Was Haplogroup R originally mongoloid?

**Vlatko Vukovic** · 10-31-2017, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by Sundqvist

yeah, the truth finally revealed

what he is speaking about in this pages? Really i can't translate it good.

Ülev · 10-31-2017, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by Vlatko Vukovic

what he is speaking about in this pages? Really i can't translate it good.

in short, even if R1a was incorporated to Turkic ethnicity, they lived far more eastern than today
but R1a M458 and other clades were found in Lithuanian Tatars, Balkars, Nogays etc. with high %

edit: and those Tatars or other Turkic groups rather did not mixed with locals, at least by paternal side, I mean they could take local women, but did not allow their daughters "marry" with local, indigenous males (that's my conclusion)

**Vlatko Vukovic** · 10-31-2017, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by Sundqvist

in short, even if R1a was incorporated to Turkic ethnicity, they lived far more eastern than today
but R1a M458 and other clades were found in Lithuanian Tatars, Balkars, Nogays etc. with high %

edit: and those Tatars or other Turkic groups rather did not mixed with locals, at least by paternal side, I mean they could take local women, but did not allow their daughters "marry" with local, indigenous males (that's my conclusion)

So Klyosov are saying that this haplogroup is originally from these Turkic tribes or?

**Vlatko Vukovic** · 10-31-2017, 10:03 AM

And what about R1a-M558

Ülev · 10-31-2017, 10:05 AM

I did not read whole article, but knowing life - everyone is trying make their people greater, so I am pretty sure that his conclusion will be that Aryans, Samratians, Scythians, Persians and Martians were of Slavic origin

but on the other side - he showed that majority of Lithuanian and Crimea Tatars have R1a - everyone can make own theory

**Proto-Shaman** · 10-31-2017, 10:41 AM

Bulgars, a Turkic tribe in Central-Eastern Europe

**Vlatko Vukovic** · 10-31-2017, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by Kipchak Håkan

Bulgars, a Turkic tribe in Central-Eastern Europe

It is not unknown fact. That Bulgars are slavicized turkic tribe.

But you must admit that they don't look today as Turkics. They have more Slavic genes and Thracians.

**Pahli** · 10-31-2017, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by Vlatko Vukovic

It is not unknown fact. That Bulgars are slavicized turkic tribe.

But you must admit that they don't look today as Turkics. They have more Slavic genes and Thracians.

It was possibly their elite that was speaking Turkic, the main population could easily have been a mix of Turkic, Iranic and Slavic that later got completely slavicized.

**Vlatko Vukovic** · 10-31-2017, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by Pahliski

It was possibly their elite that was speaking Turkic, the main population could easily have been a mix of Turkic, Iranic and Slavic that later got completely slavicized.

Point is that old-Bulgars didn't settle Balkan as Hordes (as Turks usually do in history), that is a reason why they are not similar to other turkic peoples today.

**Pahli** · 10-31-2017, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by Vlatko Vukovic

Point is that old-Bulgars didn't settle Balkan as Hordes (as Turks usually do in history), that is a reason why they are not similar to other turkic peoples today.

Well modern Bulgarians barely have any East Eurasian which means that the population that settled there only were an elite or the population they brought with them were mostly non-Mongoloid admixed