Genetic results of Scythians and comparisons

[AndarKhan]

All tables are prepared by using Gedmatch MDLP K23B.

First Example
Aldy-Bel(Arzhan2)
7th-6th centuries B.C.

Results:
http://www.haplogruplar.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/image003.jpg
Y-DNA: R1a-s441
mtDNA: A

Comparisons:
http://www.haplogruplar.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/image005.jpg

This example similiar to modern predominantly caucasoid Turkic groups and modern Tadjiks. Also, this example is not similiar to other modern Iranic groups.

Second Example
Pazyryk(Berel11)
4th-3rd centuries B.C.

Results:
http://www.haplogruplar.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/image007.jpg
Y-DNA: R1a-Z93
mtDNA: C4a1

Comparisons:
http://www.haplogruplar.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/image008.png

This example is similiar to modern predominantly mongoloid Turkic groups. Also, this example is not similiar to any modern Iranic groups.

Source of tables: http://www.haplogruplar.com/iskitlerin-genetik-yapisi-ve-gunumuz-halklariyla-karsilastirilmasi/

[Peterski]

http://i.imgur.com/exstJLv.png

http://i.imgur.com/deVCceF.png

[Kamal900]

They're still Iranic, not Turkic. These Scythians are not representatives on how they were genetically and racially were since these Scythians had admixed with local neo-Mongoloid women of Siberia and Mongolia which is how the Turkic peoples emerged.

[AndarKhan]

They're still Iranic, not Turkic. These Scythians are not representatives on how they were genetically and racially were since these Scythians had admixed with local neo-Mongoloid women of Siberia and Mongolia which is how the Turkic peoples emerged.
They were NOT Iranic. There is nothing that proves it. Also many historians said they were Turkic(maybe with another ethnic groups).

[Pahli]

They were NOT Iranic. There is nothing that proves it. Also many historians said they were Turkic(maybe with another ethnic groups).

There is nothing that proves it wrong either as Turkish pseudo-science has failed heavily to prove it wrong too. They have some words that passed down to Slavic people that have Iranic roots, not Turkic lol. Turks never originated as a West Eurasian ethnicity, only partially West Eurasian ancestry:

Now stop wasting our time with your poor science learned in low quality Turkish universities:


Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Europe 47.19
2 West_Asia 24.04
3 SW_Europe 13.65
4 Siberia 6.75
5 South_Asia 3.11
6 Americas 3.02
7 NE_Asia 1.25
8 SE_Asia 0.98

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tatar 13.67
2 Chuvash 18.02
3 Mordovian 18.65
4 Moldavian 20.39
5 Ukrainian 20.91
6 Slovak 21.29
7 Russian 21.49
8 Aluet 22
9 Slovene 22.5
10 Belarusian 22.63
11 Bosnian 22.88
12 Hungarian 23.42
13 German_North 23.45
14 Croatian 24.21
15 Polish 24.37
16 Romanian 24.4
17 Serbian 24.51
18 Montenegrin 25.27
19 Norwegian 25.31
20 Scottish 25.69

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 62.3% Mordovian + 37.7% Tadjik @ 7.16
2 51.8% Latvian + 48.2% Tadjik @ 7.24
3 51.9% Lithuanian + 48.1% Tadjik @ 7.38
4 58.5% Russian + 41.5% Tadjik @ 7.41
5 67.8% Mordovian + 32.2% Afghan_Pashtun @ 7.44
6 50.3% Tadjik + 49.7% Finnish @ 7.58
7 50.8% Chechen + 49.2% Finnish @ 7.66
8 52.7% Estonian + 47.3% Tadjik @ 7.72
9 70.3% Mordovian + 29.7% Pathan @ 7.93
10 69.6% Mordovian + 30.4% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 8.08
11 64.4% Russian + 35.6% Afghan_Pashtun @ 8.18
12 73.7% Mordovian + 26.3% Makrani @ 8.21
13 73.2% Mordovian + 26.8% Balochi @ 8.25
14 74% Mordovian + 26% Brahui @ 8.3
15 62.3% Mordovian + 37.7% Chechen @ 8.39
16 55.2% Polish + 44.8% Tadjik @ 8.43
17 50.2% Kumyk + 49.8% Finnish @ 8.44
18 55.7% Finnish + 44.3% Dagestan_Azeri @ 8.53
19 53.7% Finnish + 46.3% Adygei @ 8.73
20 67% Russian + 33% Pathan @ 8.81

They might be closest to Tatars but the distance to them is still quite big, they are still slightly more West Eurasian shifted than Tatars.

[AndarKhan]

There is nothing that proves it wrong either as Turkish pseudo-science has failed heavily to prove it wrong too. They have some words that passed down to Slavic people that have Iranic roots, not Turkic lol. Turks never originated as a West Eurasian ethnicity, only partially West Eurasian ancestry.
No. Many Linguists said their language were Turkic like Mordtmann, Zekiyev etc. Also genetically and culturally they were Turkic. You must leave your Indo-European fantasies.

[Pahli]

No. Many Linguists said their language were Turkic like Mordtmann, Zekiyev etc. Also genetically and culturally they were Turkic. You must leave your Indo-European fantasies.

They weren't Turkic at all lmfao, look at the plots, they come out mostly as 50/50 Baltic + Central Asian Iranic xD

I am also fairly sure that the majority of linguists and other scientists have closed the book regarding their language, they were nothing like ancient Turks that were 100% East Eurasian. I cannot imagine what the world would be with Turkish scientists in the lead :rolleyes:

[archangel]

Off course they were Türks,they are our forefathers.

Lol at iranians claims the Scythians with their south asian apperance.

Scythians were hardcore steppe people

[Pahli]

Off course they were Türks,they are our forefathers.

Lol at iranians claims the Scythians with their south asian apperance.

Scythians were hardcore steppe people

Turks came ages after Scythians, you look like nothing like them neither do you Anatolian Turks have any ancestry from them :lol:

R.I.P science with Turks

[Mr. Anybody]

There is nothing that proves it wrong either as Turkish pseudo-science has failed heavily to prove it wrong too. They have some words that passed down to Slavic people that have Iranic roots, not Turkic lol. Turks never originated as a West Eurasian ethnicity, only partially West Eurasian ancestry:


nicht immer. turks originated as a african (subsaharan) ancestry..dont know you?

[Pahli]

nicht immer. turks originated as a african (subsaharan) ancestry..dont know you?

Aren't Turks ancestors to the whole humanity? There's a theory on that as well.

[Leto]

Numerous accounts describe Scythians as white.

[Kamal900]

They were NOT Iranic. There is nothing that proves it. Also many historians said they were Turkic(maybe with another ethnic groups).

What historians? Turkic peoples never venture out of their east-Asian homeland until the early middle ages, and recent genetic studies on them proves that there were no mongoloid peoples in central Asia until much later time.

[Proto-Shaman]

Scythians spoke Turkic.

[AndarKhan]

Scythians spoke Turkic.

Their culture was Turkic too.

[Proto-Shaman]

Turks came ages after Scythians, you look like nothing like them neither do you Anatolian Turks have any ancestry from them :lol:

R.I.P science with Turks
The name Turk exists since at least 5000 years and appears in every corner of the Eurasian continent.

[Halgurd]

when you smoke a dank zoot


The name Turks exists since at least 5000 years and appears in every corner of the Eurasian continent.

[AndarKhan]

The name Turks exists since at least 5000 years and appears in every corner of the Eurasian continent.

Some names like Turk exist in old chinese records about Xiongnus

[Proto-Shaman]

Their culture was Turkic too.
Mainly Turkic with Finno-Ugric tendencies. As to the Scythо-Turkic ethnological parallels, they were already noted by the first, and then by the subsequent Scythologs, who came to a conclusion that ‘the vestiges of Scythian culture were perpetuated and persistently preserved in the culture of Turkic -Mongolian (and in an a smaller measure in Slavic and Finno-Ugrian) peoples’ [Elnitskiy L.A., 1977, 243]. P.I.Karalkin also came to a conclusion that The Royal Scythians were the ancestors of the Turkic speaking peoples [Karalkin P.I., 1978, 39-40].

[Proto-Shaman]

Some names like Turk exist in old chinese records about Xiongnus
The oldest chinese record reffering to Turks is from 2600 bc. The Chinese uttered the word tir like tik, because there is no r in their language. In 2200 bc it appears as Turuk Hun.

[Proto-Shaman]

What historians? Turkic peoples never venture out of their east-Asian homeland until the early middle ages, and recent genetic studies on them proves that there were no mongoloid peoples in central Asia until much later time.
There were no South-Asians in central Asia.

[Pahli]

There were no South-Asians in central Asia.

Yes, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan were full of Dravidian like farmers :rolleyes:

[AndarKhan]

The oldest chinese record reffering to Turks is from 2600 bc. The Chinese uttered the word tir like tik, because there is no r in their language. In 2200 bc it appears as Turuk Hun.

Yes, there is no "R" sound in chinese. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Taşağıl announced that.
Also, they called Köktürks to "T'u-chüeh".

[Proto-Shaman]

Yes, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan were full of Dravidian like farmers :rolleyes:
oooohh, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan are so god damn Scythic :thumb001:

[Proto-Shaman]

Yes, there is no "R" sound in chinese. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Taşağıl announced that.
Also, they called Köktürks to "T'u-chüeh".
For example pronunciation of Wusun-Turkic "büri" (wolf) is like "fuli" in Chinese.

[Proto-Shaman]

Wusun-Saka-Dingling-Kushan-Turkic y-DNA btw:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Bashkir_R1a_L342.2_lines_and_relatives.jpeg?uselan g=de

[AndarKhan]

For example pronunciation of Wusun-Turkic "büri" (wolf) is like "fuli" in Chinese.

Yes, Chinese records say there was a wusun ruler who called Fu-Li(böri). But sorry they were indo-european too. :d :d

[Proto-Shaman]

Yes, Chinese records say there was a wusun ruler who called Fu-Li(böri). But sorry they were indo-european too. :d :d
yes, according to Wikipedia since 2015 :) you can make Turks very easily to Indo.Europeans xD

[Myanthropologies]

How could it not be similar to other Iranic groups? Afghan Pashtuns and Afghan Tajiks & Pamiri Tajiks cluster with each other genetically.

Anyways, it seems they were between east euros and East iranics.

[AndarKhan]

yes, according to Wikipedia since 2015 :) you can make Turks very easily to Indo.Europeans xD

Old Chineses were indo-european.
According Wikipedia 2040
:d :d

[Proto-Shaman]

Old Chineses were indo-european.
According Wikipedia 2040
:d :d
lol actually (and really no fun), once I read a "scientific" European paper about Indo-European origins of Chinese culture and Pantheon.

[Myanthropologies]

Why are Turkish and other non central asian or steepe people so obsessed with Scythians?

[AndarKhan]

lol actually (and really no fun), once I read a "scientific" European paper about Indo-European origins of Chinese culture and Pantheon.
:d :d
Adam and Eve were indo-european.

https://media.ldscdn.org/images/media-library/gospel-art/old-testament/adam-eve-39458-wallpaper.jpg?download=true

Also, Jesus was nordic

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Blonde-Hair-Blue-Eyed-Jesus-728x803.jpg

:D :D :D

[Pahli]

How could it not be similar to other Iranic groups? Afghan Pashtuns and Afghan Tajiks & Pamiri Tajiks cluster with each other genetically.

Anyways, it seems they were between east euros and East iranics.

Actually closer to Eastern Europeans, especially Ukranians:

https://image.ibb.co/f6zh7v/Pahli.png

[Dick]

There is nothing that proves it wrong either as Turkish pseudo-science has failed heavily to prove it wrong too. They have some words that passed down to Slavic people that have Iranic roots, not Turkic lol. Turks never originated as a West Eurasian ethnicity, only partially West Eurasian ancestry:

Now stop wasting our time with your poor science learned in low quality Turkish universities:


Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Europe 47.19
2 West_Asia 24.04
3 SW_Europe 13.65
4 Siberia 6.75
5 South_Asia 3.11
6 Americas 3.02
7 NE_Asia 1.25
8 SE_Asia 0.98

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Tatar 13.67
2 Chuvash 18.02
3 Mordovian 18.65
4 Moldavian 20.39
5 Ukrainian 20.91
6 Slovak 21.29
7 Russian 21.49
8 Aluet 22
9 Slovene 22.5
10 Belarusian 22.63
11 Bosnian 22.88
12 Hungarian 23.42
13 German_North 23.45
14 Croatian 24.21
15 Polish 24.37
16 Romanian 24.4
17 Serbian 24.51
18 Montenegrin 25.27
19 Norwegian 25.31
20 Scottish 25.69

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 62.3% Mordovian + 37.7% Tadjik @ 7.16
2 51.8% Latvian + 48.2% Tadjik @ 7.24
3 51.9% Lithuanian + 48.1% Tadjik @ 7.38
4 58.5% Russian + 41.5% Tadjik @ 7.41
5 67.8% Mordovian + 32.2% Afghan_Pashtun @ 7.44
6 50.3% Tadjik + 49.7% Finnish @ 7.58
7 50.8% Chechen + 49.2% Finnish @ 7.66
8 52.7% Estonian + 47.3% Tadjik @ 7.72
9 70.3% Mordovian + 29.7% Pathan @ 7.93
10 69.6% Mordovian + 30.4% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 8.08
11 64.4% Russian + 35.6% Afghan_Pashtun @ 8.18
12 73.7% Mordovian + 26.3% Makrani @ 8.21
13 73.2% Mordovian + 26.8% Balochi @ 8.25
14 74% Mordovian + 26% Brahui @ 8.3
15 62.3% Mordovian + 37.7% Chechen @ 8.39
16 55.2% Polish + 44.8% Tadjik @ 8.43
17 50.2% Kumyk + 49.8% Finnish @ 8.44
18 55.7% Finnish + 44.3% Dagestan_Azeri @ 8.53
19 53.7% Finnish + 46.3% Adygei @ 8.73
20 67% Russian + 33% Pathan @ 8.81

They might be closest to Tatars but the distance to them is still quite big, they are still slightly more West Eurasian shifted than Tatars.

Very interesting. Is there a reconstruction as to how this person looked like?

[Pahli]

Very interesting. Is there a reconstruction as to how this person looked like?

Unfortunately not; But since they cluster quite close to Ukranians, I can imagine they looked like them but with some Asian influence (smaller eyes / noses).

[Proto-Shaman]

:d :d
Adam and Eve were indo-european.

https://media.ldscdn.org/images/media-library/gospel-art/old-testament/adam-eve-39458-wallpaper.jpg?download=true

Also, Jesus was nordic

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Blonde-Hair-Blue-Eyed-Jesus-728x803.jpg

:D :D :D

Everything out of Europea belongs to the barbarian periphery. Ironically even the word barbar has Turkic roots btw. Loaned into Indo-European languages as barbar ("foreign, barbarous, roughly, cruelly") via Akkadian "barbaru" ("wolf or leopard"), based on a duplication of Proto-Turkic börü, buri, bürü (in some Turkic dialects babir means 'leopard'). Thats the irony :D

[Pahli]

Everything out of Europea belongs to the barbarian periphery. Even the word barbar has Turkic roots btw. Loaned into Indo-European languages as barbar ("foreign, barbarous, roughly, cruelly") via Akkadian "barbaru" ("wolf or leopard"), based on a duplication of Old Turkic börü, buri, bürü (in some Turkic dialects babir means 'leopard'). Thats the irony :D

Need to get off that weed man, makes you create all these lunatic theories.

[Proto-Shaman]

Need to get off that weed man, makes you create all these lunatic theories.
This time no business with you bro. Sorry.

[Pahli]

This time no business with you bro. Sorry.

Even I enjoy ganja sometimes, no hard feelings but these Sumerian-Turkic connections are kinda off world, lets be realistic now :D

[Proto-Shaman]

Even I enjoy ganja sometimes, no hard feelings but these Sumerian-Turkic connections are kinda off world, lets be realistic now :D
ok. Do you have an academic degree to claim such things?

[Pahli]

ok. Do you have an academic degree to claim such things?

No I have common sense that should be enough, everyone can see that these Turkish historians or whatever are biased (which is a shame).

[Myanthropologies]

Actually closer to Eastern Europeans, especially Ukranians:

https://image.ibb.co/f6zh7v/Pahli.png

????? That random map has nothing to do with sicilians, and as the op diagrams show, they were clearly in between Afghan Tajiks and Russians.

[AndarKhan]

Everything out of Europea belongs to the barbarian periphery. Ironically even the word barbar has Turkic roots btw. Loaned into Indo-European languages as barbar ("foreign, barbarous, roughly, cruelly") via Akkadian "barbaru" ("wolf or leopard"), based on a duplication of Proto-Turkic börü, buri, bürü (in some Turkic dialects babir means 'leopard'). Thats the irony :D

Such a ironic. :d :d

[Proto-Shaman]

No I have common sense that should be enough, everyone can see that these Turkish historians or whatever are biased (which is a shame).
despite your "common sense" (as you call it) you are not able to make distinctions between European and Turkish academicians. thats pretty poor.

[AndarKhan]

No I have common sense that should be enough, everyone can see that these Turkish historians or whatever are biased (which is a shame).

Of course. If you wanna be a good historian, you musn't be Turk firstly. Such a disgusting perspective.

[Pahli]

????? That random map has nothing to do with sicilians, and as the op diagrams show, they were clearly in between Afghan Tajiks and Russians.

They were a mix 50/50 but Tajiks from Tajikistan and not Afghanistan, the reason why they cluster in Europe is because they barely have any South Asian to pull them Eastward, only the Asian admixture but it pulls them a bit Northward as well. In the end they would still be closer to certain Eastern Europeans, Tatars and Chuvash then Tajik Pamiris. The problem is that no modern ethnicity resembles them 100%, only a mix of Tajik and Baltic do xD


Of course. If you wanna be a good historian. You musn't be Turk firstly.

I think you guys are having a good time trolling :laugh:

[Myanthropologies]

They were a mix 50/50 but Tajiks from Tajikistan and not Afghanistan, the reason why they cluster in Europe is because they barely have any South Asian to pull them Eastward, only the Asian admixture but it pulls them a bit Northward as well. In the end they would still be closer to certain Eastern Europeans, Tatars and Chuvash then Tajik Pamiris. The problem is that no modern ethnicity resembles them 100%, only a mix of Tajik and Baltic do xD



I think you guys are having a good time trolling :laugh:

Actually, the gedmatch shows quite a bit of south-central asian, and if they were similar to Pamiri Tajiks, then they must be similar to other Eastern Iranics too because Pamiri Tajiks firmly cluster with other Eastern Iranics. Tajiks and Pashtuns are so close that a lot of times in gedmatch you have self proclaimed pashtuns coming up as Tajik before anything else, and vice versa. Eastern Europeans cluster with each other just as much as Tajiks and Pashtuns do. I have also seen plenty of papers by Larzids, etc that model steepe people as 50% EHG and 50% Iranian neolithic. They were obviously not like any modern populations, but it is safe to say that they were between east Europeans and East iranics with a hint of East asian.

[Pahli]

Actually, the gedmatch shows quite a bit of south-central asian, and if they were similar to Pamiri Tajiks, then they must be similar to other Eastern Iranics too because Pamiri Tajiks firmly cluster with other Eastern Iranics. Tajiks and Pashtuns are so close that a lot of times in gedmatch you have self proclaimed pashtuns coming up as Tajik before anything else, and vice versa. Eastern Europeans cluster with each other just as much as Tajiks and Pashtuns do. I have also seen plenty of papers by Larzids, etc that model steepe people as 50% EHG and 50% Iranian neolithic. They were obviously not like any modern populations, but it is safe to say that they were between east Europeans and East iranics with a hint of East asian.

They're closer to East Europeans because:

- High NE_Euro
- Barely any South Asian

They do have South Central Asian components but it only makes them 1/3 Afghan Pashtun and 2/3 Baltic, I'll show you the Eurogenes K15 PCA map:

http://oi67.tinypic.com/2ymtah1.jpg

They're even more European shifted than Tatars, their closest modern ethnicity would be Erzya.

[Myanthropologies]

They're closer to East Europeans because:

- High NE_Euro
- Barely any South Asian

They do have South Central Asian components but it only makes them 1/3 Afghan Pashtun and 2/3 Baltic, I'll show you the Eurogenes K15 PCA map:

http://oi67.tinypic.com/2ymtah1.jpg

They're even more European shifted than Tatars, their closest modern ethnicity would be Erzya.

That pca doesn't align with that the gedmatch even says though, so.

[Myanthropologies]

Also, the fact that people black out kit numbers and other information that could let others access this stuff for themselves suggests the posaibility of a political bias or some kind of bias.

[Pahli]

That pca doesn't align with that the gedmatch even says though, so.

I know, but from the pca plots I've seen they closer to modern East Euros than South Asians, however you can still see that Tajiks aren't that far away. Would have been nice with a Tajik Pamiri plot tho, they would be more Northwestern shifted for sure.

[Pahli]

Also, the fact that people black out kit numbers and other information that could let others access this stuff for themselves suggests the posaibility of a political bias or some kind of bias.

I can give you two gedmatch kit numbers if you want, one Iron Age Scythian and one Sarmatian.

[Myanthropologies]

I know, but from the pca plots I've seen they closer to modern East Euros than South Asians, however you can still see that Tajiks aren't that far away. Would have been nice with a Tajik Pamiri plot tho, they would be more Northwestern shifted for sure.

Who are "South Asians"? You're implying that Pashtuns and Pamiris belong to two different racial categories? Like wtf, they descend from the same exact people. You make it sound like Pamiri Tajiks are some lost Nordic people when they are extremely similar to other Eastern Iranics. We have extremely over studied European DNA, including Eastern Europeans, but barely anything from Afghanistan or Tajikstan, and as more and more samples have been coming in from that area, stories are changing.

As I have already mentioned, I base my information based off of what Lazarids papers say and not only gedmatch.

[Proto-Shaman]

Actually, the gedmatch shows quite a bit of south-central asian, and if they were similar to Pamiri Tajiks, then they must be similar to other Eastern Iranics too because Pamiri Tajiks firmly cluster with other Eastern Iranics. Tajiks and Pashtuns are so close that a lot of times in gedmatch you have self proclaimed pashtuns coming up as Tajik before anything else, and vice versa. Eastern Europeans cluster with each other just as much as Tajiks and Pashtuns do. I have also seen plenty of papers by Larzids, etc that model steepe people as 50% EHG and 50% Iranian neolithic. They were obviously not like any modern populations, but it is safe to say that they were between east Europeans and East iranics with a hint of East asian.

Pamiri Tajiks are Turanids first of all :picard2:

[Pahli]

Who are "South Asians"? You're implying that Pashtuns and Pamiris belong to two different racial categories? Like wtf, they descend from the same exact people. You make it sound like Pamiri Tajiks are some lost Nordic people when they are extremely similar to other Eastern Iranics. We have extremely over studied European DNA, including Eastern Europeans, but barely anything from Afghanistan or Tajikstan, and as more and more samples have been coming in from that area, stories are changing.

As I have already mentioned, I base my information based off of what Lazarids papers say and not only gedmatch.

I ment South Central Asians lol*

[Myanthropologies]

Pamirid Tajiks are Turanids.

They are not even remotely. I have family members that know Pamiris personally, and one of my cousins is partially pamiri, and they are phenotypically similar to other Eastern Iranics, even Pamiris themselves have claimed that they are similar to other Tajiks and Pashtuns.

[Myanthropologies]

I ment South Central Asians lol*

That's what Pamiri Tajiks are too.

[Proto-Shaman]

They are not even remotely. I have family members that know Pamiris personally, and one of my cousins is partially pamiri, and they are phenotypically similar to other Eastern Iranics, even Pamiris themselves have claimed that they are similar to other Tajiks and Pashtuns.

anthropologically speaking 100% Turanid :)

[Pahli]

That's what Pamiri Tajiks are too.

Just ignore that Turkish batbaxti

[Proto-Shaman]

batbaxti

:biggrin

[Peterski]

Scythians spoke Turkic.

Western (Ukraine) and Central (Volga, Samara) Scythians don't even get much or any of Siberian admixture. Only Eastern Scythians had Siberian admixture, therefore only they could possibly speak Turkic.

[AndarKhan]

Western (Ukraine) and Central (Volga, Samara) Scythians don't even get much or any of Siberian admixture. Only Eastern Scythians had Siberian admixture, therefore only they could possibly speak Turkic.

Scythians and Xiongnus are multi-ethnic. He talks about aristocracy.

[Pahli]

Western (Ukraine) and Central (Volga, Samara) Scythians don't even get much or any of Siberian admixture. Only Eastern Scythians had Siberian admixture, therefore only they could possibly speak Turkic.

From Samara to Ukraine they basically had no more than around 10% Mong. Its attested that they called Ukraine "Varustana", basically the vast Steppes of Ukraine :laugh:

Also from Wikipedia: "The name Dnieper is derived from Sarmatian Dānu apara "the river on the far side".[9] (By contrast, the Dniester derives from "the close river".) According to V. Abaev (expert on Scytho-Sarmatian languages) the name Dnieper derives from Scythian Dānu apr (Dānapr) "deep river", while the name Dniester is combination of Scythian Dānu (river) and Thracian Ister, the old name of Dniester.[10]

In the three countries through which it flows it has essentially the same name, albeit pronounced differently:

Russian: Днепр (Dnepr, [dnʲepr]);
Belarusian: Дняпро (Dnyapro, [dnʲaˈprɔ]) or Днепр[11] (Dnyepr, [dnʲɛpr]);
Ukrainian: Днiпро (Dnipro, [dnʲiˈprɔ]) or Дніпер[12] (Dniper, [ˈdnʲiper]).
The river is mentioned by the Ancient Greek historian Herodotus in the 5th century BC as Borysthenes (Βορυσθένης), as well as by Strabo; this name is Scythian (cf. Iranian *varu-stāna) and translates as "wide land", referring most likely to the Ukrainian steppe.[citation needed] The late Greek and Roman authors called it Δάναπρις - Danapris and Danaper respectively - (dana in Old Persian meant "river"); this form is derived from Sarmatian Dānu apara "the river on the far side".[9][citation needed] Its Old East Slavic name used at the time of Kievan Rus' was Slavuta or Slavutych, the Huns called it Var,[13] and Bulgars - Buri-Chai.[citation needed] The name in Crimean Tatar: Özü.[14]"

[Proto-Shaman]

From Samara to Ukraine they basically had no more than around 10% Mong. Its attested that they called Ukraine "Varustana", basically the vast Steppes of Ukraine :laugh:

lol even Kazakhstan had 25% Mong. at the beginning of the Iron age :laugh:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Kazakh_genesis_Ismagulov.jpg


Also from Wikipedia: "The name Dnieper is derived from Sarmatian Dānu apara "the river on the far side".[9] (By contrast, the Dniester derives from "the close river".) According to V. Abaev (expert on Scytho-Sarmatian languages) the name Dnieper derives from Scythian Dānu apr (Dānapr) "deep river", while the name Dniester is combination of Scythian Dānu (river) and Thracian Ister, the old name of Dniester.[10]

In the three countries through which it flows it has essentially the same name, albeit pronounced differently:

Russian: Днепр (Dnepr, [dnʲepr]);
Belarusian: Дняпро (Dnyapro, [dnʲaˈprɔ]) or Днепр[11] (Dnyepr, [dnʲɛpr]);
Ukrainian: Днiпро (Dnipro, [dnʲiˈprɔ]) or Дніпер[12] (Dniper, [ˈdnʲiper]).
The river is mentioned by the Ancient Greek historian Herodotus in the 5th century BC as Borysthenes (Βορυσθένης), as well as by Strabo; this name is Scythian (cf. Iranian *varu-stāna) and translates as "wide land", referring most likely to the Ukrainian steppe.[citation needed] The late Greek and Roman authors called it Δάναπρις - Danapris and Danaper respectively - (dana in Old Persian meant "river"); this form is derived from Sarmatian Dānu apara "the river on the far side".[9][citation needed] Its Old East Slavic name used at the time of Kievan Rus' was Slavuta or Slavutych, the Huns called it Var,[13] and Bulgars - Buri-Chai.[citation needed] The name in Crimean Tatar: Özü.[14]"

lol at this Iranian propaganda, trying to make a Turkic word look Iranophone xD

Borysthenes = börütengiz 'the sea of the wolf' Turkic :)

[Böri]

There is nothing funnier than modern Indo-Iranians, being mostly swarthy, arguing that Scythians (who started in Altay) were looking like Slavs despite we see strong Siberian genetical input.
Psychology science is speechless to explain this situation, a study case!

[Kelmendasi]

I don't get the reasoning behind some of the Turks here. The Scythians were confirmed as being an Iranic speaking peoples, but yet Turks still try to push their agenda about Scythians being Turks.

[Böri]

I don't get the reasoning behind some of the Turks here. The Scythians were confirmed as being an Iranic speaking peoples, but yet Turks still try to push their agenda about Scythians being Turks.

Did they leave any written record in Iranic? No.
Some Greek sources pretend that they were Iranians.
The Acheamenids had Scythian mercenaries, maybe that created confusion in Greeks's mind.

[Kelmendasi]

Did they leave any written record in Iranic? No.
Some Greek sources pretend that they were Iranians.
The Acheamenids had Scythian mercenaries, maybe that created confusion in Greeks's mind.
They were Iranic, I don't see the point in claiming otherwise. They did leave inscriptions as a matter of fact as well as personal names, toponyms, hydronyms and theonyms which all point towards an Iranic language. As well as the fact that Alanian is a descendant of Scythian and guess what, it's Iranic. The only group of "Scythians" which could have had close ties with Turkics or even possibly spoken Turkic are the easternmost ones such as the Pazyryk who may have been labelled as "Scythian" under an umbrella term, they either were mixed with Turkics or were bilingual and spoke Scythian as well as a Turkic language.

[Dick]

I don't get the reasoning behind some of the Turks here. The Scythians were confirmed as being an Iranic speaking peoples, but yet Turks still try to push their agenda about Scythians being Turks.

Who exactly were they anyway. It seems as though the Slavs called them that which basically means nomad or wanderer still today, for example Russian “skitalec”, but what did they call themselves.

[Kelmendasi]

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14615. "Genomic inference reveals that Scythians in the east and the west of the steppe zone can best be described as a mixture of Yamnaya-related ancestry and an East Asian component. Demographic modelling suggests independent origins for eastern and western groups with ongoing gene-flow between them, plausibly explaining the striking uniformity of their material culture. We also find evidence that significant gene-flow from east to west Eurasia must have occurred early during the Iron Age."

[Kelmendasi]

Who exactly were they anyway. It seems as though the Slavs called them that which basically means nomad or wanderer still today, for example Russian “skitalec”, but what did they call themselves.
They were an Iranic group who spoke an eastern Iranian language and genetically were like a mix of Yamnaya-like Dna and east Eurasian DNA, they were steppe nomads. The western Scythians were more west Eurasian genetically and were certainly ethnic Scythians that spoke Scythian whilst the eastern ones were really east Eurasian genetically making some believe that they were just Altai people that had come under "Scythian" as an umbrella term but the two had gene-flow and shared a similar or the same material-culture

[DarknessWin]

They were a mix of Iranics and Mongoloids

http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pic%5CS%5CC%5CScythian%20man%20from%20Nikopol%20ku rhan%20(reconstruction).jpg


Bastardized race and uncivilized nomads , people here speak very highly for them when in reality were garbage

[Proto-Shaman]

They were a mix of Iranics and Mongoloids.
With East Iranians being Iranified Turkics at place 4 at aDNA results.