaded by Oghuz, partly assimilated, as in Azerbayjan. Other regions remained non-Turkish until 20th century.
Claude Cahen had an objective point of view concerning the question, where he tried to distinguish the different steps of Turkish presence in Anatolia, and the social, religious, linguistic evolution of these lands. It was also in his Pre-Ottoman Turkey that he noticed the surprisingly Greek-Turkish mariage (surprising because of religions). For example, Zaynal Beg, Uzun Hasan's son, was a relative of the Basileus by women...
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~fisher/ ... cahen.html