Slavicised Turks of Vardar

[Tsontos]

The Vardariotes were pre-Ottoman Turks who inhabited the Vardar Valley region (Modern FYROM) and were eventually assimilated by the more numerous Slavs and Christianised aswell. While their language is heavily Slavicised they still retain traits of Turkish speech and some are identified as ethnic Turks despite the majority being fairly completely assimilated.

He drew attention to the Vardariotes, pre-Osmanli Turks , who had become Christianised, had settled in Vardar valley and then had been assimilated by the Slavs. The Uzes were another group of pre-Osmanli Turks who had settled near Lake Ohrid in the eleventh century and had also lost their identity to the Slavs.

-Maps and Politics, H. R Wilkinson, 1951

[Ptolemy]

Let us not forget many historians state that between about 1100 and 1220 the Turkic Patzinaks (Pechenegs) and Koumans (Kumans) have left their genetic imprint on the population of Northern FYROM (Dardania), and more
specifically on the counties of Skopje and KUMANovo. Most of the times i witness any skopjan calling Bulgarians 'Tatars', i remind them, the name Kumanovo comes from the former inhabitants of the town, the Koumans/Kumani, a fine “Turko-Tatar” tribe that a considerable percentage of skopjans from these areas still carry their genes.

[Leonatos]

Let us not forget many historians state that between about 1100 and 1220 the Turkic Patzinaks (Pechenegs) and Koumans (Kumans) have left their genetic imprint on the population of Northern FYROM (Dardania), and more
specifically on the counties of Skopje and KUMANovo.

That's right!
After their defeat by the Byzantines these turcic tribes were given lands in Macedonia and thrace, in order to guard the population there and act as police force.
Some Byzantines officials in the 14th century were descendants of hellenised cumans.
Also in the region of Moglena, in northern Greece pechenegs settled and mixed with the indigenous population.

[Leonatos]

the title of the thread is a bit misleading
The cumans and the pechenegs were a turcic tribe but they were not turks, they were cumans &pechenegs.
It is the same thing as the diferrence between German and Germanic.
Franks were germanics but they are not germans

[akritas]

Cumans or Kumans both: kooˈmänz, nomadic East Turkic people, identified with the Kipchaks (or the western branch of the Kipchaks) and known in Russian as Polovtsi.
Coming from NW Asian Russia, they conquered S Russia and Walachia in the 11th cent., and for almost two centuries warred intermittently with the Byzantine Empire, Hungary, and Kiev.
They founded a nomadic state in the steppes along the Black Sea, and were active in commerce with Central Asia and Venice.
In the early 12th cent. the main Cuman forces were defeated by the Eastern Slavs. The Mongols decisively defeated the Cumans c.1245.
Some were sold as slaves, and many took refuge in Bulgaria and also in Hungary, where they were gradually assimilated into the Hungarian culture.
Others joined the khanate of the Golden Horde (also called the Western Kipchaks), which was organized on the former Cuman territory in Russia.

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright© 2004

[Tsontos]

the title of the thread is a bit misleading
The cumans and the pechenegs were a turcic tribe but they were not turks, they were cumans &pechenegs.
It is the same thing as the diferrence between German and Germanic.
Franks were germanics but they are not germans

As I understand it the Vardariotes were of the same Seljuk stock and therefore can be called Turks. could be wrong though

[Leonatos]

As I understand it the Vardariotes were of the same Seljuk stock and therefore can be called Turks. could be wrong though

No, the vardariotes were not the same as the seljuks.
The vardariotes were probably Hungarians/Magyars, therefore nor turks neither turcic.
The Cumans and the Pechenegs that settled later were turcic but not turkish
All these tribes served in the imperial army and they formed a special unit called skythikon because they fought in the same way as the scythians did in antiquity.

[Tsontos]

My mistake, thought they were of Seljuk stock and therefore Turks.

[akritas]

Leonatos what is the diffrence from turcic and turkish ?:wacko:

[Leonatos]

it is the same as the difference between the terms germanic and german.
Dutch is a germanic language but it is not german and the Dutch people are also not german, but germanic.
The Franks in the middle Ages were a germanic people but it is false nowadays to say that the Franks were Germans.
The turcic languages include turkish but turkish is not the only turkic language.

[akritas]

Leonatos for me both terms are the same. "Turkic peoples" are Northern and Central Eurasian peoples who speak languages belonging to the Turkic family.The term "Turkic" is generally considered to represent a broad linguistic characterization, and not necessarily an ethnic one. The term "Turk" refers to a nation/ethnicity. "Turkish" on the other hand, is considered to represent more specifically the citizens of Turkeyas well as the Turkish ethnicity. The Turkic languages are a subdivision of the Altaic group.
The Vardarians Muslims are people that speak a Turkic dialect and feel as Turks.

Is like to say that Pontians are not Greeks because represent a broad linguistic characterization(GreekOne), and not necessarily an ethnic one as the un-Hellenic elements quoted in several sources.

[Leonatos]

First of all, Pontian Greek is a dialect of Greek.It is completely irrelevant.Dutch is not a dialect of German and the Uzbek language is not a dialect of the turkish language so there is no analogy.

What you quoted above about the meaning of the term turkic and turkish shows that these terms are not the same.
""Turkish" on the other hand, is considered to represent more specifically the citizens of Turkey as well as the Turkish ethnicity."
""Turkic peoples" are Northern and Central Eurasian peoples who speak languages belonging to the Turkic family."
Turkish is just one language among all those turkic language.
What is it that you don't understand?

[akritas]

Leonatos I disagree with your opinion that the Vardarian Muslims are not Turkish origin.

[Leonatos]

i didn't say that.I didn't mention in any of my posts anything about the muslims in FYROM
What i wrote are these:
1)the vardariotes of the Middle Ages were Hungarians/Magyars
2)the cumans and the pechenegs were not the same as the seljuks, they were seperate turkic trbes

[Tsontos]

akritas the difference between turkish and turkic is large. If the Turkish nationalists had there way, everyone from Finnland, to HUngary to Japan would be called Turks because there language is classified as 'Turkic'. Its rather like the Nazis claiming indo-europeans being Nordic etc.

[akritas]

Voulagroktonos show me one Turkic tribe or nation that not claim Turkish connection ?

if you find anyone!!!

Turks call as cousins the Finn or Hungs and if you go in theirs web sites they do not hide this connection with the Turks. This now mean that they have Turkish nationality.Both names (Turkic-turkish) are historically and linguistically connected with the Tu-chueh the name given by the Chinese in 6th cent AD.

Vardarian Muslims(not the Slav Muslims) identify as Turks.

[Tsontos]

A Finn would say their language is of the Turkic family but this does not mean they are Turkish. A Mongol would not say he is a Turk even though he belongs to the same linguistic family. Why would a Mongol say he's a Turk when the Mongols enslaved and wared with Turks. Saying anyone who speaks a 'Turkic' language (a name given by western linguists) is a Turk is like saying a Greek is the same ethnicity as any speaker of a European language.

Both names (Turkic-turkish) are historically and linguistically connected with the Tu-chueh the name given by the Chinese in 6th cent AD.

Turkic/ish is a distinction made for a reason, to distinguish between specificallyTurkish tribes and other peoples whose language belongs to this group.