Origin of Turanids

[greatness]

the origin of IE languages is much a mystery. I am guessing the ancestor evolved in Dasht-e-Kavir desert due to the findings of Sadeq Nazmi Afshar. The Dasht-e-Kavir is a salt desert, which indicates at some time in the past it would have been a lake, this is supported by writings in Zoroastrian texts which site an ancient lake flowing south from the Alborz mountains. While studying Spencer Wells findings this is the area where the human population branches, one group heading into India, another through central Asia into Europe.

I highly doubt u could racially trace back the Proto IE as so many varying populations speak IE languages. The original group many have only imparted its language, and the genes could have just been absorbed by local populations in Eurasia. Or there may have been a lot of diversity in the Proto-IE group whereby the various subraces eventually developed due to genetic drift and recombination.

[Dienekes]

human2 said:

The R1a of Germanics are more related to R1a of Irano-Afghans than to R1a Slavs/Uralics, so that's a clue.

You have any evidence for this claim?

[ohes]

Another thing that is taught uncorrectly in most of the Western history classes is origins of Scythians, now after learning that Scythians were of Turkish origin in Turkey, I was very surprised here when I first heard that Scythians were "Aryan" or whatever. However, more and more research shows that they are actually indeed Turanian. I guess Aryan story was just a pipedream of Nutzis who somehow managed to get into school texts of the Western world never to be questioned again.

www.stavacademy.co.uk/mimir/scythianterms.htm

www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Pagoda/7675/chapt4.html

sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/27%20Scythians/EthnicRootsEn.htm

[Agrippa]

Utter nonsense, Scythians are an Aryan/Iranian tribe related to Parthians, Persians etc. Not only there culture shows this obviously but also the scarce linguistic remains and anthropological relations.

[ohes]

Have you read the links? Are they not scientific enough or you are rejecting the idea just because it did not fit your "ideology"?

[henerte]

ohes said:

Have you read the links? Are they not scientific enough or you are rejecting the idea just because it did not fit your "ideology"?

Ohes, do you really think that a website named sophistikatedkids[/i](sic!) is scientific?



Anyways....a quote from this website:

The following discourse addresses the reasons for the current universal acceptance by the scientific community of the preposition that the Scythians were unambiguously Indo-European, and specifically Iranian speaking, and the methods to reach this conclusion...

sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/27%20Scythians/Ethnic%20Affiliation%20Scythians%20En.htm

[Agrippa]

There is very much speculation in this texts, certain argumentation are really weak like this:

As to the religious attributes, it is possible to state the following: if Scythians were Iranian-lingual, they would have had a common deity with Persians, and would not be fighting them as long and persistently as described by Herodotus.

Whats the logic there? Many groups which were very close related fought very long and hard wars.

Furthermore there were connections to Ural-Altaics, but mainly because they expanded to regions in which they lived - and brought them the horse and certain techniques. So especially the Eastern IE nomads and farmers in the oases had close contacts to Turkic and Mongolian people. As things turned and those expanded they were assimilated, but both the genetic, archaeological, linguistic, historical and racial relations point clearly to a IE origin.

[greatness]

Scythians were basically nomadic Iranids. In Persepolis, the ancient capitol of the Persians, it is written that the Saka (scythians) were brothers of the Iranians. THe Persians did, however, get into many wars with the Scythians as is documented by king Darius. But by in large, if one looks at Ukraine and southern Russia today, one can still see physically Iranid ppls who are the reminents of this old tribe.

[Agrippa]

They were mostly of Kurgan type (Eastern Cromagnid and general Eastnordid and PONTID, direct Iranid came mostly in the population in Persia, the original Iranians were more Pontid, which is related to but not the same as Iranid which is the indigenous population of the Southern West-Central Asian belt.

[oubit]

Are the Osseti of the border-region between Russia and Georgia really descendants of the Scythians or just a related tribe of the North Iranian branch?

[Agrippa]

oubit said:

Are the Osseti of the border-region between Russia and Georgia really descendants of the Scythians or just a related tribe of the North Iranian branch?

Depends on the definition of Scythian. They are the descendents of a related tribe, the Alans - a tribe of the Sarmats which some group together with the Scyths in the wider but not in the narrower sense.

[Polako]

Early Y-chromosome tests tell us that Scythians were most closely related to modern Poles and Russians...then to western Europeans.

It seems that they did mix with Mongols as they moved east...specifically, they seemed to have taken Mongol wives in Siberia...as Scytho-Siberian mtDNA suggests.

[Agrippa]

polako said:

Early Y-chromosome tests tell us that Scythians were most closely related to modern Poles and Russians...then to western Europeans.

It seems that they did mix with Mongols as they moved east...specifically, they seemed to have taken Mongol wives in Siberia...as Scytho-Siberian mtDNA suggests.

Thats something I read too. As a specialist for that region, do you know which Russian and Polish regions are closest? I doubt its Southern Poland or Northern Russia...

[Polako]

agrippa said:

polako said:

Early Y-chromosome tests tell us that Scythians were most closely related to modern Poles and Russians...then to western Europeans.

It seems that they did mix with Mongols as they moved east...specifically, they seemed to have taken Mongol wives in Siberia...as Scytho-Siberian mtDNA suggests.

Thats something I read too. As a specialist for that region, do you know which Russian and Polish regions are closest? I doubt its Southern Poland or Northern Russia...

It's too early to say. We should know this kind of stuff within the next few years I'd imagine.

But I can tell you right now that in terms of Y-chromosomes Poland is a very homogenous place. There's very little difference between north, south, east and west.

Western and central Russia is very similar to Poland. But northern Russia is different due to a higher incidence of N.

[Agrippa]

polako said:

It's too early to say. We should know this kind of stuff within the next few years I'd imagine.

But I can tell you right now that in terms of Y-chromosomes Poland is a very homogenous place. There's very little difference between north, south, east and west.

In this case we should look for the mtDNA too.