No, they would be genetically assimilated ina matter of a few generations, becoming virtually undistinguishable from other germans/slavs. Today there would be only history to remember the fact that the people that inhabit this specific central european territorry have a turkic descent.
Which is exactly what happened to the people living in the region we call today Hungary.
Maybe larger numbers of Awars are Magyar style pacified and convert to Christianity. They settle in the East of the Empire Francorum and leave in some places traces. Villages are named after them, new nobility traces themselves to Christian Awar warriors.Many turkic peoples invaded europe in the past, the avars, the huns, the cumanians, etc. Could any of them succesfully settle somewhere in central europe and became the majority of the population in the area?
So sort of like the Kalmyks but in Central Europe? For starters, try having these Turks or whoever settle in an area where the geography will shield their language and culture from being displaced or assimilated, which means mountainous or highland regions. Are the Carpathians in Central Europe? Try settling your Altaic invaders there or any other suitable land.
Wouldn't the Bulgars be a better example, as they actually were a Turkic group that got assimilated into another culture (Slavic, in this case)? The Magyars are Finno-Ugric, not Turkic, and probably not related to the Huns.No, they would be genetically assimilated ina matter of a few generations, becoming virtually undistinguishable from other germans/slavs. Today there would be only history to remember the fact that the people that inhabit this specific central european territorry have a turkic descent.
Which is exactly what happened to the people living in the region we call today Hungary.
The Gagauz people in Moldavia are majority Christian European Turks.Change around on the Bulgars and Magyars end destination. In that case we would likely have a Slavic Magyaria bordering Turkey and a "Turkish" (not mutual intelligible with Anatolian Turkish) speaking Hungary.
Wouldn't the Bulgars be a better example, as they actually were a Turkic group that got assimilated into another culture (Slavic, in this case)? The Magyars are Finno-Ugric, not Turkic, and probably not related to the Huns.
It's highly debatable that Huns or Avars being Turkic people in first place, especially for Avars. Now, a part of Hunnic elite, at least, probably spoke a Turkic or Turkic-related speech, but they were importantly sarmatized and germanised by the Vth century, that you'd have something along what happen to Bulgaria and ending with iranized-germanized-romanized Hunnic ensemble.Many turkic peoples invaded europe in the past, the avars, the huns, the cumanians, etc.
The problem is that Turko-Mongol way-of-life did required the existence of large grazing and pastoral grounds : while Pannonian Plain isn't adverse at all to this, its geographical and climatic features prevent this to be systematized on a large scale. For all it's worth, it was not as adapted as it's commonly tought to a steppe way-of-life.Could any of them succesfully settle somewhere in central europe and became the majority of the population in the area?
The slavicization of Bulgars isn't really that tied to their destination (altough the underpopulated Pannonian Plain certainly favoured Maygar linguistical survival, then Magyarisation of surrounding lands in late Middle-Ages), than the nature of steppe confederacies : Bulgar power came from the subordination of slavic or slavicized peoples that went to form the bulk of their power even before they left Pontic steppes (arguably, it only went deeper when going for Danubian region).Change around on the Bulgars and Magyars end destination. In that case we would likely have a Slavic Magyaria bordering Turkey and a "Turkish" (not mutual intelligible with Anatolian Turkish) speaking Hungary.
They appeared as a people in the Pontic steppe and Uralian foothills : not that there was any kind ofstrong differenciation with Central Asia, but the presence of slavicized, finnized, etc. peoples was, for obvious reasons, more of a thing west of Caspian Sea.Aren't Magyars central asians?
Hungarians have a 4.4% admixture of genetic legacy from migrations of peoples from the Asian steppes (e.g., the Huns, Magyars, and Bulgars) during the first millennium CE.Actually, I think 75% of Hungary's genetic material comes from the Mygar group, so they are only culturally assimilated not genetically assimilated. Although, I'm not sure how the molecular DNA works that way, I mean sure if a person has 7 great grand-parents from the same group he's 7/8 of that group, but how do you do that analysis on a whole population? For the OP's request, just have the Ottomans win at Vienna, have the Reformation stronger but less unnited(so even MORE Protastant vs Protastant and catholic vs Protastant fighting) and once the turks are in charge, a few forced conversions (to prevent future religious disunity) and the differential of birthrates of the Turks and Europeans make Gukpard's world a reality.