Mongoloid R1a in Turkish comes from Mongoloid males mixing with Anatolian Europoid females

[ButlerKing]

Even now I do not understand why Turkish and Hungarians keep claiming or calculating the percentages/or numbers of R1a they have or why they want to believe R1a it's proto-Turkic. The Turkish only became Turks after the Oghuz Turks migrated to Turkey through the creation of Seljuk empire which conquered Turkey in 10th-11th century. Thousand years before Turkey became Turks and received R1a from the Turkic people, the R1a were already predominant Mongoloid nomads hence the reason why there is so many ancient burials of Mongoloid males with R1a with Europoid females because they inherited this style from their nomadic Scythian grandfathers or great-grandfather, or heck it even predate Scythians.

I do not understand why members like Kipchak Kagan, Turul Karom are claiming R1a as Turkic. It is a sick obession


Wrong, R1b brought non-IE AGGLUTINATIVE languages into Europe, Basque and Bashkirs are the last remnants. Celtic is agglutinative, too, a totally non-IE feature. R1a in India is Scytho-Turkic not IE. The same can be said about R1a M458 in Eastern Europe and Finno-Ugric Z280!

R1a in India predated any Aryan invasion especially some sick believe of coming from Mongoloid admixed Scytho-Turkic. The highest of R1a concentration in the world can be found in North India reaching 82% and none of them have Mongoloid DNA unlike Turkish population who have 7-15% R1a but have significant Mongoloid admixture. The gypsies and Indian migrant who spread R1a in Southern Arabia and Europe would also all be heavily South Asian admixed. There's no such thing as Indians with R1a looking like east Europeans.


R1a in Southeast Asia is well correlated with South Asian mtDNA. All western eurasian haplogroups in Southeast Asia were contributed by South Asian population. Also all Southeast Asian have evidence of South Asian admixture

http://i60.tinypic.com/r0o2v6.png


Now for Turkey they have evidence of East Asian admixture from autosomal, Y-DNA, mtDNA. That's because the Central Asian Turks carrying every western or eastern haplogroups would have all been hybridsized and racially mixed to begin with. An autosomal map already proves of your admixture. So a Turkish person with R1a could have some ancestors who look like a Vietnamese guy or more accurately a Kyrgyz male.

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=37103&d=1378454779

[Bornoz]

I will never understand your obsession about Turkish people..

[ButlerKing]

I will never understand your obsession about Turkish people..

Just like I don't understand your Turks obession with claiming R1a in India came from Turks. If you look back at 2010 and 2011 threads it was Turks who started claiming Indians are descendants of Turkic males with South Indian females but are no longer Turkic due to being mixed. Of course by Turkic they mean't Europoid without any Mongoloid admixture.


Although Aryan invasion of India is already disproven and even if there really was Aryan invasion they were already South Asian admixed thousand years before any civilization or caste system was created. Even if let's say the (impossible) Aryan invasion existed and they look like Iranic males is still far more better than the disgusting Turkic R1a theory that Turks had been promoting on this thread in the last 10 years of theapricity ( including in forumbiodiverty forum )


Prove that Turkish R1a came from hybrid Mongoloid males intermixing with local anatolian Europoid females


Altai ( 1700 years before the Turkification of Turkey )

" More recent studies have been able to type for specific mtDNA lineages. For example, a 2004 study studied the HV1 sequence obtained from a male "Scytho-Siberian" at the Kizil site in the Altai Republic. It belonged to the N1a maternal lineage, a geographically "west Eurasian lineage."[130] Another study by the same team, again from two Scytho-Siberian skeletons found in the Altai Republic, were phenotypically males "of mixed Euro-Mongoloid origin". One of the individuals was found to carry the F2a maternal lineage, and the other the D lineage, both of which are characteristic of "East Eurasian" populations.[131] "


Xiongnu ( 1200 years before the Turkification of Turkey )


The Xiongnu founders. Mongoloid R1a males existed thousand years before the existence of Arpad dynasty.

" According to another archeological and genetic study in 2010, the DNA found in three skeletons in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Asia belonged to C3, D4 and including R1a. Analysis of skeletal remains from sites attributed to the Xiongnu provides an identification of dolichocephalic Mongoloid, ethnically distinct from neighboring populations in present-day Mongolia.[20] "

" According to another archeological and genetic study in 2010, the paternal Y-chromosome R1a, which is considered as an Indo-European marker, was found in three skeletons in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Asia, As the R1a was found in Xiongnu people[13] and the present-day people of Central Asia[14] Analysis of skeletal remains from sites attributed to the Xiongnu provides an identification of dolichocephalic Mongoloid, ethnically distinct from neighboring populations in present-day Mongolia.[15] "


( Pazyryk, 1600 years before the Turkification of Turkey )

Pazyryk culture ( R1a, N1b )

" Craniological studies of samples from the Pazyryk burials revealed the presence of both Mongoloid and Caucasoid components in this population.[6] quoting G. F. Debets on the physical characteristics of the population in the Pazyryk kurgans, records a mixed population. The men would seem to be part Mongoloid and the women Europoid.[7] "


( Anayino, 1500 years before the Turkfiication of Turkey )

Anayino culture

Sculptural reconstruction of men Lugovskyi burial
Ananyino culture. Gypsum. MMGerasimov work.


" Reconstruction of the mounds number 5, 6 show burial Stone Barn in racial make women Ural type men - striking features of Central Asian Mongoloid."



MALE : R1a Central Asian Mongoloid
FEMALE: H1a Caucasian female

http://www.imageup.ru/img195/1641901/tyurk1.jpg

http://www.imageup.ru/img195/1641909/f-u1.jpg

[Vlatko Vukovic]

I would like to ask mr. Kipchak Hakan, if Z280 is Turkic, how then Baltic and Slavic people don't speak Turkic, but totally different, opposite language.

[Kouros]

I would like to ask mr. Kipchak Hakan, if Z280 is Turkic, how then Baltic and Slavic people don't speak Turkic, but totally different, opposite language.

Don't ask questions

[ButlerKing]

Let's look at Kyrgyz DNA. Another proof that R1a in Central Asia couldn't possibly be just Europoid.


If R1a was simply a Europoid Turkic than it would be impossible for Kyrgyz to still be 60-80% Mongoloid and there would be at least be 30-40% of modern day Kyrgyz who are pure Europoid but we all know there is not single Kyrgyz that doesn't lack heavy Mongoloid admixture as shown from any autosomal DNA results. The only explanation for that is a very large percentage of R1a were already hybridsized with Mongoloid long before any Mongol invasion to Central Asia. It explains their higher Mongoloid autosomal DNA than average.



http://i64.tinypic.com/11vp7k5.jpg



R1a

The genetic makeup of the Kyrgyz is consistent with their origin as a mix of tribes.[30][31] For instance, 63% of modern Kyrgyz men of Jumgal District[32] share Haplogroup R1a1 (Y-DNA) with Ishkashimis (68%),[30] Tajiks of Panjikent (64%),[33][34] Pashtuns (51%),[35] and Bartangis (40%).[30][36] Low diversity of Kyrgyz R1a1 indicates a founder effect within the historical period.[33] Other groups of Kyrgyz show considerably lower haplogroup R frequencies and almost lack haplogroup N.[37]

West Eurasian mtDNA ranges from 27% to 42.6% in the Kyrgyz[38] with Haplogroup mtDNA H being the most predominant marker at 21.3% among the Kyrgyz.[38]


If R1a in Central Asian Turks were simply Europoid than at least 27% to 42.6% of Kyrgyz who have western eurasian mtDNA should all be Europoid. Meaning we should be seeing 1 in 4 or almost 1 in 2 Kyrgyz being Europoid by race instead of everyone of them being predominate Mongoloid.


Here are the Jumgal district Kyrgyz with high percentage of R1a with high percentages of western eurasian mtDNA but we can see not one of them look even remotely europoid.

http://l450v.alamy.com/450v/bf8m45/kyrgyz-family-kyrgyzstan-bf8m45.jpg
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/ANY4FY/kyrgyzstan-chayek-jumgal-kyrgyz-children-ANY4FY.jpg
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/BNCPW6/kyrgyz-boys-kyrgyzstan-BNCPW6.jpg

[ButlerKing]

I would like to ask mr. Kipchak Hakan, if Z280 is Turkic, how then Baltic and Slavic people don't speak Turkic, but totally different, opposite language.

Even now he is still claiming every R1a marker as Turkic origin, he has done this for 10 years. You can see that picture he has in his signature at the bottom of is every comment, he is hell bend on claiming R1a is Turkic wether we like it or not. That's his Turkic obsession mentality to prove every superior things comes from Turkic; history, dna

[Sora]

Butler! If Kyrgyz people have pure Western Eurasian mtDNA and predominantly Mongoloid Y-DNA, then why are Kyrgyz people predominantly Mongoloid? How do you explain this? If it was, then Kyrgyz people would look like Uzbeks or Turkmens. So, I don't agree with you. I think Kyrgyz people are mixture of Caucasoid males and Mongoloid females. Also why Caucasiod women and Mongoloid men? why not vice versa? why can't you ship Mongoloid women and Caucasoid men? :rolleyes:

[Sora]

Also @Butler, I invite you to this thread :) https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236384-The-Genetic-Structure-of-Anatolia-From-the-Neolithic-to-the-Oghuz-Migrations

[ButlerKing]

Also @Butler, I invite you to this thread :) https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236384-The-Genetic-Structure-of-Anatolia-From-the-Neolithic-to-the-Oghuz-Migrations

You don't get my point. R1a is not strictly only to European looking males.

YOU MUST FIRST LOOK AT THE GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS OF R1a and R1b

Indian men married British women and so at least a portion of R1a in the British should be Indian origin but because so many dumb idiots think R1a is strictly European they do not include any of it as Indian

" The British East India Company brought many South Asian lascars to Britain, where many settled down with local white British wives, due to a lack of Asian women in Britain at the time.[351] "

Just like in Africa, you can't claim every single R1b in Africa were spread only by European/Middle eastern males. R1b in Nigerians would most likely be from Chadic males with 92% R1b and the last time they had R1b is during the neolithic times.

https://joshuaproject.net/profiles/photos/p10166.jpg

[Thracian]

You don't get my point. R1a is not strictly only to European looking males.

Indian men married British women and so at least a portion of R1a in the British should be Indian origin but because so many dumb idiots think R1a is strictly European they do not include any of it as Indian

" The British East India Company brought many South Asian lascars to Britain, where many settled down with local white British wives, due to a lack of Asian women in Britain at the time.[351] "

R1a-Z93 is Asian. R1a-Z280 is Slavic/European. They are different.

[ButlerKing]

R1a-Z93 is Asian. R1a-Z280 is Slavic/European. They are different.

Yes, and I'm sure the British would have a little bit of R1a-Z93 from Indians. Now the thing I want to know is are the Turks going to claim R1a-Z93 in anywhere in the world are by Turkic males including the one in England ? At least I know there not dumb enough to claim Southeast Asian R1a-Z93 came from Turks but what about the rest of the world ? There were more Indian ( including gypsy migrants ) that migrated to Europe, Middle east historically than Turks.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

Even now he is still claiming every R1a marker as Turkic origin, he has done this for 10 years. You can see that picture he has in his signature at the bottom of is every comment, he is hell bend on claiming R1a is Turkic wether we like it or not. That's his Turkic obsession mentality to prove every superior things comes from Turkic; history, dna

I think it's becouse he is R1a, he wants to somehow prove himself that he is clear Turanoid. But i don't care for this clade such as Z93. But the fact is that Z280 (Balto-Slavic) is unexistant among Turanoids, and M458 almost unexistant. No one of Turks (except Karachay-Balkars) have such haplogroup, and they are more likely result of Russian influence there.

[ButlerKing]

I think it's becouse he is R1a, he wants to somehow prove himself that he is clear Turanoid. But i don't care for this clade such as Z93. But the fact is that Z280 (Balto-Slavic) is unexistant among Turanoids, and M458 almost unexistant. No one of Turks (except Karachay-Balkars) have such haplogroup, and they are more likely result of Russian influence there.

Karachay-Balkars are Turkified people anyway.

It's amazing how puny 7-15% R1a Turkish are claiming this marker for themselves, they don't even have much of it on the other hand the highest concentrations are found in North Indians 48-72% and yet a Turkish like Kipchak Kagan have the nerve going around claiming every one of them are Turkic origin . They don't even know that their central Asia R1a were already heavily mixed/or better said contaminated with Mongoloid admixture long before their own Turkish( Turkified) existence.

[ButlerKing]

I'll be waiting for Kipchan Khagan to reply to this thread. Like he seriously think that his own wishful thinking would be made a reality the just because he keep repeating the same thing.


I though he stopped but he didn't. He must have been rejected by a Indian female hence the reason he continues to have Turkic DNA fantasies in South Asia.

[Marmara]

R1a-Z93 is not Turkic it's Aryan. Turks have it by mixing with Scythians.

[Bobby Martnen]

R1a-Z93 is not Turkic it's Aryan. Turks have it by mixing with Scythians.

AR1YAN!!!

[Marmara]

AR1YAN!!!

By Aryan i mean original Indo-İranian, not the Nazi definition.

[Kelmendasi]

You don't get my point. R1a is not strictly only to European looking males.

YOU MUST FIRST LOOK AT THE GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS OF R1a and R1b

Indian men married British women and so at least a portion of R1a in the British should be Indian origin but because so many dumb idiots think R1a is strictly European they do not include any of it as Indian

" The British East India Company brought many South Asian lascars to Britain, where many settled down with local white British wives, due to a lack of Asian women in Britain at the time.[351] "

Just like in Africa, you can't claim every single R1b in Africa were spread only by European/Middle eastern males. R1b in Nigerians would most likely be from Chadic males with 92% R1b and the last time they had R1b is during the neolithic times.

[mg]https://joshuaproject.net/profiles/photos/p10166.jpg[/img]
So far there haven't been ethnic Brits tested that belong to R1a-Z93 so what you say about Indian R1a carriers spreading R1a among Brits is just wrong. The R1a clades found in ethnic Brits are R1a-L664 and R1a-Z284 both of which are Germanic

[Kelmendasi]

I think it's becouse he is R1a, he wants to somehow prove himself that he is clear Turanoid. But i don't care for this clade such as Z93. But the fact is that Z280 (Balto-Slavic) is unexistant among Turanoids, and M458 almost unexistant. No one of Turks (except Karachay-Balkars) have such haplogroup, and they are more likely result of Russian influence there.
Kipchak Khagan is in fact L1b iirc and not R1a. But yh his pan-Turanist views are absolute BS

[ButlerKing]

R1a-Z93 is not Turkic it's Aryan. Turks have it by mixing with Scythians.

Yes, R1a in Turkic are from Scythian.

Although I don't believe in the Aryan invasion I get what you mean.


Watch these videos they are very educational.

Listen to what Dr. David Frawley says, there's no such thing as Aryan invasion to India


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qych3WYNViA

Out of India theory makes more sense but I believe it can be wrong too


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pMAdHcqS0U

[Bobby Martnen]

By Aryan i mean original Indo-İranian, not the Nazi definition.

I was just making a joke about haplogroups. I am neither a Nazi, nor R1.

[Marmara]

I was just making a joke about haplogroups. I am neither a Nazi, nor R1.

:hitler:


https://youtu.be/1ZVeAAUaD0M

[ButlerKing]

So far there haven't been ethnic Brits tested that belong to R1a-Z93 so what you say about Indian R1a carriers spreading R1a among Brits is just wrong. The R1a clades found in ethnic Brits are R1a-L664 and R1a-Z284 both of which are Germanic

I have yet to see a Y-DNA study of British. I understand R1a is a minority in British and most of them would most likely be Germanic but it be a bit impossible to say Indian males left no genetic impact give the fact that Indian traders/soldiers/settlers migrated with little Indian females. The British also married Indian females and they are anglo-Indians while the offspring of Indian males/British women became completely assimilated and losing all their South Asian traits.

Even the British royal family have Indian DNA ancestry

https://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/14/world/europe/britain-prince-william-india/index.html


"Britain's royal family has long been taunted for its German roots, but now a more exotic lineage can be revealed after evidence emerged indicating that Prince William is the direct descendant of an Indian woman "


"Jim Wilson, chief scientist at BritainsDNA, told CNN the discovery means"William probably has a very small amount (of Indian DNA), maybe half a percent will be of South Asian heritage."

"The mitochondrial DNA will not be passed on to the child of William and Kate," he added. "But because we also did some testing on the other DNA of his cousins, we could see that they had little bits of Indian DNA across their genome, so it's quite likely that William has a few other bits of Indian DNA, and he could well pass "

[Vlatko Vukovic]

R1a-Z93 is not Turkic it's Aryan. Turks have it by mixing with Scythians.

Kipchak Hakan claims that Z93, and not only Z93 but also Z280 and M458 are Turkic haplogroups.

[Kelmendasi]

I have yet to see a Y-DNA study of British. I understand R1a is a minority in British and most of them would most likely be Germanic but it be a bit impossible to say Indian males left no genetic impact give the fact that Indian traders/soldiers/settlers migrated with little Indian females. The British also married Indian females and they are anglo-Indians while the offspring of Indian males/British women became completely assimilated and losing all their South Asian traits.

Even the British royal family have Indian DNA ancestry

https://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/14/world/europe/britain-prince-william-india/index.html


"Britain's royal family has long been taunted for its German roots, but now a more exotic lineage can be revealed after evidence emerged indicating that Prince William is the direct descendant of an Indian woman "


"Jim Wilson, chief scientist at BritainsDNA, told CNN the discovery means"William probably has a very small amount (of Indian DNA), maybe half a percent will be of South Asian heritage."

"The mitochondrial DNA will not be passed on to the child of William and Kate," he added. "But because we also did some testing on the other DNA of his cousins, we could see that they had little bits of Indian DNA across their genome, so it's quite likely that William has a few other bits of Indian DNA, and he could well pass "
I'm talking about ethnic Brits who have no known ancestry from India or Indians.

[Thracian]

Yes, and I'm sure the British would have a little bit of R1a-Z93 from Indians. Now the thing I want to know is are the Turks going to claim R1a-Z93 in anywhere in the world are by Turkic males including the one in England ? At least I know there not dumb enough to claim Southeast Asian R1a-Z93 came from Turks but what about the rest of the world ? There were more Indian ( including gypsy migrants ) that migrated to Europe, Middle east historically than Turks.

That is possible. I don't know but hard to say R1a-Z93 is in Europe comes exactly from Turks, Indians, Persians or Tadjiks.

[Yaglakar]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_ expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg

r1a predates proto-Turks.

https://media.nature.com/lw926/nature-assets/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/images/ejhg201450f3.jpg

"In the complementary R1a-Z93 haplogroup, the paragroup R1a-Z93* (Figure 3b) is most common (>30%) in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia, but it also occurs in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (1–8%). R1a-Z2125 (Figure 3c) occurs at highest frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (>40%)." https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201450

Kyrgyz Y-DNA subclade is similar to that of Pashtuns. Not suprising given that Indo-European Sakas and Wusuns used to live there before the arrival of proto-Turks (Xiongnu aka white Huns). The Altai subclade is likely from Eastern Scythians.

[ButlerKing]

I'm talking about ethnic Brits who have no known ancestry from India or Indians.

Saying there's no ethnic British with Indian ancestry would be impossible. There's British ancestry in Anglo-Indian just like there is Indian ancestry in ethnic Brits

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_marriage

" Inter-ethnic marriage began occurring more often in Britain since the 17th century, when the British East India Company began bringing over many Indian scholars, lascars, servants and workers. Though mixed marriages were not always accepted in British society, there were no legal restrictions against intermarriage at the time.[388][389] By the mid-19th century, there were more than 40,000 Indian seamen, diplomats, scholars, soldiers, officials, tourists, businessmen and students arriving(normally temporarily) to Britain.[323] By the late 19th century and early 20th century, there were around 70,000 South Asians working on British ships,[390] 51,616 of whom were lascar seamen working on British merchant ships for the Royal Navy when World War 1 began.[391][392] Families with South Asian lascar fathers and white mothers established small interracial families in Britain's dock areas .[393] This led to a number of"mixed race" children being born in the country. The small number of ethnic minority women in Britain were often outnumbered by "half-caste Indian" daughters born from white mothers and Indian fathers although mixed race families were still very unusual in Britain at this time.[394] In addition, a number of British officers who had Indian wives and Anglo-Indian children in British India often brought them over to Britain in the 19th century.[395]

[Kelmendasi]

Yes, R1a in Turkic are from Scythian.

Although I don't believe in the Aryan invasion I get what you mean.


Watch these videos they are very educational.

Listen to what Dr. David Frawley says, there's no such thing as Aryan invasion to India


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qych3WYNViA

Out of India theory makes more sense but I believe it can be wrong too


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pMAdHcqS0U
The Indo-Iranian migration/Invasion is basically proven by Linguistic, Archaeological and Genetic research

[ButlerKing]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_ expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg

r1a predates proto-Turks.

https://media.nature.com/lw926/nature-assets/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/images/ejhg201450f3.jpg

"In the complementary R1a-Z93 haplogroup, the paragroup R1a-Z93* (Figure 3b) is most common (>30%) in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia, but it also occurs in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (1–8%). R1a-Z2125 (Figure 3c) occurs at highest frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (>40%)." https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201450



Kyrgyz Y-DNA subclade is similar to that of Pashtuns. Not suprising given that Indo-European Sakas and Wusuns used to live there before the arrival of proto-Turks (Xiongnu aka white Huns). The Altai subclade is likely from Eastern Scythians.

This chart here is wrong


R1a is low on southern Kyrgyz but high in northern kyrgyz. Some Kyrgyz groups have only 40% R1a

https://sites.google.com/site/thelineagesofasia/_/rsrc/1251231666063/home/R1a.png


They need sort out highland Kyrgyz and lowland kyrgyz. Just like their Y-DNA is different so is their West Eurasian mtDNA depending on the Kyrgyz it's 20% in highland to 50% in lowland Kyrgyz


http://i57.tinypic.com/nf1mqc.jpg


" The genetic makeup of the Kyrgyz is consistent with their origin as a mix of tribes.[30][31] For instance, 63% of modern Kyrgyz men of Jumgal District[32] share Haplogroup R1a1 (Y-DNA) with Ishkashimis (68%),[30] Tajiks of Panjikent (64%),[33][34] Pashtuns (51%),[35] and Bartangis (40%).[30][36] Low diversity of Kyrgyz R1a1 indicates a founder effect within the historical period.[33] Other groups of Kyrgyz show considerably lower haplogroup R frequencies and almost lack haplogroup N.[37] "

West Eurasian mtDNA ranges from 27% to 42.6% in the Kyrgyz[38] with Haplogroup mtDNA H being the most predominant marker at 21.3% among the Kyrgyz.[38]


Kyrgyz may have 40-70% R1a ( depending on the Kyrgyz tribes, some Kyrgyz actually have very low R1a despite several studies show them with high )

http://i65.tinypic.com/8yvrx5.gif
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/60_Genetics/WorldHaplogroupsMaps/KyrgyzMT_DNA.gif

Kyrgyz are genetically diverse haplogroup and autosomally so it's hard to say. With two Kyrgyz group being 62.5% East Eurasian, one group being 67.5% East Eurasian, one group is 56% and two are 50% ( Btw the Kyrgyz with only 50% in western Kyrgyzstan historically belong to a Tajikistan area and they properly mixed with the Tajiks there, that's why the Kyrgyz in Tajikistan are also the same only after the Soviets helped Tajiks gained back half of it's area back ). Other shows them being 70-80% East Eurasians

The Tajiks and the Tajiks in Uzbekistan are also roughly genetically the same

( Yellow dots are Turkic, Greek dots are Iranian Tajiks and Uzbeksized Tajiks)

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/TJCuJVizYSI/AAAAAAAAClY/KT6PkWSIZnM/s1600/centralasianmartinez.jpg

[ButlerKing]

The Indo-Iranian migration/Invasion is basically proven by Linguistic, Archaeological and Genetic research

There was no migration/invasion of Indo-Iranian. There was a migration of Indo-Europeans linguistic groups, indeed there was a migration o South India which were done by North Indian males.

Now I want to ask you what do you imagine " Indo-Europeans " migrants to South Asia to be like? Do you imagine them looking like Iranian males from Tajikistan or Iran ? It's more likely they would have look Afghans/Pakistani/North Indians and later expanded to to rest of South Asia.

[Yaglakar]

This chart here is wrong

Kyrgyz don't live in the south of the country, and if they do they are mixed with Uzbeks. The are over a million ethnic Uzbeks in the south. That high r1a is due to mountains which protected those Indo-European males.

[Kelmendasi]

There was no migration/invasion of Indo-Iranian. There was a migration of Indo-Europeans linguistic groups, indeed there was a migration o South India which were done by North Indian males.

Now I want to ask you what do you imagine " Indo-Europeans " migrants to South Asia to be like? Do you imagine them looking like Iranian males from Tajikistan or Iran ? It's more likely they would have look Afghans/Pakistani/North Indians and later expanded to to rest of South Asia.
Those Indo-Europeans were Indo-Iranians from the Andronovo culture who then migrated into northern India and became the Painted Grey ware peoples who scholars believe spoke an Indo-Aryan language. Those people probably looked like or similar to the Tocharians and were lighter skinned

[ButlerKing]

Kyrgyz don't live in the south of the country, and if they do they are mixed with Uzbeks. The are over a million ethnic Uzbeks in the south. That high r1a is due to mountains which protected those Indo-European males.

Like I said, we don't even know if the R1a in Kyrgyz pre-dated Indo-European males by thousand years or existed after the Mongol invasion sending Mongol-Turkic tribes to mix with them.

[ButlerKing]

Those Indo-Europeans were Indo-Iranians from the Andronovo culture who then migrated into northern India and became the Painted Grey ware peoples who scholars believe spoke an Indo-Aryan language. Those people probably looked like or similar to the Tocharians and were lighter skinned

Wishful thinking. Although it is not as insulting as the Turkic theory are you trying to say Northern Indians are partially central asian Andronovo people?

Aryan invasions have already been long disproved, this is no up for anymore debate. It's better to say Northern Indians are mixture of west Asian and ASI people. Andronovo are European and West Asian admixed people.

[Yaglakar]

Like I said, we don't even know if the R1a in Kyrgyz pre-dated Indo-European males by thousand years or existed after the Mongol invasion sending Mongol-Turkic tribes to mix with them.

Read this again:

"In the complementary R1a-Z93 haplogroup, the paragroup R1a-Z93* (Figure 3b) is most common (>30%) in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia, but it also occurs in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (1–8%). R1a-Z2125 (Figure 3c) occurs at highest frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (>40%)." https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201450

This particular subclade stretches through mountain systems from Kyrgyzstan through Tajikistan and Afghanistan. Proto-Turks or Turkic peoples could not have brought it there in such high frequencies. Do Pashtuns look like North-East/East Asians? The males (Saka and Wusun) in what is today Kyrgyzstan mixed with 'Mongoloid' females.

[ButlerKing]

Read this again:

"In the complementary R1a-Z93 haplogroup, the paragroup R1a-Z93* (Figure 3b) is most common (>30%) in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia, but it also occurs in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (1–8%). R1a-Z2125 (Figure 3c) occurs at highest frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (>40%)." https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201450



You're confused with some things here.

[Yaglakar]

You're confused with some things here.

Please elaborate.

[ButlerKing]

Read this again:

"In the complementary R1a-Z93 haplogroup, the paragroup R1a-Z93* (Figure 3b) is most common (>30%) in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia, but it also occurs in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (1–8%). R1a-Z2125 (Figure 3c) occurs at highest frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (>40%)." https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201450

This particular subclade stretches through mountains systems from Kyrgyzstan through Tajikistan and Afghanistan. Proto-Turks or Turkic peoples could not have brought it there. Do Pashtuns look like North-East/East Asians? The males (Saka and Wusun) in what is today Kyrgyzstan mixed with 'Mongoloid' females.

Firstable I would never dare say R1a-Z93 came from Mongoloids that's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE !!! I'm saying R1a (or more specifically R1a-Z93 ) in Turkish population came from hybridsized Mongoloid people. There's no such thing as pure R1a during the Turkic migration of central Asia in 6th to 13th century or the Turkic migration to Turkey during 10-11th century.


About Kyrgyz from modern day Kyrgyzstan we have no freaking idea if they were the results of Caucasoid males mixing with Mongoloid females or the result of Euro-Mongoloid males mixing with both mongoloid and caucasoid females.

YOU SHOULD KNOW KYRGYZ CAME FROM CENTRAL SIBERIA (later came to western mongolia )

" The early Kyrgyz people, known as Yenisei Kyrgyz, have their origins in the western parts of modern-day Mongolia and first appear in written records in the Chinese annals of the Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian (compiled 109 BC to 91 BC), as Gekun (鬲昆, 隔昆) or Jiankun (堅昆). They were described in Tang Dynasty texts as having "red hair and green eyes", while those with dark hair and eyes were said to be descendants of a Chinese general Li Ling.[19] In Chinese sources, these Kyrgyz tribes were described as fair-skinned, green- or blue-eyed and red-haired people with a mixture of European and Mongol features.[20][21][22][23] "


They already had a mixture of mongoloid europoid features since 109 BC to 91 BC..... that was like 1300 years before the Mongol invasion of Central Asia which the Kyrgyz migrated in the 1300 century AD

Nearly every R1a type from South Siberia, Central Asia, South Asia are R1a-Z93. The Pasthuns DNA are closer to Tajiks but have significant ASI admixture but a lot less than Pakistani, North Indians.

[ButlerKing]

Red hair is sometimes interpreted as a shade of brown in Indian and Chinese culture. Ginger were seen as orange instead. There's no modern day population today with more than 25% red hair.

http://bezformata.ru/content/Images/000/021/934/image21934160.jpg
http://mtdata.ru/u26/photo2DB3/20067697512-0/original.jpg

[Smeagol]

Aryan invasions have already been long disproved, this is no up for anymore debate.

Majority of scholars disagree with you.

[ButlerKing]

Majority of scholars disagree with you.

Where is the evidence for majority ???

You can be deluded in that believe all you want.

http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/worldreligions/files/2014/05/invasion-theory1.jpg
https://image.slidesharecdn.com/aryans-110527041639-phpapp02/95/aryans-invaded-india-fabricated-history-2-728.jpg
https://image.slidesharecdn.com/aryans-110527041639-phpapp02/95/aryans-invaded-india-fabricated-history-6-728.jpg


A very educational video for you.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhp3aDcV1AY

[Smeagol]

Where is the evidence for majority ???

New DNA evidence is solving the most fought-over question in Indian history. And you will be surprised at how sure-footed the answer is, writes Tony Joseph

The thorniest, most fought-over question in Indian history is slowly but surely getting answered: did Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC when the Indus Valley civilisation came to an end, bringing with them Sanskrit and a distinctive set of cultural practices? Genetic research based on an avalanche of new DNA evidence is making scientists around the world converge on an unambiguous answer: yes, they did.

This may come as a surprise to many — and a shock to some — because the dominant narrative in recent years has been that genetics research had thoroughly disproved the Aryan migration theory. This interpretation was always a bit of a stretch as anyone who read the nuanced scientific papers in the original knew. But now it has broken apart altogether under a flood of new data on Y-chromosomes (or chromosomes that are transmitted through the male parental line, from father to son).

Lines of descent

Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so. New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question.

The reason for the difference in mtDNA and Y-DNA data is obvious in hindsight: there was strong sex bias in Bronze Age migrations. In other words, those who migrated were predominantly male and, therefore, those gene flows do not really show up in the mtDNA data. On the other hand, they do show up in the Y-DNA data: specifically, about 17.5% of Indian male lineage has been found to belong to haplogroup R1a (haplogroups identify a single line of descent), which is today spread across Central Asia, Europe and South Asia. Pontic-Caspian Steppe is seen as the region from where R1a spread both west and east, splitting into different sub-branches along the way.

The paper that put all of the recent discoveries together into a tight and coherent history of migrations into India was published just three months ago in a peer-reviewed journal called ‘BMC Evolutionary Biology’. In that paper, titled “A Genetic Chronology for the Indian Subcontinent Points to Heavily Sex-biased Dispersals”, 16 scientists led by Prof. Martin P. Richards of the University of Huddersfield, U.K., concluded: “Genetic influx from Central Asia in the Bronze Age was strongly male-driven, consistent with the patriarchal, patrilocal and patrilineal social structure attributed to the inferred pastoralist early Indo-European society. This was part of a much wider process of Indo-European expansion, with an ultimate source in the Pontic-Caspian region, which carried closely related Y-chromosome lineages… across a vast swathe of Eurasia between 5,000 and 3,500 years ago”.

In an email exchange, Prof. Richards said the prevalence of R1a in India was “very powerful evidence for a substantial Bronze Age migration from central Asia that most likely brought Indo-European speakers to India.” The robust conclusions of Professor Richards and his team rest on their own substantive research as well as a vast trove of new data and findings that have become available in recent years, through the work of genetic scientists around the world.

What’s happened very rapidly, dramatically, and powerfully in the last few years has been the explosion of genome-wide studies of human history based on modern and ancient DNA, and that’s been enabled by the technology of genomics and the technology of ancient DNA....” David Reich, Geneticist and professor, Harvard Medical School

Peter Underhill, scientist at the Department of Genetics at the Stanford University School of Medicine, is one of those at the centre of the action. Three years ago, a team of 32 scientists he led published a massive study mapping the distribution and linkages of R1a. It used a panel of 16,244 male subjects from 126 populations across Eurasia. Dr. Underhill’s research found that R1a had two sub-haplogroups, one found primarily in Europe and the other confined to Central and South Asia. Ninety-six per cent of the R1a samples in Europe belonged to sub-haplogroup Z282, while 98.4% of the Central and South Asian R1a lineages belonged to sub-haplogroup Z93. The two groups diverged from each other only about 5,800 years ago. Dr. Underhill’s research showed that within the Z93 that is predominant in India, there is a further splintering into multiple branches. The paper found this “star-like branching” indicative of rapid growth and dispersal. So if you want to know the approximate period when Indo-European language speakers came and rapidly spread across India, you need to discover the date when Z93 splintered into its own various subgroups or lineages. We will come back to this later.

So in a nutshell: R1a is distributed all over Europe, Central Asia and South Asia; its sub-group Z282 is distributed only in Europe while another subgroup Z93 is distributed only in parts of Central Asia and South Asia; and three major subgroups of Z93 are distributed only in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Himalayas. This clear picture of the distribution of R1a has finally put paid to an earlier hypothesis that this haplogroup perhaps originated in India and then spread outwards. This hypothesis was based on the erroneous assumption that R1a lineages in India had huge diversity compared to other regions, which could be indicative of its origin here. As Prof. Richards puts it, “the idea that R1a is very diverse in India, which was largely based on fuzzy microsatellite data, has been laid to rest” thanks to the arrival of large numbers of genomic Y-chromosome data.

Gene-dating the migration

Now that we know that there WAS indeed a significant inflow of genes from Central Asia into India in the Bronze Age, can we get a better fix on the timing, especially the splintering of Z93 into its own sub-lineages? Yes, we can; the research paper that answers this question was published just last year, in April 2016, titled: “Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences.” This paper, which looked at major expansions of Y-DNA haplogroups within five continental populations, was lead-authored by David Poznik of the Stanford University, with Dr. Underhill as one of the 42 co-authors. The study found “the most striking expansions within Z93 occurring approximately 4,000 to 4,500 years ago”. This is remarkable, because roughly 4,000 years ago is when the Indus Valley civilization began falling apart. (There is no evidence so far, archaeologically or otherwise, to suggest that one caused the other; it is quite possible that the two events happened to coincide.)

The avalanche of new data has been so overwhelming that many scientists who were either sceptical or neutral about significant Bronze Age migrations into India have changed their opinions. Dr. Underhill himself is one of them. In a 2010 paper, for example, he had written that there was evidence “against substantial patrilineal gene flow from East Europe to Asia, including to India” in the last five or six millennia. Today, Dr. Underhill says there is no comparison between the kind of data available in 2010 and now. “Then, it was like looking into a darkened room from the outside through a keyhole with a little torch in hand; you could see some corners but not all, and not the whole picture. With whole genome sequencing, we can now see nearly the entire room, in clearer light.”

Dr. Underhill is not the only one whose older work has been used to argue against Bronze Age migrations by Indo-European language speakers into India. David Reich, geneticist and professor in the Department of Genetics at the Harvard Medical School, is another one, even though he was very cautious in his older papers. The best example is a study lead-authored by Reich in 2009, titled “Reconstructing Indian Population History” and published in Nature. This study used the theoretical construct of “Ancestral North Indians” (ANI) and “Ancestral South Indians” (ASI) to discover the genetic substructure of the Indian population. The study proved that ANI are “genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans”, while the ASI were unique to India. The study also proved that most groups in India today can be approximated as a mixture of these two populations, with the ANI ancestry higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers. By itself, the study didn’t disprove the arrival of Indo-European language speakers; if anything, it suggested the opposite, by pointing to the genetic linkage of ANI to Central Asians.

However, this theoretical structure was stretched beyond reason and was used to argue that these two groups came to India tens of thousands of years ago, long before the migration of Indo-European language speakers that is supposed to have happened only about 4,000 to 3,500 years ago. In fact, the study had included a strong caveat that suggested the opposite: “We caution that ‘models’ in population genetics should be treated with caution. While they provide an important framework for testing historical hypothesis, they are oversimplifications. For example, the true ancestral populations were probably not homogenous as we assume in our model but instead were likely to have been formed by clusters of related groups that mixed at different times.” In other words, ANI is likely to have resulted from multiple migrations, possibly including the migration of Indo-European language speakers.

The spin and the facts

But how was this research covered in the media? “Aryan-Dravidian divide a myth: Study,” screamed a newspaper headline on September 25, 2009. The article quoted Lalji Singh, a co-author of the study and a former director of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, as saying: “This paper rewrites history… there is no north-south divide”. The report also carried statements such as: “The initial settlement took place 65,000 years ago in the Andamans and in ancient south India around the same time, which led to population growth in this part. At a later stage, 40,000 years ago, the ancient north Indians emerged which in turn led to rise in numbers there. But at some point in time, the ancient north and the ancient south mixed, giving birth to a different set of population. And that is the population which exists now and there is a genetic relationship between the population within India.” The study, however, makes no such statements whatsoever — in fact, even the figures 65,000 and 40,000 do not figure it in it!

This stark contrast between what the study says and what the media reports said did not go unnoticed. In his column for Discover magazine, geneticist Razib Khan said this about the media coverage of the study: “But in the quotes in the media the other authors (other than Reich that is - ed) seem to be leading you to totally different conclusions from this. Instead of leaning toward ANI being proto-Indo-European, they deny that it is.”

Let’s leave that there, and ask what Reich says now, when so much new data have become available? In an interview with Edge in February last year, while talking about the thesis that Indo-European languages originated in the Steppes and then spread to both Europe and South Asia, he said: “The genetics is tending to support the Steppe hypothesis because in the last year, we have identified a very strong pattern that this ancient North Eurasian ancestry that you see in Europe today, we now know when it arrived in Europe. It arrived 4500 years ago from the East from the Steppe...” About India, he said: “In India, you can see, for example, that there is this profound population mixture event that happens between 2000 to 4000 years ago. It corresponds to the time of the composition of the Rigveda, the oldest Hindu religious text, one of the oldest pieces of literature in the world, which describes a mixed society...” In essence according to Reich, in broadly the same time frame, we see Indo-European language speakers spreading out both to Europe and to South Asia, causing major population upheavals.

The dating of the “profound population mixture event” that Reich refers to was arrived at in a paper that was published in the American Journal of Human Genetics in 2013, and was lead authored by Priya Moorjani of the Harvard Medical School, and co-authored, among others, by Reich and Lalji Singh. This paper too has been pushed into serving the case against migrations of Indo-European language speakers into India, but the paper itself says no such thing, once again!

Here’s what it says in one place: “The dates we report have significant implications for Indian history in the sense that they document a period of demographic and cultural change in which mixture between highly differentiated populations became pervasive before it eventually became uncommon. The period of around 1,900–4,200 years before present was a time of profound change in India, characterized by the de-urbanization of the Indus civilization, increasing population density in the central and downstream portions of the Gangetic system, shifts in burial practices, and the likely first appearance of Indo-European languages and Vedic religion in the subcontinent.”

The study didn’t “prove” the migration of Indo-European language speakers since its focus was different: finding the dates for the population mixture. But it is clear that the authors think its findings fit in well with the traditional reading of the dates for this migration. In fact, the paper goes on to correlate the ending of population mixing with the shifting attitudes towards mixing of the races in ancient texts. It says: “The shift from widespread mixture to strict endogamy that we document is mirrored in ancient Indian texts.”

So irrespective of the use to which Priya Moorjani et al’s 2013 study is put, what is clear is that the authors themselves admit their study is fully compatible with, and perhaps even strongly suggests, Bronze Age migration of Indo-European language speakers. In an email to this writer, Moorjani said as much. In answer to a question about the conclusions of the recent paper of Prof. Richards et al that there were strong, male-driven genetic inflows from Central Asia about 4,000 years ago, she said she found their results “to be broadly consistent with our model”. She also said the authors of the new study had access to ancient West Eurasian samples “that were not available when we published in 2013”, and that these samples had provided them additional information about the sources of ANI ancestry in South Asia.

One by one, therefore, every single one of the genetic arguments that were earlier put forward to make the case against Bronze Age migrations of Indo-European language speakers have been disproved. To recap:

1. The first argument was that there were no major gene flows from outside to India in the last 12,500 years or so because mtDNA data showed no signs of it. This argument was found faulty when it was shown that Y-DNA did indeed show major gene flows from outside into India within the last 4000 to 4,500 years or so, especially R1a which now forms 17.5% of the Indian male lineage. The reason why mtDNA data behaved differently was that Bronze Age migrations were severely sex-biased.

2. The second argument put forward was that R1a lineages exhibited much greater diversity in India than elsewhere and, therefore, it must have originated in India and spread outward. This has been proved false because a mammoth, global study of R1a haplogroup published last year showed that R1a lineages in India mostly belong to just three subclades of the R1a-Z93 and they are only about 4,000 to 4,500 years old.

3. The third argument was that there were two ancient groups in India, ANI and ASI, both of which settled here tens of thousands of years earlier, much before the supposed migration of Indo-European languages speakers to India. This argument was false to begin with because ANI — as the original paper that put forward this theoretical construct itself had warned — is a mixture of multiple migrations, including probably the migration of Indo-European language speakers.

Connecting the dots

Two additional things should be kept in mind while looking at all this evidence. The first is how multiple studies in different disciplines have arrived at one specific period as an important marker in the history of India: around 2000 B.C. According to the Priya Moorjani et al study, this is when population mixing began on a large scale, leaving few population groups anywhere in the subcontinent untouched. The Onge in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands are the only ones we know to have been completely unaffected by what must have been a tumultuous period. And according to the David Poznik et al study of 2016 on the Y-chromosome, 2000 B.C. is around the time when the dominant R1a subclade in India, Z93, began splintering in a “most striking” manner, suggesting “rapid growth and expansion”. Lastly, from long-established archaeological studies, we also know that 2000 BC was around the time when the Indus Valley civilization began to decline. For anyone looking at all of these data objectively, it is difficult to avoid the feeling that the missing pieces of India’s historical puzzle are finally falling into place.

The second is that many studies mentioned in this piece are global in scale, both in terms of the questions they address and in terms of the sampling and research methodology. For example, the Poznik study that arrived at 4,000-4,500 years ago as the dating for the splintering of the R1a Z93 lineage, looked at major Y-DNA expansions not just in India, but in four other continental populations. In the Americas, the study proved the expansion of haplogrop Q1a-M3 around 15,000 years ago, which fits in with the generally accepted time for the initial colonisation of the continent. So the pieces that are falling in place are not merely in India, but all across the globe. The more the global migration picture gets filled in, the more difficult it will be to overturn the consensus that is forming on how the world got populated.

Nobody explains what is happening now better than Reich: “What’s happened very rapidly, dramatically, and powerfully in the last few years has been the explosion of genome-wide studies of human history based on modern and ancient DNA, and that’s been enabled by the technology of genomics and the technology of ancient DNA. Basically, it’s a gold rush right now; it’s a new technology and that technology is being applied to everything we can apply it to, and there are many low-hanging fruits, many gold nuggets strewn on the ground that are being picked up very rapidly.”

So far, we have only looked at the migrations of Indo-European language speakers because that has been the most debated and argued about historical event. But one must not lose the bigger picture: R1a lineages form only about 17.5 % of Indian male lineage, and an even smaller percentage of the female lineage. The vast majority of Indians owe their ancestry mostly to people from other migrations, starting with the original Out of Africa migrations of around 55,000 to 65,000 years ago, or the farming-related migrations from West Asia that probably occurred in multiple waves after 10,000 B.C., or the migrations of Austro-Asiatic speakers such as the Munda from East Asia the dating of which is yet to determined, and the migrations of Tibeto-Burman speakers such as the Garo again from east Asia, the dating of which is also yet to be determined.

What is abundantly clear is that we are a multi-source civilization, not a single-source one, drawing its cultural impulses, its tradition and practices from a variety of lineages and migration histories. The Out of Africa immigrants, the pioneering, fearless explorers who discovered this land originally and settled in it and whose lineages still form the bedrock of our population; those who arrived later with a package of farming techniques and built the Indus Valley civilization whose cultural ideas and practices perhaps enrich much of our traditions today; those who arrived from East Asia, probably bringing with them the practice of rice cultivation and all that goes with it; those who came later with a language called Sanskrit and its associated beliefs and practices and reshaped our society in fundamental ways; and those who came even later for trade or for conquest and chose to stay, all have mingled and contributed to this civilization we call Indian. We are all migrants.
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/how-genetics-is-settling-the-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece

[Yaglakar]

Firstable I would never dare say R1a-Z93 came from Mongoloids that's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE !!! I'm saying R1a (or more specifically R1a-Z93 ) in Turkish population came from hybridsized Mongoloid people. There's no such thing as pure R1a during the Turkic migration of central Asia in 6th to 13th century or the Turkic migration to Turkey during 10-11th century.


About Kyrgyz from modern day Kyrgyzstan we have no freaking idea if they were the results of Caucasoid males mixing with Mongoloid females or the result of Euro-Mongoloid males mixing with both mongoloid and caucasoid females.

YOU SHOULD KNOW KYRGYZ CAME FROM CENTRAL SIBERIA (later came to western mongolia )

" The early Kyrgyz people, known as Yenisei Kyrgyz, have their origins in the western parts of modern-day Mongolia and first appear in written records in the Chinese annals of the Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian (compiled 109 BC to 91 BC), as Gekun (鬲昆, 隔昆) or Jiankun (堅昆). They were described in Tang Dynasty texts as having "red hair and green eyes", while those with dark hair and eyes were said to be descendants of a Chinese general Li Ling.[19] In Chinese sources, these Kyrgyz tribes were described as fair-skinned, green- or blue-eyed and red-haired people with a mixture of European and Mongol features.[20][21][22][23] "


They already had a mixture of mongoloid europoid features since 109 BC to 91 BC..... that was like 1300 years before the Mongol invasion of Central Asia which the Kyrgyz migrated in the 1300 century AD

Nearly every R1a type from South Siberia, Central Asia, South Asia are R1a-Z93. The Pasthuns DNA are closer to Tajiks but have significant ASI admixture but a lot less than Pakistani, North Indians.

Modern Kyrgyz did not come from south Siberia (Minusinsk Hollow) and do not descend from Yenisei Kyrgyz. The name is a misnomer. It is a national myth of Kyrgyz Republic. They speak a Kipchak language similar to that of Kazakhs. Yenisei Kyrgyz spoke a dialect of Orkhon-Yenisei language (aka Old Turkic). Modern continuations are Shor and Khakas languages.

"Although Kyrgyz continued to inhabit the upper Yenisei region after that, their connection to the modern Kyrgyz of the T'ian-shan region is unclear. Some scholars believe that some Kyrgyz began to migrate to the northern slopes of the T'ian-shan as early as the first century BCE, and heightened their movement in the eighth to tenth centuries CE, with still later stages of migration during the Mongol era, but conflicting theories are numerous." Michael Drompp

http://www.academia.edu/10197431/The_Yenisei_Kyrgyz_from_Early_Times_to_the_Mongol_ Conquest

[ButlerKing]

New DNA evidence is solving the most fought-over question in Indian history. And you will be surprised at how sure-footed the answer is, writes Tony Joseph

The thorniest, most fought-over question in Indian history is slowly but surely getting answered: did Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC when the Indus Valley civilisation came to an end, bringing with them Sanskrit and a distinctive set of cultural practices? Genetic research based on an avalanche of new DNA evidence is making scientists around the world converge on an unambiguous answer: yes, they did.

This may come as a surprise to many — and a shock to some — because the dominant narrative in recent years has been that genetics research had thoroughly disproved the Aryan migration theory. This interpretation was always a bit of a stretch as anyone who read the nuanced scientific papers in the original knew. But now it has broken apart altogether under a flood of new data on Y-chromosomes (or chromosomes that are transmitted through the male parental line, from father to son).

Lines of descent

Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so. New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question.

The reason for the difference in mtDNA and Y-DNA data is obvious in hindsight: there was strong sex bias in Bronze Age migrations. In other words, those who migrated were predominantly male and, therefore, those gene flows do not really show up in the mtDNA data. On the other hand, they do show up in the Y-DNA data: specifically, about 17.5% of Indian male lineage has been found to belong to haplogroup R1a (haplogroups identify a single line of descent), which is today spread across Central Asia, Europe and South Asia. Pontic-Caspian Steppe is seen as the region from where R1a spread both west and east, splitting into different sub-branches along the way.

The paper that put all of the recent discoveries together into a tight and coherent history of migrations into India was published just three months ago in a peer-reviewed journal called ‘BMC Evolutionary Biology’. In that paper, titled “A Genetic Chronology for the Indian Subcontinent Points to Heavily Sex-biased Dispersals”, 16 scientists led by Prof. Martin P. Richards of the University of Huddersfield, U.K., concluded: “Genetic influx from Central Asia in the Bronze Age was strongly male-driven, consistent with the patriarchal, patrilocal and patrilineal social structure attributed to the inferred pastoralist early Indo-European society. This was part of a much wider process of Indo-European expansion, with an ultimate source in the Pontic-Caspian region, which carried closely related Y-chromosome lineages… across a vast swathe of Eurasia between 5,000 and 3,500 years ago”.

In an email exchange, Prof. Richards said the prevalence of R1a in India was “very powerful evidence for a substantial Bronze Age migration from central Asia that most likely brought Indo-European speakers to India.” The robust conclusions of Professor Richards and his team rest on their own substantive research as well as a vast trove of new data and findings that have become available in recent years, through the work of genetic scientists around the world.

What’s happened very rapidly, dramatically, and powerfully in the last few years has been the explosion of genome-wide studies of human history based on modern and ancient DNA, and that’s been enabled by the technology of genomics and the technology of ancient DNA....” David Reich, Geneticist and professor, Harvard Medical School

Peter Underhill, scientist at the Department of Genetics at the Stanford University School of Medicine, is one of those at the centre of the action. Three years ago, a team of 32 scientists he led published a massive study mapping the distribution and linkages of R1a. It used a panel of 16,244 male subjects from 126 populations across Eurasia. Dr. Underhill’s research found that R1a had two sub-haplogroups, one found primarily in Europe and the other confined to Central and South Asia. Ninety-six per cent of the R1a samples in Europe belonged to sub-haplogroup Z282, while 98.4% of the Central and South Asian R1a lineages belonged to sub-haplogroup Z93. The two groups diverged from each other only about 5,800 years ago. Dr. Underhill’s research showed that within the Z93 that is predominant in India, there is a further splintering into multiple branches. The paper found this “star-like branching” indicative of rapid growth and dispersal. So if you want to know the approximate period when Indo-European language speakers came and rapidly spread across India, you need to discover the date when Z93 splintered into its own various subgroups or lineages. We will come back to this later.

So in a nutshell: R1a is distributed all over Europe, Central Asia and South Asia; its sub-group Z282 is distributed only in Europe while another subgroup Z93 is distributed only in parts of Central Asia and South Asia; and three major subgroups of Z93 are distributed only in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Himalayas. This clear picture of the distribution of R1a has finally put paid to an earlier hypothesis that this haplogroup perhaps originated in India and then spread outwards. This hypothesis was based on the erroneous assumption that R1a lineages in India had huge diversity compared to other regions, which could be indicative of its origin here. As Prof. Richards puts it, “the idea that R1a is very diverse in India, which was largely based on fuzzy microsatellite data, has been laid to rest” thanks to the arrival of large numbers of genomic Y-chromosome data.

Gene-dating the migration

Now that we know that there WAS indeed a significant inflow of genes from Central Asia into India in the Bronze Age, can we get a better fix on the timing, especially the splintering of Z93 into its own sub-lineages? Yes, we can; the research paper that answers this question was published just last year, in April 2016, titled: “Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences.” This paper, which looked at major expansions of Y-DNA haplogroups within five continental populations, was lead-authored by David Poznik of the Stanford University, with Dr. Underhill as one of the 42 co-authors. The study found “the most striking expansions within Z93 occurring approximately 4,000 to 4,500 years ago”. This is remarkable, because roughly 4,000 years ago is when the Indus Valley civilization began falling apart. (There is no evidence so far, archaeologically or otherwise, to suggest that one caused the other; it is quite possible that the two events happened to coincide.)

The avalanche of new data has been so overwhelming that many scientists who were either sceptical or neutral about significant Bronze Age migrations into India have changed their opinions. Dr. Underhill himself is one of them. In a 2010 paper, for example, he had written that there was evidence “against substantial patrilineal gene flow from East Europe to Asia, including to India” in the last five or six millennia. Today, Dr. Underhill says there is no comparison between the kind of data available in 2010 and now. “Then, it was like looking into a darkened room from the outside through a keyhole with a little torch in hand; you could see some corners but not all, and not the whole picture. With whole genome sequencing, we can now see nearly the entire room, in clearer light.”

Dr. Underhill is not the only one whose older work has been used to argue against Bronze Age migrations by Indo-European language speakers into India. David Reich, geneticist and professor in the Department of Genetics at the Harvard Medical School, is another one, even though he was very cautious in his older papers. The best example is a study lead-authored by Reich in 2009, titled “Reconstructing Indian Population History” and published in Nature. This study used the theoretical construct of “Ancestral North Indians” (ANI) and “Ancestral South Indians” (ASI) to discover the genetic substructure of the Indian population. The study proved that ANI are “genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans”, while the ASI were unique to India. The study also proved that most groups in India today can be approximated as a mixture of these two populations, with the ANI ancestry higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers. By itself, the study didn’t disprove the arrival of Indo-European language speakers; if anything, it suggested the opposite, by pointing to the genetic linkage of ANI to Central Asians.

However, this theoretical structure was stretched beyond reason and was used to argue that these two groups came to India tens of thousands of years ago, long before the migration of Indo-European language speakers that is supposed to have happened only about 4,000 to 3,500 years ago. In fact, the study had included a strong caveat that suggested the opposite: “We caution that ‘models’ in population genetics should be treated with caution. While they provide an important framework for testing historical hypothesis, they are oversimplifications. For example, the true ancestral populations were probably not homogenous as we assume in our model but instead were likely to have been formed by clusters of related groups that mixed at different times.” In other words, ANI is likely to have resulted from multiple migrations, possibly including the migration of Indo-European language speakers.

The spin and the facts

But how was this research covered in the media? “Aryan-Dravidian divide a myth: Study,” screamed a newspaper headline on September 25, 2009. The article quoted Lalji Singh, a co-author of the study and a former director of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, as saying: “This paper rewrites history… there is no north-south divide”. The report also carried statements such as: “The initial settlement took place 65,000 years ago in the Andamans and in ancient south India around the same time, which led to population growth in this part. At a later stage, 40,000 years ago, the ancient north Indians emerged which in turn led to rise in numbers there. But at some point in time, the ancient north and the ancient south mixed, giving birth to a different set of population. And that is the population which exists now and there is a genetic relationship between the population within India.” The study, however, makes no such statements whatsoever — in fact, even the figures 65,000 and 40,000 do not figure it in it!

This stark contrast between what the study says and what the media reports said did not go unnoticed. In his column for Discover magazine, geneticist Razib Khan said this about the media coverage of the study: “But in the quotes in the media the other authors (other than Reich that is - ed) seem to be leading you to totally different conclusions from this. Instead of leaning toward ANI being proto-Indo-European, they deny that it is.”

Let’s leave that there, and ask what Reich says now, when so much new data have become available? In an interview with Edge in February last year, while talking about the thesis that Indo-European languages originated in the Steppes and then spread to both Europe and South Asia, he said: “The genetics is tending to support the Steppe hypothesis because in the last year, we have identified a very strong pattern that this ancient North Eurasian ancestry that you see in Europe today, we now know when it arrived in Europe. It arrived 4500 years ago from the East from the Steppe...” About India, he said: “In India, you can see, for example, that there is this profound population mixture event that happens between 2000 to 4000 years ago. It corresponds to the time of the composition of the Rigveda, the oldest Hindu religious text, one of the oldest pieces of literature in the world, which describes a mixed society...” In essence according to Reich, in broadly the same time frame, we see Indo-European language speakers spreading out both to Europe and to South Asia, causing major population upheavals.

The dating of the “profound population mixture event” that Reich refers to was arrived at in a paper that was published in the American Journal of Human Genetics in 2013, and was lead authored by Priya Moorjani of the Harvard Medical School, and co-authored, among others, by Reich and Lalji Singh. This paper too has been pushed into serving the case against migrations of Indo-European language speakers into India, but the paper itself says no such thing, once again!

Here’s what it says in one place: “The dates we report have significant implications for Indian history in the sense that they document a period of demographic and cultural change in which mixture between highly differentiated populations became pervasive before it eventually became uncommon. The period of around 1,900–4,200 years before present was a time of profound change in India, characterized by the de-urbanization of the Indus civilization, increasing population density in the central and downstream portions of the Gangetic system, shifts in burial practices, and the likely first appearance of Indo-European languages and Vedic religion in the subcontinent.”

The study didn’t “prove” the migration of Indo-European language speakers since its focus was different: finding the dates for the population mixture. But it is clear that the authors think its findings fit in well with the traditional reading of the dates for this migration. In fact, the paper goes on to correlate the ending of population mixing with the shifting attitudes towards mixing of the races in ancient texts. It says: “The shift from widespread mixture to strict endogamy that we document is mirrored in ancient Indian texts.”

So irrespective of the use to which Priya Moorjani et al’s 2013 study is put, what is clear is that the authors themselves admit their study is fully compatible with, and perhaps even strongly suggests, Bronze Age migration of Indo-European language speakers. In an email to this writer, Moorjani said as much. In answer to a question about the conclusions of the recent paper of Prof. Richards et al that there were strong, male-driven genetic inflows from Central Asia about 4,000 years ago, she said she found their results “to be broadly consistent with our model”. She also said the authors of the new study had access to ancient West Eurasian samples “that were not available when we published in 2013”, and that these samples had provided them additional information about the sources of ANI ancestry in South Asia.

One by one, therefore, every single one of the genetic arguments that were earlier put forward to make the case against Bronze Age migrations of Indo-European language speakers have been disproved. To recap:

1. The first argument was that there were no major gene flows from outside to India in the last 12,500 years or so because mtDNA data showed no signs of it. This argument was found faulty when it was shown that Y-DNA did indeed show major gene flows from outside into India within the last 4000 to 4,500 years or so, especially R1a which now forms 17.5% of the Indian male lineage. The reason why mtDNA data behaved differently was that Bronze Age migrations were severely sex-biased.

2. The second argument put forward was that R1a lineages exhibited much greater diversity in India than elsewhere and, therefore, it must have originated in India and spread outward. This has been proved false because a mammoth, global study of R1a haplogroup published last year showed that R1a lineages in India mostly belong to just three subclades of the R1a-Z93 and they are only about 4,000 to 4,500 years old.

3. The third argument was that there were two ancient groups in India, ANI and ASI, both of which settled here tens of thousands of years earlier, much before the supposed migration of Indo-European languages speakers to India. This argument was false to begin with because ANI — as the original paper that put forward this theoretical construct itself had warned — is a mixture of multiple migrations, including probably the migration of Indo-European language speakers.

Connecting the dots

Two additional things should be kept in mind while looking at all this evidence. The first is how multiple studies in different disciplines have arrived at one specific period as an important marker in the history of India: around 2000 B.C. According to the Priya Moorjani et al study, this is when population mixing began on a large scale, leaving few population groups anywhere in the subcontinent untouched. The Onge in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands are the only ones we know to have been completely unaffected by what must have been a tumultuous period. And according to the David Poznik et al study of 2016 on the Y-chromosome, 2000 B.C. is around the time when the dominant R1a subclade in India, Z93, began splintering in a “most striking” manner, suggesting “rapid growth and expansion”. Lastly, from long-established archaeological studies, we also know that 2000 BC was around the time when the Indus Valley civilization began to decline. For anyone looking at all of these data objectively, it is difficult to avoid the feeling that the missing pieces of India’s historical puzzle are finally falling into place.

The second is that many studies mentioned in this piece are global in scale, both in terms of the questions they address and in terms of the sampling and research methodology. For example, the Poznik study that arrived at 4,000-4,500 years ago as the dating for the splintering of the R1a Z93 lineage, looked at major Y-DNA expansions not just in India, but in four other continental populations. In the Americas, the study proved the expansion of haplogrop Q1a-M3 around 15,000 years ago, which fits in with the generally accepted time for the initial colonisation of the continent. So the pieces that are falling in place are not merely in India, but all across the globe. The more the global migration picture gets filled in, the more difficult it will be to overturn the consensus that is forming on how the world got populated.

Nobody explains what is happening now better than Reich: “What’s happened very rapidly, dramatically, and powerfully in the last few years has been the explosion of genome-wide studies of human history based on modern and ancient DNA, and that’s been enabled by the technology of genomics and the technology of ancient DNA. Basically, it’s a gold rush right now; it’s a new technology and that technology is being applied to everything we can apply it to, and there are many low-hanging fruits, many gold nuggets strewn on the ground that are being picked up very rapidly.”

So far, we have only looked at the migrations of Indo-European language speakers because that has been the most debated and argued about historical event. But one must not lose the bigger picture: R1a lineages form only about 17.5 % of Indian male lineage, and an even smaller percentage of the female lineage. The vast majority of Indians owe their ancestry mostly to people from other migrations, starting with the original Out of Africa migrations of around 55,000 to 65,000 years ago, or the farming-related migrations from West Asia that probably occurred in multiple waves after 10,000 B.C., or the migrations of Austro-Asiatic speakers such as the Munda from East Asia the dating of which is yet to determined, and the migrations of Tibeto-Burman speakers such as the Garo again from east Asia, the dating of which is also yet to be determined.

What is abundantly clear is that we are a multi-source civilization, not a single-source one, drawing its cultural impulses, its tradition and practices from a variety of lineages and migration histories. The Out of Africa immigrants, the pioneering, fearless explorers who discovered this land originally and settled in it and whose lineages still form the bedrock of our population; those who arrived later with a package of farming techniques and built the Indus Valley civilization whose cultural ideas and practices perhaps enrich much of our traditions today; those who arrived from East Asia, probably bringing with them the practice of rice cultivation and all that goes with it; those who came later with a language called Sanskrit and its associated beliefs and practices and reshaped our society in fundamental ways; and those who came even later for trade or for conquest and chose to stay, all have mingled and contributed to this civilization we call Indian. We are all migrants.
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/how-genetics-is-settling-the-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece

What a long list of boring nonsense crap that would take hours to read.
You should just underline or bold the parts that matters.

The real Aryans are today's people from Afghanistan, Pakistan, North India and from there a Aryan invasion accured to the rest of India.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/28/article-2151143-1357BCFC000005DC-54_306x423.jpg

[Yaglakar]

Modern Kyrgyz did not come from south Siberia (Minusinsk Hollow) and do not descend from Yenisei Kyrgyz. The name is a misnomer. It is a national myth of Kyrgyz Republic. They speak a Kipchak language similar to that of Kazakhs. Yenisei Kyrgyz spoke a dialect of Orkhon-Yenisei language (aka Old Turkic). Modern continuations are Shor and Khakas languages.

"Although Kyrgyz continued to inhabit the upper Yenisei region after that, their connection to the modern Kyrgyz of the T'ian-shan region is unclear. Some scholars believe that some Kyrgyz began to migrate to the northern slopes of the T'ian-shan as early as the first century BCE, and heightened their movement in the eighth to tenth centuries CE, with still later stages of migration during the Mongol era, but conflicting theories are numerous." Michael Drompp

http://www.academia.edu/10197431/The_Yenisei_Kyrgyz_from_Early_Times_to_the_Mongol_ Conquest

Also for your information modern Turkish is much closer to Old Turkic than Kyrgyz, that is Turkish is more Yenisei Kyrgyz than Tien-Shan Kyrgyz. Any linguist or Turkologist will tell you that.

[ButlerKing]

Modern Kyrgyz did not come from south Siberia (Minusinsk Hollow) and do not descend from Yenisei Kyrgyz. The name is a misnomer. It is a national myth of Kyrgyz Republic. They speak a Kipchak language similar to that of Kazakhs. Yenisei Kyrgyz spoke a dialect of Orkhon-Yenisei language (aka Old Turkic). Modern continuations are Shor and Khakas languages.

"Although Kyrgyz continued to inhabit the upper Yenisei region after that, their connection to the modern Kyrgyz of the T'ian-shan region is unclear. Some scholars believe that some Kyrgyz began to migrate to the northern slopes of the T'ian-shan as early as the first century BCE, and heightened their movement in the eighth to tenth centuries CE, with still later stages of migration during the Mongol era, but conflicting theories are numerous." Michael Drompp

http://www.academia.edu/10197431/The_Yenisei_Kyrgyz_from_Early_Times_to_the_Mongol_ Conquest

That's not up for you to decide.

Anthropological types

" The dominant type of the Yenesy Kyrgyz" was Mongoloid but there is a indisputable large admixture of Europoid "
Anthropology of the North: Translations from Russian Sources, Issues 1-3 [1]
https://books.google.co.uk/books?ei=AqVKU4zRJaWO7QaqhoGgCw&id=qEcsAAAAMAAJ&dq=The+dominant+type+of+the+Yenisey+%22Kyrgyz%22+w as+Mongoloid.+But+there+is+an+indisputable+admixtu re+of+Europoid+elements+in+their+composition&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=Kyrgyz



" According to recent historical findings, Kyrgyz history dates back to 201 BC[/b].[25] [u]The Yenisei Kyrgyz lived in the upper Yenisey River valley, central Siberia. In Late Antiquity the Yenisei Kyrgyz were a part of the Tiele people. Later, in the Early Middle Ages, the Yenisei Kyrgyz were a part of the confederations of the Göktürk and Uyghur Khaganates. "

" In 840 a revolt led by the Yenisei Kyrgyz brought down the Uyghur Khaganate, and brought the Yenisei Kyrgyz to a dominating position in the former Turkic Khaganate. With the rise to power, the center of the Kyrgyz Khaganate moved to Jeti-su, and brought about a spread south of the Kyrgyz people, to reach Tian Shan mountains and Xinjiang, bringing them into contact with the existing peoples of western China, especially Tibet. By the 16th century the carriers of the ethnonym Kirgiz lived in South Siberia, Xinjiang, Tian Shan, Pamir-Alay, Middle Asia, Urals (among Bashkirs), in Kazakhstan.[26] In the Tian Shan and Xinjiang area, the term Kyrgyz retained its unifying political designation, and became a general ethnonym for the Yenisei Kirgizes and aboriginal Turkic tribes that presently constitute the Kyrgyz population.[27] Though it is obviously impossible to directly identify the Yenisei and Tien Shan Kyrgyz, a trace of their ethnogenetical connections is apparent in archaeology, history, language and ethnography. A majority of modern researchers came to the conclusion that the ancestors of Kyrgyz tribes had their origin in the most ancient tribal unions of Sakas/Scythians, Wusun/Issedones, Dingling, Mongols and Huns .[28] |



Like I said their ethnogenetical is so incredible complex it's hard to say who they are but the fact it's ancient Yenesei Kyrgyz were hybrids and so we don't know if R1a already existed among the ancient Kyrgyz or existed after the 13th century. But it's most likely most R1a in Kyrgyz already existed 2200 years thousand years before they had any contact with other ethnic groups.

[ButlerKing]

Also for your information modern Turkish is much closer to Old Turkic than Kyrgyz, that is Turkish is more Yenisei Kyrgyz than Tien-Shan Kyrgyz. Any linguist or Turkologist will tell you that.

I'm sure only mainly Turkologist will say that. Turkish- Oghuz language originated from Central Asia, the original Oghuz speakers in Central Asia originated from East Kazakhstan.


Also it clearly says here that most modern day Kyrgyz are mainly the descendants of ancient Yenesei Kyrgyz

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yenisei_Kyrgyz

" The Kyrgyz Khaganate existed from 550 to 1219 CE; in 840, it took over the leadership of the Turkic Khaganate from the Uyghurs, expanding the state from the Yenisei territories into the Central Asia and Tarim basin. The Yenisei Kyrgyz mass migration to the Jeti-su resulted in the formation of the modern Kyrgyz Republic, land of the modern-day Kyrgyz. "

[Smeagol]

What a long list of boring nonsense crap that would take hours to read.
You should just underline or bold the parts that matters.

:bored:

[Yaglakar]

That's not up for you to decide.

Anthropological types

" The dominant type of the Yenesy Kyrgyz" was Mongoloid but there is a indisputable large admixture of Europoid "
Anthropology of the North: Translations from Russian Sources, Issues 1-3 [1]
https://books.google.co.uk/books?ei=AqVKU4zRJaWO7QaqhoGgCw&id=qEcsAAAAMAAJ&dq=The+dominant+type+of+the+Yenisey+%22Kyrgyz%22+w as+Mongoloid.+But+there+is+an+indisputable+admixtu re+of+Europoid+elements+in+their+composition&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=Kyrgyz



" According to recent historical findings, Kyrgyz history dates back to 201 BC[/b].[25] [u]The Yenisei Kyrgyz lived in the upper Yenisey River valley, central Siberia. In Late Antiquity the Yenisei Kyrgyz were a part of the Tiele people. Later, in the Early Middle Ages, the Yenisei Kyrgyz were a part of the confederations of the Göktürk and Uyghur Khaganates. "

" In 840 a revolt led by the Yenisei Kyrgyz brought down the Uyghur Khaganate, and brought the Yenisei Kyrgyz to a dominating position in the former Turkic Khaganate. With the rise to power, the center of the Kyrgyz Khaganate moved to Jeti-su, and brought about a spread south of the Kyrgyz people, to reach Tian Shan mountains and Xinjiang, bringing them into contact with the existing peoples of western China, especially Tibet. By the 16th century the carriers of the ethnonym Kirgiz lived in South Siberia, Xinjiang, Tian Shan, Pamir-Alay, Middle Asia, Urals (among Bashkirs), in Kazakhstan.[26] In the Tian Shan and Xinjiang area, the term Kyrgyz retained its unifying political designation, and became a general ethnonym for the Yenisei Kirgizes and aboriginal Turkic tribes that presently constitute the Kyrgyz population.[27] Though it is obviously impossible to directly identify the Yenisei and Tien Shan Kyrgyz, a trace of their ethnogenetical connections is apparent in archaeology, history, language and ethnography. A majority of modern researchers came to the conclusion that the ancestors of Kyrgyz tribes had their origin in the most ancient tribal unions of Sakas/Scythians, Wusun/Issedones, Dingling, Mongols and Huns .[28] |



Like I said their ethnogenetical is so incredible complex it's hard to say who they are but the fact it's ancient Yenesei Kyrgyz were hybrids and so we don't know if R1a already existed among the ancient Kyrgyz or existed after the 13th century. But it's most likely most R1a in Kyrgyz already existed 2200 years thousand years before they had any contact with other ethnic groups.

This is from Wikipedia... There is no evidence of Yenisei Kyrgyz migration to Tien-Shan. Huge swathes of land (3000 km) separate Minusink Hollow from Tien-Shan. There is no evidence of Yenisei Kyrgyz establishing Khaganate/empire. After they sacked the Uighur capital in Mongolia, they moved back to Minusink Hollow.

"Scholars who write of a Kyrgyz "empire" from about 840 to about 924 are describing a fantasy. All available evidence suggests that despite some brief extensions of their power onto the Mongolian Plateau, the Kyrgyz did not maintain a significant political or military presence there after their victories in the 840s. Chinese diplomatic interactions with the Kyrgyz in the 840s do suggest that the Kyrgyz hoped to extend their sway into the Tarim Basin and possibly other areas; it is also clear that they hoped for Chinese cooperation in this project-cooperation which was not given, as the T'ang state was itself not sufficiently strong to engage in expansionism. At any rate, the projected joint venture fell through, and there is no evidence that the Kyrgyz actually pursued the dream of empire on their own"

"Although they did not significantly extend their power after 840 to create a great empire in the manner of the Xiongnu, Turks (Gokturks), or Uygurs, the Kyrgyz are nonetheless historically of great importance, particularly in the effects that their destruction of the Uygur steppe empire had on other peoples. Not only did the Kyrgyz cause the migration of Uygurs to the Tarim Basin and its environs, but they also influenced the rise of both Khitan and Karluk power in Inner Asia by removing the Uygurs, who had kept those (and other) peoples constrained."

They could not possibly established an empire that stretched to modern day Kyrgyzstan, because the same lands were occupied by Oghuz, Karluks, Yaghma and Chigils. Plus Northern Xinjiang and Gansu was controlled by Uighur-Tochar kingdoms. There were no wars between Yenisei Kyrgyz and these peoples.

[Kamal900]

Dude, admit that you're Indian. I don't know why there are many Indians on the internet pretending to be Whites.

[ButlerKing]

This is from Wikipedia... There is no evidence of Yenisei Kyrgyz migration to Tien-Shan. Huge swathes of land (3000 km) separate Minusink Hollow from Tien-Shan. There is no evidence of Yenisei Kyrgyz establishing Khaganate/empire. After they sacked the Uighur capital in Mongolia, they moved back to Minusink Hollow.

"Scholars who write of a Kyrgyz "empire" from about 840 to about 924 are describing a fantasy. All available evidence suggests that despite some brief extensions of their power onto the Mongolian Plateau, the Kyrgyz did not maintain a significant political or military presence there after their victories in the 840s. Chinese diplomatic interactions with the Kyrgyz in the 840s do suggest that the Kyrgyz hoped to extend their sway into the Tarim Basin and possibly other areas; it is also clear that they hoped for Chinese cooperation in this project-cooperation which was not given, as the T'ang state was itself not sufficiently strong to engage in expansionism. At any rate, the projected joint venture fell through, and there is no evidence that the Kyrgyz actually pursued the dream of empire on their own"

"Although they did not significantly extend their power after 840 to create a great empire in the manner of the Xiongnu, Turks (Gokturks), or Uygurs, the Kyrgyz are nonetheless historically of great importance, particularly in the effects that their destruction of the Uygur steppe empire had on other peoples. Not only did the Kyrgyz cause the migration of Uygurs to the Tarim Basin and its environs, but they also influenced the rise of both Khitan and Karluk power in Inner Asia by removing the Uygurs, who had kept those (and other) peoples constrained."

They could not possibly established an empire that stretched to modern day Kyrgyzstan, because the same lands were occupied by Oghuz, Karluks, Yaghma and Chigils. Plus Northern Xinjiang and Gansu was controlled by Uighur-Tochar kingdoms. There were no wars between Yenisei Kyrgyz and these peoples.

This isn't from wikipedia but from a random article but let's say even if that's true. The question we want to know is how was Kyrgyz DNA were formed and where was the source of their R1a came. Rather than claiming their Y-DNA came from Wusun it's possible that they were already R1a before their migration to Zhetysu ( modern day Kyrgyzstan ).

Modern day Kyrgyz.... are they result of 1) Wusun ( Europoid ) with Yenesei Kirghiz ( Mongoloid-Europoid ) or 2) the result of Mongoloid-Europoid with Mongol females or 3) were they Mongoloid-Europoid males mixing with Mongoloid-Europoid females or with both mongoloid females, caucasoid females seperately ? The latter or last 2 makes much more sense to me given modern day Kyrgyz genetic and physical appearance.

There's also a large percentage of Caucasian female mtDNA 1 in 4 to 1 in 2 Kyrgyz people. If R1a was simply Europoid mixing with Mongoloid females than where the heck are the Europoid Kyrgyz today ?

[Yaglakar]

This isn't from wikipedia but from a random article but let's say even if that's true. The question we want to know is how was Kyrgyz DNA were formed and where was the source of their R1a came. Rather than claiming their Y-DNA came from Wusun it's possible that they were already R1a before their migration to Zhetysu ( modern day Kyrgyzstan ).

Modern day Kyrgyz.... are they result of 1) Wusun ( Europoid ) with Yenesei Kirghiz ( Mongoloid-Europoid ) or 2) the result of Mongoloid-Europoid with Mongol females or 3) were they Mongoloid-Europoid males mixing with Mongoloid-Europoid females or with both mongoloid females, caucasoid females seperately ? The latter or last 2 makes much more sense to me given modern day Kyrgyz genetic and physical appearance.

There's also a large percentage of Caucasian female mtDNA 1 in 4 to 1 in 2 Kyrgyz people. If R1a was simply Europoid mixing with Mongoloid females than where the heck are the Europoid Kyrgyz today ?

Kyrgyz subclade is different from that of Altai peoples. It is prudent to assume that mostly Pashtun like people (Saka and Wusun) inhabited these mountainous regions but they likely had higher "Mongoloid" admixture from the start due to proximity to the Steppes. Carriers of r1a survived because proto-Turkic/Turkic horse based military strategy is far less effective in mountainous terrain. Through time they got Turkified by Kipchaks or others and more 'Mongoloid' admixture added up. The thing is these men survived in high numbers and passed on their r1a.

[ButlerKing]

I would think some R1a in Kyrgyz were Europoid-Mongoloid and some are Europoid, and as for their mtDNA , there are Kazakh females with western Eurasian mtDNA and look typical Kazakhs and Tajiks with mongoloid mtDNA and look typical Tajik Caucasian.

[Marmara]

Red hair is sometimes interpreted as a shade of brown in Indian and Chinese culture. Ginger were seen as orange instead. There's no modern day population today with more than 25% red hair.

http://bezformata.ru/content/Images/000/021/934/image21934160.jpg
http://mtdata.ru/u26/photo2DB3/20067697512-0/original.jpg

It's not a shade of brown, Red Hair is a common trait among İranics. We have an Afghan member with red hair.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/29/33/de/2933dec8ecf3789ee0526011a447856c.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BhgbPCRCYAArU37.png

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-844cc8bbecf9ec18545bd7f7118a91d9-c

Wusun (Iranics) were described red haired and dark skinned.

Even Turkics with partial İranics ancestry shows this trait

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/9f/2d/8c/9f2d8cf5418c50c3c61e59e7b6ddae5c--north-western-red-heads.jpg

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-9160a1590c20d34604164d3273b368ec-c

Aryans were somehow highly red haired.

[ButlerKing]

Kyrgyz subclade is different from that of Altai peoples. It is prudent to assume that Pashtun like people (Saka and Wusun) inhabited these mountainous regions but they likely had higher "Mongoloid" admixture from the start due to proximity to the Steppes. Carries of r1a survived because proto-Turkic/Turkic horse based military strategy is far less effective in mountainous terrain. Through time they got Turkified by Kipchaks or others and more 'Mongoloid' admixture added up. The thing is these men survived in high numbers and passed on their r1a.

So you agree they would have also been Euro-Mongoloid people ? What do you mean by Pasthun like people with higher Mongoloid admixture ?

For a half Chinese/ half white they be 50% Mongoloid/50% Caucasoid and it takes one Chinese parent and one European parent. the genetic admixture of most Kyrgyz are from 60-80% Mongoloid so that's roughly the equivalent of 100% Mongoloid parent and a 25-60% Mongoloid parent.

[Yaglakar]

I would think some R1a in Kyrgyz were Europoid-Mongoloid and some are Europoid, and as for their mtDNA , there are Kazakh females with western Eurasian mtDNA and look typical Kazakhs and Tajiks with mongoloid mtDNA and look typical Tajik Caucasian.

Eastern Scythians prior to the arrival of proto-Turks were already a mixed race. Proto-Turks (Xiongnu) already had up to 20% Caucasian admixture as early as 3rd century BC. Turkics were a mixed people right at the start. That r1a is represented in Uzbeks, Uyghurs and others but in lesser percentages. It is higher in Kyrgyz because of Indo-European males who lived in mountains survived in greater numbers. Plus the got an addition of Turkic r1a from the Steppes.

[ButlerKing]

It's not a shade of brown, Red Hair is a common trait among İranics. We have an Afghan member with red hair.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/29/33/de/2933dec8ecf3789ee0526011a447856c.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BhgbPCRCYAArU37.png

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-844cc8bbecf9ec18545bd7f7118a91d9-c

Wuson (Iranics) were described red haired and dark skinned.

Even Turkics with partial İranics ancestry shows this trait

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/9f/2d/8c/9f2d8cf5418c50c3c61e59e7b6ddae5c--north-western-red-heads.jpg

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-9160a1590c20d34604164d3273b368ec-c

Aryans were somehow highly red haired.

There's no modern ethnic group that have more than 20% of red hair. You're showing very untypical people. Pasthun with red hair is rare.

https://connellkl.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/40-maps-they-didn_t-teach-you-in-school-bored-panda-mozilla-firefox-3162015-52503-pm-bmp.jpg



Chinese even described Hmongs as blonde hair people with red hair blue eyes, green eyes.

These people are 100% Mongoloid with 0% admixture of any race btw.

Blonde hair would seem correct Hmong

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-08229eed49f19c4428207479ddb01597-c
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-b020d9f1b2af29c8ae20ccbe7c6b75b0-c

Hmong with Red hair was properly or Hmong with a shade of brown that can look red

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s283/shortypai/paisdigital043.jpg
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2474/3577937419_11a6c3d05b.jpg
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZDczOGNiZTctMTg4Mi00NDYxLWFmYTgtZDM5M2YzMjA4YT A0XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNzU5MDIzOTQ@._V1_.jpg

[Marmara]

There's no modern ethnic group that have more than 20% of red hair. You're showing very untypical people. Pasthun with red hair is rare.



Sure thing, what i mean is İranics probably had even more redheads back then and red hair is an Aryan trait that mostly disappeared by mixing. It's not just a shade of brown.

[ButlerKing]

Sure thing, what i mean is İranics probably had even more redheads back then and red hair is an Aryan trait that mostly disappeared by mixing. It's not just a shade of brown.


People just tend to exaggerate in historical times. While I truly believed a significant large minority of them had it no way could in hell it could have been the majority.

Indians today also described Kalash as white skinned, blue eye people.

https://78.media.tumblr.com/01316d83b14a2e59b5c0a850fe45850f/tumblr_od45q9Bb1J1roqv59o1_500.png


While it's true a significant portion of them are light skinned and blue eyes but this is still not true for the majority or general population. Although Indians had always described them with those traits , the reality is many of them can be just as dark as north Indians, it's just the other half have lighter skinned by no means they are as exaggerated as historical records suggest they are.

It's like the Indian historians completely ignored the ones that look like these aswell which I can say for sure represent 50% or slightly more.

Also there are many many many many many North Indians with lighter skinned than these

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Qsl_MpdGv_o/SpLxZ0vtPUI/AAAAAAAAARU/W8p7x0P6fow/s320/1.jpg
http://zahanat.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/kalash-ppl.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Eastern Scythians prior to the arrival of proto-Turks were already a mixed race. Proto-Turks (Xiongnu) already had up to 20% Caucasian admixture as early as 3rd century BC. Turkics were a mixed people right at the start. That r1a is represented in Uzbeks, Uyghurs and others but in lesser percentages. It is higher in Kyrgyz because of Indo-European males who lived in mountains survived in greater numbers. Plus the got an addition of Turkic r1a from the Steppes.


Okay, but these Indo-European males who lived in the mountain region, how Mongoloid would they have been ?

This is what I'm trying to say that people should be careful when they are claiming different types of R1a. South Indians with R1a were spread by North Indian males and they certainly had heavy South Asian admixture themselves. I do not believe a single R1a in Central and South India came from a Iranic or European looking male.

In Central Asian case, I believe R1a is from both Mongoloid Turkic and Iranic people.

[Ülev]

R-Z93

R1a1b2a2* (R-M780) occurs at high frequency in South Asia: India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Himalayas. The group also occurs at >3% in some Iranian populations and is present at >30% in Roma from Croatia and Hungary.[57]

[Yaglakar]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_ expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg

I don't see how first r1a individuals would have looked like "white" Europeans if it originated in Middle East. By the time they arrived in India, they were heavily mixed as well.

[jackrussell]

:D

Karachay and Balkars are not Turkified ; they are Turks.

[ButlerKing]

R-Z93

R1a1b2a2* (R-M780) occurs at high frequency in South Asia: India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Himalayas. The group also occurs at >3% in some Iranian populations and is present at >30% in Roma from Croatia and Hungary.[57]

Correct. Also this proves most of R1-Z93 in Europe were contributed by Indians rather than Turkic. I'm not sure about in East Europe, properly some would have have been Turkic but I would think some of them at least have to be from Roma aswell, some Roma/Gypsies group have a lot higher R-Z93 that's because there are many diverse genetically gypsies group even in India.

[Ülev]

I can't edit my previous post for some reason, so let me paste the link here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a#R1a1a1b2_(R-Z93)_(Asia))

[ButlerKing]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_ expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg

I don't see how first r1a individuals would have looked like "white" Europeans if it originated in Middle East. By the time they arrived in India, they were heavily mixed as well.

If you read some previous you would see many members try to white-wash ancient Middle easterners being white until the semetics, Indians, Mongoloid came and mess up their gene pool. A lot of euro-centrist have the idea that R1a from anywhere in the world originally resembled these types


https://i.pinimg.com/736x/87/b1/aa/87b1aae9b659e8ab48023c46f65ce1fd--viking-men-bearded-men.jpg
https://c.stocksy.com/a/ZEH600/z0/1496219.jpg

And in their sick little heads they believe something like these represents the original pure Iranic people who the Aryan invaders.

I'm sure you've seen those stupid ass Youtube videos of " Aryans in India, Pakistan, Iran, Kurds, Arabia ". They use individuals that look nothing like 99% of the general populations.

https://kurdistanland.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/kurdish-children.jpg
http://www.ghandchi.com/iranscope/Anthology/KavehFarrokh/300/image051.jpg

[ButlerKing]

:D

Karachay and Balkars are not Turkified ; they are Turks.

Well they obviously don't have the same hair type as Kipchaks so their claim in being Kipchaks are highly suspicious

They look swarthy and dark.

http://www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/system/uploads/article_image/image/0000/6535/view_1.jpg
http://www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/system/uploads/article_image/image/0000/3910/view___________-___.jpg
http://s9.postimg.org/7rse1gmmn/Balkarmen.jpg
http://tag.fuen.org/fileadmin/_processed_/csm_20141125_Bars_El_e9ac3da240.jpg

[jackrussell]

Well they obviously don't have the same hair type as Kipchaks so their claim in being Kipchaks are highly suspicious

They look swarthy and dark.

http://www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/system/uploads/article_image/image/0000/6535/view_1.jpg
http://www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/system/uploads/article_image/image/0000/3910/view___________-___.jpg
http://s9.postimg.org/7rse1gmmn/Balkarmen.jpg
http://tag.fuen.org/fileadmin/_processed_/csm_20141125_Bars_El_e9ac3da240.jpg


:D you really need to learn more about Karachay and Balkar Turks.

Premise of your work seems to be based upon thinking that some Turks don't really know if they are Turks for real .

:D


This is not a reasonable explanation under any circumstances .

[jackrussell]

Here is a Karachay festival in Turkey,


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwDZh8hBVZ4

Karaçaylar Eskişehir'de Kültürlerini Yaşatıyor - Nartlanı Toy Künü Etkinlikleri

[Mingle]

R1a-Z93 is not Turkic it's Aryan. Turks have it by mixing with Scythians.

Not necessarily Scythians, but East Iranics in general. I would say they mostly got it from Khwarezmians and Sogdians.

[ButlerKing]

:D you really need to learn more about Karachay and Balkar Turks.

Premise of your work seems to be based upon thinking that some Turks don't really know if they are Turks for real .

:D


This is not a reasonable explanation under any circumstances .

Wikipedia claims they are Kipchak descent. Do you believe these people are really Kipchap descent ????

[Nanushka]

Even now I do not understand why Turkish and Hungarians keep claiming or calculating the percentages/or numbers of R1a they have or why they want to believe R1a it's proto-Turkic. The Turkish only became Turks after the Oghuz Turks migrated to Turkey through the creation of Seljuk empire which conquered Turkey in 10th-11th century. Thousand years before Turkey became Turks and received R1a from the Turkic people, the R1a were already predominant Mongoloid nomads hence the reason why there is so many ancient burials of Mongoloid males with R1a with Europoid females because they inherited this style from their nomadic Scythian grandfathers or great-grandfather, or heck it even predate Scythians.

I do not understand why members like Kipchak Kagan, Turul Karom are claiming R1a as Turkic. It is a sick obession

Oh do you still believe in this old-fashioned info from early 20th century? I assume you already know about proto-Turkic people settled and moved around whole eurasia like Dingling, Scythian-Sarmatian, Hun-Akhun, Sabir, Wusun, Yue-chi, Kiengar .. all lived in different ethnogenetic cultures in different time periods in the different parts of mother eurasia. Not to mention other long-forgotten proto-Turks as Hurrian, Kimmer and Turukku that lived in Anatolia and near east. As I wrote earlier, all of them are in academia now and being researched.

Seljuk turks entered Anatolia with Manzikert, yes, but they met already with Turkic origin Turkish-speaking ppl there like the Pecheneg who passed to Alparslan's side during the war with alomst 50,000 soldiers. This helped them greatly to get the war. Ottomans also met descendants of Pecheneg, Cuman-Kipchack, Avar in Caucaisa, Pontic steppes and Balkans and even before them Oghuz dominated middle-east up to Khorasan.

Do you know that high rate of R1a in northern India can well be coming from turkic tribe Yue-chi who were expelled by great Hun empire Maotun (Mete) out of inner Asia and went west and settled in Bactria? Their empire along with turkic Kushan was all over Afghanistan and northern India today. Also years later Akhuns before becoming Avars came to northern India after their conflict with Gokturks and lived there for 150 years. It is ofc possible that their remnants there mixed with locals and transferred their DNA to them that lived to current day. The same may apply to al turkic tribes travelled all across asia and middle-east.

I think you'd better change your classical viewpoint about Turks and start looking at things from a reverse angle. This will improve your perception, free your mind. Maybe you are looking at history from a wrong perspective, what you write till now is nothing new, repeating all the same about Turks: when they were in Asia they were Mongols, when they came to Anatolia they became Arabs =))) No they were white race that mixed with all other races and gave rise to new communities, thats it. You are confusing your mind too much with cliche info and unnecesarily complicated genetics.

You know what they say; if you want to hide something, put it in front of the eyes:)

[Nanushka]

R1a-Z93 is not Turkic it's Aryan. Turks have it by mixing with Scythians.

Scythians? They have always been referred to as either from the same origin with Huns (Priscus, 448 AD) or Pechenegs (Michael Attaleiates, the History, 1079 AD, he was present at Manzikert)

I cant upload the related document of Attaleiates due to some error

[Marmara]

Scythians? They have always been referred to as either from the same origin with Huns (Priscus, 448 AD) or Pechenegs (Michael Attaleiates, the History, 1079 AD, he was present at Manzikert)

I cant upload the related document of Attaleiates due to some error

By Scytians i meant Iranics anyway, like Sogdians.

[jackrussell]

Wikipedia claims they are Kipchak descent. Do you believe these people are really Kipchap descent ????

Dude

I am a Kipchak descend too .

You really don't seem to understand this issue .

[Yaglakar]

By Scytians i meant Iranics anyway, like Sogdians.

Sogdians are settled Sakas. Proto-Turks initially mixed with Eastern nomadic Scythians (who were already partially mixed). The more Turkics moved towards West, the more Caucasian admixture they got.

[Nanushka]

Dude

I am a Kipchak descend too .

History professors and some friends tend to call me Kipchak as well since remnants of Avars lived in Kipchak federation in northern Caucasia after their main body migrated to Pannonia:)

[ButlerKing]

Scythians? They have always been referred to as either from the same origin with Huns (Priscus, 448 AD) or Pechenegs (Michael Attaleiates, the History, 1079 AD, he was present at Manzikert)

I cant upload the related document of Attaleiates due to some error

Anyone who fought like Scythians were considered Scythian back than but by physical descriptions Huns were described as short, dark skin, eyes small like pinhole, flat nose where as Scythians were described as tall, blonde

[Nanushka]

Anyone who fought like Scythians were considered Scythian back than but by physical descriptions Huns were described as short, dark skin, eyes small like pinhole, flat nose where as Scythians were described as tall, blonde

I dont understand, is it really this difficult to figure out that Huns mingled with mongols and chinese when they lived in inner Asia? Ofc they carried their mixed genes to europe as well. Clever europeans who make all sort of figuration about admixtures like yourself should be able to think about this too I guess. Arent I right?

[ButlerKing]

Oh do you still believe in this old-fashioned info from early 20th century? I assume you already know about proto-Turkic people settled and moved around whole eurasia like Dingling, Scythian-Sarmatian, Hun-Akhun, Sabir, Wusun, Yue-chi, Kiengar .. all lived in different ethnogenetic cultures in different time periods in the different parts of mother eurasia. Not to mention other long-forgotten proto-Turks as Hurrian, Kimmer and Turukku that lived in Anatolia and near east. As I wrote earlier, all of them are in academia now and being researched.

Seljuk turks entered Anatolia with Manzikert, yes, but they met already with Turkic origin Turkish-speaking ppl there like the Pecheneg who passed to Alparslan's side during the war with alomst 50,000 soldiers. This helped them greatly to get the war. Ottomans also met descendants of Pecheneg, Cuman-Kipchack, Avar in Caucaisa, Pontic steppes and Balkans and even before them Oghuz dominated middle-east up to Khorasan.

Do you know that high rate of R1a in northern India can well be coming from turkic tribe Yue-chi who were expelled by great Hun empire Maotun (Mete) out of inner Asia and went west and settled in Bactria? Their empire along with turkic Kushan was all over Afghanistan and northern India today. Also years later Akhuns before becoming Avars came to northern India after their conflict with Gokturks and lived there for 150 years. It is ofc possible that their remnants there mixed with locals and transferred their DNA to them that lived to current day. The same may apply to al turkic tribes travelled all across asia and middle-east.

I think you'd better change your classical viewpoint about Turks and start looking at things from a reverse angle. This will improve your perception, free your mind. Maybe you are looking at history from a wrong perspective, what you write till now is nothing new, repeating all the same about Turks: when they were in Asia they were Mongols, when they came to Anatolia they became Arabs =))) No they were white race that mixed with all other races and gave rise to new communities, thats it. You are confusing your mind too much with cliche info and unnecesarily complicated genetics.

You know what they say; if you want to hide something, put it in front of the eyes:)


I don't understand what superficial nonsense you're trying to tell me but let correct you on something.


Scythian-Sarmatian, Hun-Akhun, Sabir, Wusun, Yue-chi, Kiengar = All Indo-European speakers related with Iranian why the hell you claim them as Turks. A Iranian Tajik from Central Asia have a million times more right to claim these people before a Turkish speaker can. They have high R1a so why claim it's Turkic not Tajik ???? get over it please, 90% of Turkic tribes have low R1a. Tajik especially Pamiri have the highest R1a in Central Asia and they are both Iranic people.

Now you claim Hurrian, Kimmer and Turukku as proto-Turks that lived in Anatolia and near east ? what superficial nonsense. You're claim east semetic people as Turks ? but yeah go ahead and claim your superficial nonsense. Anybody in the world can make superficial claims and superficial interpretation of other ethnic groups. Yup Yup just go ahead and look for tiny similarities and claim these people as pure Turks or proto-Turks to fit your agenda.

All these tribes first have origin from middle east before they went to Turkey

Turukku were an ancient near eastern people in the north western parts of Ancient Iran during the Bronze Age. They
predominantly Hurrian-speaking but with significant [/b]East Semitic-speaking[/b] components

Hurrians were a people of the Bronze Age Near East. They spoke a Hurro-Urartian language called Hurrian and lived in Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamia. Hurrian names occur sporadically in northwestern Mesopotamia and the area of Kirkuk in modern Iraq by the Middle Bronze Age. There is similarities between Hurrian and the Northeast Caucasian languages, and thus place it in the Alarodian family. Examples of the proposed phonological correspondences are Proto-East-Caucasian


Facial reconstruction of original Gokturks

The first Turkic migration were the Gokturk happened in the 6th century


http://i48.tinypic.com/2r6nx2b.jpg


And they looked like this

http://i48.tinypic.com/2cz4nwz.jpg
http://i41.tinypic.com/34j6fk9.jpg
http://i42.tinypic.com/2qa5p28.jpg
http://i42.tinypic.com/2vi0aw0.jpg


Facial reconstructions of original Oghuz

The Oghuz turkmen were related with Gokturk but mixed with the Iranic people, however the different is that Gokturk were predominately Mongoloid to Mongoloid. While Oghuz Turk have both people who are 100% Mongoloid and people were 25-50% Mongoloid and 25-50% Caucasoid.

By Russian anthropologists



Oghuz from Western + Southern Kazakhstan.

Google Translating Russian to English


" Among the Oghuz (mainly in the steppe zone of their resettlement) dominated Mongoloid racial type. "They - wrote about the Aral Oghuz in the tenth century. Al-Masudi, - most of undersized (Turks) and they have very small eyes" [11]. Other medieval authors note poorly defined vegetation on the face and body and Ploskonos Oguz. All of this suggests Mongoloid features that were characteristic of the bulk predominantly steppe Oguz [12]. "


http://i45.tinypic.com/zmf75y.jpg


" These written sources of X-XII centuries. the physical appearance of the Oghuz confirm some paleoanthropological materials. Among the found in the Oguz-Pecheneg mounds of western Kazakhstan skulls dominate Mongoloid types with the South Siberian features. However, there are also found the skull Caucasoid and metisnogo appearance. [13]


More intensive process of ethnic assimilation is likely to take place among the Oghuz south-western regions of Central Asia. Quite a few, but very interesting in this respect craniological material is located in southern Kazakhstan. In excavated ANBernshtam Oguz cemeteries Sasyk-Bulak buried dolihokrannye Caucasoids mixed with Mongoloid features. [14] "



Kipchaks



They were a mixed race group basically

Facial reconstruction of Kipchak contained and burials
Caucasoid (with some Mongoloid admixture ) and mongoloid ( with some caucasoid admixture )

" According to Ukrainian anthropologists, Kipchaks had racial characteristics of Caucasians and Mongoloids, namely a broad flat face and protruding nose. Researcher E. P. Alekseeva drew attention to the fact that European Kipchak stone images have both Mongoloid and Caucasoid faces. "


Kipchak who look more caucasoid
http://s2.forumimage.ru/uploads/20091029/125682172870747162.jpg

Kipchak who look more mongoloid

http://www.imageup.ru/img181/1559241/kipchak.jpg[/QUOTE]



Google Translating Russian to English

"Anthropological of Kipchaks, like other Turkic their predecessors in the Northern Black Sea was probably mixed. Thus, SA Pletnev, describing several graves in the Polovtsian White Vezhe notes Mongoloidness buried and concluded "the presence of a component in the Mongolian Polovtsian environment. However, she and other researchers believe that the whole Black Sea Kipchaks in anthropological terms, is not much different from the previous nomadic population of the Northern Black Sea Region VIII - X in the beginning., And most fully characterized Polovtsy Caucasoid appearance. Ukrainian anthropologist A. Shevchenko said that in the guise of Polovtsian originally joined racial characteristics Caucasoid and Mongoloid, namely a broad flat face and expressive protruding nose. Historian EP Alekseev drew attention to the fact that European Kipchak stone images have both mongoloid person, and Caucasoid. However, in its view, the Kipchaks, who moved to Georgia in the first half of the XII century. were predominantly Caucasian appearance, another Georgian sources pointed to their Mongoloid, as later noted an unusual appearance of the Mongols. Note that Caucasoid appearance was also pretty much typical for Asian Kipchak, before the start of their movement in Europe. According to anthropologist VV Ginzburg population of East Kazakhstan VIII-X centuries. Presumably referring to Kimak-Kipchak Khanate, was characterized by a predominance of Caucasoid features, although here there were also carriers of the Mongoloid and transition types. Also in this regard can also lead to historian and archaeologist BA Litvinskiy which characterizes anthropological image of the medieval population of Kazakhstan, wrote the following: "... most of the local Turkic ethnic entities time remained Caucasoid, preserving genetic features that precede them tribal people. Turning to the overall ratio of the two major racial components in the physical appearance of the local inhabitants of the reporting time, the conditional share of Mongoloid elements as a whole amounted to 1/3 of populations." . A number of local groups impurity level reached half of the total gene pool. In some series of crania, particularly pritobolskoy Series VIII-X centuries. n. e. from Northern Kazakhstan, the conditional share Mongoloid reached 2/3 of the total weight.

[ButlerKing]

I dont understand, is it really this difficult to figure out that Huns mingled with mongols and chinese when they lived in inner Asia? Ofc they carried their mixed genes to europe as well. Clever europeans who make all sort of figuration about admixtures like yourself should be able to think about this too I guess. Arent I right?

No. Because it happened in 3rd century. They were predominant Mongoloid with only some Europoid admixture long before they had contact with Turks.


" A majority (89%) of the Xiongnu mtDNA sequences can be classified as belonging to Asian haplogroups, and nearly 11% belong to European haplogroups. This finding indicates that contact between European and Asian populations preceded the start of Xiongnu culture, and confirms results reported for two samples from an early 3rd century BC Scytho-Siberian population "


"Other archaeological sites have been unearthed in Inner Mongolia and elsewhere; they represent the Neolithic and historical periods of the Xiongnu's history.[108] Those included the Ordos culture, many of them had been identified as the Xiongnu cultures. The region was occupied predominantly by peoples showing Mongoloid features, known from their skeletal remains and artifacts. Portraits found in the Noin-Ula excavations demonstrate other cultural evidences and influences, showing that Chinese and Xiongnu art have influenced each other mutually. Some of these embroidered portraits in the Noin-Ula kurgans also depict the Xiongnu with long braided hair with wide ribbons, which is seen to be identical with the Ashina clan hair-style.[109] Well-preserved bodies in Xiongnu and pre-Xiongnu tombs in the Mongolian Republic and southern Siberia show both Mongoloid and Caucasian features.[110] Analysis of skeletal remains from sites attributed to the Xiongnu provides an identification of dolichocephalic Mongoloid, ethnically distinct from neighboring populations in present-day Mongolia.[111] "


http://i50.tinypic.com/14buxit.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/4sl1ft.jpg

[Yaglakar]

I dont understand, is it really this difficult to figure out that Huns mingled with mongols and chinese when they lived in inner Asia? Ofc they carried their mixed genes to europe as well. Clever europeans who make all sort of figuration about admixtures like yourself should be able to think about this too I guess. Arent I right?

The first proto-Turks (carriers of a Turkic language) originate from Inner Monglolia (Ordos, PRC).

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/c8/a4/76/c8a476db45e0f90644325b58b174f988.png

Hell, these guys might even not have been nomads, but rice farmers. They might have adopted Steppe culture from Eastern Scythians, eventually overcoming them because they were better at it. They were likely more "mongoloid" than today's Mongolians.

There was no presence of Turkic languages in Europe before 400 AD prior to the arrival of Oghuric speaking Turks from the east.

http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_400ad.jpg
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_450ad.jpg

Avar, Khazar, and Bulgar empires were established from these Hunnic remnants.

[ButlerKing]

The first proto-Turks (carriers of a Turkic language) originate from Inner Monglolia (Ordos, PRC).

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/c8/a4/76/c8a476db45e0f90644325b58b174f988.png

Hell, these guys might even not have been nomads, but rice farmers. They might have adopted Steppe culture from Eastern Scythians, eventually overcoming them because they were better at it. They were likely more "mongoloid" than today's Mongolians.

There was no presence of Turkic languages in Europe before 400 AD prior to the arrival of Oghuric speaking Turks from the east.

http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_400ad.jpg
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_450ad.jpg

Avar, Khazar, and Bulgar empires were established from these Hunnic remnants.

I doubt they are as Mongoloid as Mongols but the earlier Turks conqueror would properly be something like 79-80% which would make them look almost pure Mongoloid anyway.

East Mongols are nearly pure Mongoloid 95-100%

West Mongols are 80-85% but this is no surprise given the interaction they had with Turkic tribes of west Mongolia but they all predominant Mongoloid to begin with

http://i39.tinypic.com/2ppyhbm.jpg

[Yaglakar]

I doubt they are as Mongoloid as Mongols but the earlier Turks conqueror would properly be something like 79-80% which would make them look almost pure Mongoloid anyway.

East Mongols are nearly pure Mongoloid 95-100%

West Mongols are 80-85% but this is no surprise given the interaction they had with Turkic tribes of west Mongolia but they all predominant Mongoloid to begin with

http://i39.tinypic.com/2ppyhbm.jpg

I am talking about earliest proto-Turks - the first carriers of the language. They were so far to east that they likely were devoid of any European or Near Eastern heritage (or had it in minuscule amounts).

[Vlatko Vukovic]

I am talking about earliest proto-Turks - the first carriers of the language. They were so far to east that they likely were devoid of any European or Near Eastern heritage (or had it in minuscule amounts).

Do you think that R1a-Z93 didn't speak Indo-European, before get Turkicized?

[Yaglakar]

Do you think that R1a-Z93 didn't speak Indo-European, before get Turkicized?

That subclade is that of Eastern Scythians who spoke an Indo-European language. Eastern Scythians were already mixed before they got incorporated into expanding proto-Turks. I don't think Turkicize is the right word, because the very foundation of proto-Turks is that intermixing on the Steppes. Turks are late comers on the world stage.

[Nanushka]

I don't understand what superficial nonsense you're trying to tell me. but let correct you on some ething


Scythian-Sarmatian, Hun-Akhun, Sabir, Wusun, Yue-chi, Kiengar = All Indo-European speakers related with Iranian why the hell you claim them as Turks. A Iranian Tajik from Central Asia have a million times more right to claim these people before a Turkish speaker can. They have high R1a so why claim it's Turkic not Tajik ???? get over it please, 90% of Turkic tribes have low R1a. Tajik especially Pamiri have the highest R1a in Central Asia and they are both Iranic people.

Now you claim Hurrian, Kimmer and Turukku as proto-Turks that lived in Anatolia and near east ? what superficial nonsense. You're claim east semetic people as Turks ? but yeah go ahead and claim your superficial nonsense. Anybody in the world can make superficial claims and superficial interpretation of other ethnic groups. Yup Yup just go ahead and look for tiny similarities and claim these people as pure Turks or proto-Turks to fit your agenda
....

....

....


Oh pls dont dump that bulk of wiki nonsense on me, I know that you are trying to intimidate me with that stuff but I have no time and patience to read it all =) I can only scan it through. It is totally european to call everthing that dont fit to your own expectations as 'superficial nonsense' isnt it? Ok then, I can easily call yours the same. Show me one evidence that Huns-Akhuns (Avars), Sabirs, Wusun, Yue-chi are iranian and IE speaking (lol). It is only wishful thinking depending on the wishful thinking of the outworn, so-called old western and soviet historians(!)

Let me give you a clue about who those iranians(!) might be; most probably they were the remnants of turkic people who lived in the land of Iran, including Khorasan as well as Afghanistan, Tajikistan and northern India for a very long time. Cultural and physical interaction didnt take place like you thought it did but vice versa, turkish culture and phenotype affected the persians a lot. You may say that I cant prove it, actually I can, I have so many new books and material that belongs to recent research but you say its mainly turkish scholars. However, it is you who cant prove yours with sound material as I find your old stuff worthless and invalid

[Nanushka]

The first proto-Turks (carriers of a Turkic language) originate from Inner Monglolia (Ordos, PRC).

Hell, these guys might even not have been nomads, but rice farmers. They might have adopted Steppe culture from Eastern Scythians, eventually overcoming them because they were better at it. They were likely more "mongoloid" than today's Mongolians.

There was no presence of Turkic languages in Europe before 400 AD prior to the arrival of Oghuric speaking Turks from the east.

I am quoting from the latest research: Scythians lived in the whole eurasia and the ones in western wing were more caucasoid than the ones in the east due to known reasons. Kurgans tell it all, giving us incredible info about their admixture

Recent turkish historians like Ahmet Tasagil, Ilhami Durmus, Abduhalik Cay and Osman Karatay say they were speaking a proto-turkic language, you can follow them if you wish

[Vlatko Vukovic]

That subclade is that of Eastern Scythians who spoke an Indo-European language. Eastern Scythians were already mixed before they got incorporated into expanding proto-Turks. I don't think Turkicize is the right word, because the very foundation of proto-Turks is that intermixing on the Steppes. Turks are late comers on the world stage.

Right, important is that you admire that Z93 spoke Indo-European language before they switched to Turkic one.

[ButlerKing]

Oh pls dont dump that bulk of wiki nonsense on me, I know that you are trying to intimidate me with that stuff but I have no time and patience to read it all =) and as far as I see from scanning through, you you dont correct me but you support me except for the iranian thing. It is totally european to call everthing that dont fit to your own expectations as 'superficial nonsense' isnt it? Ok then, I can easily call yours the same. Show me one evidence that Huns-Akhuns (Avars), Sabirs, Wusun, Yue-chi are iranian and IE speaking (lol). It is only wishful thinking depending on the wishful thinking of the outworn, so-called old western and soviet historians(!)

Let me give you a clue about who those iranians(!) might be; most probably they were the remnants of turkic people who lived in the land of Iran, including Khorasan as well as Afghanistan, Tajikistan and northern India for a very long time. Cultural and physical interaction didnt take place like you thought it did but vice versa, turkish culture and phenotype affected the persians a lot. You may say that I cant prove it, actually I can, I have so many new books and material that belongs to recent research but you say its mainly turkish scholars. However, it is you who cant prove yours with sound material as I find your old stuff you worthless and invalid

Lol how super convenient it is to just claim any ancient central Asia groups as Turkic . Funny how Kipchak Khagan even claim North African tribes as Turks just because they call themselves "Tuareg". Just stamp the word " Turk " on anyone you want and they are Turks. You can easily do the same crap with Arabs, Iranians, Europeans, Chinese, Korean being Turks aswell but because the Iranic people you kept claiming just happened to be from central Asia you take advantage of on any ancient Iranic central Asian groups being Turkic.


"A wide variety of people came to populate the steppes. Nomadic groups in Central Asia included the Huns and other Turks, as well as Indo-Europeans such as the Tocharians, Persians, Scythians, Saka, Yuezhi, Wusun, and others, and a number of Mongol groups. Despite these ethnic and linguistic differences, the steppe lifestyle led to the adoption of very similar culture across the region. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian_languages

" The Scythian languages are a group of Eastern Iranian languages of the classical and late antiquity (Middle Iranian) period "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephthalite_Empire ( Ahkuns )

According to most specialist scholars, the spoken language of the Hephthalites was an Eastern Iranian language, but different from the Bactrian language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wusun#Language

" The Wusun are generally believed to have been an Indo-European-speaking people.[46][47][48][49] They are thought to be Iranian-speaking by the archaeologist Elena Kuzmina,[50] linguist János Harmatta,[51] Joseph Kitagawa,[52] David Durand-Guédy,[53] Turkologist Peter B. Golden[54][55] and Central Asian scholar Denis Sinor.[20][56] "



As for Yue-Chi ( Yuezhi ) the crap about you say Indians R1a coming from them is a whole lot of bullshit. Also they spoke the Bactrian language is an Iranian language which was spoken in the Central Asian region of Bactria (present-day Afghanistan and Tajikistan)[3] and used as the official language of the Kushan and the Hephthalite empires.


So you wish to claim people as Turks ????? The Tajiks and Pamiri are also remnants of Turkic ????

If their language, DNA isn't Turk than what makes them a Turk ? You think these people who identify as Iranian have no history of their own???

http://www.paulstravelblog.com/images/629/13.jpg
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-64c229153df49c5d14ac9879d258b497
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/14/69/e0/1469e0e1d3219bcb1f64114b59ac4368--caucasian-people-european-people.jpg


What is Turkification ?

Turkification, or Turkicization (Turkish: Türkleştirme), is a cultural shift whereby populations or states adopted a historical Turkic culture, such as in the Ottoman Empire. As the Turkic states developed and grew, there were many instances of this cultural shift, both voluntary and involuntary.

Diverse people were effected by Turkification including Anatolian, Balkan, Caucasian and Middle Eastern peoples from different ethnic origins, such as Albanians, Arabs, Armenians, Assyrians, Circassians, Georgians, Greeks, Jews, Romani, Slavs, Iranic peoples such as Kurds, as well as Lazs from all the regions of the Ottoman Empire and Iran.

An early form of Turkification occurred in the time of the Seljuk Empire among the local population of Anatolia, involving intermarriages, religious conversion, linguistic shift and interethnic relationships, which today is reflected in the predominant indigenous Anatolian genetic makeup of the modern Turkish people.[1][2][3]

[Yaglakar]

I am quoting from the latest research: Scythians lived in the whole eurasia and the ones in western wing were more caucasoid than the ones in the east due to known reasons. Kurgans tell it all, giving us incredible info about their admixture

Recent turkish historians like Ahmet Tasagil, Ilhami Durmus, Abduhalik Cay and Osman Karatay say they were speaking a proto-turkic language, you can follow them if you wish

Scythians predate Turks. They spoke an East Iranian language. They lost the steppes entirely to Turks by 5th century AD and in the process mixed with them. The more Turks moved west the more they mixed.

[Yaglakar]

Right, important is that you admire that Z93 spoke Indo-European language before they switched to Turkic one.

Are you some sort of Y-DNA nationalist? :rolleyes:

[ButlerKing]

Right, important is that you admire that Z93 spoke Indo-European language before they switched to Turkic one.

If you though Kipchak Khagan was insane look at Buusra claiming that R1a in Northern India coming from Yuezhi.... so much for Aryan invasion theory. A group of Turkish nationalist are making Turkic invasion theories.


Do you know that high rate of R1a in northern India can well be coming from turkic tribe Yue-chi who were expelled by great Hun empire Maotun (Mete) out of inner Asia and went west and settled in Bactria? Their empire along with turkic Kushan was all over Afghanistan and northern India today.

[Bornoz]

Are you some sort of Y-DNA nationalist? :rolleyes:

I've never seen such a thing :lol:

[Vlatko Vukovic]

Are you some sort of Y-DNA nationalist? :rolleyes:

Not, indeed. But i am curious what Turkic people think of R1a, since this guy Kipchak Hakan claims from the 2012 that R1a is original Turkic haplo, and have nothing with Indo-Europeans.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

If you though Kipchak Khagan was insane look at Buusra claiming that R1a in Northern India coming from Yuezhi.... so much for Aryan invasion theory. A group of Turkish nationalist are making Turkic invasion theories.

I am asking myself how can they believe in such things? They really believe in this.

[Yaglakar]

Not, indeed. But i am curious what Turkic people think of R1a, since this guy Kipchak Hakan claims from the 2012 that R1a is original Turkic haplo, and have nothing with Indo-Europeans.

But why would I "admire" it? The foundation of proto-Turks is linked to that haplogroup so he is kind of right. :rolleyes:

[Vlatko Vukovic]

But why would I "admire" it? The foundation of proto-Turks is linked to that haplogroup so he is kind of right. :rolleyes:

Do you know what he claims? That R1a-Z93 in Iranic people, for example, are Turkic. That Z280 among Ugric people is Turkic, that M458 in Polish people is Turkic too. Do you get it?

[Yaglakar]

Do you know what he claims? That R1a-Z93 in Iranic people, for example, are Turkic. That Z280 among Ugric people is Turkic, that M458 in Polish people is Turkic too. Do you get it?

Yes but Indo-European migrations are 4000 years old and r1a is at least 20000 years old. How is r1a Indo-European?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/IE_expansion.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_ expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg

[Vlatko Vukovic]

Yes but Indo-European migrations are 4000 years old and r1a is at least 20000 years old. How is r1a Indo-European?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/IE_expansion.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_ expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg

R1a is Indo-European and it is called such like that by all scientists and genetical experts.

[Ülev]

Poles use sanskrit and even do not realize that, other Slavs have only 20% common vocabulary with polish language

all Slavs laugh at polish "prze"/"pshe", but no one knows from where it comes

polish word for excuse me / sorry is przepraszam - pshe prasham

polish word pshe/prze means great, bigger

http://www.indiachildnames.com/name.aspx?name=Prasham
sanskrit word prasham -->
Name Prasham generally means Peace, is of Indian origin, Name Prasham is a Masculine (or Boy) name. Person with name Prasham are mainly Hindu by religion. Name Prasham belongs to rashi Kanya (Virgo) .

and what should do person after quarell etc? - should try to make bigger/greater peace - pshe + prasham = psheprasham / przepraszam

Holy R1thelians

[ButlerKing]

Here is a Karachay festival in Turkey,


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwDZh8hBVZ4

Karaçaylar Eskişehir'de Kültürlerini Yaşatıyor - Nartlanı Toy Künü Etkinlikleri


These people don't fit the Kipchak description.

[jackrussell]

These people don't fit the Kipchak description.

:D


:D

That is because the Kipchak description is incomplete .


You do understand that blue eyes and blonde hair actually about melanin and pigmentation production or it's lack thereof ?

[Yaglakar]

These people don't fit the Kipchak description.

You fail to realize over and over again that admixture of any sort doesn't make anyone less of a Kipchak or Oghuz or Turk. Besides, the girl in the thumbnail is cute. :)

[ButlerKing]

:D


:D

That is because the Kipchak description is incomplete .


You do understand that blue eyes and blonde hair actually about melanin and pigmentation production or it's lack thereof ?

Sorry but these Caucasus Turkic people don't fit the description of Kipchak, they look typically similar to georgians, armenians or north caucasus people.

So what's the incomplete description ? I just read the Kipchak wiki, other than the fact they were described with blonde hair, blue eyes with some of them being physically mongoloid, some of them being physically caucasoid I cannot find any other descriptions that can match Kipchak and caucasus turks who have black hair, brow eyes,

[Leto]

R1a is not a Mongoloid haplogroup, for heaven's sake.

[ButlerKing]

R1a is not a Mongoloid haplogroup, for heaven's sake.

R1a is obviously not Mongoloid but that doesn't mean Mongoloid males carrying R1a are unable to follow their fathers footsteps who will also mix with both europoid females and mongoloid females. Why do Turkish have Mongoloid admixture ? it's because their R1a came from central Asian males who were hybrids.

For example I've seen plenty of Pakistani/North Indian males who married British women and same for vice versa. British women who marries Pakistani/North Indian men, their child still inherits the Indian type R1a and the Indian women who marries British men will inherit their R1b. The half Indian kid that has R1b can still look Indian and mix with another Indian female and their male offsprings would be predominant 3/4 Indian but still carry R1b but if marries British women they still be a 1/4 Indian with R1b.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

R1a is not a Mongoloid haplogroup, for heaven's sake.

Of course it isn't. Only in empty heads of some members here.

[Leto]

R1a is b obviously not Mongoloid but that doesn't mean Mongoloid males carrying R1a are unable to follow their fathers footsteps who mixed with both europoid females and mongoloid females. Why do Turkish have Mongoloid admixture ? it's because their R1a came from central Asian males who were hybrids.

For example I've seen plenty of Pakistani/North Indian males who married British women and same for vice versa. British women who marries Pakistani/North Indian men, their child still inherits the Indian type R1a and the Indian women who marries British men will inherit their R1b. The half Indian kid that has R1b can still look Indian and mix with another Indian female and their male offsprings would be predominant 3/4 Indian but still carry R1b but if marries British women they still be a 1/4 Indian with R1b.
The Turks of Turkey are like 10% Mongoloid on average and R1a is not even the dominant haplo there. Besides, a halogroup doesn't determine your race. There are African-Americans who are R1b and I1, but over 80% SSA autosomally.

[Leto]

Of course it isn't. Only in empty heads of some members here.
Some believe it is a primordial Altaic Türük haplogroup...

[ButlerKing]

The Turks of Turkey are like 10% Mongoloid on average and R1a is not even the dominant haplo there. Besides, a halogroup doesn't determine your race. There are African-Americans who are R1b and I1, but over 80% SSA autosomally.

R1a in Turkish is only 7-14% and 20% in some places. They don't have very high R1a but if most of these R1a came from Central Asia like Kipchak Khagan had claimed than most of them would have definately be tainted with Mongoloid admixtures.

Mongoloid admixture depends ( east turkey is predominated by Kurdish people )
http://i68.tinypic.com/2h5r9z4.jpg


Any R1a in Central Asia Turks ( not Iranic ) after 6th century would have been heavily mixed and Turkish recieved their R1a in 10th-11th century. Just like any R1a admixture dating back 8000 years ago in India would have been heavily South Asian admixed.


A Kyrgyz male with R1a who marries a European women is still a Mongoloid R1a male who marries a European women . So the Turkish that kept emphasizing their R1a heritage must acknolwdge it is not a racially pure R1a is a hybrid R1a. And those ancient burials of Mongoloid males and Europoid females shows their half breed Mongoloid sons did the same thing their scythian father or grandfathers did.

http://img.kbs.co.kr/cms/1tv/sisa/loveasia/view/vod/__icsFiles/artimage/2007/11/06/c_1tc_asia2/11.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Some believe it is a primordial Altaic Türük haplogroup...

This is only a Turkish believe.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

Poles use sanskrit and even do not realize that, other Slavs have only 20% common vocabulary with polish language

all Slavs laugh at polish "prze"/"pshe", but no one knows from where it comes

polish word for excuse me / sorry is przepraszam - pshe prasham

polish word pshe/prze means great, bigger

http://www.indiachildnames.com/name.aspx?name=Prasham
sanskrit word prasham -->
Name Prasham generally means Peace, is of Indian origin, Name Prasham is a Masculine (or Boy) name. Person with name Prasham are mainly Hindu by religion. Name Prasham belongs to rashi Kanya (Virgo) .

and what should do person after quarell etc? - should try to make bigger/greater peace - pshe + prasham = psheprasham / przepraszam

Holy R1thelians

Maybe Rethelites kept it from their mother language of M458 ?

[jackrussell]

Sorry but these Caucasus Turkic people don't fit the description of Kipchak, they look typically similar to georgians, armenians or north caucasus people.

So what's the incomplete description ? I just read the Kipchak wiki, other than the fact they were described with blonde hair, blue eyes with some of them being physically mongoloid, some of them being physically caucasoid I cannot find any other descriptions that can match Kipchak and caucasus turks who have black hair, brow eyes,


:D

If you weren't decidedly monovisioned than it would have been an easier search for you .

Is there any Turkish resources amongs your research references or citations ?

https://www.turktarihim.com/K%C4%B1p%C3%A7aklar.html

[ButlerKing]

:D

If you weren't decidedly monovisioned than it would have been an easier search for you .

Is there any Turkish resources amongs your research references or citations ?

https://www.turktarihim.com/K%C4%B1p%C3%A7aklar.html


i GOOGLE TRANSLATED YOUR LINK BUT i DON'T GET THE POINT.

[ButlerKing]

:D

If you weren't decidedly monovisioned than it would have been an easier search for you .

Is there any Turkish resources amongs your research references or citations ?

https://www.turktarihim.com/K%C4%B1p%C3%A7aklar.html


The ancient Kipchaks looked like this. Some looking Mongoloid, some looking typical Caucasian.

https://t00.deviantart.net/mdYWnP1r7StwegCXFkRbD82X-Hc=/fit-in/700x350/filters:fixed_height(100,100):origin()/pre00/3c5c/th/pre/i/2015/348/2/8/tales_of_yore_by_charcoalfeather-d881esv.png


Or maybe Kipchaks were Mongoloid blonde. Anything is possible that crazy hellhole central Asia

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_gdroq_aO8Zw/SqqoJy-5U5I/AAAAAAAACM4/Tlc9j1Br9oA/s400/45370.jpg
https://www.ut.ee/sites/default/files/12476c73a57e0df154e0962088fe91fdb1497cb3fa11982418 fca1bbb64753e0_0.jpg
https://68.media.tumblr.com/7a5303644a8dfe343619f1b528e845dd/tumblr_og054jRLy11qjdjmoo7_r1_1280.jpg


The pictures I posted fit a much better description than these Caucasus Turks who claim to be Kipchaks lol

http://s9.postimg.org/7rse1gmmn/Balkarmen.jpg

[ButlerKing]

The Turks of Turkey are like 10% Mongoloid on average and R1a is not even the dominant haplo there. Besides, a halogroup doesn't determine your race. There are African-Americans who are R1b and I1, but over 80% SSA autosomally.


So you actually understood what I mean't ? the part that I bold shows you understood what I mean't.

WHY DID YOU SAY THIS -----> Leto: R1a is not a Mongoloid haplogroup, for heaven's sake

You contradict yourself. Anyone who read my first page should understand I never once said R1a is Mongoloid but different regions have different types of admixture in their haplogroups.

[jackrussell]

The ancient Kipchaks looked like this. Some looking Mongoloid, some looking typical Caucasian.

https://t00.deviantart.net/mdYWnP1r7StwegCXFkRbD82X-Hc=/fit-in/700x350/filters:fixed_height(100,100):origin()/pre00/3c5c/th/pre/i/2015/348/2/8/tales_of_yore_by_charcoalfeather-d881esv.png


Or maybe Kipchaks were Mongoloid blonde. Anything is possible that crazy hellhole central Asia

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_gdroq_aO8Zw/SqqoJy-5U5I/AAAAAAAACM4/Tlc9j1Br9oA/s400/45370.jpg
https://www.ut.ee/sites/default/files/12476c73a57e0df154e0962088fe91fdb1497cb3fa11982418 fca1bbb64753e0_0.jpg
https://68.media.tumblr.com/7a5303644a8dfe343619f1b528e845dd/tumblr_og054jRLy11qjdjmoo7_r1_1280.jpg


The pictures I posted fit a much better description than these Caucasus Turks who claim to be Kipchaks lol

http://s9.postimg.org/7rse1gmmn/Balkarmen.jpg


:D

So you have no Turkish contribution to subject matter you research , uh ?

You gonna base your argument on exclusively on info produced by enemies of Turks ?


My suggestion to you is at least make a token effort and find a Turkish sell out expert to concurr with your obviously politically and personally motivated vendetta .

:D


Kaukasian Kipchak Kountry ;)


https://www.altayli.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kipcak-001.jpg

[ButlerKing]

:D

So you have no Turkish contribution to subject matter you research , uh ?

You gonna base your argument on exclusively on info produced by enemies of Turks ?


My suggestion to you is at least make a token effort and find a Turkish sell out expert to concurr with your obviously politically and personally motivated vendetta .

:D


Kaukasian Kipchak Kountry ;)


https://www.altayli.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kipcak-001.jpg


The problem is your Caucasus Turkic people does not neither the description of Kipchaks nor their anthropological types.
Are you telling that the Turkish people deny the physical descriptions of Kipchaks???? Look at Kipchak Khagan he thinks Kipchaks were blonde, blue eyes.

So the question now is who are the Caucasus Turkic like Balkars and Karachay who think of themselves as Kipchaks ????


Facial reconstruction of Kipchak contained and burials
Caucasoid (with some Mongoloid admixture ) and mongoloid ( with some caucasoid admixture )

" According to Ukrainian anthropologists, Kipchaks had racial characteristics of Caucasians and Mongoloids, namely a broad flat face and protruding nose. Researcher E. P. Alekseeva drew attention to the fact that European Kipchak stone images have both Mongoloid and Caucasoid faces. "


Kipchak who look more caucasoid
http://s2.forumimage.ru/uploads/20091029/125682172870747162.jpg

Kipchak who look more mongoloid

http://www.imageup.ru/img181/1559241/kipchak.jpg

[Joso]

The problem is your Caucasus Turkic people does not neither the description of Kipchaks nor their anthropological types.
Are you telling that the Turkish people deny the physical descriptions of Kipchaks???? Look at Kipchak Khagan he thinks Kipchaks were blonde, blue eyes.

So the question now is who are the Caucasus Turkic like Balkars and Karachay who think of themselves as Kipchaks ????


Facial reconstruction of Kipchak contained and burials
Caucasoid (with some Mongoloid admixture ) and mongoloid ( with some caucasoid admixture )

" According to Ukrainian anthropologists, Kipchaks had racial characteristics of Caucasians and Mongoloids, namely a broad flat face and protruding nose. Researcher E. P. Alekseeva drew attention to the fact that European Kipchak stone images have both Mongoloid and Caucasoid faces. "


Kipchak who look more caucasoid
http://s2.forumimage.ru/uploads/20091029/125682172870747162.jpg

Kipchak who look more mongoloid

http://www.imageup.ru/img181/1559241/kipchak.jpg

What you think about this video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjk9GoQ8EvI&t=29s

[ButlerKing]

What you think about this video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjk9GoQ8EvI&t=29s

Another dumb Turkish nationalist video. The video doesn't say Turks are ancestors of Europeans nor did it say P1-M45 was Turkic or proto Turkic. It was just a idiot Turkish youtuber who made the tile like that.

[Joso]

Another dumb Turkish nationalist video. The video doesn't say Turks are ancestors of Europeans nor did it say P1-M45 was Turkic or proto Turkic. It was just a idiot Turkish youtuber who made the tile like that.

The title also says that the proto-turkics are the ancestors of the native Americans and Indians... I think they are right about the native americans or they are not?

[ButlerKing]

The title also says that the proto-turkics are the ancestors of the native Americans and Indians... I think they are right about the native americans or they are not?

They are not. The video doesn't claim Turks are ancestors of Indians.... it's stupid ass Turkish nationalist misinterpreting the meaning.

[Joso]

Another dumb Turkish nationalist video. The video doesn't say Turks are ancestors of Europeans nor did it say P1-M45 was Turkic or proto Turkic. It was just a idiot Turkish youtuber who made the tile like that.

And what about this one?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M43TYldfqzc

[jackrussell]

And what about this one?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M43TYldfqzc

He won't hear you .

Here we have an uppity user with an obvious axe to grind .

I can also give him Inuit Kumuks but he wouldn't take a minute to think .

I can also give him Ukranian Kumuk but he would think " it is stupid Turkish Nationalism " .

:D

I am a Kumuk Kipchak Kabardian descend but he thinks I am lying too .

:D

My nostril hairs are ginger but he probably conclude that I must have snorted dry blood.

:)

[Vlatko Vukovic]

The languages of R1a such as (Indian languages, Balto-Slavic languages, Iranian languages) are NOT agglutinative, which proves that these people (who are from common linguistical origin) are NOT related to agglutinative-speakers of Turkic language.
Who have anything in brain he will conclude this realistic fact. R1a-Z93 is proto-Turkic indeed, they participated in Turkic ethnogenesis, but those people spoke IE language and there is no doubt about these facts.

[jackrussell]

The languages of R1a such as (Indian languages, Balto-Slavic languages, Iranian languages) are NOT agglutinative, which proves that these people (who are from common linguistical origin) are NOT related to agglutinative-speakers of Turkic language.
Who have anything in brain he will conclude this realistic fact. R1a-Z93 is proto-Turkic indeed, they participated in Turkic ethnogenesis, but those people spoke IE language and there is no doubt about these facts.

:D

There is always doubt about facts ; to do otherwise it's not Scientific but sheer and stupid Dogmatic .

[Vlatko Vukovic]

:D

There is always doubt about facts ; to do otherwise it's not Scientific but sheer and stupid Dogmatic .

These doubts have to be proven again by other facts. Not just speaking in empty.

[Joso]

He won't hear you .

Here we have an uppity user with an obvious axe to grind .

I can also give him Inuit Kumuks but he wouldn't take a minute to think .

I can also give him Ukranian Kumuk but he would think " it is stupid Turkish Nationalism " .

:D

I am a Kumuk Kipchak Kabardian descend but he thinks I am lying too .

:D

My nostril hairs are ginger but he probably conclude that I must have snorted dry blood.

:)

About the Indians and Europeans i don't know but i think the turkics are really the ancestors of the native Americans because there many similarities in their culture

[jackrussell]

These doubts have to be proven again by other facts. Not just speaking in empty.

Facts are all over the Turkic Academia all over Eurasia .

You do need to speak the lingo of Kuman and Kipchaks and some other Caucasian tribes .

Problem with your premises is that it also discounts the main resource for Kipchak Studies .

You haven't read any Kipchaks research papers in Turkish , have you ?

:D

[jackrussell]

About the Indians and Europeans i don't know but i think the turkics are really the ancestors of the native Americans because there many similarities in their culture


Migration out of Asia was gradual and omni-directional ; tribes migrated in all directions possible .

There are Inuits with name Kumuk in Canada ; certainly bearing resemblance to my nephews and nieces .

There is the issue of Melungeons too .

:D

But lets hash together now ;) this a European forum where an Indian with a flag of Saint George in his avatar can tell you whether Turk is this or that ; all without ever asking a Turk .

:D

Saint George comes from Asia Minor and Tac Mahal is Turkish .


I have to feed my cat mirmir mirmirovic . :D

[Joso]

Migration out of Asia was gradual and omni-directional ; tribes migrated in all directions possible .

There are Inuits with name Kumuk in Canada ; certainly bearing resemblance to my nephews and nieces .

There is the issue of Melungeons too .

:D

But lets hash together now ;) this a European forum where an Indian with a flag of Saint George in his avatar can tell you whether Turk is this or that ; all without ever asking a Turk .

:D

Saint George comes from Asia Minor and Tac Mahal is Turkish .


I have to feed my cat mirmir mirmirovic . :D

About the similarities, i think the biggest simimilarity is the native American shamanism and the turkic Tengriism. But there are a lot of other similarities too

[jackrussell]

About the similarities, i think the biggest simimilarity is the native American shamanism and the turkic Tengriism. But there are a lot of other similarities too

It is believed that the Maya language developed from Proto-Mayan dating from minimum 2,000 BC. It then diffused into several branches known as Yucatecan, Huastecan, Cholan, Qhanjobalan, Mamean and Quechuan. All these Mayan dialects are agglutinative languages and can be shown to pertain to the Asiatic, Altaic language group. Here are some Maya words which are very similar to Turkish. The Maya word is given in bold and the corresponding Turkish word is in red within brackets (5).

Leader: Ahau (Agha), Ax: Baat (Balta), Servant, Low: Ashac (Uşak, Aşağı), A lot, Strong: Tchac (Çok), Pine tree: Tcha (Çam), Difficult: Tchetun (Çetin), Augment, Climb: Tchich (Çık), Left handed: Tchol (Çolak, Solak), Boulder: Kaa (Kaya), Bird: Kutz (Kuş), Inside: İçil (İçinde), Female: İş (Dişi), Belt: Kaşnak (Kasnak), Day: Kin (Gün), Sun: Kiniş (Güneş), Person: Kişe (Kişi), Old man: Koça (Koca), Slave: Kul (Kul), Mother: Naa (Ana), Be: Ol (Ol), Stay clean: Tamazkal (Temiz-kal), Inundation: Tosh (Taşkın), Hill: Tepek (Tepe), Stone: Tetl (Taş), Gather: Top (Topla), Dust: Toz (Toz), Full: Tul (Tolu, Dolu), Filled: Tulan (Dolgun), Deep: Tup (Dip), Pebble: Tzekel (Çakıl), Scabies: Ueez (Uyuz), Urinate: Uiş (İşe), Reach: Ul (Ulaş), Bore: Uy (Oy), Humid: Yash (Yaş), Green: Yashil (Yeşil). Summer: Yashkin (Yaz-günü).

These 37 words form a small sample indicating the relationship of the main Maya Yucatec language with Turkish. Since there have been no physical interaction in the last two millennia between Asiatic Turks and Central American Maya, these words cannot be loanwords. They have to stem from a common root language, which I have labeled as the Proto-language.




A solar day in Mayan is “kin” and is “gün” in Turkish, while the sun in Mayan is “kinish” and is “günesh” in Turkish. Such similarities can certainly not be coincidental.



you may like this page :

http://www.astroset.com/bireysel_gelisim/ancient/a28.htm

[Joso]

It is believed that the Maya language developed from Proto-Mayan dating from minimum 2,000 BC. It then diffused into several branches known as Yucatecan, Huastecan, Cholan, Qhanjobalan, Mamean and Quechuan. All these Mayan dialects are agglutinative languages and can be shown to pertain to the Asiatic, Altaic language group. Here are some Maya words which are very similar to Turkish. The Maya word is given in bold and the corresponding Turkish word is in red within brackets (5).

Leader: Ahau (Agha), Ax: Baat (Balta), Servant, Low: Ashac (Uşak, Aşağı), A lot, Strong: Tchac (Çok), Pine tree: Tcha (Çam), Difficult: Tchetun (Çetin), Augment, Climb: Tchich (Çık), Left handed: Tchol (Çolak, Solak), Boulder: Kaa (Kaya), Bird: Kutz (Kuş), Inside: İçil (İçinde), Female: İş (Dişi), Belt: Kaşnak (Kasnak), Day: Kin (Gün), Sun: Kiniş (Güneş), Person: Kişe (Kişi), Old man: Koça (Koca), Slave: Kul (Kul), Mother: Naa (Ana), Be: Ol (Ol), Stay clean: Tamazkal (Temiz-kal), Inundation: Tosh (Taşkın), Hill: Tepek (Tepe), Stone: Tetl (Taş), Gather: Top (Topla), Dust: Toz (Toz), Full: Tul (Tolu, Dolu), Filled: Tulan (Dolgun), Deep: Tup (Dip), Pebble: Tzekel (Çakıl), Scabies: Ueez (Uyuz), Urinate: Uiş (İşe), Reach: Ul (Ulaş), Bore: Uy (Oy), Humid: Yash (Yaş), Green: Yashil (Yeşil). Summer: Yashkin (Yaz-günü).

These 37 words form a small sample indicating the relationship of the main Maya Yucatec language with Turkish. Since there have been no physical interaction in the last two millennia between Asiatic Turks and Central American Maya, these words cannot be loanwords. They have to stem from a common root language, which I have labeled as the Proto-language.




A solar day in Mayan is “kin” and is “gün” in Turkish, while the sun in Mayan is “kinish” and is “günesh” in Turkish. Such similarities can certainly not be coincidental.



you may like this page :

http://www.astroset.com/bireysel_gelisim/ancient/a28.htm

Thanks for the information, very interesting, i found this: http://www.turkishculture.org/literature/language/turkish-language-americans-459.htm?type=1

[Proto-Shaman]

To make it clear. These are the facts:

https://i.imgur.com/hCt51hJ.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/ZYAqwmZ.png

[Kouros]

Scythians = Proto-indo-Europeans

[Proto-Shaman]

R1a in India predated any Aryan invasion especially some sick believe of coming from Mongoloid admixed Scytho-Turkic. The highest of R1a concentration in the world can be found in North India reaching 82% and none of them have Mongoloid DNA unlike Turkish population who have 7-15% R1a but have significant Mongoloid admixture. The gypsies and Indian migrant who spread R1a in Southern Arabia and Europe would also all be heavily South Asian admixed. There's no such thing as Indians with R1a looking like east Europeans.

R1a in Southeast Asia is well correlated with South Asian mtDNA. All western eurasian haplogroups in Southeast Asia were contributed by South Asian population. Also all Southeast Asian have evidence of South Asian admixture

http://i60.tinypic.com/r0o2v6.png

Now for Turkey they have evidence of East Asian admixture from autosomal, Y-DNA, mtDNA. That's because the Central Asian Turks carrying every western or eastern haplogroups would have all been hybridsized and racially mixed to begin with. An autosomal map already proves of your admixture. So a Turkish person with R1a could have some ancestors who look like a Vietnamese guy or more accurately a Kyrgyz male.

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=37103&d=1378454779
Kipchak Kyrgyz DC2 (descent cluster) related to R1a1a1b2 (R1a-Z93). The movement started in Central Asia.
https://i.imgur.com/myqn9XN.jpg

Stop your Out of India bullshit :whistle:xD

[ButlerKing]

Kipchak Kyrgyz DC2 (descent cluster) related to R1a1a1b2 (R1a-Z93). The movement started in Central Asia.
https://i.imgur.com/myqn9XN.jpg

Stop your Out of India bullshit :whistle:xD

Lol so you finally replied..... lol TURKS thinks R1a is proto-Turks , Turks think R1b1 is proto-Turk..... what's next ? Haplogroup E is proto-Turk ???

Don't forget Kyrgyz with R1a-Z93 is due to founder effect and lack mutations where Indians has many mutations. Keep dreaming your R1a proto-Turk nonsense :thumb001:

[Nanushka]

The problem is your Caucasus Turkic people does not neither the description of Kipchaks nor their anthropological types.
Are you telling that the Turkish people deny the physical descriptions of Kipchaks???? Look at Kipchak Khagan he thinks Kipchaks were blonde, blue eyes.

So the question now is who are the Caucasus Turkic like Balkars and Karachay who think of themselves as Kipchaks ????


It is still possible to get mixed even in a land of fair people like northern Caucasia. Apparently arab and persian genes added to the gene pool of ours and we can't deny it but the percentages are considerably low compared to southern caucasia. Check this one out:

72956

He happens to be my cousin (uploaded with his permission) and all the north caucasians around me are mostly of this phenotype, but ofc we may get 'foreign' effect too, its inevitable. We are somehow near middle-east and you are not. So looking at some photos and determining that we lack the Cuman-Kipchak typology is simply not true at all

[Nanushka]

TURKS thinks R1a is proto-Turks , Turks think R1b1 is proto-Turk..... what's next ? Haplogroup E is proto-Turk ???


It's not only Turks, some foreign scholars like A.Klyosov (2010) thinks the same about R1b: ''Europe became Türkic-speaking with the arrival of the people carrying R1b haplogroup (the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC), and that lasted until the middle of the 1st millennium BC (3,000-2,500 years BP)''

About R1a he says ''In this study we assume that R1a1 spoke Proto-IE languages from the beginning of the R1a1 tribe 21000 ± 3000 years before present, in South Siberia, otherwise we drive to complete uncertainty. Future studies would show whether Proto-IE flexive languages were the original languages of R1a1, or acquired languages, and if so, from whom.''

So he assumes like other scholars did =)

[ButlerKing]

It is still possible to get mixed even in a land of fair people like northern Caucasia. Apparently arab and persian genes added to the gene pool of ours and we can't deny it but the percentages are considerably low compared to southern caucasia. Check this one out:

72956

He happens to be my cousin (uploaded with his permission) and all the north caucasians around me are mostly of this phenotype, but ofc we may get 'foreign' effect too, its inevitable. We are somehow near middle-east and you are not. So looking at some photos and determining that we lack the Cuman-Kipchak typology is simply not true at all


So you admit you're not pure Kipchaks, you claimed arab and Persian genes were added.
You showed me a blonde north Caucasian which is not a common trait. Most North Caucasus have dark brown hair. So totally different from the Kipchaks.


Show me a picture of north Caucasians with those phenotypes in group pictures.

[Proto-Shaman]

Don't forget Kyrgyz with R1a-Z93 is due to founder effect and lack mutations where Indians has many mutations. Keep dreaming your R1a proto-Turk nonsense :thumb001:
Omg :picard2: it is so senseless to discuss with you.

1. You don't even understand the meaning of being effected by the founder :clap2:
2. Highest R1a diversity is not equal to anything comparable to what you are trying to imply, non-Aryan R1a in India is of pre-Neolithic origins. Get it? :picard2:
3. Now, ADD this map to your Bollywood founder effect archive...
https://i.imgur.com/JFBUl6m.jpg

... https://i.imgur.com/Xaq53ms.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Omg :picard2: it is so senseless to discuss with you.

1. You don't even understand the meaning of being effected by the founder :clap2:
2. Highest R1a diversity is not equal to anything comparable to what you are trying to imply, non-Aryan R1a in India is of pre-Neolithic origins. Get it? :picard2:
3. Now, ADD this map to your Bollywood founder effect archive...
https://i.imgur.com/JFBUl6m.jpg

... https://i.imgur.com/Xaq53ms.jpg

Have you though maybe your map is oudated and doesn't shows other populations with high R-Z93

R1a1a1b2 (R-Z93) (Asia)


R1a1a1b2 [R1a1a2* (Underhill (2014))] (R-Z93) is most common (>30%) in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia, cropping up in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (1–8%).[51]

R1a1a1b2a* (R-Z2125): This subgroup occurs at highest frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (>40%). At a frequency of >10% it is also observed in other Afghan ethnic groups and in some populations in the Caucasus and Iran.

[51]
Relative frequency of R-M434 to R-M17
Region People N R-M17 R-M434
Number Freq. (%) Number Freq. (%)
Pakistan Baloch 60 9 15% 5 8%
Pakistan Makrani 60 15 25% 4 7%
Middle East Oman 121 11 9% 3 2.5%
Pakistan Sindhi 134 65 49% 2 1.5%
Table only shows positive sets from N = 3667 derived from 60 Eurasian populations sample.[3]

R-M434 is a subclade of Z2125. It was detected in 14 people (out of 3667 people tested) all in a restricted geographical range from Pakistan to Oman. This likely reflects a recent mutation event in Pakistan (Underhill 2009).

R1a1b2a1* (R-M560 is very rare and was only observed in four samples: two Burushaski speakers (north Pakistan), one Hazara (Afghanistan), and one Iranian Azerbaijani.[51]

R1a1b2a2* (R-M780) occurs at high frequency in South Asia: India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Himalayas. The group also occurs at >3% in some Iranian populations and is present at >30% in Roma from Croatia and Hungary.[51]

[Proto-Shaman]

You showed me a blonde north Caucasian which is not a common trait. Most North Caucasus have dark brown hair. So totally different from the Kipchaks.

Show me a picture of north Caucasians with those phenotypes in group pictures.
Kipchak from North Caucasus with R1a Z2123 and Kipchak look:
https://i.imgur.com/JbYdq2j.png

And this Kipchak G2a3b guy looks like the medieval Kipchak reconstruction: http://suyun.info/index.php?LANG=RUS&p=06082013

http://suyun.info/userfiles/image037.png
http://suyun.info/userfiles/image035.png

[Proto-Shaman]

Have you though maybe your map is oudated and doesn't shows other populations with high R-Z93

R1a1a1b2 (R-Z93) (Asia)


R1a1a1b2 [R1a1a2* (Underhill (2014))] (R-Z93) is most common (>30%) in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia, cropping up in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (1–8%).[51]

R1a1a1b2a* (R-Z2125): This subgroup occurs at highest frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (>40%). At a frequency of >10% it is also observed in other Afghan ethnic groups and in some populations in the Caucasus and Iran.

[51]
Relative frequency of R-M434 to R-M17
Region People N R-M17 R-M434
Number Freq. (%) Number Freq. (%)
Pakistan Baloch 60 9 15% 5 8%
Pakistan Makrani 60 15 25% 4 7%
Middle East Oman 121 11 9% 3 2.5%
Pakistan Sindhi 134 65 49% 2 1.5%
Table only shows positive sets from N = 3667 derived from 60 Eurasian populations sample.[3]

R-M434 is a subclade of Z2125. It was detected in 14 people (out of 3667 people tested) all in a restricted geographical range from Pakistan to Oman. This likely reflects a recent mutation event in Pakistan (Underhill 2009).

R1a1b2a1* (R-M560 is very rare and was only observed in four samples: two Burushaski speakers (north Pakistan), one Hazara (Afghanistan), and one Iranian Azerbaijani.[51]

R1a1b2a2* (R-M780) occurs at high frequency in South Asia: India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Himalayas. The group also occurs at >3% in some Iranian populations and is present at >30% in Roma from Croatia and Hungary.[51]
Butlerking you are mentally disturbed. I just posted the latest map of one of the R1a subclades (paragroup Z93* which the INDIANS lack!), you even copy-pasted text from the same study the map was from :rotfl:

[Bobby Martnen]

R1ETHELITE TUR1KS!!!

[Proto-Shaman]

@ButtHurtKing

A Kipchak with haplogroup C

https://i.imgur.com/VeYsVl3.png

[ButlerKing]

Kipchak from North Caucasus with R1a Z2123 and Kipchak look:
https://i.imgur.com/JbYdq2j.png

And this Kipchak G2a3b guy looks like the medieval Kipchak reconstruction: http://suyun.info/index.php?LANG=RUS&p=06082013

http://suyun.info/userfiles/image037.png
http://suyun.info/userfiles/image035.png


And here I though you said they were blonde hair, blue eyes.


Anthropology


" According to Ukrainian anthropologists, Kipchaks had racial characteristics of Caucasians and Mongoloids, namely a broad flat face and protruding nose. Researcher E. P. Alekseeva drew attention to the fact that European Kipchak stone images have both Mongoloid and Caucasoid faces. However, in her opinion, most of the Kipchaks, who settled in Georgia in the first half of the 12th century, were predominantly Caucasoid in appearance with some admixture of Mongoloid traits. They were already joined by Cumans. In the course of the Turkic expansion they migrated into Siberia and further into the Trans-Volga region.[3] "

I don't what original Kipchak look like or what after the Kipchaks later looked like when they settled in Caucasus but you can sure they would also have look mixed with Mongoloid.

Kipchak look? How do we know if those North Caucasus people are what Kipchak look like.
Facial reconstructions shows Kipchaks also look like these.



Looks more Mongoloid than even those Chinese/Asian mixed breed.
http://s018.radikal.ru/i506/1202/ca/735016289912.jpg
http://www.imageup.ru/img181/1559241/kipchak.jpg


As for phenotypes even these mix breed much a better description than your swarthy typical caucasus looks.


This kid is 1/8 white, 4/8 Mexican, and 3/4 Korean...
https://i.imgur.com/5nBUAAp.jpg

1/4 Filipino...1/4 Japanese
https://i.imgur.com/zwPrCGV.jpg

1/4 Filipino
https://i.imgur.com/1frLqNa.jpg

3/8 Chinese
https://i.imgur.com/Chx441H.jpg

1/4 Filipino, rest is Jewish...
https://i.imgur.com/aY4ICh9.jpg

1/4 Indonesian
https://i.imgur.com/uqM0Khy.jpg

1/2 Filipino, 1/2 Iranian
https://i.imgur.com/34nwzIN.jpg

1/4 Filipino...
https://i.imgur.com/EXau8IB.jpg

Another 1/4 Filipino...
https://i.imgur.com/FdQhEZD.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Butlerking you are mentally disturbed. I just posted the latest map of one of the R1a subclades (paragroup Z93* which the INDIANS lack!), you even copy-pasted text from the same study the map was from :rotfl:

So what's the point of your Mongoloid Paragroup Z93* ? Also what's of your Jackie Chan look alike Turks saying " Turan is watching YOU !... and Turand WILL find YOU ! "

Are you claiming proto-Turks were Mongoloid or Caucasoid ? proto-Turks were Mongoloid so they were not R1a people.

R1a in Turks are all contaminated by Mongolian admixture.

[ButlerKing]

R1ETHELITE TUR1KS!!!

R1a elite Turks of central Asian Mongoloid origin.

[Proto-Shaman]

So what's the point of your Mongoloid Paragroup Z93* ?
That it came from East European/West Siberian Z645.

https://i.imgur.com/XNYqay2.jpg


Are you claiming proto-Turks were Mongoloid or Caucasoid ?
both.


proto-Turks were Mongoloid so they were not R1a people.

R1a in Turks are all contaminated by Mongolian admixture.
How is that possible? :blink:

[Nanushka]

So you admit you're not pure Kipchaks, you claimed arab and Persian genes were added.
You showed me a blonde north Caucasian which is not a common trait. Most North Caucasus have dark brown hair. So totally different from the Kipchaks.

Show me a picture of north Caucasians with those phenotypes in group pictures.

It's a common trait and I know it better than you ofc. I dont think that I have to prove anything but you will find some typical northern caucasian pics down here and they do look Kipchak:

73015
73016
73017

Kipchak Hakan also gave nice photos from NC, they do look like my people too. That the northerner mixed with the southerner due to islam (from lowland daghestan, azerbaijan etc) in early times as well as with ppl from georgia armenia etc, and even encounters with mongols didnt affect our phenotype that much, we still keep our original look to a great extent

[ButlerKing]

That it came from East European/West Siberian Z645.

https://i.imgur.com/XNYqay2.jpg


both.


How is that possible? :blink:


Kipchak Hakan, are you claiming R1a came from Mongoloid, Europoid or Mongoloid-Europoid ?

All R1a from Central Asia are mongoloid admixed just like all R1a from South Asian are ASI admixed. Just what the heck you are trying to claim ?

[Mingle]

Kipchak Hakan, are you claiming R1a came from Mongoloid, Europoid or Mongoloid-Europoid ?

All R1a from Central Asia are mongoloid admixed just like all R1a from South Asian are ASI admixed. Just what the heck you are trying to claim ?

He claims it came from Mongoloid-Europoid people.

[ButlerKing]

It's a common trait and I know it better than you ofc. I dont think that I have to prove anything but you will find some typical northern caucasian pics down here and they do look Kipchak:

73015
73016
73017

Kipchak Hakan also gave nice photos from NC, they do look like my people too. That the northerner mixed with the southerner due to islam (from lowland daghestan, azerbaijan etc) in early times as well as with ppl from georgia armenia etc, and even encounters with mongols didnt affect our phenotype that much, we still keep our original look to a great extent


Lol You showed me pictures of people wearing hats covering their hair and showed me a few having more light brown hair.

NONE OF THE PEOPLE IN YOUR PICTURE HAS BLONDE HAIR.

Kipchaks were described with blonde hair, blue eyes. How can anyone claim your Caucasus Turkic are Kipchaks when you have even less blonde hair than even Europeans and even less than these Uralic Mongoloid Hybrids and Paleo-Siberian Mongoloids.

https://pre00.deviantart.net/de54/th/pre/f/2014/252/f/4/blonde_hair_map_by_schrodinger_excidium-d7yjja3.png

Lol At this rate even a blonde Uralic is more closer to a example of Kipchak than your blondeless north caucacus turkic hahahaha. DON'T GET ME WRONG...... I'm not claiming Kipchaks were Mongoloid but your Caucasus Turkic look no different than any other Caucasus.


http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/rf-dudinka-06.jpg
https://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=44343&d=1391920298
https://img.index.hu/cikkepek/kultur/galeria/me18.jpg
https://68.media.tumblr.com/7a5303644a8dfe343619f1b528e845dd/tumblr_og054jRLy11qjdjmoo7_r1_1280.jpg

[ButlerKing]

He claims it came from Mongoloid-Europoid people.


If it's Mongoloid-Europoid than why don't North Indians shows Mongoloid DNA ? It's only Mongoloid-Europoid because Turks themselves are mixed as central Asians.

[Leto]

Some Turkic speakers assimilated some IE-speakers who were R1a. As simple as that. Just like we have N1c carriers who speak Slavic and Baltic languages.

[Proto-Shaman]

Some Turkic speakers assimilated some IE-speakers who were R1a. As simple as that. Just like we have N1c carriers who speak Slavic and Baltic languages.
That's for sure, you have read too much eupedia.

[Proto-Shaman]

If it's Mongoloid-Europoid than why don't North Indians shows Mongoloid DNA ? It's only Mongoloid-Europoid because Turks themselves are mixed as central Asians.
That's not true. North India and Bangladesh is full of Mongoloids. Do you need glasses?

[ButlerKing]

That's not true. North India and Bangladesh is full of Mongoloids. Do you need glasses?


Sorry it's only the tribal that have some Mongoloid. General North Indians and most of Bengal lack Mongoloid admixture.

http://www.harappadna.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/caste3.jpg

Those Tibeto-Burmese migrants that came from China, Burma, Tibet are mostly haplogroup O. They aren't native but head hunter savages nomads with a similar tradition to your Mongoloid Turks.

[Massagetae]

http://suyun.info/userfiles/image037.png


Kinda reminds me of Ugur Dundar. Man in the picture has same eye color as my brother.

https://s13.postimg.org/77uckgk9j/ugur-dundar.png (https://postimages.org/)

[Leto]

And this Kipchak G2a3b guy looks like the medieval Kipchak reconstruction: http://suyun.info/index.php?LANG=RUS&p=06082013

http://suyun.info/userfiles/image037.png

Is he a full Bashkir? Looks more European than many Tatars. Doesn't look Turkic to me.

[ButlerKing]

Is he a full Bashkir? Looks more European than many Tatars. Doesn't look Turkic to me.


He is a North Caucasus person for properly a Balkar or Karachay. Many Tatar are Turkified Slavs to begin with.

[jackrussell]

He is a North Caucasus person for properly a Balkar or Karachay. Many Tatar are Turkified Slavs to begin with.

So Karachay and Balkar as well as Tatar are just Turkified Turks , eh ?

:D

Sorry but you belong in Moronia too .

:D

[Leto]

He is a North Caucasus person for properly a Balkar or Karachay. Many Tatar are Turkified Slavs to begin with.
The description says he's from a Bashkir clan.

Tatars are not Turkified Slavs, but a mix of Volga Finnics and Bulgars.

[jackrussell]

The description says he's from a Bashkir clan.

Tatars are not Turkified Slavs, but a mix of Volga Finnics and Bulgars.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zx_Lu-Hj3ac



;)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CV2Giboo94

[jackrussell]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZpxVDqfTlM

[jackrussell]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-6SaA6Rsik

[ButlerKing]

So Karachay and Balkar as well as Tatar are just Turkified Turks , eh ?

:D

Sorry but you belong in Moronia too .

:D

Yes, because there was a ancient/medieval population that existed in the area of Tatars, Balkars, Karachay and those people spoke Indo-Europeans, Northwest Caucasian languages not Turkic languages.
Modern day Tatars, Balkars, Karachay are nothing more but Turkofied people with some Turkic admixture.

[ButlerKing]

The description says he's from a Bashkir clan.

Tatars are not Turkified Slavs, but a mix of Volga Finnics and Bulgars.

I don't know what Volga Finnics are but the Bulgars were partially Mongoloid.

[jackrussell]

Yes, because there was a ancient/medieval population that existed in the area of Tatars, Balkars, Karachay and those people spoke Indo-Europeans, Northwest Caucasian languages not Turkic languages.
Modern day Tatars, Balkars, Karachay are nothing more but Turkofied people with some Turkic admixture.

Do you speak any Caucasian Languages ?

I do a speak few .


:D

Have you any idea how childish your reasoning and assertion sounds ?


Millions of Turks never discovered it but you , on a forum , done it all .

You solved the mystery of Turks !!!

:D

Go to Karachay and Balkar or Tataristan and tell them that they are not Turks but Turkified Caucasians .

:D

They will either humour you by laughing at your ideas or they will just teach you some manners .



Go to Moronia . I mean Greece and they will love you and will let you have a medal .

[ButlerKing]

Do you speak any Caucasian Languages ?

I do a speak few .


:D

Have you any idea how childish your reasoning and assertion sounds ?


Millions of Turks never discovered it but you , on a forum , done it all .

You solved the mystery of Turks !!!

:D

Go to Karachay and Balkar or Tataristan and tell them that they are not Turks but Turkified Caucasians .

:D

They will either humour you by laughing at your ideas or they will just teach you some manners .



Go to Moronia . I mean Greece and they will love you and will let you have a medal .


Caucasus people and Karachay, Balkar do not differ in DNA both of them are Caucasus, west Asian with small-some European DNA

[Yaglakar]

Butlerking look how Turkics have enriched Indian political organization and state foundation :rolleyes:

https://i.imgur.com/ZsHKHOv.png
https://i.imgur.com/iZnQLVv.png

Babur - the founder of Mughal Empire:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Babur_of_India.jpg

[ButlerKing]

Turkish user Ilbilge https://www.theapricity.com/forum/member.php?20269-Ilbilge

She had thumbed 12 times. Also she claims to be real Scythian descent on her profile.


She thumb me down 12+ times

[ButlerKing]

Butlerking look how Turkics have enriched Indian political organization and state foundation :rolleyes:

https://i.imgur.com/ZsHKHOv.png
https://i.imgur.com/iZnQLVv.png

Babur - the founder of Mughal Empire:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Babur_of_India.jpg

They all assimilated into superior Indian culture and identified as Indians. Indian culture is too powerful that all Turkic rulers eventually identified as Indians.

[ButlerKing]

Babur - the founder of Mughal Empire:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Babur_of_India.jpg

In your picture he looks like a Mongoloid-Europoid but no date is given

However in this picture " Babur and Humayun Persian style painting, c. 1650 "

He looked like a pure Mongoloid ( although he wouldn't be genetically )
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Babur_and_Humayun.jpg

[Yaglakar]

In your picture he looks like a Mongoloid-Europoid but no date is given

Using your logic Muhammad and his disciples were Mongoloid:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Medieval_Persian_manuscript_Muhammad_leads_Abraham _Moses_Jesus.jpg
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/Mohammed_Edinb_13thC.jpg

This style of miniature paintings came from the East (China) and was adopted by Turks (mainly Uighurs). It appeared in Middle East and India following Turkic migrations and conquests. Paintings depict dominant socio-political and cultural trends NOT actual people the way they physically appeared. The same thing goes for Scythian artefacts found in burials. Great majority of Scythian art was crafted by Greeks with Scythian natural world motives in Greek image. That is why you see retards on this forum posting Scythian artefacts that appear to be depicting "white" people.

[Pahli]

Using your logic Muhammad and his disciples were Mongoloid:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Medieval_Persian_manuscript_Muhammad_leads_Abraham _Moses_Jesus.jpg
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/Mohammed_Edinb_13thC.jpg

This style of miniature paintings came from the East (China) and was adopted by Turks (mainly Uighurs). It appeared in Middle East and India following Turkic migrations and conquests. Paintings depict dominant socio-political and cultural trends NOT actual people the way they physically appeared. The same thing goes for Scythian artefacts found in burials. Great majority of Scythian art was crafted by Greeks with Scythian natural world motives in Greek image. That is why you see retards on this forum posting Scythian artefacts that appear to be depicting "white" people.

I'm pretty sure those artefacts depict what they should, regardless of what influence it had, if they were mongoloid then they obviously wouldn't depict themselves as whites.

But you're right about the miniatures, they are heavily influenced by the Chinese;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_miniature

[ButlerKing]

Using your logic Muhammad and his disciples were Mongoloid:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Medieval_Persian_manuscript_Muhammad_leads_Abraham _Moses_Jesus.jpg
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/Mohammed_Edinb_13thC.jpg

This style of miniature paintings came from the East (China) and was adopted by Turks (mainly Uighurs). It appeared in Middle East and India following Turkic migrations and conquests. Paintings depict dominant socio-political and cultural trends NOT actual people the way they physically appeared. The same thing goes for Scythian artefacts found in burials. Great majority of Scythian art was crafted by Greeks with Scythian natural world motives in Greek image. That is why you see retards on this forum posting Scythian artefacts that appear to be depicting "white" people.

NO ONE would ever draw pictures of people that they look nothing alike. The reason why those miniatures of Arabs look Mongoloid because it was drawn by Turkic Mongoloids themselves so they draw people with facial features similar to themselves.

For example the images of these people originated from Golestan of Iran.

http://www.payvand.com/news/05/may/shahnameh-detail.jpg


And those paintings today originated from the same area where Turks have these physical features

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3001/2759029152_2a6c9d43e8.jpg
https://iranian.com/NaderDavoodi/2004/August/Azadi/Images/2.jpg

[Yaglakar]

I'm pretty sure those artefacts depict what they should, regardless of what influence it had, if they were mongoloid then they obviously wouldn't depict themselves as whites.

But you're right about the miniatures, they are heavily influenced by the Chinese;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_miniature

They did not look like today's Eastern or Western Europeans. Eastern Scythians were heavily mixed, western ones less so, but that admixture would make them look quite distinct from East European forest populations.

"In the recent two years new aDNA tests were made on various ancient samples across Eurasia, among them two from Scythian burials. This time the modern techniques of SNPs (in comparison to STRs in earlier tests) were in use. The Iron Age Scythian samples from the Volga region and European Steppes appear neither closely related to Eastern Europeans nor South- and Central Asians. "

"These early studies have been elaborated by an increasing number of studies by Russian scholars. Conclusions which might be drawn thus far, from an mtDNA perspective, are (i) an early, Bronze Age mixture of both west and east Eurasian lineages, with western lineages being found far to the East, but not vice versa; (ii) an apparent reversal by Iron Age times, with increasing presence of East Eurasian lineages in the western steppe;"

The great majority of Scythian art (especially the complex-sophisticated art you see on the internet) was crafted by GREEKS. This is acknowledged by practically the entire academia.

[Pahli]

They did not look like today's Eastern or Western Europeans. Eastern Scythians were heavily mixed, western ones less so, but that admixture would make them look quite distinct from East European forest populations.

"In the recent two years new aDNA tests were made on various ancient samples across Eurasia, among them two from Scythian burials. This time the modern techniques of SNPs (in comparison to STRs in earlier tests) were in use. The Iron Age Scythian samples from the Volga region and European Steppes appear neither closely related to Eastern Europeans nor South- and Central Asians. "

"These early studies have been elaborated by an increasing number of studies by Russian scholars. Conclusions which might be drawn thus far, from an mtDNA perspective, are (i) an early, Bronze Age mixture of both west and east Eurasian lineages, with western lineages being found far to the East, but not vice versa; (ii) an apparent reversal by Iron Age times, with increasing presence of East Eurasian lineages in the western steppe;"

The great majority of Scythian art (especially the complex-sophisticated art you see on the internet) was crafted by GREEKS. This is acknowledged by practically the entire academia.

Many of those artifacts were found in Western Scythian kurgans and areas, Eastern Scythians were not known by the Greeks at all, they perfectly depicted those Scythians they met, those that were dominantly Caucasoid.

[ButlerKing]

I'm pretty sure those artefacts depict what they should, regardless of what influence it had, if they were mongoloid then they obviously wouldn't depict themselves as whites.

But you're right about the miniatures, they are heavily influenced by the Chinese;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_miniature

That's because they were drawn by Mongoloid Iranian-Turks who looked similar to the Chinese.

It has nothing to do with the fact that those art influenced by Chinese. Although is influenced by Chinese only the Iranian-Turks drawn their arts that style because it suits their own facial features

Iran 17th cent Iranian tile Palace face. A bit weird to tell me these facial features have nothing to do with the Mongoloid-Turkic ethnic groups in Iran.

http://c8.alamy.com/comp/BF3NNN/iran-17th-cent-iranian-tile-palace-face-painting-BF3NNN.jpg


An Iranian-Turk Jackie Chan lookalike
http://www.bdfutbol.com/i/j/98464.jpg

[Yaglakar]

Many of those artifacts were found in Western Scythian kurgans and areas, Eastern Scythians were not known by the Greeks at all, they perfectly depicted those Scythians they met, those that were dominantly Caucasoid.

"As the Scythians came in contact with the Greeks at the Western end of their area, their artwork influenced Greek art, and was influenced by it; also many pieces were made by Greek craftsmen for Scythian customers. Although we know that goldsmith work was an important area of Ancient Greek art, very little has survived from the core of the Greek world, and finds from Scythian burials represent the largest group of pieces we now have. The mixture of the two cultures in terms of the background of the artists, the origin of the forms and styles, and the possible history of the objects, gives rise to complex questions." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian_art

“While such objects could conceivably be examined from the perspective of both their makers and their different consumers or audience groups, in classical archaeology the focus has in general been on the original creators-the itinerant workshops of architects and marble carvers building tombs for the dynasties in Asia Minor, the classical Greek sculptors and painters who had designed the famous prototypes of the copies or variations adorning Roman interiors and gardens, and, in the case of Greco-Scythian art, the Greek artisans hired by the nomadic chiefs of the Black Sea steppe to recreate indigenous types of drinking-vessel, jewelry, and weaponry according to superior representational possibilities of Greek art. The hypothetical constellation of Greek master jewelers plying their craft for tribal leaders is almost universally accepted in academic literature.” C***** Meyer. 2013. Greco-Scythian Art and the Birth of Eurasia: From Classical Antiquity to Russian Modernity. Oxford University Press. p. 2-3

“While the artistic shaping of Scythian divinities was in most instances Greek, Iranian ideology is often discernible under the Greek appearance, in certain cases Iranian artistic tradition, too: Scythian art was also related to that of Luristan. It is noteworthy that the shapes of vessels of Greek manufacture, discovered in Scythian complexes, are typically Scythian; numerous objects were executed as decorations of Scythian dress and headgear (pendants, etc.) or horse harnesses. Thus, most of art were intentionally executed by Greek artisans according to Scythian preferences and probably in accordance with Scythian orders.” Yulia Ustinova. 1998. The Supreme Gods of the Bosporan Kingdom: Celestial Aphrodite and the Most High God. Brill Academic Pub. p. 22

Where is proof of accurate depiction? Greek craftsmen living in towns and working for guilds barely saw anyone outside their habitat. We only see Greco-Scythian nature motives. I mentioned it earlier dominant socio-political and cultural trends is what mattered. Portraying Scythians in Greek image with Greco-Scythian nature motives was considered superior the same way Persians were portraying Muhammad as a "Mongoloid" following Turkic invasions and subsequent Turkic rule. But "dominant Caucasoid", I will take. They were definitely not predominantly Mongoloid, but Western steppe Scythians looked distinct, perhaps like Tajiks of today.

[Pahli]

But "dominant Caucasoid", I will take. They were definitely not predominantly Mongoloid, but Western steppe Scythians looked distinct, perhaps like Tajiks of today.

They looked nothing like Tajiks, there is no modern population that resembles them genetically, the closest would be Volga Tatars or a mix of Tajik and Baltic.

I think if you take a lesser Mongoloid looking Tatar, they could fit the physical description.

[Leto]

And those paintings today originated from the same area where Turks have these physical features
https://iranian.com/NaderDavoodi/2004/August/Azadi/Images/2.jpg
They look as dark as Indonesians, lol.

[Pahli]

They look as dark as Indonesians, lol.

They might be Hazaras

[ButlerKing]

They look as dark as Indonesians, lol.



About the same color as Iranians. It's not like Iranians they are a light skinned people.

http://media.worldbulletin.net/news/2015/04/07/iranian-soldiers.jpg

[ButlerKing]

They might be Hazaras

They are Turkmen or Iranian Turks.

[Pahli]

They are Turkmen or Iranian Turks.

Then they are most likely Turkmen, I'm just surprised by how dark they are.

[ButlerKing]

Then they are most likely Turkmen, I'm just surprised by how dark they are.

Not all of them are dark. Just like not all Iranians are dark, some Iranians are even darker than that.

[Leto]

Not all of them are dark. Just like not all Iranians are dark, some Iranians are even darker than that.
Iranians are usually lighter than you portray them. They don't have much non-Caucasoid blood. Over 90% Caucasoid.

[Mingle]

Then they are most likely Turkmen, I'm just surprised by how dark they are.This is just one picture. I don't think most are that dark. They look tanned anyways.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

[ButlerKing]

Iranians are usually lighter than you portray them. They don't have much non-Caucasoid blood. Over 90% Caucasoid.

Are yous seriously associating pure Caucasoid with light skinned ?
Southwest Asian is supposed to be a dark caucasoid genetics to begin with

Here are 100% pure Caucasoid Armenians


http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/08/europe_armenian_voices/img/9.jpg
https://sport.news.am/static/images/natioanalfootball/kopenhagen/sarkisov.JPG
https://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.2187918.1429891018!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_620_330/image.jpg
https://pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/the-promise1.jpg?w=605
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/93/9b/d0/939bd09ed410d3134de983ec2eb50137.jpg

[ButlerKing]

This is just one picture. I don't think most are that dark. They look tanned anyways.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk


Indeed they are aren't as dark on average

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-j9Ce8gvUhWQ/VH_--mkyX9I/AAAAAAAAOtA/EEq4l_viOiM/s1600/13930912152848118_PhotoL.jpg
https://media.mehrnews.com/d/2017/04/22/4/2437341.jpg

[Leto]

Are yous seriously associating pure Caucasoid with light skinned ?
Southwest Asian is supposed to be a dark caucasoid genetics to begin with

Here are 100% pure Caucasoid Armenians

I said they are not as dark as you portray them. And Armenians despite being fairly swarthy are still lighter than any South Asian or North African population (mixed Caucasoids).

[ButlerKing]

I said they are not as dark as you portray them. And Armenians despite being fairly swarthy are still lighter than any South Asian or North African population (mixed Caucasoids).

Wrong again. I've seen many south Asians and north Africans who are way lighter than Armenians.


Why did you mention about non-Caucasoid bloo if you think Caucasoid admixture have nothing to do with light skinned people.

[Leto]

Wrong again. I've seen many south Asians and north Africans who are way lighter than Armenians.


Why did you mention about non-Caucasoid bloo if you think Caucasoid admixture have nothing to do with light skinned people.
On average they are not lighter.

[ButlerKing]

On average they are not lighter.

They are only somewhat lighter on average.

[Leto]

Why did you mention about non-Caucasoid bloo if you think Caucasoid admixture have nothing to do with light skinned people.
Because Caucasoid is often associated with white people. Dark Middle Easterners are regarded as partial n*ggers.

[ButlerKing]

Because Caucasoid is often associated with white people. Dark Middle Easterners are regarded as partial n*ggers.


What a dumb thing to say !!!!!
If being dark is regarded as negroid admixture than are you saying all southern Europeans include some north Europeans are partially n*ggers?
There are many white skinned south Asians who are way lighter skinned than Europeans whites. Most white people are not even white skin, they are olive, tan, pink skin, dark white, yellow mix.

[Pahli]

Because Caucasoid is often associated with white people. Dark Middle Easterners are regarded as partial n*ggers.

Yes but Caucasoid is not determined by skin colour but by skull.

[ButlerKing]

Yes but Caucasoid is not determined by skin colour but by skull.

It is his eurocentrist racist mind that associates white skinned- pure caucasoids genetics with european DNA. I've debated on this many times before.

[Proto-Shaman]

Is he a full Bashkir? Looks more European than many Tatars. Doesn't look Turkic to me.
I don't know. You have to contact the page owner.

[Proto-Shaman]

Turkish user Ilbilge https://www.theapricity.com/forum/member.php?20269-Ilbilge

She had thumbed 12 times. Also she claims to be real Scythian descent on her profile.


She thumb me down 12+ times
I really would like to thumb you down, too, but I don't dare because you are too dumb for me.

[Proto-Shaman]

Many of those artifacts were found in Western Scythian kurgans and areas, Eastern Scythians were not known by the Greeks at all, they perfectly depicted those Scythians they met, those that were dominantly Caucasoid.
The autosomal data so far posted in this forum allows us to conclude that even western Scythians were not just Caucasoids, but rather of the Eurasian spectrum of Caucasoids.

[Proto-Shaman]

They looked nothing like Tajiks, there is no modern population that resembles them genetically, the closest would be Volga Tatars or a mix of Tajik and Baltic.

I think if you take a lesser Mongoloid looking Tatar, they could fit the physical description.
Pamiri Tajiks, Shugnans etc. have high autosomal matches with western Scythians (right behind Volga and Baltic people), I already run the kit-results on gedmatch.com

[Friends of Oliver Society]

I will never understand your obsession about Turkish people..

Because some Turkish posters made statements that touches on R1a in India and that is upsetting to Butlerking who we all know is an Irishman living in England and certainly not an Indian living in England. He just happens to have a deep interest in India and hates any posters he feels are anti-Indian.

The Irish have always been a friend to India and Butlerking - the most Irish of the Irish - represents this well.

[Pahli]

The autosomal data so far posted in this forum allows us to conclude that even western Scythians were not just Caucasoids, but rather of the Eurasian spectrum of Caucasoids.

Well, I put them in Eurogenes K15 pca plot and they plot just slightly East of Yamnaya and West of Tatars, so I agree but I would still say they are pred. Caucasoid, Sarmatians are almost like Ukrainians, also slightly Eastward of them.

[ButlerKing]

Pamiri Tajiks, Shugnans etc. have high autosomal matches with western Scythians (right behind Volga and Baltic people), I already run the kit-results on gedmatch.com

So does that mean you finally agree Scythians were Iranic people or do you still think they were Turks? Pamiri and Shugnans are all Iranic people.

[ButlerKing]

Because some Turkish posters made statements that touches on R1a in India and that is upsetting to Butlerking who we all know is an Irishman living in England and certainly not an Indian living in England. He just happens to have a deep interest in India and hates any posters he feels are anti-Indian.

The Irish have always been a friend to India and Butlerking - the most Irish of the Irish - represents this well.

This is funny coming from someone who changes his avatar and account name multiple times.

[Yaglakar]

Butlerking, latest addition to your Yellow Mongoloid reconstructions:

https://onturk.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/164813_478507227378_538052378_6101755_16194_n.jpg

Fresh blood so to speak. :)

Also visit this page, there is some guy who hates South Asians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?237632-does-a-south-asian-inferiority-complex-exist/page3

[Proto-Shaman]

So does that mean you finally agree Scythians were Iranic people or do you still think they were Turks? Pamiri and Shugnans are all Iranic people.
:picard2::picard2::picard2:

[ButlerKing]

Butlerking, latest addition to your Yellow Mongoloid reconstructions:

https://onturk.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/164813_478507227378_538052378_6101755_16194_n.jpg

Fresh blood so to speak. :)

Also visit this page, there is some guy who hates South Asians:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?237632-does-a-south-asian-inferiority-complex-exist/page3


Looks pretty much like this

https://www.biography.com/.image/ar_1:1%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cg_face%2Cq_80%2Cw_300/MTIwNjA4NjM0MjAzODMzODY4/to-go-with-oly-2012-prkfeaturefiles.jpg

[ButlerKing]

:picard2::picard2::picard2:

I don't know what's your problem. You said they have high DNA matches ( between scythians WITH pamiri tajiks and shugnans ) that means the were iranic.

[Proto-Shaman]

I don't know what's your problem. You said they have high DNA matches ( between scythians WITH pamiri tajiks and shugnans ) that means the were iranic.
That means just I didn't told the full story. Get the problem?

[ButlerKing]

That means just I didn't told the full story. Get the problem?

What else is there to talk about ? Scythians, Pamiri Tajiks, Shugnans have high DNA matches and are all Indo-Europeans. End of story.

[Proto-Shaman]

What else is there to talk about ? Scythians, Pamiri Tajiks, Shugnans have high DNA matches and are all Indo-Europeans. End of story.

Ok here is the full story:
1. Turkics
2. Siberian isolated tribes
3. Volga Finno-Turkics
4. Baltics and Slavics
5. Pamiris
6. Germanics

Get it now? Any Indo-European˟˟ questions so far?