Surprising Hunnic samples!

[Token]

Hunnic_Hungary_scaled

Sarmatian_Pokrovka 50.70
Hunnic_Tien_Shan 23.05
Altai_IA 17.95
Udmurt 5.85
Tajik 2.45
Tabasaran 0.00
Lithuanian 0.00
Finnish 0.00
Nordic_IA 0.00
Slavic_Bohemia 0.00
Germany_Medieval 0.00


Hunnic_Tien_Shan

Sarmatian_Pokrovka 51.70
Altai_IA 31.25
Scythian_ZevakinoChilikta 11.80
Scythian_AldyBel 5.25
Scythian_Pazyryk 0.00
Scythian_Samara 0.00
Han 0.00
Selkup 0.00
Mongola 0.00
Kanai_MBA 0.00
Karasuk_o 0.00
Zevakinskiy_LBA 0.00
Kashkarchi_BA 0.00

[Jana]

Huns were mix of everything...with numerous slavic and germanic allies

This ones look Eurasian, shouldn't they be ?

[Böri]

Huns were mix of everything...with numerous slavic and germanic allies


Not Huns in Tien Shan (aka Tengri Mountains).

[Token]

Hunns were mix of everything...with numerous slavic and germanic allies

This ones look Eurasian, shouldn't they be ?
The samples suggests otherwise: European populations are straightly discarded by the algorithm as a source for their West Eurasian input. Huns were actually a two-way mix of Scytho-Sarmatians and northern East Asians.

[Leto]

What calculator is that? How can I get my own results?

[Jana]

The samples suggests otherwise: European populations are straightly discarded by the algorithm as a source for their West Eurasian input. Huns were actually a two-way mix of Scytho-Sarmatians and northern East Asians.

weren't Sarmatians genetically closest to Russians with minimal east eurasian imput (cca 10%)? From what I have seen they were quite more European than Schyntians

[Token]

weren't Sarmatians genetically closest to Russians with minimal east eurasian imput (cca 10%)? From what I have seen they were quite more European than Schyntians

Yes, basically. Western Sarmatians had around 15% East Eurasian while Scythians could vary from 20% to more than half. What makes Russians closest to them is the East Eurasian input integrally present in the modern Russian gene-pool at around 10%. They aren't more philogenetically related than a modern Irish is to a Sarmatian though.

[Jana]

Yes, basically. Western Sarmatians had around 15% East Eurasian while Scythians could vary from 20% to more than half. What makes Russians closest to them is the East Eurasian input integrally present in the modern Russian gene-pool at around 10%. They aren't more philogenetically related than a modern Irish is to a Sarmatian though.

thanks, i understand :thumb001:

[Leto]

Yes, basically. Western Sarmatians had around 15% East Eurasian while Scythians could vary from 20% to more than half. What makes Russians closest to them is the East Eurasian input integrally present in the modern Russian gene-pool at around 10%. They aren't more philogenetically related than a modern Irish is to a Sarmatian though.
10% is not the average for Russians. 5% or so.

[Leto]

And the 'Scythians' you're refering to were not a unified nation or ethnic group.

[Token]

And the 'Scythians' you're refering to were not a unified nation or ethnic group.

They obviously were. They shared the same origin, culture, language, genes and lifestyle, everything that defines a ethnic group. Your statement is beyond retarded.


10% is not the average for Russians. 5% or so.

Nope, you are pulling numbers out of your ass.

[Leto]

Nope, you are pulling numbers out of your ass.
What? It's you who are talking nonsense. I'm Russian/East Slavic and have seen hundreds of samples from Russia and neighboring countries. And you're Brazilian, not even European. Ethnic Russians are not 10% Siberian on average, 10% would be at the highest end of the spectrum (Northern Russia). So please stop and better listen to someone who knows better.

From Eurogenes K13:

Kargopol_Russian
0.23 East_Asian
6.67 Siberian
1.70 Amerindian

Erzya (Mordovians)
0.49 East_Asian
7.11 Siberian
1.50 Amerindian

Southwest_Russian
0.22 East_Asian
2.14 Siberian
0.81 Amerindian

Ukrainian
0.91 East_Asian
1.41 Siberian
0.78 Amerindian

Belorussian
0.18 East_Asian
1.32 Siberian
0.18 Amerindian

The Amerindian is not fully East Eurasian, it's around 1/3 ANE or so. Actual East Asians get little to no Amerindian.
My mom is Northern Russian, she's 8-9% East Eurasian on Eurogenes and Dodecad, but she's not average. My dad is mostly Belorussian, he gets like 2-3% including things like Amerindian, Beringian, etc.

[Leto]

They obviously were. They shared the same origin, culture, language, genes and lifestyle, everything that defines a ethnic group. Your statement is beyond retarded.

I think archeologists tend to call various groups Scythian, from Ukraine to the Altai region. They might have shared some cultural elements but they were not necessarily one ethnic group. In fact cultures labeled as Scythian existed from like 700 BC to 400 AD if I remember correctly. We're talking about hundreds of years and thousands of miles.

[StonyArabia]

The Huns were clearly a Mongoloid race, however it's not known if they were Turkic or not. Some have said their language was rather Oghuric but this seems not to be the case, and the Hunnic languages are an isolate but still bear strong elements to Mongolic and Turkic languages ,and it was also not written language. Plus the Huns would use Gothic as their main language and Attila himself had German wives. The Huns can be either from from North China, Yinesian people, or some kind Turkic people. Also the skull of the Huns shows them to have been Mongoloid rather than Caucasian or Iranians.

It would be interesting if they would exhume Moorish remains in Iberia and southern France, and see how they resemble modern day North Africans and Arabians, I believe they already did, and it showed them to be the same with no difference.

[Leto]

The Huns were clearly a Mongoloid race, however it's not known if they were Turkic or not. Some have said their language was rather Oghuric but this seems not to be the case, and the Hunnic languages are an isolate but still bear strong elements to Mongolic and Turkic languages ,and it was also not written language. Plus the Huns would use Gothic as their main language and Attila himself had German wives. The Huns can be either from from North China, Yinesian people, or some kind Turkic people. Also the skull of the Huns shows them to have been Mongoloid rather than Caucasian or Iranians.

I don't think they were 80-100% East Eurasian/Mongoloid when they reached Eastern and Central Europe. Maybe they were like modern Karakalpak people of Western Uzbekistan who are around 50-55% mongoloid.

[Yaglakar]

https://i.imgur.com/llfx4V8.png
Hyun Jin Kim. The Huns. Routledge. page 29


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI-hxemUyQU

[Böri]

European Huns were Oğur like old Bulgars or modern Chuvash. Asian Huns starting 700 years before them were Turkic of unidentified branch with some Paleo-Siberian elements.

[İrle]

They obviously were. They shared the same origin, culture, language, genes and lifestyle, everything that defines a ethnic group. Your statement is beyond retarded.



You are a fucking joke. "Scythian" is an umbrella term to define all the nomadic peoples from Ukraine to Altai region in between 8th-4th centuries BC. You know jack shit about "Scythian" language except for few words mentioned by Greek sources and they are from the "Scythians" in Ukranian steppes. Not to mention there has never been a genetic consistency in Eurasian steppes, Scythians were not exception.

[Leto]

Western Scythians were predominantly European though. And obviously IE speakers.

[Böri]

Origin of Huns were discussed in modern era since 18th century.
There were theories pretending they were Mongolic, Germanic or even Slavic.

In 1940's, a German historian and archeologist (forgot his name) proved European Huns were followers of old Huns (Xiongnu) and were the same people.
He found by noticing Chinese and European sources crossed.
Hunnic invasion of Alania (south part of Pontic-Caspian steppes) in 352 was mention in Chinese sources as 'Xiongnu invades Alans, and Roman sources in the West said 'Huns invaded Alans, for the exact same event.

Göktürks and the Ashina clan are also known to be part of the Xiongnu who stayed in Asia, during 4th and 5th century.

[Fieraru]

I don't get it how come there is 0% Mongolia for the Hun sample?? that makes no sense

The first Huns recorded attacked China before they came to Europe.

[Yaglakar]

How many Hunnic samples are currently available? Do we know their Y-DNA?

Can somebody run all available Hunnic kits through gedmatch and post results here?

Thanks.