Asena/Ashina (Turkic Xiongnu extraction) Royal Y-dna: Q ?

[Böri]

The genetic marker/Y-DNA haplogroup Q-M378 has been located in the tomb of the Yeniseian-Turkic language speaking Xiongnu/Hunnu aristocracy at the Heigouliang cemetery (Xiongnu king summer camp)- the Black Gouliang barrow to the east of the Barkol Basin at the ruins of Hami (Kumul) in North Xinjiang (at the Mongolian border) from 2nd-1st century BCE. This same genetic marker/Y-DNA haplogroup Q-M378 has been detected among contemporary Uyghurs of Xinjiang (2010, 2014) [available Uyghur Q-M378 haplotypes shows striking similarity to those of Ashkenazi Q-M378 suggesting that at least part of Uyghur Q-M378 actually are L245] and more importantly, haplogroup Q-M378 has been also located throughout Mongolia and in Japan (source: 2007 Royal Ashina Khazaria DNA project).

In Japan, the Ashina clan (using the kanji Kan-on characters, 蘆名氏, “芦名” and “葦名”) is mostly spread out over the Kanagawa, in the Kanto region’s, including Kamakura. The name came from the area called Ashina in the city of Yokosuka in Kanagawa Prefecture. The clan claims descent from Taira clan through the Miura clan a clan prominent during the Sengoku period.
https://japanesemythology.wordpress.com/ashinazuchi/



We understand these findings through lenses of the medieval Chinese sources and sciences of 21st century.

Main facts are:
- Medieval Chinese sources located and equated Tiele (direct progeny of the Xiongnu/Hunnu/Huns according to the same sources) tribe Kosa (Gejie, Gesa etc.) with the Khazar clan/tribe/surname located around Caspian Sea and with Qasar clan/tribe/surname of legendary Orkhon Uyghur Nobility „Nine Tiele Clans/Names/Tribes„(Toquz Oghuz, Jiu Xing) founders and later rulers of the Uyghur Empire
- the same sources links exclusively both Uyghurs and Ashina to Tiele, not all Turkic speaking peoples
- Turks had become a strong power after absorbing about 50,000 households of the Tiele Tribes (which included the later so-called 'Nine Family Names')
- sometime during early 7th century branch of the Khazar/Qasar clan together with branch of Ashina clan migrated to Eastern Europe and formed independent Khazar Empire
- remaining part of the Khazar/Qasar Clan as part of Toquz Oghuz alliance destroyed Eastern Gok Turk Empire and formed independent Uyghur Empire
- after fall of the Yaglakar Royal Dynasty in early 9th century, it has been replaced with the Qasar/Khazar/Ko-Sa Royal Dynasty to rule with the Uyghur Empire
- the European branch of the Khazar/Qasar Royal Clan accepted Judaism sometime in 8th or 9th century (a branch or cousin of the Ansa /Ashina Royal Clan of Turks)
- While the plundering of the Roman areas is variously attested (for sources, see Maenchen-Helfen, pp. 38-42), only Priscus (frag. 11) and the Liber Calipharum (Chronicon miscellaneum 3.4; tr., pp. 106-7) report the invasion of the Persian empire. Under the leadership of Basikh and Koursikh, a detachment of Huns rode down the valleys of the Euphrates and Tigris to Ctesiphon. This invasion (395-396/8) included Armenia, Syria, Palestine and Northern Mesopotamia.
Therefore that can be one of the likely source events for Q-L245 in the region.

We believe that evidences strongly suggest conclusion/proof/possibility that minor part of contemporary Ashkenazi people, those with Y-DNA mutations Q-M378,Q-L245, Q-Y2200 (and its various further subclades) are direct progeny of the Xiongnu supreme rulling class through Qasar/Khazar/Kosa historical episode.

We understand proof as “a conclusion based upon the sum of the evidence that supports a valid assertion or deduction (i.e., a conclusion drawn from aggregated clues)” ref. Elizabeth Shown Mills, Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace, 2d ed. (Baltimore, Maryland: Genealogical Publishing, 2012).
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/ashina-royal-dynasty/about/background

[Böri]

Q's you have in MENA region are from 4th century Huns obviously. After cleansing Aryanic Sarmats and Alans in the Pontic-Caspian steppes (modern Russia and Ukraine), Huns first attacked the Armenians and Mesopotamia, before Mundzuk and Attila headed toward Germanic and Roman lands.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

And how you differentiate Mongolic Xiongnu of Turkic Xiongnu ?

[Böri]

And how you differentiate Mongolic Xiongnu of Turkic Xiongnu ?

Mongols are C mostly with minor Q, N, R1, L etc. Back then Mongols were more east and dominated by the Siberian elite Turkic-Yeniseian(Kettic) elements. The second Xiongnu emperor Modun (3rd century BC) is known to have defeated the proto-Mongol Donghus before defeating the Han Chinese Imperial army at the famous Baideng Battle. Modun first pacified Mongolic tribes to the east, and Indo-European (Yuezhi, Toharians) to the west of his realm before attacking Han dynasty's China.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

Mongols are C mostly with minor N, R1, L etc. Mongols were more east and dominated by the Siberian elite Turkic-Yeniseian(Kettic) elements.

That is based on archaeology or?

[Böri]

That is based on archaeology or?

yes. Chinese written sources too.

[Yaglakar]

Oghur = archaic form of Oghuz

https://i.imgur.com/nb7TjiC.png


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7Vu4pp66hk

[Austrvegr]

Ashina < Iranic Akhshayna, Blue ( > Turkic Kok). They were Aryan Kagans ( < Iranic Hva-Kama, Self-Powerful, i.e. Autocrats) of subjugated Turco-Mongols.

[AK-47]

Ashina < Iranic Akhshayna, Blue ( > Turkic Kok). They were Aryan Kagans ( < Iranic Hva-Kama, Self-Powerful, i.e. Autocrats) of subjugated Turco-Mongols.
Kagan is a common Ashkenazi surname.
Khazar origin?

[Böri]

Ashina < Iranic Akhshayna, Blue ( > Turkic Kok). They were Aryan Kagans ( < Iranic Hva-Kama, Self-Powerful, i.e. Autocrats) of subjugated Turco-Mongols.

No. Ashina is Chinese pronounciation of that word. In Orkhon or other Turkic runes, that clan doesn't use that word.

Chinese have weird language.
They can't say Turk. They say Tu Jue for Turk.
So, when Chinese say Ashina, we don't know in reality what is that word standing for.
Echin? Asina? Esen?

Let aside etymological study, not even speculations cant be made based on that Chinese prounounciation.
They call themselves Turks in their scripts, it's a modern brain masturbation pretending that those people were lying when claiming to be Turks.

[Austrvegr]

Kagan is a common Ashkenazi surname.
Khazar origin?

Jewish Kagan is distorted Kohen, priest. Nothing to do with the Iranic Hva-Kama > Kagan.

[AK-47]

Jewish Kagan is distorted Kohen, priest. Nothing to do with the Iranic Hva-Kama > Kagan.
Jewish Surnames Explained:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2014/01/08/ashkenazi_names_the_etymology_of_the_most_common_j ewish_surnames.html

Jewish family names from non-Jewish languages included: Sender/Saunders — from Alexander; Kagan — descended from the Khazars, a Turkic-speaking people from Central Asia; Kelman/Kalman — from the Greek name Kalonymous, the Greek translation of the Hebrew shem tov (good name), popular among Jews in medieval France and Italy; Marcus/Marx — from Latin, referring to the pagan god Mars.

[AK-47]

Jewish Kagan is distorted Kohen, priest. Nothing to do with the Iranic Hva-Kama > Kagan.
The Khazar royalty were converts to Judaism, perhaps that distortion surname found in Russian Jews was started by them for their priestly class?

[Yaglakar]

Ashina < Iranic Akhshayna, Blue ( > Turkic Kok). They were Aryan Kagans ( < Iranic Hva-Kama, Self-Powerful, i.e. Autocrats) of subjugated Turco-Mongols.

Laughable absurd gallimaufry of nonsense. But the fact that the earliest eastern Slav polity was established by Varangians (Vikings) who adopted political and organizational structure of Khazar Khaganate, inheriting Khazar cities including Kiev is a solid fact.

https://i.imgur.com/n8KyPvR.png
J. Brutzkus. The Khazar Origin of Ancient Kiev. page 111

Regarding pathetic attempts of Soviet regime to hide the truth about early Slavic history:

https://i.imgur.com/Qp0KuNI.png
Wladyslaw Duczko. 2004. Viking Rus: Studies on the Presence of Scandinavians in Eastern Europe. Brill. page 11

[Pahli]

Lol at the Huns invading the Persian Empire, they failed and their Central Asian branch was butchered. Sarmatians still lived in North Caucasia / others migrated to Eastern Europe.

There's some discussion about the Ashina tribe being Saka of origin, although there's no proper evidence for that.

[Austrvegr]

Laughable absurd gallimaufry of nonsense.

Such a well-substantiated argument. So Turco-Mongolic. :)

[gültekin]

Such a well-substantiated argument. So Turco-Mongolic. :)

Slavs literally have NOTHING to do with any kind of "Scythian", nor culturally neither genetically. For years your Slavic blogger-God Davidski used to portray the Scythians as some kind of Slavic-like people genetically but turned out they had nothing to do with you pseudo-Aryan marsh peoples.

Slavs have never been nomadic, they have always been subjugated by nomadic horse people (be it under the name of Scythian, Hun, Cuman etc). All the Scythian samples so far resemble modern Turkic populations, even the westernmost samples resemble modern Tatars and Ural folks. Slavs do not belong the Steppes. They did not even have horse archers as part of their culture.

Yamnaya samples have at least 30% Gedrosia/SCA like admixture whereas modern Slavs (Scythian wannabe pseudo Aryans) have almost 0%. This pseudo Indo-European Slav(e) piece of shit used to mock Anatolian Turks but even Anatolian Turks have legit and direct Steppe (Oghuz) ancestry, unlike these pseudo-steppe people who have never been part of the steppes.

[Leto]

Slavs literally have NOTHING to do with any kind of "Scythian", nor culturally neither genetically. For years your Slavic blogger-God Davidski used to portray the Scythians as some kind of Slavic-like people genetically but turned out they had nothing to do with you pseudo-Aryan marsh peoples.

The recent Kashkarchi samples from the Fergana Valley prove otherwise. They were white and R1a.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.ru/2018/04/on-doorstep-of-india.html

I4153 U5b2b R1a1a1b Kashkarchi_BA 1200-1000 BCE Uzbekistan
I4255 N1a1a1 R1a1a1b Kashkarchi_BA 1200-1000 BCE Uzbekistan

[Pahli]

Kashkarchi_BA from Ferghana Valley is extremely close to Andronovo samples;

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Europe 54.04
2 West_Asia 18.75
3 SW_Europe 16.84
4 South_Asia 4.16
5 Americas 4.07
6 West_Africa 1.94
7 SW_Asia 0.16
8 East_Africa 0.04

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Mordovian 13.34
2 Russian 14.7
3 Ukrainian 14.88
4 Belarusian 15.21
5 Polish 16.14
6 Slovak 16.86
7 German_North 17.81
8 Moldavian 18.03
9 Estonian 18.27
10 Norwegian 18.59
11 Slovene 18.63
12 Swedish 18.8
13 Lithuanian 19.01
14 Latvian 19.17
15 Tatar 19.23
16 Hungarian 19.63
17 Irish 20.7
18 Bosnian 20.87
19 Scottish 20.9
20 Utahn_European 20.96

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 70.8% Lithuanian + 29.2% Afghan_Pashtun @ 6.35
2 70.6% Latvian + 29.4% Afghan_Pashtun @ 6.38
3 71.8% Estonian + 28.2% Afghan_Pashtun @ 6.45
4 67.3% Latvian + 32.7% Tadjik @ 6.72
5 75.2% Lithuanian + 24.8% Makrani @ 6.75
6 67.5% Lithuanian + 32.5% Tadjik @ 6.76
7 76% Estonian + 24% Makrani @ 6.77
8 72% Lithuanian + 28% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 6.78
9 71.8% Latvian + 28.2% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 6.8
10 74.6% Latvian + 25.4% Balochi @ 6.81
11 74.8% Lithuanian + 25.2% Balochi @ 6.81
12 73% Estonian + 27% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 6.86
13 75% Latvian + 25% Makrani @ 6.86
14 72.7% Lithuanian + 27.3% Pathan @ 6.91
15 73.6% Estonian + 26.4% Pathan @ 6.92
16 75.7% Estonian + 24.3% Balochi @ 6.92
17 75.5% Lithuanian + 24.5% Brahui @ 6.92
18 75.3% Latvian + 24.7% Brahui @ 6.94
19 68.6% Estonian + 31.4% Tadjik @ 6.97
20 72.6% Latvian + 27.4% Pathan @ 6.99

The only thing that differences these Steppe samples from Eastern Europeans is that they have more Gedrosian / CHG admixture over Anatolian farmer admixture, otherwise they're almost the same genetically

[Leto]

Kashkarchi_BA from Ferghana Valley is extremely close to Andronovo samples;

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 NE_Europe 54.04
2 West_Asia 18.75
3 SW_Europe 16.84
4 South_Asia 4.16
5 Americas 4.07
6 West_Africa 1.94
7 SW_Asia 0.16
8 East_Africa 0.04

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Mordovian 13.34
2 Russian 14.7
3 Ukrainian 14.88
4 Belarusian 15.21
5 Polish 16.14
6 Slovak 16.86
7 German_North 17.81
8 Moldavian 18.03
9 Estonian 18.27
10 Norwegian 18.59
11 Slovene 18.63
12 Swedish 18.8
13 Lithuanian 19.01
14 Latvian 19.17
15 Tatar 19.23
16 Hungarian 19.63
17 Irish 20.7
18 Bosnian 20.87
19 Scottish 20.9
20 Utahn_European 20.96

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 70.8% Lithuanian + 29.2% Afghan_Pashtun @ 6.35
2 70.6% Latvian + 29.4% Afghan_Pashtun @ 6.38
3 71.8% Estonian + 28.2% Afghan_Pashtun @ 6.45
4 67.3% Latvian + 32.7% Tadjik @ 6.72
5 75.2% Lithuanian + 24.8% Makrani @ 6.75
6 67.5% Lithuanian + 32.5% Tadjik @ 6.76
7 76% Estonian + 24% Makrani @ 6.77
8 72% Lithuanian + 28% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 6.78
9 71.8% Latvian + 28.2% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 6.8
10 74.6% Latvian + 25.4% Balochi @ 6.81
11 74.8% Lithuanian + 25.2% Balochi @ 6.81
12 73% Estonian + 27% Pakistan_Pashtun @ 6.86
13 75% Latvian + 25% Makrani @ 6.86
14 72.7% Lithuanian + 27.3% Pathan @ 6.91
15 73.6% Estonian + 26.4% Pathan @ 6.92
16 75.7% Estonian + 24.3% Balochi @ 6.92
17 75.5% Lithuanian + 24.5% Brahui @ 6.92
18 75.3% Latvian + 24.7% Brahui @ 6.94
19 68.6% Estonian + 31.4% Tadjik @ 6.97
20 72.6% Latvian + 27.4% Pathan @ 6.99

The only thing that differences these Steppe samples from Eastern Europeans is that they have more Gedrosian / CHG admixture over Anatolian farmer admixture, otherwise they're almost the same genetically
https://preview.ibb.co/n68Z6x/Kashkarchi.jpg (https://ibb.co/kRq3zH)

I don't see anyone claiming that Scythians were Slavs or anything like that. People just say they were more European than any modern Iranic group which makes sense. But the Kashkarchi weren't even Scythians, in 1200-1000 BC the Scythians didn't exist as a group, I think those guys were some late Andronovo offshoot or something like that. But definitely Indo-Iranian.

[Yaglakar]

Lol at the Huns invading the Persian Empire, they failed and their Central Asian branch was butchered. Sarmatians still lived in North Caucasia / others migrated to Eastern Europe.

The Sassanids and Kök Türüks were the ones who butchered White Huns.

https://i.imgur.com/k3BYwDd.png
Hyun Jin Kim. 2015. The Huns (Peoples of the Ancient World). Routledge. page 92

WHITE HUNNIC EXPANSION AND THE KIDARITE DYNASTY

The scholar Czeglédy in the mid twentieth century had speculated that the Hua, whom he assumed to be Vars (Avars), may have expanded into Western Turkestan (Central Asia) in the middle of expanded into Western Turkestan (Central Asia) in the middle of the fourth century AD and that this may have been the trigger that ignited the great Hunnic migration west in the same century.11 He associated this Hua (Var) activity in Western Turkestan with the rise of the more powerful Rouran (probably in origin the Wuhuan (Avars?) already mentioned above) further to the east. These Rouran, who were originally located in the vicinity of the city of Dunhuang, in close proximity to Turpan (eastern Xinjiang), began their extraordinary rise under Shelun Khagan in the late fourth century. However, there is as yet no firm evidence that would indicate that the Rouran expanded further west before Shelun’s rise in the late fourth century AD, i.e. they appear too late on the scene to have been responsible for putting pressure on the Hua and Huns in the mid fourth century AD. The Hua or the Hephthalites, if our Chinese sources are correct, became the vassals of the Rouran presumably some time in the late fourth century AD or early fifth century AD.

The first Rouran movement into what is now modern Kazakhstan (the original territory of the European Huns in the fourth century AD) should probably be dated to the time of the Tuoba Wei alliance with the Yueban Huns in the fifth century against the Rouran, which is obviously too late to have affected the original Hunnic expansion into Europe and Central Asia. More recently it has been proposed that the Huns started moving west out of the Altai in the fourth century AD, not because of renewed military pressure from the east (for instance from the Rouran), but because of radical climate deterioration in the Altai region in that century.12 Neither the military pressure theory nor the climate change explanation are satisfactory, since the Hunnic expansion west of the Altai region may well have commenced long before the fourth century. Érdy, on the basis of archaeological evidence provided by Hunnic cauldrons, has argued for a Hunnic presence in the Tobol, Irtysh, Middle Ob region already in the third century AD.13 However, the drastic change in climate in the fourth century may have had an impact on the sudden thrust of the Huns remaining in the Altai region in a southwesterly direction into Central Asia. As La Vaissière shows in his excellent analysis of the Chinese sources on the early migration of the White Huns, the Huns from the Altai suddenly moved south in the 350s AD.14 The invasion of these Huns rapidly swallowed up what was left of the Kangju state, and put immense pressure on the eastern borders of the Sassanians and Kushan remnants in southern Central Asia.

The so-called Kidarite (possibly a term referring to western Huns, deriving from the old Turkic runic term kidirti meaning west)15 Huns figure prominently in this initial Hunnic intrusion into southern Central Asia and we find them in firm possession of Bactria ca. 360 AD.16 An Armenian source, P’awstos Buzandac’i, tells us that the Hon (Huns) under the Kidarite dynasty conquered the region some time before 367 AD. The question of whether this Kidarite dynasty was ethnically ‘Mongoloid’ Huns (a preconception based on the premise that the Huns were Turkic, and Turks = Mongoloid) or ‘Caucasian’ Iranians has provoked a fruitless discussion among scholars and became, somewhat discouragingly, the dominant focus of research. Tremblay (2001) believed that they and the later Hephthalites, who overthrew them, were both Iranian in origin. Grenet (2002) thought likewise.

The whole debate was to a certain degree influenced by the confused account left by the Roman historian Procopius (sixth century AD) about the name of the Hunnic state in Central Asia: White Huns. Both Procopius and our Indian sources call the Central Asian Huns White Huns or Sveta Huna (White Huns). Procopius (1.3.2–7) noted that the White Huns were ruled by a king and were guided by a lawful constitution, i.e. that they had a sophisticated state structure comparable to those of the Sassanian Persians, with whom they were often in conflict, and also to those of the Romans. But he then misinterpreted the appellation ‘white’ to mean that the White Huns were white and not swarthy like the European Huns supposedly were. As Pulleyblank points out, the colour white was simply symbolic of west among steppe nomads. Black signified north and red the south, hence the existence also of Red Huns (Kermichiones or Alkhon from the Turkic Al-for scarlet+ Hun, meaning Red Huns), who were the southern wing of the White Huns.17 As Pritsak points out, in steppe societies the colour black signifying north and the colour blue signifying east, both of which carried connotations of greatness and supremacy,18 almost always had precedence over white (west) and red (south). Thus whichever group constituted the Black or Blue Huns (if they existed, or are identifiable with known Hunnic groups such as Attila’s Huns in Europe or the Yueban Huns in Kazakhstan) probably possessed seniority over the White Huns, at least initially. The fact that the colour black, kara in Turkish, suggested elevated status among the European Huns also as it did among other Inner Asian Turkic peoples, seems to be confirmed by the report in Olympiodorus (a fifth century AD Roman historian) that the supreme king of the Huns was called Karaton.19

The Kidarite usage of earlier Kushan symbolism in their coins led some scholars to attribute to them a native Iranian identity. However, it is now becoming increasingly evident that the Kidarites (whose name, as mentioned above, may simply indicate that they are the western Huns) were Hunnic invaders who occupied eastern Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan and who gradually became Iranized in culture after their conquest. This has been confirmed recently by the discovery of a seal inscription which calls a certain Lord Ularg as firstly king of the Huns and then Kushan-shah.20 The Kidarite appropriation of Kushan symbolism and claims to be the heirs to the Kushan legacy should be seen in the light of a long process of acculturation and the White Hunnic Kidarite adaptation to their new environment. Priscus (fr. 33 and fr. 41),21 a contemporary fifth century Roman source, calls them without any hint of ambiguity or generalization Huns and names the contemporary Kidarite king Khunkas. Tremblay notes that the etymology for this name is most likely to be X(y)on-qan, i.e. Hun Khan (Khan of the Huns).22

The Chinese source the Bei Shi tells us that a king called Kidara (either a personal name or more likely the attribution of the name of the dynasty to an individual king) conquered the territory north and south of the Hindu Kush (i.e. Afghanistan) some time before 410 AD and had subjected the Gandhara region (northeastern Afghanistan and northern Pakistan) to Hunnic rule.23 From there the Kidarites became a threat to the Gupta Empire of India (ca. 320–550 AD). During the reign of the Indian Gupta king Kumaragupta I (413–455 AD) the Kidarites pushed into the Punjab (northwestern India). These Kidarites, who were the first major dynasty to rule the White Hun state in Central Asia, were by this stage under increasing pressure from another dynasty, the above mentioned Hephthalites, and were gradually ejected from their northern territories in Sogdia (Uzbekistan) and Bactria (northern Afghanistan) some time in the fifth century AD. They were finally destroyed in the Gandhara region by the Hephthalites towards the end of the fifth century, sometime between 477 AD (the date of their last embassy to the Tuoba Wei) and 520 AD (when Gandhara is definitely under Hephthalite control according to a Chinese pilgrim).

Before that dramatic ending the Kidarites invaded India repeatedly during the time of the Gupta monarch Skandagupta (455–67 AD). The Bhitari pillar inscription dating from the end of the reign of Skandagupta tells of how during the preceding reign of Kumaragupta I, the Hunas (Kidarites) almost destroyed the Gupta state. The hapless Kumaragupta passed over control of the defeated Gupta army to his more competent son Skandagupta. However, even he had troubles coping with the Hunnic invasion. The inscriptions describe how Skandagupta had to reestablish his lineage ‘that had been made to totter’, encounter many dangers and hardships that forced him even to ‘spend a night sleeping on the bare earth’.24 Skandagupta claims that he vanquished the Hunas and conquered the whole world, but even after this alleged Gupta triumph the Huns remained in control of much of the Punjab and the Guptas permanently lost control of much of their western territories, leading one to wonder how real and decisive these Gupta claims to victory over the Huns actually were. It was most probably the intrusion of the Hephthalites into Kidarite territory that allowed the Guptas a brief respite from Hunnic invasions, not any decisive Indian military triumph over the Huns.

As mentioned earlier, the scholarly research on the Hephthalites who replaced the Kidarites as the ruling clan of the White Hun state was equally preoccupied with the question of the origins of this second Hunnic dynasty. We have already discussed the contentious issue of whether they were new arrivals or part of the initial wave of Hunnic migration into southern Central Asia. Another vexing question for many was again the issue of race. Were the Hephthalites mainly Turco-Mongol (Mongoloid) or Iranian (Caucasoid) in ethnic-racial composition? In the first half of the twentieth century Marquart (1903) and Grousset thought they were Mongols. McGovern also in the early twentieth century and La Vaissière (2007) argued for a Turkic identity, which is likely to be correct, while Enoki (1959) argued for an Iranian origin. Given the heterogeneous nature of steppe political entities and dynasties, all of the above mentioned ethnicities and ‘racial’ groups were probably represented in some way in the White Hun Hephthalite state.

They themselves of course claimed to be Huns and that is how they were also known to their immediate neighbours. The Hunnic origin or self-identification of the Hephthalite dynasty is reflected in the form OIONO or HIONO, which appears in their coinage.25 The confusion concerning their identity results largely from the multiple and conflicting origin theories provided by our Chinese sources mentioned briefly above. The Wei Shu (102.2278–9), for instance, suggests both an Iranian origin via the Yuezhi and a Turkish alternative via Gaoche. The Iranian origin of the Hephthalites vouched for most prominently by the renowned Japanese Inner Asian scholar Enoki, has now been largely discredited due to the discovery that the so-called Hephthalite language with Iranian affinities, used to justify the Iranian theory, was not introduced by the Hephthalites themselves, but was the indigenous language of the region conquered by the Hephthalites.26 One could therefore justifiably dismiss the reference to the Yuezhi in the Wei Shu reference above as simply an anachronism common in Chinese historiography.

However, the confusion in the Chinese sources is in all likelihood actually indicative of the real ethnic heterogeneity of the Hephthalite state and even its elite. It is likely that the Hephthalite Hunnic state contained a core of largely Turkic speaking military elite, which was rapidly being influenced by Iranian and also Indian cultural practices and languages. At least a partially Mongolic speaking dominant core group might also be a possibility, if we were to accept the Hua=Var=Wuhuan identification suggested by Pulleyblank. Pulleyblank (1983), Golden (1992) and Czeglédy (1983) all hint at the possibility that the Mongolic Var (Hua) tribes, along with the presumably Turkic Huns, may have constituted the ruling core of the Hephthalite state and that these Var were connected to the Wuhuan confederacy of Inner Mongolia. As an indication of this, Pulleyblank notes the striking similarities in headdress and hairstyles between the Wuhuan and the Hephthalites27 (not particularly convincing evidence for determining ethnic origins).

A powerful Iranian cultural influence on the ruling elite also cannot be ruled out. Known Hephthalite personal names certainly give this impression. They seem to be for the most part Iranian (though alternative Turkic etymologies are also sometimes offered by experts), indicating a high degree of cultural and probably ethnic fusion between Turco-Mongol Huns and native Iranians. The same heterogeneity was of course, as already highlighted, a characteristic feature of the earlier Xiongnu and also the European Huns whom we will discuss shortly. In any case, one of the last Hephthalite rulers to be recorded in history, a certain Nizak (or Tirek) who ruled in the region of Badghis (in western Afghanistan), bore the title Tarkhan, which incidentally was originally a Xiongnu title. The fact that the Hephthalites referred to themselves as Huns argues definitively against an Iranian, sedentary origin in Badakhstan (northern Afghanistan). However, the Iranization of the Hephthalites and the presence of an Iranian element in their confederacy from very early on are certainly possible.

The Persians would call both the Kidarite Huns and Hephthalite Huns collectively as Chionites. Despite objections by some, most historians now agree that the Chionites and the Huns were one and the same.28 The arrival of these Chionites (the Kidarites) had serious consequences for the history of Iran. In 350 AD the Sassanian king Shapur II had to abandon his siege of the Roman fortress of Nisibis in order to deal with the new threat emerging on his empire’s eastern borders. The war against these new enemies lasted for eight long years (350–358 AD) and Shapur somehow managed to end hostilities by forging an uneasy alliance with the Huns. The benefit of this alliance was the provision of Hunnic military aid to the Persians. Shapur used his newly won Hunnic allies to augment his army in the siege of Amida in 360 AD. During the siege Grumbates, the king (probably a sub-king) of the Chionites (his name being possibly Kurum-pat: Turkish, ruling prince), lost his son.29 The unfortunate Romans within the city then had to bear the brunt of the rage of the infuriated Hunnic king.

By the subsequent reign of Bahram IV the Sassanians, having suffered repeated defeats, had lost almost all of their eastern Iranian lands (which Sassanian Persia had seized earlier from the Kushans) to the White Huns under the Kidarites. Only the strategic oasis city of Merv (in modern Turkmenistan) remained of Persia’s eastern possessions.30 To make matters worse Persia was forced to pay a regular tribute to the Huns. The Sassanian king Yazdegard II (reigned 438–57) ca. 442 AD halted the humiliating tribute payments and attempted to reverse the defeats the Sassanians had suffered at the hands of the Kidarite Huns. By 450 AD the Persians seem to have managed to push their way into either Tokharistan/Bactria (namely the city/region of Taliqan in northeastern Afghanistan near the city of Balkh) or more probably an adjacent region further to the west.

The sudden success enjoyed by the Persians over the Huns in the 440s and 450s (after nearly a century of constant one-sided battering at the hands of the Huns) requires explanation and one explanatory factor is very easy to identify. It has already been noted above that the Kidarite invasions of India intensified during this very period and that this was due mainly to Hephthalite pressure which was building against the Kidarites. The Kidarites at this time found themselves trapped in a pincer attack by the Hephthalites and the Sassanians, hence the increased urgency to find an escape route into India during these decades. This pattern of Inner Asian peoples invading India to escape conquest by a more powerful Inner Asian group would be repeated throughout the later history of India, the most famous example being the famous Timurid Mughal conquest of India. The Mughals of the sixteenth century AD were pushed south by the more powerful Shaybanid Uzbeks from the north.

Around 456 AD or slightly earlier around 454 AD the Persian king Yazdegard was feeling confident enough to demand reverse tribute from the Kidarite Huns. The Huns refused to comply and in a major engagement that followed the Persians suffered another decisive defeat, which reversed all previous Persian gains in the preceding decade. To make matters worse a bitter civil war erupted shortly afterwards within the beleaguered Persian Empire. The next Sassanian king Peroz (reigned 457–84) overcame his brother Hormizd and seized the Persian throne with the support of an army provided by the Hephthalite Huns. In order to repay the Hephtalites for their assistance, Peroz may have ceded the formerly Kidarite possession of Taliqan (wherever the city was located, see above) to the Hephthalites.

The Kidarites, sensing Persian weakness, renewed their offensive against the Persians and in 464 AD the desperate Peroz even resorted to asking the Eastern Romans for financial aid against the Kidarites, a request which was haughtily refused by Constantinople. In order to buy time and to appease the Kidarites Peroz offered the Kidarite ruler Khunkhas his sister in marriage. According to Priscus, Peroz resorted to subterfuge and sent a woman of lowly status rather than his sister as wife to Khunkhas. The Hunnic king soon discovered the deception and sought revenge. He invited 300 Persian officers to his realm and then murdered or mutilated them in order to humiliate Peroz. War was renewed and the balance was tipped in favour of the Persians when once again the Hephthalites intervened on the side of the Persians. The allies captured the Kidarite capital of Balaam (possibly Balkh?) in 467 AD and the Kidarties retreated to Gandhara where their rule was later extinguished by the Hephthalites.

WHITE HUNNIC EMPIRE AT ITS ZENITH UNDER THE HEPHTHALITE DYNASTY

The cooperation between the Hephthalites and the Persians against a common enemy, the Kidarites, would not survive the demise of the Kidarites. The Hephthalites seized the Kidarite territory that the Persians had taken and assumed leadership of all the White Huns. Peroz attempted to take back those lands, but he was resoundingly defeated by a Hephthalite king called Akhshunwar (or Khushnavaz).31 Peroz was captured by the Huns on two occasions and managed to escape death by agreeing to pay a huge ransom-tribute and sending one of his sons to the Hephthalite court as a hostage. Persia had now again been reduced to the status of a vassal state to the Huns. Peroz, however, had still not learnt his lesson and tried his luck against the Huns once again. According to Procopius (1.3.1–22; 1.4.1–14) he was slain with most of his army in a disastrous battle with the Hephthalites in 484 AD. The historian Agathias (4.27.3–4, a sixth century AD East Roman source)32 provides much the same information as Procopius and emphasizes again that the Hephthalites were a Hunnic people. These triumphs over the Sassanians made the name of the Hephthalite Huns a terror to the Persians and other Iranian peoples.

The victorious Hephthalites then proceeded to intervene in Sassanian internal affairs. In 488 AD Kavad, one of Peroz’s surviving sons, elicited support from his White Hunnic Hephthalite overlords. The Huns married Kavad to either the daughter or sister of the reigning Hunnic king and then provided him with the necessary military aid to gain the Sassanian throne.33 Kavad was forced to seek refuge with the Hephthalites yet again ten years later due to a revolt. The Hephthalites supplied him with 30,000 men to reclaim his kingdom. However, the price for this aid was high. Kavad was forced to cede more territory to the Huns and pay an increased annual tribute. Part of the Sassanian coinage was countermarked with a Hephthalite sign signaling that they were destined as tribute to the Hunnic king34 and the Hephthalite kings claimed that they were the legitimate rulers of Iran, the Sassanians being merely their vassals. The Persian king Kavad, increasingly short of funds, asked the East Romans, with whom Persia had relatively good relations for about half a century (which was largely due to Hunnic pressure which prevented the Persians from upsetting the Romans, and vice versa, the Romans the Persians due to the European Hunnic threat, rather than any new amicable intentions on the part of the two powers), for loans. The Romans, just as they had refused the request from his father Peroz before him, arrogantly rebuffed Kavad. In 502 AD Kavad renewed the ancient hostilities between the two empires in order to avenge his humiliation.35

The Persians would continue to pay tribute to the Huns from 484 AD to the 550s AD during the reign of Khusrau I (531–79 AD). With the Persians subjected the Hephthalite Hunnic Empire now reached the zenith of its power. The Hephthalites proceeded to expand east as well. In the last decade of the fifth century AD Kashgar and Khotan were occupied and between 497 AD and 509 AD Karashahr and the region of modern day Urumchi (all regions in Xinjiang in western China) fell to the Hephthalite Huns. Nearly all of Eastern and Western Turkestan were now in Hephthalite hands. The Chinese historical records mention the vast extent of the Hephthalite White Hunnic Empire. The Liangshu 54 lists among their domains Persia, Kashmir, Karashahr, Kucha, Kashgar and Khotan and the Bei Shi 97 names Kangju (Sogdia), Khotan, Kashgar and Persia.36 More than thirty lands to the west of China are seen as being subject to the White Huns in our sources.

After also conquering the Kidarites in Gandhara and northwestern India in the late fifth century AD, the Hephthalites began their invasions of India during the reign of King Budhagupta of the declining Gupta Empire of India in the last quarter of the fifth century. In the early sixth century AD a Hephthalite sub-king by the name of Toramana, who was called by the Indians ‘the boundlessly famed ruler of the earth’, conquered all of western India penetrating as far east as modern day Madhya Pradesh and completely dominating Uttar Pradesh, Rajputana, Punjab, and Kashmir. His son Mihirakula became the ruler of virtually the whole of northern India. His capital in India seems to have been Sakala (modern Sialkot in Pakistan). His cruelty however is said to have incited the vassalized Indians to rebel against him. He somehow ended up in the custody of a certain Baladitya (possibly a Gupta ruler or magnate). In the meantime the brother of Mihirakula usurped the Hunnic throne.

By the second quarter of the sixth century AD the Hephthalite Hunnic Empire was probably the most extensive empire in the world. In the east it extended as far as Urumchi in modern day Xinjiang, in the south central India, in the north the steppes of Kazakhstan and in the west up to the borders of the Eastern Roman Empire via its vassals the Sassanian Persians. However, the glory of the Central Asian Huns would be numbered in the middle of the sixth century AD when a new power emerged in the east, the Göktürks. The Hephthalites had been linked in some way to the powerful Rouran Khaganate in Mongolia in the early stages of their rise. Chinese sources suggest that they were initially the vassals of the Rouran before becoming independent. By the middle of the sixth century AD the Rouran Khaganate was overthrown by the Göktürk Khaganate and the new rulers of the eastern steppes, the Turks, now sought to conquer the Hephthalites as well.

The Sassanian Persians who had been seeking an opportunity to cast off the Hunnic yoke tried to form an alliance with the Göktürks against their Hephthalite overlords. The Turkish Khagan reacted swiftly and a mighty Göktürk army seized the city of Tashkent and then engaged the Hephthalite army under King Gatfar near Bukhara. A titanic struggle ensued, a gigantic eight day battle involving contingents drawn from nearly every Inner Asian nationality. The result was the complete defeat of the Hephthalite Huns. The Turks duly occupied Transoxiana from the retreating Hephthalites who elected a new king called Faganish (also called Afganish) as they fled south. The Hephthalites were now, however, trapped between the Persians and the Turks and the last Hephthalite king surrended to King Khusrau of Persia sometime between 560 and 563 AD.

Hyun Jin Kim. 2015. The Huns (Peoples of the Ancient World). Routledge. page 106-111



There's some discussion about the Ashina tribe being Saka of origin, although there's no proper evidence for that.

Kök is likely a semantic reconstruction of an Indo-European word Ashina (Tochar,Saka,Khotanese) and also recorded by Chinese. In the old Turkic inscriptions Kök Türük is used. This all due to cultural exchange. There was an Iranic and Persian cultural influence on Kidarites and Hephtalites as well.

[Pahli]

https://preview.ibb.co/n68Z6x/Kashkarchi.jpg (https://ibb.co/kRq3zH)

I don't see anyone claiming that Scythians were Slavs or anything like that. People just say they were more European than any modern Iranic group which makes sense. But the Kashkarchi weren't even Scythians, in 1200-1000 BC the Scythians didn't exist as a group, I think those guys were some late Andronovo offshoot or something like that. But definitely Indo-Iranian.

Its most likely a Proto-Scythian sample, by 900 B.C they were already migrating to Europe.

[Yaglakar]

The recent Kashkarchi samples from the Fergana Valley prove otherwise. They were white and R1a.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.ru/2018/04/on-doorstep-of-india.html

I4153 U5b2b R1a1a1b Kashkarchi_BA 1200-1000 BCE Uzbekistan
I4255 N1a1a1 R1a1a1b Kashkarchi_BA 1200-1000 BCE Uzbekistan

White shmite, doesn't matter. When Oghur Turks arrived your ancestors were living in swamps and forests. They subjugated them and brought their Slavic vassals to the Balkans - hence Balkanite Slavs emerged. Later Khazars built the 'mother of Russian cities' Kiev and your Varangian overlords adopted customs, organization and political structures from Turks.

[Leto]

White shmite, doesn't matter. When Oghur Turks arrived your ancestors were living in swamps and forests. They subjugated them and brought their Slavic vassals to the Balkans - hence Balkanite Slavs emerged. Later Khazars built the 'mother of Russian cities' Kiev and your Varangian overlords adopted customs, organization and political structures from Turks.
The Khazars didn't build Kiev and Slavs migrated to the Balkans on their own. Until the 500s or so Turkic people were barely relevant historically speaking.

You Turks are so deeply Russophobic.

[Yaglakar]

The Khazars didn't build Kiev and Slavs migrated to the Balkans on their own. Until the 500s or so Turkic people were barely relevant historically speaking.

You Turks are so deeply Russophobic.

Technically it was built by Slavs because the town has been laid to dust several times, but it was originally founded by Khazars - Sambatas as recorded in Byzantine chronicles. Sam=high, bat=fortress. Kiev = lower settlement, Küi=lower/harbor, ev=settlement. The Khazars called the high-ground where they built the fortress as Sambat and lower ground as Küiev or harbor/lower settlement where the populace resided.

https://i.imgur.com/IffEBdz.png
J. Brutzkus. The Khazar Origin of Ancient Kiev. page 111

In regards to Slavic migrations and the role played by Avars I refer you to the following thread:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236803-Balto-Slavic-history-before-5th-century/page4&highlight=balto

And I am not a russophobe. I date Russian girls and have Russian and Ukrainian friends. You on the other hand seem like a white nationalist of some sort constantly spamming info about ancient 'white' migration.

[Leto]

Technically it was built by Slavs because the town has been laid to dust several times, but it was originally founded by Khazars - Sambatas as recorded in Byzantine chronicles. Sam=high, bat=fortress. Kiev = lower settlement, Küi=lower/harbor, ev=settlement. The Khazars called the high-ground where they built the fortress as Sambat and lower ground as Küiev or harbor/lower settlement where the populace resided.

https://i.imgur.com/IffEBdz.png
J. Brutzkus. The Khazar Origin of Ancient Kiev. page 111

In regards to Slavic migrations and the role played by Avars I refer you to the following thread:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?236803-Balto-Slavic-history-before-5th-century/page4&highlight=balto

I can neither prove nor disprove these etymological hypotheses at this moment.


And I am not a russophobe. I date Russian girls and have Russian and Ukrainian friends. You on the other hand seem like a white nationalist of some sort constantly spamming info about ancient 'white' migration.
Where the heck do you live? And why wouldn't a Turkic nationalist/supremacist date his own girls? You guys are often like that: I'm so proud to be this or that, yet I prefer foreign women with light features. I use 'white' mainly to trigger people like you or Gültekin who are not European.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

White shmite, doesn't matter. When Oghur Turks arrived your ancestors were living in swamps and forests. They subjugated them and brought their Slavic vassals to the Balkans - hence Balkanite Slavs emerged. Later Khazars built the 'mother of Russian cities' Kiev and your Varangian overlords adopted customs, organization and political structures from Turks.

Why you don't add how later all Slavs kicked all Turkics nomads to steppe? From Croats to Russians?

[Leto]

The later Khazar elite was Jewish by religion and the whole Khanate was multiethnic, yet some automatically assume they were all like Mongols racially and culturally which has no proof.

[Leto]

Why you don't add how later all Slavs kicked all Turkics nomads to steppe? From Croats to Russians?
Conquering Slavs, destroying their cities, enslaving them - brave and badass behavior.
Being conquered and destroyed by the Russians because of those constant raids and attacks - evil Russian imperialism and chauvinism.
:rolleyes: :laugh:

[Yaglakar]

Where the heck do you live? And why wouldn't a Turkic nationalist/supremacist date his own girls? You guys are often like that: I'm so proud to be this or that, yet I prefer foreign women with light features. I use 'white' mainly to trigger people like you or Gültekin who are not European.

Relax, white nationalist. Go out of your Soviet concrete apartment, get some fresh air and return with a jar of боярышник.

[Böri]

Conquering Slavs, destroying their cities, enslaving them - brave and badass behavior.
Being conquered and destroyed by the Russians because of those constant raids and attacks - evil Russian imperialism and chauvinism.
:rolleyes: :laugh:

Mongols conquered East Slavs, except Novgorod and Pskov which accepted vassalage for 200 years. Slavs didnt conquer by themselves, they were hunter gatherers turning to peasants, organised and led by a Germanic Varangian Rus’ class which were fathered by an exiled Khazar kaghan who lost civil war he waged against converts to Judaism. Around 780’s.

[Böri]

Why you don't add how later all Slavs kicked all Turkics nomads to steppe? From Croats to Russians?

Croats were owned by Turks at Krbava field. A numerically inferior Turkish Akinji forces completely obliterated the Croats including their nobility. They were irrelevant nation. Were it not for Magyar and later German Habsburg protectionism probably Croats wouldnt have made until today. Later they slaughtered you Bosniaks for you were culturally...

[Vlatko Vukovic]

Mongols conquered East Slavs, except Novgorod and Pskov which accepted vassalage for 200 years. Slavs didnt conquer by themselves, they were hunter gatherers turning to peasants, organised and led by a Germanic Varangian Rus’ class which were fathered by an exiled Khazar kaghan who lost civil war he waged against converts to Judaism. Around 780’s.

Did you read "Primary Chronicles" about Eastern Europe in time of Varangian Rus?

The Nestor (author) wrote that Slavic and Finnic tribes fought and kicked Varangians back, but, because Slavic and Finnic tribes had conflicts between themselfs, they invited Varangians to rule among them. And then Kievan Rus started to exist.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

Croats were owned by Turks at Krbava field. A numerically inferior Turkish Akinji forces completely obliterated the Croats including their nobility. They were irrelevant nation. Were it not for Magyar and later German Habsburg protectionism probably Croats wouldnt have made until today. Later they slaughtered you Bosniaks for you were culturally...

Croats destroyed Avars from Balkan. I speak about early medieval times.

[Leto]

Relax, white nationalist. Go out of your Soviet concrete apartment, get some fresh air and return with a jar of боярышник.
You don't know who I am. I've been here since 2014 and you probably work at a construction site somewhere in Moscow for a low wage.

[Böri]

Croats destroyed Avars from Balkan. I speak about early medieval times.

Avar origins are disputed; considering how Göktürks hated them, they might be from Mongolic Rurans kicked out from Central steppe by Turks.
European and Slavic historiography prefers a supposedly Turkic group which controlled Central Europe for 250 years rather than a Mongolic-Tungus group one because Turks are ‘politically more correct invaders’

[Leto]

Mongols conquered East Slavs, except Novgorod and Pskov which accepted vassalage for 200 years. Slavs didnt conquer by themselves, they were hunter gatherers turning to peasants, organised and led by a Germanic Varangian Rus’ class which were fathered by an exiled Khazar kaghan who lost civil war he waged against converts to Judaism. Around 780’s.
The Russians gradually neutralized and conquered all Golden Horde remnants (they would constantly pillage and raid our lands) one by one within a few centuries and defeated the Ottomans numerous times.

[Böri]

The Russians gradually neutralized and conquered all Golden Horde remnants (they would constantly pillage and raid our lands) one by one within a few centuries and defeated the Ottomans numerous times.

So the point? Everyone and thing have ups and downs. Wasn't Russia stopped being Russian around 1918 when a group of Jews, Lithuanians, Georgians shot down the Russian Tsar and his family and created a new state based on local councils? It needed a decade for the Russification of councils once again.

[Leto]

So the point? Everyone and thing have ups and downs. Wasn't Russia stopped being Russian around 1918 when a group of Jews, Lithuanians, Georgians shot down the Russian Tsar and his family and created a new state based on local councils? It needed a decade for the Russification of councils once again.
Yes, Communism destroyed our culture.

This is all off-topic, I'm leaving this thread since I have not much to say on topic.

[Yaglakar]

You don't know who I am. I've been here since 2014 and you probably work at a construction site somewhere in Moscow for a low wage.

There are no Uyghurs in Russia, dumbass.

Although there was this one guy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOaKPbkJg-I

:D