Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 295

Thread: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

  1. #261

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Geronimo2006 View Post
    I think they were Mongolic or Turkic or an admixture of the two. I saw a documentary some years ago which I think was called Pagans and they reconstructed a face from a Hunnic grave skull and it looked Far Eastern. However it seems Gothic was widely spoken in the empire so maybe had a status like Russian in the Soviet Union. The Hunnic names have been theorized as Turkic, Iranian, Mongolic or even German sounding and Wikipedia says all of these claims apply to the name Atilla. His brother Bleda apparently had a Germanic name. It's possibly that the Huns adopted non Hunnic names from coming into contact with new peoples. The programme also showed a map of burials similar to Hunnic ones stretching across Siberia to Mongolia, which seems to increase the likelihood of the Xiongnu theory. It would be interesting to look for similarities with the Xiongnu names.
    The problem with facial reconstruction is that it takes into account the biases of the artist. Measuring skulls has long been proven to be an inexact art at best--for example, the epicanthlic fold isn't something you can see on a skeleton. The problem with the burials is that it suggests what pretty much everyone can guess: there was a migration of tribes westward from modern-day Mongolia. The evidence we have on the Huns' origins is all extremely circumstantial here, which again isn't something I'm saying to disprove the theory but rather to suggest that it's still open to interpretation. The Huns could be the Xiongnu, or a tribe dislocated by them, but it seems more likely that the Huns were a political distinction more than an ethnic one, perhaps with a Xiongnu (or similar culture) elite but in the style of all steppe empires the conquerors assimilated with the conquered.


  2. #262

    Default

    I hate racist,orientalist western term.Aryan ,Caucosoid,Mongoloid etc.... Geneticly ; lot of turkic people have more %50 caucasoid dna. Baskir have %90 caucasoid dna(more than scandnavian) But Baskirs 's appaerance seem %70 mongolid-%30 caucasoid. Western belive Aryan myth. They try to explain it with science.
    Attilas Huns werent completly Xioghnu. All large nomad empire have diffrent nomadic ethncitiy. Nomads can assimalted by settled culture or are enslaved by other nomadic people. They just were absorbed by settled people or cities. Nomads havent manpower as settled people. Xioghnu dynsty could be turkic or mongolic. But mongols didin live western asia,urals and caspian sea. Turkic peope lived there .Attila were turkic. Turkic people were oghuz,kipchak,ogur-bulgar-chuvash, early kirghiz ,sabirs that have caucosoid mongolid mix features.

    Altaic languge theory have problems. Subject ,number,basic item are common in all turkic languages. But they are diffrent in mongolian languges ...Dukha peope are turkic tribe where live in mongolia. Dukhas understant more easy tukish languges than mongolian lang. Turkish -Oghuz turks leaved from central asia 1200 years ago. Turkic and mongolic language arent same etimologhic root.Just exchange words little and some grammatic type..

    Chuvash arent turkifacited mari people. Mari have higher N y dna as other finnic -uralic tirbes. R1a - z93 turkic ydna. Westerns think All nomadic people were scythians before huns period. It is wrong... Dahae, Massagatea,Saka,Sctyhians,sarmatians ,Tocharian,Yuechi,Issodones were diffrent people. It isnt true that all of them were scythians... Researcher as thought Issones(Wu-Sun) were indo-iranic. But we know they are turkic nowadays. We dont know .We havent source. Nowadys Altains,Kirghiz were descendent of scythians( before huns periods nomads). Scythians languges have iranic and turkic words. Some resaercher think that a languge was proto aryan-turkic languge(Nostratic lang theory)
    Last edited by Maximinus Thrax; February 11, 2015 at 12:17 PM. Reason: multiple posts merged

  3. #263

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by CagatayKhan View Post
    Chuvash aren turkifacited mari. Mari ahve higher N y dna as a other finnic -uralic tirbes. R1a z93 turkic ydna. Westerns think All nomadic people were scythians before huns period. wrong... we dont know We havent source. Nowadys Altains,Kirghiz were descendent of scythians. Sctyhians languges have iranic and turkic words. Some resaercher think that a languge was proto aryan-turkic languge(Nsotratic theory)
    I understand what you're saying here but you have to understand that tracing language isn't about vocabulary. The Scythian languages are Indo-European because of their grammatical structure and the use of several key words--mostly having to do with wheeled wagons. The Turkic languages are built entirely differently grammar-wise, meaning their roots are separate from Indo-European. Of course Oghuz and Kypchak forms of turkic will have plenty of Indo-European loan words, and the languages they came into contact with will have Turkic words as well: that's just what happens when two different cultures interact and trade.

    I completely agree with you on the use of archaic and eurocentric terms, though. "Caucasoid" and "Mongoloid" are best left in the 20th Century where they belong.


  4. #264

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by CagatayKhan View Post
    I hate racist,orientalist western term.Aryan ,Caucosoid,Mongoloid etc.... Geneticly ; lot of turkic people have more %50 caucasoid dna. Baskir have %90 caucasoid dna(more scandnavian) But Baskirs 's appaerance seem %70 mongolid-%30 caucasoid. Western belive Aryan myth. They try to explain it with science.
    Attilas Huns werent Xioghnu. All large nomad empire have diffrent nomadic ethncitiy. Nomads can assimalte civizlaiton and other nomadic people. They just were absorbed settled people or cities. Nomads havent manpower as settled people. Xioghnu dynsty were turkic or mongolic. But mongols didin live western asia,urals and caspian sea. Turkic peope lived there Attila were turkic. Turkic people were oghuz,kipchak,ogur-bulgar-chuvash, early kirghiz ,sabirs that have caucosoid mongolid mix features.,uyghur
    Are you saying turkic peoples lived western of the Urals before the 5th century?


  5. #265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yayattasa View Post
    Are you saying turkic peoples lived western of the Urals before the 5th century?
    Can being..South urals, east of caspian sea , azov , north -east balck sea

    Quote Originally Posted by Broreale View Post
    I understand what you're saying here but you have to understand that tracing language isn't about vocabulary. The Scythian languages are Indo-European because of their grammatical structure and the use of several key words--mostly having to do with wheeled wagons. The Turkic languages are built entirely differently grammar-wise, meaning their roots are separate from Indo-European. Of course Oghuz and Kypchak forms of turkic will have plenty of Indo-European loan words, and the languages they came into contact with will have Turkic words as well: that's just what happens when two different cultures interact and trade.

    I completely agree with you on the use of archaic and eurocentric terms, though. "Caucasoid" and "Mongoloid" are best left in the 20th Century where they belong.
    I dont know Scytians lang grammer structure. Do you know any source? I just know some word about Scythian lang.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Scythian_languages
    http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turk...tSourcesEn.htm
    There are a lang. occur turkic and indo-iranic words.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjn-leEIT70
    Nowadys iranic speaking people 's dna
    Scythins had tukic-tengri relgions,art, clothes,warfare tacitic, culture. But they spoke iranic lang. They had turkic and slavic dna .LOL It is too complex. All nomads werent sctyhians before huns period. It is too important. We make some mistake.. DNA, languges, culture are diffrent process

    Someone think Osettian is descandent of Scythians.. But Osettian have very limited R1a <%3

    Last edited by Maximinus Thrax; February 11, 2015 at 12:18 PM. Reason: dp/merged

  6. #266

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    How much R1a is found among the Ossetians is irrelevant--they speak an Eastern Iranian language.

    Also, you are putting the cart before the horse when it comes to the scythians and turks. The Scythian religion is primarily distinct because of Herodotus' records of a worship of "Tabiti." And despite the rightful doubt placed on Herodotus' testimony there is a common link with the Proto-Indo-European religion that spread into India and the Iranian plateau. Sun/fire worship are key elements of the sacred texts Avestas and Vedas, a sign of the Indo-European tribes that migrated southward from the Karakorum. Turkic tribes traveled through this same region in the Migration Period, with Sarmatian tribes still present. The presence of loanwords is neither surprising nor shocking. Also the video on the relative scarcity of the R1a marker in modern-day Iran is nothing new: genetically, people don't spread as far as they can culturally. I'm sure the Tocharians had more blood ties with the local people of the Tarim Basin than any band of nomads out on the Ponto-Caspian steppe.

    As for the tracing of supposed Scythian words to Turkic ones, this is pseudoscience because any two languages which have come into contact can be broken down the same way. The skeletal Proto-Indo-European roots are all over old Scythian and Sarmatian words, not to mention Ossetian. Ossetian also has a good amount of influence from both Turkic and Slavic languages but it's decidedly closer to Slavic because, in the end, the Indo-European grammatical structure is apparent. Most important is the tracing of key words having to do with wheeled vehicles, something which could be tracked from Britain to the Tarim Basin.

    Lastly, culture is amorphous, changeable, and above all a response to the outside environment. I'm certain that the post-Hunnic Caucasus Alans would have had many customs that resembled their Turkic neighbors; not only because they adopted Turkic customs but left their own imprint on the proto-Turks as well. Horse archery isn't the sole provenance of the Turks--the Apache and Lakota were practicing it within half a century of the first Spanish horses going feral. The North American high plains offered them an excellent environment for it. If the Vasconian languages had started on the Ponto-Caspian plain then I'm sure the Basques would have been known as great horse archers, too, and not because this tactic was gifted unto them by Turkic newcomers. The idea of status as being carried by sitting atop a horse spread with Indo-European tribes, even to places where cavalry wasn't king in warfare. There are very few things a researcher can point to and say "Yes, that's it. That's the root of this whole family tree." But when it's found? It builds something far more important than genetic markers and postmodern racial dynamics. The genes in our blood are as changeable as how we interpret the supposed differences we have because of that blood, but the way we're raised sticks with us for the rest of our lives.


  7. #267

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Broreale View Post
    How much R1a is found among the Ossetians is irrelevant--they speak an Eastern Iranian language.

    Also, you are putting the cart before the horse when it comes to the scythians and turks. The Scythian religion is primarily distinct because of Herodotus' records of a worship of "Tabiti." And despite the rightful doubt placed on Herodotus' testimony there is a common link with the Proto-Indo-European religion that spread into India and the Iranian plateau. Sun/fire worship are key elements of the sacred texts Avestas and Vedas, a sign of the Indo-European tribes that migrated southward from the Karakorum. Turkic tribes traveled through this same region in the Migration Period, with Sarmatian tribes still present. The presence of loanwords is neither surprising nor shocking. Also the video on the relative scarcity of the R1a marker in modern-day Iran is nothing new: genetically, people don't spread as far as they can culturally. I'm sure the Tocharians had more blood ties with the local people of the Tarim Basin than any band of nomads out on the Ponto-Caspian steppe.

    As for the tracing of supposed Scythian words to Turkic ones, this is pseudoscience because any two languages which have come into contact can be broken down the same way. The skeletal Proto-Indo-European roots are all over old Scythian and Sarmatian words, not to mention Ossetian. Ossetian also has a good amount of influence from both Turkic and Slavic languages but it's decidedly closer to Slavic because, in the end, the Indo-European grammatical structure is apparent. Most important is the tracing of key words having to do with wheeled vehicles, something which could be tracked from Britain to the Tarim Basin.

    Lastly, culture is amorphous, changeable, and above all a response to the outside environment. I'm certain that the post-Hunnic Caucasus Alans would have had many customs that resembled their Turkic neighbors; not only because they adopted Turkic customs but left their own imprint on the proto-Turks as well. Horse archery isn't the sole provenance of the Turks--the Apache and Lakota were practicing it within half a century of the first Spanish horses going feral. The North American high plains offered them an excellent environment for it. If the Vasconian languages had started on the Ponto-Caspian plain then I'm sure the Basques would have been known as great horse archers, too, and not because this tactic was gifted unto them by Turkic newcomers. The idea of status as being carried by sitting atop a horse spread with Indo-European tribes, even to places where cavalry wasn't king in warfare. There are very few things a researcher can point to and say "Yes, that's it. That's the root of this whole family tree." But when it's found? It builds something far more important than genetic markers and postmodern racial dynamics. The genes in our blood are as changeable as how we interpret the supposed differences we have because of that blood, but the way we're raised sticks with us for the rest of our lives.
    Osetian have few R1a totally . I see %50 turkic- %50 aryan mix culture . http://users.cwnet.com/millenia/scythgod.htm
    mtdna and ydna of antic siberian descandent
    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/att...7&d=1358807011

    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/att...6&d=1358807011
    Turkic-slavic dna ,not iranic

  8. #268

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Most evidence regarding Attila's appearance suggests he was Turkic. I think a more relevant question people should be asking is why Sarmatians and other Indo-European groups are being depicted as East-Asians/Turks in Attila.

  9. #269

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    "Turkic" is a ethnolinguistical term. In terms of appearance, we can't be so sure, but mongol-like is very plausible.
    About the sarmatians, obviously they should be more akin to iranian-types. Where were they shown?


  10. #270

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by CagatayKhan View Post
    Osetian have few R1a totally . I see %50 turkic- %50 aryan mix culture . http://users.cwnet.com/millenia/scythgod.htm
    mtdna and ydna of antic siberian descandent
    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/att...7&d=1358807011

    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/att...6&d=1358807011
    Turkic-slavic dna ,not iranic
    And you reply with the same flawed haplogroup tracking which I just disproved. Okay.

    "Turkic" is a ethnolinguistical term. In terms of appearance, we can't be so sure, but mongol-like is very plausible.
    About the sarmatians, obviously they should be more akin to iranian-types. Where were they shown?
    Laziness is the only thing that can explain it. I honestly don't get CA, they already had Scythian-Sarmatian models in Rome 2. You have to be aggressively lazy to make them look turkic.


  11. #271

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Broreale View Post
    And you reply with the same flawed haplogroup tracking which I just disproved. Okay.



    Laziness is the only thing that can explain it. I honestly don't get CA, they already had Scythian-Sarmatian models in Rome 2. You have to be aggressively lazy to make them look turkic.
    Lots of turkic people seem diffrent each other. Indo-aryans too...

    Huns and Alans werent too mongolid apperance. They seem as Xioghnu,Xiebi in Attila. I think it is wrong.
    Adam seem black people. Human race evulation. R and Q brother dna :d Theri father is P . Q is dominnat in American İndian . Q y dna is more close to R y dna than I ,E,G ...
    I hate that people say always indo-aryan, tall, fair skinn...
    Last edited by CagatayKhan; February 16, 2015 at 03:08 PM.

  12. #272

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Broreale View Post
    Laziness is the only thing that can explain it. I honestly don't get CA, they already had Scythian-Sarmatian models in Rome 2. You have to be aggressively lazy to make them look turkic.
    Or misinformed by pan-Turanist propaganda.

    Although your explanation is just as good, seeing as, for example, all TW games (at lest since Rome I) have misplaced wildlife. And by "misplaced" I mean exclusively American wildlife in Asian and European settings. Example: that "skree" you hear in the latest promotional video for ATW, as well as frequently in other TW games, is a Red-tailed Hawk calling.


    Quote Originally Posted by CagatayKhan View Post
    I hate that people say always indo-aryan, tall, fair skinn...
    I think people are quite aware that Indo-Aryans can also be short, brown Indians, or Middle-Eastern-looking Persians. The point is that mongolid types were rarer in ancient Central Asia than they're today, and that the overwhelming majority of Central Asians was Iranian in one way or another.

  13. #273
    Darios's Avatar Cneazul Dumbravei
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dumbrava Roșie, Romania
    Posts
    2,159

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by CagatayKhan View Post
    I hate that people say always indo-aryan, tall, fair skinn...
    You're the only one here who seems to equate "Indo-Iranian" people with "tall, fair skinned, blonde." Physical differences between people are largely geographical based, not ethno-linguistic. People from more northern regions of the world are indeed more likely have these features whether they speak Slavic, Finnish, or Bashkir

    FYI, Greeks, Romanic people, Armenians, etc are also Indo-European speakers but blondism is extremely rare among them, so drop it with the Aryan stupidity.

    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    Or misinformed by pan-Turanist propaganda.
    I am honestly beginning to think that the game design has been influenced by this. There is no reason whatsoever for the Sarmatians to appear East Asian and for the Magyars to be present in Attila.
    Under the Patronage of PikeStance


  14. #274

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Darios View Post
    FYI, Greeks, Romanic people, Armenians, etc are also Indo-European speakers but blondism is extremely rare among them, so drop it with the Aryan stupidity.
    Well in the case of Romance speakers or Greeks, I wouldn't say "extremely rare". Blondes are quite common in the northern areas of Spain and Italy, and not totally uncommon in Greece (not sure about Romania), although they are of course a minority in all those countries.


    I am honestly beginning to think that the game design has been influenced by this. There is no reason whatsoever for the Sarmatians to appear East Asian and for the Magyars to be present in Attila.
    Yeah, and it's really depressing that people living in a modern, free country could fall for this crap. Even in Turkey, where anti-historical brainwashing is officially sanctioned by the state, there are people who don't buy that kind of propaganda.

  15. #275

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    For real, can't see what's the gain of faking history. It's not like the current turkified anatolians would gain international "prestige" by claiming descent from the nomads 1600 years ago. Is it used as some kind of (internal) nationalistic propaganda?
    They should be studying the (much grander) feats of their actual ancestors.


  16. #276
    Darios's Avatar Cneazul Dumbravei
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dumbrava Roșie, Romania
    Posts
    2,159

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Yayattasa View Post
    For real, can't see what's the gain of faking history. It's not like the current turkified anatolians would gain international "prestige" by claiming descent from the nomads 1600 years ago. Is it used as some kind of (internal) nationalistic propaganda?
    They should be studying the (much grander) feats of their actual ancestors.
    Turanism was largely a reaction to 19th century Pan-Slavism. The Ottoman Empire was getting its ass handed to it by Russia and the Balkan states so the Turks began to look more towards Central Asia to expand its influence. A similar phenomenon occurred in Hungary as the former kingdom had much of its territory stripped away from it and began to view other European countries with a wary eye. Both countries could claim "descent" from medieval steppe peoples so hence began the great Turanist movement.

    Ironically, despite the pseudo-fascist way in which it's taught/examined, there is a bit of truth behind it. Some modern day "Turkic" peoples probably do owe much of their DNA to ancient Scytho-Sarmatians but it's because medieval Turkic peoples migrated west, conquered, and assimilated the remnants of earlier steppe dwellers, NOT because the ancient Scytho-Sarmatians were "Turks." It works both ways of course. I know a few people in Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine who have slight Asiatic features probably due to previous Polovtsi and Tatar invaders/settlers. Mr. CatagayKhan's tendency to throw around DNA and halogroup information is therefore irrelevant.
    Under the Patronage of PikeStance


  17. #277

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Yayattasa View Post
    For real, can't see what's the gain of faking history. It's not like the current turkified anatolians would gain international "prestige" by claiming descent from the nomads 1600 years ago. Is it used as some kind of (internal) nationalistic propaganda?
    They should be studying the (much grander) feats of their actual ancestors.
    Moden turkey population %35 came from balkans(Turk, bosnian,albanian). (Balkan is turkic word ) :d %15 of populaiton cam from cirmea -caucasia(Tatar,turk,cherkesk). Greek population 's %50 came from Turkey (orthodox rum, a bit orthox turkic) We havent common genetic with Greece. Our E,J2,R1b are diffrent group. Turkey population 's%50 have Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan genetics.( %20 Bosnian,Albanina,Cherkes), %15 turkifacated Anatolian native-rums, %15 kurds-arabs).. Oghuz mixed some Sogds,Tocharian with in Sogdina, Khorasan. Hey dude. Anatolian Turks don need Central Asian ancestor. Ottaman empire even is enough. I am not natonalist. I am just realist.
    Last edited by CagatayKhan; February 16, 2015 at 03:36 PM.

  18. #278

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Darios View Post
    and for the Magyars to be present in Attila.
    Are the Magyars in this game?


  19. #279

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    What's the deal with Eastern Europeans being so worried about race? It seems like minor racial subgroups are serious business for a lot of people here.

  20. #280

    Default Re: Attila Caucasian or Asian?!

    Quote Originally Posted by gavitron View Post
    What's the deal with Eastern Europeans being so worried about race? It seems like minor racial subgroups are serious business for a lot of people here.
    Are you sure, that the Eastern Europeans are worried about Attila's race?

Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •