why turks have most higher r1a?

XipeTotek

Regular Member
Messages
115
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Ethnic group
Turkish,Albanian
i see on a website altai turks have most r1a gens on the world. its meaning they are more slavic than russians? i wanna learn about first turkic tribes more mongoloid or more caucasoid? and they are scythians? or who? if they are scythians why our language family are differerent from them. mongolians assimiliated us? so we are assimiliated scyhtians from mongols or what?
 
i see on a website altai turks have most r1a gens on the world. its meaning they are more slavic than russians? i wanna learn about first turkic tribes more mongoloid or more caucasoid? and they are scythians? or who? if they are scythians why our language family are differerent from them. mongolians assimiliated us? so we are assimiliated scyhtians from mongols or what?
Based on genetic admixtures of people from Turkey, the Turks who invaded Anatolia were Mongoloid.
 
i see on a website altai turks have most r1a gens on the world. its meaning they are more slavic than russians? i wanna learn about first turkic tribes more mongoloid or more caucasoid? and they are scythians? or who? if they are scythians why our language family are differerent from them. mongolians assimiliated us? so we are assimiliated scyhtians from mongols or what?

I think this is only another evidence of the most probable scenario for the coalescence and expansion of the Turkic tribes: an increasingly expansive and influential confederation of steppe tribes united under the common banner of a lingua franca (Common Turkic) and a few similar cultural traits (a religion based around a supreme Sky God/Tengri, for example).

A relatively recent paper analyzed the ancient DNA of individuals in some Scythian sites of the Iron Age, and they found out that: western Scythians were most similar to people living now in the North Caucasus and parts of Central Asia; and the present-day Turkic populations of the Eurasian steppe, including its western area, are most similar to the eastern Scythians who lived in north Central Asia. By the way, in the Antiquity those eastern Scythians were still mostly West Eurasian Iranic, but they already had relevant East Asian admixture (maybe relations with the Proto-Turks andd Proto-Mongols were already increasing until the latter became the more powerful of steppe ethnicities?).

Many things still need to be clarified and analyzed through ancient and modern DNA, but if you asked me I'd bet that the Proto-Turks were typical mongoloid Central Siberians (Altaians, Western Mongolians), but by the time they really became "THE Turks", the powerful and numerous people spreading toward everywhere in Eurasia, they were basically a blend of those Altaians and Mongolians with many, many Scythians, other Iranic peoples (Sogdians, Bactrians etc.) and perhaps even some Finno-Ugric peoples like the Magyars while they still lived in the steppes.
 
i see on a website altai turks have most r1a gens on the world. its meaning they are more slavic than russians? i wanna learn about first turkic tribes more mongoloid or more caucasoid? and they are scythians? or who? if they are scythians why our language family are differerent from them. mongolians assimiliated us? so we are assimiliated scyhtians from mongols or what?

Based on results from groups of Turkmens some have thought that the elite of Oghuz Turks belonged to Q1a1b-M25 (but maybe that's true only about Turkmens).

In the region where 'Common Turkic' was spoken there could have been many haplogroups. Certainly R1a-Z93 existed there.

The terms 'mongoloid', 'caucasoid' etc aren't scientific. Certainly they weren't East Asians.

I have thought that the Mongols had Turkic elites and pushed other Turkic groups to move towards west.
 
'mongoloid', caucasoid' are very useful terms for people which doesn't like split hairs; 'mongoloid' implies a set of phenotypical traits which are statistically very dominant among almost pure East-Asians, and are, when typical of the greater number of a group, the signature of also a dominant east-asian autosomal constitution of this group. At the individual level, it's an other thing.
I share the point of Ygorcs.
 
I see we have good scientists here again! what a lost of time when we speak about the most of East Asians and their (partly diverse) phenotypes appearing in history IN ACCORD with au DNA changes, as a whole -haplo's Y, mt and autosomes -, for people who don't like split hairs - if phenotypes (typology and means) had been taken in account more seriously and in details with fewer "sniffs" of modern "scientists" we could have seen long time ago the changes during Copper/Bronze transition in Southeastern Europe and Balkans and in Chalco Italy, and in Eastern Iberia too, all that before anDNA, though I find DNA a progress (but not in so a proportion to exclude anything else)!
 
Sorry for my histerical tone! The matter doesn't deserve it. Lack of alcohol, or chamomile?
 
Based on genetic admixtures of people from Turkey, the Turks who invaded Anatolia were Mongoloid.

Not sound logical. Turkic people especially, South Central Asia (Turkmenistan-Uzbekestan) started to mix and turned Caucasoid much before.

Actually, that region is one of the main based of Iranic people, so Turkic invader have already heavily mixed with iranians in there then invaded Anatolia
 
Not sound logical. Turkic people especially, South Central Asia (Turkmenistan-Uzbekestan) started to mix and turned Caucasoid much before.

Actually, that region is one of the main based of Iranic people, so Turkic invader have already heavily mixed with iranians in there then invaded Anatolia
How do you explain elevated level of Siberian and East Asian admixtures in your DNA and other Turks in general? Silk Road traders? ;)
 
Lebrok, I rather share the opinion of Ygorcs on this very matter; It could have been the same process which could explain why Southern Slavs are not so close to Eastern Slavs and even Western Slavs, and explain too why so low level of typical "invaders" auDNA is found sometimes among accultured pops: the latter and ultimate waves of invaders or colonisators were already mixed since some time, kind of progressive change on the road (local wives played a great role here, I think more and more proofs are popping up now).
And why do you say the east-asian components are so elevated among Anatolian Turks?: it is not what I red until now?
 
Lebrok, I rather share the opinion of Ygorcs on this very matter; It could have been the same process which could explain why Southern Slavs are not so close to Eastern Slavs and even Western Slavs, and explain too why so low level of typical "invaders" auDNA is found sometimes among accultured pops: the latter and ultimate waves of invaders or colonisators were already mixed since some time, kind of progressive change on the road (local wives played a great role here, I think more and more proofs are popping up now).
And why do you say the east-asian components are so elevated among Anatolian Turks?: it is not what I red until now?
Good catch, sorry I meant NE Asian. Here are the comparative samples I have. To bad we don't have Anatolian sample from IA or anything before Turk conquest.
M740087I2499 Modern M348213i0247 M084152PR3_I0575Moder Moder Moder Moder
Anatolia, SEBA Turkey scythian EarlySarmatian, Pokrovka, Russia 5th–2nd c. BCEMongolian Turkmen Uzbek Uyghur
Run Time 4.58 Run time11 Run time6 Run time Run time Run time Run time
S-Indian- S-Indian1 S-Indian1 S-Indian- S-Indian1 S-Indian5 S-Indian5 S-Indian5
Baloch8 Baloch15 Baloch25 Baloch25 Baloch5 Baloch26 Baloch18 Baloch16
Caucasian42 Caucasian44 Caucasian8 Caucasian6 Caucasian5 Caucasian30 Caucasian17 Caucasian13
NE-Euro7 NE-Euro11 NE-Euro45 NE-Euro51 NE-Euro6 NE-Euro10 NE-Euro14 NE-Euro12
SE-Asian- SE-Asian0 SE-Asian1 SE-Asian0 SE-Asian- SE-Asian0 SE-Asian- SE-Asian-
Siberian- Siberian4 Siberian6 Siberian4 Siberian38 Siberian7 Siberian17 Siberian15
NE-Asian- NE-Asian3 NE-Asian1 NE-Asian- NE-Asian39 NE-Asian8 NE-Asian20 NE-Asian30
Papuan0 Papuan0 Papuan- Papuan- Papuan- Papuan- Papuan- Papuan-
American- American0 American3 American2 American1 American1 American1 American1
Beringian- Beringian1 Beringian1 Beringian1 Beringian2 Beringian1 Beringian2 Beringian2
Mediterranean29 Mediterranean11 Mediterranean9 Mediterranean11 Mediterranean2 Mediterranean4 Mediterranean4 Mediterranean2
SW-Asian13 SW-Asian9 SW-Asian- SW-Asian- SW-Asian- SW-Asian7 SW-Asian2 SW-Asian-
San- San0 San- San- San- San- San- San-
E-African- E-African0 E-African- E-African- E-African- E-African- E-African- E-African-
Pygmy- Pygmy0 Pygmy- Pygmy- Pygmy- Pygmy- Pygmy- Pygmy-
W-African0 W-African0 W-African- W-African- W-African- W-African- W-African- W-African-
 
How do you explain elevated level of Siberian and East Asian admixtures in your DNA and other Turks in general? Silk Road traders? ;)

You have turned word elevated so I am skipping it :D

I didn't say that invaders didn't have Mongoloid admixture. My point is their mongoloid admixture weren't as much as to define them as Mongoloid.

How full Iranian Sythian, started to show EastAsian admixture later. Western Turk started to show Caucasoid admixture. Early Turk and Arab writers confims it. According to some of them, word Turkmen is coming from Persian word - Turk-manend which means "like-Turk" and they add that Turks start to look like Tajiks (another Iranian Nation)

About current Siberian & East Asian admixture in Turkey, genetic is multi-unknown equation. So first Turkish invader are just one thing. What are the others?

*Mongolian Invasion, they came to even East Anatolia
*Before Mongolian came, in fornt of them East Turkic People had came (Turkic people who were forced by Mongolian, They were more Mongoloid)
*Tatars and Other Pontic-Steps Turkic people who were forced by Russians to go Anatolia.

About the last one, we are 12 people in our company but one is originate from Crimea and other one is more blonde then Putin and from Russian Tatarestan. Both of them, say that their all villages are same.
 
i see on a website altai turks have most r1a gens on the world. its meaning they are more slavic than russians? i wanna learn about first turkic tribes more mongoloid or more caucasoid? and they are scythians? or who? if they are scythians why our language family are differerent from them. mongolians assimiliated us? so we are assimiliated scyhtians from mongols or what?

Russians are finnish. So is Putin. It is already established fact.



First of all Altai is Scythic region which was inhabitated by IE scythian tribes basically from earliest beginnings - it has one of the richest deposits of artifacts from scythians. That is the main source of R1a in those lands.

Mongols most probably come from region of Khitan, that also includes Dauria and Jurchen - they all are names of mongols. The only mongolic tribe in Europe are kalmyks and they have notable y-dna C even today - just like other mongols.
Tungusic people live on Amur river area near mongols.
Turkic seems more like branch or neighbouring languages of mongols. It is hard to tell, but if they are not hybrid offshot of mongols, then most likely they lived west of mongols in area, what is considered eastern Mongolia and most probably were driven to west by mongols from their homeland. Note, that the migrations before mongols happened west and then east, but were driven by IE steppe people.

Genetically all three have y-dna C. Also related to these three groups are Nivkhs(Sakhalin and Amur estuary are their home place) and Chukotkan-Kamchatkian people. They have no knowledge of horse riding - most probably, that neither of any other y-dna C had, that includes mongols, tungus and turkic people and this knowledge came from IE people.

Ainu are not related to them(Ainu are y-dna D) - they are related to original Tibetians and some Indian tribes. Ainu were original inhabitants of all of Japan, but not Sakhalin, where they invaded Nivkhs. Korean are basically chinese, who speak different language. Yukagir are N and Yenisean(original inhabitants of Baikal area and Yenisey river and probably Sakha or what was not under ice in ice age) are Q.

Modern turkic people do not have any genetical ties to their "cousins"(if they are not related, then they are not relatives). The only true turkic people(if we use y-dna C as a base) nowadays are Kazakhs - rest are product of linguistical assimilation of local people, with some unimportant exceptions.

Horse riding, milk drinking is IE development. Even if people in Europe do not mix blood and milk as a drink, it does not mean, that their ancestors didn't do it.This is nothing special for neighbours to adapt and become masters of these things. For example, chinese did not developed metalurgy on their own, but it was most probably, that Miao Miao ancestors did so, even if they are driven out from their lands now.


Modern Turks in Turkey has nothing to do with Turkic tribes, as they all are mostly assimilated Canaaniites, prehelenic semithic greeks and hellenic and R1b invaders, that created Mittani and later - Armenia(which was created as a mix of Hurrians and IE - hence Ar in Armenian and in ancient name of nakh people - Ers, that is still present in name of Erevan). Most ancient Hattic inhabitants of Anatolia were more related linguistically to Circassians and genetically also to Georgians, as are Circassians. I guess it is very political question in Turkey, where differences between Turks, Kurds and Armenians does not exist, except in language.
 
Last edited:
Russians are finnish. So is Putin. It is already established fac
First of all Altai is Scythic region which was inhabitated by IE scythian tribes basically from earliest beginnings - it has one of the richest deposits of artifacts from scythians. That is the main source of R1a in those lands.
Mongols most probably come from region of Khitan, that also includes Dauria and Jurchen - they all are names of mongols. The only mongolic tribe in Europe are kalmyks and they have notable y-dna C even today - just like other mongols.
Tungusic people live on Amur river area near mongols.
Turkic seems more like branch or neighbouring languages of mongols. It is hard to tell, but if they are not hybrid offshot of mongols, then most likely they lived west of mongols in area, what is considered eastern Mongolia and most probably were driven to west by mongols from their homeland. Note, that the migrations before mongols happened west and then east, but were driven by IE steppe people.
Genetically all three have y-dna C. Also related to these three groups are Nivkhs(Sakhalin and Amur estuary are their home place) and Chukotkan-Kamchatkian people. They have no knowledge of horse riding - most probably, that neither of any other y-dna C had, that includes mongols, tungus and turkic people and this knowledge came from IE people.
Ainu are not related to them(Ainu are y-dna D) - they are related to original Tibetians and some Indian tribes. Ainu were original inhabitants of all of Japan, but not Sakhalin, where they invaded Nivkhs. Korean are basically chinese, who speak different language. Yukagir are N and Yenisean(original inhabitants of Baikal area and Yenisey river and probably Sakha or what was not under ice in ice age) are Q.
Modern turkic people do not have any genetical ties to their "cousins"(if they are not related, then they are not relatives). The only true turkic people(if we use y-dna C as a base) nowadays are Kazakhs - rest are product of linguistical assimilation of local people, with some unimportant exceptions.
Horse riding, milk drinking is IE development. Even if people in Europe do not mix blood and milk as a drink, it does not mean, that their ancestors didn't do it.This is nothing special for neighbours to adapt and become masters of these things. For example, chinese did not developed metalurgy on their own, but it was most probably, that Miao Miao ancestors did so, even if they are driven out from their lands now.
Modern Turks in Turkey has nothing to do with Turkic tribes, as they all are mostly assimilated Canaaniites, prehelenic semithic greeks and hellenic and R1b invaders, that created Mittani and later - Armenia(which was created as a mix of Hurrians and IE - hence Ar in Armenian and in ancient name of nakh people - Ers, that is still present in name of Erevan). Most ancient Hattic inhabitants of Anatolia were more related linguistically to Circassians and genetically also to Georgians, as are Circassians. I guess it is very political question in Turkey, where differences between Turks, Kurds and Armenians does not exist, except in language.
i dont agree so much. i am half albanian and half turk but i have and my family have a slanted eyes. i see so much slanted eyes people in turkey. turkic peoples always mixed hybrid nation. and i know my ancestos come from all of our history. scythians,hunnic,gokturk,ottoman. turks are always most mixed nation on the world. so this is reason why we are powerful and change the history :)
 
You should look at R1a subclade also. Idians for instance have high rates of R1a incidence but that does not mean they are Russians. It means that 10-15000 years ago when everyone was dark, they had the same male ancestor, later everyone diverged.so the subclade will tell you what are really R1a people of Turkey
 
Russians are finnish. So is Putin. It is already established fact.

If they are Finnish, how they speak Slavic language? From the sky it came to them?

Oh, pls, don't say me that before Old Church Slavonic they spoke some another language. :D :D
 
i see on a website altai turks have most r1a gens on the world. its meaning they are more slavic than russians? i wanna learn about first turkic tribes more mongoloid or more caucasoid? and they are scythians? or who? if they are scythians why our language family are differerent from them. mongolians assimiliated us? so we are assimiliated scyhtians from mongols or what?

Look at subclades. R1a-Z280 is Balto-Slavic, R1a-M458 proto-Slavic, Turkic and Mongolic R1a are different branches (except Nogai, where's foundable R1a-M458), but everything have some mysteries, same for Nogai M458.
 
The only true turkic people(if we use y-dna C as a base) nowadays are Kazakhs - rest are product of linguistical assimilation of local people, with some unimportant exceptions.

Oh my God, oh my God...

Did you read somewhere that Golden Horde were Turkified Mongols? And the modern Kazakhs are mainly descedants of Golden Horde. So how they could be "the only true turkic people" ?

Btw. in my opinion Turks of N1b are proto-Turks.
 
Oh my God, oh my God...

Did you read somewhere that Golden Horde were Turkified Mongols? And the modern Kazakhs are mainly descedants of Golden Horde. So how they could be "the only true turkic people" ?


Btw. in my opinion Turks of N1b are proto-Turks.

proto turks come from native american hablogroup q. n hablogroup is uralic peoples
 

This thread has been viewed 21833 times.

Back
Top