|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jun 4, 2007 23:56:34 GMT 3
We would have been certain if we had any written documents from the Xiongnu and Huns.
|
|
|
Post by bokharian on Dec 3, 2007 1:27:31 GMT 3
Hi all,great forum here! newbee,my parents are fair skinned Pakistanis...I have dark brown hair ,green eyes and blond/red facaial hair?..never really understood how you get this in Pakistan...until I saw the special on nova "mysterious mummies of China".This blew me out of my seat > literally ! Since then I have been hooked on the connections from various cultures...The Kurgan peoples are of great interest .My last name is Bokhari > sure sounds like Tokhari < i think I am of this gene ,wonder if I can submit a gene test? anyone know where I would begin? my email is sbok150@hotmail.com ,peace all.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Dec 3, 2007 20:19:55 GMT 3
Hello Bokharian, welcome aboard
|
|
|
Post by Azadan Januspar on Jul 8, 2008 20:40:45 GMT 3
What was the first dated appearance of the rain deers in artworks and where?
|
|
Altantugs
Är
The Hope die at the End
Posts: 12
|
Post by Altantugs on Sept 1, 2008 5:57:54 GMT 3
Is there any mongolian?
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 20, 2009 22:40:23 GMT 3
I don't think Afanasievo was Uralic/Ugric.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 21, 2009 14:38:28 GMT 3
It is way more possible for those Afanesiovians to be Indo-Europeans rather than Uralics.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 22, 2009 4:17:50 GMT 3
I mean that the Afanesiova culture probably belongs to Indo-Europeans, not Altaics or Uralic.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jan 22, 2009 4:45:20 GMT 3
Because of the presence of Indo-European nomads in the region Unfortunately, I am not an expert on this prehistory of Central Asia, so I can't give you better and more detailed answers
|
|
|
Post by Alanus on Apr 28, 2010 0:51:16 GMT 3
I mean that the Afanesiova culture probably belongs to Indo-Europeans, not Altaics or Uralic. You seem to be correct. The Afanesiova culture carries all the Indo-European traits in its burial sites. The culture then extended to Pazryak. And, earlier, you asked whether this latter culture was Indo-Iranian or Turkic. It looks like a little of both even if their language developed into what we know as Saka. Genetic studies on a few Pazryak graves (only about a dozen) show that about 60% were Caucasion, in other words coming from Afanesiova-Iranian. The other 40% had Asian features in the facial bone structure, indicating (to me) that they were Hunnic or "proto-Mongol." This same combination, Caucasion and Asian, also shows up in the Sarmatian-Alanic kurgans at Fillipovka, and in the modern population of Kazakhs. I love it! Because we must discount the term "race" in these people. They were just steppe nomads, not a particular "race" as perceived by someone with a personal/political/national agenda.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Apr 28, 2010 12:16:16 GMT 3
Yes, they all seemed to have mixed with each other If they were Hunnic, they would have been Turkic because the Mongolic or Proto-Mongolic peoples did not live in the Yenisei basin at that time; it was mostly a Turkic-inhabited area. I also personally don't believe that the Pazyryk finds belong to the Asian Huns, because the Asian Huns lived mostly in Mongolia and northern China, while the Yenisei Basin and the Altais were inhabited by other Turkic peoples such as the Qyrghyz and Ding-ling at that time.
|
|
|
Post by Alanus on May 5, 2010 21:07:46 GMT 3
Sorry mr Buganculuu was me! the word `Hun` mean `Human, Human race` ok? I remembered I have read somewhere that the word Qun , one of self designations and self nominations of Kypchaks is of Turkic orgin and means man, human alongside with kishi. Is this qun related to Mongolian word Hun (man, human). If they are, we can assume that this is an Altaic word lost in modern Turkic but still alive in Mongolian. Turkic form is Qun Mongolian Form is Hun So may be common word Khun , the first man to be known So This Khun stands for Original Hunnic word for Huns themsselves? Can we assume that Huns considered themselves first humans? Gosh! It is too complicated. I hope ypu can understand what I mean. Good question. I think every culture (extended tribe) thought of themselves as descending from the "first man." Also from legendary heroes. Here's a point. The ancient Britons believed they descended from "Alanus, the first man in Europe." (I may have mentioned this on another tread) What about the Alans themselves? Did they think the same thing? I suppose we could modify their thought to call this progenitor "the first Indo-European man" and come out fairly correct. Other cultures had their own progenitor: Adam comes to mind. And then we have heroes. The Romans, Gauls, and even the Britons (related to the Gauls) wanted to descend from Aeneius the Trojan... who never existed. So what about Khun and Alanus? Again, probably someone who never existed... OR... an actual progenitor founded on cultural memory.
|
|