Racial origin of the Thracians, Huns, Mongols, Turkics?

[Ross Findlay]

Hi guys. I'm haplogroup R1B S116 L21 (Celtic - North West European subclade). I'm really having trouble understanding the racial origin of many ancient peoples. Firstly, given that Caucasians belong to Proto Indo European categories: Proto Germanic, Proto Slavic, Proto Italic, Proto Hellenic, Proto Iranic, Proto Celtic, Proto Baltic, and any others I may have accidentally omitted, am I correct in thinking the Thracians are Proto Slavic?, (this is a question based on ethno-genetics not language). My second question is - Am I right in thinking the Huns are a mix of Caucasoid and Mongoloid? and if so, what type of Caucasoid were they - what PIE category? My next question is - Are the Huns Turkic? My understanding was that they were Turkic and that the Turkic were Caucasoid and Mongoloid? - hence why I asked if I was right to assume the huns were so too. Lastly, I read somewhere that the Mongols were in some way Proto Indo European - making them not mongoloid or partly not mongoloid? Thanks to everyone who gives me feedback, I'd really appreciate anyone giving the time to help me get a better understanding of these more ambiguous and fascinating people.

 

[ThirdTerm]

Götaland and Gotland in southern Sweden now have the highest frequency of haplogroup Q in Europe (5%) and almost all of it belong to the Q1a2b1 (L527) subclade. The Romans reported that the Huns consisted of a small ruling elite and their armies comprised mostly of Germanic warriors. Gotland and Götaland is the presumed homeland of the ancient Goths. In the 1st century CE, some Goths migrated from Sweden to Poland, then in the 2nd century settled on the northern shores of the Black Sea around modern Moldova. The Huns conquered the Goths in the Pontic Steppe in the 4th century, forcing some of them to flee the Dnieper region and settled in the Eastern Roman Empire (Balkans). It would not be improbable that some Goths and Huns moved back to southern Sweden, either before invading the Roman Empire, or after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, displaced by the Slavic migrations to Central Europe. After all, even ancient people kept the nostalgia of their ancestral homeland and knew exactly where their ancestors a few hundreds years earlier came from.

According to this article from the Y-DNA Haplogroup Q page on this website, the Huns belonged to Haplogroup Q. The frequency of the Q1a2b1 (L527) subclade is 5% in southern Sweden and it's thought that the region was colonised by the ancient Huns, who may have led Viking expeditions in Europe as chieftains. The map on the page shows that there are some hot spots of Haplogroup Q, especially in those regions where the Viking settlements were established such as Normandy. Moreover, some Hunnic tribes such as the Magyars may have been a Turkic people. The Central-Asian haplogroup P* is present in the Székelys (Csányi et al. 2008), who are believed to have descended from Attila the Hun. 8.2% of the Uygurs also have P (Zhou et al. 2007) and the original Magyar tribes were a Turkic ethnic group similar to the Uygurs, who migrated to Hungary from Central Asia.

The two modern Hungarian-speaking populations, based on 22 Y-chromosomal binary markers, share similar components described for other Europeans, except for the presence of the haplogroup P*(xM173) in Szekler samples, which may reflect a Central Asian connection, and high frequency of haplogroup J in both Szeklers and Hungarians. MDS analysis based on haplogroup frequency values, confirms that modern Hungarian and Szekler populations are genetically closely related, and similar to populations from Central Europe and the Balkans. The presence of haplogroup P*(xM173) in Szeklers is striking, because this clade is otherwise almost absent in continental Europe (Semino et al., 2000a; Wells et al., 2001). Haplogroup P*(xM173) is almost absent in continental Europe. The presence of this haplogroup in the Szeklers may indicate a connection with Central Asian populations. Also, there is an elevated haplogroup J frequency. This may reflect Anatolian and southern Balkan contributions to the gene pools of Hungarians and Szeklers, but historical data and the comparative analyses of maternal lineages of ancient Hungarian population suggest that the earlier migrations of the Magyars may also have contributed to the presence of this lineage in the Carpathian Basin.

 

[Hauteville]

Ruler class of Hunnic empire were probably central Asian but all the empire of Attila was made up by a lot of different populations. Thracians were Indo Europeans.

 

[MOESAN]

According to this article from the Y-DNA Haplogroup Q page on this website, the Huns belonged to Haplogroup Q. The frequency of the Q1a2b1 (L527) subclade is 5% in southern Sweden and it's thought that the region was colonised by the ancient Huns, who may have led Viking expeditions in Europe as chieftains. The map on the page shows that there are some hot spots of Haplogroup Q, especially in those regions where the Viking settlements were established such as Normandy. Moreover, some Hunnic tribes such as the Magyars may have been a Turkic people. The Central-Asian haplogroup P* is present in the Székelys (Csányi et al. 2008), who are believed to have descended from Attila the Hun. 8.2% of the Uygurs also have P (Zhou et al. 2007) and the original Magyar tribes were a Turkic ethnic group similar to the Uygurs, who migrated to Hungary from Central Asia.

There is a lot of chances that the first Turks and Huns were of 'east-asian' stock.
Concerning Y-Q in Scandinavia, I wonder if this haplo was not there before Huns invasions. It's present in other germanicized regions where Huns did not have long during strongholds: in Savoie in France (Alamans + Burgundians) and Alsace France (Alamans). Some autosomal traits were present among EHG evocating 'east-asian' imput or the imput of a population ancestral to 'east-asians'; some very ancient incursions of Siberia Y-Q then?
But it's true we are basing our opinion here upon small percentage among small samples, for France at least, and the the "law of great numbers" (its exceptions, rather)can produce erratic results. (+ drifts).

 

[MOESAN]

As said by Hauteville, Huns arriving in Central Europe were a mix of diverses tribes. The same occurred with Magyars (and yes, some Turkic tribes or turikicized I-Ean tribes were associated to Magyars on their road towards Europe).

 

[johen]

Regarding Hun:

- the Artifacts related to the Hun In Korea

- The elongated skulls of their elite group; Ancient Korea and Manchu area were factory of elongated skulls.

So there might be a connection between the first Hun elite group and North East Asia Including ancient Korea.

 

[Ross Findlay]

Thanks for all the info

 

[Ross Findlay]

Hi again guys, so are the Turkic people genetically Asian, or are they mixed? I was also wondering what type of Proto Indo European the Thracians were? Thank you

 

[A. Papadimitriou]

I don't know much and I don't like speculations but R1a is high in many Turkic speaking people today like the Kyrgyz and haplogroups N (usually high in Uralic speaking people) or C (usually high in Mongolian, Tungusic etc speaking people) are also significant in certain Turkic speaking ethnic groups.
I don't know who the original creators of the language were but those who came to Europe were already mixed it seems. The labels 'Asian', 'European' etc aren't very useful.

 

[Fsdrm]

I didn't know that pseudo linguistic and pseodo history is so popular among some member of this site.
Academic linguists can't see any relation between Turkic and Hungarian languages, because there aren't proofs for that.
Academic historians can't see any relation between Huns and Magyar people, because they had no proofs fro that.
That's why you can't find such a lunatic ideas in Western Encyclopedias (E.Encarta, E. Britannica, E.Americana, German Brockhaus E., French Larousse E. etc...)
According to Historians and Linguists Hungarians came from Southern ural or South Western part of Ural mountains, which is very very far from Central Asian region. (Similar to Paris-Moscow distance, which is an enormous distance!)

 

[vcovaci]

Based on linguistic analysis of the names of Hunnic rulers it's assumed by some that they spoke a Turkic language, but nothing can be known for certain.
Historians of their times claimed that they "cut the cheeks of the males with a sword, so that before they receive the nourishment of milk they must learn to endure wounds. Hence they grow old beardless and their young men are without comeliness, because a face furrowed by the sword spoils by its scars the natural beauty of a beard". To me this sounds like some sort of false propaganda aimed at portraying the Huns as savage. The fact that they were beardless makes me think of an East Asian origin. The Roman diplomat Priscus describes Attila as having typical East Asian physical features.

 

[Boreas]

I don't know much and I don't like speculations but R1a is high in many Turkic speaking people today like the Kyrgyz and haplogroups N (usually high in Uralic speaking people) or C (usually high in Mongolian, Tungusic etc speaking people) are also significant in certain Turkic speaking ethnic groups.

I think you summarized well.

Check how difference Turks - Uyhurs - Uzbeks - Chuvash genetic structures. There are no Kazakhs(group C) and Siberian Turkic(N) people. There are also different.

 

[DuPidh]

Hi again guys, so are the Turkic people genetically Asian, or are they mixed? I was also wondering what type of Proto Indo European the Thracians were? Thank you

If this could help!?? Thracians spoke a language that was the same family with Illyrian(old Albanian). Which means like Spanish and Italian language. Which in turn means Illyrians and Thracians were in the same place at least 3000 years before Christ.Which means they were coming from the same brunch of people and were in process of separation. So I would say the old Thracians looked a lot like Kosovo people look today. DNA test of Bulgaria which seats in the homeland of Thracia shows they have high percentage of E V13 AND j2a and J2b.

 

[Yetos]

If this could help!?? Thracians spoke a language that was the same family with Illyrian(old Albanian). Which means like Spanish and Italian language. Which in turn means Illyrians and Thracians were in the same place at least 3000 years before Christ.Which means they were coming from the same brunch of people and were in process of separation. So I would say the old Thracians looked a lot like Kosovo people look today. DNA test of Bulgaria which seats in the homeland of Thracia shows they have high percentage of E V13 AND j2a and J2b.

how about the oposite?

 

[Sile]

If this could help!?? Thracians spoke a language that was the same family with Illyrian(old Albanian). Which means like Spanish and Italian language. Which in turn means Illyrians and Thracians were in the same place at least 3000 years before Christ.Which means they were coming from the same brunch of people and were in process of separation. So I would say the old Thracians looked a lot like Kosovo people look today. DNA test of Bulgaria which seats in the homeland of Thracia shows they have high percentage of E V13 AND j2a and J2b.

The only thracian spoken in the ancients was in modern bulgaria and european turkey .............unless you think that dacian and getea are also thracian:shocked:

these bulgarian thracians did not change their language into Latin like the Romanian dacians did, they where replaced by turkic bulgars who in turn adopted the slavic language

 

[LeBrok]

The only thracian spoken in the ancients was in modern bulgaria and european turkey .............unless you think that dacian and getea are also thracian:shocked:

these bulgarian thracians did not change their language into Latin like the Romanian dacians did, they where replaced by turkic bulgars who in turn adopted the slavic language

Replaced?!!! And you concluded this by checking genetics of modern Bulgarians?

 

[LeBrok]

Which in turn means Illyrians and Thracians were in the same place at least 3000 years before Christ.

Wow, IEs in Balkans in Late Neolithic?! Any source to substantiate this extraordinary claim of Illyrians and Thracians ethnic existence in 3k BC at all, never mind in Balkans?

Which means they were coming from the same brunch of people and were in process of separation. So I would say the old Thracians looked a lot like Kosovo people look today. DNA test of Bulgaria which seats in the homeland of Thracia shows they have high percentage of E V13 AND j2a and J2b.

And how did you connect EV13 to IEs of Late Neolithic?

 

[DuPidh]

Wow, IEs in Balkans in Late Neolithic?! Any source to substantiate this extraordinary claim of Illyrians and Thracians ethnic existence in 3k BC at all, never mind in Balkans?

And how did you connect EV13 to IEs of Late Neolithic?

The presence of Illyrians in Greek sources was mentioned in "Iliad" of Homer 1800 years bc. But that means they did not come there the day they were mentioned. They could have been there thousand of years before they were mentioned. In the same source you hear about Thracian's as well.
But again the language of Thracian is described as Thraco-Illyrian or Daco -Thracian. The linguists detect connections between these languages which means The Dacs, the Illyrians and Thracians were in a distant past the same people. Since the Bulgarians seat in Thracian homeland its not correct to say that racially Thracian's looked somehow similar like Bulgarians or Romanians since both are heavily mixed. Bulgarians have the Turkic Bulgar layer ans the Slavic one, and the Romanians have Slavic and Roman layer.(Romans deported thousand of Rome's women for reasons that I am not mentioning here since might look insulting.). So the only people that are less mixed and have consistently live in the area are Kosovans that's why I suggested that they are the close we can get to the Thracian's in racial terms.

 

[LeBrok]

The presence of Illyrians in Greek sources was mentioned in "Iliad" of Homer 1800 years bc.

Not 1200 BC? Now, pushing existence of any known IE ethnicity to 3000 BC to Late Neolithic is quite a stretch. Don't you think? Fast mixing and changing of ethnicities and languages in space of last 2000 years is well represented by known history of Europe. Even if there is ethnic and linguistic continuity it is hard to call Romans Italians and vice versa. Much harder is to equate modern English to ethnicity living on the island 2kya.
Mind you that 3000 BC is before upheavals of Bronze Age which brought dramatic changes in Europe. Almost every culture changed during that time.

 

[Yetos]

The only thracian spoken in the ancients was in modern bulgaria and european turkey .............unless you think that dacian and getea are also thracian:shocked:

these bulgarian thracians did not change their language into Latin like the Romanian dacians did, they where replaced by turkic bulgars who in turn adopted the slavic language

with Balgur of Asparuch (five tribes) also came Slavic Severi(seven tribes),
Bulgarians speak Slavic due to Severi.
Asparuch took the sea road, and settle at Ryce
Severi took parallel road inland and settled at the center of today Bulgaria,
Montana was known for celtic tribe named Serdi.