What explains the presence of R1a in central Asia and other non Indo European peoples

shinyDust

Regular Member
Messages
41
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Tirana
Ethnic group
Illyrised Gallo-Roman
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b U152
mtDNA haplogroup
H5
Could haplogroup R1a be of Turkic origin?
Why does it peak among Kyrgyzes. Could R1a-Z93 be a Turkic marker rather than Iranic?
What about R1b m73?
Were central Asians Indo Europeans before they became turkified
It's such a mish mash and so confusing to me to pinpoint which was which.
What is the true Turkic haplogroup Q? C? N?
If haplo Q and R are related does this mean that Indo Europeans and proto turkics share a common ancestor.
What about the ma'lta basal R* mummy. Was he white/oriental

I'm sorry guys for loading you with questions
I'm just deeply curious and into those stuff.
 
Buuuuumpppp
 

That's an entirely fake story that has been proven wrong by ancient DNA.


Could haplogroup R1a be of Turkic origin?
Why does it peak among Kyrgyzes. Could R1a-Z93 be a Turkic marker rather than Iranic?

That's correct, Turkics have two main branches the European branch the Oghur Turkics and the Asiatic branch the Shaz Turkics


wylIvJW.png



The European branch is the older and ancestral branch dated to around 2500BC


KHnXJTe.jpg

Shaz Turkics (R1a-Z93) of Sintashta/Andronovo were the offshoot of the Oghurs (R1a-M417) of Corded Ware


I029A3t.png

Turkics ruled South Asia from 500BC with the Yuezhi (Asii/Asena legendary Turkic tribe that Turkics from Scandinavia to China claimed descent from) until the Mughal Empire so that's how R1a became widespread there specially among the elites.


S5xPUjN.jpg

In Europe during the 5th century BC the Oghur nomads were pushed east by climate change which was drying up the pastures. That didn't stop the Huns/Oghurs from coming back every winter and raping the Dacian women (Baltoslavs) who were settling the region that they left (Zarubintsy).


"Each year, the Huns came to the Slavs, to spend the winter with them; then they took the wives and daughters of the Slavs and slept with them, and among the other mistreatments [already mentioned] the Slavs were also forced to pay levies to the Huns. The sons of the Huns were raised with the wives and daughters."
Chronicle of Fredegar


wX321PB.jpg

Now some people want you to believe that every Turkic tribe of antiquity were "Iranics", this websites does a good job exposing their lies and nonsense:
http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/27_Scythians/ScythianWordListSourcesEn.htm
 
Such a load of nonsense... Proto-Turkic language dates to no more than 2500 years ago. aDNA records from the Pontic-Caspian steppe and Central Asia conclusively prove a major change in the genetic makeup of the entire region, starting slowly in the Early Iron Age and accelerating very fast, pulling local peoples eastward toward East Asians and Siberians, roughly from ~2300-2400 YBP onwards. And that's precisely when the Proto-Turkic language is dated as having started diverging in different branches and later different languages. The extensive grammatical and lexical similarities with Proto-Mongolic also obviously point to a profound and prolonged contact with the neighbnoring but distinct language family in Northeast Asia, unless you all mean Proto-Mongolic was also originally spoken in Europe, and the early Turkic loanwords from Indo-Iranian and Old Chinese also point to exactly the same location near the Altai.

Besides, R1a-M417 is present in many areas that were never known to harbor any Turkic language or even any Turkic linguistic subbstrate, but virtually all Turkic-speaking areas with a lot of R1a-M417 today are known to have had at least some Indo-European speakers in the past. Not to mention the obvious fact that haplogroups may boom via random drift even in just a few centuries, let alone in millennia, and that, of course, people shift their language all the time when a new sociopolitical and cultural dominance appears (and we've seen that clearly in historical times when Turks became the prevalent force in Anatolia). These people must believe that E1b1b-V13 guys had always spoken Indo-European languages and that J1 guys had always spoke Semitic just because that's where the highest frequency of those haplogroups in modern people are found. Such a weak argument.
 
Proto-Turkic language dates to no more than 2500 years ago.

That's based on the assumption that they only came into existence when the Chinese decided to write a text that would survive 2500 years about them.

major change in the genetic makeup of the entire region, starting slowly in the Early Iron Age and accelerating very fast, pulling local peoples eastward toward East Asians and Siberians

Your dating is wrong, by the late Bronze Age they were already admixed. Here's the trick, Turks spread Mongolian autosomal admixture all over the Steppe, but they remained R1a males.

The extensive grammatical and lexical similarities with Proto-Mongolic also obviously point to a profound and prolonged contact with the neighbnoring but distinct language family in Northeast Asia.

Yes, since 2000BC which is when Andronovo/Turks got to Mongolia. If Andronovo spoke Iranic you would have extensive grammatical and lexical similarities between Proto-Mongolic and Iranic instead.
 
Hello,
Here is a recent study about the origins of Turkic languages:
(It turns out, I can't post links because I'm new, so i m trying a different way.)

newscientist.com/article/2296962-origins-of-japanese-and-turkish-language-family-traced-back-9000-years/

And this is the original article at Nature Magazine:
nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04108-8
 
Such a load of nonsense... Proto-Turkic language dates to no more than 2500 years ago. aDNA records from the Pontic-Caspian steppe and Central Asia conclusively prove a major change in the genetic makeup of the entire region, starting slowly in the Early Iron Age and accelerating very fast, pulling local peoples eastward toward East Asians and Siberians, roughly from ~2300-2400 YBP onwards. And that's precisely when the Proto-Turkic language is dated as having started diverging in different branches and later different languages.

Hello,
Here is a recent study about the origins of Turkic languages:
(It turns out, I can't post links because I'm new.)

newscientist.com/article/2296962-origins-of-japanese-and-turkish-language-family-traced-back-9000-years/

And this is the original article at Nature Magazine:

nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04108-8
 
Hello,
Here is a recent study about the origins of Turkic languages:
(It turns out, I can't post links because I'm new.)

newscientist.com/article/2296962-origins-of-japanese-and-turkish-language-family-traced-back-9000-years/

And this is the original article at Nature Magazine:

nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04108-8

I think that Turkic and other Altaic, Uralic languages invented by N peoples but Japanese have mostly O and D Y-DNA. If Japanese and Altaic, Uralic languages descent from common origin, its mean that first Proto-Japanese whose before arrived Japan originated from N peoples and then their languange totaly assimilated into O and D peoples.
 
R1a being Turkic makes little sense considering how widespread it is (from Poland to India in large frequencies). Obviously it is Slavo-Iranic hence its linguistic consistency with Satem languages, not to mention affinity with Kentum languages and peoples (R1b). Clearly the Kirgiz males are the exception to the rule. They were likely conquered by Turks or peacefully adopted the lingua franca of central Asia at some point.

I think the original Turks were haplogroup N. Yes, both Uralics and Turkics can belong to the same haplogroup because it is sufficiently old. The Turks of Siberia (Yakuts and Sakhas) still have extremely high proportions of N. Early on, they conquered neighboring peoples of different haplogroups who then spread the Turkic languages.

Haplogroup C really seems to be in the region where the Tungusian people arose.
 
Y-DNA R arose 35.000 years ago.
 
Doesn't matter how old the haplogroups are if they were stagnant for the bulk of that time, or moving slowly. The domestication of the horse changed everything and that only happened perhaps 5000 years ago.
 

This thread has been viewed 7480 times.

Back
Top