In A.D. 1360 the Turks of Asia begin to become the Turks of Europe under Amurath I.; during whose reign Anatolia was a great centre of conquest, of which the Asiatic extension was limited by the parallel centre of conquest--Bokhara under Tamerlane. On the side of Europe, however, all was free. A.D. 1453, is the date of the taking of Constantinople. Since then the Turk area in Europe has been formed. _Rate, completeness or incompleteness of the ethnological change effected._--These two questions are connected. We can scarcely tell how long it took to transform the non-Turk countries like Asia Minor and Thrace, into the Turk countries of Roum, unless we also know how far the transformation is real or apparent. Now upon this point we want information. No man can say how many ethnological elements other than Turk may be present amongst the Anatolian and Rumelian speakers of the Ottoman language. Still the conquest of the two areas is spread over a period of not less than three hundred and seventy nine years; beginning with the invasion of Asia Minor, by Togrul's successor, and ending with the taking of Constantinople by Mahomet II. _Turk elements of intermixture in families other than the Turk._--These must be noticed briefly. The facts connected with the question falling under the three following heads:-- 1. _Turk blood in the ruling families of the East._--The Ghiznivide and Seljukian dynasties of Persia, the Uzbek rulers of Bokhara, the Pasha of Ægypt, the Great Mogul, &c. 2. _Turks living in separate communities in countries beyond the Turk area._--Turks of Persia, Armenia, Bokhara, &c. 3. _Localities where the Turkish language has been spoken and become extinct._--Parts of Hungary, for which see the notice of the _Cumani_. Other localities, of which by far the most important is Bulgaria. At present the Bulgarian language is Slavonic; and, such being the case, the _primâ facie_ evidence is in favour of the people being Slavonic also. Reasons, however, for the contrary will be found in the notice of the Slavonians. By adding, to all this, the statement that at least one nation, the Bashkirs, although speaking Turk, are supposed to be Finnic, and, by recollecting at the same time, the great extent of Turk conquests, like some of those of Tamerlane, less permanent than those enumerated, as well as the effects of the trade in female slaves (preeminently supported by Turk nations), we may arrive at a valuation of the importance of the Turk family as a physical influence in the way of intermixture.