In Cantonese (a very widely spoken Southern Chinese dialect that has kept ancient pronunciation of many Chinese characters), the character for Xiongnu（匈奴）is pronounced "Hungnou".
In Mongolia, Xiognu is known as Hunnu, so when I started reading about history in English I confused them with Huns at first. They might be connected but IDK.
Yep, Old Chinese had a dialect that was very different from today's Mandarin. The latter actually originated from the northern plains of china where it had been inhabited by the nomadic tribes after the fall of the Han dynasty.
It is frankly very comfusing. The thing is in Turkey, They teach us about this tribe confederation called "the Asian Hun" or " the Great Hun" in our History lessons(AND I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CHINSE DYNASTY) Which is apparently called Xiongnu in other conturies??? And I am just learning that there are debates about whether countries like Europe Hun have Xiongnu origin or not... And we were told that they came from Xiongnu... It is just too confusing for me.
@@tuvshinbayarmandakh The Mongolian version is most probably from Qing era Chinese, since the nu part at the end was a pejorative used for other peoples as well, meaning slaves. The Huns would in most probability have been long forgotten among the Turkic and Mongolic peoples by then, and were rediscovered thanks to historiography.
The Gaoju (高車 lit. "High Cart"), also known as Tiele,[90] were early Turkic speakers related to the earlier Dingling,[91][92] who were once conquered by the Xiongnu.[93][94] Weishu also mentioned the linguistic and ethnic proximity between the Gaoju and the Xiongnu.[95] de la Vaissière proposes that the Hephthalites had originally been one Oghuric-speaking tribe who belonged the Gaoju/Tiele confederation.[82][96][97]
@@amongus1672 Sorma amk ya. Türk adının geçtiği veya alakalı olduğu her videoda var adam. Her cephede savaşıyor mübarek, tek kişilik ordu yemin ediyorum.
While its true that there was some controversy about the origin of the Huns, the consensus after recent decades is that they were Turks of Oghuric affiliation, mostly based on credible studies confirming that the vast majority of attested Hunnic names, as well as all Hunnic successor clans are of evident Oghur Turkic origin. All Hunnic tribes (entirely Oghur Turkic) : Akatziri, Onogurs, Utigurs, Sabirs, Bulgars, Saragurs, Kutrigurs, Barsils, Balanjars Recorded Hunnic names of Turkic origin : Aigan = moon prince; from Turkic aï & can Alp Ilutuer / Ilteber = heroic chieftain; from Turkic alp & iltäbär Althias = six; from Turkic Alti Akkagas = white rock; from Turkic ak & kayač Atakam = elder shaman; from Turkic ata & kam Balach = calf; from Turkic Malaq Berik = strong; from Turkic Berık Basik = governor; from Turkic Bârsiğ Bleda = wise; from Turkic Bildä Bochas = either gullet; from Turkic Boğuz; or bull, from Buqa Dengizich = ocean-like, heavenly; from Turkic teɲez & dêɲri; or, more simply, great lake Donat / Donatu = horse; from Turkic Yonat Edeco = good; from Turkic Ädgü Ellac = to rule; from Turkic el & lä Emmedzur = horse lord; from Turkic Ämäcur Eskam / Esqam = companion of the shaman; from Turkic Eŝkam Hereka / Kreka = pure princess; from Turkic Arïqan Ernakh / Hernac = small man, heroic man; from Turkic Ernäk Iliger = prince man; from Turkic ilig & är Karadach = black mountain; from Turkic Qaradağ Karaton = black cloak; from Turkic Qarâton Kursik = either noble; from Turkic Kürsiğ; or belt-bearer, from Qurŝiq Kutilzis = blessed herald; from Turkic kut & elči Mundzuk = bead; from Turkic Munčuq Oebarsius / Aybars = moon leopard, from Turkic Aïbârs; or dun leopard, from oy & bars Oldogan / Odolgan = either red falcon; from Turkic al & dogan; or chubby, from Tolgun Oktar / Uptar = brave; from Turkic Öctär Ruga / Rua = wise man; from Turkic Ögä Turgun = still/calm; from Turkic Turkun Uldin = six; from Turkic Alti Zolban = shepherd star; from Turkic Čolpan.
People digged Xiongnu nobel tombs in recent few years! The results shows Xiongnu DNA matches high as 65% with modern Mongolians! Analysis came out as Xiongnu descendants are still where their ancestors were.
Ever since I found my family tree tracing back to a Xiongnu individual called Xiutu who lived in the 2nd century BC, I've been thinking about this subject, and I found this video very informative. Thank you very much for creating such amazing contents!
The history of the Gaoju is given in the respective entry in WS 103 + (pp. 2505-2508); until the beginning of Text 1.056/B it is extracted as follows. 高車,蓋古赤狄之餘種也初號為狄歷,北方以為敕勒,諸夏以為高車、丁零。 其語略與匈奴同而時有小異,或云其先匈奴之也。 The Gaoju are probably the remaining tribes of the ancient Chidi [lit. 'the red Di']. Initially they were called Dili. People in the north called them Chile, whereas people in China proper called them Gaoju or Dingling. Their language is roughly the same as that of the Xiongnu but at times has minor differences from that. Some say that their ancestors were the nephew of [i.e. indirectly related to] the Xiongnu.
It's widely accepted that the Hephthalites / White Huns were Turkic nomads from the Altai range, while their native language is assumed to be Oghuric, the connection to the Khalaj Turk Shahis leaves an open door for an Arghu theory It's now agreed over that the Xiongnu, European Huns, & White Huns were a common Hunnic people whereas their ethno-linguistic affiliation is presumed to be Oghur Turkic Reconstruction of the Turkic Jie language, spoken by the Jie people, a Xiongnu tribal group su-Ø kete-r erkan boklug-gu tukta-ŋ English translation : When/as the army goes out, capture the Boklug (a chief) ! The Hunnic inscription on a dinner plate belonging to the last ruler of the Huns, Dengizich, was identified as Turkic. The Hunnic sample of Khan Diggiz plate ; kinkeg dikkiz ükü essä - kijü sax sax saxynil gür täηrig English translation : Beware of king Dikkiz the Wise's blow ! Retreat to the Tengri (God) beyond the world!
Aside from the "Hungnou/匈奴" (Chinese Cantonese)/"Huns"pronunciation similarity, the meaning of "Nou/Nu/奴“has also shifted significantly over time. Currently, it means "Slavery". Yet, in the ancient times, it meant "tribe". So, "Hungnou/Xiongnu/匈奴“ meant the Hung Tribe, or simply the Hungs, similar to what has happened to the Slavs I Eastern Europe during the Roman Period.
in Cantonese, this tribe is called 匈奴 "hung nu", Xiongnu is the worst translation by mandarin speaking people. Cantonese has been proofed being more closely related to the ancient spoken language of midland China.
@@Frikssskingg then y'all need to stop calling Kazakhs, kyrgyz, Uyghurs, Mongols, Uzbeks, yakuts/sakhas and Hazaras your brothers. You so called blonde hair blue eyes turk should keep your pan Turkism to yourself since y'all are the purest,most authentic Turks right? While central Asians are Mongols/Chinese am i right?🤡
@@bearclaw1051 Their names are Turkic tho? Their traditions are also Turkic. The Mongols were the Tung-Hu who Bagatur Khan defeated and drove to the mountains of Xianbei. Huns were Turkic, Tung-hu were mongolic, they later submitted to the Huns.
300 BC, and I cant believe you put question mark on Philippine islands. When Austronesian people first settled there, after they went out of Southeast China 5,000 years ago and expanded to Micronesia & Polynesia in Pacific. PH is 100% Austronesian archipelago of freakin more than 7,600 islands. Just Fyi! Anyways, just want to say that Xiongnu is Turkic mixed with Asian nomads of the East, most probably Tungusic people.
I know the history well. we are the closest species to Iranian people. Since 1990, our historians have created a false history about cyanosis. According to archeological findings, they are the closest relatives of the ancient Khukhturks and the modern Mongols. but our Turkish scientists gave money to Mongolian scientists and took it for themselves. I'm really ashamed. our blood will not lie to whom we are descended.
In my opinion I believe the xiongnu were a Turkic led khaganate with both Turkic and Mongolic core tribes, however I cannot know for sure, and to think of a multi ethnic polity such as the xiongnu so rigidly would be tenuous and dubious.
Xiognu pushed proto Mongols East besides most of the Mongols you think of were Turkic around and a bit after this time, the Keraites, Naimans, Tatars, Khitans (mix of Xiognu and Xianbei), Onghu and other tribes core majority of mongols in other words were Turkic people that became/were mongolised by the time of Genghis Khan.
@@Willxdiana How could ethnic groups who were formed after the collapse of the Mongol Empire, lead a state that preceded it by one thousand years or so?
8 This can be surmised by analysing the names of Hunnic princes and tribes. The names of the following Hunnic princes are clearly Oghuric Turkic in origin: Mundzuk (Attila's father, from Turkic Munc uq = pearl/jewel: for an in-depth discussion of the Hunnic origin of this name in particular see Schramm (1969), 139-40), Oktar/Uptar (Attila's uncle, Öktär brave/powerful), Oebarsius (another of Attila's paternal uncles, Arbårs leopard of the moon), Karaton (Hunnic supreme king before Ruga, Qarâton = black-cloak), Basik (Hunnic noble of royal blood, early fifth century, Bársig = governor), Kursik (Hunnic noble of royal blood, from either Kürsig, meaning brave or noble, or Quršiq meaning belt-bearer). For these etymologies see Bona (1991), 33. Three of Attila's known sons. have probable Turkic names: Ellac, Dengizich, Hernak, and Attila's principal wife, the mother of the crown prince' Ellac, has the Turkic name Herekan, as does another notable wife named Eskam. See Maenchen-Helfen (1973), 392-415. See also Bona (1991), 33-5, and Pritsak (1956), 414. Most known Hunnic tribal names are also Turkic, Maenchen-Helfen (1973), 427-41, e.g. Ultincur, Akatir etc. The cur suffix in many of these names is a well-known Turkic title and as Beckwith (1987), 209, points out the To-lu or Tardus tribes (Hunnic in origin) of the Western Turkish On Oq were each headed by a Cur (noble). Zieme (2006), 115, speculates that the title cur belongs to a pre-Turkic Tocharian stratum of the Turkic language, which, if true, again highlights the essential heterogeneity of Central Asian peoples and even languages. See also Aalto (1971), 35. In addition to this primary language (Oghuric Turkic), Priscus informs us that Latin and Gothic were also understood by the Hunnic elite. See Priscus, fr. 13.3, Blockley (1983), 289. The name of Ellac, Attila’s eldest son, is a corruption of the Turkic älik ( ilik ) meaning ‘ruler, king’. 21 Ernak/Irnik the youngest son also has the variation of the same suffix in his name. His name is probably Turkic är-näk , meaning ‘great hero’, with the suffix here functioning as an augmentation of the Turkic är-än (hero). 22 Thus the suffix -ik/ich was used in Hunnic to imply greatness (i.e. ruler or kingship). These names were, it seems, formal court titles rather than personal names. Kim, H. (2013). The end of the Hunnic Empire in the west. In The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe (pp. 89-136). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Naturally we also have more probable Turkic etymologies for these names, especially for those of Attila and Bleda. However, even if they were Germanic or Germanicized Turkic names," ,99 this does not allow us to make any hasty assumptions about the official language of the empire, if it ever existed. What Heather ignores is the fact that we have convincing or highly probable Turkic etymologies for the names of many of the other Hunnic kings and nobles before and after Attila, e.g. Mundzuk (Attila's father, from Turkic Muncuq = 'pearl/jewel'), Oktar/Uptar (Attila's uncle, Öktär = "brave/power ful'), Oebarsius (another of Attila's paternal uncles, Aïbârs = 'leopard of the moon'), Karaton (Hunnic supreme king before Ruga, Qaraton = 'black cloak'), Basik (Hunnic noble of royal blood, early fifth century, Bårsig= 'governor'), Kursik (Hunnic noble of royal blood, from either Kürsig, meaning 'brave or noble', or Qursiq meaning 'belt-bearer'). All three of Attila's known sons have probable Turkic names: Ellac, Dengizich, Hernak, and Attila's principal wife, the mother of the first son Ellac, has the Turkic name Herekan, as does another wife named Eskam (Ešqam = 'companion of the Shaman).102 It seems highly likely then from the names that we do know, most of which seem to be Turkic, that the Hunnic elite was predominantly Turkic speaking. However, in the western half of the empire, where most of their subjects spoke Germanic languages, the Huns may have used both Hunnic (Oghuric Turkic) and Gothic. Thus fief holders and royal family mem Ibers in the west who ruled Germanic tribes often bore Germanic or Germanicized titles (of great significance, as we will discover later on in the book), e.g. Laudaricus and Ardaric.105 Priscus, who is our only reliable source, being an actual eye-witness, tells us that at the Hunnic court Hunnic, Gothic and Latin were spoken, but with Hunnic always men tioned before Gothic. All three languages were apparently understood by the elite to some degree, so much so that Zercon the Moor could provoke laughter by jumbling all three together at a Hunnic banquet in the presence of Attila.107 There is, however, no indication anywhere that any of these three languages was the lingua franca. Kim, H. (2013). Notes. In The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe (pp. 30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
A genetic study published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology in November 2007 examined of 17 individuals buried at the Murong Xianbei cemtery in Lamadong, Liaoning, China ca. 300 AD. They were determined to be carriers of the maternal haplogroups B, C, D, F, G2a, Z, M, and J1b1. These haplogroups are common among East Asians, and to a lesser extent Siberians. The maternal haplogroups of the Murong Xianbei were noticibly different from those of the Huns and Tuoba Xianbei.[17] 7 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences from Tuoba Xianbei remains in Dong Han period were analyzed. Together with the Data of Xiongnu published, the genetic affinities between Tuoba Xianbei and Xiongnu were analyzed in genetic diversity, haplogroup status, Fst genetic distances, phylogenetic analysis and multidimentional scaling (MDS) analysis. The results indicated that the Tuoba Xianbei presented the closer affinities to the Xiongnu, which implied that there was the gene flow between Tuoba Xianbei and Xiongnu during the 2 southward migrations. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17905712/ Whereas the Hunas from about 450 were Turkic in language. sai.columbia.edu/files/sai/content/Ahmed%20-%20Trautmann%2C%20Ch.%209%20Turks%20and%20Mughals-1_0.pdf In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster tends to disappear projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf Turkic Speaking Huns books.google.com.tr/books?id=YKPaLi1d1O4C&pg=PA6&dq=&hl=tr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjO4tibh5HpAhWKw6YKHaKtA_UQ6AEINDAC#v=onepage&q=&f=false (Oxford University Press) The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations. The predominant part of the Xiongnu population is likely to have spoken Turkic (Late Proto-Turkic, to be more precise). www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf The Huns, a Turkic-speaking people www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Asia-and-Oceania/Mongolia-HISTORY.html Shih Le was a Chieh, a Hsiung-nu tribe which seems to have spoken a Turkic language. www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/shih-le The Balkars speak the Karachay-Balkar language, which belongs to the Kipchak Subgroup of the West Hunnic Branch of the Turkic Language Family. www.encyclopedia.com/history/modern-europe/russian-soviet-and-cis-history/balkars Prof. Dr. Nicola Di Cosmo in: The Turks: Early ages, Part 4. Huns (Xiongnu): The Origin and Rise of the Xiongnu Empire, Y. T., 2002, pp.217-227, University of Michigan, ISBN 9756782552, 9789756782552 "There is not much doubt among historians about the Turkish nature of the Great Hun Empire, which ruled between 318 B.C. and 216 A.D., as well as that of its predecessor proto-Huns, whose presence was confirmed by Chinese sources. The Great Hun Empire, the Western Hun Empire and especially the European Huns were examined comprehensively by Western historians."
They’re obviously Proto-Mongolian, almost always, the land a people come from is where their descendants lived on. Even for nomads, there were regions they stayed within. Maybe in its westernmost portions it had some Iranic and Turkic tribes
The Xiongnu homeland became Chinese provinces, 2/3 of the Xiongnu population transformed into Han Chinese, 1/3 of the war refugees conquered Central Asia, western Asia and Turkey
Por la similitud de los nombres, es posible que los hunos fueran parte de las tribus que formaban el imperio xiongnu, con una predominancia proto-turca. En cuanto a la etnicidad de xiongnu, es posible que fuese multiétnica, pero lo más seguro es que predominara el componente oriental, proto-turco y proto-mongol.
It's widely accepted that the Hephthalites / White Huns were Turkic nomads from the Altai range, while their native language is assumed to be Oghuric, the connection to the Khalaj Turk Shahis leaves an open door for an Arghu theory It's now agreed over that the Xiongnu, European Huns, & White Huns were a common Hunnic people whereas their ethno-linguistic affiliation is presumed to be Oghur Turkic Reconstruction of the Turkic Jie language, spoken by the Jie people, a Xiongnu tribal group su-Ø kete-r erkan boklug-gu tukta-ŋ English translation : When/as the army goes out, capture the Boklug (a chief) ! The Hunnic inscription on a dinner plate belonging to the last ruler of the Huns, Dengizich, was identified as Turkic. The Hunnic sample of Khan Diggiz plate ; kinkeg dikkiz ükü essä - kijü sax sax saxynil gür täηrig English translation : Beware of king Dikkiz the Wise's blow ! Retreat to the Tengri (God) beyond the world!
What’s interesting is that out of all the nomadic tribes, it is the Turks with the most mixed haplogroup s and mitochondrial DNA… Haplogroup N = Uralic C-M217 = Mongolic C3 = Tungusic (distant relatives of the mongols??) Q = Yeneseian and Amerindian But Turkic? It seems mostly split between Q and N, and then the western Turks have a lot of western haplogroups like J and R…hmmm….maybe it was the TURKS that were a multiracial but unified confederacy and the Xiongnu might’ve been the original ancestors of the Turks…
I strongly think that they were multiethnic, including a group that was proto-Turko-Mongolic, a group that was the westernmost extension of Tocharian and Iranic, some small portions of Tungusic and Yeneseian, and her languages that were paleosiberian quasi-isolates, such as Nivkh. I beleive that there was a "pre-Yeneseian" language that was displaced in about the 2000 BCE period, when the later "Yeneseians" moved in from the south, originally from the south-western Baikal area. I believe that the ORIGINAL or 'old Yeneseian' language was pretty different from the language that replaced it.
One Old chinese documents says "Gokturk were descend of Xiognu". Another chinese document says "Gokturks like as Xiognu". Gokturk learned how to ruled empire from Xiognu Resarches show us that. They ruled like Xiognu. There is a no need discuss that. Another point is European Huns are not turkic people. İs this real? After attila's death his son Ernak ruled balkans. His successor Bulgarian Khanete. Khanete's leader clan is Dulo Clan. Dulo clan's tamga is IYI. İn Turkish TUĞLUK CLAN. Tamga show us that DULO is ottoman's ruler clan KAYI. Thats it.
l am from Türkiye. İllustrative DNA test shows l have %30 Xiongnu genome. So you can say Xiongnu were Turkish anchestors of Turkic men. My haplogroup iş Q. İn bronze age period l have %6.6 amur river hunter gatherers, %3.6 yellow river hunter gatherers genome. %20 central steppe herderer. So you can say Xiongnu were anchestors of Türkiye. A lot of mix in history but ethnic Turks of Türkiye are grandson's of Xiongnu
Xiongnu are turk according the Chinese sources. Mongols appeared in the 13 th century and the land named after them we all know there were turkish tribe like Nayman between them . we all know this land was the home of Gokturk Empire in the 6 th century and the Uighur Empire in the 8 th century, and still to day there is many turkish tribes lives in the North west like Duha tribe (Tsaatan),tuva , kazak and uighur . Mongolia is the ancient home land of Turkish peopole .
The Chinese never tried to differentiete between Mongolian and Turkic people, and also Mongolic people have been proven to exist during the Xioungu era.
Xiongnus were mostly mongolic people. You can still find them living in Mongolia and northern China. Doesn't look like turks or Caucasians. How come only chinese have any written first hand description of these people?
I find it very inconsistent that you are so leery when it comes to the topic of the video but are quick to call the Scythian language Iranic, when that topic is even more debated than the Huns.
Easy assimilation after conquest? Conquest could only mean paying tribute (taxes) but otherwise a not - too oppressive assimilation into the "tribe". This creates a mixed language (and DNA) and some "loyalty". This is sort of like medieval serfs not really distinguishing too much about which Lord collected tribute from them. They just "went with the flow". The wars were between the Lords (who collects the taxes?) - not the serfs. Later (Post Xiongnu), conquest looks different, such as with Genghis Khan whose terms of surrender were oppressive, so the fight continued to the death. The oppressive conquest model led to firmer boundaries and more distinct languages and cultures. The Han culture would have a tempting target for all nomadic raiders - as was Rome. Easy alliances with potential raiders and later division and rivalry about who gets what - including fratricide over inheritance issues.
we know that roman historians wrote about the huns that they were tall and strong and we know that they wrote the same about iranian ,and we also know the turks and mongols are not tall.and we also know that genetic and iranic words are more commen in hungary than turkic.
I don’t where I had read that but the former türük tribes after they beat the énnemi raise the young children to made them future warriors and by this that make hétérogeneous ethnic group difficult to distinguish because they was assimilated.
On the topic of if the Huns of Asia and Europe are related: it has been noted by ancient historians that the Caucasian Huns which were the same as European ones had open relation with Hephthalites. In fact, on one instance the Caucasian Huns even warned the Hephthalites about an offensive the Sassanids planned on them, which leads us to think they had friendly relations. To further support this, the tamga of the Hephthalites have been found in Caucasian excavations. One other thing to note, Hunnic era cultures in the Kama/Perm region and Central Asia (Jety-asar culture in this instance) engaged in trade as is evident from archeological data.
American history professor Justin McCarthy said that Turks came from very different regions and united under the Turkish identity, just like the Americans, despite their roots in different places. found the same structures as the structures. In the article published by Science Direct, it was seen that there is a genetic sharing between the Huns and the Turks.🐺🐺
Xiongnu was Turkic. They had 5 clans. Supreme elite rulers came from Luandi klan ( alayuntlu) all chanyu was Turkic haplogroup mostly Q. At 2012 Li Honhjie found in Black Gouliang cemetery Xiongnu elites skletons. 12 men buried 4 of them y DNA haplogroup Q M378 as hosts, 8 were Q1a M25 as hosts and victims. Li honhjie et al 2012, jilin University China. R1az93 and their subclades are scytians but assomilated in Turkish nation, N1C was Turkic N1a was assimilated uralic men in Turkic tribes. C2a Mongolian but mixed in turkish tribes
Main nation(Founders): Mongol tribes confederation Vassals(Conquered area’s people):Turkic tribes Enemy: China Expansion: until Europe including White Huns, Attila Huns. Great Xiongnu empire 👏👏👏
Huns have 80 tribes and so does Xiongnu. They were together and United. Some were white, some were even Muslim. My family were Hunnic. We don't need scholars to tell us who we are.
Most likely 匈奴 (Xiongnu) was a multi-ethnic tribal confederacy. It could've been a generic term referring to all the northern barbarians. After the Gokturks, the Uyghurs controlled the Turkic homeland (i.e. Western Mongolia and South Siberia) until they were usurped and pushed out by the Yenisey Kyrgyz around 1,100 years ago. Their direct descendants are known as the Western Yugur and Eastern Yugur people living in China. Interestingly, Western Yugur is a Turkic-language while Eastern Yugur is a Mongolic language. Turkic and Mongolic tribes have been living in proximity for thousands of years, and naturally many tribal alliances were formed. (Even two of the four official wives of Genghis Khan were from Turkic clans.) As for how to pronounce 匈奴, Chinese pronunciation has shifted from ancient times. The current Beijing/Mandarin pronunciation isn't the same as the Han Dynasty era. Ancient centers of power for Chinese kingdoms was more inland, near the ancient Silk Road gateway. Beijing became the preferred capital of various Mongolic and Manchu dynasties, particularly in the past 1,000 years or so, because it was a convenient halfway point between their homelands and China proper. As such, current standard Mandarin/Beijing dialect was heavily influenced by ruling classes of various northern conquest regimes. It's the product of Mongols and Manchus trying to pronounce Chinese.
According to Chinese sources Xiongnu spoke a language closely related to Tiele, they were clearly Oghur Turkic. Also Para-Mongolic languages are not part of Mongolic languages as you said.
Pure garbage, Mandarin is not influenced by Mongolian and Manchu, this is a very different language, Manchu and Mongolian vocabulary is very different from Chinese, you are just a madman
@@papazataklaattiranimam Chinese sources shouldn't be taken as is, you need to take that with a huge grain of salt, since they never tried to Differentiate them, and just generalized both Mongols and Turks into the same group.
@@DemonixGamer Hello-Helló ;) Avar are our closest bro too, atleast our ancestors once formed same group with them, DNA elite of avars showed that from modern population autosomally closest were my Buryad people and even we share the same haplo clade N1a which make up 48% of Buryats and 80% in Khori-Buryad tribe. You as their descendant my family too😉
@@barguttobed The history of the Gaoju is given in the respective entry in WS 103 + (pp. 2505-2508); until the beginning of Text 1.056/B it is extracted as follows. 高車,蓋古赤狄之餘種也初號為狄歷,北方以為敕勒,諸夏以為高車、丁零。 其語略與匈奴同而時有小異,或云其先匈奴之也。 The Gaoju are probably the remaining tribes of the ancient Chidi [lit. 'the red Di']. Initially they were called Dili. People in the north called them Chile, whereas people in China proper called them Gaoju or Dingling. Their language is roughly the same as that of the Xiongnu but at times has minor differences from that. Some say that their ancestors were the nephew of [i.e. indirectly related to] the Xiongnu.
Jai Hinduja. Xiongnu are Hsia Chinese and they had preserved a still living village in Anhui province. No need to dispute because researchers can easily go there and collect their DNAs
Just cause a tribe is a vasal toa king does not mean they are genetically the same. France controlled Vietnam for 100 years, but the Vietnamese are not French.
Xiongnu and Huns are of Turkic background, words from anpother language can be borwed in your dominant language like words for diary products into Tirkic languages.In that regards the Mongolian empire was in fact a Turko-Mongolian empire and thet were the desecndants of the Gokturks, Mongols in the region didn't have the number to create such a vast army and empire without the Turks. Same rule applies for Xiangnou and Huns.
The Lambert Lombards were originally XiongNu Huns who went to Pannonia and then onto Belgium and Scandinavia. There is little Hun blood left in Hungary to the dismay of the Hungarians but their aristocracy did not want to integrate or intermarry with the Hun Barbarians and so the unwanted Lombard Huns just kept moving to brighter pastures. The truth is stranger than the fiction.
@raffaellodellavaris8140 Very interesting, sources please? In Hungary or should I say the Carpathian Basin more properly there was and is a historical continuum. The graves speak volumes, there's archeological evidence of the many steppe peoples that were in Hungary throughout its history- Scythians, Sarmatians, Huns, Avars, Magyars, Pechenegs, Cumans historical evidence that also proves the Magyar tribal confederation of (Árpáds Magyars) were comprised of Scytho-Sarmatian and former Hunnic peoples. If a substantial part European Huns migrated with the Lombards it's highly possible because during the great barbarian migration period of European history many Huns, Alans and other former Hunnic confederation people were serving as mercenaries.
Ancient Turks have incomparibly highed amounts of Western Eurasian paternal haplogroups than the East Eurasion people because ancient Turks have West Eurasian roots and they’re related with Sintashta, Andronovo, Karasuk and Tagar cultures as well as Subars and BMAC cultures. Paternal lineage (Y-DNA) points the direction of ethnicity and autosomal DNA points the direction of phenotype. Subars were originally the norhern neighbours of Sumerians(northern Iraq) and they had symbiotic relation with Sumerians as there were many Subars assimilated among Sumerians. Sumerians were calling themselves Kangar not Sumerian and its neighbours were wrongly calling them Sumerians which is the corrupt pronounciation of the word “Subar”. Sumerians and Subars were different people but Subars unlike Sumerians were warrior people who were fighting against invasion of Semitic people of Sumerian lands. Those people after centuries of fights with semitic people forced to leave the region and the ones stayed in Sumeria were enslaved and eventually assimilated by Semitic people. The hypothesis is that one arm of Subars leaving Mesopotamia eventually reached Siberia through southern and northern Azerbaijan and also by following the cultural route of Khorasan- Urals via east of Caspian Sea and Aral lake. According to this hypthesis the name of the Siberian branch of Turks (Sabars or Sabirs) too actually comes from Subars and they contributed to the genesis of proto-Turkish language and constitutes one of the roots of Turkish ethniciy. Actually that explains some 38 common main words between Sumerian and Turkish languages. BMAC people or Bactria-Mariana Archeological Complex people who lived in Central Asia in Bronze age and its populations were comprised of hunter gatherers from Siberia as well. Those people were completely destroyed and eradicated by the Arian people who took their lands and eradiacted their culture completely. Turks which is the ruling ethnicity of Scythians emerged as an ethnic group in Southern Siberia as the mix of the aforementioned people (People of Sintashta, Andronovo, Karasuk, Tagar cultures, Subars and BMAC people) and from there they started to conquer lands towards both east and west. The western arm of them is known as Saka today and they went to Central Asia and reached as far as Urals region and eastern Europe by founding big and small many many states along the way with the local populations they met. The eastern arm on the other hand started their military expeditions from western Mongolia to eastern Mongolia and later China are known as Asian Huns (or Xiongnu) today. Asian Huns started the substantial genetic and phenotypic mix by intermixing and assimilating the Asiatic people on their way (proto-Mongols, proto-Tunguz, proto-Koreans, and the Chinese) in eastern Mongolia, Liao river and in Manchuria regions. ASIAN HUNS AKA XIONGNU WERE FROM THE SAME ETHNICIY WITH SCYTHIANS AND HERE’S THE EVIDENCE Alexander the Great after conquering the Persian Empire marched toward Central Asia in about 330 BCE. He first moved to northeast and made war with the Sycthian clans there. As the war was inconclusive he moved toward southeast where he fought the scouts of Xiongnu (Asian Hun Empire). After these wars historians traveling with him noted some important informations regarding Scythians. They mentioned that both Scythians and Xiongnu had same clothing, fighting in the same way and more importantly they were speaking the same language. (Kaegi, W. E. (2003). Heraclius: Emperor of Byzantium (First Edition) Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press, 140-151.) CONCLUSION ABOUT THE LINK BETWEEN SCYTHIANS, ASIAN HUNS AKA XIONGNU AND TURKS In a nutshell archeological, genetic and linguistic evidence suggests that Scythians (the rulers of them) are the proto-Turks. The remnants of Scythians who remained in Southern Siberia later merged with the Asian Huns who returned to their motherland in Southern Siberia in the the late 4th century BC. Asian Huns were ethnically Scythians despite that their phenotypes diversified during their military expeditions in the east which last for centuries. Kok Turk Empire and the Yenisei Kyrgyz people emerged as the successors of Scythians and Asian Huns. Scythians or Sakas (their rulers) are thought to be the ancestors of the contemporary Turks mostly living in Siberia, Tarim Basin, Central Asia, Middle East, Caucasus eastern Europe and Anatolia.
WAIT A MINUTE ISN’T IT TRUE THAT AUTOSOMAL DNA OF THE MOST ANCIENT TURKS SUGGEST THAT THEY HAD MOSTLY MONGOLOID PHENOTYPES? The problem of comparing the genetic makeup of ancient populations with the contemporary populations is that DNA samples extracted from the ancient burial sites mostly belonged to the people of the noble classes or royal families while the DNA samples obtained from the contemporary populations belonged to the common people. Medieval Turks (and most probably the proto-Turks too) had different traditions of getting lands than Iranic people. Iranic people had the practice of incest marriages for the noble class in order to protect their noble blood. This tradition doesn’t exist in Turks and presumably in proto-Turks either. The noble class of Turkish populations normally marry the noble people of their neighbour states and empires in order to be able to demand more lands as dowries. That’s why they’re very much mixed with the people of the neighbour states, empires, tribes etc. For that reason for example it isn’t a good idea to compare genetic makeup of medieval and proto Turks with ancient Iranic people to determine which side had more West Eurasian genes because all you can have access is the DNA samples of the people belonging noble class in each ethnic group rather than the common people and because of the totally different cultural practises that would be quite misleading.. Yet even in the DNA of those (proto) Turks belonging the noble class who’re very much mixed with Asiatic populations there’s incomparibly higher rate of West Eurasian genes than east Eurasian populations. If they were naturally east Eurasian people there wouldn’t be any difference between them and east Eurasian people considering the fact that they were going on marrying with the nobles of the east Eurasian people when they were already deep in East Eurasia and surrounded with many many East Eurasian populations. This evidently proves that they initially had West Eurasian root. Also not to mention the fact that the DNA samples extracted from these people were far away from representing the common populations. So we can assume that the common people in their countries had diverse populations leaning toward West Eurasian. If you can connect the dots you can actually see that common population of not only proto Turk but also Turks had West Eurasian roots. Now let’s talk about the phenotypes of the common population in Turks according to the Chinese annals. Chinese histories describe the early Turks (Tujue or Tüküe) as “mixed barbarians” having a noteworthy frequency of blonde to brown hair and blue or green eyes. The Tang historian Yan Shigu described them as "blue-eyed and red bearded". The ruling clan of the Turks, the Ashina, the tribe which first used the term “Türk”, were described by Chinese authors as having an unusual appearance. According to Chinese scientist Xue Zongzheng, the early Turks had physical features that were quite different from those of East Asian people. These would include deep eye sockets, prominent noses, and light eye or hair color. Chinese sources mention that Xiongnu (Asian Huns) and Ashina which is the founder of Kok Turk empire were the same people. Furthermore they say that people of the Ashina clan phenotypically were very similar to Yenisei Kyrgyz population. According to the Yenisei inscriptions from 6th ceentury Yenisei Kyrgyz people were speaking Turkish and these people became the part of Kok Turk Empire only in the 8th century. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yenisei_Kyrgyz
Here it is unimportant whether Turks were blond or not. I mentioned it to emphasize the fact that those people mentioned by the Chinese weren’t Iranic people because there is no mention of huge blond population for Iranic people even in the most ancient descriptions and depictions regarding the phenotypes of Iranic people. Phenotypes of Iranic people clearly draw the picture of phenotypes similar to Semitic people like Assyrians or Indian people. So who did Turks mix with to have such distinctively different phenotypes in western and eastern Mongolia where there is no other population carrying west Eurasian genes than the Turks? Another logical question is how on earth Turks could get such distinctive phenotypical traits if they had East Asian origin? As a rule East Asian phenotypes are dominant over the rest of the phenotypes and common Iranic people have never had these distinctive phenotypical traits. It’s important to note that R haplogroup which is often associated with Indo-Europeans actually originates from Southern Siberia. The existance of this particular haplogroup in Afanesievo culture at the same time span with Yamnaya culture actually suggests that the direction of migration was from Southern Siberia to Pontic Steppes where Yamnaya culture emerged not from Pontic Steppes to Southern Siberia. www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#:~:text=Haplogroup%20R*%20originated%20in%20North,central%20Siberia%20(Raghavan%20et%20al. Another important point is that people of Sintashta culture who are often wrongly associated with Indo-Iranic people actually fought and defended themselves against Indo-Aryan invasion and only after Indo-Aryan people set their agricultural fields fire they had to move toward north and east in search for new lands for living. Actually they had no real contact with Indo-Aryan people. So the question is how is it possible that they can have any relation with Indo-Aryan or Indo-European languages. Most probably bulk of the Sintashta population who migrated north and east weren’t the speakers of Indo-European languages. Most probably they were speaking an agglutinative language and the language of proto-Turks emerged as a substrate of this agglutinative language. There is no real evidence regarding Indo-European roots of Iranic people. The language of Avesta in Iranic people and the language of Veda in Indian people are very similar to each other. Most probably what happened was these Indo-Aryan people coming from India conquered the remnants of Sintashta people who didn’t move to east and north and imposed their language on them. From there this language was imposed on the populations in Europe who had much less crowded populations back then and that’s how Indo-European languages emerged. ISN’T IT TRUE THAT INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES EMERGED EARLIER THAN THE LANGUAGE OF PROTO TURKS? The claim is that Indo-European languages emerged prior to the language of proto-Turks. The linguists who propose this hypothesis base their opinion that branches of Turkish language and lects of those branches in Turkish language still have much higher intelligibility with each other than Indo-European languages and according to them this suggests that it’s much younger language than Indo-European languages whose intelligibility with each other is incomparibly lower. Yet, this notion isn’t very correct because the root words in agglutinative languages can be much better preserved than flexive languages due to their morphological qualities. Here’s a little information regarding Turkish language That’s why they could still remain far more intelligible than flexive languages like Indo-European languages even if they were formed from much earlier times than Indo-European languages. So this kind of evaluation regarding the age of languages which is valid for flexive languages isn’t very valid for agglutinative languages like the branches of Turkish language and the lects of these branches inTurkish language. SO WHY IS IT THAT COMMON PEOPLE OF TURKS IN CENTRAL ASIA DON’T HAVE THE SAME PHENOTYPES WITH WEST EURASIAN PEOPLE? This DNA sequencing research below gives an adequate answer to this particular question. Population Dynamics and the Rise of Empires in Inner Asia”This DNA research’s published on November 5, 2020. This is the latest and one of the largest DNA sequencing researches that has been made in Mongolia so far.Here is a little information about the research
@@kedisukriye On the contrary Chinese sources always mention that early Turks had Europoid physical traits. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashina_tribe The fact that the Chinese described Turks as having distinctively different physical characteristics from the Iranic people is significant. The Iranic people are typically described as having physical characteristics similar to Semitic people like the Assyrians or Indian people, while the Turks are described as having blond or light-colored hair and distinctive eye and nose features. This raises the question of who the Turks mixed with to have these distinctive physical characteristics in western and eastern Mongolia, where there are no other populations with West Eurasian genes except for the Turks. It is also worth considering how the Turks could have acquired such distinctive physical traits if they had East Asian origins. You are under the illusion of the physical traits of the Central Asian and Siberian Turks which makeup only a small fraction of the entire Turkish populations. The physical traits of the Central Asian Turks have changed and became more homogenous leaning towards Asiatic people because these people mixed and assimilated some Mongolian tribes which converted to Islam. That’s how they’ve got more Asiatic facial features in various degrees. The ones living in Siberia on the other hand are just small minorities who were heavily mixed with the Tungusic and Mongolian people living in the same geography. Yet when we analyze the DNA of both Central Asian and Siberian Turks we can clearly see that they have incomparibly higher rate of West Eurasian genes compared to East Eurasian people which definitely proves their West Eurasian root. Kül Tigin's phenotype represents the phenotype of the people from royal family and nobles who were making marriages witth the nobles of the neighbouring Asiatic states, empires and tribes in order to acquire lands as dowries and to establish alliances. His phenotype doesn't reflect the phenotype of common Turks. Kül Tigin lived between 684 CE-731 CE and Kok Turk Empire was founded in 552 CE. So he represents the Turks belonging to the royay family who have made marriages with Asiatic people for generations. The study of genetic makeup in ancient populations is a complex and nuanced field, with several potential pitfalls. One significant challenge is the fact that DNA samples extracted from ancient burial sites often come from noble classes or royal families, while samples obtained from contemporary populations often come from common people. This can make it difficult to accurately compare the genetic makeup of ancient and contemporary populations.One example of this issue can be found in the comparison of medieval Turks (and possibly proto-Turks) with Iranic people. While the noble class of Turkish populations engaged in marriages with nobles from neighboring states and empires as a way of obtaining dowries and acquiring new lands, the noble class of Iranic people practiced incest marriages in order to protect their noble blood. This difference in cultural practices means that it would be misleading to compare the genetic makeup of medieval and proto-Turks with ancient Iranic people in order to determine which group had more West Eurasian genes. Even in the DNA of (proto) Turks belonging to the noble class, who were heavily mixed with Asiatic populations, there is a significantly higher rate of West Eurasian genes compared to East Eurasian populations. This suggests that these groups initially had West Eurasian roots. It is also important to note that the DNA samples extracted from these groups do not accurately represent the common populations, so it can be assumed that the common people in these countries had diverse populations with a tendency towards West Eurasian. The comparison of genetic makeup in ancient and contemporary populations can be a complex task, and care must be taken to consider the limitations and biases of the available DNA samples.
if a French men suggests something that means you need to take it with a pinch of salt. If the history refers as Turks than the French men has a historical hatred in that suggestion. How could Xiongnu be iranian even if today people are speaking Turkic languages around that area. th-cam.com/video/cubsSWp3RYY/w-d-xo.html
This is not even debatable... this is pure bullshit. They are a turkic state with mainly turkic mongolic population. the leaders are turks, the traditions are turkic and mongolic, the army is turkic and mongolic, etc...
Scythian initially were Ancient Kazakh whom were Iranic ancestors blonde Mongolian white with Asian look from Russia and Ukraine. Chinese Ancestors too were have some connections Khitan and Kazakh tribes before mixing with Austronesian tribes from Southern China which became Han Chinese.
Indoiranian nonsense about iranic roots of scythians are false. In kazakhstan there were numerous archeologic findings proving that nomadic people in scythian time periods were asian looking(mongoloid skull shapes). And as well as golden jewelry works where the people portrayed like asians.
Sentence structure should be revealing. As a Finlander, I've long heard of the Finnish language being in the same language grouping as Turkish. The sentence structure is distinct. Language isn't everything, though. DNA normally reveals much, but listening to this tangled tale, I will pass on offering any conclusion about that!
The most closed ethnic group to Xiongnu are modern Mongols. Paleogenetic remains of Xiongnu shows big genetic continuity between Mongols and Xiongnu, moreover between the Slab Grave culture (which precedes and also ancestral to Xiongnu) and Modern Mongols(60-80% of Mongol DNA came from Slab Grave culture)
Hell no lol. The mongol similar results come from LATE Xiongnu meaning after they conquered mongols. The early Xiongnu results are almost indistinguishable from scythians of chandman culture "We observe two distinct demographic processes that contributed to the formation of the early Xiongnu. First, half of the early individuals (n = 6) form a genetic cluster (earlyXiongnu_west) resembling that of Chandman_IA of the preceding Sagly/Uyuk culture from the Altai-Sayan region (Figure 2). They derive 92% of their ancestry from Chandman_IA with the remainder attributed to additional Iranian-related ancestry, which we model using BMAC as a proxy (Figures 3D and 4D; Table S5F). This suggests that the low-level Iranian-related gene flow identified among the Chandman_IA Sagly/Uyuk during the EIA likely continued during the second half of the first millennium BCE, spreading across western and northern Mongolia." Stop drinking and then spewing nonsense.
Turks already were mixture of different ethnicities at the beginning. Turks were never been one single ethnic group but a federation of multiple ethnic groups ruled by an Altaic aristhocracy.
I"m not an expert! while searching for my ancestry i happen to find out that Kushan and Sangu empires existed at same time period around the time of Jesus Christ [P.B.U.H]. the Kushans started in turkey and Sangu started in india. why nobody is discussing the possibility that they were Indian origin. in modern day India Pakistan and Kashmir there is still a group of tribe known as Gujjars who have sub tribe Kasana and sangu.
the aisan and european huns are the same.no need for a debate.they were nomadic.and the huns of asia and europe had nothing to do with iranians.they were turkic.they spoke turkic and there is no confederation.it turned into an empire just like the ottoman,seljuk,and other turkic empires.in mongolia back in history turkic tribes used to live.the mongolians used to live in more eastern parts of asia.the huns became composed of many other nations as they expanded,just like the romans...was the roman empire an confederation?no.were all the subjects of the roman empire composed of romans?no.when it comes to turkic history,historians of the west avoid the word turk...the us of america is a multi ethnic confederation.the huns were setting empires.empires are not composed of one single nation.but the rulers and the majority of the army remains as turkic just like it happened with the subsequent turkic empires.
Nobody actually "appears" at a certain era.. Believe me, everyone that has ever lived, has a father and a mother. (Adam and Jesus being exceptions here.. :) ) We all have more or less the same number of ancestors
Xiongnu are a union of turkic (west altaian) and mongolic (east altaian) people. Also this is not only one union, also Scythians are a union of turkic (north khazarian) and iranic (south khazarian) people. Turkic people were reliable, allying, strong, militaristic people, this is why turkic people ruled many empires in history. Also, there is no iranic genetics, those are mostly turkic genetics instead, as we can see R1a, R1b in ydna genetic studies. (I will explain later) Iranic is actually should be called as "persian" not more, because iran do not have connection with south asians genetically. Persians are west asians. Genetics can be explained by ydna haplogroups easily. But on the other hand, europeans try to change it intentionally because there are asiatic people majorities in europe. I was trying to compare and match languages and haplogroups in general. I will classify haplogroups according to conclusion I got: A0 - first ydna human genetic in west africa, A1, B0 - first mutation from A0, A2, B1 - southwest african, khoisan, A3, B2, CT - central african, nilotic, saharan, CT have mutated to DE, CF in east africa, DE have separated to D1, E1, D1, D2 - tibetan, burman, andamanese, D3 - ainu japanese, E1 - kenya, tanzania, E1a - niger-congo, bantu, E1b1 - kushitic, egyptian, helenic, E1b2 - berberic, northwest african, CF have separated to C1, F, C1 have mutated to C1a, C1b and F have mutated to G, H, I, J, K in nortwest india, C1a, G1 - european early farmers, G2 - south caucasian, arian, armenian, H - south indian, I - gothic, central european, proto european, I1 - germanic, nordic, visigothic, I2 - slavic, balkanic, ukrainian, ostrogothic, J - proto mesopotamian, J1 - arabic, assyrian, hebrew, akkadian, J2 - grecoroman, persian, bactrian, south khazarian, K, K1, K2a have mutated to L, T in west india, L, T - west indian, sanskrit, vedic, C1b, K2b - proto southeast asian, sundaland, C1b, C2 - east austronesian, melanesian, C3 - mongolic, tungusic, C4 - aboriginal australian, K2b have mutated to M, N, O, P in southeast asia, M, S - papuan, new guinean, S mutated from M, N, N1 - proto uralic in northern east asia, N2, N3 - north asian, uralic, finnic, samoyedic, O - thai-kadai, austroasiatic, O1, O2 - west austronesian, sinitic, chinese, O3 - koreanic, japonic, P - aeta, negrito, philippinese, P1 - proto altaic, altaian, tuvan, siberian, P1 have mutated to Q, R in altaian siberia, Q, Q1a - ket, yeniseian, slab grave culture, Q1b - nadene/atabasq, native american, R, R1 - proto altaic, north euroasian, mal'ta buret culture, modern uyghur turkic, oghur/oghuz turkic, R1a - hunnic, central asian turkic, east european (tatar, khazar, avar, bolgar, balkar, magyar originated), north indian (hephtal hun, kirgiz, uzbek, gaznevid, timur, babur, burushaski hunza originated), R1b - saka, sumerian, scythian, north khazarian, bashkir, turkmen, west european (tyrrhenian, etruscan, raetic, vasconic, basq, aquitan, saxonian originated), old anatolian, mesopotamian (sumerian, elamite, turkmen originated), R2 - tamil, dravidian, sri lanka... As we can see, R1a ,R1b have genetic connection with agglutinative language speaking uralic-altaic, dene-yeniseian, tyrrhenian-vasconic, north caucasian and related sino-tibetan, native american languages. This proves that scythians were turkic R1 and persian J2, arian G union and xiongnu were hunnic, turkic R1 and mongolic C3.
Xiongnu ruling class and elite was Turkic. There is no debate on that. All primary sources proved that but some "historians" needs a Xiongnu guy would come to the Earth and say "we are Turkic". Also, Huns and Hephtalite elites were descendants of Xiongnu. Although majority of population inside these two empires were not Turkic ruling class(or founder class) were Turkic without no doubt.
Xioung nu -ancestor of scythians-who were ancestors of huns,turks and magyars. Daniel Tubin an archeogeneticist states in his poster that every turk has some ancestral dna of the xioung nu... Long story short...if u have a tiny bit of ancestrial xioung nu dna,consider urself lucky,whether ure a turk,hungarian,german,iranian or scandinavian...
Nomadic people identified by clans and not by language/ethnicity. (Ethnicity is a modern social construct.) There are a number of famous clans in the Xianbei (鮮卑) ruling class that are supposed to be descendants of the Xiongnu (匈奴), specifically Southern Xiongnu. The most famous one is the Dugu-clan (独狐部) which produced many Empresses for the various Xianbei rulers. During the Tang dynasty Dugu-clan Sinicize their name and adopted Liu (劉) as their family name. They were part of the ruling aristocracy as they were maternal ancestors of the Imperial Family. Also the ruling Yuwen clan (宇文部) of the Xianbei Northern Zhou, are recorded to have unique and different origins from the rest of the Xianbei. They descend from the Xiongnu as well. Turkic and Mongolic are concepts that didn't exist in this time frame. Nobody Xianbei person identified as a Mongol. No Xiongnu identified as a Turk either. Almost all of them identified by their clans, which is why Turkic and Mongolic nomads only had clan names (and not family names).
Check the map of Yamnaya culture,Scythia and Sarmatia,Onoguria and Old Great Bulgaria,there is where is horse is domestikated,with horse those peoples migrated,all over the world,there are mix and pushed back,by mongoloid peoples.Why in all of those land,and many slavic countries even now is used bulgarian alfabet,not some chinese,from our poor,small turkic Bulgaria.Bulgars have tradition for defected long heads,as sarmatians.Old great in slavic is the same,as latin and greek Magna,who give this name?Old Bulgarian calendar start 7532 year ago.BTW bulgars have bin under Gokturk khaganate,for 70 years,but we are allways bin in war,against Ashina, bulgars are rulled,by Dulo clan in the begining,but i dont think,we are hunnic peoples,but some federation of horse tribes,wich allways lived around Black see steppes.I dont understand what turkic mean at all,mongolian?Please,who are bulgarians,not who rulled them,find the truth.Healt and happynes
Smoking Gun, the White Huns, Aka the Xyon, Huns are definitely part of the Xiougnu, as Xiongnu is just a Sinocized way of saying Hunnu, which in Mongolian, and Kazakh has no difference betwern Huns, ans also Genetic research shows a connection.
According to the results published by Nature (journal), Turkic, Mongolic, Koreanic, Japonic and Tungusic languages can be traced back to the first farmers moving across Northeast Asia from the Early Neolithic onwards, where they split from a common ancestor around the Liaodong Gulf, near Korea, 9000 years ago. The Liao River Civilization(遼河文明) Xiaohexi culture 小河西文化 (9,000-8,500 BP) Xinglongwa culture 興隆窪文化 (8,200-7,400 BP): major Y-DNA N Zhaobaogou culture 趙宝溝文化 (7,500-6,500 BP): major Y-DNA N Hongshan culture 紅山文化 (6,500-5,000 BP)·: major Y-DNA N O2 C2 About 5,000-6,000 years ago，Trans-Eurasian Language Separation（Japanese, Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic）： 1，Most of them who remained in the east became Mongolian，Tungusic people 2，O2a+C2+N1a enter the Korean peninsula and Japan The proto-Koreans started to migrate into the southern Korean Peninsula from Manchuria and northern Korea, where they started to replace and assimilate the previous Japonic-speaking rice-agriculturalists, which arrived earlier in the peninsula. 3，About 4000 years ago, the agricultural ancestors of the Turkic peoples probably migrated westwards into Mongolia and Southern Siberia，form Slab-grave culture（NOCQ） N1a has been found with greatest frequency among Siberian Turks（The Tuvans，Dolgans，The Yakuts，Yukaghir.....） 4，They expanded west from Mongolia or Manchuria. then formed western empires like the Khazar, Kangar, Kara-Khanid, Seljuq, Timurid, gradually assimilating Western Asian genes(R1az93+J2+G) The ultimate origin of the Turkic peoples is in Northeast Asia, with their secondary homeland being Mongolia. From Mongolia and southern Siberia the Turkic people expanded and started to dominate large parts of Eurasia. Your ancestors were never Turkic, but Oghuz (Turkified Indo-Iranian) who assimilated Byzantines (Indo-European) The real Turks→they don’t have J2 haplogroup If you analyze DNA analysis together with historical records, things become very clear Your Anatolian ancestors probably never “met” East Asians，That's the reason why Anatolian don't look like a Central Asian（Kazakhs, Kyrgyzs, Turkmens） 1，the Turkic peoples and Han are of different origins, but have since lived together for a long time and there must be a group of mixed blood. Han chinese: 70%O+ 12%C2+ 10,3%N1+ 4,2%Q1 Haplogroup O2 is dominant (50%∼60%) in Han Chinese sample The Turkic peoples overlap considerably with Han Chinese，but the Anatonians haplogroup ratio [O2a 0%] in a similar way Modern Koreans and Janpanese are suggested to be the descendants of a prehistoric group of people from Siberia According to Orkhon Monuments/Inscriptions，Turkic regard Goguryeo as their “blood brothers” Origin of Koreans: Liao River/Northeast Asia(O2a+N1a+C2) + Korean peninsula natives (O1b2) O1b2 are the commonest Korean and Janpanese Y-chromosome haplogroup ，but the Anatonians haplogroup ratio [O1b2 0%] Tungusic people, Proto-Turks, and Mongols genetically are the same origin Turkish people claim that 80% of the Mongol Army were Turks but，The majority of Mongolians belong to the y-DNA Haplogroup C2b，O2a，N1a（about 80%-90%） Genetically, Manchu exhibit roughly equal frequencies of the Y-DNA haplogroups N1a（formerly N1c）, O2a and C2 (formerly C3). It is noteworthy that the Han Chinese made a distinction between Xiongnu (including Turkic and Mongolic people) from more western nomadic barbarians such as Wusun or Saka. They described the Wusun and Saka as strange looking barbarians with ice eyes (blue eyes) and red/blonde hair, resembling monkeys/macaques. They noted no special difference between Xiongnu and Han, except they “barbarian lifestyle”. Similarly, Turkic people were described by Chinese historians, and later Muslim writers as possessing East Asian physiognomy. Some western Turkic groups were described to have blonde/red hair but distinctly different from the other western barbarians which share this characteristics. → This suggests mixed ancestry, with Turkic people having assimilated Saka/Wusun like groups. As a result of Turkic peoples （NOCQ） expansion, Turks who were a primarily East Asian peoples moved out of the Eastern Kazakhstan/Western Mongolian and into Central Asia These Turkic peoples began to assimilate with the Iranic locals of Central Asia. Thats why today Central Asian have this caucasian/oriental phenotype. The Central Asian genetic makeup is a composition of early Iranic peoples and later Turkic arrivals. Mainly Uzbeks, Turkmens, Tajiks, Uyghurs posses varying ratios of this Turkic-Iranic admixture As the Oghuz Turk peoples (who are now a mix of Turkic and Iranic) expanded into the Iranian plateau under the Seljuk Empire and eventually migrated further west into Asia Minor. First, the Turks assimilated some Indo-Iranian speakers (Saka, Scythians, Sogdians......)，Shaped the Eurasian race (Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Turkmens) Then,these Turkified Indo-Iranian speakers entered Anatolia, killed and assimilated the Byzantines (Indo-European speakers/ Anatonians，Armenians, Greeks.....） Now, lots of Anatonians worshiped their “turkic dad ”and slaughtered their blood brothers.....What irony!
None of the languages of Neolithic North east Asia survived to this day, modern day Mongolic, Tungusic japonic and Koreanic all formed at the start of the Bronze Age under heavy steppe (Turkic and indo European) influence, while each have some remnant elements of their previous local culture. O1b2 and O2a doesn’t link to any surviving languages, while c2a might be the original speaker of dene languages, n1a might be the steppe people that finally destroyed north East Asian Neolithic with mass migration, but none of them are the original Turkic they just adopted Turkic or similar steppe culture/ languages.
@@lupsastta90None of the languages of Neolithic North.....？？？Didn't I already write it! About 5,000-6,000 years ago，Trans-Eurasian Language Separation The Northeast Asian entered Korea and formed the early Korean language They assimilated the Korean peninsula native O1b2 About 4000 years ago, the Northeast Asian probably migrated westwards into Mongolia and Southern Siberia，form Slab-grave culture（Proto-Turkic） O1b2 and O2a doesn’t link to any surviving languages wrong，Tibetans have two major haplogroup - D1 and O2a Han people don't have D1, they only have O2a O2a and its subclades are related to the spread of Sino-Tibetan speaker N1a, Q1, C2 also appeared in the northern Han haplogroups Haplogroup N1a, found mainly among Uralic speakers today, did originated in the Manchurian Neolithic, together with other subclades of haplogroup N, it would explain that Uralic languages are related to Altaic languages like Turkic and Mongolic languages and, more distantly also Korean, Japanese and Ainu 1，First East Asian-related wave=Paleo-Siberians and Ancestral Native Americans (Yeniseian and others).（Q1） Yeniseian theories→Xiongnu→Q1a1a1a-M120+Q1b 2，Second East Asian-related wave=Neo-Siberians (Uralic and Yukaghir).（N1a） Genetically, Yukaghirs exhibit roughly equal frequencies of the Y-DNA haplogroups N1a, Q1, and C2 (formerly C3） N1a2b-P43 N1a-L1034 Third East Asian-related wave=Ancient Northeast Asians (Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic).（N1a，C2，O2a） Trans-Eurasian Language→Turkic theories/Mongolic theories Alexander Vovin argues that at least parts of the Xiongnu, possibly its core or ruling class, spoke a Yeniseian language.Positing a higher degree of similarity of Xiongnu to Yeniseian as compared to Turkic This conclusion has primarily been drawn from the analysis of preserved Xiongnu texts in the form of Chinese characters. It has been further suggested that the Yeniseian-speaking Xiongnu elite underwent a language shift to Turkic while migrating westward or The Turkic people probably replaced Yeniseian-speaker In short，NCO replaces Q1 (Yenisei speakers/Xiongnu) → rapidly expands → absorbs and assimilates Rz93
Wake up to reality kiddo😂 In the classical Persian literary tradition - the entire vocabulary of which consists of stock phrases and images - "Turk' and 'Tajik' are stand-in terms for easily recognizable social stereotypes: one simple but violent; the other wily but civilized. Rūmi turns this on its head, however, in the following couplet: Attack upon attack came the darkness of night/Be strong like a Turk, not soft like a Tajik' (Yek hamleh va yek hamleh, āmad shab va tārīkī/chosti kon va "Torki' kon, na narmī va ‘Tājīkī'). Often ‘Turk' was also used to refer to the poet's beautiful young (unattainable) beloved, as in the following lines from Sa'di: 'Maybe they'll tell the King/"Your Turk (i.e., your Beloved) has spilled Tajik blood" (Shayad ke be padshah begüyand/Tork-e tö berikht khūn-e Tājīk), or elsewhere, 'Show your Tajik face, not Abyssinian black/That the Heavens may obliterate the face of the Turks' (Ru-ye Tājīkāna-t benmā, tā dagh-e habash/ Asman chehre-ye Torkān yaghma'i keshad). Since Turkic men often ‘married up’ and started families with Tajik women, the bloodlines tended to become increasingly mixed over the generations. (Recent DNA studies in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan have shown no notable genetic difference between modern Uzbeks and Tajiks.) And since children typically spent their first years within the harem, the influence of Tajik mothers in constructing the identity of their mixed-race children was surely much greater than is admitted in the patriarchal written sources of the time. Military figures in particular often made much of their tough Turkic heritage, even as they sought to demonstrate their own cultivation by speaking Persian and patronizing Persian courtly culture. The Tajik scribes, for their part, were naturally required to flatter their patrons, but they flattered themselves as well in whatever subtle ways they could. - Richard Foltz, Chapter 4, Tajiks and Turks, The Turk-Tajik symbiosis The number of nomads of Turkic origin that migrated to Anatolia is a matter of discussion. According to Ibn Sa'id al-Maghribi, there were 200,000 Turkmen tents in Denizli and its surrounding areas, 30,000 in Bolu and its surrounding areas, and 100,000 in Kastamonu and its surrounding areas.[25][26]According to a Latin source, at the end of the 12th century, there were 100,000 nomadic tents in the regions of Denizli and Isparta.[27] According to Ottoman tax archives, in modern-day Anatolia, in the provinces of Anatolia, Karaman, Dulkadir and Rûm, there were about 872,610 households in the 1520s and 1530s; 160,564 of those households were nomadic, and the remainder were sedentary. Of the four provinces, Anatolia (which does not include the whole of geographic Anatolia but only its western and some of its northwestern parts) had the largest nomadic population with 77,268 households. Between 1570 and 1580, 220,217 households of the overall 1,360,474 households in the four provinces were nomadic, which means that at least 20% of Anatolia was still nomadic in the 16th century. The province of Anatolia, which had the largest nomadic population with 77,268 households, saw an increase of its nomadic population to 116,219 households in those years.[28] Intermarriage between Turks and Greek, Armenian and Georgian natives of Anatolia was not unheard of, although the majority of these unions were between Turkish men and Christian women. The children of these unions, known as 'Mixovarvaroi', were raised as Turks and were of the Muslim faith (although there were some cases of Mixovarvaroi defecting to the Byzantines). It is likely that these unions played a role in the eventual diminishment of the Christian population in Anatolia and its transition from Greek/Christian to Turkish/Muslim. [24] Vryonis Jr, Speros (1971). The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century. California: Berkeley University Press. p. 176.
We have grave fron Hunnu! Before 2000 year china call Mongols Barbarians or Huns!!!! 100 💯 procent Mongols grandfathers!!! Even we have about 10000 Grave from Hunnus!!!! Genetic sager att Hunnu genetic 95 procent today Mongols 😊😊😊😊😊
@@halaldunya918 dude Huns aint a different people their language has been confirmed to be archaic turkic. Mongolian on tungusic language are a lot different than Turkic. Plus Turks didnt originate in eastern asia but more likely to be around caspian sea during sintashta andronovo periods and yeah its not succesor of yamnaya culture so these arent indo european. Neither afanesievo is indo european. Old soviet altaic theory is just false japanese koreans tungus mongols and turks didnt differ from common ancestors but Turkic language is %30 similiar to the uralic languages rather mongolian. Q is mongol tungusic haplogroup and R1a Z93 is confirmed to be Turkic which is seen in samara - sintashta - andronovo cultures. Sintashta is predecessed by Fatnoyovo-Belonovo which came from Samara's succesor Khvalynsk and Corded Ware culture. You can just follow the y DNA gene flow to see where Turks originated. Kurgan hypothesis for indo europeans is just racist and white supremacist. No indo european ever did kurgans Elshanka Samara Khvalynsk did and teached the caucasian hunter gatherers who are real proto indo europeans of south caucasia which eventually mixed with R haplogroup carrier Northern Eurasian Hunter Gatherers. Caucasian hunter gatherers just had J and G haplogroups. Indo europeans originally didnt have this. Southern Arc 2023 proves that Yamnaya isnt the first indo european culture but a mix between caucasian and northern eurasian hunter gatherers which Proto Turks were also from north eurasian hunter gatherers R haplogroup carriers. Thats why Bashkir and other many turkic people has this haplogroup today. Mongols today has C3 haplogroup
@@halaldunya918 All the hunnic names like Touman Motun Bagatur Attila Rugila Dengizik are archaic turkic names. Hunnic scripts has been found in both todays chinese lands and syria and scripts are very distinctly old turkic even they are written in proto orkhon scripts. ''Süke Talıkang Bokukgı Tutang'' found during asian xiongnu empire and ''Ig Kenç Apa Kurçik, sal arangı enç uga'' found during western hunnic invasions. Apa Kurçik was a commander of Balamir Khan and he was ordered to invade middle east and Huns just left a script there both statements can be translated to turkic.
“Eastern Turkic”-Xiongnu/Xianbei/Rouran/Mongolian/Manchu people（Qing）, Ydna N1aO2aC2bQ1+R1a form the Altaic language family（About 5000 years ago - 10000 years ago） “Western Turkic”-Eurasian - They look like Chinese-Russian mixed race The common Y-DNA haplogroups in Turkic peoples are 1，Haplogroup N-M231 (found with especially high frequency among Turkic peoples living in present-day Russia) 2，Haplogroup C-M217 (especially in Central Asia and, in particular, Kazakhstan) 3，Haplogroup Q-M242 (especially in Southern Siberia and among Turkmens and the Qangly tribe of Kazakhs) 4，Haplogroup O-M175 (especially among Turkic peoples living in present-day China and the Naiman tribe of Kazakhs). Some groups also have Haplogroup R1aJD.... N - Uralic people/Yakuts O - Korean，Japanese，Chinese C2-Mongolian + Tungusic peoples Q-Native American Mongoloid race（80%-90%NOCDQ）： 1，Turkic：Tuvans，Kazakh，Dolgans，Yukaghir people 2，Paleo-Siberian：Chukchi people 3，Mongolic languages：Buryats，mongolian，Kalmyks 4，Northern Tungusic：Evenks，Evens，Oroqen 5，East Asian：Manchu，Xibe，Chinese, Korean，Japanese，Tibetan 6， Eskimo-Aleut：Inuit，Yeniseian people 7，Ural-Turkic people：Nenets people，Nganasan people，Yakut Martine Robbeets suggests that the Turkic peoples were descended from a Transeurasian agricultural community based in northeast China, which is to be associated with the Xinglongwa culture（Y-DNA: N1a ） and the succeeding Hongshan culture（Y-DNA: N1a O2a C2b） The East Asian agricultural origin of the Turkic peoples has been corroborated in multiple recent studies. Around 2,200 BC, due to the desertification of northeast China, the agricultural ancestors of the Turkic peoples probably migrated westwards into Mongolia, where they adopted a pastoral lifestyle. Linguistic and genetic evidence strongly suggest an early presence of Turkic peoples in eastern Mongolia The genetic evidence suggests that the Turkification of Central Asia was carried out by East Asian dominant minorities migrating out of Mongolia. The exact location of the homeland of the Turkic peoples and languages cannot be adequately concluded, but must have been somewhere within the areas of the "Northeast Asian gene pool" The main migration of Turkic peoples occurred between the 6th and 11th centuries, when they spread across most of Central Asia. The Turkic peoples slowly replaced and assimilated the previous Iranian-speaking locals, turning the population of Central Asia from largely Iranian into primarily of East Asian descent mixed race：NOCQ+JGER1a 1，Kazakhs, Kyrgyz 2，Uzbeks，Uighurs казахи 1, C2 (50.85%), O2 (10.82%), N (5.33%), Q (3.17%), D (0.46%) 2. R (12.13%), J (8.19%), G (4.95%), E (1.78%) Восточная Азия→70.63%NOCDQ киргизы 1，C-M130 (33,1%), N1b-P43 (12,1%), O-M175 (3,7%), , Q-M242 (1,2%) 2，R1a1a-M198 (42,1%),R1b1b1-M73 (3,3%), G-M201 (1,2%). Восточная Азияn→50.1%NOCQ узбеки 1,C2b1(12.2%)，O2(2.7%)，N1c(5.4%)，O1b（1.4%），Q1a（5.4%） 2,R1a-Z93（27%）, R1b1(8.3%), R2（2.7%），J2（13,6 %）......... Восточная Азияn→27.1NOCQ уйгуры уйгуры имеют 60 % европейских генов и 40 % восточноазиатских A study based on paternal DNA (2005) shows West Eurasian haplogroups (J and R) in Uyghurs make up 65% to 70% and East Asian haplogroups (C, N, D and O) 30% to 35% Anatonian, Azerbaijanis J2，Arabs J1 haplogroups R1a - R1a1a1b1 (Slavs) + R1a1a1b2（Z93） (Iranians, Brahmins, Pashtuns）
L. C3 doesn't even appear in Mongolia until Xiongnu. Before that R1b R1a and Q and N are found, then J1 and J2 and only then does C3 appear. Most of the haplogroups of ancient Turks are J2 R1a R1b Q1
@@SteppeWisdom According to the results published by Nature (journal), Turkic, Mongolic, Koreanic, Japonic and Tungusic languages can be traced back to the first farmers moving across Northeast Asia from the Early Neolithic onwards, where they split from a common ancestor around the Liaodong Gulf, near Korea, 9000 years ago. The Liao River Civilization(遼河文明) Xiaohexi culture 小河西文化 (9,000-8,500 BP) Xinglongwa culture 興隆窪文化 (8,200-7,400 BP): major Y-DNA N Zhaobaogou culture 趙宝溝文化 (7,500-6,500 BP): major Y-DNA N Hongshan culture 紅山文化 (6,500-5,000 BP)·: major Y-DNA N O2 C2 About 5,000-6,000 years ago，Trans-Eurasian Language Separation（Japanese, Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic）： 1，Most of them who remained in the east became Mongolian，Tungusic people 2，O2a+C2+N1a enter the Korean peninsula and Japan The proto-Koreans started to migrate into the southern Korean Peninsula from Manchuria and northern Korea, where they started to replace and assimilate the previous Japonic-speaking rice-agriculturalists, which arrived earlier in the peninsula. 3，About 4000 years ago, the agricultural ancestors of the Turkic peoples probably migrated westwards into Mongolia and Southern Siberia，form Slab-grave culture（NOCQ） N1a has been found with greatest frequency among Siberian Turks（The Tuvans，Dolgans，The Yakuts，Yukaghir.....） 4，They expanded west from Mongolia or Manchuria. then formed western empires like the Khazar, Kangar, Kara-Khanid, Seljuq, Timurid, gradually assimilating Western Asian genes(R1az93+J2+G) The ultimate origin of the Turkic peoples is in Northeast Asia, with their secondary homeland being Mongolia. From Mongolia and southern Siberia the Turkic people expanded and started to dominate large parts of Eurasia. Your ancestors were never Turkic, but Oghuz (Turkified Indo-Iranian) who assimilated Byzantines (Indo-European) The real Turks→they don’t have J2 haplogroup If you analyze DNA analysis together with historical records, things become very clear Your Anatolian ancestors probably never “met” East Asians，That's the reason why Anatolian don't look like a Central Asian（Kazakhs, Kyrgyzs, Turkmens） 1，the Turkic peoples and Han are of different origins, but have since lived together for a long time and there must be a group of mixed blood. Han chinese: 70%O+ 12%C2+ 10,3%N1+ 4,2%Q1 Haplogroup O2 is dominant (50%∼60%) in Han Chinese sample The Turkic peoples overlap considerably with Han Chinese，but the Anatonians haplogroup ratio [O2a 0%] in a similar way Modern Koreans and Janpanese are suggested to be the descendants of a prehistoric group of people from Siberia According to Orkhon Monuments/Inscriptions，Turkic regard Goguryeo as their “blood brothers” Origin of Koreans: Liao River/Northeast Asia(O2a+N1a+C2) + Korean peninsula natives (O1b2) O1b2 are the commonest Korean and Janpanese Y-chromosome haplogroup ，but the Anatonians haplogroup ratio [O1b2 0%] Tungusic people, Proto-Turks, and Mongols genetically are the same origin Turkish people claim that 80% of the Mongol Army were Turks but，The majority of Mongolians belong to the y-DNA Haplogroup C2b，O2a，N1a（about 80%-90%） Genetically, Manchu exhibit roughly equal frequencies of the Y-DNA haplogroups N1a（formerly N1c）, O2a and C2 (formerly C3). It is noteworthy that the Han Chinese made a distinction between Xiongnu (including Turkic and Mongolic people) from more western nomadic barbarians such as Wusun or Saka. They described the Wusun and Saka as strange looking barbarians with ice eyes (blue eyes) and red/blonde hair, resembling monkeys/macaques. They noted no special difference between Xiongnu and Han, except they “barbarian lifestyle”. Similarly, Turkic people were described by Chinese historians, and later Muslim writers as possessing East Asian physiognomy. Some western Turkic groups were described to have blonde/red hair but distinctly different from the other western barbarians which share this characteristics. → This suggests mixed ancestry, with Turkic people having assimilated Saka/Wusun like groups.
@@SteppeWisdom As a result of Turkic peoples （NOCQ） expansion, Turks who were a primarily East Asian peoples moved out of the Eastern Kazakhstan/Western Mongolian and into Central Asia These Turkic peoples began to assimilate with the Iranic locals of Central Asia. Thats why today Central Asian have this caucasian/oriental phenotype. The Central Asian genetic makeup is a composition of early Iranic peoples and later Turkic arrivals. Mainly Uzbeks, Turkmens, Tajiks, Uyghurs posses varying ratios of this Turkic-Iranic admixture As the Oghuz Turk peoples (who are now a mix of Turkic and Iranic) expanded into the Iranian plateau under the Seljuk Empire and eventually migrated further west into Asia Minor. First, the Turks assimilated some Indo-Iranian speakers (Saka, Scythians, Sogdians......)，Shaped the Eurasian race (Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Turkmens) Then,these Turkified Indo-Iranian speakers entered Anatolia, killed and assimilated the Byzantines (Indo-European speakers/ Anatonians，Armenians, Greeks.....） Now, lots of Anatonians worshiped their “turkic dad ”and slaughtered their blood brothers.....What irony! NOCQ They are related to Japanese Korean Mongolian speakers R1az93+R1bM73 They are related to Indo-Europeans speakers（Eastern European Steppes） J2？？Quite a few ancient Mediterranean and Middle Eastern civilisations flourished in territories where J2 lineages were preponderant. This is the case of the Hattians, the Hurrians，the Elamites...
@@夜行者-s2x first of all there were NO TURKIC people 9000 years ago Secondly the Nature journal is from 2018 and has outdated data My data is from Jeong et Al 2020 Thirdly even if going by the Liao theory it makes no sense as all the earliest civilizations that can be linked to Turks such as Xiongnue have a dominance of haplogroups J1 J2a R1a R1b Q1 not of C3 O or N1. C3 doesn’t even appear on the territory of Mongolia until Xiongnu. Even the slab grave culture were all Q1 Your East Asian theory fell flat on its face and you’re a CCP bot
Steppe confederations were not united based on language, but on culture, a common nomadic lifestyle. So all the steppe tribes were Hun/Xiongnu. Likewise, in the Turk era all the steppe tribes from the Caspian to Manchuria were Turk - regardless of their language. Same in the time of the Uyghurs and Mongols. Of course we can discuss what language the Xiongnu leading tribe spoke, but overall the Xiongnu were a multilingual confederation.
Xiongnu = Hun .. They are Turkic-Mongol (Altaic) union, like the other Khanates in this region. Iranic?? Are you crazy? A Persian couldn't even have sustain 1 week there. Bu Dangalakları değil, Konu üzerin'de ciddi bilimsel çalışmalar yapan, Prof. Ahmet Taşağıl'ı dinleyin. Hun'lar Türk'tür..
Well you're not wrong the Hepthalites, Kiderites, Huna, European Huns, Xiognu, aswell as the Tokhara Yabgus, Turk shahis and Nisu Huns are all related by originating from the same area originally which is the proto Turkic homeland of Altai.
Another interesting mention is the Xionites or Xioni which is pronounced very similair to Chunni from the Göktürk letters to the byzantines about the Pseudo Avars being Turkic and de ending from the Chunni and Var Oghuric Tribes.. Which is almost identical to Khingila the founder of the Hepthalites unifying the Uar and Xioni(tes) and creating the Hepthalite state.
Recently, it has been proven that the dominant language was Mongolian. Many Mongolian deer stone scripts now have been decodified and read and confirmed that many words, grammars are complete match with the modern Mongolian language. Therefore the ruling class was Mongolians, not turks.
The history of the Gaoju is given in the respective entry in WS 103 + (pp. 2505-2508); until the beginning of Text 1.056/B it is extracted as follows. 高車,蓋古赤狄之餘種也初號為狄歷,北方以為敕勒,諸夏以為高車、丁零。 其語略與匈奴同而時有小異,或云其先匈奴之也。 The Gaoju are probably the remaining tribes of the ancient Chidi [lit. 'the red Di']. Initially they were called Dili. People in the north called them Chile, whereas people in China proper called them Gaoju or Dingling. Their language is roughly the same as that of the Xiongnu but at times has minor differences from that. Some say that their ancestors were the nephew of [i.e. indirectly related to] the Xiongnu.
indo europeans peoples originated at modern day southern russia (northern caucasus) and eastern ukraine. Later, the proto indo europeans started to migrate elsewhere, to the west and east. The west branch went deeply into Europe, forming most of today’s european languages. The eastern branch, except the tocharians, settled at central asia, known as indo-iranians. They split into two groups -indo-aryans and iranians, who then invaded the iranian plateau and Indian subcontinent. So, there were many iranic speakers located at central asia, mostly scythians, sogdians and bactrians, who were replaced by the turkic speakers after the gorturk invasion
@@عليياسر-ذ5ب The Indian Emperor Ashoka was the first to spread Buddhism not Scythians. Also, Tibetan monks were the ones who spread it all over East Asia. The only religion that actually spread by word and not by sword.
@@kagar3465 He was one of the Scythians, and these people invaded the Indian continent, my friend, because the Huns and the Uighurs expelled the Iranian Scythians from Central Asia and from western Mongolia
@@kagar3465 And the Scythians are very racist people. It is true that they spread Buddhism in India, China and Southeast Asia, but they enslaved the indigenous Indians and made the caste system. The symbols of the Scythians were the Nazi flag and the dragon
1) Etymology of polytonym/dynastonym/hydronym Xiōngnú: (匈奴) Modern Chinese: xiōngnú < Old Chinese: *hoŋ-nâ Mongolic: *hoŋa "hole" (匈河) Modern Chinese: xiōnghé < Old Chinese: *hoŋ-gai < Mongolic: *hoŋgai "hole" (忽倪) Modern Chinese: hūní < Middle Chinese: *xoŋɛi < Mongolic: *hoŋai "hole" (渾義) Modern Chinese: húnyì < Middle Chinese: *hon-ngi < Mongolic: *hoŋgi "hole" (黄河) Modern Chinese: huánghé < Old Chinese: *gwâŋ-gâi < Mongolic: *hoŋgai "hole" *hoŋgai ~ *hoŋai ~ *hoŋa ~ *hoŋi ~ *hoŋ ~ *hoŋgi are earlier pronunciations of Ongi (Mongolian hydronym), the Pre-Proto-Mongolic forms can be reconstructed as *poŋgai ~ *poŋai ~ *poŋa ~ *poŋi ~ *poŋ ~ *poŋgi. *hoŋai > Greek: Χωναι *hoŋa > Sanskrit: Hūṇa, Avestan: Xyaona, Khotanese: Huna *hoŋi > Old Turkic: Hoŋï *hoŋ > Sogdian: Xwn, Armenian: Hon, Pahlavi: Xyōn, Syriac: Hun, Khorezmian: Hūn Some other Mongolic borrowings that i found (from late form *oŋgi): Kazakh: ұңғы "hole"" Evenki: унги "hole" Manchurian: unngin "hole" 2) Etymology of endonym Hú from Xiōngnú/Hoŋa warriors: (胡) Modern Chinese: hú < Old Chinese: *gâ < Mongolic: *ka (奚) Modern Chinese: xī < Middle Chinese: *ghei < Mongolic: *kai *kai ~ *ka was an endonym of many Mongolic peoples, like Kumo Xi (*kumak kai), Donghu (Eastern *ka) etc. (kai in some Modern Mongolic dialects means snake/dragon, so for me it seems related to ethnonym *abar "creeping, snake, worm" and words *mokai "snake", *koro-kai "worm". The semantics is still being discussed in linguistics) 3) The Xiōngnú/Hoŋa belonged to Proto-Mongolic archeological Slab-Grave culture as the Donghu. Mongoloid Xiōngnú have the autosomal similarity to Mongoloid Avars and modern Mongolics (Caucasoid Xiōngnú of course close to old and modern Iranians). 4) When the Xiōngnú/Hoŋa or Hú/Ka conquered (Dene-Yeniseian as Tlingit or less likely Indo-European?) Dinglings and the Turkic Yeniseian Kirgiz (Gekun) in 201 BC later were formed Tiele people (tribe of Kalmyks, Buryats). The ethnonym Tiele/Tegreg was etymologized by Mongolic word: *tegreg "cart" (dialectal metathesized form of *tergeg "cart" < *tergen < *ter- "to run" + *-gen "verbal noun/adjective and particle suffix") > Old Chinese: /*tʰet̚ lək̚/ > Modern Chinese: /tiě lè/ (鐵勒). Another recorded metathesized Mongolic ethnonym is Tabghach /tabɣatʃ/ from earlier Mongolic: *taxbac "land ruler". Khalkha: тэрэг (ᠲᠡᠷᠭᠡ), тэргэг "cart" (from form *tergeg) Kalmyk: тегрн "cart" (from form *tegren) (the changes of ending /n/ > /g/ also had lexemes: *ayiran > *ayirag; *ayiman > *ayimag, *kimuran > *kimurag) Some tribes of Tegregs still had Mongolic names as Sirs (< *sir "yellow" dialectal form of *sïra) and Kurykans (< *kurigan "lamby" < *kuri "lamb" + *-gan "diminutive and animal suffix"). Some names/surnames of Tiele chiefs as Gésà/Qasar (葛薩) were etymologized by Mongolic *hasar "dog" (PPM form *pasar). The Yakut branch (the potential descendant of Turkic-Kurykan language) has the biggest Mongolic lexical substrate, more than Sayan branch (the potential descendant of Turkic-Chick language). So in simple facts the Xiōngnú/Hoŋa were using Mongolic lexicon, belonged to PM archeological culture, were autosomally related to modern Mongolics. P. S. Chicks (𐰲𐰃𐰚 /tʃik/) were native Dene-Yeniseian tribe of Tuva, later they were Turkified. Name comes from DE word cik "swan" (maybe that's why we have Tuvan clan куулар "swans" and Altay ку-кижи "swan people" an alternative endonym of Chelkans, and Altay hydronym лебедь/куу "swan").
Kurykan means "tent" in Old Turkic and its stem is coming from kur- verb which means stretch, dry originally and build in later uses. In Old Turkic inscriptions there are people called as "Üç Kurykan" which literally means "three tents" and similar to other uses like oghuz (clans), oba (tent camp), oghur (lir Turkic version of oghuz). Alsa kasar, kazar is clearly Turkic either from verb stems kas- (stretch) or kez- (wander) and it means either stretcher/archer or wanderer. Your Mongolic etymologies are very far fetched.
@@batuhanyldz5102 1) Tent tribe of Buryats/Daurs/Uriankhais and Yakuts, very dope but senseless and not semantically related to Oghur. Peter Golden's etymology is better. 2) These mostly are not my ideas, i saw some etymological studies from Mongolic and Turkic linguists, i just corrected some reconstructions and reconstructed PPM forms: (Christopher P. Atwood) *xoŋai > *hoŋai (+ PPM *poŋai) The "Turkic" Qasar was a name of Mongolic Temujin's young brother (i know some Turkoids believe that he was Turkic khan)
I didn't say anything about Buryat/Daur/Uriankhai union, I just told you that in Orkhon inscriptions there's a people called Three Kurykans and kurykan is a Turkic word with a very obvious etymology. Peter Golden is not omnipotent or omniscience, because when he builds a connection with the word lamb, he clearly forgets the word "kuri" in Mongolian is "kuzu" in Turkic. But there's still a word, named kurykan and it's used for tents. It also remains widely used and if you know just a little bit about rhota/zeta sound change rules of Common Turkic, you would understand why this is quite obvious. I'm not a Turkoid who claims Genghis Khan is Turkish either. But I can clearly say that both his personal name Temujin after a killed Tatar warlord comes from Turkic "temürçi - blacksmith" and his regnal name Chinggis comes from Turkic "tengiz - sea." So I wouldn't surprise his brother's name has also a Turkic root. It doesn't make Borjigins Turkic, just like using Persian names doesn't make Seljuks Persian.
@@batuhanyldz5102 1) Blah-blah-blah "Turkic" temür is a Chinese loanword in Altaic sprachbund (鐵物 /*diēr-mwur/), teŋgir/z also can be a Sinism if it comes from Chinese root teŋ- "equal, balance" (theonyms can become hydronyms). Historical Tatars were Mongolic like their polytonym *tartar "pennant" (was a name of some Rouran/Nirun ruler, analogically Nogai-khan > polytonym Nogais, Uzbek-khan > polytonym Uzbeks) > Khalkha: дадар (seems a cognate to word дарцаг "pennant"), so name Temujin was taken from Mongolic-speaking Tatar as *temürcin. 2) Mongolic etymology still better, we know the tribe Kuri in Muslim sources.
Evasive and dishonest "facts" presented here. Over 80% of the genetic samples collected from the bones of Xiongnu graves are matching with present-day Mongolian population, not the Turkic populations of somewhere. Yes, some minority is matching actually Iranian and Turkic populations. Second, the so-called Turkic tribes then (like Ashina) and now are actually Mongolic tribes who adopted the Turkic language. Without complicating the facts. To that matter, 'Ashino' means 'Chono' (Wolf) in Mongolic languages. Nevertheless, the answer to the final question in the video could be the following: Nothing so mysterious or to be discussed: It is increasingly being proven that The Xiongnu masses were Mongolic tribes unified with Iranians populations, like the Dinglings. (Dinglings were Indo-Europeans with Tagar culture, not Turkic or Tungusic as previously presumed).
@3:57 map; Vietnam history of Viet "Yue". Viet "Yue" is confederate 15 alliance states depicts in "Dong Son" drum and we identify ourselves as Viet people . Before Han dynasty expansion there are 15 Viet states and called as Bach Viet "Many Viet states alliance". The only Viet state still exists "Vietnam" is because they able to withstand by many Chinese, Mogolian, and Manchurian dynasty invasions. Chinese history did not mentioned other Viet states because those history got burn down, wipe out, etc. and force these Viet states people to assimilate to each new dynasty. Here is a few differences, Vietnam language is adjective after noun, our king can only have 1 wife, women are highly value, and no artifacts or sacrifice human/animal in the grave. Why Vietnam has many women warrior leaders because our culture value women highly. "Viet Nam" is two words meaning Viet in the south. What sad is we lost a great amount of history of others 14 states their languages, cultures, kings, flags, etc. FYI...Cantonese-Chinese folks today were part of Viet 15 states back then. Viet "Viet Nam" since Kings era is always signify with yellow color background and never red color background flag like today.
Xiongnu royalty were most likely yeniseian with the nobility being majority turkic and some proto mongolic tribes. The vassal tribes that were subjugated to the xiongnu was most likely iranic and uralic tribes as they expanded out of mongolia and into central asia.
Хунну были скорее протомонголами как по мне и среди "алтайских" (языковой *негенетический* союз тюркского, монгольского, уральского, тунгусского) и иранских языков нету значимого числа енисейской лексики кстати (критикую), а доминирующий антропологический тип хунну монголоидный, а не европеоидный как у енисейцев. 1) Этимология хунну: (匈河) новокит. xiōnghé < древнекит. *hoŋ-gai < монгольский *hoŋgai "онги" (匈奴) новокит. xiōngnú < древнекит. *hoŋ-nâ < монгольский *hoŋa "онги" 1. Читал этимологические исследования Christopher'а Pratt'а Atwood'а что хунну это изначально название династии происходящей от монгольского гидронима Онги (собственно название монгол произошло от старого тунгусского гидронима Мангу, на территории Амура. Среди тунгусов есть племя мангуни, кстати). Онги на монгольском означает отверстие, связанно с глаголом онгил- "делать дыру". Интересно что у чингис-хана Тэмуджина, приписывающего себя к хунну личная тамга именовалась "онги". 2. Я искал индоевропейскую, тюркского этимологию хунну, но ничего убедительного пока не нашёл. 2) После завоеваний енисейских киргизов и динлинов, появилась конфедерация телэ, тут как раз этимология названия: (鐵勒) новокит. tiělè < древнекит. /tʰet̚ lək̚/ < монгольский *tegreg "телега" < *tegren. Хотя и есть версия с тюркским *tegereg "коло, колесо" она не фонетична и вроде семантически несовпадающая с кит. иероглифами. 3) Тегрегские племена это орхонские уйгуры, курыканы, сиры и т. д., хочу упомянуть о этимологических, этнических связах с монголами. 1. Якутские языки (по всей видимости потомки курыканского языка) имеют сильный монгольский субстрат, а их этноним может быть этимологизирован как монг. *kurigan "ягненок" < *kuri "ягня" + *-gan "ласкательный суффикс". Курыканы являются предками бурят и якуто-долган. 2. Орхонские уйгуры имели этнические связи с (пара)монгольскими тобасцами (их язык определи на основе кит. источников). Потомки орхонских уйгуров это современные югуры, югуры сейчас говорят на монгольском (шира-югурский) и тюркском (сарыг-югурский), что как бы странно для "тюрков", да и состав племён югуров в основном монгольский по моим наблюдениям (хотя и имеются киргизские/хакасские племена), а генетически они близки к халха, бурятам, калмыкам. Название орхоно-уйгурской династии яглакар "помазанник" стало прототипом монгольского названия племени джалаир. Название уйгур (точнее *oygur) стало прототип монгольского названия ойрат (*oyiran "ойрат" < *oygiran "уйгуры" < *oygir "уйгур" < *ōy "масть") (Мой уточняющий комментарий лексема *ōy сохранилась только в тувинском и хакасском, она обозначает в языках вроде буланую и мышастую масть из прочитанных мною российских материалов. *-gur это суффикс для цветов, а *-an это коллективный/множественный суффикс. По Питеру Голдену название киргиз возможно происходит от тюркского *kï̄r "чалый" + *-gïŕ "суффикс цвета" > *kï̄rgïŕ "чаловатый" > *kï̄rgïz, вот так примерно работает суффикс для цветов) 3. Этноним сиров (скорее всего предшественники кипчаков) по всей видимости связан с монгольским словом *sir "жёлтый" (когнат слову шира, как у югур) от сюда племя сары-кипчак (*sarï перевод *sir), по другой версии Питера Голдена происходит от санскритского श्री шри/śrī "удача". Но всё же моя версия более фонетически схожая c 𐰾𐰃𐰼 /sir/ как в орхонских памятниках, чем шри.
The history of the Gaoju is given in the respective entry in WS 103 + (pp. 2505-2508); until the beginning of Text 1.056/B it is extracted as follows. 高車,蓋古赤狄之餘種也初號為狄歷,北方以為敕勒,諸夏以為高車、丁零。 其語略與匈奴同而時有小異,或云其先匈奴之也。 The Gaoju are probably the remaining tribes of the ancient Chidi [lit. 'the red Di']. Initially they were called Dili. People in the north called them Chile, whereas people in China proper called them Gaoju or Dingling. Their language is roughly the same as that of the Xiongnu but at times has minor differences from that. Some say that their ancestors were the nephew of [i.e. indirectly related to] the Xiongnu.
The opposite is true. Horse Culture and iron technology spread from the Indo-Europeans to the ancient Turks and Mongols. If you see murals of proto-Turkic VIPs in history and coins with ancient Turkic VIPs, they look either European, or Iranic, not East Asian.
Rubbish. Xiongnu did not have its own written language. Everything written about Xiongnu are from Chinese and Roman sources. Xiongnu was a Mongolic people, and the ancestors of the mongols in the medieval period and the Mongolians of today. Tungustic language is the same as the Mongolian language, came from the Khitan language, which was adopted by the Jurchens/Manchu people.
Until nowadays, most of these Central Asian countries (All the Stans except Tadjikistan 🇹🇯 who’s Iranian, the Kazakhs, the Kirghiz, the Özbek, the Türkmen are all Turkic people) even though still in Russia Federation in Sibirya, the Sakhas, the Yakut, the Khakas are Turkic people still shamanist for some of them but mostly converted to Russian Orthodox Church and in Russian Caucasus Mountain, many Turkic people like Avars, Karatchaï, Tatars, Karakalpaks, Balkhars are Turkic and Muslim like their ethnic cousins of Modern day Turkish Secular Republic
It is Hunnu. Hunnu is Mongol ancestors. It has nothing to do with today's people who called themselves Turkish. Today Turkish people has no DNA connection nor cultural connection with Hunnu. Enough already. Hun mean Human, even before Hunnu there is other Mongol ancestors call them selves Bida ( means we, or ours) . The name Mongol also mean We are, or Ours.
In Cantonese (a very widely spoken Southern Chinese dialect that has kept ancient pronunciation of many Chinese characters), the character for Xiongnu（匈奴）is pronounced "Hungnou".
Yeah A lot of people/historians seems to ignore this fact. Cantonese has more similarities to ancient Chinese dialect then Mandarin
In Mongolia, Xiognu is known as Hunnu, so when I started reading about history in English I confused them with Huns at first. They might be connected but IDK.
Yep, Old Chinese had a dialect that was very different from today's Mandarin. The latter actually originated from the northern plains of china where it had been inhabited by the nomadic tribes after the fall of the Han dynasty.
It is frankly very comfusing. The thing is in Turkey, They teach us about this tribe confederation called "the Asian Hun" or " the Great Hun" in our History lessons(AND I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CHINSE DYNASTY) Which is apparently called Xiongnu in other conturies???
And I am just learning that there are debates about whether countries like Europe Hun have Xiongnu origin or not... And we were told that they came from Xiongnu...
It is just too confusing for me.
@@tuvshinbayarmandakh The Mongolian version is most probably from Qing era Chinese, since the nu part at the end was a pejorative used for other peoples as well, meaning slaves. The Huns would in most probability have been long forgotten among the Turkic and Mongolic peoples by then, and were rediscovered thanks to historiography.
The Gaoju (高車 lit. "High Cart"), also known as Tiele,[90] were early Turkic speakers related to the earlier Dingling,[91][92] who were once conquered by the Xiongnu.[93][94] Weishu also mentioned the linguistic and ethnic proximity between the Gaoju and the Xiongnu.[95] de la Vaissière proposes that the Hephthalites had originally been one Oghuric-speaking tribe who belonged the Gaoju/Tiele confederation.[82][96][97]
Hocam sen niye her yerdesin?
@@amongus1672 Sorma amk ya. Türk adının geçtiği veya alakalı olduğu her videoda var adam. Her cephede savaşıyor mübarek, tek kişilik ordu yemin ediyorum.
@@amongus1672 harbi ya adam heryerde
Facts
Adam man of culture
While its true that there was some controversy about the origin of the Huns, the consensus after recent decades is that they were Turks of Oghuric affiliation, mostly based on credible studies confirming that the vast majority of attested Hunnic names, as well as all Hunnic successor clans are of evident Oghur Turkic origin.
All Hunnic tribes (entirely Oghur Turkic) :
Akatziri, Onogurs, Utigurs, Sabirs, Bulgars, Saragurs, Kutrigurs, Barsils, Balanjars
Recorded Hunnic names of Turkic origin :
Aigan = moon prince; from Turkic aï & can
Alp Ilutuer / Ilteber = heroic chieftain; from Turkic alp & iltäbär
Althias = six; from Turkic Alti
Akkagas = white rock; from Turkic ak & kayač
Atakam = elder shaman; from Turkic ata & kam
Balach = calf; from Turkic Malaq
Berik = strong; from Turkic Berık
Basik = governor; from Turkic Bârsiğ
Bleda = wise; from Turkic Bildä
Bochas = either gullet; from Turkic Boğuz; or bull, from Buqa
Dengizich = ocean-like, heavenly; from Turkic teɲez & dêɲri; or, more simply, great lake
Donat / Donatu = horse; from Turkic Yonat
Edeco = good; from Turkic Ädgü
Ellac = to rule; from Turkic el & lä
Emmedzur = horse lord; from Turkic Ämäcur
Eskam / Esqam = companion of the shaman; from Turkic Eŝkam
Hereka / Kreka = pure princess; from Turkic Arïqan
Ernakh / Hernac = small man, heroic man; from Turkic Ernäk
Iliger = prince man; from Turkic ilig & är
Karadach = black mountain; from Turkic Qaradağ
Karaton = black cloak; from Turkic Qarâton
Kursik = either noble; from Turkic Kürsiğ; or belt-bearer, from Qurŝiq
Kutilzis = blessed herald; from Turkic kut & elči
Mundzuk = bead; from Turkic Munčuq
Oebarsius / Aybars = moon leopard, from Turkic Aïbârs; or dun leopard, from oy & bars
Oldogan / Odolgan = either red falcon; from Turkic al & dogan; or chubby, from Tolgun
Oktar / Uptar = brave; from Turkic Öctär
Ruga / Rua = wise man; from Turkic Ögä
Turgun = still/calm; from Turkic Turkun
Uldin = six; from Turkic Alti
Zolban = shepherd star; from Turkic Čolpan.
Sycthians+Bmac+Siberians+East Asian= formation of turkic people(Xiongnu). That's the reason why samples' dna matches dominantly with turkic people.
Xiongnu isn;t Turkic it was Mixed but the Proto-Mongols dna were majority.
Scythians not turks
@@xorx7702 u are funny
Scythian dna = Turkic Dna 😉
@@refl1x362 😂😂😂
@@Tokyo2905 Kazakhs are not Turks genetically.
People digged Xiongnu nobel tombs in recent few years! The results shows Xiongnu DNA matches high as 65% with modern Mongolians! Analysis came out as Xiongnu descendants are still where their ancestors were.
Ever since I found my family tree tracing back to a Xiongnu individual called Xiutu who lived in the 2nd century BC, I've been thinking about this subject, and I found this video very informative.
Thank you very much for creating such amazing contents!
No problem, glad you enjoyed it :)
My Y haplogroup were tracing back to Xiutu as well and funny thing is my last name is Xiu. This is really interesting ...
Yenisei (Yeni-sey) in Turkic means New Valley, if the inhabitants were not Turkic why named the area in Turkish?
no, this is so wrong, Yenisey is Ena Soy which means Mother River
ikr peoples just too fragile to give Turks an origin
@@umartoshtemirovI find it interesting that;
1) Ana means mother in Turkish
2) Saj or Say means stony riverbed
3) Su means Water in Turkish.
@@TwitchingEye747 Ena is in kipchak dialect and means mother, say is same so as u said, suv is water in uzbek so, Yenisei is Enasay
The history of the Gaoju is given in the respective entry in WS 103 + (pp. 2505-2508); until the beginning of Text 1.056/B it is extracted as follows.
高車,蓋古赤狄之餘種也初號為狄歷,北方以為敕勒,諸夏以為高車、丁零。 其語略與匈奴同而時有小異,或云其先匈奴之也。
The Gaoju are probably the remaining tribes of the ancient Chidi [lit. 'the red Di']. Initially they were called Dili. People in the north called them Chile, whereas people in China proper called them Gaoju or Dingling.
Their language is roughly the same as that of the Xiongnu but at times has minor differences from that. Some say that their ancestors were the nephew of [i.e. indirectly related to] the Xiongnu.
It's widely accepted that the Hephthalites / White Huns were Turkic nomads from the Altai range, while their native language is assumed to be Oghuric, the connection to the Khalaj Turk Shahis leaves an open door for an Arghu theory
It's now agreed over that the Xiongnu, European Huns, & White Huns were a common Hunnic people whereas their ethno-linguistic affiliation is presumed to be Oghur Turkic
Reconstruction of the Turkic Jie language, spoken by the Jie people, a Xiongnu tribal group
su-Ø kete-r erkan
boklug-gu tukta-ŋ
English translation : When/as the army goes out, capture the Boklug (a chief) !
The Hunnic inscription on a dinner plate belonging to the last ruler of the Huns, Dengizich, was identified as Turkic. The Hunnic sample of Khan Diggiz plate ;
kinkeg dikkiz ükü essä - kijü sax sax saxynil gür täηrig
English translation : Beware of king Dikkiz the Wise's blow ! Retreat to the Tengri (God) beyond the world!
Aside from the "Hungnou/匈奴" (Chinese Cantonese)/"Huns"pronunciation similarity, the meaning of "Nou/Nu/奴“has also shifted significantly over time. Currently, it means "Slavery". Yet, in the ancient times, it meant "tribe". So, "Hungnou/Xiongnu/匈奴“ meant the Hung Tribe, or simply the Hungs, similar to what has happened to the Slavs I Eastern Europe during the Roman Period.
Kazakh
Ancient Iranic ? hell no
hell yes mongoloid
Ғұн! Ghun! 🇰🇿❤️🐺👍
One nation should speak out for its own ancestral history! Other nations will always decreasing its credibility!
in Cantonese, this tribe is called 匈奴 "hung nu", Xiongnu is the worst translation by mandarin speaking people. Cantonese has been proofed being more closely related to the ancient spoken language of midland China.
In Mongolia people don't know what Xiongnu is but they know their ancestor "Khunnu"
In chinese sources, Gok Turks were described as the descendants of Xiongnu.
Gokturks were described as blonde haired people with colored eyes and light skin in Chinese sources
@@Frikssskingg then y'all need to stop calling Kazakhs, kyrgyz, Uyghurs, Mongols, Uzbeks, yakuts/sakhas and Hazaras your brothers. You so called blonde hair blue eyes turk should keep your pan Turkism to yourself since y'all are the purest,most authentic Turks right? While central Asians are Mongols/Chinese am i right?🤡
@y.c1074 Nope.
@y.c1074BRUH no they didnt
There was many ethic tribes of nomadic horse archers
I think it's obvious that the Xiongnu(Great Hun Empire) is a Turkic-Mongolian khanate with Turk leaders.
No. Learders were mongolians. Turkic were submitted to them.
We don’t know what ethnicity the rulers even were
@@bearclaw1051 WTF!? The nation called Mongol was created in 12th century while Turk Khanate was established in 6th century! 😅
@@bearclaw1051 Their names are Turkic tho? Their traditions are also Turkic. The Mongols were the Tung-Hu who Bagatur Khan defeated and drove to the mountains of Xianbei. Huns were Turkic, Tung-hu were mongolic, they later submitted to the Huns.
Least nationalistic Turk
Thank you for this channel for being Non pan-turkic and for exposing scientific reasearch. Its understood that Multi ethnic empire.
300 BC, and I cant believe you put question mark on Philippine islands. When Austronesian people first settled there, after they went out of Southeast China 5,000 years ago and expanded to Micronesia & Polynesia in Pacific. PH is 100% Austronesian archipelago of freakin more than 7,600 islands. Just Fyi!
Anyways, just want to say that Xiongnu is Turkic mixed with Asian nomads of the East, most probably Tungusic people.
Xiongnu is a country where Turks and Moguls live together, but Turks have a say.
No moguls
@@Alghi451no In Xiongnu was Turks the ruler in Xianbei the mongols
@@Berkehan35xiongnu and xienbe not same time they ancestor of mongols. We turk all iranic people
@@Monzoni-t7u learn history 😂😂
I know the history well. we are the closest species to Iranian people. Since 1990, our historians have created a false history about cyanosis. According to archeological findings, they are the closest relatives of the ancient Khukhturks and the modern Mongols. but our Turkish scientists gave money to Mongolian scientists and took it for themselves. I'm really ashamed. our blood will not lie to whom we are descended.
In my opinion I believe the xiongnu were a Turkic led khaganate with both Turkic and Mongolic core tribes, however I cannot know for sure, and to think of a multi ethnic polity such as the xiongnu so rigidly would be tenuous and dubious.
Xiognu pushed proto Mongols East besides most of the Mongols you think of were Turkic around and a bit after this time, the Keraites, Naimans, Tatars, Khitans (mix of Xiognu and Xianbei), Onghu and other tribes core majority of mongols in other words were Turkic people that became/were mongolised by the time of Genghis Khan.
I believe they were buryat and yakut lead. Core warrior were mongol and Turks. By the way the Kazakh and Kyrgyz don’t care about hunnu
@@Willxdiana How could ethnic groups who were formed after the collapse of the Mongol Empire, lead a state that preceded it by one thousand years or so?
@@ProfessorOFanthropology979 Tiele tribe lead it. Buryat and yakut were Tiele
@@Willxdiana that’s a massive generalisation
8 This can be surmised by analysing the names of Hunnic princes and tribes. The names of the following Hunnic princes are clearly Oghuric Turkic in origin: Mundzuk (Attila's father, from Turkic Munc uq = pearl/jewel: for an in-depth discussion of the Hunnic origin of this name in particular see Schramm (1969), 139-40), Oktar/Uptar (Attila's uncle, Öktär brave/powerful), Oebarsius (another of Attila's paternal uncles, Arbårs leopard of the moon), Karaton (Hunnic supreme king before Ruga, Qarâton = black-cloak), Basik (Hunnic noble of royal blood, early fifth century, Bársig = governor), Kursik (Hunnic noble of royal blood, from either Kürsig, meaning brave or noble, or Quršiq meaning belt-bearer). For these etymologies see Bona (1991), 33. Three of Attila's known sons. have probable Turkic names: Ellac, Dengizich, Hernak, and Attila's principal wife, the mother of the crown prince' Ellac, has the Turkic name Herekan, as does another notable wife named Eskam. See Maenchen-Helfen (1973), 392-415. See also Bona (1991), 33-5, and Pritsak (1956), 414. Most known Hunnic tribal names are also Turkic, Maenchen-Helfen (1973), 427-41, e.g. Ultincur, Akatir etc. The cur suffix in many of these names is a well-known Turkic title and as Beckwith (1987), 209, points out the To-lu or Tardus tribes (Hunnic in origin) of the Western Turkish On Oq were each headed by a Cur (noble). Zieme (2006), 115, speculates that the title cur belongs to a pre-Turkic Tocharian stratum of the Turkic language, which, if true, again highlights the essential heterogeneity of Central Asian peoples and even languages. See also Aalto (1971), 35. In addition to this primary language (Oghuric Turkic), Priscus informs us that Latin and Gothic were also understood by the Hunnic elite. See Priscus, fr. 13.3, Blockley (1983), 289.
The name of Ellac, Attila’s eldest son, is a corruption of the Turkic älik ( ilik ) meaning ‘ruler, king’. 21 Ernak/Irnik the youngest son also has the variation of the same suffix in his name. His name is probably Turkic är-näk , meaning ‘great hero’, with the suffix here functioning as an augmentation of the Turkic är-än (hero). 22 Thus the suffix -ik/ich was used in Hunnic to imply greatness (i.e. ruler or kingship). These names were, it seems, formal court titles rather than personal names.
Kim, H. (2013). The end of the Hunnic Empire in the west. In The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe (pp. 89-136). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Naturally we also have more probable Turkic etymologies for these names, especially for those of Attila and Bleda. However, even if they were Germanic or Germanicized Turkic names," ,99 this does not allow us to make any hasty assumptions about the official language of the empire, if it ever existed. What Heather ignores is the fact that we have convincing or highly probable Turkic etymologies for the names of many of the other Hunnic kings and nobles before and after Attila, e.g. Mundzuk (Attila's father, from Turkic Muncuq = 'pearl/jewel'), Oktar/Uptar (Attila's uncle, Öktär = "brave/power ful'), Oebarsius (another of Attila's paternal uncles, Aïbârs = 'leopard of the moon'), Karaton (Hunnic supreme king before Ruga, Qaraton = 'black cloak'), Basik (Hunnic noble of royal blood, early fifth century, Bårsig= 'governor'), Kursik (Hunnic noble of royal blood, from either Kürsig, meaning 'brave or noble', or Qursiq meaning 'belt-bearer'). All three of Attila's known sons have probable Turkic names: Ellac, Dengizich, Hernak, and Attila's principal wife, the mother of the first son Ellac, has the Turkic name Herekan, as does another wife named Eskam (Ešqam = 'companion of the Shaman).102
It seems highly likely then from the names that we do know, most of which seem to be Turkic, that the Hunnic elite was predominantly Turkic speaking. However, in the western half of the empire, where most of their subjects spoke Germanic languages, the Huns may have used both Hunnic (Oghuric Turkic) and Gothic. Thus fief holders and royal family mem Ibers in the west who ruled Germanic tribes often bore Germanic or Germanicized titles (of great significance, as we will discover later on in the book), e.g. Laudaricus and Ardaric.105 Priscus, who is our only reliable source, being an actual eye-witness, tells us that at the Hunnic court Hunnic, Gothic and Latin were spoken, but with Hunnic always men tioned before Gothic. All three languages were apparently understood by the elite to some degree, so much so that Zercon the Moor could provoke laughter by jumbling all three together at a Hunnic banquet in the presence of Attila.107 There is, however, no indication anywhere that any of these three languages was the lingua franca.
Kim, H. (2013). Notes. In The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe (pp. 30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
A genetic study published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology in November 2007 examined of 17 individuals buried at the Murong Xianbei cemtery in Lamadong, Liaoning, China ca. 300 AD. They were determined to be carriers of the maternal haplogroups B, C, D, F, G2a, Z, M, and J1b1. These haplogroups are common among East Asians, and to a lesser extent Siberians. The maternal haplogroups of the Murong Xianbei were noticibly different from those of the Huns and Tuoba Xianbei.[17]
7 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences from Tuoba Xianbei remains in Dong Han period were analyzed. Together with the Data of Xiongnu published, the genetic affinities between Tuoba Xianbei and Xiongnu were analyzed in genetic diversity, haplogroup status, Fst genetic distances, phylogenetic analysis and multidimentional scaling (MDS) analysis. The results indicated that the Tuoba Xianbei presented the closer affinities to the Xiongnu, which implied that there was the gene flow between Tuoba Xianbei and Xiongnu during the 2 southward migrations.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17905712/
Whereas the Hunas from about 450 were Turkic in language.
sai.columbia.edu/files/sai/content/Ahmed%20-%20Trautmann%2C%20Ch.%209%20Turks%20and%20Mughals-1_0.pdf
In the Hunno-Bulgarian languages /r/ within a consonantic cluster
tends to disappear
projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/huri/files/vvi_n4_dec1982.pdf
Turkic Speaking Huns
books.google.com.tr/books?id=YKPaLi1d1O4C&pg=PA6&dq=&hl=tr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjO4tibh5HpAhWKw6YKHaKtA_UQ6AEINDAC#v=onepage&q=&f=false
(Oxford University Press)
The language of the European Huns is sometimes referred to as a Bulghar Turkic variety in general linguistic literature, but caution is needed in establishing its affiliations.
The predominant part of the Xiongnu population is likely to have spoken Turkic (Late Proto-Turkic, to be more precise).
www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/4CBA0E2CB74C8093EC1CA38C95067D55/S2513843X20000183a_hi.pdf/_div_class__title__Early_nomads_of_the_Eastern_Steppe_and_their_tentative_connections_in_the_West__div_.pdf
The Huns, a Turkic-speaking people
www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Asia-and-Oceania/Mongolia-HISTORY.html
Shih Le was a Chieh, a Hsiung-nu tribe which seems to have spoken a Turkic language.
www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/shih-le
The Balkars speak the Karachay-Balkar language, which belongs to the Kipchak Subgroup of the West Hunnic Branch of the Turkic Language Family.
www.encyclopedia.com/history/modern-europe/russian-soviet-and-cis-history/balkars
Prof. Dr. Nicola Di Cosmo in: The Turks: Early ages, Part 4. Huns (Xiongnu): The Origin and Rise of the Xiongnu Empire, Y. T., 2002, pp.217-227, University of Michigan, ISBN 9756782552, 9789756782552
"There is not much doubt among historians about the Turkish nature of the Great Hun Empire, which ruled between 318 B.C. and 216 A.D., as well as that of its predecessor proto-Huns, whose presence was confirmed by Chinese sources. The Great Hun Empire, the Western Hun Empire and especially the European Huns were examined comprehensively by Western historians."
They’re obviously Proto-Mongolian, almost always, the land a people come from is where their descendants lived on. Even for nomads, there were regions they stayed within. Maybe in its westernmost portions it had some Iranic and Turkic tribes
The Xiongnu homeland became Chinese provinces, 2/3 of the Xiongnu population transformed into Han Chinese, 1/3 of the war refugees conquered Central Asia, western Asia and Turkey
Por la similitud de los nombres, es posible que los hunos fueran parte de las tribus que formaban el imperio xiongnu, con una predominancia proto-turca. En cuanto a la etnicidad de xiongnu, es posible que fuese multiétnica, pero lo más seguro es que predominara el componente oriental, proto-turco y proto-mongol.
Dna says : Turkman.. 😂But Turkman mixed a little with persian.
@@meralkeskin8511 because türkic warriors have harem from persian girls and chinese girls and greek girls
It's widely accepted that the Hephthalites / White Huns were Turkic nomads from the Altai range, while their native language is assumed to be Oghuric, the connection to the Khalaj Turk Shahis leaves an open door for an Arghu theory
It's now agreed over that the Xiongnu, European Huns, & White Huns were a common Hunnic people whereas their ethno-linguistic affiliation is presumed to be Oghur Turkic
Reconstruction of the Turkic Jie language, spoken by the Jie people, a Xiongnu tribal group
su-Ø kete-r erkan
boklug-gu tukta-ŋ
English translation : When/as the army goes out, capture the Boklug (a chief) !
The Hunnic inscription on a dinner plate belonging to the last ruler of the Huns, Dengizich, was identified as Turkic. The Hunnic sample of Khan Diggiz plate ;
kinkeg dikkiz ükü essä - kijü sax sax saxynil gür täηrig
English translation : Beware of king Dikkiz the Wise's blow ! Retreat to the Tengri (God) beyond the world!
@@meralkeskin8511
Mixed blood Turkman are the city dwellers as M. Kashgari stated .
Kazakh
loved this!!
Glad you enjoyed it!
What’s interesting is that out of all the nomadic tribes, it is the Turks with the most mixed haplogroup s and mitochondrial DNA…
Haplogroup N = Uralic
C-M217 = Mongolic
C3 = Tungusic (distant relatives of the mongols??)
Q = Yeneseian and Amerindian
But Turkic? It seems mostly split between Q and N, and then the western Turks have a lot of western haplogroups like J and R…hmmm….maybe it was the TURKS that were a multiracial but unified confederacy and the Xiongnu might’ve been the original ancestors of the Turks…
Xiongu are the Turkic with also Hunnic and Mongolic identity. Typically look of the Kazakh (Kipchak) Turks of today. 🇰🇿
Bu yabancılar kafayı Moğollar ile bozmuş. Türkiye'den selamlar. 🇹🇷♥️🇰🇿
Kazakhs look East Asian and Chinese, ancient Turks were like Han Chinese people.
Recent Xiongnu tomb DNA results shows high match with modern Mongolians.
I strongly think that they were multiethnic, including a group that was proto-Turko-Mongolic, a group that was the westernmost extension of Tocharian and Iranic, some small portions of Tungusic and Yeneseian, and her languages that were paleosiberian quasi-isolates, such as Nivkh. I beleive that there was a "pre-Yeneseian" language that was displaced in about the 2000 BCE period, when the later "Yeneseians" moved in from the south, originally from the south-western Baikal area. I believe that the ORIGINAL or 'old Yeneseian' language was pretty different from the language that replaced it.
Xiongnu= Huns= Turks The dna codes of xiongnu like turkic people dna (R-Z2124 Like Ottoman dynasty)
Q1 like Oghuz tribes
R-Z2125 LİKE Kyrgyz Tribes
One Old chinese documents says "Gokturk were descend of Xiognu". Another chinese document says "Gokturks like as Xiognu". Gokturk learned how to ruled empire from Xiognu Resarches show us that. They ruled like Xiognu. There is a no need discuss that. Another point is European Huns are not turkic people. İs this real? After attila's death his son Ernak ruled balkans. His successor Bulgarian Khanete. Khanete's leader clan is Dulo Clan. Dulo clan's tamga is IYI. İn Turkish TUĞLUK CLAN. Tamga show us that DULO is ottoman's ruler clan KAYI. Thats it.
in cantonese xiongnu is pronounced as hung1 nou4, which is very similar to huns and huna
l am from Türkiye. İllustrative DNA test shows l have %30 Xiongnu genome. So you can say Xiongnu were Turkish anchestors of Turkic men. My haplogroup iş Q.
İn bronze age period l have %6.6 amur river hunter gatherers, %3.6 yellow river hunter gatherers genome. %20 central steppe herderer. So you can say Xiongnu were anchestors of Türkiye. A lot of mix in history but ethnic Turks of Türkiye are grandson's of Xiongnu
bro im qazaq))
Xiongnu are turk according the Chinese sources. Mongols appeared in the 13 th century and the land named after them we all know there were turkish tribe like Nayman between them . we all know this land was the home of Gokturk Empire in the 6 th century and the Uighur Empire in the 8 th century, and still to day there is many turkish tribes lives in the North west like Duha tribe (Tsaatan),tuva , kazak and uighur . Mongolia is the ancient home land of Turkish peopole .
The Chinese never tried to differentiete between Mongolian and Turkic people, and also Mongolic people have been proven to exist during the Xioungu era.
Xiongnus were mostly mongolic people. You can still find them living in Mongolia and northern China. Doesn't look like turks or Caucasians. How come only chinese have any written first hand description of these people?
2000 years ago, east Turkic tribes looks like more east north asians.
I find it very inconsistent that you are so leery when it comes to the topic of the video but are quick to call the Scythian language Iranic, when that topic is even more debated than the Huns.
Easy assimilation after conquest? Conquest could only mean paying tribute (taxes) but otherwise a not - too oppressive assimilation into the "tribe". This creates a mixed language (and DNA) and some "loyalty". This is sort of like medieval serfs not really distinguishing too much about which Lord collected tribute from them. They just "went with the flow". The wars were between the Lords (who collects the taxes?) - not the serfs. Later (Post Xiongnu), conquest looks different, such as with Genghis Khan whose terms of surrender were oppressive, so the fight continued to the death. The oppressive conquest model led to firmer boundaries and more distinct languages and cultures.
The Han culture would have a tempting target for all nomadic raiders - as was Rome. Easy alliances with potential raiders and later division and rivalry about who gets what - including fratricide over inheritance issues.
Xiongnu is mongolic
Iranian theory of xiongnu is one of the most oxymoron things I have ever seen.
Turks were similar to Chinese people, but they mixed with Middle Eastern and slavic and no longer looked east asian.
we know that roman historians wrote about the huns that they were tall and strong and we know that they wrote the same about iranian ,and we also know the turks and mongols are not tall.and we also know that genetic and iranic words are more commen in hungary than turkic.
I don’t where I had read that but the former türük tribes after they beat the énnemi raise the young children to made them future warriors and by this that make hétérogeneous ethnic group difficult to distinguish because they was assimilated.
On the topic of if the Huns of Asia and Europe are related:
it has been noted by ancient historians that the Caucasian Huns which were the same as European ones had open relation with Hephthalites. In fact, on one instance the Caucasian Huns even warned the Hephthalites about an offensive the Sassanids planned on them, which leads us to think they had friendly relations. To further support this, the tamga of the Hephthalites have been found in Caucasian excavations.
One other thing to note, Hunnic era cultures in the Kama/Perm region and Central Asia (Jety-asar culture in this instance) engaged in trade as is evident from archeological data.
American history professor Justin McCarthy said that Turks came from very different regions and united under the Turkish identity, just like the Americans, despite their roots in different places. found the same structures as the structures. In the article published by Science Direct, it was seen that there is a genetic sharing between the Huns and the Turks.🐺🐺
Xiongnu was Turkic. They had 5 clans. Supreme elite rulers came from Luandi klan ( alayuntlu) all chanyu was Turkic haplogroup mostly Q.
At 2012 Li Honhjie found in Black Gouliang cemetery Xiongnu elites skletons. 12 men buried 4 of them y DNA haplogroup Q M378 as hosts, 8 were Q1a M25 as hosts and victims. Li honhjie et al 2012, jilin University China.
R1az93 and their subclades are scytians but assomilated in Turkish nation, N1C was Turkic N1a was assimilated uralic men in Turkic tribes. C2a Mongolian but mixed in turkish tribes
Main nation(Founders): Mongol tribes confederation
Vassals(Conquered area’s people):Turkic tribes
Enemy: China
Expansion: until Europe including White Huns, Attila Huns.
Great Xiongnu empire 👏👏👏
Huns have 80 tribes and so does Xiongnu. They were together and United. Some were white, some were even Muslim. My family were Hunnic. We don't need scholars to tell us who we are.
Most likely 匈奴 (Xiongnu) was a multi-ethnic tribal confederacy. It could've been a generic term referring to all the northern barbarians.
After the Gokturks, the Uyghurs controlled the Turkic homeland (i.e. Western Mongolia and South Siberia) until they were usurped and pushed out by the Yenisey Kyrgyz around 1,100 years ago. Their direct descendants are known as the Western Yugur and Eastern Yugur people living in China. Interestingly, Western Yugur is a Turkic-language while Eastern Yugur is a Mongolic language. Turkic and Mongolic tribes have been living in proximity for thousands of years, and naturally many tribal alliances were formed. (Even two of the four official wives of Genghis Khan were from Turkic clans.)
As for how to pronounce 匈奴, Chinese pronunciation has shifted from ancient times. The current Beijing/Mandarin pronunciation isn't the same as the Han Dynasty era. Ancient centers of power for Chinese kingdoms was more inland, near the ancient Silk Road gateway. Beijing became the preferred capital of various Mongolic and Manchu dynasties, particularly in the past 1,000 years or so, because it was a convenient halfway point between their homelands and China proper. As such, current standard Mandarin/Beijing dialect was heavily influenced by ruling classes of various northern conquest regimes. It's the product of Mongols and Manchus trying to pronounce Chinese.
Genghis Khans wives were Mongol .
According to Chinese sources Xiongnu spoke a language closely related to Tiele, they were clearly Oghur Turkic.
Also Para-Mongolic languages are not part of Mongolic languages as you said.
@@papazataklaattiranimam No it was multiethnical .
Pure garbage, Mandarin is not influenced by Mongolian and Manchu, this is a very different language, Manchu and Mongolian vocabulary is very different from Chinese, you are just a madman
@@papazataklaattiranimam Chinese sources shouldn't be taken as is, you need to take that with a huge grain of salt, since they never tried to Differentiate them, and just generalized both Mongols and Turks into the same group.
Hunnu(Xiongnu) are my ancestors. I'm Buryat Mongolian, Khori tribe!
Hello, distant cousin. 😉 (Avar/Magyar descendant checking in)
@@DemonixGamer Hello-Helló ;) Avar are our closest bro too, atleast our ancestors once formed same group with them, DNA elite of avars showed that from modern population autosomally closest were my Buryad people and even we share the same haplo clade N1a which make up 48% of Buryats and 80% in Khori-Buryad tribe. You as their descendant my family too😉
@@barguttobed heyyy buryat brother
@@barguttobed love to avars and buryats from Kalmyk
@@barguttobed
The history of the Gaoju is given in the respective entry in WS 103 + (pp. 2505-2508); until the beginning of Text 1.056/B it is extracted as follows.
高車,蓋古赤狄之餘種也初號為狄歷,北方以為敕勒,諸夏以為高車、丁零。 其語略與匈奴同而時有小異,或云其先匈奴之也。
The Gaoju are probably the remaining tribes of the ancient Chidi [lit. 'the red Di']. Initially they were called Dili. People in the north called them Chile, whereas people in China proper called them Gaoju or Dingling.
Their language is roughly the same as that of the Xiongnu but at times has minor differences from that. Some say that their ancestors were the nephew of [i.e. indirectly related to] the Xiongnu.
Jai Hinduja. Xiongnu are Hsia Chinese and they had preserved a still living village in Anhui province. No need to dispute because researchers can easily go there and collect their DNAs
Just cause a tribe is a vasal toa king does not mean they are genetically the same. France controlled Vietnam for 100 years, but the Vietnamese are not French.
Xiongnu and Huns are of Turkic background, words from anpother language can be borwed in your dominant language like words for diary products into Tirkic languages.In that regards the Mongolian empire was in fact a Turko-Mongolian empire and thet were the desecndants of the Gokturks, Mongols in the region didn't have the number to create such a vast army and empire without the Turks. Same rule applies for Xiangnou and Huns.
The Lambert Lombards were originally XiongNu Huns who went to Pannonia and then onto Belgium and Scandinavia. There is little Hun blood left in Hungary to the dismay of the Hungarians but their aristocracy did not want to integrate or intermarry with the Hun Barbarians and so the unwanted Lombard Huns just kept moving to brighter pastures. The truth is stranger than the fiction.
@raffaellodellavaris8140
Very interesting, sources please? In Hungary or should I say the Carpathian Basin more properly there was and is a historical continuum. The graves speak volumes, there's archeological evidence of the many steppe peoples that were in Hungary throughout its history- Scythians, Sarmatians, Huns, Avars, Magyars, Pechenegs, Cumans historical evidence that also proves the Magyar tribal confederation of (Árpáds Magyars) were comprised of Scytho-Sarmatian and former Hunnic peoples. If a substantial part European Huns migrated with the Lombards it's highly possible because during the great barbarian migration period of European history many Huns, Alans and other former Hunnic confederation people were serving as mercenaries.
Ancient Turks have incomparibly highed amounts of Western Eurasian paternal haplogroups than the East Eurasion people because ancient Turks have West Eurasian roots and they’re related with Sintashta, Andronovo, Karasuk and Tagar cultures as well as Subars and BMAC cultures. Paternal lineage (Y-DNA) points the direction of ethnicity and autosomal DNA points the direction of phenotype.
Subars were originally the norhern neighbours of Sumerians(northern Iraq) and they had symbiotic relation with Sumerians as there were many Subars assimilated among Sumerians. Sumerians were calling themselves Kangar not Sumerian and its neighbours were wrongly calling them Sumerians which is the corrupt pronounciation of the word “Subar”. Sumerians and Subars were different people but Subars unlike Sumerians were warrior people who were fighting against invasion of Semitic people of Sumerian lands.
Those people after centuries of fights with semitic people forced to leave the region and the ones stayed in Sumeria were enslaved and eventually assimilated by Semitic people. The hypothesis is that one arm of Subars leaving Mesopotamia eventually reached Siberia through southern and northern Azerbaijan and also by following the cultural route of Khorasan- Urals via east of Caspian Sea and Aral lake.
According to this hypthesis the name of the Siberian branch of Turks (Sabars or Sabirs) too actually comes from Subars and they contributed to the genesis of proto-Turkish language and constitutes one of the roots of Turkish ethniciy. Actually that explains some 38 common main words between Sumerian and Turkish languages.
BMAC people or Bactria-Mariana Archeological Complex people who lived in Central Asia in Bronze age and its populations were comprised of hunter gatherers from Siberia as well. Those people were completely destroyed and eradicated by the Arian people who took their lands and eradiacted their culture completely.
Turks which is the ruling ethnicity of Scythians emerged as an ethnic group in Southern Siberia as the mix of the aforementioned people (People of Sintashta, Andronovo, Karasuk, Tagar cultures, Subars and BMAC people) and from there they started to conquer lands towards both east and west.
The western arm of them is known as Saka today and they went to Central Asia and reached as far as Urals region and eastern Europe by founding big and small many many states along the way with the local populations they met.
The eastern arm on the other hand started their military expeditions from western Mongolia to eastern Mongolia and later China are known as Asian Huns (or Xiongnu) today. Asian Huns started the substantial genetic and phenotypic mix by intermixing and assimilating the Asiatic people on their way (proto-Mongols, proto-Tunguz, proto-Koreans, and the Chinese) in eastern Mongolia, Liao river and in Manchuria regions.
ASIAN HUNS AKA XIONGNU WERE FROM THE SAME ETHNICIY WITH SCYTHIANS AND HERE’S THE EVIDENCE
Alexander the Great after conquering the Persian Empire marched toward Central Asia in about 330 BCE. He first moved to northeast and made war with the Sycthian clans there. As the war was inconclusive he moved toward southeast where he fought the scouts of Xiongnu (Asian Hun Empire). After these wars historians traveling with him noted some important informations regarding Scythians. They mentioned that both Scythians and Xiongnu had same clothing, fighting in the same way and more importantly they were speaking the same language.
(Kaegi, W. E. (2003). Heraclius: Emperor of Byzantium (First Edition) Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press, 140-151.)
CONCLUSION ABOUT THE LINK BETWEEN SCYTHIANS, ASIAN HUNS AKA XIONGNU AND TURKS
In a nutshell archeological, genetic and linguistic evidence suggests that Scythians (the rulers of them) are the proto-Turks. The remnants of Scythians who remained in Southern Siberia later merged with the Asian Huns who returned to their motherland in Southern Siberia in the the late 4th century BC. Asian Huns were ethnically Scythians despite that their phenotypes diversified during their military expeditions in the east which last for centuries. Kok Turk Empire and the Yenisei Kyrgyz people emerged as the successors of Scythians and Asian Huns. Scythians or Sakas (their rulers) are thought to be the ancestors of the contemporary Turks mostly living in Siberia, Tarim Basin, Central Asia, Middle East, Caucasus eastern Europe and Anatolia.
WAIT A MINUTE ISN’T IT TRUE THAT AUTOSOMAL DNA OF THE MOST ANCIENT TURKS SUGGEST THAT THEY HAD MOSTLY MONGOLOID PHENOTYPES?
The problem of comparing the genetic makeup of ancient populations with the contemporary populations is that DNA samples extracted from the ancient burial sites mostly belonged to the people of the noble classes or royal families while the DNA samples obtained from the contemporary populations belonged to the common people.
Medieval Turks (and most probably the proto-Turks too) had different traditions of getting lands than Iranic people.
Iranic people had the practice of incest marriages for the noble class in order to protect their noble blood.
This tradition doesn’t exist in Turks and presumably in proto-Turks either. The noble class of Turkish populations normally marry the noble people of their neighbour states and empires in order to be able to demand more lands as dowries. That’s why they’re very much mixed with the people of the neighbour states, empires, tribes etc.
For that reason for example it isn’t a good idea to compare genetic makeup of medieval and proto Turks with ancient Iranic people to determine which side had more West Eurasian genes because all you can have access is the DNA samples of the people belonging noble class in each ethnic group rather than the common people and because of the totally different cultural practises that would be quite misleading..
Yet even in the DNA of those (proto) Turks belonging the noble class who’re very much mixed with Asiatic populations there’s incomparibly higher rate of West Eurasian genes than east Eurasian populations. If they were naturally east Eurasian people there wouldn’t be any difference between them and east Eurasian people considering the fact that they were going on marrying with the nobles of the east Eurasian people when they were already deep in East Eurasia and surrounded with many many East Eurasian populations.
This evidently proves that they initially had West Eurasian root. Also not to mention the fact that the DNA samples extracted from these people were far away from representing the common populations. So we can assume that the common people in their countries had diverse populations leaning toward West Eurasian.
If you can connect the dots you can actually see that common population of not only proto Turk but also Turks had West Eurasian roots. Now let’s talk about the phenotypes of the common population in Turks according to the Chinese annals.
Chinese histories describe the early Turks (Tujue or Tüküe) as “mixed barbarians” having a noteworthy frequency of blonde to brown hair and blue or green eyes. The Tang historian Yan Shigu described them as "blue-eyed and red bearded". The ruling clan of the Turks, the Ashina, the tribe which first used the term “Türk”, were described by Chinese authors as having an unusual appearance. According to Chinese scientist Xue Zongzheng, the early Turks had physical features that were quite different from those of East Asian people. These would include deep eye sockets, prominent noses, and light eye or hair color.
Chinese sources mention that Xiongnu (Asian Huns) and Ashina which is the founder of Kok Turk empire were the same people. Furthermore they say that people of the Ashina clan phenotypically were very similar to Yenisei Kyrgyz population. According to the Yenisei inscriptions from 6th ceentury Yenisei Kyrgyz people were speaking Turkish and these people became the part of Kok Turk Empire only in the 8th century.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yenisei_Kyrgyz
Here it is unimportant whether Turks were blond or not. I mentioned it to emphasize the fact that those people mentioned by the Chinese weren’t Iranic people because there is no mention of huge blond population for Iranic people even in the most ancient descriptions and depictions regarding the phenotypes of Iranic people.
Phenotypes of Iranic people clearly draw the picture of phenotypes similar to Semitic people like Assyrians or Indian people. So who did Turks mix with to have such distinctively different phenotypes in western and eastern Mongolia where there is no other population carrying west Eurasian genes than the Turks? Another logical question is how on earth Turks could get such distinctive phenotypical traits if they had East Asian origin? As a rule East Asian phenotypes are dominant over the rest of the phenotypes and common Iranic people have never had these distinctive phenotypical traits.
It’s important to note that R haplogroup which is often associated with Indo-Europeans actually originates from Southern Siberia. The existance of this particular haplogroup in Afanesievo culture at the same time span with Yamnaya culture actually suggests that the direction of migration was from Southern Siberia to Pontic Steppes where Yamnaya culture emerged not from Pontic Steppes to Southern Siberia.
www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#:~:text=Haplogroup%20R*%20originated%20in%20North,central%20Siberia%20(Raghavan%20et%20al.
Another important point is that people of Sintashta culture who are often wrongly associated with Indo-Iranic people actually fought and defended themselves against Indo-Aryan invasion and only after Indo-Aryan people set their agricultural fields fire they had to move toward north and east in search for new lands for living. Actually they had no real contact with Indo-Aryan people. So the question is how is it possible that they can have any relation with Indo-Aryan or Indo-European languages. Most probably bulk of the Sintashta population who migrated north and east weren’t the speakers of Indo-European languages. Most probably they were speaking an agglutinative language and the language of proto-Turks emerged as a substrate of this agglutinative language.
There is no real evidence regarding Indo-European roots of Iranic people. The language of Avesta in Iranic people and the language of Veda in Indian people are very similar to each other. Most probably what happened was these Indo-Aryan people coming from India conquered the remnants of Sintashta people who didn’t move to east and north and imposed their language on them. From there this language was imposed on the populations in Europe who had much less crowded populations back then and that’s how Indo-European languages emerged.
ISN’T IT TRUE THAT INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES EMERGED EARLIER THAN THE LANGUAGE OF PROTO TURKS?
The claim is that Indo-European languages emerged prior to the language of proto-Turks. The linguists who propose this hypothesis base their opinion that branches of Turkish language and lects of those branches in Turkish language still have much higher intelligibility with each other than Indo-European languages and according to them this suggests that it’s much younger language than Indo-European languages whose intelligibility with each other is incomparibly lower.
Yet, this notion isn’t very correct because the root words in agglutinative languages can be much better preserved than flexive languages due to their morphological qualities.
Here’s a little information regarding Turkish language
That’s why they could still remain far more intelligible than flexive languages like Indo-European languages even if they were formed from much earlier times than Indo-European languages. So this kind of evaluation regarding the age of languages which is valid for flexive languages isn’t very valid for agglutinative languages like the branches of Turkish language and the lects of these branches inTurkish language.
SO WHY IS IT THAT COMMON PEOPLE OF TURKS IN CENTRAL ASIA DON’T HAVE THE SAME PHENOTYPES WITH WEST EURASIAN PEOPLE?
This DNA sequencing research below gives an adequate answer to this particular question.
Population Dynamics and the Rise of Empires in Inner Asia”This DNA research’s published on November 5, 2020. This is the latest and one of the largest DNA sequencing researches that has been made in Mongolia so far.Here is a little information about the research
In Chinese sources Turks were described as East Asian people. Just look at the face of Kul Tigin. He has a typical Mongolian face.
@@kedisukriye On the contrary Chinese sources always mention that early Turks had Europoid physical traits.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashina_tribe
The fact that the Chinese described Turks as having distinctively different physical characteristics from the Iranic people is significant. The Iranic people are typically described as having physical characteristics similar to Semitic people like the Assyrians or Indian people, while the Turks are described as having blond or light-colored hair and distinctive eye and nose features. This raises the question of who the Turks mixed with to have these distinctive physical characteristics in western and eastern Mongolia, where there are no other populations with West Eurasian genes except for the Turks. It is also worth considering how the Turks could have acquired such distinctive physical traits if they had East Asian origins.
You are under the illusion of the physical traits of the Central Asian and Siberian Turks which makeup only a small fraction of the entire Turkish populations. The physical traits of the Central Asian Turks have changed and became more homogenous leaning towards Asiatic people because these people mixed and assimilated some Mongolian tribes which converted to Islam. That’s how they’ve got more Asiatic facial features in various degrees. The ones living in Siberia on the other hand are just small minorities who were heavily mixed with the Tungusic and Mongolian people living in the same geography. Yet when we analyze the DNA of both Central Asian and Siberian Turks we can clearly see that they have incomparibly higher rate of West Eurasian genes compared to East Eurasian people which definitely proves their West Eurasian root.
Kül Tigin's phenotype represents the phenotype of the people from royal family and nobles who were making marriages witth the nobles of the neighbouring Asiatic states, empires and tribes in order to acquire lands as dowries and to establish alliances. His phenotype doesn't reflect the phenotype of common Turks. Kül Tigin lived between 684 CE-731 CE and Kok Turk Empire was founded in 552 CE. So he represents the Turks belonging to the royay family who have made marriages with Asiatic people for generations.
The study of genetic makeup in ancient populations is a complex and nuanced field, with several potential pitfalls. One significant challenge is the fact that DNA samples extracted from ancient burial sites often come from noble classes or royal families, while samples obtained from contemporary populations often come from common people. This can make it difficult to accurately compare the genetic makeup of ancient and contemporary populations.One example of this issue can be found in the comparison of medieval Turks (and possibly proto-Turks) with Iranic people. While the noble class of Turkish populations engaged in marriages with nobles from neighboring states and empires as a way of obtaining dowries and acquiring new lands, the noble class of Iranic people practiced incest marriages in order to protect their noble blood. This difference in cultural practices means that it would be misleading to compare the genetic makeup of medieval and proto-Turks with ancient Iranic people in order to determine which group had more West Eurasian genes.
Even in the DNA of (proto) Turks belonging to the noble class, who were heavily mixed with Asiatic populations, there is a significantly higher rate of West Eurasian genes compared to East Eurasian populations. This suggests that these groups initially had West Eurasian roots. It is also important to note that the DNA samples extracted from these groups do not accurately represent the common populations, so it can be assumed that the common people in these countries had diverse populations with a tendency towards West Eurasian.
The comparison of genetic makeup in ancient and contemporary populations can be a complex task, and care must be taken to consider the limitations and biases of the available DNA samples.
@@Alprtngakrc take a look at Gokturk genetics. They are clearly East Asian: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrks
Iranic is not even an option.
if a French men suggests something that means you need to take it with a pinch of salt. If the history refers as Turks than the French men has a historical hatred in that suggestion.
How could Xiongnu be iranian even if today people are speaking Turkic languages around that area.
th-cam.com/video/cubsSWp3RYY/w-d-xo.html
This is not even debatable... this is pure bullshit. They are a turkic state with mainly turkic mongolic population. the leaders are turks, the traditions are turkic and mongolic, the army is turkic and mongolic, etc...
Scythian initially were Ancient Kazakh whom were Iranic ancestors blonde Mongolian white with Asian look from Russia and Ukraine. Chinese Ancestors too were have some connections Khitan and Kazakh tribes before mixing with Austronesian tribes from Southern China which became Han Chinese.
Indoiranian nonsense about iranic roots of scythians are false.
In kazakhstan there were numerous archeologic findings proving that nomadic people in scythian time periods were asian looking(mongoloid skull shapes). And as well as golden jewelry works where the people portrayed like asians.
Sentence structure should be revealing.
As a Finlander, I've long heard of the Finnish language being in the same language grouping as Turkish. The sentence structure is distinct.
Language isn't everything, though.
DNA normally reveals much, but listening to this tangled tale, I will pass on offering any conclusion about that!
It's not in the same language group.
The most closed ethnic group to Xiongnu are modern Mongols. Paleogenetic remains of Xiongnu shows big genetic continuity between Mongols and Xiongnu, moreover between the Slab Grave culture (which precedes and also ancestral to Xiongnu) and Modern Mongols(60-80% of Mongol DNA came from Slab Grave culture)
Hell no lol. The mongol similar results come from LATE Xiongnu meaning after they conquered mongols. The early Xiongnu results are almost indistinguishable from scythians of chandman culture
"We observe two distinct demographic processes that contributed to the formation of the early Xiongnu. First, half of the early individuals (n = 6) form a genetic cluster (earlyXiongnu_west) resembling that of Chandman_IA of the preceding Sagly/Uyuk culture from the Altai-Sayan region (Figure 2). They derive 92% of their ancestry from Chandman_IA with the remainder attributed to additional Iranian-related ancestry, which we model using BMAC as a proxy (Figures 3D and 4D; Table S5F). This suggests that the low-level Iranian-related gene flow identified among the Chandman_IA Sagly/Uyuk during the EIA likely continued during the second half of the first millennium BCE, spreading across western and northern Mongolia."
Stop drinking and then spewing nonsense.
Good question. Their language is similar to Turkish but they were a mix of different peoples of central Asia.
There are a few words from the Hun language, and the vast majority of these words are of Iranian origin.
Turks already were mixture of different ethnicities at the beginning. Turks were never been one single ethnic group but a federation of multiple ethnic groups ruled by an Altaic aristhocracy.
I"m not an expert!
while searching for my ancestry i happen to find out that Kushan and Sangu empires existed at same time period around the time of Jesus Christ [P.B.U.H]. the Kushans started in turkey and Sangu started in india.
why nobody is discussing the possibility that they were Indian origin.
in modern day India Pakistan and Kashmir there is still a group of tribe known as Gujjars who have sub tribe Kasana and sangu.
the aisan and european huns are the same.no need for a debate.they were nomadic.and the huns of asia and europe had nothing to do with iranians.they were turkic.they spoke turkic and there is no confederation.it turned into an empire just like the ottoman,seljuk,and other turkic empires.in mongolia back in history turkic tribes used to live.the mongolians used to live in more eastern parts of asia.the huns became composed of many other nations as they expanded,just like the romans...was the roman empire an confederation?no.were all the subjects of the roman empire composed of romans?no.when it comes to turkic history,historians of the west avoid the word turk...the us of america is a multi ethnic confederation.the huns were setting empires.empires are not composed of one single nation.but the rulers and the majority of the army remains as turkic just like it happened with the subsequent turkic empires.
Nobody actually "appears" at a certain era..
Believe me, everyone that has ever lived, has a father and a mother.
(Adam and Jesus being exceptions here.. :) )
We all have more or less the same number of ancestors
Xiongnu are a union of turkic (west altaian) and mongolic (east altaian) people. Also this is not only one union, also Scythians are a union of turkic (north khazarian) and iranic (south khazarian) people. Turkic people were reliable, allying, strong, militaristic people, this is why turkic people ruled many empires in history.
Also, there is no iranic genetics, those are mostly turkic genetics instead, as we can see R1a, R1b in ydna genetic studies. (I will explain later) Iranic is actually should be called as "persian" not more, because iran do not have connection with south asians genetically. Persians are west asians.
Genetics can be explained by ydna haplogroups easily. But on the other hand, europeans try to change it intentionally because there are asiatic people majorities in europe. I was trying to compare and match languages and haplogroups in general. I will classify haplogroups according to conclusion I got:
A0 - first ydna human genetic in west africa,
A1, B0 - first mutation from A0,
A2, B1 - southwest african, khoisan,
A3, B2, CT - central african, nilotic, saharan,
CT have mutated to DE, CF in east africa,
DE have separated to D1, E1,
D1, D2 - tibetan, burman, andamanese,
D3 - ainu japanese,
E1 - kenya, tanzania,
E1a - niger-congo, bantu,
E1b1 - kushitic, egyptian, helenic,
E1b2 - berberic, northwest african,
CF have separated to C1, F,
C1 have mutated to C1a, C1b and F have mutated to G, H, I, J, K in nortwest india,
C1a, G1 - european early farmers,
G2 - south caucasian, arian, armenian,
H - south indian,
I - gothic, central european, proto european,
I1 - germanic, nordic, visigothic,
I2 - slavic, balkanic, ukrainian, ostrogothic,
J - proto mesopotamian,
J1 - arabic, assyrian, hebrew, akkadian,
J2 - grecoroman, persian, bactrian, south khazarian,
K, K1, K2a have mutated to L, T in west india,
L, T - west indian, sanskrit, vedic,
C1b, K2b - proto southeast asian, sundaland,
C1b, C2 - east austronesian, melanesian,
C3 - mongolic, tungusic,
C4 - aboriginal australian,
K2b have mutated to M, N, O, P in southeast asia,
M, S - papuan, new guinean, S mutated from M,
N, N1 - proto uralic in northern east asia,
N2, N3 - north asian, uralic, finnic, samoyedic,
O - thai-kadai, austroasiatic,
O1, O2 - west austronesian, sinitic, chinese,
O3 - koreanic, japonic,
P - aeta, negrito, philippinese,
P1 - proto altaic, altaian, tuvan, siberian,
P1 have mutated to Q, R in altaian siberia,
Q, Q1a - ket, yeniseian, slab grave culture,
Q1b - nadene/atabasq, native american,
R, R1 - proto altaic, north euroasian, mal'ta buret culture, modern uyghur turkic, oghur/oghuz turkic,
R1a - hunnic, central asian turkic, east european (tatar, khazar, avar, bolgar, balkar, magyar originated), north indian (hephtal hun, kirgiz, uzbek, gaznevid, timur, babur, burushaski hunza originated),
R1b - saka, sumerian, scythian, north khazarian, bashkir, turkmen, west european (tyrrhenian, etruscan, raetic, vasconic, basq, aquitan, saxonian originated), old anatolian, mesopotamian (sumerian, elamite, turkmen originated),
R2 - tamil, dravidian, sri lanka...
As we can see, R1a ,R1b have genetic connection with agglutinative language speaking uralic-altaic, dene-yeniseian, tyrrhenian-vasconic, north caucasian and related sino-tibetan, native american languages. This proves that scythians were turkic R1 and persian J2, arian G union and xiongnu were hunnic, turkic R1 and mongolic C3.
The Xiongnu were the direct descendants of Eastern Scythians.The descendants of the Xiongnu would become the Huns, Turks, and the Mongols.
Xiongnu ruling class and elite was Turkic. There is no debate on that. All primary sources proved that but some "historians" needs a Xiongnu guy would come to the Earth and say "we are Turkic". Also, Huns and Hephtalite elites were descendants of Xiongnu. Although majority of population inside these two empires were not Turkic ruling class(or founder class) were Turkic without no doubt.
Xiongnu ruling class and elite was Turkic 🤣🤣🤣🤣. How the ruling class was turkic, when the eastern tyuryuks emerged in 545 AD as Rouranic slaves?
Xioung nu -ancestor of scythians-who were ancestors of huns,turks and magyars. Daniel Tubin an archeogeneticist states in his poster that every turk has some ancestral dna of the xioung nu... Long story short...if u have a tiny bit of ancestrial xioung nu dna,consider urself lucky,whether ure a turk,hungarian,german,iranian or scandinavian...
They was Turks not Mongols. Xiongnu = Turkic Tribes. Xianbei= Mongol tribes.
F Mongolian
Nomadic people identified by clans and not by language/ethnicity. (Ethnicity is a modern social construct.) There are a number of famous clans in the Xianbei (鮮卑) ruling class that are supposed to be descendants of the Xiongnu (匈奴), specifically Southern Xiongnu. The most famous one is the Dugu-clan (独狐部) which produced many Empresses for the various Xianbei rulers.
During the Tang dynasty Dugu-clan Sinicize their name and adopted Liu (劉) as their family name. They were part of the ruling aristocracy as they were maternal ancestors of the Imperial Family. Also the ruling Yuwen clan (宇文部) of the Xianbei Northern Zhou, are recorded to have unique and different origins from the rest of the Xianbei. They descend from the Xiongnu as well.
Turkic and Mongolic are concepts that didn't exist in this time frame. Nobody Xianbei person identified as a Mongol. No Xiongnu identified as a Turk either. Almost all of them identified by their clans, which is why Turkic and Mongolic nomads only had clan names (and not family names).
@@yo2trader539then does this mean turks and mongols didnt see each other different?
Turks and Mongols look the same bro, it's just a language difference between them, Turks and Mongols both lived in Northern China.
@@odez5412Yes, because there is literally no difference in appereance.
Xiongnu are Mongolic... No need to make a research. 😂 (its also Mongolian ancestors and no need to be pan-turkic)
Check the map of Yamnaya culture,Scythia and Sarmatia,Onoguria and Old Great Bulgaria,there is where is horse is domestikated,with horse those peoples migrated,all over the world,there are mix and pushed back,by mongoloid peoples.Why in all of those land,and many slavic countries even now is used bulgarian alfabet,not some chinese,from our poor,small turkic Bulgaria.Bulgars have tradition for defected long heads,as sarmatians.Old great in slavic is the same,as latin and greek Magna,who give this name?Old Bulgarian calendar start 7532 year ago.BTW bulgars have bin under Gokturk khaganate,for 70 years,but we are allways bin in war,against Ashina, bulgars are rulled,by Dulo clan in the begining,but i dont think,we are hunnic peoples,but some federation of horse tribes,wich allways lived around Black see steppes.I dont understand what turkic mean at all,mongolian?Please,who are bulgarians,not who rulled them,find the truth.Healt and happynes
Well the huns were made up from turks and mongols as far as i know
Smoking Gun, the White Huns, Aka the Xyon, Huns are definitely part of the Xiougnu, as Xiongnu is just a Sinocized way of saying Hunnu, which in Mongolian, and Kazakh has no difference betwern Huns, ans also Genetic research shows a connection.
The Xiongnu were an Iranic people.
According to the results published by Nature (journal), Turkic, Mongolic, Koreanic, Japonic and Tungusic languages can be traced back to the first farmers moving across Northeast Asia from the Early Neolithic onwards, where they split from a common ancestor around the Liaodong Gulf, near Korea, 9000 years ago.
The Liao River Civilization(遼河文明)
Xiaohexi culture 小河西文化 (9,000-8,500 BP)
Xinglongwa culture 興隆窪文化 (8,200-7,400 BP): major Y-DNA N
Zhaobaogou culture 趙宝溝文化 (7,500-6,500 BP): major Y-DNA N
Hongshan culture 紅山文化 (6,500-5,000 BP)·: major Y-DNA N O2 C2
About 5,000-6,000 years ago，Trans-Eurasian Language Separation（Japanese, Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic）：
1，Most of them who remained in the east became Mongolian，Tungusic people
2，O2a+C2+N1a enter the Korean peninsula and Japan
The proto-Koreans started to migrate into the southern Korean Peninsula from Manchuria and northern Korea, where they started to replace and assimilate the previous Japonic-speaking rice-agriculturalists, which arrived earlier in the peninsula.
3，About 4000 years ago, the agricultural ancestors of the Turkic peoples probably migrated westwards into Mongolia and Southern Siberia，form Slab-grave culture（NOCQ）
N1a has been found with greatest frequency among Siberian Turks（The Tuvans，Dolgans，The Yakuts，Yukaghir.....）
4，They expanded west from Mongolia or Manchuria. then formed western empires like the Khazar, Kangar, Kara-Khanid, Seljuq, Timurid, gradually assimilating Western Asian genes(R1az93+J2+G)
The ultimate origin of the Turkic peoples is in Northeast Asia, with their secondary homeland being Mongolia. From Mongolia and southern Siberia the Turkic people expanded and started to dominate large parts of Eurasia.
Your ancestors were never Turkic, but Oghuz (Turkified Indo-Iranian) who assimilated Byzantines (Indo-European)
The real Turks→they don’t have J2 haplogroup
If you analyze DNA analysis together with historical records, things become very clear
Your Anatolian ancestors probably never “met” East Asians，That's the reason why Anatolian don't look like a Central Asian（Kazakhs, Kyrgyzs, Turkmens）
1，the Turkic peoples and Han are of different origins, but have since lived together for a long time and there must be a group of mixed blood.
Han chinese: 70%O+ 12%C2+ 10,3%N1+ 4,2%Q1
Haplogroup O2 is dominant (50%∼60%) in Han Chinese sample
The Turkic peoples overlap considerably with Han Chinese，but the Anatonians haplogroup ratio [O2a 0%]
in a similar way
Modern Koreans and Janpanese are suggested to be the descendants of a prehistoric group of people from Siberia
According to Orkhon Monuments/Inscriptions，Turkic regard Goguryeo as their “blood brothers”
Origin of Koreans: Liao River/Northeast Asia(O2a+N1a+C2) + Korean peninsula natives (O1b2)
O1b2 are the commonest Korean and Janpanese Y-chromosome haplogroup ，but the Anatonians haplogroup ratio [O1b2 0%]
Tungusic people, Proto-Turks, and Mongols genetically are the same origin
Turkish people claim that 80% of the Mongol Army were Turks
but，The majority of Mongolians belong to the y-DNA Haplogroup C2b，O2a，N1a（about 80%-90%）
Genetically, Manchu exhibit roughly equal frequencies of the Y-DNA haplogroups N1a（formerly N1c）, O2a and C2 (formerly C3).
It is noteworthy that the Han Chinese made a distinction between Xiongnu (including Turkic and Mongolic people) from more western nomadic barbarians such as Wusun or Saka. They described the Wusun and Saka as strange looking barbarians with ice eyes (blue eyes) and red/blonde hair, resembling monkeys/macaques. They noted no special difference between Xiongnu and Han, except they “barbarian lifestyle”.
Similarly, Turkic people were described by Chinese historians, and later Muslim writers as possessing East Asian physiognomy.
Some western Turkic groups were described to have blonde/red hair but distinctly different from the other western barbarians which share this characteristics. → This suggests mixed ancestry, with Turkic people having assimilated Saka/Wusun like groups.
As a result of Turkic peoples （NOCQ） expansion, Turks who were a primarily East Asian peoples moved out of the Eastern Kazakhstan/Western Mongolian and into Central Asia
These Turkic peoples began to assimilate with the Iranic locals of Central Asia. Thats why today Central Asian have this caucasian/oriental phenotype.
The Central Asian genetic makeup is a composition of early Iranic peoples and later Turkic arrivals. Mainly Uzbeks, Turkmens, Tajiks, Uyghurs posses varying ratios of this Turkic-Iranic admixture
As the Oghuz Turk peoples (who are now a mix of Turkic and Iranic) expanded into the Iranian plateau under the Seljuk Empire and eventually migrated further west into Asia Minor.
First, the Turks assimilated some Indo-Iranian speakers (Saka, Scythians, Sogdians......)，Shaped the Eurasian race (Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Turkmens)
Then,these Turkified Indo-Iranian speakers entered Anatolia, killed and assimilated the Byzantines (Indo-European speakers/ Anatonians，Armenians, Greeks.....）
Now, lots of Anatonians worshiped their “turkic dad ”and slaughtered their blood brothers.....What irony!
None of the languages of Neolithic North east Asia survived to this day, modern day Mongolic, Tungusic japonic and Koreanic all formed at the start of the Bronze Age under heavy steppe (Turkic and indo European) influence, while each have some remnant elements of their previous local culture. O1b2 and O2a doesn’t link to any surviving languages, while c2a might be the original speaker of dene languages, n1a might be the steppe people that finally destroyed north East Asian Neolithic with mass migration, but none of them are the original Turkic they just adopted Turkic or similar steppe culture/ languages.
@@lupsastta90None of the languages of Neolithic North.....？？？Didn't I already write it!
About 5,000-6,000 years ago，Trans-Eurasian Language Separation
The Northeast Asian entered Korea and formed the early Korean language
They assimilated the Korean peninsula native O1b2
About 4000 years ago, the Northeast Asian probably migrated westwards into Mongolia and Southern Siberia，form Slab-grave culture（Proto-Turkic）
O1b2 and O2a doesn’t link to any surviving languages
wrong，Tibetans have two major haplogroup - D1 and O2a
Han people don't have D1, they only have O2a
O2a and its subclades are related to the spread of Sino-Tibetan speaker
N1a, Q1, C2 also appeared in the northern Han haplogroups
Haplogroup N1a, found mainly among Uralic speakers today, did originated in the Manchurian Neolithic, together with other subclades of haplogroup N, it would explain that Uralic languages are related to Altaic languages like Turkic and Mongolic languages and, more distantly also Korean, Japanese and Ainu
1，First East Asian-related wave=Paleo-Siberians and Ancestral Native Americans (Yeniseian and others).（Q1）
Yeniseian theories→Xiongnu→Q1a1a1a-M120+Q1b
2，Second East Asian-related wave=Neo-Siberians (Uralic and Yukaghir).（N1a）
Genetically, Yukaghirs exhibit roughly equal frequencies of the Y-DNA haplogroups N1a, Q1, and C2 (formerly C3）
N1a2b-P43
N1a-L1034
Third East Asian-related wave=Ancient Northeast Asians (Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic).（N1a，C2，O2a）
Trans-Eurasian Language→Turkic theories/Mongolic theories
Alexander Vovin argues that at least parts of the Xiongnu, possibly its core or ruling class, spoke a Yeniseian language.Positing a higher degree of similarity of Xiongnu to Yeniseian as compared to Turkic
This conclusion has primarily been drawn from the analysis of preserved Xiongnu texts in the form of Chinese characters.
It has been further suggested that the Yeniseian-speaking Xiongnu elite underwent a language shift to Turkic while migrating westward or
The Turkic people probably replaced Yeniseian-speaker
In short，NCO replaces Q1 (Yenisei speakers/Xiongnu) → rapidly expands → absorbs and assimilates Rz93
Wake up to reality kiddo😂
In the classical Persian literary tradition - the entire vocabulary of which consists of stock phrases and images - "Turk' and 'Tajik' are stand-in terms for easily recognizable social stereotypes: one simple but violent; the other wily but civilized. Rūmi turns this on its head, however, in the following couplet: Attack upon attack came the darkness of night/Be strong like a Turk, not soft like a Tajik' (Yek hamleh va yek hamleh, āmad shab va tārīkī/chosti kon va "Torki' kon, na narmī va ‘Tājīkī'). Often ‘Turk' was also used to refer to the poet's beautiful young (unattainable) beloved, as in the following lines from Sa'di: 'Maybe they'll tell the King/"Your Turk (i.e., your Beloved) has spilled Tajik blood" (Shayad ke be padshah begüyand/Tork-e tö berikht khūn-e Tājīk), or elsewhere, 'Show your Tajik face, not Abyssinian black/That the Heavens may obliterate the face of the Turks' (Ru-ye Tājīkāna-t benmā, tā dagh-e habash/ Asman chehre-ye Torkān yaghma'i keshad).
Since Turkic men often ‘married up’ and started families with Tajik women, the bloodlines tended to become increasingly mixed over the generations. (Recent DNA studies in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan have shown no notable genetic difference between modern Uzbeks and Tajiks.) And since children typically spent their first years within the harem, the influence of Tajik mothers in constructing the identity of their mixed-race children was surely much greater than is admitted in the patriarchal written sources of the time. Military figures in particular often made much of their tough Turkic heritage, even as they sought to demonstrate their own cultivation by speaking Persian
and patronizing Persian courtly culture. The Tajik scribes, for their part, were
naturally required to flatter their patrons, but they flattered themselves as well
in whatever subtle ways they could.
- Richard Foltz, Chapter 4, Tajiks and Turks, The Turk-Tajik symbiosis
The number of nomads of Turkic origin that migrated to Anatolia is a matter of discussion. According to Ibn Sa'id al-Maghribi, there were 200,000 Turkmen tents in Denizli and its surrounding areas, 30,000 in Bolu and its surrounding areas, and 100,000 in Kastamonu and its surrounding areas.[25][26]According to a Latin source, at the end of the 12th century, there were 100,000 nomadic tents in the regions of Denizli and Isparta.[27]
According to Ottoman tax archives, in modern-day Anatolia, in the provinces of Anatolia, Karaman, Dulkadir and Rûm, there were about 872,610 households in the 1520s and 1530s; 160,564 of those households were nomadic, and the remainder were sedentary. Of the four provinces, Anatolia (which does not include the whole of geographic Anatolia but only its western and some of its northwestern parts) had the largest nomadic population with 77,268 households. Between 1570 and 1580, 220,217 households of the overall 1,360,474 households in the four provinces were nomadic, which means that at least 20% of Anatolia was still nomadic in the 16th century. The province of Anatolia, which had the largest nomadic population with 77,268 households, saw an increase of its nomadic population to 116,219 households in those years.[28]
Intermarriage between Turks and Greek, Armenian and Georgian natives of Anatolia was not unheard of, although the majority of these unions were between Turkish men and Christian women. The children of these unions, known as 'Mixovarvaroi', were raised as Turks and were of the Muslim faith (although there were some cases of Mixovarvaroi defecting to the Byzantines). It is likely that these unions played a role in the eventual diminishment of the Christian population in Anatolia and its transition from Greek/Christian to Turkish/Muslim. [24]
Vryonis Jr, Speros (1971). The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century. California: Berkeley University Press. p. 176.
We have grave fron Hunnu! Before 2000 year china call Mongols Barbarians or Huns!!!! 100 💯 procent Mongols grandfathers!!! Even we have about 10000 Grave from Hunnus!!!! Genetic sager att Hunnu genetic 95 procent today Mongols 😊😊😊😊😊
You guys still trying to steal our Mongolian history 😂
Hun Türk
Hun is the Mongols but that time there were no name as a Mongol
False
@@Lord_Genghis_Khan you are faker, remove your name chinghis if you are not Mongol
Huns and Mongols and Turks were East Asian nomads from Northern China, they pretty much looked the same, until they mixed with other nations.
@@halaldunya918 dude Huns aint a different people their language has been confirmed to be archaic turkic. Mongolian on tungusic language are a lot different than Turkic. Plus Turks didnt originate in eastern asia but more likely to be around caspian sea during sintashta andronovo periods and yeah its not succesor of yamnaya culture so these arent indo european. Neither afanesievo is indo european. Old soviet altaic theory is just false japanese koreans tungus mongols and turks didnt differ from common ancestors but Turkic language is %30 similiar to the uralic languages rather mongolian. Q is mongol tungusic haplogroup and R1a Z93 is confirmed to be Turkic which is seen in samara - sintashta - andronovo cultures. Sintashta is predecessed by Fatnoyovo-Belonovo which came from Samara's succesor Khvalynsk and Corded Ware culture. You can just follow the y DNA gene flow to see where Turks originated. Kurgan hypothesis for indo europeans is just racist and white supremacist. No indo european ever did kurgans Elshanka Samara Khvalynsk did and teached the caucasian hunter gatherers who are real proto indo europeans of south caucasia which eventually mixed with R haplogroup carrier Northern Eurasian Hunter Gatherers. Caucasian hunter gatherers just had J and G haplogroups. Indo europeans originally didnt have this. Southern Arc 2023 proves that Yamnaya isnt the first indo european culture but a mix between caucasian and northern eurasian hunter gatherers which Proto Turks were also from north eurasian hunter gatherers R haplogroup carriers. Thats why Bashkir and other many turkic people has this haplogroup today. Mongols today has C3 haplogroup
@@halaldunya918 All the hunnic names like Touman Motun Bagatur Attila Rugila Dengizik are archaic turkic names. Hunnic scripts has been found in both todays chinese lands and syria and scripts are very distinctly old turkic even they are written in proto orkhon scripts. ''Süke Talıkang Bokukgı Tutang'' found during asian xiongnu empire and ''Ig Kenç Apa Kurçik, sal arangı enç uga'' found during western hunnic invasions. Apa Kurçik was a commander of Balamir Khan and he was ordered to invade middle east and Huns just left a script there both statements can be translated to turkic.
“Eastern Turkic”-Xiongnu/Xianbei/Rouran/Mongolian/Manchu people（Qing）, Ydna N1aO2aC2bQ1+R1a form the Altaic language family（About 5000 years ago - 10000 years ago）
“Western Turkic”-Eurasian - They look like Chinese-Russian mixed race
The common Y-DNA haplogroups in Turkic peoples are
1，Haplogroup N-M231 (found with especially high frequency among Turkic peoples living in present-day Russia)
2，Haplogroup C-M217 (especially in Central Asia and, in particular, Kazakhstan)
3，Haplogroup Q-M242 (especially in Southern Siberia and among Turkmens and the Qangly tribe of Kazakhs)
4，Haplogroup O-M175 (especially among Turkic peoples living in present-day China and the Naiman tribe of Kazakhs).
Some groups also have Haplogroup R1aJD....
N - Uralic people/Yakuts
O - Korean，Japanese，Chinese
C2-Mongolian + Tungusic peoples
Q-Native American
Mongoloid race（80%-90%NOCDQ）：
1，Turkic：Tuvans，Kazakh，Dolgans，Yukaghir people
2，Paleo-Siberian：Chukchi people
3，Mongolic languages：Buryats，mongolian，Kalmyks
4，Northern Tungusic：Evenks，Evens，Oroqen
5，East Asian：Manchu，Xibe，Chinese, Korean，Japanese，Tibetan
6， Eskimo-Aleut：Inuit，Yeniseian people
7，Ural-Turkic people：Nenets people，Nganasan people，Yakut
Martine Robbeets suggests that the Turkic peoples were descended from a Transeurasian agricultural community
based in northeast China, which is to be associated with the Xinglongwa culture（Y-DNA: N1a ） and the succeeding Hongshan culture（Y-DNA: N1a O2a C2b）
The East Asian agricultural origin of the Turkic peoples has been corroborated in multiple recent studies.
Around 2,200 BC, due to the desertification of northeast China, the agricultural ancestors of the Turkic peoples probably migrated westwards into Mongolia, where they adopted a pastoral lifestyle.
Linguistic and genetic evidence strongly suggest an early presence of Turkic peoples in eastern Mongolia
The genetic evidence suggests that the Turkification of Central Asia was carried out by East Asian dominant minorities migrating out of Mongolia. The exact location of the homeland of the Turkic peoples and languages cannot be adequately concluded, but must have been somewhere within the areas of the "Northeast Asian gene pool"
The main migration of Turkic peoples occurred between the 6th and 11th centuries, when they spread across most of Central Asia. The Turkic peoples slowly replaced and assimilated the previous Iranian-speaking locals, turning the population of Central Asia from largely Iranian into primarily of East Asian descent
mixed race：NOCQ+JGER1a
1，Kazakhs, Kyrgyz
2，Uzbeks，Uighurs
казахи
1, C2 (50.85%), O2 (10.82%), N (5.33%), Q (3.17%), D (0.46%)
2. R (12.13%), J (8.19%), G (4.95%), E (1.78%)
Восточная Азия→70.63%NOCDQ
киргизы
1，C-M130 (33,1%), N1b-P43 (12,1%), O-M175 (3,7%), , Q-M242 (1,2%)
2，R1a1a-M198 (42,1%),R1b1b1-M73 (3,3%), G-M201 (1,2%).
Восточная Азияn→50.1%NOCQ
узбеки
1,C2b1(12.2%)，O2(2.7%)，N1c(5.4%)，O1b（1.4%），Q1a（5.4%）
2,R1a-Z93（27%）, R1b1(8.3%), R2（2.7%），J2（13,6 %）.........
Восточная Азияn→27.1NOCQ
уйгуры
уйгуры имеют 60 % европейских генов и 40 % восточноазиатских
A study based on paternal DNA (2005) shows West Eurasian haplogroups (J and R) in Uyghurs make up 65% to 70% and East Asian haplogroups (C, N, D and O) 30% to 35%
Anatonian, Azerbaijanis J2，Arabs J1
haplogroups R1a - R1a1a1b1 (Slavs) + R1a1a1b2（Z93） (Iranians, Brahmins, Pashtuns）
L. C3 doesn't even appear in Mongolia until Xiongnu. Before that R1b R1a and Q and N are found, then J1 and J2 and only then does C3 appear. Most of the haplogroups of ancient Turks are J2 R1a R1b Q1
@@SteppeWisdom According to the results published by Nature (journal), Turkic, Mongolic, Koreanic, Japonic and Tungusic languages can be traced back to the first farmers moving across Northeast Asia from the Early Neolithic onwards, where they split from a common ancestor around the Liaodong Gulf, near Korea, 9000 years ago.
The Liao River Civilization(遼河文明)
Xiaohexi culture 小河西文化 (9,000-8,500 BP)
Xinglongwa culture 興隆窪文化 (8,200-7,400 BP): major Y-DNA N
Zhaobaogou culture 趙宝溝文化 (7,500-6,500 BP): major Y-DNA N
Hongshan culture 紅山文化 (6,500-5,000 BP)·: major Y-DNA N O2 C2
About 5,000-6,000 years ago，Trans-Eurasian Language Separation（Japanese, Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic）：
1，Most of them who remained in the east became Mongolian，Tungusic people
2，O2a+C2+N1a enter the Korean peninsula and Japan
The proto-Koreans started to migrate into the southern Korean Peninsula from Manchuria and northern Korea, where they started to replace and assimilate the previous Japonic-speaking rice-agriculturalists, which arrived earlier in the peninsula.
3，About 4000 years ago, the agricultural ancestors of the Turkic peoples probably migrated westwards into Mongolia and Southern Siberia，form Slab-grave culture（NOCQ）
N1a has been found with greatest frequency among Siberian Turks（The Tuvans，Dolgans，The Yakuts，Yukaghir.....）
4，They expanded west from Mongolia or Manchuria. then formed western empires like the Khazar, Kangar, Kara-Khanid, Seljuq, Timurid, gradually assimilating Western Asian genes(R1az93+J2+G)
The ultimate origin of the Turkic peoples is in Northeast Asia, with their secondary homeland being Mongolia. From Mongolia and southern Siberia the Turkic people expanded and started to dominate large parts of Eurasia.
Your ancestors were never Turkic, but Oghuz (Turkified Indo-Iranian) who assimilated Byzantines (Indo-European)
The real Turks→they don’t have J2 haplogroup
If you analyze DNA analysis together with historical records, things become very clear
Your Anatolian ancestors probably never “met” East Asians，That's the reason why Anatolian don't look like a Central Asian（Kazakhs, Kyrgyzs, Turkmens）
1，the Turkic peoples and Han are of different origins, but have since lived together for a long time and there must be a group of mixed blood.
Han chinese: 70%O+ 12%C2+ 10,3%N1+ 4,2%Q1
Haplogroup O2 is dominant (50%∼60%) in Han Chinese sample
The Turkic peoples overlap considerably with Han Chinese，but the Anatonians haplogroup ratio [O2a 0%]
in a similar way
Modern Koreans and Janpanese are suggested to be the descendants of a prehistoric group of people from Siberia
According to Orkhon Monuments/Inscriptions，Turkic regard Goguryeo as their “blood brothers”
Origin of Koreans: Liao River/Northeast Asia(O2a+N1a+C2) + Korean peninsula natives (O1b2)
O1b2 are the commonest Korean and Janpanese Y-chromosome haplogroup ，but the Anatonians haplogroup ratio [O1b2 0%]
Tungusic people, Proto-Turks, and Mongols genetically are the same origin
Turkish people claim that 80% of the Mongol Army were Turks
but，The majority of Mongolians belong to the y-DNA Haplogroup C2b，O2a，N1a（about 80%-90%）
Genetically, Manchu exhibit roughly equal frequencies of the Y-DNA haplogroups N1a（formerly N1c）, O2a and C2 (formerly C3).
It is noteworthy that the Han Chinese made a distinction between Xiongnu (including Turkic and Mongolic people) from more western nomadic barbarians such as Wusun or Saka. They described the Wusun and Saka as strange looking barbarians with ice eyes (blue eyes) and red/blonde hair, resembling monkeys/macaques. They noted no special difference between Xiongnu and Han, except they “barbarian lifestyle”.
Similarly, Turkic people were described by Chinese historians, and later Muslim writers as possessing East Asian physiognomy.
Some western Turkic groups were described to have blonde/red hair but distinctly different from the other western barbarians which share this characteristics. → This suggests mixed ancestry, with Turkic people having assimilated Saka/Wusun like groups.
@@SteppeWisdom
As a result of Turkic peoples （NOCQ） expansion, Turks who were a primarily East Asian peoples moved out of the Eastern Kazakhstan/Western Mongolian and into Central Asia
These Turkic peoples began to assimilate with the Iranic locals of Central Asia. Thats why today Central Asian have this caucasian/oriental phenotype.
The Central Asian genetic makeup is a composition of early Iranic peoples and later Turkic arrivals. Mainly Uzbeks, Turkmens, Tajiks, Uyghurs posses varying ratios of this Turkic-Iranic admixture
As the Oghuz Turk peoples (who are now a mix of Turkic and Iranic) expanded into the Iranian plateau under the Seljuk Empire and eventually migrated further west into Asia Minor.
First, the Turks assimilated some Indo-Iranian speakers (Saka, Scythians, Sogdians......)，Shaped the Eurasian race (Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Turkmens)
Then,these Turkified Indo-Iranian speakers entered Anatolia, killed and assimilated the Byzantines (Indo-European speakers/ Anatonians，Armenians, Greeks.....）
Now, lots of Anatonians worshiped their “turkic dad ”and slaughtered their blood brothers.....What irony!
NOCQ
They are related to Japanese Korean Mongolian speakers
R1az93+R1bM73
They are related to Indo-Europeans speakers（Eastern European Steppes）
J2？？Quite a few ancient Mediterranean and Middle Eastern civilisations flourished in territories where J2 lineages were preponderant. This is the case of the Hattians, the Hurrians，the Elamites...
@@夜行者-s2x first of all there were NO TURKIC people 9000 years ago
Secondly the Nature journal is from 2018 and has outdated data
My data is from Jeong et Al 2020
Thirdly even if going by the Liao theory it makes no sense as all the earliest civilizations that can be linked to Turks such as Xiongnue have a dominance of haplogroups J1 J2a R1a R1b Q1 not of C3 O or N1.
C3 doesn’t even appear on the territory of Mongolia until Xiongnu. Even the slab grave culture were all Q1
Your East Asian theory fell flat on its face and you’re a CCP bot
Steppe confederations were not united based on language, but on culture, a common nomadic lifestyle. So all the steppe tribes were Hun/Xiongnu. Likewise, in the Turk era all the steppe tribes from the Caspian to Manchuria were Turk - regardless of their language. Same in the time of the Uyghurs and Mongols. Of course we can discuss what language the Xiongnu leading tribe spoke, but overall the Xiongnu were a multilingual confederation.
All? Nonsense and easily disproven.
All the steppe tribes that were a part of the confederation, of course...@@maximus3160
Why do you keep pronouncing Xiongnu as "Tsiongnu"? The X is a simple Sh sound.
Because it's the way Chinese writes it
Xiongnu = Hun .. They are Turkic-Mongol (Altaic) union, like the other Khanates in this region. Iranic?? Are you crazy? A Persian couldn't even have sustain 1 week there. Bu Dangalakları değil, Konu üzerin'de ciddi bilimsel çalışmalar yapan, Prof. Ahmet Taşağıl'ı dinleyin. Hun'lar Türk'tür..
iranic? LMAO
no.
Yes 😀 hahaH
So far I've always thought the Name "White huns" meant that they we're related to the huns. You've given me a lot to think about
Glad you found the video interesting :)
Well you're not wrong the Hepthalites, Kiderites, Huna, European Huns, Xiognu, aswell as the Tokhara Yabgus, Turk shahis and Nisu Huns are all related by originating from the same area originally which is the proto Turkic homeland of Altai.
Another interesting mention is the Xionites or Xioni which is pronounced very similair to Chunni from the Göktürk letters to the byzantines about the Pseudo Avars being Turkic and de ending from the Chunni and Var Oghuric Tribes.. Which is almost identical to Khingila the founder of the Hepthalites unifying the Uar and Xioni(tes) and creating the Hepthalite state.
land locked.. easy-peasy,agry-bagry,hocus-pocus
land locked.. easy-peasy,agry-bagry,hocus-pocus
I believe they were buryat and yakut lead hunnu. Core warrior were mongol and Turks. By the way the Kazakh and Kyrgyz don’t care about hunnu
They care
@@ЖанараЖанар-ь1ь nah they don’t. Barely any mention of it
@@Willxdiana bro are you from kazakhstan
@@barguttobed they release a new video on Golden Horde dna. Looks like modern Mongolian dna
@@Willxdiana Of course cause we are their direct descendants
Multi ethnic, multi linguistic empire
Recently, it has been proven that the dominant language was Mongolian. Many Mongolian deer stone scripts now have been decodified and read and confirmed that many words, grammars are complete match with the modern Mongolian language. Therefore the ruling class was Mongolians, not turks.
The history of the Gaoju is given in the respective entry in WS 103 + (pp. 2505-2508); until the beginning of Text 1.056/B it is extracted as follows.
高車,蓋古赤狄之餘種也初號為狄歷,北方以為敕勒,諸夏以為高車、丁零。 其語略與匈奴同而時有小異,或云其先匈奴之也。
The Gaoju are probably the remaining tribes of the ancient Chidi [lit. 'the red Di']. Initially they were called Dili. People in the north called them Chile, whereas people in China proper called them Gaoju or Dingling.
Their language is roughly the same as that of the Xiongnu but at times has minor differences from that. Some say that their ancestors were the nephew of [i.e. indirectly related to] the Xiongnu.
Nice pseudo history though
@PAPAZA TAKLA ATTIRAN İMAM Mongolians spoke, speak, and will be speaking forever Mongolian language in their homeland Mongolia 🇲🇳 .
How the hell Iranic people doing in Central Asia.
indo europeans peoples originated at modern day southern russia (northern caucasus) and eastern ukraine. Later, the proto indo europeans started to migrate elsewhere, to the west and east. The west branch went deeply into Europe, forming most of today’s european languages. The eastern branch, except the tocharians, settled at central asia, known as indo-iranians. They split into two groups -indo-aryans and iranians, who then invaded the iranian plateau and Indian subcontinent. So, there were many iranic speakers located at central asia, mostly scythians, sogdians and bactrians, who were replaced by the turkic speakers after the gorturk invasion
The Scythian Iranians gave you Buddhism, my friend in Central Asia, their respect
@@عليياسر-ذ5ب The Indian Emperor Ashoka was the first to spread Buddhism not Scythians. Also, Tibetan monks were the ones who spread it all over East Asia. The only religion that actually spread by word and not by sword.
@@kagar3465 He was one of the Scythians, and these people invaded the Indian continent, my friend, because the Huns and the Uighurs expelled the Iranian Scythians from Central Asia and from western Mongolia
@@kagar3465 And the Scythians are very racist people. It is true that they spread Buddhism in India, China and Southeast Asia, but they enslaved the indigenous Indians and made the caste system. The symbols of the Scythians were the Nazi flag and the dragon
1) Etymology of polytonym/dynastonym/hydronym Xiōngnú:
(匈奴) Modern Chinese: xiōngnú < Old Chinese: *hoŋ-nâ Mongolic: *hoŋa "hole"
(匈河) Modern Chinese: xiōnghé < Old Chinese: *hoŋ-gai < Mongolic: *hoŋgai "hole"
(忽倪) Modern Chinese: hūní < Middle Chinese: *xoŋɛi < Mongolic: *hoŋai "hole"
(渾義) Modern Chinese: húnyì < Middle Chinese: *hon-ngi < Mongolic: *hoŋgi "hole"
(黄河) Modern Chinese: huánghé < Old Chinese: *gwâŋ-gâi < Mongolic: *hoŋgai "hole"
*hoŋgai ~ *hoŋai ~ *hoŋa ~ *hoŋi ~ *hoŋ ~ *hoŋgi are earlier pronunciations of Ongi (Mongolian hydronym), the Pre-Proto-Mongolic forms can be reconstructed as *poŋgai ~ *poŋai ~ *poŋa ~ *poŋi ~ *poŋ ~ *poŋgi.
*hoŋai > Greek: Χωναι
*hoŋa > Sanskrit: Hūṇa, Avestan: Xyaona, Khotanese: Huna
*hoŋi > Old Turkic: Hoŋï
*hoŋ > Sogdian: Xwn, Armenian: Hon, Pahlavi: Xyōn, Syriac: Hun, Khorezmian: Hūn
Some other Mongolic borrowings that i found (from late form *oŋgi):
Kazakh: ұңғы "hole""
Evenki: унги "hole"
Manchurian: unngin "hole"
2) Etymology of endonym Hú from Xiōngnú/Hoŋa warriors:
(胡) Modern Chinese: hú < Old Chinese: *gâ < Mongolic: *ka
(奚) Modern Chinese: xī < Middle Chinese: *ghei < Mongolic: *kai
*kai ~ *ka was an endonym of many Mongolic peoples, like Kumo Xi (*kumak kai), Donghu (Eastern *ka) etc.
(kai in some Modern Mongolic dialects means snake/dragon, so for me it seems related to ethnonym *abar "creeping, snake, worm" and words *mokai "snake", *koro-kai "worm". The semantics is still being discussed in linguistics)
3) The Xiōngnú/Hoŋa belonged to Proto-Mongolic archeological Slab-Grave culture as the Donghu. Mongoloid Xiōngnú have the autosomal similarity to Mongoloid Avars and modern Mongolics (Caucasoid Xiōngnú of course close to old and modern Iranians).
4) When the Xiōngnú/Hoŋa or Hú/Ka conquered (Dene-Yeniseian as Tlingit or less likely Indo-European?) Dinglings and the Turkic Yeniseian Kirgiz (Gekun) in 201 BC later were formed Tiele people (tribe of Kalmyks, Buryats). The ethnonym Tiele/Tegreg was etymologized by Mongolic word: *tegreg "cart" (dialectal metathesized form of *tergeg "cart" < *tergen < *ter- "to run" + *-gen "verbal noun/adjective and particle suffix") > Old Chinese: /*tʰet̚ lək̚/ > Modern Chinese: /tiě lè/ (鐵勒). Another recorded metathesized Mongolic ethnonym is Tabghach /tabɣatʃ/ from earlier Mongolic: *taxbac "land ruler".
Khalkha: тэрэг (ᠲᠡᠷᠭᠡ), тэргэг "cart" (from form *tergeg)
Kalmyk: тегрн "cart" (from form *tegren)
(the changes of ending /n/ > /g/ also had lexemes: *ayiran > *ayirag; *ayiman > *ayimag, *kimuran > *kimurag)
Some tribes of Tegregs still had Mongolic names as Sirs (< *sir "yellow" dialectal form of *sïra) and Kurykans (< *kurigan "lamby" < *kuri "lamb" + *-gan "diminutive and animal suffix"). Some names/surnames of Tiele chiefs as Gésà/Qasar (葛薩) were etymologized by Mongolic *hasar "dog" (PPM form *pasar). The Yakut branch (the potential descendant of Turkic-Kurykan language) has the biggest Mongolic lexical substrate, more than Sayan branch (the potential descendant of Turkic-Chick language). So in simple facts the Xiōngnú/Hoŋa were using Mongolic lexicon, belonged to PM archeological culture, were autosomally related to modern Mongolics.
P. S. Chicks (𐰲𐰃𐰚 /tʃik/) were native Dene-Yeniseian tribe of Tuva, later they were Turkified. Name comes from DE word cik "swan" (maybe that's why we have Tuvan clan куулар "swans" and Altay ку-кижи "swan people" an alternative endonym of Chelkans, and Altay hydronym лебедь/куу "swan").
Kurykan means "tent" in Old Turkic and its stem is coming from kur- verb which means stretch, dry originally and build in later uses. In Old Turkic inscriptions there are people called as "Üç Kurykan" which literally means "three tents" and similar to other uses like oghuz (clans), oba (tent camp), oghur (lir Turkic version of oghuz).
Alsa kasar, kazar is clearly Turkic either from verb stems kas- (stretch) or kez- (wander) and it means either stretcher/archer or wanderer. Your Mongolic etymologies are very far fetched.
@@batuhanyldz5102 1) Tent tribe of Buryats/Daurs/Uriankhais and Yakuts, very dope but senseless and not semantically related to Oghur. Peter Golden's etymology is better.
2) These mostly are not my ideas, i saw some etymological studies from Mongolic and Turkic linguists, i just corrected some reconstructions and reconstructed PPM forms:
(Christopher P. Atwood) *xoŋai > *hoŋai (+ PPM *poŋai)
The "Turkic" Qasar was a name of Mongolic Temujin's young brother (i know some Turkoids believe that he was Turkic khan)
I didn't say anything about Buryat/Daur/Uriankhai union, I just told you that in Orkhon inscriptions there's a people called Three Kurykans and kurykan is a Turkic word with a very obvious etymology.
Peter Golden is not omnipotent or omniscience, because when he builds a connection with the word lamb, he clearly forgets the word "kuri" in Mongolian is "kuzu" in Turkic. But there's still a word, named kurykan and it's used for tents. It also remains widely used and if you know just a little bit about rhota/zeta sound change rules of Common Turkic, you would understand why this is quite obvious.
I'm not a Turkoid who claims Genghis Khan is Turkish either. But I can clearly say that both his personal name Temujin after a killed Tatar warlord comes from Turkic "temürçi - blacksmith" and his regnal name Chinggis comes from Turkic "tengiz - sea." So I wouldn't surprise his brother's name has also a Turkic root. It doesn't make Borjigins Turkic, just like using Persian names doesn't make Seljuks Persian.
@@batuhanyldz5102 1) Blah-blah-blah "Turkic" temür is a Chinese loanword in Altaic sprachbund (鐵物 /*diēr-mwur/), teŋgir/z also can be a Sinism if it comes from Chinese root teŋ- "equal, balance" (theonyms can become hydronyms). Historical Tatars were Mongolic like their polytonym *tartar "pennant" (was a name of some Rouran/Nirun ruler, analogically Nogai-khan > polytonym Nogais, Uzbek-khan > polytonym Uzbeks) > Khalkha: дадар (seems a cognate to word дарцаг "pennant"), so name Temujin was taken from Mongolic-speaking Tatar as *temürcin.
2) Mongolic etymology still better, we know the tribe Kuri in Muslim sources.
@@aboba5995 source = Trustmebro😂
Chanyu is Y Haplogroup R1a,from Gol Mod grand tomb,Quite different from today stepps,Han dynasty made sure the death of them
Evasive and dishonest "facts" presented here. Over 80% of the genetic samples collected from the bones of Xiongnu graves are matching with present-day Mongolian population, not the Turkic populations of somewhere. Yes, some minority is matching actually Iranian and Turkic populations. Second, the so-called Turkic tribes then (like Ashina) and now are actually Mongolic tribes who adopted the Turkic language. Without complicating the facts. To that matter, 'Ashino' means 'Chono' (Wolf) in Mongolic languages. Nevertheless, the answer to the final question in the video could be the following: Nothing so mysterious or to be discussed: It is increasingly being proven that The Xiongnu masses were Mongolic tribes unified with Iranians populations, like the Dinglings. (Dinglings were Indo-Europeans with Tagar culture, not Turkic or Tungusic as previously presumed).
@3:57 map; Vietnam history of Viet "Yue". Viet "Yue" is confederate 15 alliance states depicts in "Dong Son" drum and we identify ourselves as Viet people . Before Han dynasty expansion there are 15 Viet states and called as Bach Viet "Many Viet states alliance". The only Viet state still exists "Vietnam" is because they able to withstand by many Chinese, Mogolian, and Manchurian dynasty invasions. Chinese history did not mentioned other Viet states because those history got burn down, wipe out, etc. and force these Viet states people to assimilate to each new dynasty. Here is a few differences, Vietnam language is adjective after noun, our king can only have 1 wife, women are highly value, and no artifacts or sacrifice human/animal in the grave. Why Vietnam has many women warrior leaders because our culture value women highly. "Viet Nam" is two words meaning Viet in the south. What sad is we lost a great amount of history of others 14 states their languages, cultures, kings, flags, etc. FYI...Cantonese-Chinese folks today were part of Viet 15 states back then. Viet "Viet Nam" since Kings era is always signify with yellow color background and never red color background flag like today.
Xiongnu -----> Huns -----> Turks
Xianbei ------> Rouran---> Mongols
Nope
@@papazataklaattiranimam why ? This is the closest simplification of the origins of the Turks and Mongols to reality
@@krimozaki9494 how about something that is not pseudo history?
@@papazataklaattiranimam do you have this thing ?
@@krimozaki9494 do some academic research about Para-Mongolic
THE GREAT TURKIC EMPIRE'S
Xiongnu royalty were most likely yeniseian with the nobility being majority turkic and some proto mongolic tribes. The vassal tribes that were subjugated to the xiongnu was most likely iranic and uralic tribes as they expanded out of mongolia and into central asia.
Хунну были скорее протомонголами как по мне и среди "алтайских" (языковой *негенетический* союз тюркского, монгольского, уральского, тунгусского) и иранских языков нету значимого числа енисейской лексики кстати (критикую), а доминирующий антропологический тип хунну монголоидный, а не европеоидный как у енисейцев.
1) Этимология хунну:
(匈河) новокит. xiōnghé < древнекит. *hoŋ-gai < монгольский *hoŋgai "онги"
(匈奴) новокит. xiōngnú < древнекит. *hoŋ-nâ < монгольский *hoŋa "онги"
1. Читал этимологические исследования Christopher'а Pratt'а Atwood'а что хунну это изначально название династии происходящей от монгольского гидронима Онги (собственно название монгол произошло от старого тунгусского гидронима Мангу, на территории Амура. Среди тунгусов есть племя мангуни, кстати).
Онги на монгольском означает отверстие, связанно с глаголом онгил- "делать дыру". Интересно что у чингис-хана Тэмуджина, приписывающего себя к хунну личная тамга именовалась "онги".
2. Я искал индоевропейскую, тюркского этимологию хунну, но ничего убедительного пока не нашёл.
2) После завоеваний енисейских киргизов и динлинов, появилась конфедерация телэ, тут как раз этимология названия:
(鐵勒) новокит. tiělè < древнекит. /tʰet̚ lək̚/ < монгольский *tegreg "телега" < *tegren. Хотя и есть версия с тюркским *tegereg "коло, колесо" она не фонетична и вроде семантически несовпадающая с кит. иероглифами.
3) Тегрегские племена это орхонские уйгуры, курыканы, сиры и т. д., хочу упомянуть о этимологических, этнических связах с монголами.
1. Якутские языки (по всей видимости потомки курыканского языка) имеют сильный монгольский субстрат, а их этноним может быть этимологизирован как монг. *kurigan "ягненок" < *kuri "ягня" + *-gan "ласкательный суффикс". Курыканы являются предками бурят и якуто-долган.
2. Орхонские уйгуры имели этнические связи с (пара)монгольскими тобасцами (их язык определи на основе кит. источников). Потомки орхонских уйгуров это современные югуры, югуры сейчас говорят на монгольском (шира-югурский) и тюркском (сарыг-югурский), что как бы странно для "тюрков", да и состав племён югуров в основном монгольский по моим наблюдениям (хотя и имеются киргизские/хакасские племена), а генетически они близки к халха, бурятам, калмыкам.
Название орхоно-уйгурской династии яглакар "помазанник" стало прототипом монгольского названия племени джалаир.
Название уйгур (точнее *oygur) стало прототип монгольского названия ойрат (*oyiran "ойрат" < *oygiran "уйгуры" < *oygir "уйгур" < *ōy "масть")
(Мой уточняющий комментарий лексема *ōy сохранилась только в тувинском и хакасском, она обозначает в языках вроде буланую и мышастую масть из прочитанных мною российских материалов. *-gur это суффикс для цветов, а *-an это коллективный/множественный суффикс. По Питеру Голдену название киргиз возможно происходит от тюркского *kï̄r "чалый" + *-gïŕ "суффикс цвета" > *kï̄rgïŕ "чаловатый" > *kï̄rgïz, вот так примерно работает суффикс для цветов)
3. Этноним сиров (скорее всего предшественники кипчаков) по всей видимости связан с монгольским словом *sir "жёлтый" (когнат слову шира, как у югур) от сюда племя сары-кипчак (*sarï перевод *sir), по другой версии Питера Голдена происходит от санскритского श्री шри/śrī "удача". Но всё же моя версия более фонетически схожая c 𐰾𐰃𐰼 /sir/ как в орхонских памятниках, чем шри.
@@aboba5995 Speak in english
The history of the Gaoju is given in the respective entry in WS 103 + (pp. 2505-2508); until the beginning of Text 1.056/B it is extracted as follows.
高車,蓋古赤狄之餘種也初號為狄歷,北方以為敕勒,諸夏以為高車、丁零。 其語略與匈奴同而時有小異,或云其先匈奴之也。
The Gaoju are probably the remaining tribes of the ancient Chidi [lit. 'the red Di']. Initially they were called Dili. People in the north called them Chile, whereas people in China proper called them Gaoju or Dingling.
Their language is roughly the same as that of the Xiongnu but at times has minor differences from that. Some say that their ancestors were the nephew of [i.e. indirectly related to] the Xiongnu.
Their language is related to Tiele, how they could be non-Turkic you blockhead😂
The opposite is true. Horse Culture and iron technology spread from the Indo-Europeans to the ancient Turks and Mongols. If you see murals of proto-Turkic VIPs in history and coins with ancient Turkic VIPs, they look either European, or Iranic, not East Asian.
Rubbish. Xiongnu did not have its own written language. Everything written about Xiongnu are from Chinese and Roman sources. Xiongnu was a Mongolic people, and the ancestors of the mongols in the medieval period and the Mongolians of today. Tungustic language is the same as the Mongolian language, came from the Khitan language, which was adopted by the Jurchens/Manchu people.
Until nowadays, most of these Central Asian countries (All the Stans except Tadjikistan 🇹🇯 who’s Iranian, the Kazakhs, the Kirghiz, the Özbek, the Türkmen are all Turkic people) even though still in Russia Federation in Sibirya, the Sakhas, the Yakut, the Khakas are Turkic people still shamanist for some of them but mostly converted to Russian Orthodox Church and in Russian Caucasus Mountain, many Turkic people like Avars, Karatchaï, Tatars, Karakalpaks, Balkhars are Turkic and Muslim like their ethnic cousins of Modern day Turkish Secular Republic
The Mongols' claims in this regard have no basis. It is obvious that Xoingnu is Turkic and they speak Turkic.
It is Hunnu. Hunnu is Mongol ancestors. It has nothing to do with today's people who called themselves Turkish. Today Turkish people has no DNA connection nor cultural connection with Hunnu. Enough already. Hun mean Human, even before Hunnu there is other Mongol ancestors call them selves Bida ( means we, or ours) . The name Mongol also mean We are, or Ours.
Its east Iranian, pushtoon
Oh hell no
Turkic Kazakh kazakhstan