Are Finns, Hungarians, Russians and Eastern Slavs part 'Mongoloid'? (life, pay, English)

[Thomas R.]

Because of the "Golden Horde" I would think at least some Russians have, perhaps slight, Mongolian ancestry. Within the European part of Russia the Kalmyks were shown to be related to Mongolians if I understood this right.

Genetic evidence for the Mongolian ances... [Am J Phys Anthropol. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

BBC News - Regions and territories: Kalmykia

Kalmyks are also Buddhist, the only European people to be so. Crimean Tatars I think also had some such ancestry. The one Crimean Tatar I met looked mostly "white" but maybe a bit Asian.

But these are not Russians so much as a population in European Russia. I tried to look up information on the so-called "Genghis Khan Y-chromosome" prevalence in Russia, but I didn't quite find an easy stat on it.

Finnish and Hungarian are placed as "Uralic" languages. At one time Uralic was linked to Altaic to form "Ural-Altaic" and was part of a theory they were related to Mongolians or even Japanese. This theory has since lost favor. A Michael Fortescue proposed Uralic was related to Siberian languages, and ultimately Eskimo/Inuit, but I don't know how widespread that theory is. In specific the Hungarians look to have intermixed some with Turkic peoples which would not make them "Mongoloid" (I know you mean something different than Mongolian, but Mongolian proper is maybe easiest to justify for some of these) but maybe a tad Asiatic. I know a Hungarian-American professor I had an infatuation with claimed he had slightly "Asiatic" features.

[Trimac20]

Originally Posted by Thomas R.

Because of the "Golden Horde" I would think at least some Russians have, perhaps slight, Mongolian ancestry. Within the European part of Russia the Kalmyks were shown to be related to Mongolians if I understood this right.

Genetic evidence for the Mongolian ances... [Am J Phys Anthropol. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

BBC News - Regions and territories: Kalmykia

Kalmyks are also Buddhist, the only European people to be so. Crimean Tatars I think also had some such ancestry. The one Crimean Tatar I met looked mostly "white" but maybe a bit Asian.

But these are not Russians so much as a population in European Russia. I tried to look up information on the so-called "Genghis Khan Y-chromosome" prevalence in Russia, but I didn't quite find an easy stat on it.

Finnish and Hungarian are placed as "Uralic" languages. At one time Uralic was linked to Altaic to form "Ural-Altaic" and was part of a theory they were related to Mongolians or even Japanese. This theory has since lost favor. A Michael Fortescue proposed Uralic was related to Siberian languages, and ultimately Eskimo/Inuit, but I don't know how widespread that theory is. In specific the Hungarians look to have intermixed some with Turkic peoples which would not make them "Mongoloid" (I know you mean something different than Mongolian, but Mongolian proper is maybe easiest to justify for some of these) but maybe a tad Asiatic. I know a Hungarian-American professor I had an infatuation with claimed he had slightly "Asiatic" features.

In Vietnam and Thailand there were many Russian tourists. A few definitely looked more 'Asiatic' than the typical British or German tourists, so I think many are already on the 'continuum' towards the Asian look/had some blood from the Turkic tribes.

[cojoncillo]

Cf. Fr. grattez le Russe et vous trouverez le Tartare, scratch the Russian and you will find the Tartar (attributed to Napoleon).

Of course, Napoleon and Hitler were entirely wrong about Russians, as they discovered later.

[erasure]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

erasure, what do you mean by the Chuvash and Mordvins are Siberian Native people? They're in Western Russia.

Of course they are in Western Russia - somewhere around Volga river??
( As a true Moscovite I tend to think that everything East of Moscow is already Siberia))))
( But the point is, some "natives" seem to be more accepted by Russians for intermarriages than other.)

I looked at the site you linked. Some of that information is still being debated by specialists. I've never heard the Tuvans included with the Finno-Ugrians, for example. Genetic studies done on Tuvans indicate many of them migrated south from the far North, coming from the Samoyedic peoples, originally.

I think it's still all very debatable ( the origins of this or that group of people)

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by Thomas R.

Because of the "Golden Horde" I would think at least some Russians have, perhaps slight, Mongolian ancestry. Within the European part of Russia the Kalmyks were shown to be related to Mongolians if I understood this right.

Genetic evidence for the Mongolian ances... [Am J Phys Anthropol. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

BBC News - Regions and territories: Kalmykia

Kalmyks are also Buddhist, the only European people to be so. Crimean Tatars I think also had some such ancestry. The one Crimean Tatar I met looked mostly "white" but maybe a bit Asian.

But these are not Russians so much as a population in European Russia. I tried to look up information on the so-called "Genghis Khan Y-chromosome" prevalence in Russia, but I didn't quite find an easy stat on it.

Finnish and Hungarian are placed as "Uralic" languages. At one time Uralic was linked to Altaic to form "Ural-Altaic" and was part of a theory they were related to Mongolians or even Japanese. This theory has since lost favor. A Michael Fortescue proposed Uralic was related to Siberian languages, and ultimately Eskimo/Inuit, but I don't know how widespread that theory is. In specific the Hungarians look to have intermixed some with Turkic peoples which would not make them "Mongoloid" (I know you mean something different than Mongolian, but Mongolian proper is maybe easiest to justify for some of these) but maybe a tad Asiatic. I know a Hungarian-American professor I had an infatuation with claimed he had slightly "Asiatic" features.

The Huns originally were a Turkic tribe around the area just south of Mongolia, where they stirred up trouble for the Chinese. At some point on their way West, they were heavily influenced by Uralic speakers. The Tatars are Turkic. The Kalmyks are a Mongol tribe. Inuit and Chuckchi at this point are considered Paleo-Siberian. Some linguists link them with the nearby Koryak, in the north of the Kamchatka Peninsula.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by erasure

( But the point is, some "natives" seem to be more accepted by Russians for intermarriages than other.)

I can see that, that makes sense.

Yes, the origins of peoples is still debatable, but with the new genetic research, more information is available, and gradually the gap between competing theories is closing. We live in exciting times in that regard. Also, China is doing more archaeological work around their side of the Altai and Manchuria, so that is contributing new information. I wish Russia would invest more money in archaeological work relating to the Siberian and Far Eastern peoples, rather than focussing most of their effort on the Scythians. A lot remains to be learned about the prehistory of the Ainu on the Amur River in the Russian Far East, for example. There is still so much work that needs to be done everywhere.

[russiaonline]

Ethnic Russians have extremely low incidence of Mongoloid markers. As for citizens of Russia, numbers are a bit different

According to genetics almost 100% of Russians are originally from Europe. So much for intermixing...

[russiaonline]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

Ironically Stalin, a Georgian (as Hitler was Austrian) began to persecute or at least disfavour the other Soviet groups. After the Sino Soviet split many Chinese were evicted from the Russian far east, and the same with Russians in northern China.

Vladivostok (near China): the government tried hard to kick Chinese out since almost the city's founding, but succeeded only during Stalin's rule (= strong fed government). There was a reason for this, and for all similar "persecutions".

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by cojoncillo

[color=#000000]

Of course, Napoleon and Hitler were entirely wrong about Russians, as they discovered later.

This is such a great line, lol !

As I mentioned before, Russians are very high in a certain Persian marker, which is why they focus most of their archaeological work on the Scythians. "Persian" meaning a branch of Indo-European. Most specialists put the origin of Indo-European people in the Russian steppes, so Russians couldn't possibly be more European. Russians, in that sense, "invented" the Indo-European "race".

[callmemaybe]

They are a bit closer in that direction yes.