So I have been wondering this for a while now


some chinese people have more sharp features like stronger jawline, chin, slightly higher cheekbones & nose bridge and the other have realy round faces and flatter noses so wich are the ' real' chinese



could someone enlighten me?


vs


so sorry for posting william hung but he's the perfect example

Chen Kun is Chinese.


William Hung is American.

aw cmon man U know what i mean

Just use your little brain, you shall know what I mean.

Daze-shenglong...behave!

I'll enjoy slapping you too much to make it a convincing punishment.

They are both "real" Chinese; i.e. if William Hung is Chinese descend. Tujue, you could also be a real Chinese if you are Chinese descend. There were a lot of Chinese who had settled in the Middle East long time ago; for example, the time around Tang dynasty.

And shouldn't this post in the Chinese Anthropology section?

there is no such thing as a real Chinese as Chinese are a diverse group.. where both in the North and South.. the Hans were intermixed with different ethnic groups(Manchu, Turks, Mongols, Bai Yue, Chu, etc).

Tujue, first of all you have to understand that 'Chinese' in the modern context includes all citizens of the People's Republic of China (PRC), as well as potentially all citizens of other countries (including Taiwan) whose ancestors came from the territory now under the jurisdiction of the PRC. Ethnicity is not necessarily relevant to being designated as 'Chinese'. In other words, an ethnically Tibetan citizen of the PRC living in Tibet and an ethnically Tibetan citizen of the USA living in California could both be called 'Chinese' depending on one's point of view, although both might not be willing to accept such a designation.

What you meant by 'Chinese', however, is the ethnic group that is known as Han in the PRC, and as Hua among Chinese communities in other countries. This is the largest ethnic group in the world, and as others have already commented, it is genetically very diverse. For political and ideological reasons, members of numerous other ethnic groups have been reclassified as 'Han' during the past 800-900 years, although that reclassification only applied to south and southwest China from the Qing period onwards. So you have Han/Hua people who differ quite a lot in phenotype, although eye colour and hair colour generally remain black or very dark brown.

William Hung's family was from Hong Kong, while Chen Kun's family was from Chongqing. The ancestors of both families almost certainly migrated from elsewhere before that. But my preliminary comment would be that Hung's features are most commonly associated with the southern Han/Hua, while Chen's features are most commonly associated with the northern Han/Hua. For that issue, please refer to this thread: http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=11825

Mang Chinese settled in Middle East during Tang time?? Where you got the info from?

Tang proper only covered to today Central Asia during its peak but later lost to the emerging Abbassid Arab in Battle of Talas.

I would place him in the Southern Han/Sinid category. His facial attribute, body, skin tone are too southern to be in the North.

this was the answer I was looking for thank



@ 大泽升龙

don't get your panties in a twist it was just a simple question

That was exactly why Chinese settled in Middle East. At that time, many Chinese soldiers and craftsmen were captured and brought to Middle East. That was also when the Chinese technology of making paper (and I think a few other Chinese crafts) got transfered to the West.

It was not just the victors or conquerors could settle in an area. Sometimes, captives or slaves could do so also. For example, the African slaves settled in varioius areas in the American Continent and the Caribbean, and they even established countries like Jamaica and Haiti.

Well, after the Battle of Talas, only a few people survived in the Tang side and most of the soldiers fought for Tang were not Chinese but people from Central Asia.

Anyway stick to the OP topic, Chinese 's phenotype is as varied as Turkish (Xi_Tujie, you are Turkish, right?). The Western Turkish in Anatolia look closer to Greek, Central/Eastern Turkish look closer to Central Asian Turk, South-Eastern Turkish look closer to Arab/Kurd, I have even seen some Turkish with blue eye and blond hair but they are all Turkish (I don't know if the Kurd would call themselves Turkish).

A simple question deserves a simple answer, think harder.


I think Middle Asia was more possilbe. Even there were many Han Chinese emigrated into Middle Asia at that time, most of them would be assimilated by locals after Tang lost its control in that region.


I will classify Chen Kun as Middle Sinid with paleo-Austronesian influence. In fact, this type is quite common in China, from south to north; as to Hung Hing Cheung the William, I will classify him as South Sinid, which type is very common in Guangdong.


Turks are Turks, no matter blonde or black. Originally, the Turkic tribes were quite mixed, neither a Chinese nor a Russian would look very different from them. The Turkish (Türkler) we call today are mainly descendants of Seljuks who later on conquered Anatolia and built Ottoman Empire. Most of its people have a mid-eastern looking. Some blonde elements may come from the conquered Byzantine and Slavic subjects and some black elements may come from the North Africa.

i'm meskhetian turk or ahiska turk (slightly different)

I have people in my family who look like all the people u discribed



your correct except for the Black Elements (mabey only super minimal through arabs)

It was possible. Where exactly is Samarkand? Is it considered as Middle Asia or Middle East? Personally, I generally group everything from the tip end beyond the West of (modern day) Chinese border to the tip end of the West of the Turkish border as Middle East (including Egypt of course). I do know Baghdad should be considered as Middle East, though.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Talas:



Although I am not sure whether the paper mill in Baghdad would be built by Chinese craftsmen or not, but who knows?



I agree.



I agree.



From what I have read, there were 2/3 of the Tang forces being labelled as Chinese and not Tang's non-Chinese allies. Some records talked about 20,000 Tang soldiers being captured in the battle (I guess including the non-Chinese forces as well). Many scholars thought that the 20,000 captives might be a bit high. Let's say it was only 10,000 people captured and 2/3 of them were Chinese; then, there sould be 6000+ Chinese soldiers who were captives and got brought back to wherever places as prisoners of war. Btw, when classical Chinese used the word "沒" (mo4) for armies' destruction, it didn't mean the soldiers in the army were all killed or dead. It just meant the army was destroyed or conquered -- therefore, there would be survivors as well as captives.



I agree. I saw a documentary about silk road in China. There was a modern Chinese wedding going on (not in a major city just a small village or town). The Chinese wedding guests included people who looked like Indians, Persians, probably both Central Asian Turk and South-Eastern Turk, Afghanis, Mongolians, Tibetans, as well as very Han looking Chinese!

samarkand is in uzbekistan thats East Central asia


about the papermill in bagdad i vaguelly rember something about the connection to the chinese

is uzbekistan mixed chinese people? they seem like it

Uzbeks are Turkic they're the closest to the Uygurs

Not all mongoloid people are Chinese.

Central Asia experienced two big wave of mongoloid peoples, the ancient Turks and Mongols.

In the oasis regions, they mixed with the Indo-European population there. These became the Uzbeks and the Uighurs.

Today Samarkand is actually a predominantly Tajik city but in Uzbekistan.

thats not correct you make it sound like the Asiatic huns intermixed to some extend with the Locals. But infactt they almost completely replaced them. Only in cities like Samarkand Bikhara, etc you can see tadjiks or other iranian peoples; But ofcourse the more south and south west u go you will see more of a mix

it is true, the Uzbeks and Uyghurs are a mixture of mongoloid peoples (Turkic and Mongol speaking) and Indo-Iranian people

Basicly there only Turkic speaking and the indo-european mix is when go to the cities or the verry southern parts of Xiangjiang like Hotan or Old Cities in Uzbekistan.


the mixture is minimal in the north
Abdurhehim Heyit he is a Uygur probably from the north. But you almost can't see the indo-european mixture (you only asume it because he looks different from the mongols or chinese)

man from Hotan


Intermarriage was more common in the past than it is now. Tadjiks are different than the iranians today

^Actually, some Tajiks who live in the mountains are very pure and did not mix with either Iranians nor Turko-Mongols. Eastern Iranians (including Tajiks) have a high amount of Haplogroup R1b which is also the most common in Eastern Europe. The Western Iranians (as well as southern Azerbaijanians) have more higher amount of Haplogroup J, maybe reflecting from the invasion by Semitic Arab Muslim armies in the past.

The "Han" is a recently formed ethnic group that spans across several parts of historic China; including most "Sinicized" minority groups. The original "Chinese" people were the neolithic Huaxia tribes, who looked something like people in the North of China (Shandong, Henan, Liaoning).

And for god's sake, Caucasoids do not have higher cheekbones than East Asians. Tungusic/Mongolic peoples have the highest cheekbones and then the second would be North Chinese.