Scythians

I think there is an active effort that is organized to discredit this whole board.

I remember when information was the key on this website...

Oh late 2000's I wish those times back...

>ancestors to the Kurds
According to Kurds, so were the Medes... and the Gutians, Hittites, and whatever the fuck else they want to delude themselves with. I understand as a stateless people, you need to conjure fake ancestry to bolster your pride, but do stay within the realm of rationality.

>lost their old proud ways of warfare and culture
Right, cause the Sassanids totally weren't a thing.

>unlike the proud Kurds
A stateless people who have lost all their wars against their neighbours. Muh proud ways of warfare.

>Tocharians
>Iranic

They are related to Indo-Iranics but correct, are not quite Indo-Iranics themselves.

What makes you say that turkic and scythian culture is more similar? Their economic background? Would you say that plains indians were turkic too just because they shared similar ways of providing food for themselves despite the fact that this is conditioned by the place you live in more than your cultural heritage? Even the retarded turk is more sensible than you.

The first thing persians learned, even after becoming comfy with their empire, was riding and archery. Were persians turkic too?

They certainly were not one single confederation of tribes. And no confederation called "the scythians" had any turkic element that we can prove. Scythians and turkics only become related when turks are given the scythian name due to geography, like the goths. Or when were see small scythic/iranic elements in later mainly turkic confederations.

>Was Scythians
English is obviously not your first language.
>were actually Persian
No, they were Indo-Iranians, a fellow Iranic people like the Persians, Medes, Parni, Parthians, Sarmatians, Sogdians, etc...
>culture was pretty similar Turkic culture
No. Also being nomadic horsemen on the Steppes doesn't exclusively originate with Turkic/Hunnic/Mongolic peoples. And the Scythians predate them millennia anyway.
>no realy relevance to Persian culture
Well ignoring they spoke a related Iranian language, were an Iranian people, were of the same racial stock, and also shared many cultural and religious beliefs. Or the fact that archery, horsemanship, and combat were instilled in Persians and Medes since they were young boys as soon as they could walk. Sure let's say they have nothing in common with Persians and Medes at the time and are entirely related to Turkics who were busy shitting in the tundras near or around Siberia with their ancestors.

Not totally on topic but Im interested in depiction of 'eastern' people in classical world, it seems like they're always depicted consistently with the same look, is this due to the shared 'Iranic' custom?
And does the use of Phrygian cap was always widespread there?

...

Even the biblical three wise men were depicted with this look

When was one of the wise men BLACKED?

...

tocharians were R1a, they were from the Indo-Iranian (Aryan) branch of IE.

They were genetically related to Iranians, Tocharians, Croats, Ukrainians and Poles.

Nothing in common with Turks or Turkics.

That make Slavs and Scandinavians Indo-Iranian too? Retard.

learn to read before you call anyone a retard. slavs are in fact descendants of the primary group of cwc folk and late expansions of the R1a branch of IE, unlike germans and scandis that are mongrelized mix of native populations.
>scandis
>indo-aryan
since when?

all this agression, go jerk off or something.

>slavs are in fact descendants of the primary group of cwc folk and late expansions of the R1a branch of IE
And your point? Corded Ware Culture wasn't Indo-Iranian.

>>scandis
>>indo-aryan
>since when?
Never, I was pointing out populations that are rich in R1a and are not Indo-Iranian in reponse to your stupid idea that Tocharians were Indo-Iranian because they had R1a.

When they decided that the ME wasn't exotic enough, probably

>Turkic
Keep dreaming

Several figures in the persepolis reliefs wear caps similar to the phrygian cap.

>slavs are in fact descendants of the primary group of cwc folk

Nope, postdating CWC by a while and just as mongrlized as any germanic folk

>tfw there aren't Scythians left in the central asia :(

Too much LARP is killing it

Not exactly. They were ancestral to Turkic people despite speaking Indo-Iranian languages.

nature.com/articles/ncomms14615

You may as well say that Hittites were ancestral to turkic people because turks live in their homeland today.

Not sure how true that is, though.
Turkic people are predominantly descended from Scythians. Kurds and Ukrainians, that much.

What do you mean by "scythians"? Despite what Veeky Forums believes, it's a pretty flexible word. Goths were also called scythians.

There's a fucking link. This is not about Goths but steppe people.

In the Iron Age, West Scythians in Europe were 90% Euro-Aryanoid and 10% Mongoloid.

East Scythians(Pazyryks etc) were more like 50-50.

Both types contributed to modern day Turkic people mainly.

Iranians aren't R1a they're J2

And Tocharians spoke a Centum language, were light skinned, blond and red haired

They're more related to Europeans than anything else

Only eastern Scythians contributed a lot to Turkics, says that paper.

>A continuity test was performed between the two Iron Age groups (‘West’ and ‘East’) and a large set of contemporary Eurasian populations (n=86, Supplementary Table 19). For western Scythian-era samples, contemporary populations with high statistical support for a genealogical link are located mainly in close geographical proximity, whereas contemporary groups with high statistical support for descent from eastern Scythians are distributed over a wider geographical range. Contemporary populations linked to western Iron Age steppe people can be found among diverse ethnic groups in the Caucasus, Russia and Central Asia (spread across many Iranian and other Indo-European speaking groups), whereas populations with genetic similarities to eastern Scythian groups are found almost exclusively among Turkic language speakers (Supplementary Figs 10 and 11).

Those figs show that Karakalpaks and Tubalars are almost fully descended from eastern Scythians.

>And Tocharians spoke a Centum language, were light skinned, blond and red haired

There's no such thing as "Centum language".
PIE is "Centum". Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic are Satemized.

Neither, but closer to Persians than to Turks.

>PIE is "Centum". Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic are Satemized.
No, PIE was neither Centum nor Satem. Just like Hittite language.

These languages are Satemized because they(Balto-Slavs, Indo-Iranians) are language shifters and could not speak perfectly the language of their European overlords.

Tocharians were Western Europeans.

It doesn't matter whether Hittite fits into an imaginary Centum-Satem division but it obviously can not be Satem.

Only Satem languages are real because Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic are actually related.

Tocharian is not particularly related to any other IE language.

>Tocharian is not particularly related to any other IE language.
It's related to all other centum languages like Latin.

Why does every board with turkroaches turn into such a shithole? I mean, scythians turkic? Lmao

Centum languages don't exist.

>Tocharians were Western Europeans.
No, they were just Afanasevo IE immigrants.

Hittite was Centum too and Hittites like the Proto Indo-Europeans were R1b

>Anyone who makes me butthurt is a Turk
the thread was most likely created by an Ameribrainlet, my subhuman friend.

>muh haplogroups
kys brainlet

Someone get me the roach spray please fast

Yes they does. Those are languages which merged consonants.

For an example changed k' to k.
No, Hittte still had unmerged consonants. It is counted as isolated IE language.

>brainlet

t. butthurt Semite(Iranian) or Dravidian(Indian)

Okay wh*Te subhuman
now fuck off before i kick your subhuman skull in. shoo you son of a whore.

Okay apparently I didn't remember it correctly.

Page 69 supplementary

>The populations with the highest likelihood of direct descent were either located in close proximity (e.g. Russians, Mohska), the Caucasus (e,g, Azeris, Abazinians) or in Central Asia (e.g. some Uzbeks, Tajiks)

That's a hot take, why don't you write a paper on it and prove all those other linguists wrong

That's an outdated view and besides, Tocharian branches off from other IE before Western Europe is even raped by steppe people. There is no chance that they came from fucking Ireland.

Hittite is recognized as an Centum language

>There is no chance that they came from fucking Ireland.
What the fuck? I've never said such thing. Are you fucking retarded? They came from the steppe to further steppe and had no further connection to "Western Europe".

Outdated. It's neither Centum nor Satem. It's from Anatolian language group.

They came from the steppe when Latin and Sanskrit were the exact same thing.

>Outdated

Sounds like a wishful thinking

>Sounds like a wishful thinking
No, Hittite being non-Satem and non-Centum language was even the main reason for Renfrew creating Anatolian hypothesis.

History will remember that Renfrew as a joke.

>According to Kurds, so were the Medes... and the Gutians, Hittites, and whatever the fuck else they want to delude themselves with. I understand as a stateless people, you need to conjure fake ancestry to bolster your pride, but do stay within the realm of rationality.
Haha this. I've met a Kurd claiming they wuz Goths and that's why 5% Kurds have blue eyes...

Serbs often claim they are of Kurdish descent

Clothes depend on where the nearest proximity to superpower is.

I'd reckon Tochars near China would dress similar to Chinese. And the ones closer to Persia would dress similar to Persian.

Proto-Baltic/Slavics share similarities with Indo-Iranics to begin with.

>Turkic people are predominantly descended from Scythians.
No they aren't.
>Kurds
Kurds existed independently of the Scythians. In fact late Arsacid period and early Sassanian era has both Parthians and Persians referring to Kurds as nomadic tribals while the Scythians were still alive.
>Ukrainians
No.

Proto-Turks were 100% Mongoloid. Practically Korean, Manchu etc.
All the Euro blood in Turkic people comes mainly from the mixed race East Scythians.

Middle Eastern people like Iranians and Kurds don't have much to do with Europe as far as genes go.

If C. Asians had Euro blood then they'd be white but they're more Iranian influenced.

The Altai and Tuvans are pulling towards Europe from Mongolia.
This is because they have excess East Scythian ancestry compared to Mongols, who have some themselves.

The East Scythians European heritage comes from the Andronovo and Afanasevo who were not fucking Iran natives, deal with it.

>All Euroblood in Turkic people come mainly from mixed race East Scythians
No, it doesn't.

>Middle Eastern people like Iranians
Iranians haven't changed much genetically in the last 3000 years and are closer to Europeans then even modern day Anatolian Turkic speaking "Turks".

Scythians are an Iranic people.

Andronovo were European expats from Ukraine.

Iranians are ~95% indigenous Elamite and such and ~5% Andronovo.
This is because Iran already had a huge indigenous population when it was conquered and so the conquerors didn't make as much of an impact.

Your own image properly shows that Iranians are very different from Europeans.

Scythians were Baltoslavic speakers which is closely related to Indoiranian, Balts and Slavs are descendants of the slaves of the Scythians who adopted their masters' language.

Well there is some placename evidence of a Celtic related language being spoken in Belarus. Poland definitely had some western language before Slavic expansion.

>(F)ersian Arabzadeh claiming Euro heritage
LMAO

>Iranians are ~95 indigenous Elamite
>~5% Andronvo
Source your bullshit. Now.

>Your
That's not my image and that has nothing to do with autosomal DNA. Stop bullshitting.

I'm not even Iranian you retard roach.

>Iranians are ~95% Elamite
That makes no sense. By the time Proto-Indo-Iranics show up to interact with the Elamites, every single source we have tells us the Elamites were on the edge of extinction due to the Neo-Assyrian Empire's reprisals against the Neo-Elamite Empire before the Medes join with the Babylonian/Chaldeans to take them down.

You are making things up and don't even understand how those images work apparently as well.

>I'm not even Iranian you retard roach.
nevertheless you're a (F)ersian enabler

Keep avatar and signature fagging, retard kun.

I'm sorry I don't know much about Iran other than the fact that the people there don't have much European admixture. Maybe you know enough to figure out who the real ancestors of Iranians are.

Maybe you should stop shitposting first.

Scythians spoke an Iranic language.

Factual information isn't shitposting just because it hurts Iranian autism. You just need to deal with reality.

What factual information? Besides constantly shitposting and trying to poison the well, you haven't posted any facts at all.

What's the point of posting links to papers about Andronovo, Sintashta and Srubnaya genetics when you're never gonna read them anyway?

If you actually cared about the reality you would fucking Google it anyway

You sure are backpedaling a lot from here despite recent genetic studies showing modern Iranians here not being at all significantly divergent from their Iron Age ancestors.

Then you made up a blanket statement about Iranians being "95% Elamite" and provided no sources.

So ergo, you are a shitposter.

Iranians being similar to iron age, bronze age and late neolithic Iranians backs up my point.

Try to be not autistic for a few minutes and you'll get it.

>backs up my point
No it doesn't. Again, you just reply with a blanket statement with no sources, evidence, or proof and repeat your disingenuous arguments. Lets relate the fact for example, the Elamites were reduced to a few townships and small cities after the last Neo-Assyrian invasion of Elam by the time Medes, Persians, and other Indo-Iranians were entering the Iranian Plateau. Lets ignore the fact most Iranians cluster with Southern Europeans and Caucasus peoples more then they do Semitic Near-Easterners or Central Asians. And let's totally ignore Neolithic and Zagros farmers who would would be of the same stock as their European kin make up the admixture of PIE groups.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Rofl

>Overall in Iran, native population groups do not form tight clusters either according to language or region. Rather, they occupy intermediate positions among Near Eastern and Caucasus clusters. Some of the Iranian groups lie within the Near Eastern group (often with such as the Turks and Georgians), but none fell into the Arab or Asian groups. Some Iranian groups in Iran, such as the Gilaki's and Mazandarani's, have paternal genetics (Y-DNA) virtually identical to South Caucasus ethnic groups while the small Iranian Baloch ethnic group, being the only outliers who have heavy pulls towards South Asia

>T-they waz Elamites and Dravidians n shit!

I'm talking about the Andronovo and Sintashta who are the common linguistic ancestors of South Asian Indo-Europeans and Iranians.
They came from the Corded Ware and were what we would all consider Europeans.

When they conquered Iran with their chariots the land was too densely settled for them to change the local genetic structure much.

You have be very mentally ill to think Iranians are Corded Ware people who cluster with Europeans.

>land was too sensely settled for them
By Neolithic and Zagros pastoralists already settled in the area. Nothing to do with Elamites who were a dying civilization and ethnic group at that point you retard.

Stop trying to switch the goal posts.

Why do you think Elamites weren't Zagros farmers? They obviously were.
Anyway I said Elamites and such, not exclusively Elamites.
The point is really that Iranians aren't genetically derived from the Corded Ware but local groups.

Why do you think they are when no evidence exists supporting your ad hoc bullshit claim in the first place?
>They obviously were.
They obviously weren't. There is no proof or evidence they ever were or considered that, so you are pulling claims out of your ass.
>Elamites and such
Still fallacious and wrong.
>Iranians aren't genetically derived from Corded Ware
PIE stems from Andronvo and Sinstasha, which is not tied to South Asian ethnic groups at all. Sintasha cultures stem from Central Asia and Northern Eurasia, not South East Asia, so you are wrong there. Andronovo is where PIE directly stems from in the Urals area.

So you are wrong again.

>They obviously weren't. There is no proof or evidence they ever were or considered that, so you are pulling claims out of your ass.

What the fuck do you think they were then? Australian Aboriginals?

>Still fallacious and wrong.

Do you want me to add Semitic tribes to the list of ancestors or something?

>PIE stems from Andronvo and Sinstasha

Nah. Sintashta stems from Corded Ware which stems from Yamna which stems from Khvalynsk culture which stems from Samara culture.
PIE would correspond most closely to the Yamna phase.

>which is not tied to South Asian ethnic groups at all. Sintasha cultures stem from Central Asia and Northern Eurasia, not South East Asia, so you are wrong there. Andronovo is where PIE directly stems from in the Urals area.

I have no fucking idea what you're trying to say. Just calm down and try to make sense.

There is not even the possibility of Andronovo and Sinstashta being vectors of Indoeuropean languages into south Asia. Not sure why people keep repeating this retardation when the most important geneticist of our time said it's wrong.

You made up a claim that Elamitse are the same as native Zagros pastoralists and farmers, you dipshit. Put up or show up. You keep repeating a claim that you haven't substaniated and made up on the spot with no sources, no evidences, and no academic research behind it at all.

>The Proto–Indo-Iranians were the descendants of the Indo-European Sintashta culture and the subsequent Andronovo culture, located at the Eurasian steppe that borders the Ural River on the west, the Tian Shan on the east.
>The early Indo-Iranians are commonly identified with the descendants of the Proto-Indo-Europeans known as the Sintashta culture and the subsequent Andronovo culture within the broader Andronovo horizon, and their homeland with an area of the Eurasian steppe that borders the Ural River on the west, the Tian Shan on the east. Historical linguists broadly estimate that a continuum of Indo-Iranian languages probably began to diverge by 2000 BC, if not earlier,[9]:38–39 preceding both the Vedic and Iranian cultures
>The Indo-Iranians and their expansion are strongly associated with the Proto-Indo-European invention of the chariot. It is assumed that this expansion spread from the Proto-Indo-European homeland north of the Caspian sea south to the Caucasus, Central Asia, the Iranian plateau, and Northern India

You are a retard.
Stop lying.

>I have blah blah

Not sure why you're clustering my post with whomever you're talking to, I'm just pointing you David Reich from Harvard said it's impossible for Andronovo and Sinstashta to have been the vectors of Indoeuropean languages into south Asia