Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-10-24
STORY OF THE FIRST TURK
ELDEST SON OF JAPHETH, BORN
DURING FLOOD.
Was Given the Name of Turk and
Was the Ninth Person on
Board Noah's Ark.

From the London Telegraph.
Who was the first Turk? We are asked
to identify him. in the most literal sense.
with a grandson of Noah. Osmanli his
torians incline to the belief that more
than eight human beings were in the ark.
that one of the additional persons was the
eldest son of Japheth that he was born
during the food and that his name was
Turk. A descendant of Turk. in the
fourth generation, one Alindjekhan, had
two sons Gwins) who were named Tatar
Khan and Mogol-Khan. In this assump-
ton of the princely title of Khan" the
offspring of Japheth seem to have antici-
pated the "Dukes"-in Hebrew. the al
luphei"-who traced their ancestry to
Esau. Tatar was the father of the Turks:
Mogol was the father of the Mongols.
Turks and Mongols were thus closely con-
nected by birth, and the wars which at
once broke out between them. and the
reconciliations that speedily ensued, had
much of the nature of family quarrels.
Turks and Mongols.
The Turks were the more frequently
triumphant. one Mongol throne after an
other yielding to their arms. without the
usually left behind by wrangles among
kinsmen. Not till the Christian era was
well advanced did the chronological name
of these children of Japheth appear in his
tory The Chinese chroniclers. with char
acteristic difficulty in using the liquid let
ter "r," call the Turks 'Tu-kiu in ref
erence to an embassy which Tu-kiue
king sent to the Emperor of China in the
year 500 About this epoch the Tu-kiue
To ho1yo hQI nj
standing in the world to be somewhat ac-
tive in establishing relations with foreign
powers. Greek annalfSts record the ar
rival of two separate embassies, in 56S
and SO. from the King of the Tourkoi to
the Byzantine Emperor Justin II. The
most ancient documents in the pure Turk
ish are apparently not older than the
year 1873. and are traceable to the Uigurs,
tribe whose royal seat was at kushan-
the Kiao-Chang of the Chinese-and
eral civilization have been cordially rec
ognized by Arabic historians.
Facts From Chinese.
For what may be learned of the earlier
character and customs of the Tu-kiue we
must again turn to the annalists of China.
These annalists are sympathetic, and, to
begin with, are not known to dispute the
contention Of Osmanli chroniclers that the
various branches of the enormous Mongol
and Tartar famlies-be they speakers of
monosyllabic languages on the one hand.
or of agglutinative languages on the
other-trace their origin to one common
ancestor. Turk. the eldest grandson of
Noah. And SO. in the Turks of 1.-The dark
backward and abysm of time" We dis
cover a people of nOmadS, OF shepherds,
of iron miners. but. above all things else,
Of fv,cy IL nrin o.
rants. who placed their services at the
disposal of Mongol sovereignS.
These are the men who became the
custodians of the great wall of China.
and whose exploits and characters might
bear no unfavorable comparison with
whatever has been ascrbed in miracu-
lous power and valor, in purity of mo-
tive and majesty of bearing to the pala-
dins of western romance or the heroes
of the ShahNameh. They owed their
military virtues to that spirit of disci-
pline and reverence for authority which
remains to this day one of the chief char
acteriSticS of the true OSmanli soldier.
1t was a rule to which every Turk, in
his implacable ardor for union, was re-
signed that the first symptom of inSub-
ordination. the slightest sign of disobedi-
ence In the ranks must be stamped down
with the one irrevocab,e chaStiSement OF
death In the magnificent and appalling
career of Jenghis Kahn the act which
stands apart with internal distinction
among his atrocities is the carrying by
storm of Herat, when a full week of mas
sacre. night and day, ended in the death
of 100000 persons. Yet this uneXampled
deed of vengeance on the part of one of
the most notable descendants of Turk was
caused entirely by An act of administra-
tive revolt within the doomed city.
Military Heroes.
Again, for a warrior of the Tu-kine ma
ton to die of illness in his home was
looked upon as an infamy. To perish on
the battlefield. surrounded by the en-
emies whom one had slain, was not a
matter of exceptional glory; it was the
only possible death for man of honor
and spirit. And. in connection with this
point. to ascribe the conduct of Turks In
war to fanaticism inspired by the teach
ing of the karon is one of the most gro
tesque of historical errors. Turkish brav-
cry and contempt for death were proven
bal in Chinese annals ages before the
birth of Mohammed, centuries before even
the Christian era. Indeed, at the time
which the annalists of China fix for the
beginning of their records the Turks pro-
feSsed no religion. Only after a long
course of ages did they accept the OBJ
scure faith of Shamanism the high priest
of which claimed the power of ascending
to hold converse In heaven with Kaira-
Kan, the supreme god of virtue, or to
dart down the unfathomable abyss and
engage In desperate combat with Erik,
the king of the lower world. This form
of dualistic worship led the Turks by an
easy stage to MaZdeism, the alteration of
Ahura- Mazda, the lord and giver of light,
with Its attendant reverence for the sa-
cred fire and its fearsome acknowledge
ment of Angra- Mainzu, the author of
evil-a creed which the inhabitants of
Turkestan were first among their clans
men to accept from the followers of Ia
rathustra or Zoroaster Elsewhere Uigu-
rian Turks became exemplary Buddhists;
Turks established in western China en-
braced with enthusiasm the HISTORIAN
form of Christianity: finally they turned
and remained fixed TO the faith of Is
lam.