So it's official that Original Turks , Xiongnu, Huns, Gokturks were Mongoloid?

Do you agree with this claim?

  • Yes

    Votes: 21 63.6%
  • No

    Votes: 9 27.3%
  • I'm still not sure

    Votes: 3 9.1%

  • Total voters
    33
Chadic people have 72-95% R1b but they seem to have this marker before the existence of any western European ethnicity/identify was formed.

But Chadic people have R1b-V88, which is a completely different branch than Western European R1b-L51 - check:

By contrast, Indo-Iranians and Turkic peoples share mostly the same branch of R1a, Z93:

Some Turkic groups (e.g. Bashkirs) have quite a lot of R1b-M478 (left side of the graph), which is not under M269:

This R1b-M478 might be originally Turkic, but R1a-Z93 is inherited from Indo-Iranians:

http://s15.postimg.org/3p6zzfty3/R1_Tree.png

R1_Tree.png
 
haplogroup does no define racial heritage

Y-DNA is just one chromosome and it tells just about one branch of ancestors (direct paternal ancestors). Better in defining racial heritage is autosomal DNA, which covers all of ancestors (including women and male ancestors other than father's, father's, father...):

http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA

"Autosomal DNA is a term used in genetic genealogy to describe DNA which is inherited from the autosomal chromosomes. An autosome is any of the numbered chromosomes, as opposed to the sex chromosomes. Humans have 22 pairs of autosomes and one pair of sex chromosomes (the X chromosome and the Y chromosome). Autosomes are numbered roughly in relation to their sizes. That is, Chromosome 1 has approximately 2,800 genes, while chromosome 22 has approximately 750 genes."

Some Y lines are much more successful than others because people like Genghis Khan or Niall of the Nine Hostages had plenty of sons with multiple women. Today in Ireland and in the USA a few million people have Y-DNA lineage of Niall of the Nine Hostages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_of_the_Nine_Hostages

If some very powerful man lived a very long time ago, and had a lot of sons - and if we assume that his sons also had a lot of sons (because if their father was powerful then we can assume that many of his children and grandchildren also had a lot of inherited power for, at least several generations), then it is quite possible, that today millions of people carry their Y-DNA lineages.

According to one estimate, population of the entire world 8000 years ago was only 5 million people:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/12/the-axial-age-world-population/

World_population_growth_li.png


This 5 million is a rather low estimate (some other estimates put it at ca. 10 million at that time).

But 50 males (assuming that someone had 100 children at that time) is 0.002% out of 2,5 million.

But what if someone 8000 years ago had 50 sons, and each of his sons had on average 25 sons?

That would be 1250 grandsons or already 0.05% out of 2,5 million males (1/2 of 5 million were men).

Today 0.05% of the world's male population would be 1,750,000, in the one - two million range.

But it seems that some of males who lived 6000 years ago have many millions of descendants today.
 
No, most of Indian R1a is also under Z93/Z94 - actually most is under even younger L657:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L657/

It most certainly came with the Aryan migration ("invasion" is a wrong term) to India:



Source (pages 471 - 473 out of 782):

https://ia800503.us.archive.org/30/items/TheOriginOfTheIndo-iranians/TheOriginOfTheIndo-iranian.pdf


There was no such thing as " Aryan migration " , it was migration of Indo-European speakers and Aryan is not a racial terms, it means "noble" .

R1a in India predate the existence of any ethnic group. Also R1a in India were clearly not European, because Indian are DNA mixture of 2 large components. They are West Asian and Weddoids.
 
But Chadic people have R1b-V88, which is a completely different branch than Western European R1b-L51 - check:

By contrast, Indo-Iranians and Turkic peoples share mostly the same branch of R1a, Z93:

Some Turkic groups (e.g. Bashkirs) have quite a lot of R1b-M478 (left side of the graph), which is not under M269:

This R1b-M478 might be originally Turkic, but R1a-Z93 is inherited from Indo-Iranians:

http://s15.postimg.org/3p6zzfty3/R1_Tree.png

R1_Tree.png


But my point is it predates the existence of Turkic language/empire was formed.



Pazyryk culture ( 600 BC ) Males were R1a part Mongoloid, females were Europoid.


" Craniological studies of samples from the Pazyryk burials revealed the presence of both Mongoloid and Caucasoid components in this population.[6] quoting G. F. Debets on the physical characteristics of the population in the Pazyryk kurgans, records a mixed population. The men would seem to be part Mongoloid and the women Europoid.[7] "


books




" Though almost 3000 miles separate the Scythian Empire from Pazyryk, both belonged to a world shared by peoples of different origins and languages (in one burial theman is of Mongoloid, the woman of Indo-European type) with a common burials of Europoid females and part Mongoloid males. "
 
If one looks at the Y DNA tree all non-Africans are from C Haplogroup. Just one branch remained that identifies the mongols. However, mongols are composed of many tribes. Genghis Khan is the one who unified them all and the mongols were formed. It is said he had red hair and green eyes. All non-Africans are C Haplogroup at the very top. The later adaptations are to local environment, diet and customs or culture.
 
Haplogroup C1a also could be found in ancient DNA from Europe until Neolithic times.

For example prehistoric Kostenki14 who lived in Russia at the Volga River had C1a.

It has not disappeared completely, it seems.

For example in a sample of 234 people from Halle an der Saale, one (0,43%) had C.
 
There was no such thing as "Aryan migration", it was migration of Indo-European speakers and Aryan is not a racial terms, it means "noble"

Aryan at first meant "companion", not noble (it started to mean "noble" later). This is how Indo-Iranians described themselves.

In addition the Indian branch of Indo-Iranian languages and peoples is called Indo-Aryan languages (and Indo-Aryan peoples).

So using a term "Aryan migration" is not incorrect. You can as well use a term "Indo-Aryan migration".

Pazyryk culture (600 BC) Males were R1a part Mongoloid, females were Europoid.

Pazyryk culture were people who spoke Iranian languages - not Turkic. What was their physical type is a different issue.

But it is IMO impossible that males and females of the same reproductive communicy can be so different "racially".

Maybe they are drawing conclusions based on a very small sample of people.

R1a in India predate the existence of any ethnic group.

Ethnic groups exist as long as humans do, so how can it "predate the existence of any ethnic group"?

The first ethnic group which expanded out of Africa, was the "Out-of-Africa Tribe" - check:

The society of our “out of Africa” ancestors (I)
The migrant warriors that colonized the world:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3104569/

The “Out of Africa Tribe” (II):
Paleolithic warriors with big canoes and protective weapons:


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3656025/

Culture Out of Africa:

http://www.dhushara.com/paradoxhtm/culture.htm

Also R1a in India were clearly not European

Who said they were European? R1a-Z93 split from R1a-Z283 somewhere near the Ural Mountains, it seems.

At least in Kapova Cave in the Ural they found a burial of a man with Z645, which is ancestral to both Z93 and Z283.

because Indian are DNA mixture of 2 large components. They are West Asian and Weddoids.

A lot of North Indian ancestry is from the Eurasian steppe as well, because that's where Indo-Aryans came from.

By the Eurasian steppe in this case I mean mostly Central Asia, Southern Russia and the Ural Region.

West Asia is to the south and to the south-west of Central Asia, and that's not where Indo-Aryans came from:

Central Asia according to 3 different definitions:

Central_Asia_borders.png
 
Gurka atla said:
The Pazyryk culture is Indo-European but many of the burials are between Half Mongoloid men with Europoid females, the males seems to be R1a. The R1a in Turkic could have predated Turkic ethnicity and languages rather than recieving from Indo-Europeans.

It's only 1 Western Eurasian male. The others 2 were found to be a male with haplogroup C3 and mtDNA D4, and another with D4.

Three Xiongnu elite

1 Xiongnu R1a and U2e1
1 Xiongnu C3 and D4
1 Xiognu with D4.

I know that one was Caucasoid and 2 were Mongoloid. But you claimed, that the one with R1a was Mongoloid - which isn't true.

The R1a elite burial was that of a West Eurasian male, while one of the other two elite burials was that of a C3 Mongoloid male.

This pattern can also be observed in other burials of racially mixed communities of that region in which C and Q haplogroups correlate with more Mongoloid features and darker hair & eyes, while R1a with more Caucasoid features and lighter hair & eyes.

In terms of mitochondrial (mtDNA) female haplogroups, there was also a mix of West Eurasian and East Asian lineages.
 
That is the point we can't define C Haplogroup as phenotypes developed over thousands of years of adaptation. The original phenotype would be African if one morphs African with current groups that would be how East Asians, Mid East, Siberian and Europeans looked after the Ice Age. There are software that does that. Models of ancient people show African descent. The refined features developed over thousands of years.
 
So - what do you think - were original Proto-Turks more like Turks from Siberia, or more like Turks from Central Asia?

Today, there are considerable "racial" differences between these two groups (different proportions of Caucasoid/Mongoloid):

http://s9.postimg.org/qfaoixfsv/Human_clusters.png

Human_clusters.png
 
If one looks at the Y DNA tree all non-Africans are from C Haplogroup. Just one branch remained that identifies the mongols. However, mongols are composed of many tribes. Genghis Khan is the one who unified them all and the mongols were formed. It is said he had red hair and green eyes. All non-Africans are C Haplogroup at the very top. The later adaptations are to local environment, diet and customs or culture.

But than again Green eyes, red hair, blonde hair, blue eyes is nothing unsual for the Mongolians, Kazakhs, Nenets, Tuvans, Selkups. It even exists in the Hmong population where caucasian admixture is 0%

Mongolians
5bxzj6.jpg



Kazakhs and Tuvans
Kazakhwithlightcoloredhairandoreyeskz.jpg


Nenets
me18.jpg


Selkups
d26fe48b5cadc55bad664f6fabd9cee6.jpg


Hmong
paisdigital043.jpg
 
If one looks at the Y DNA tree all non-Africans are from C Haplogroup. Just one branch remained that identifies the mongols. However, mongols are composed of many tribes. Genghis Khan is the one who unified them all and the mongols were formed. It is said he had red hair and green eyes. All non-Africans are C Haplogroup at the very top. The later adaptations are to local environment, diet and customs or culture.

However these traits are nothing unsual for Central Asian and Siberian Mongoloids. You can find Hmong with similar traits even though they have 0% Caucasian admixture. So Genghis Khan would have look like a Mongoloid with light traits.

Mongolians on average have 3-5% Caucasian admixture but some have 10-15%.

5bxzj6.jpg



Besides the drawing of Odegei Khan, the Chinese draw him very Mongoloid

YuanEmperorAlbumOgedeiPortrait.jpg
 
Haplogroup C1a also could be found in ancient DNA from Europe until Neolithic times.

For example prehistoric Kostenki14 who lived in Russia at the Volga River had C1a.

It has not disappeared completely, it seems.

For example in a sample of 234 people from Halle an der Saale, one (0,43%) had C.

Haplogroup C is a complicated and diverse marker.

C3 is typical of Mongolic speakers
C2 is typical of Melanesian Black Papuan
C4 is typical of Australian aborigines
C5 is typical of North Indian sub-tribes
 
Aryan at first meant "companion", not noble (it started to mean "noble" later). This is how Indo-Iranians described themselves.

In addition the Indian branch of Indo-Iranian languages and peoples is called Indo-Aryan languages (and Indo-Aryan peoples).

So using a term "Aryan migration" is not incorrect. You can as well use a term "Indo-Aryan migration".



Pazyryk culture were people who spoke Iranian languages - not Turkic. What was their physical type is a different issue.

But it is IMO impossible that males and females of the same reproductive communicy can be so different "racially".

Maybe they are drawing conclusions based on a very small sample of people.



Ethnic groups exist as long as humans do, so how can it "predate the existence of any ethnic group"?

The first ethnic group which expanded out of Africa, was the "Out-of-Africa Tribe" - check:

The society of our “out of Africa” ancestors (I)
The migrant warriors that colonized the world:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3104569/

The “Out of Africa Tribe” (II):
Paleolithic warriors with big canoes and protective weapons:


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3656025/

Culture Out of Africa:

http://www.dhushara.com/paradoxhtm/culture.htm



Who said they were European? R1a-Z93 split from R1a-Z283 somewhere near the Ural Mountains, it seems.

At least in Kapova Cave in the Ural they found a burial of a man with Z645, which is ancestral to both Z93 and Z283.



A lot of North Indian ancestry is from the Eurasian steppe as well, because that's where Indo-Aryans came from.

By the Eurasian steppe in this case I mean mostly Central Asia, Southern Russia and the Ural Region.

West Asia is to the south and to the south-west of Central Asia, and that's not where Indo-Aryans came from:

Central Asia according to 3 different definitions:

Central_Asia_borders.png



My point is R1a have many different variations and mutations. So one cannot really say Turkic R1a is the same as Indo-Europeans because it long intermixed with different ethnic group and mutated into it's own unique marker ( predating the Turkic ethnicity ). North Indians indo-aryan ancestry are derived from to the area of Afghanistan-Pakistan and they had already intermixed with the Weddoid/Dravidian like people. All Afghan, Pakistan, North Indians have weddoid admixture, Afghan having the lowest 10-15% while Pakistan and North Indians have 45-55%.

History is far too complexed. The people who migrated to India would have still looked like modern day Pakistani and east Afghans, they wouldn't have looked like some nordic type people.


A very broad definition of Central Asia. North India in South Asia bothers next to Tibet ( Sino-Tibetan speakers ) Pakistan not central Asia. While Pakistan bothers next to Afghanistan, Tibet, North India. Afghanistan is considered a South Asian country, sometimes in tge Middle east but realistlically they were inbetween Middle east, South Asia, Central Asia.

China and Tibet are sino-Tibetan, Mongolia are Mongolic speakers.

And this region Qinghai are Tibetan speakers rather than Han Chinese

qinghai_location.gif

map.png
 
So - what do you think - were original Proto-Turks more like Turks from Siberia, or more like Turks from Central Asia?

Today, there are considerable "racial" differences between these two groups (different proportions of Caucasoid/Mongoloid):

http://s9.postimg.org/qfaoixfsv/Human_clusters.png

Human_clusters.png

Most likely original Turks were from Siberia. And than they mixed with Indo-Europeans of Central Asia ( both from Turkic and Mongol-Turkic invasion ).

Anatolian were mixed with the Turkic and Turkified Indo-Europeans to become the modern Turkish people.
 
I know that one was Caucasoid and 2 were Mongoloid. But you claimed, that the one with R1a was Mongoloid - which isn't true.

The R1a elite burial was that of a West Eurasian male, while one of the other two elite burials was that of a C3 Mongoloid male.

This pattern can also be observed in other burials of racially mixed communities of that region in which C and Q haplogroups correlate with more Mongoloid features and darker hair & eyes, while R1a with more Caucasoid features and lighter hair & eyes.

In terms of mitochondrial (mtDNA) female haplogroups, there was also a mix of West Eurasian and East Asian lineages.

They found only 1 western eurasian male, what about his descendants and others with R1a? surely they were mixed with Mongoloid. The Xiongnu should have significant R1a since Xiongnu also have 11% European mtDNA but all they found was 1 western eurasian male. And I'm curious, do they even say he is pure western Eurasian based on genetics or anthropology ? because even the Scythians were already mixed but with small degrees of Mongoloid admixture despite their western eurasian Y-DNA and mtDNA

Kyrgyz have 63% R1a and 42% western Eurasian mtDNA but are genetically 68% - 72% Mongoloid as anyone can clearly see from that autosomal DNA you provided.

Surely there is a at least some Kyrgyz with R1a with western eurasian mtDNA and still look Mongoloid.

FM2005-CentraalAzie-134.jpg

3kyr_lrg.jpg

foust%20dec1%20p.jpg
 
I'm fine with the wording. I don't see Mongolians being any less Asian than others.

Again I will use Sardinian Example. Which ethnic group can give you a example Sardinian, Greeks in Crete, People of Sicily, South Italy? If you take the reference of South Italian as a mediterraean race, Turkey and other North West Asian countries will be more Mediterranean, in Sicily case, Egypt can be seem as more mediterraean. But the truth just can be found with Sardinians.

but whatever :grin:
 
However these traits are nothing unsual for Central Asian and Siberian Mongoloids. You can find Hmong with similar traits even though they have 0% Caucasian admixture. So Genghis Khan would have look like a Mongoloid with light traits.

Mongolians on average have 3-5% Caucasian admixture but some have 10-15%.

5bxzj6.jpg



Besides the drawing of Odegei Khan, the Chinese draw him very Mongoloid

YuanEmperorAlbumOgedeiPortrait.jpg

Before other proofs I still think light pigmentation for eyes and hairs is an 'europoid' trait yet not universal among 'europoids';
the 0% of something in rough autosomals admixtures is not the proof of 0% true admixture - the small numbers or alleles pairs involved in pigmentation can pass 'incognito' through rough estimations? all the way the unique way to know is a peer analysis of the chromosomes segments concerned by pigmentation (for what we know) as it has been done for red hairs among Jamaicans, which showed being caused by genes in European inherited segments.
WHo knows: maybe it will be discovered other mutations among typica mongoloids? But I wait serious results before changing mind.
 
@Gurka
You say yourself Miongols have some degrees of 'caucasian' DNA and this is enough to explain the rare cases of light pigmentation which is not "not-unusual" as you say. To solve the problem it would be possible to make states of light pigmentations %s and 'caucasian' DNA %s ???

&: the female of your post #35 is far to be pure mongloid, according to my criteria

Thanks for the picture. I 'm not far to think that the first turkic speakers of Altai were (at this stage of the language birth) a predominently 'mongoloid' group but they had already a slight 'caucasian' admixture, which one augmented with time and colonizations towards West.
 
@Gurka
You say yourself Miongols have some degrees of 'caucasian' DNA and this is enough to explain the rare cases of light pigmentation which is not "not-unusual" as you say. To solve the problem it would be possible to make states of light pigmentations %s and 'caucasian' DNA %s ???

&: the female of your post #35 is far to be pure mongloid, according to my criteria

Thanks for the picture. I 'm not far to think that the first turkic speakers of Altai were (at this stage of the language birth) a predominently 'mongoloid' group but they had already a slight 'caucasian' admixture, which one augmented with time and colonizations towards West.

asian eyes with red hair
https://aratta.wordpress.com/2015/01/25/the-genetic-causes-ethnic-origins-and-history-of-red-hair/

most populace people with red hair
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udmurt_people

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=...X&ved=0ahUKEwjAk9GyhNLJAhWBQpQKHWzVA5oQsAQIKQ
 

This thread has been viewed 95379 times.

Back
Top