PDA

View Full Version : Tocharians


Raven
12-02-2010, 03:37 AM
Three things:

1. Tocharians were loaded with r1b, unlike the Indo-Europeans who followed them who were r1a
2. Tocharians had textiles identical to Celtic textiles
3. Tocharian hats are almost identical to Hungarian, Romanian, Moldovan & Balkan folk hats

Tocharian mummy:

http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/Elbruss/2-7.jpg

Hungarians:

http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/Elbruss/3-4.jpg

Romanians:

http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/Elbruss/5-3.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/2iudmif.jpg

Racialinspector
12-02-2010, 07:30 AM
1. Tocharians were loaded with r1b, unlike the Indo-Europeans who followed them who were r1a

Source. This has been claimed numerous times but never proven.

3. Tocharian hats are almost identical to Hungarian, Romanian, Moldovan & Balkan folk hats

Ok.

Raven
12-02-2010, 08:28 PM
Source. This has been claimed numerous times but never proven.


UG = Uygur

http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/Elbruss/hg.png

http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf

Also there was a study posted back on HBF about this, but I can't seem to find it now, maybe someone can link it?

So the R1a in Uighurs most likely came much later from the Turkic speaking nomads, but the R1b & J is a total mystery. My guess would be Tocharians came from around modern Armenia, because that's the only place you can find R1b + J living side by side, but still, Armenians aren't very red haired like the Chinese claimed the Tarim Basin people were. Also not only did Tocharians precede the Andronovo people by almost a thousand years, they also had different clothing, styles of burial & not a single horse was found buried in any Tocharian grave, not even jewelry depicting horses, none of that. Afanasevo people were obsessed with horses, so that rules out any connection between the two.

Raven
12-05-2010, 08:41 AM
Bump.

Polako
12-05-2010, 08:48 AM
The R1b in modern Uygurs is not of European origin, and most likely has nothing to do with the Tocharians. It's Asian-specific, and likely Turkic.

Also, the only ancient DNA results to date from the Tarim Basin show only R1a, as far as Y-DNA is concerned, accompanied by both European and Asian mtDNA lineages.

Raven
12-05-2010, 08:56 AM
The R1b in modern Uygurs is not of European origin

Well, all R1b is ultimatley not of European origin, remember, it probably originated in Anatolia, the Iranian plateau or the south Caucasus, somewhere around there.

and most likely has nothing to do with the Tocharians. It's Asian-specific, and likely Turkic.

That's debatable.

Also, the only ancient DNA results to date from the Tarim Basin show only R1a

Not suprising at all, the Tarim Basin is not that far from the R1a urheimat in northern India. ;)

Ponto
12-05-2010, 09:09 AM
Until the Tocharians are tested, those mummies had teeth in their desiccated gobs, and the dna is tested from those teeth, none of us will know what Y chromosome haplogroups those Tocharian mummy men had. It is worth remembering that only the top dogs of the Tocharians, and the "Kurganites" ended up in well preserved states after burial. The general run of the mill Tocharians or Scythians were not given such lavish after death treatment, so only a minority of their populations, those of the elite are preserved enough to dna test.

The Indo-European speakers of the Bronze Age in Europe practiced cremation, as is the norm among Hindu Indians today. It is unlikely any remains of those people can be tested to obtain dna. The two peoples, the Indo-European speakers and the Kurgan builders practised different funerary traditions. The Tocharians practiced inhumation.

dsong2006
12-05-2010, 09:39 AM
Comparing textile and hats is not a legitimate way of analyzing Tocharians. I think people are stringing together random pieces of information and interpreting them together in a way they want to interpret it. Tocharians and/or Yuezhi's have been in the Tarim Basin and W. Gansu since 1800B.C. way way way before there was a tribe called the Magyars or a state called the Romania. Also the similarities in textile weave pattern could just mean that such patterns were much older than the Celtics and have been around with the before the different Indo-European groups split apart. The presence of R1a proves the same. Since it is found in people from S. Asia, C. Asia and Siberia, we can infer that it is the marker of the early Indo-Europeans from their original homeland before splitting of R1a. Uyghurs carry R1b from the Turkic admixture and R1a from Tocharian admixture and together with other haplotypes combine to make them roughly 50/50 west and east Eurasian.

Partizan
12-05-2010, 09:47 AM
I agree with Nistru,Tocharians were closer to Celtic people than Indo-Iranians...Some of "blond Uyghur girl" pics I saw look similar to Irish or Scottish,just more Mongoloid version :lol:

Polako
12-05-2010, 11:01 AM
Well, all R1b is ultimatley not of European origin, remember, it probably originated in Anatolia, the Iranian plateau or the south Caucasus, somewhere around there.

Many R1b lineages are of European origin.

That's debatable.

No, it's a fact.

A major Y-chromosome haplogroup R1b Holocene era founder effect in Central and Western Europe (http://secher.bernard.free.fr/Articles/R1b_Myres.pdf)

Not suprising at all, the Tarim Basin is not that far from the R1a urheimat in northern India.

Yeah, and that's why there were no Indian specific mtDNA lineags found there, only a H lineage straight from Central Europe.

Polako
12-05-2010, 11:06 AM
The Indo-European speakers of the Bronze Age in Europe practiced cremation, as is the norm among Hindu Indians today. It is unlikely any remains of those people can be tested to obtain dna. The two peoples, the Indo-European speakers and the Kurgan builders practised different funerary traditions. The Tocharians practiced inhumation.

Which Indo-European speakers of the Bronze Age in Europe practiced cremation?

You mean the late Iron Age of course, when the kurgan cultures in Europe were no more, except for the Scytho-Sarmatians, the last kurganoid culture.

David Noi
12-05-2010, 05:07 PM
Which Indo-European speakers of the Bronze Age in Europe practiced cremation?

type in google.com, enter cremation Bronze Age in Europe

You mean the late Iron Age of course, when the kurgan cultures in Europe were no more, except for the Scytho-Sarmatians, the last kurganoid culture.


type in google.com, enter Western Baltic Kurgan culture

and learn more about the origin of the relative high percentage of R1a1 in todays Poland and adjoining regions

Raven
12-08-2010, 11:01 AM
Yeah, and that's why there were no Indian specific mtDNA lineags found there, only a H lineage straight from Central Europe.

Haplogroup H is found at a frequency of 10% in India. :)

Anyways, I think it's much more realistic to assume that R1a1a arrived in Central Asia directly from India rather than traveling all the way from Poland, which sounds more like Hitler's wet dream. The Indian sub-continent has always been densley populated & most likely what happened was similar to the Roma ethnogenesis... A group of people were expelled and forced to wander until they re-settled in Eastern Europe.

The Modern studies for R1a1 (M17) suggest that it could have originated in South Asia. It could have found its way initially from Western India (Gujarat) through Pakistan and Kashmir, then via Central Asia and Russia, before finally coming to Europe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmin#Brahmin_and_genetic_communities

Raven
12-08-2010, 11:19 AM
Comparing textile and hats is not a legitimate way of analyzing Tocharians.


The archaeological evidence is very limited when dealing with these people, so you have to work with what's available, which isn't much.


The presence of R1a proves the same. Since it is found in people from S. Asia, C. Asia and Siberia, we can infer that it is the marker of the early Indo-Europeans from their original homeland before splitting of R1a.


The reason R1a is high in central Asia is because R1a originated locally, in south Asia, simple as that.


Uighurs carry R1b from the Turkic admixture and R1a from Tocharian admixture and together with other haplotypes combine to make them roughly 50/50 west and east Eurasian.

& that's yet another mystery, how did R1b end up among those Turkic speakers? :hmm:

David Noi
12-08-2010, 05:20 PM
& that's yet another mystery, how did R1b end up among those Turkic speakers? :hmm:

no mystery at all!

R1b can be found under Tajiks. They are speakers of Iranian language and Iranian language was fairly common in Xinjiang and Central Asia before the Turks became dominant.

Colin Wilson
12-08-2010, 05:31 PM
I think the R1a amongst Uyghurs is from Indo-Iranians such as Sakas and R1b is from Centum Indo-European=>Tocharians
As you know the closest IE branch to Tocharain is the Germanic one and both have some corelation with the hg R1b

Colin Wilson
12-08-2010, 05:33 PM
Like the Anatolian language family, the Tocharian family is extinct; also like Anatolian, Tocharian texts were deciphered in the early 20th century and their study has suggested major changes to theories about early Indo-European (IE) languages. Prominent among these is the fact that Tocharian exhibits some fundamental affinities to the more western language families, such as Celtic, Italic, Hellenic and especially Germanic that distinguish it from the geographically much closer eastern language families, such as Indo-Iranian or even Balto-Slavic.

http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/general/IE.html

T-Dominator
12-08-2010, 05:55 PM
Yenisseian Kyrgyzs (Asiatic Scythians) were a Europid and Kurgan population. They are cause of R-M17 among Kyrgyzs and Uyghurs. Real Kyrgyzs were not mongolid. Turkic R1b is of Tocharian origin of course.

dsong2006
12-08-2010, 06:25 PM
http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/general/IE.html

Its possible that Tocharians split off from other Indo-Europeans before the Satemization process occurred. Or possibly its a Centum group that drifted in the opposite direction of the main group. Isn't Hittite also a Centum language?

Turcomanian
12-08-2010, 06:30 PM
Yenisseian Kyrgyzs (Asiatic Scythians) were a Europid and Kurgan population. They are cause of R-M17 among Kyrgyzs and Uyghurs. Real Kyrgyzs were not mongolid. Turkic R1b is of Tocharian origin of course.

how come real kyrgyz are not real mongoloid?? all of them are also mongoloid

newtoanthropology
12-08-2010, 07:13 PM
Haplogroup H is found at a frequency of 10% in India. :)

Anyways, I think it's much more realistic to assume that R1a1a arrived in Central Asia directly from India rather than traveling all the way from Poland, which sounds more like Hitler's wet dream. The Indian sub-continent has always been densley populated & most likely what happened was similar to the Roma ethnogenesis... A group of people were expelled and forced to wander until they re-settled in Eastern Europe.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmin#Brahmin_and_genetic_communities

Not really. Central Asia is the more likely candidate than India or Eastern Europe.

David Noi
12-08-2010, 08:28 PM
Its possible that Tocharians split off from other Indo-Europeans before the Satemization process occurred. Or possibly its a Centum group that drifted in the opposite direction of the main group. Isn't Hittite also a Centum language?

its not only possible, it is supported by many linguists.

David Noi
12-08-2010, 08:32 PM
Yenisseian Kyrgyzs (Asiatic Scythians) were a Europid and Kurgan population. They are cause of R-M17 among Kyrgyzs and Uyghurs. Real Kyrgyzs were not mongolid. Turkic R1b is of Tocharian origin of course.

the relation of todays Kyrgyz to the Jennisey Kyrgyz is problematic. Some scholars believe that todays Kyrgyz only took over the name of a region.

Colin Wilson
12-09-2010, 09:29 AM
Its possible that Tocharians split off from other Indo-Europeans before the Satemization process occurred. Or possibly its a Centum group that drifted in the opposite direction of the main group. Isn't Hittite also a Centum language?
Hittite is said to have both Satem and Centum features(Greek also has both satem and centum features, albeit the satem words proportion and the parallel features that go with it are very minor contrarily to hittite), besides Satem/Centum distinction is only 1 of the various and very complexly overlapping IE isoglosses, for example Greek despite being Centum is more akin to Armenian and Indo-Iranian(shared past construction paterns as well as some shared lexicon that is absent from the other western branches)
Below a table of IE cognates
http://media-1.web.britannica.com/eb-media/85/1985-004-9186FD7D.gif
And below a map of the various IE groupings(please notice the intersection due to unlinear isoglosses)
http://dnghu.org/indoeuropean/indoeuropean_archivos/image005.png


how come real kyrgyz are not real mongoloid?? all of them are also mongoloid
There was also mongoloid huns and caucasoid huns(white huns), yenissey Kirghiz were non Turkic speaking(according to Peter Golden)obscure folk.

David Noi
12-09-2010, 10:05 AM
yenissey Kirghiz were non Turkic speaking(according to Peter Golden)obscure folk.

as far as I remember Peter mentioned that the Jennisej Kyrkyz spoken another language beside Turkic as the ancients Uyghurs and some other ancient "Turks", ie turkicized tribes, did. The Jennisej Kyrkyz probably spoken IE as secondary language beside Turkic. Read more about this topic:

Breaking The Orkhon Tradition: Kirghiz Adherence To The Yenisei Region After A.D 840., by Michael Drompp.

Colin Wilson
12-09-2010, 11:05 AM
Some linguistic stuff about Tocharian-Germanic connection
http://anthrocivitas.net/forum/showthread.php?p=125777#post125777

Hypothesis: Germanic related to Tocharian

An even more interesting finding may be a possible proximity of Proto-Germanic to Proto-Tocharian (Old. Eng : Toch B ~ 65%; German : Toch B ~ 59%). This observation deserves further investigation:

OE. wćter; Toch. A. wär; Toch. B. wer < *wat'er (?) (but Ir.uisce; W. dwr; Gr. hüdo:r; Lith. vanduő)
Goth. swistar; Toch. A. s'ar; Toch. B s'er <*set'er (sister) (the same loss of aspirated intervocalic -t'-)
Goth. weis; Toch. B. wes (we) (also, at least Lith. vedu 'we two' and OCS ve 'we two', but not as 'we' in the phonological form of *weis, and not in the European Centum languages)
Goth. hairto; Toch. B. arańce <*harnte (?) (heart)
Goth. waurts; German Wurzel; Toch. A witsako (root)
German Blatt; Toch. A pält; Toch. B pilta (leaf, blade) (this root is also persistent in the Indo-Iranian branch)
German Stamm 'stem'; Toch. A s.tám; Toch. B stám (tree)
Goth. waurms; Toch. A wal (worm) (but also L. vermis (with a full ending); Gr. rhomos; I. cruimh, Alb. krimb, Pruss. <Girmis>)
Consider also the strong aspiration in t'- which lead to a transformation t' > ts (not necessarily palatalization as normally explained):
Toch. B mácer (mother); Toch. B pacer (father); Toch. B tkácer (daugther); Toch. B. kuce (who)
Tocharian k- finds explanation as a strongly aspirated t' > tk' > k' > k (Apparently, the digraph <tk> as preserved in Toch. A tkam (earth); Toch. A ckácer; Toch. B tkácer marks the result of this aspiration.)
Here's a short lemma that attempts to prove a regular correspondence between Proto-Tocharian *ka- and *tV- in the European Centum languages:
Toch. A kam; Toch. B keme, hence Proto-Toch. *kam < *tham (tooth)
Toch. A kantu; Toch. B kantwo, hence Proto-Toch. *kantwo <*thank'wo (with a metathesis) (tongue)
Toch. A kom.; Toch. B kaum., hence Proto-Toch. *kaum < *thaum (day, sun)
Toch. A tkam.; Toch. B kem., hence Proto-Toch. *kam (tkam) <*tham (earth, cf. Lat. tellus, OIr. ti:r)
Toch. A karke; Toch B kara:k, hence Proto-Toch. *karak < *tharak, *tharakh, *tharah (tree branch)
Toch. A kayurs'; Toch. B kaurs'e, hence Proto-Toch. *kaurs'e < *thaurse (bull, cf. Taurus)
Toch. A kälyt-är;Toch. B kalt-är, hence Proto-Toch. *kalt-ar < *thalt-ar (s-tand) (?)
[Yet, in some other cases we have k < *k:
Toch. A känt; Toch. B kante, hence Proto-Toch. *kente (hundred)
Toch. A kanwem.; Toch. B keni, hence Proto-Toch. *ken- (knees (du.))]
The former process is possible if Proto-Tocharian stops where heavily aspirated, hence *ta > *tha > *hha > *kha > *ka before an open /a/ when the dentals were undergoing allophonic lention. The metathesis in *tankwo occurred precisely under the impact of aspiration, because both *th and kh* were pronounced in a rather similar way at some point, more or less like *hhanhhwo
The Tocharian aspiration reminds of the Grimm's law and the aspiration in the West Germanic languages.
Some of the Grimm's law seems to be already in progress in early Proto-Tocharian, since we have *k > *h > 0 in:
Got. dauhtar; Toch. B tkácer (but Gr. thügáte:r)Got. hairto; Toch. B. arańce <*harnte (?)
Other examples of Germano-Tocharian analogies might include:
A. kumn-äs'; B. känm-as's'äm; Germ. kommen (come) [cf. Skt. gamati "he goes," Avestan jamaiti "goes," Lith. gemu "to be born," Gk. bainein "to go, walk, step," L. venire "to come"), which do not have the same semantic and phonological form as in Germ. and Toch.]
B. s'ayye; Germ. Schaf (sheep) [no known cognates outside Gmc. The more usual IE word for the animal was *ewe.
It should not be particularly surprising that the Proto-Tocharians wandered as far as the Takla-Makan desert - remember that we have a massive Gothic migration to the Crimean peninsula and the rest of the Europe about two thousands of years later. The Indo-Europeans used horses, whereas the vast Ponto-Caspian and Central Asian steppes allowed for distant migrations across Eurasia.
By no means I insist on proto-Tocharian-proto-Germanic unity; at this level that's just a tentative hypothesis, which follows from the data under consideration, but which is rather poorly demonstrated herein.

David Noi
12-09-2010, 01:04 PM
there is no Tocharian-Germanic connection other than both languages represent very ancient IE split-offs. However split-offs of different groups at different times.

BTW I miss the Tocharian and Germanic word for "soap" in the chart above, Menges mentioned.

T-Dominator
12-09-2010, 04:27 PM
There was also mongoloid huns and caucasoid huns(white huns), yenissey Kirghiz were non Turkic speaking(according to Peter Golden)obscure folk.

Chinese sources: "Yenissei Kyrgyzs speak Turkic". They are first people who defined to be Turkic speaker.

David Noi
12-09-2010, 10:18 PM
turkic speakers yes, but largely not of turkic stock. Read Drompp.

David Noi
12-09-2010, 10:22 PM
humayunürüö, I got it:

Kasgari quoted the word sav ... along with śav, a soap containig plant, a plant serving for washing. ... the ultimate source being germanic (cf. the etymological dictionaries by Ernout-Meillet or Kluge) Karl H Menges. The turkic languages and peoples. An introduction to turkic studies.

T-Dominator
12-10-2010, 02:42 PM
turkic speakers yes, but largely not of turkic stock. Read Drompp.

Yes, if you equate "Turkic" to east Siberian folks, your statement is true! But I think of "Turkic" in a way opens to Pannonia.

coolpolitealex
12-10-2010, 04:43 PM
Well, all R1b is ultimatley not of European origin, remember, it probably originated in Anatolia, the Iranian plateau or the south Caucasus, somewhere around there.



That's debatable.



Not suprising at all, the Tarim Basin is not that far from the R1a urheimat in northern India. ;)

Please excuse my coming in, but do you really need to put that face in your posts,as they really are very irritating to me, what is the point, i know it is nothing to do with me, but i am getting over an accident and the sudden appearance ofyour intimidating stare , i mean what is the point of it, but i have no right to tell you what to do ,but i had to mention it in all honesty and if i have scroll down the page and out jumps that stare then i'm sorry it will make my enjoyment absolutely nil' and will feel i have to stop coming, "i MEAN WHAT IS THE POINT OF STARING LIKE THAT ? maybe you don't realise, or you do it on purpose, can you tell which one it is please thank you, oh and sorry must introduce myself , i am Coolpolitealex from London

Partizan
12-10-2010, 05:19 PM
Please excuse my coming in, but do you really need to put that face in your posts,as they really are very irritating to me, what is the point, i know it is nothing to do with me, but i am getting over an accident and the sudden appearance ofyour intimidating stare , i mean what is the point of it, but i have no right to tell you what to do ,but i had to mention it in all honesty and if i have scroll down the page and out jumps that stare then i'm sorry it will make my enjoyment absolutely nil' and will feel i have to stop coming, "i MEAN WHAT IS THE POINT OF STARING LIKE THAT ? maybe you don't realise, or you do it on purpose, can you tell which one it is please thank you, oh and sorry must introduce myself , i am Coolpolitealex from London

Which face you exactly mean?

T-Dominator
12-10-2010, 06:22 PM
Which face you exactly mean?

Is about ;).

Partizan
12-10-2010, 06:31 PM
Is about ;).

I thought the same but it wasn't that as I learned from Nistru :)

David Noi
12-11-2010, 11:27 AM
Yes, if you equate "Turkic" to east Siberian folks, your statement is true! But I think of "Turkic" in a way opens to Pannonia.

there is no doubt, that turkish language and culture originates from the mongoloid tribes of ancient transbaikalia and to the north of Ordos.

T-Dominator
12-11-2010, 11:56 AM
there is no doubt, that turkish language and culture originates from the mongoloid tribes of ancient transbaikalia and to the north of Ordos.

A quote:

In the 2nd millennium B.C., the Pannonici (a European Flavio population, who had written the Vinča signs) used the Flavio 16-letters VUARK alphabet (See my previous book).
Around 1000 B.C., before the Celts would assimilate them, some Pannonici migrated and settled around Dzungaria, in Central Asia. They brought their rovás there, encrypted them, and spread them over a large area, in Asia.
The oldest inscription written in Pannonico VUARK has been found in Central Asia. The inscription has been dated 5th century B.C. and confirms the existence of the rovás at a much earlier date than has so far been believed. This script consists of letters, which existed already in Pannonia in an alphabet of the 14th century B.C. (see my next book) and in the earliest Etruscan and Greek alphabets. The script contains characters and ligatures that would later be used in Southern Chinese and other Asiatic scripts.

The Pannonico Pazyryki, (taken from the name of their common sacred place, in Central Asia) opened the Silk Road, through the Dzungarian Gate, at least 2,500 years ago. They established 'China settlements' along the Silk Road from Loulan (Tarim Basin) to the lower reaches of the Huang He and even in Yunnan, Southern China. They became a rich population. They wore silk clothes, gold juwelry, Celtic style garments, and the same conical headdress that had been in use in Europe before the arrival of the Indo-Europeans. They enjoyed ephedra and they could afford to leave real treasures in their tombs.

You should have doubt about it. :thumbsup:

Colin Wilson
12-11-2010, 01:10 PM
In the 2nd millennium B.C., the Pannonici (a European Flavio population, who had written the Vinča signs) used the Flavio 16-letters VUARK alphabet (See my previous book).
Around 1000 B.C., before the Celts would assimilate them, some Pannonici migrated and settled around Dzungaria, in Central Asia. They brought their rovás there, encrypted them, and spread them over a large area, in Asia.
The oldest inscription written in Pannonico VUARK has been found in Central Asia. The inscription has been dated 5th century B.C. and confirms the existence of the rovás at a much earlier date than has so far been believed. This script consists of letters, which existed already in Pannonia in an alphabet of the 14th century B.C. (see my next book) and in the earliest Etruscan and Greek alphabets. The script contains characters and ligatures that would later be used in Southern Chinese and other Asiatic scripts.

The Pannonico Pazyryki, (taken from the name of their common sacred place, in Central Asia) opened the Silk Road, through the Dzungarian Gate, at least 2,500 years ago. They established 'China settlements' along the Silk Road from Loulan (Tarim Basin) to the lower reaches of the Huang He and even in Yunnan, Southern China. They became a rich population. They wore silk clothes, gold juwelry, Celtic style garments, and the same conical headdress that had been in use in Europe before the arrival of the Indo-Europeans. They enjoyed ephedra and they could afford to leave real treasures in their tombs.

The problem is this theory is not accepted by scholar community due to its many flaws,anachronisms,incompatibilities and the lack of archeological and linguistic evidences.
The Runic scripts derive ultimately from Aramaic and there is no evidence of non indo-european speaking folks in eastern europe, indeed it seems that after LGM eastern Europe was to be repopulated by Asian originated Indo-European speaking tribes.
The ones involved in the silk road trade were Indo-European speaking Tocharians and Sakas, there is no place for Uralic&Altaic speaking folks(where is their genetic input aside from the recently coming north mongoloid component!?)

T-Dominator
12-11-2010, 01:37 PM
The problem is this theory is not accepted by scholar community due to its many flaws,anachronisms,incompatibilities and the lack of archeological and linguistic evidences.
The Runic scripts derive ultimately from Aramaic and there is no evidence of non indo-european speaking folks in eastern europe, indeed it seems that after LGM eastern Europe was to be repopulated by Asian originated Indo-European speaking tribes.
The ones involved in the silk road trade were Indo-European speaking Tocharians and Sakas, there is no place for Uralic&Altaic speaking folks(where is their genetic input aside from the recently coming north mongoloid component!?)

Look, there is not ONE scholar community. Also I quoted some scholars who accepted and quoted this theory.

Some visual evidences:

http://i52.tinypic.com/mawfgm.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/280tddy.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/mj7ifr.jpg

By the way:

Language
• Traces of Hungarian language have been found in the Tarim Basin (G. S. Lane
University of Chicago, USA), Tibet (Körösi Csaba Sandor), Manchuria (James
Xueyuan Zhu, IACD, Korea), Yugria (Khanty, Mansi…). The Ugrian populations
still surviving in Siberia, along the Ob and Yennisey rivers, could be survivors of Pazyryk, Kyzil and of the Minusinsk Basin populations. They fled the Huns
and descended the rivers, when the Huns attacked the region (second half of
the first millennium B.C., A. Herman).
The Indo-Germanists and the Indo-Iranists label the Scythians as “war faring
Indo-Iranian speakers”. As only 5 (five) glossae of Scythian language are
known, this theory is pure Indo-Iranist speculation.

Colin Wilson
12-11-2010, 02:31 PM
Those visual evidences are most likely shared indo-european cultural items because they predate the advancement of uralic speaking magyars into panonia(as you know magyars very lately made their way into present day hungary as late as the 10 th century)

As only 5 (five) glossae of Scythian language are
known, this theory is pure Indo-Iranist speculation.
But all evidences are for Scythians being northeast iranic speakers because of:
-iranic toponomy in the scythian inhabitated areas
-iranic onomastics for the scythian rulers etc...
-scythians borrowings into old persian and other language have iranic etymology
-scythian is said to be related to sarmatian and alanic and those 2 languages wich left much more evidences than scythian are clearly east iranic tongues

T-Dominator
12-11-2010, 02:51 PM
Those visual evidences are most likely shared indo-european cultural items because they predate the advancement of uralic speaking magyars into panonia(as you know magyars very lately made their way into present day hungary as late as the 10 th century)

This standpoint is from 19th century Habsburg school. So, no need to argue.

Raven
12-11-2010, 09:44 PM
Is about ;).

I had a picture of my face on my signature (you can see it in my album) and he got scared !

David Noi
12-21-2010, 02:59 PM
This standpoint is from 19th century Habsburg school. So, no need to argue.

even the worst hungarian fascists wouldn't argue as stupid as you do.

What you call "Habsburg school" are the views of all serious scholars including serious hungarians.

T-Dominator
12-21-2010, 05:34 PM
even the worst hungarian fascists wouldn't argue as stupid as you do.

What you call "Habsburg school" are the views of all serious scholars including serious hungarians.

While you call my arguing style as "stupid", you should be careful. Don't show people your dumb-oid mechanism of thought.

Hungarian historians and others who considered in Habsburg school are damn fossil remnants of 18-20th (first half of) century's cliche comprehension of history.

21st century's history presents new concepts and contexts. Only a dumb-oid SERIOUS fossil can claim Uralicness of Hungarians although Huns have never lived in Urals! :lol: