PDA

View Full Version : Brother branch of the Yakuts ion the Balkans



eastara
06-21-2021, 12:25 AM
Recently we received the first Big Y of a Bulgarian with haplogroup N. We expected to be something with the Balto-Slavic branches of N1a-Tat, which are occasionally found on the Balkans, but he turned out to be from the branch A9416, which is a brother of the more known Yakut clade.
There are also a few Croats, Hungarians and Chuvash. The branch is very young, only formed 1700 ybp, TMRCA 1400 ybp, so definitely arrived somewhere in the early Middle ages. However the Bulgarian has 0 STR matches at any level, so he has split from the others a long time ago.
I could not find any information about this branch, wonder who has brought this to the Balkans - Avar, Bulgars, Tartars, etc, there are are no old sample found for now.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-PH1612/

Kulin
06-21-2021, 12:30 AM
TMRCA is very close close to the Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian basin. Likely picked up by the ancient Magyars during their long migration. Looks to be originally a Siberian/NEA clade.

SG_Jun
06-21-2021, 03:42 AM
Recently we received the first Big Y of a Bulgarian with haplogroup N. We expected to be something with the Balto-Slavic branches of N1a-Tat, which are occasionally found on the Balkans, but he turned out to be from the branch A9416, which is a brother of the more known Yakut clade.
There are also a few Croats, Hungarians and Chuvash. The branch is very young, only formed 1700 ybp, TMRCA 1400 ybp, so definitely arrived somewhere in the early Middle ages. However the Bulgarian has 0 STR matches at any level, so he has split from the others a long time ago.
I could not find any information about this branch, wonder who has brought this to the Balkans - Avar, Bulgars, Tartars, etc, there are are no old sample found for now.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-PH1612/

This branch of Haplogroup N-M2058 is actually very unique and it shows signs of a very clear and strong link to early expansion of the Turkic language family. The Chuvash are the last remaining branch of Oghur Turkic peoples and are often seen as being the last descendants of Old Bulgars who also spoke an Oghur Turkic language. Oghur Turkic was the first branch of the Turkic language family to have split off. Sakha (Yakut) also split off pretty early on hence Chuvash and Sakha (Yakut) are two of the most unintelligible and divergent Turkic languages to other Turkic speakers (eg Turkish, Azerbaijani, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Uzbek, Uyghur etc.) today.

The reason for other Hungarian samples on the same branch is likely due to the Onogur (aka Ten Oghur) tribes which consisted of these Old Bulgars and also the Finno-Ugric / Uralic speaking Magyars. This is also the etymological origin for the term "Hungary" or "Ungarn", Byzantine Greek "Oungroi (Οὔγγροι)" was borrowed from Old Bulgarian ągrinŭ, in turn borrowed from Oghur-Turkic Onogur ('ten [tribes of the] Ogurs'). Onogur was the collective name for the tribes who later joined the Bulgar tribal confederacy that ruled the eastern parts of Hungary after the Avars. Some of these Old Bulgars and Onogur tribes later traversed across the steppe and arrived in modern day Hungary and Bulgaria, lending their ethnonym to these countries and its people; hence it is entirely possible that this lineage could have followed the path of the Old Bulgars into Bulgaria. The TMRCA of 1400 ybp also matches the time of Old Great Bulgaria (located in modern day Ukraine) which was in the 7th century AD. In my opinion this is the most plausible explanation.

Huck Finn
06-21-2021, 05:53 AM
Agreed, this was originally an Oghur Turkic speaking lineage. most probably. Possibly therefore related to Volga Bulgars, who were Oghur Turkic speakers. Chuvash and Magyar connections are therefore expected, as Chuvash is the last remaining Oghur Turkic language and Hungarians indeed were in close contact with some or even many Oghur Turkic speaking groups.

Huck Finn
06-22-2021, 06:20 AM
Oghur Turkic was the first branch of the Turkic language family to have split off. Sakha (Yakut) also split off pretty early on hence Chuvash and Sakha (Yakut) are two of the most unintelligible and divergent Turkic languages to other Turkic speakers (eg Turkish, Azerbaijani, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Uzbek, Uyghur etc.) today.

Indeed. These Oghur Turkic, Sakha and probably also Pannonian Avar connections related to to paternal N might be of some guidance if we want to locate the cradle of the early, still clearly Siberian Uralic. It shouldn't, on the other hand, have been very far from the area of the earliest expansion point of Ymyakhtakh, if I'm right, now that there are N carrying Chukchi's, Koryaks etc., probably related to that expansion.

SG_Jun
06-22-2021, 01:09 PM
Indeed. These Oghur Turkic, Sakha and probably also Pannonian Avar connections related to to paternal N might be of some guidance if we want to locate the cradle of the early, still clearly Siberian Uralic. It shouldn't, on the other hand, have been very far from the area of the earliest expansion point of Ymyakhtakh, if I'm right, now that there are N carrying Chukchi's, Koryaks etc., probably related to that expansion.

At the moment N-M2058 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-M2058/), N-Y16323 which includes 2 Chukchi samples (https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-Y16323/), N-Y13850 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-Y13850/), N-Y9022 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-Y9022/) are the main Turkic branches under N1a1-TAT and N-VL67 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-VL67/) is the main Turkic branch under N1a2-L666 which all seems to have a TMRCA of 4600 ybp to 3700 ybp. It seems likely that the Turkic subclades underwent a strong expansion during this period, and most of the ancient samples of N1a1-TAT upstream subclades so far which have been found including N-F1419, N-L708, N-M2126, N-Z1979, N-M2126, N-CTS6967 were mainly discovered in Irkutsk Oblast, Zabaykalsky Krai, Krasnoyarsk Krai and the Sakha Republic (Yakutia).

Yes you are right that patrilineal haplogroup N would be of great guidance to locate the early cradle of the Uralic language family given its extremely high frequency across all Uralic ethnic groups. I've also read about the Seima-Turbino phenomenon which was known for its sophisticated metallurgy and a possible catalyst for the spread of Haplogroup N and Uralic languages across North Eurasia which originated in southern Siberia during the same time period. Even in China archaeologists have discovered similar artefacts to that of the Seima-Turbino culture, and a sudden influx of sophisticated metallurgy and bronze age technology into the region from Siberia during this time period allowing Chinese civilisation to take hold and develop. Looking at how closely intertwined some of these Turkic branches are with Uralic branches, in my opinion it could have formed a continuum of N-M231 men in the area of Siberia who lived right next to each other, with Uralic speaking branches migrating north-westward. Whereas one of the first Proto-Turkic speaking branch likely being N-M2058 diversified forming the earliest ethnicities (Old Bulgars, Chuvash, Sakha), whereas some other Turkic branches mixed with different ethnic groups and cultures in the region, some branches migrated westwards in waves of their own, to the southwest, also to the north and east.

In my opinion the Yukaghirs who live in the northeastern parts of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia) in the Russian Federation are quite an interesting population given their possible links to the Ymyakhtakh culture and also some linguists believe there may be a distant link between Yukaghir and Uralic languages, but there seems to be little to no information about their Y-DNA other than the fact that some of them belong to a subclade of N1c that is different from that of the Sakha (Yakuts).

Huck Finn
06-22-2021, 08:46 PM
Looking at how closely intertwined some of these Turkic branches are with Uralic branches, in my opinion it could have formed a continuum of N-M231 men in the area of Siberia who lived right next to each other, with Uralic speaking branches migrating north-westward.

You may very well be right. The only problem I see here is that at least I'm not aware of any old enough Turkic influences, such as common vocabulary, in Uralic and vice versa. The typological similarity is there, of course.

SG_Jun
06-23-2021, 03:57 AM
You may very well be right. The only problem I see here is that at least I'm not aware of any old enough Turkic influences, such as common vocabulary, in Uralic and vice versa. The typological similarity is there, of course.

Neither am I a linguist myself nor a speaker of any Turkic/Uralic language so I can't provide much information regarding this, but based on Y-DNA the distant connection between Uralic and some branches of Turkic is definitely there. The Sakha (Yakut) language and Chuvash language are probably the most noteworthy in this case, rather than the other Turkic languages which are also mutually unintelligible with Chuvash and Sakha (Yakut) at this point. However, there is little online material on the Sakha (Yakut) and Chuvash languages due to their relatively small population of speakers and the dominance of Russian across these areas. Even through the Chuvash it may not be easy to filter out which elements of their language and culture arose from ancient contact with Uralic peoples and which ones are more recent because the Chuvash have also been living around predominantly Uralic areas for thousands of years. In fact the Chuvash were consistently thought of and misclassified as being Uralic for hundreds of years

These days the so-called "Ural-Altaic language family" hypothesis has been so strongly stigmatised by the international community in part due to nationalist tendencies, that most researchers barely even re-visit the topic or try to find any similarities between these languages any more, instead relegating it to being some sort of pseudoscience fuelled by pan-nationalism. In my opinion, sure the Uralic and Turkic languages are most likely two separate language families which developed and emerged separately, but more could definitely be done on trying to find out more cognates, loanwords and/or the history of contact between the two language families.