I heard about these 3rd branch of Aryans. Can you tell us more about them? Where did they originated and which Indo-Aryan dialects are closest to it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vishwamitra
I heard about these 3rd branch of Aryans. Can you tell us more about them? Where did they originated and which Indo-Aryan dialects are closest to it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vishwamitra
Tocharians are not the same as Tukhara. The people of the Tarim Basin were incorrectly named "Tocharian". But anyways, what makes you say the Tocharians were Aryan? Aryan has always meant Indo-Iranian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vishwamitra
https://borderlessblogger.files.word...satem_map1.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tocharian_languages
Bactrian (along with Greek) was one of the official languages of the Kushan Empire. It had nothing to do with the "Tocharians" of the Tarim Basin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushan_Empire
Yes, I am :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vishwamitra
This sound interesting. So they must have belonged to haplogroup R1b? Were they Centum or Satem?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vishwamitra
Ok, here comes the problem, Celtic is an agglutinative language, which is totally alien to Indo-European. And According to the Russian biochemist Anatol Klyosov R1b has also non-Indo-European origins, but Proto-Turkic and Dene-Caucasian instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vishwamitra
Tocharians ≠ Tocharian ABCQuote:
Originally Posted by Mingle
read Stupipedia, in your own source. lol
Yes that's what I said. They were wrongly given the name Tocharian. We already had this discussion a year or two ago if you remember.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kipchak Håkan
Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk
But they were still IE, weren't they? The Tarim basin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingle
Yes they were. I didn't pay attention to what he meant by "ABC". My point is that the Tocharians mentioned in history (Tukharas) are the original Tocharians and they were ethnic Bactrian. The people from the Tarim Basin are not Tocharians at all though but just wrongly given that name. But they were also IEs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
There is zero connections between the medieval Indo-European dialects of Tarim basin (Toch. A, Toch. B, Toch. C) and the Proto-Turkic Z93 mummies of the Tarim basin, neither to the historically recorded Oghuz Tokhars of Mahmut al-Kashgari.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mingle
Proto-Turkic expansion:
https://imageshack.com/a/img923/2233/UmNGpw.png
https://imageshack.com/a/img923/6818/RryXx0.png
and if one goes back far enough, proto-Mongols and proto-Turks come from the same root.
I knew of them. The rulers of these Alchon Huns looked very much like modern Oghuz and Karluk speakers, in particular Uyghurs, Turkmens, Uzbeks, Azerbaijanis and Anatolian Turks. Did they have any genetic impact in South Asia at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vishwamitra
Real Proto-Turks
https://i.imgur.com/aXYGgwC.png
(all good things come threes)
These maps reflect the original Scythian ethnogenesis. But Afanasievo and Okunevo are some 500 years older than originally thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yaglakar
Ryuk is banned?
OK.
For those who are interested in Turkic paleogenetics - the studies of the Kazakh genetics.
https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=27277833
This is a study for a narrow circle of persons .To get the full version of the article, complicated registration is required.
It has very valuable information.
Preview :
Quote:
This article describes the study of ethnogenesis of the Turkic peoples according to the methods of population genetics. The author identifies three approaches to research: 1. The study of autosomal markers; 2. A study of polymorphism of Y-chromosome among modern populations; 3. Investigation of polymorphism of Y-chromosome among ancient populations. The article describes the results of genetic studies of such ancient peoples as the Hunnu, Donghu, Scythians, the population of Zhou realm (China), representatives of the Yamnaya, Andronovo, Karasuk, Taghar and other archaeological cultures. Interesting data on the pit culture coincides with the modern populations of the Burzyan and Naiman-Baganaly. Data on the Scythians, the Andronovo culture matches with modern tribes of the Kipchaks, Tabyn, Elan, and part of the Karachais. Data on the Karasuk culture matches with some of the Polish-Lithuanian Tatar families and modern Kyrgyz tribes of On and Sol Kanat (left and right wings). This article presents data on the testing of autosomal markers, namely the timing of the beginning of the genetic admixture of different populations, which marked the beginning of the population under study. The author presents the dates of “genetic admixture” of such peoples as the Turks, Balkars, Chuvashes, Iranian Azerbaijanis, Tatars, Bashkirs, Kazakhs, Uighurs, Uzbeks, Kyrgyzes, Turkmens, Kumyks, Nogais. He offers the examples of how the ethno-genetic studies are used in scientific purposes, more precisely in the process of nation building while writing the “national histories” of various nations. The author describes the situation of use of genetic data in the national construction of the Jews, Bashkirs, Hungarians, Russians. The article describes the major haplogroups occurring among various Turkic families: 1. Bashkir tribes: Kipchaks, Tabyn, Gaina, Kangls, Burzyan; 2. Kazakh tribes: Qara Kipchaks, Bultyn-Kipchaks, Argyn, Konyrat (Kungirats), Alshyn, Uysun, Naimans, Tabyn, Kerei, Shanyshkyly (Katagan); 3. Kyrgyz tribes relating to subdivisions of the On Kanat, Sol kanat, Ichkilik.
To Yaglakar.
Here written:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD...80%D0%BE%D0%B2
I heard that the Uygurs have a legend that they have semi-Turkic, semi-Mongolian origin.Quote:
Mogul layer:
The last major ethnic component that became part of the present-day Uyghur ethnos were the Moguls (Turkic speaking Mongols), who came by several waves at the 13th century, consisting of such tribes as Barlas, Douglat, Nyugate, Arlat, Churas, Bayrin and others. [1] The last large wave of Moguls came with Chagataid Said Khan at the beginning of the 16th century. The Moguls originally speaking Mongolian languages were gradually assimilated by local Turks, switched to the local Turkic language called Chagatai, adopted Islam (XIV century. Tugluk Timur-khan), began to settle.
How really big is the Mongolic component of ethnogenesis of present-day Uigurs? Or it is an exaggeration?
According to contemporary Haidar Dughlat, there were 30,000 Moghuls left in 1500s. He says that most blended with the Muslim population. And taking into account that the whole population of Uighurs and Kashgarians was likely low, a few hundred thousand perhaps, the genetic impact was likely large. Moghuls are not considered Mongols per say in Uighur folk memory, even though they are at least initially. The fact that they converted to Islam en mass and gradually switched to Türki was enough to perceive them as their own. Even though at the time large portions of the country were still non-Muslim. All other Mongols were usually referred to as Qalmaqs irrespective of whether they were Oirats or Kalkha Mongols.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelubey
Apart from DNA arguments it is quite difficult to say who is the ancestor of the Turks and the Persians. Many sources show that the Scythians spoke Persian, but their habitat was spread over large areas, including West Asia but also Central Asia. Nobody knows what language they spoke in northern Scythia, for example.
I think we can get a lot out of their war style. In particular the horseback archery culture.
Xiongu appeared on stage around 300 years later. Their way of warfare was identical. In particular their horse archers..
The Europeans were amazed by the Huns when they rushed in with horses. The Europeans didn't stand a chance against the fast mounted archers..
This was a typical style of Turkic warfare. Horseback archers were used as symbols on various flags and coins of Turks.
I'm not sure if we can get a relationship out of this. Also ancient Persians used the mounted archery culture but not much as the Turks did.
Scythian:
https://i.imgur.com/Q8PmgxW.jpg?1
Phartian:
https://i.imgur.com/quYA0M0.jpg?1
Unfortunately I couldn't find any artifacts from Xiongnu with horseback archery on it but in many Chinese historical sources we can conclude that the same warfare culture also prevailed among the Xiongnu people.
But why is R haplogroup so frequent amongst asiatic looking amerindians?
Indo-Europeans migrated in 80.000 bc into americas then build time machine to rob future R-men's genomes, then backmigrated into Europea, and finally killed and raped I1/I2 men. Anyway, thread reached 130,895 (Z93 Turan reconquered pole position).Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico33
Haplogroup R1 is 100% corelated with European ancestry, it has nothing to do with Turkic peoples, it was mixed into the pot with IRANIAN speaking Scythians.
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/0...al-health.html
Haplogroup C has nothing to do with Turkic peoples either, it's a Mongolic marker, the reason it's found in Kazakhs... is well... Kazakhs are a Turco-Mongol tribe.
Haplogroups Q, N and maybe J2a (which is definetely a CHG marker) were found in Proto-Turks, whom were of 95%+ EAST EURASIAN ancestry,
Eğer bundan başka bir iddianız varsa, kesinlikle yanılıyorsunuz ve Türk eğitim sistemi sizin beyninizi yıkamış. Başka bir açıklaması bilimsel olarak KESİNLİKLE YOK.
Dude R1 is between 12,500 and 25,700 years old (most likely 18,500 years). It is way older than turkics, you can only only talk about certain subclades of r1a (and also r1b) and turkics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Balthier
To say that R1 is 100% European is the most retarded thing I ever heard on this forum.
Other than r1b-v88, there are no exceptions on the present time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Annihilus
F1019 (below 2935) is turning out to be quite turkic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Balthier
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-F1345/ i don't see any Turkish flags here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Annihilus
i suggest you read this article, http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/0...al-health.html
"The oldest example of R1a in ancient DNA from Central Asia is dated to 2132-1940 calBCE (ID I3770, Narasimhan 2019). Moreover, this sequence is closely related to much older R1a samples from Central, Eastern and Northern Europe, and phylogenetically nested within their diversity. Thus, it must surely represent a population expansion from Europe to Central Asia. Indeed, it's also associated with the Bronze Age Andronovo archeological culture, which is usually seen as an offshoot of the Corded Ware culture (CWC) of Late Neolithic Europe. The vast majority of present-day R1a lineages in Central Asia are closely related to that of I3770, and so must also ultimately derive from Europe."
Obviously R1a was spread by ancient whites (Indo-Aryans and their descendants) :cool: It's 2019 and I don't know why some people still shit bricks when they are told this.
I said turkic not Turkish. F1019 was first discovered in a Kazakh and a Uyghur. The two Russian F1019's are Balkars (ignore their additional mutation that's only 225 years old) the other one is me. A Khazar R1a turned out to be F1019. We are slowely getting there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Balthier
Polako is a good guy but he has a clear agenda, besides I am not interested in Indian R1a and slavs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Balthier
R1a comes indeed from ancient white people with European characteristics, it is of Indo-European origin but what we should have in mind is that Indo-europeans are not only the ancestors of modern European peoples. Some of them went to Asia mixed with East Eurasian groups and during Middle-Ages took part in ethnogenesis of Turkic peoples. We know from history that Khazars, Cuman, Pethcenegs were Turkic tribes but their appearance varried a lot among these people. The historical sources mentions that some Khazars had European appearance (despite they were Turkic) while others Mongolian or in some cases even middle-Eastern. This is why we find East Asian haplogroups (Q for example) and Indo-European (R-Z93) among them.
You really can't talk about whites and R1a in that manner. R1a is much older than the white skin mutations that arose some 8000 years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
R1a was spread across Eurasia (particularly Central and South Asia) much later than that supposed date. In the Bronze Age supposedly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Annihilus
Turkic-speaking people didn't exist in Central Asia up until 500 AD or so. It was Indo-European back then.
deleted
deleted
Dude, all R1a in Eastern & Central Asia are of indo-iranian/tocharian descent. There almost are no R1a in Altay Turks and Yakut Turks for that reason. Also, are you from Samsun?Quote:
Originally Posted by Annihilus
Edit: it appears i was wrong about Altai People, they a lot of R1a, i confused them with the Tuvans.
J2a? East Asia? seriously?Quote:
Originally Posted by Balthier
So, why do you shit bricks then? :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
Yeah, i'm surprised you don't know that. It's pretty much famous lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto-Shaman
seriously :1127: are you mentally ill or just retarded?Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
https://i.imgur.com/OLlkXva.jpg
Looks like EHG and WSHG were both Türkic Mongoloid Steppe Overlords :rolleyes:
Shut up, NAZI canine. We all know where your canine stupidity hails from: Turkey!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto-Shaman
Attachment 91929
Attachment 91930
saka=huns=medieval turkic people.
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...rasian_steppes