I think in one 40k book they were called easterners (asian), westerners (anglo saxon stuff)and southerners (african) but no northerners. I may be wrong on that, HOWEVER. I remember in the Cain books there are some asian and african heritage (even a dark skinned valhallan) present, but the majority is white.

Side Note: Isn't the EMPRAH turkish?

Cymbel said:

It wouldn't matter. Much like Jesus, he just has to be white and English-speaking or everything will just go straight to… Oh. Yeah… Chaos.

Well while she has an Asian Name, Asian themed armor and weapons and even an Asian themed ship. She sure looked non-Asian to me.

the emperor's enthnicity is confused by being born in what would later become Turkey, but doing so before the Turks arrived.  Those illustrations of him that exist seem to be dark haired and with a skin colour somewhere between tanned and north African.

Darth Fanboy said:

Haha. I'm really glad my questions has turned from starships to race in the 41st millennium.

All my players are new to the 40k universe and when I first showed them pictures of the emperor in the rule book they asked me if he was Cherokee.

jarsen said:

Heh. You can confuse them even more by telling them (accurately) that he is truly Caucasian (i.e. from the Caucasus region, not generically white: for that I prefer 'caucasid'), as if you plot his birthplace (not given particularly precisely, as it's usually given as Central Anatolia, although at least one source has placed it on the lower slopes of Mt Ararat, which is hardly central), it's almost slap in the middle of the transcaucasus region (southern caucasus).

Ethnically speaking? Well, pre-historic near-east cultures are hardly my speciality, but a browse through the Wiki articles on peoples of the caucasus suggests that Nakh or Maykop would be the most likely. I'd prefer to say Maykop, as that'd make him from one of the kurgan cultures, but Nakh looks a little more likely to have held that region of Anatolia at the time. I'm most definitely not an expert though.

With regard to the original question, however: there are a number of Imperial Navy ships mounting a plain (or wreathed) skull as decoration on the fo'c'sle and prow, shown mostly in the Battlefleet Gothic BBB (although there were some notable conversions in WD which replaced the prow with the skull head/bridge from the Epic Imperator Titan model). Admittedly, the high-sided armoured sheer-prow the Navy currently favours seems to naturally suggest wings of some sort (originally, Lunar and Gothic cruisers, seen bow-on, were supposed to look just like aquilae), making winged skulls, and aquilae (both single and double-headed) pretty inevitable as figureheads and prow decoration.
There are also a number of examples of a robed (potentially angelic) figure being mounted as a figurehead, most prominently the HDMS Indomitable Retribution (IIRC. It was almost definitely a Retribution-class Battleship).

It's also worth remembering the current trend in prow designs is comparatively recent, with examples of ships built using a tumblehome clipper design, and even straight bows still showing up in Naval Reserve fleets… and the hands of pirates, renegade and Rogue Traders. Sources such as Inferno! magazine and Warhammer Monthly show that fitting ships of classes that normally use the tumblehome clipper prow (like a Slaughter or Canrage-class) with a large decorative monster's head instead (replacing, or occasionally in addition to the pronounced fo'c'sle) is far from unknown (and the Infidel raider is notable for actually having almost a trimaran prow design, with the centre often being replaced with a skull).

In other words: go crazy. Ain't no-one gonna stop you unless your figurehead or prow design is actively blasphemous (say… a gigantic daemon's head, or a bust of Horus).

I wish to see the drawing of THE EMPEROR: EMPEROR OF THE IMPERIUM in a Fez

Cymbel said:

And a bow tie.

jarsen said:

Because bow ties are cool.