Looking at European genes : Paleolithic vs Neolithic

A strange thing! Never I heart that there are in Mongolia people with fair
hair and light eyes. Blue eyes seem me impossible. You only can find
really blue eyed men in Scandinavia, north of Germany and the Netherlands.
In East-Europa light eyes are mixed green/grey eyes. Real blue eyes are
there very rare.
 
Other Uralids also look quite Europeans too. For instance, these are Kuomi people (photo from Wiki)


hmm yes fair colours, but just look the face of the woman in middle,

the face lloks like more European or Asian,
just compare from right the 1rst and the 3rd woman in face characteristics.

it is obvious the difference.
 
as i stated previously, just because a race has 1% mongolid, does not make that race mongolid. its an irrevelant %.
We might as well say we are east african, because thats where humans originated.
 
russian_costume08.jpg
1577076687462b488059e49.jpg


For comparison - Sami and Russians
 
I have been wondering about this chart -
NE_Europe.png

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p217/dpwes/NE_Europe.png

All Europeans make up one diagonal from South Italians at one end to Latvians on the other end, while the Finnish move to different direction. They are also followed to some extent by Swedes and Estonians. This "other" direction could be easily explained by mongoloid influx, only then Lithuanians and Latvians should be placed somewhere on that "other" direction, too because they have a lot of N1c1. Besides, why would Latvians rather than Lithuanian be set at the far end of the diagonal, this is somewhat contradicts Y-haplogroup make up as Lithuanians have more of N1c1 and Latvians more of R1b.
 
A strange thing! Never I heart that there are in Mongolia people with fair
hair and light eyes. Blue eyes seem me impossible. You only can find
really blue eyed men in Scandinavia, north of Germany and the Netherlands.
In East-Europa light eyes are mixed green/grey eyes. Real blue eyes are
there very rare.

It's normal, you are not an anthropologist, and I doubt that you have travelled extensively around northern Asia. Here are a few examples of blond and/or blue-eyed Mongols.

blond-mongol-girl.jpg


images


blue-eyes.jpg


Fair hair and eyes are also common in Central Asia, especially among the Uighurs, Tajiks and some tribes of Afghanistan and northern Pakistan.
 
It's normal, you are not an anthropologist, and I doubt that you have travelled extensively around northern Asia. Here are a few examples of blond and/or blue-eyed Mongols.

http://pastmist.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/blond-mongol-girl.jpg

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSOC_XbRSrJsAre9wSh7xVYgMfCSNY8asIy8pB0X6GBsz0DmNbD&t=1

http://www.articlesafari.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/blue-eyes.jpg

Fair hair and eyes are also common in Central Asia, especially among the Uighurs, Tajiks and some tribes of Afghanistan and northern Pakistan.

With the Uighurs, AFAIK blond hair is generally thought to be a legacy of the Tocharians, who were absorbed by the Uighurs when these invaded the Tarim Basin in the 9th century.
 
With the Uighurs, AFAIK blond hair is generally thought to be a legacy of the Tocharians, who were absorbed by the Uighurs when these invaded the Tarim Basin in the 9th century.

I know that. Everywhere in Central and Northern Asia blond hair and blue eyes were brought by Indo-European speakers from the Pontic-Caspian steppes (including the Tocharians). This is actually one of the strongest argument in favour of the Pontic-Caspian stepped homeland for the Indo-Europeans (as opposed to Anatolia or the Caucasus where blond hair and blue eyes are rare).
 
I know that. Everywhere in Central and Northern Asia blond hair and blue eyes were brought by Indo-European speakers from the Pontic-Caspian steppes (including the Tocharians). This is actually one of the strongest argument in favour of the Pontic-Caspian stepped homeland for the Indo-Europeans (as opposed to Anatolia or the Caucasus where blond hair and blue eyes are rare).

Oh, I absolutely agree! What also speaks against Anatolia or the Caucasus is the diversity of non-IE languages in these regions.

Otherwise, what I would also like to bring up in regard for blond hair and blue eyes are the Nuristanis of Afghanistan, which also have frequently-occuring blond hair and blue eyes. They are also a peculiar lot in another aspect: linguistically, the Nuristani languages represent their own third branch of Indo-Iranic (the two main branches are Indic such as Sanskrit, Singhalese, Hindi or Urdu - and Iranic such as Persian, Kurdish and Pashto).
 
well can someone responsibly categorize

I mean the differences

among

1 Ugric
2 Finnic Suomi
3 skandinayians
4 estonia-latvia
5 Moggolia
6 yugurs (turks of china)

I mean as I read the more the people are confused,

especially what is the difference in YDNA, mtDNA and some anthropometrical parameters.

how many sub-trbes we have etc,
 
well can someone responsibly categorize

I mean the differences

among

1 Ugric
2 Finnic Suomi
3 skandinayians
4 estonia-latvia
5 Moggolia
6 yugurs (turks of china)

I mean as I read the more the people are confused,

especially what is the difference in YDNA, mtDNA and some anthropometrical parameters.

how many sub-trbes we have etc,
Yes, by the looks and genetics also :)

For instace, I was reading about branches of N1c1 - there is Finnish, South Baltic (Prussians, Lithuanians, Latvians), and other branches for Uralids, Northern Russians, etc.
http://dna-forums.org/index.php?/topic/11890-neuri-south-baltic-n1c1/
 
Oh, I absolutely agree! What also speaks against Anatolia or the Caucasus is the diversity of non-IE languages in these regions.

Otherwise, what I would also like to bring up in regard for blond hair and blue eyes are the Nuristanis of Afghanistan, which also have frequently-occuring blond hair and blue eyes. They are also a peculiar lot in another aspect: linguistically, the Nuristani languages represent their own third branch of Indo-Iranic (the two main branches are Indic such as Sanskrit, Singhalese, Hindi or Urdu - and Iranic such as Persian, Kurdish and Pashto).

Exactly! And what speaks about the IE homeland being in the Balkans is the extreme diversity of IE languages there:wary2: In fact there is not any known pre-Indo-European language in the Balkans
 
Exactly! And what speaks about the IE homeland being in the Balkans is the extreme diversity of IE languages there:wary2: In fact there is not any known pre-Indo-European language in the Balkans

I think one major problem there is the fact that the Paleo-Balkan languages are all rather scarcely attested. It would be easier to say what their relationship towards each other was, as well towards the other branches of IE. It also help greatly identifying the actual ancestor language of Albanian.
 
Exactly! And what speaks about the IE homeland being in the Balkans is the extreme diversity of IE languages there:wary2: In fact there is not any known pre-Indo-European language in the Balkans

Albanian obviously evolved from a non-IE language and later became hybridised with IE terms.

The Minoan language was also not IE.
 
Albanian obviously evolved from a non-IE language and later became hybridised with IE terms.

The Minoan language was also not IE.

I disagree on your assessment regarding Albanian: Albanian is weird and unique in many respects, but it's clearly possible to derive Albanian words from PIE via sound correspondence. There's nothing non-Indo-European about it, in my opinion.

Minoan is unclassified (due to the small corpus, and the fact that we cannot read a large part of the script), but I'm inclined to agree that it was non-IE.
 
Albanian obviously evolved from a non-IE language and later became hybridised with IE terms.

The Minoan language was also not IE.

The Minoan language was spoken in Crete not in the Balkans. As for Albanian I really don't know. Do you think they are Pelasgians (pre-Indo-Europeans)?
 
The Minoan language was spoken in Crete not in the Balkans. As for Albanian I really don't know. Do you think they are Pelasgians (pre-Indo-Europeans)?

In my opinion, Albanian is most probably descended from Dacian, but it received input from other languages (including Latin, to a considerable degree), ancient Greek, and probably Paleo-Balkan languages other than Dacian.
 
That seems reasonable, I had once speculated about a close relationship of Romanians and Albanians because of their common looks. I also came up with a study that identified Albanians with ancient Thracians in anthropolical charachteristics. Maybe they are a hybrid of Daco-Thracians who mixxed with Illyrians and Epirotans later.
 
That seems reasonable, I had once speculated about a close relationship of Romanians and Albanians because of their common looks. I also came up with a study that identified Albanians with ancient Thracians in anthropolical charachteristics. Maybe they are a hybrid of Daco-Thracians who mixxed with Illyrians and Epirotans later.

That Albanian/Romanian similarity is actually not a coincidence. Although a Romance language, Romanian also has a considerable share of words ostensibly of Dacian origin - and in fact Albanian and Romanian share also a considerable number of these words. I was actually going to compose something on Albanian, but I really didn't get around to that yet.
 

This thread has been viewed 94345 times.

Back
Top