Are modern Iranians not descended fully or at all from ancient Iranians...

Are modern Iranians not descended fully or at all from ancient Iranians? Persians/Parthians/Scythians/Afghans/Sogdians/Tocharians/Medes etc are often described in classical history as having fiery red hair, blue/green eyes, blonde hair, etc. There are some remnants of these like you see in Kurds, Kalash, Pashtuns, Nuristanis, Persians (often isolated populations or rare snowflakes).

Did the Arabs and Eurasian/Mongol Turks really genetically fuck them up that bad, or are there other cases of migration and displacement?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_history_of_Egypt
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domba
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dom_people
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doms
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_people
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garachi
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyuli
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghorbati
science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6298/499
latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-first-farmers-dna-20160714-snap-story.html
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/6256173/Mahmoud-Ahmadinejad-revealed-to-have-Jewish-past.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Use your head

What you're positing would be around 80,000 Arab soldiers somehow completely displacing and replacing a settled Iranian population of about 30 million people

Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is

Persians were ruled by foreigners for 1000+ years so it is likely

Even In Turkey east asian admixture is miniscule, and they look far more like a greek or armenian than like a krygz or uighur.

More than likely that the migrant populations were very tiny compared to locals, and they were asimilated into them.

Hardly. They interbreed with the arabs, fucking their own shit up.

Y-you're a fucking idiot, OP.

Occasional anecdotal descriptions of one-off nobles or persons of interest including "muh Aryan" traits isn't ground for a blanket extrapolation of the appearance of the dozens of millions of inhabitants an entire region.

Arabs are more pure Caucasoid than modern or erstwhile Persians from any region, and definitely more so than Pashtuns and many of the other groups you name, as well. Mongols didn't contribute much to the stock of South Asia/Near East as far as I know, either.

You're a glaringly obvious /pol/tard and, guess what, have to go back! Hope you enjoyed your stay.

No modern people are fully descended from any ancient people. There is always admixture. But sure, modern Iranians are more descended from ancient Persians than anyone else is.

>arabs

and the mongols and turks

during tamerlane conquest alone there were about 8-20 million death tolls

Lets see
>first the Macedonians that burnt down their capital and killed a bunch
>then the Parthians that killed a bunch
>then the Roman wars that razed their capital
>then the Sassanids that killed a bunch
>then the Justinian plague that is said to have killed almost 50% of the entire population around Mesopotamia
>then came the Arabs that massacred some cities that didn't surrender like Estakhr while women and children were used for ficki ficki
>then the turkic Ghaznavids and after that the Seljuk turks that were more lenient, but still killed their fair share and ficki ficki'd
>and then the turkic Khwarezmids that I am sure killed off a bunch of people and ficki ficki'd also
>followed by the Mongols that killed 25% of the entire population, that was already deluted by arab, persian and superior turkic genes
>then came Timur's slumber party that is said to have killed around 17 million people in the area while emptying villages
>follwed by the Safavids, Qajars bla bla bla bla
Yeah, modern persians are basically arab mongrels in denial with a fair bit of superior turkic genes at this point.

Yeah, but Turks are just the Chinamen that were too lazy and stupid for China

>M-muh /pol/ boogieman

As said, Mongol and Turk conquest alone caused pretty substantial changes to the ethnic makeup of Iran through sheer death toll.

30 million was the population of Persia in the 5th century BC, by the time the Arabs invaded it was probably around 150 million.

But yeah, people are dumb. Modern Iranians are more or less the same people as ancient Persians.

No it isn't you retardo. Having a foreign ruling class is a whole different thing from having a foreign population. Just look at Egypt or England.

>implying death is the same as race-mixing

It would seem so to you, wouldn't it, /pol/tard? You're out of your depth here; go back to debating pornography with your circle-jerk echo chamber and leave the real anthropology to real anthropologists.

>/pol/ boogieman

"Superior" and "Turkic" don't go well together, I'm afraid.

Why bother our Xiongnu bretheren to the East when you had a "all you can ficki ficki" buffet to the West that is the easiest conquerable land to grab since the Abbasids wanted to run Islam and each conquest follows with a "how to make your own Persianate state" starter kit?

>ancient Persian mummies have light hair and haplotypes of Europeans
>ancient texts from Greeks describe Persians as having light features
>Persians speak Indo-European dialect
>Remains of other Iranian populations dug up all have light features/hair

>"muh Aryan"
Iran literally means Aryan.

>>then the Sassanids that killed a bunch
>follwed by the Safavids, Qajars bla bla bla bla
Those were natives persians

>150 million

Jesus Christ how dumb can you be. Modern Iran isn't even close to that, and that's with modern medicine.

But they still killed a bunch of their own people.

Also this paper mentions alot of Koyunlu's Turkmen dynasties during the Safavid era I ain't even gonna read into.
Sheeit, at this point we might aswell call you Turkey.

Thanks for bringing me up to speed bro, been binge-reading Wikipedia tonight?

Before you simplistically tell me more shit everyone on Veeky Forums already knows, let me tell you that the vast majority of citizens under Aechemenid Persia had black hair, brown eyes, and tan skin.

Keep denying though! WE WUZ!!!!

Well, congratulations on not bringing up a single reasonable argument and just being a condescending dick. You sure showed me. Better run off to your anthropology class, they'll miss you.

>Are modern Iranians not

How am I supposed to answer this? I don't know how you'll interpret my answer. Please refrain from using double negatives.

Yes.

Why does nobody ever cite primary sources on Veeky Forums?

Wait a minute, this paper mentions a region called Gilan in Northern Iran bordering the Caspian sea.

That....yes, apparently the Gilites and Deylamites withstood the Arab conquest and even wrecked their shit to create their own dynasty and later withstood the different Turkic rulers (or atleast played along and paid tribute).
It also mention that the Mongols didn't manage to conquer it at first or even after the ilkhanate was established cause of the terrain and suffering heavy losses.
And then the Safavids came to conquer the areas, so there might be some traces in those folks I guess of this "ancient persian" meme phenotype since they survived the slumber parties.

>any kind of population change means they were originally white scandinavian aryans until the evil somalian-arab camel archers came in
>this is somehow related to /pol/ and must be brought up

Why are people so unwilling to admit populations change? It seems very reasonable to believe that after several massive invasions from the east and west that caused such mass death; they would have a little of the invader added in them each time. Look around the world, there are no static, unchanging populations, they have found people that look like mongols and greeks in Afghanistan. There are even traces of the Dutch being absorbed into Taiwan from a past colony being taken over by the Ming.

I mean imagine droit du seigneur or some designated rape mercenary army coming through. A good quote for this is by Stalin at the end of WWII, "understand it if a soldier who has crossed thousands of kilometres through blood and fire and death has fun with a woman or takes some trifle."

because it's mostly shitposting

Because genetics and common sense say no

>It seems very reasonable (for me)

Great argument.

one sentence epic meme guys you really showed me

I specifically said "A LITTLE of the invader added in them".

just you wait for that one buttblasted iranian diaspora OP i can feel it

Look at autosomal DNA plots. Iranians are nowhere near Arabs or Mongols.

Light features are a result of ambient temperature. For example, Azeris are autosomally Iranians but tend to be fairer, but they are the same race as other Iranians. Race is not skin-deep. Check image and google some images of Azeris -- many of which have blue eyes and blonde hair.

Iranians are still the same as ancient times. I believe the Indo-Iranians were also racially North Caucasus, hence the Ossetians can be a good proxy for Indo-Iranians.

Iranians are in an intermediary position between North Caucasians and Mesopotamians (like Assyrians), which fits well within the narrative of our history.

Only autosomal DNA matters.

Haplogroups just give you ideas on migration of different groups of people (e.g., mtDNA for maternal migration and yDNA for paternal migration), but autosomal DNA gives you a better idea of current race since it's inherited from all of our great grandparents.

Paternal haplogroup doesn't actually mean much though. Can only be reliable up to your great grandfather or something. This is because the Y chromosome mutates easily. The maternal haplogroup literally does go all the way back, but it is still a worse marker of race compared to autosomal DNA.

>shitskin
>dark hair
>dark eyes
They're arabic rape babies.

>Persians/Parthians/Scythians/Afghans/Sogdians/Tocharians/Medes etc are often described in classical history as having fiery red hair, blue/green eyes, blonde hair, etc.

Like where?
Scythians, Sarmatians and other Iranic peoples inhabiting eastern Europe not withstanding.

Persians are still the same as what they once were. Dark hair and dark eyes were common amongst both the Assyrians and Persians. Pic is of a Persian at Persepolis.

The Sasanid empire was reaaaaally really big.

Original Iranians were like people from Tehran. The center moved to Persepolis and they became mixed witn mesopotamians

Iran, as a nation, was created by the mixture of North Caucasians and Mesopotamians.

We are not mixed with Arabs.

>ruled by foreigners for 1000+ years
No they weren't.

>Macedonians.
Married and intermixed with Iranians. Wrong so far.
>Parthians
Iranian, also didn't kill anything Iranian or Iranic.
>Roman wars
Nope.
>razed their capital
Doesn't reflect nation populations.
>Sassanids killed a bunch
Lies.
>Justinian plague
Only killed about half the population in WESTERN Persia.
>Arabs that massacred some cities
Wrong.
>women and children
Place tell me how fucking a few thousand of Iranian women by less then 40,000 Arabs will have significant genetic impact on a population over 30 to 50 million people.
>Ghaznavids
>Khwarmazians
>Seljuks
Persianized, that's when your cockroach kind started to look like humans and less like mongoloids.
>Mongols that killed 25% of the population
Put up hard proof that isn't a certain Persian historian's bullshit.
>Timurlane
See above.
>Safavids
They killed Turks.
>Qajars
They killed other Turks.
You basically suck at shitposting.

>They stilled a bunch of their own people.
Killing Goturks, Arabs, and Romans isn't their own people. : ^ )

Dark hair isn't that common in northern or northeast Iran; lighter brown hair is more common in those regions.
Like in Eurasia and Central Asia; hell they found a bunch of Persian mummies in eastern Iran about a decade ago dating from between the late Parthian to early Sassanid periods of silver and ore miners with dirty brown and red hair.

>Dark hair isn't that common in northern or northeast Iran; lighter brown hair is more common in those regions.
I know, read what I am saying here:

Azerbaijani Azeris are very swarthy people. Also outside of Tabriz, you'll find most Iranian Azeris in Central Iran like in Rasht or Tehran. And almost all ethnic Iranians living in those regions tend to be fairer skinned.

My mom is from Mashhad and her family is much lighter then her relatives who live in Shiraz.

The point is: light features are a result of ambient temperature. I think only a few genes select for depigmentation, right?

The last thing Iran needs is to be Balkanized based off retarded light skin supremacy.

I look fair too, but my cousin is fairer. He is tall, dirty blonde, and green eyed.

Europe was created from Yamnaya hunter-gatherers meeting and mixing with the Anatolian Neolithic farmers, and likewise, Iran was formed from Indo-Iranians (who were autosomally North Caucasoid and not IE hunter-gatherers) mixing with Mesopotamians.

Pic is of the mayor of Tehran btw.

Iran is fine the way it is. It doesn't need to "Balkanize" at all.

Not all Aryan tribes are from Iran. Some were living in Eastern Europe and likely incorporated (what would become) Slavic peoples.

Talking about Aryan people in persia and arabic migrations somehow changing their genepool from blonde herrenfolk into shitskins; that's just silly weewuzing

Weren't arab migrations pretty much just into syria, levant, iraq, and part of egypt?

> Iran was formed from Indo-Iranians (who were autosomally North Caucasoid and not IE hunter-gatherers)
Proofs?

>Persians/Parthians/Scythians/Afghans/Sogdians/Tocharians/Medes etc are often described in classical history as having fiery red hair, blue/green eyes, blonde hair, etc
He says with no source

ok I lie, his source is probably /pol/

Most of the "they were ruled by foreigners so they're all just rapebabies" is bullshit.

your pic looks 100% arab though

>Azerbaijani Azeris

As someone who knows an Azeri and has seen all of his extended family, I can tell you they are typically quite pale and black-haired with brown eyes.

As someone who has Azeris friends, I can tell you that the average Azeri wildly varies in complexion from fair to swarthy as much as any other Iranian ethnicity does.

Even most of Iraq, it was other Semitics or Iranians who assimilated into the Arabic language rather then genetically or racially intermixing. All of central Iraq was more or less part of traditional Persian homestead lands in particular for over 2000 years when the Arabs showed up.
No he doesn't.

>LIES, LIES, WRONG, waaaah doesn't fit my agenda
Great counter arguments, mongrel.

And for a nation filled with muslims (but still digusting shia's) you fail to realize that women back then were nothing more than cattle and your average man could have up to 10-15 persian sows to ficki ficki with and breed lots of mongrels.

That's not Arabic physiognomy .

...

percent of modern Egyptian genetic marker resembles largely ancient Egyptians we were not replaced with arabs though they remain an element
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_history_of_Egypt

good post

Short answer no, somewhere along they way they go sandniggerified and there's a genetic input from Caucasus to which they now cluster with more closely.

Tocharians weren't Iranians, they formed their own group.

Wrong. See:

>Those in the Steppes of Central Asia or parts of Russia that were heavily wiped out if not assimilated by Turkic invaders who followed
Also this has zero to do with Iranians who still exist as a dominant ethnic group in Iran, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan. So if you had phrased your post as: "Somewhere along the way those in Central Asia and Russian territory got wiped out and assimilated by repeated invading waves of migratory Turkic peoples and the Mongols so they got TURKIFIED, you'd be right. But in the Caucasus region, Greater Iran, Mesopotamia, and Levant, the Turks are the one who got assimilated in turn.

Also none of what you posted has anything to do with modern day Iranians in said lands that aren't the Steppes.

>your pic looks 100% arab though
GTFO.

Ossetians are descendants of the Alan people. I think they're a decent proxy of the Indo-Iranians. Iran was formed from Indo-Iranians uniting with other native Mesoptamians, hence why Iranians are in an intermediary position between North Caucasoids and Mesopotamian on autosomal DNA plots.

It's kind of like how Europe was formed from Yamnaya Hunter-Gatherers mixing with Neolithic Anatolian farmers. Check image.

PIE descendants traveled south (Andronovo) and came into the area of Iran. The founders were indeed Andronovo stock and fair. They mixed with native Elamites (Dravids), Semites, and assorted Veddoids of the territory that is now Iran.

Later, Mongoloids, more Semites, and more Veddoids did their migrations and contributed to modern Iranians.

tl;dr Iran was populated by dark people before light and fair Andronovo conquered them and applied the IE stylez

Maybe, but since they're the ethnic continuation with language, identity, abd sometimes religion, it doesn't really matter to anthropology.
They're absolutely the continuation of ancient Iranics.

Iran was only populated in that far Southwest by the small state/empire of the Elamites. It was populated by no other people on the plateau, which is the other reason why the various Iranian and Iranic tribes populated and spread out so quickly within 300 or 400 years becoming the dominant ethnic group in Iran.

>Dravids
Elamites have no relation to Dravidians and they disappeared after the fall of the Neo Elamite Empire's destruction and the rise of the Median and Achaemenid Empires by the early 5th century BC.
>Semites
Never happened.
>assorted Vddoids
Never happened. You're making things up now.
>Mongoloids
Got assimilated and never made a genetic impact on Iranian genepool at any point, still wrong here.
>more Semites
Still didn't happen.
>and more Veddoids
Never happened. Stop lying and talking out of your ass. Veddoids/Dravidians have never lived beyond the sub-Indian continent.

I think i agree with this guy.
Rape babies is rape babies

Nice (You)

this

>self-hating Veddoid "Iranian"


The Dravidian Brahui population of Balochistan are a relict Dravid population, indicating that Dravidian languages were formerly much more widespread and were supplanted by the incoming Indo-Aryan languages.[57][58][59]
According to David McAlpin, the Dravidian languages were brought to India by immigration into India from Elam, located in present-day southwestern Iran..[5][42] According to Renfrew and Cavalli-Sforza, Proto-Dravidian was brought to India by farmers from the Iranian part of the Fertile Crescent.[43][4][44][note 1] According to Mikhail Andronov, Dravidian languages were brought to India at the beginning of the third millennium BCE.[6]

Kivisild et al. (1999) note that "a small fraction of the 'Caucasoid-specific' mtDNA lineages found in Indian populations can be ascribed to a relatively recent admixture."[45] at ca. 9,300 ± 3,000 years before present,[46] which coincides with "the arrival to India of cereals domesticated in the fertile Crescent" and "lends credence to the suggested linguistic connection between Elamite and Dravidic populations".[46]

According to Gallego Romero et al. (2011), their research on lactose tolerance in India suggests that "the west Eurasian genetic contribution identified by Reich et al. (2009) principally reflects gene flow from Iran and the Middle East."[47]

According to Romero, this suggests that "the most common lactose tolerance mutation made a two-way migration out of the Middle East less than 10,000 years ago. While the mutation spread across Europe, another explorer must have brought the mutation eastward to India – likely traveling along the coast of the Persian Gulf where other pockets of the same mutation have been found."[48]

According to Palanichamy et al. (2015), "The presence of mtDNA haplogroups (HV14 and U1a) and Y-chromosome haplogroup (L1) in Dravidian populations indicates the spread of the Dravidian language into India from west Asia."

>40,000 Arabs will have significant genetic impact on a population over 30 to 50 million people.
Iran had 50 million people in the 7th century? What? Where iranian women being buried in Y shaped coffins?

>100% FinnoSlavic Iranian no Veddoid
>no ancient and recent Veddoid mixture


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domba
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dom_people
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doms
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_people
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garachi
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyuli
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghorbati


The world-wide used name for Gypsies to identify themselves is the term “Rrom”,[3] which in the Romani language means a man. The words Rom, Dom and Lom are used to describe Romani peoples who diverged in the 6th century, related to the Domba people of India.

The Romani, Dom, Lom originated in India and arrived in Persia, then Europe, around 1,000 years ago,[56]

Romani existence and permanence in Persia of have been largely assimilated, despite the strong loss of culture brought about by fragmentation and geographical dispersion.

Besides Romani of Persia, there are numerous Veddoid peoples including Zargari, Dom, Garachi, Lyuli, Ghorbati. Another group of Dom origin in Iran are the Lori, who are found in the Baloch regions of southeast Iran.

>Iran was only populated in that far Southwest by the small state/empire of the Elamites. It was populated by no other people on the plateau
We sequenced Early Neolithic genomes from the Zagros region of Iran (eastern Fertile Crescent), where some of the earliest evidence for farming is found, and identify a previously uncharacterized population that is neither ancestral to the first European farmers nor has contributed substantially to the ancestry of modern Europeans. These people are estimated to have separated from Early Neolithic farmers in Anatolia some 46,000 to 77,000 years ago and show affinities to modern-day South Asian populations, but particularly to Iranian Zoroastrians. We conclude that multiple, genetically differentiated hunter-gatherer populations adopted farming in southwestern Asia, that components of pre-Neolithic population structure were preserved as farming spread into neighboring regions, and that the Zagros region was the cradle of eastward expansion.


science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6298/499
After arising between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers some 10,000 to 12,000 years ago, farming spread northwest from Mesopotamia into Anatolia (present-day Turkey) and then into Europe, southern Asia, the Arabian peninsula and north Africa.

Although the Zagros people clearly knew a thing or two about farming, it appears they didn’t carry that knowledge out of the Fertile Crescent.

The people who lived in Anatolia during the Neolithic period were descendants of an entirely different genetic group, the researchers found, much to their surprise. They estimated that the ancestors of the Anatolians and the Zagros people split from each other between 46,000 and 77,000 years ago, according to the study.

latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-first-farmers-dna-20160714-snap-story.html

Yes it does.

>Iranian semites
Assyrians, Arabs, Babylonians, Jews have been present in Iran for eons

the majority assimilated to become modern Iranians

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/6256173/Mahmoud-Ahmadinejad-revealed-to-have-Jewish-past.html

>Ahmadinejad-revealed-to-have-Jewish-past
oy vey

...

The Assyrian presence in Iran goes back 4000 years to ancient times, and Assyria was involved in the history of Ancient Iran even before the arrival of the modern Iranian peoples to the region circa 1000 BC. During the Old Assyrian Empire (c.2025-1750 BC) and Middle Assyrian Empire (1365-1020 BC) the Assyrians ruled over parts of Pre-Iranic northern and western Iran. The Neo-Assyrian Empire (911-605 BC) saw Assyria conquer the Iranic Persians, Medes, Manneans and Parthians into their empire, together with the ancient pre-Iranic Elamites, Kassites, Manneans and Gutians, and also the Iranic Cimmerians of Asia Minor and Scythians of the Caucasus.[10] The home of the Assyrians in Iran has traditionally been along the western shore of Lake Urmia from the Salmas area to the Urmia plain

>not autosomal DNA plots
Nice (You) again.

So riddle me this: If Iranians are Dravidians and Semites, why does almost every autosomal DNA test carried out on the region match Iranians with Anatolian Turks and South Caucasus people?

>Where iranian women being buried in Y shaped coffins?

I know rape is your fantasy Abdul, but at least provide sources for your shitposting on this board.

>The Neo-Assyrian Empire (911-605 BC) saw Assyria conquer the Iranic Persians, Medes, Manneans and Parthians into their empire, together with the ancient pre-Iranic Elamites, Kassites, Manneans and Gutians, and also the Iranic Cimmerians of Asia Minor and Scythians of the Caucasus

No, a simple google search shows that Assyrians made it as far east as Urmia, Ectabana, and Susa, Persia (Pars) was farther eastward, and Media included all of historic Azarbaijan and modern day Gilan.

They never even made it as far as the Caucasus, the Armenian kingdom of Utartu they conquered was primarily located in modern day Eastern Turkey (aka West Armenia) as well as today's province of West Azerbaijan in Iran (the Urmia region).

They didn't even come close to reaching the Caspian, so I don't know why you included the Parthians in this.