Photo: Funral masks. Tashtyk culture, Southern Siberia.
"In various sources on the history of the Altai tribes, we have encountered references to their significant closeness in origin and cultural development to the population of the Minusinsk Basin. In contrast, the mountainous taiga regions to the east of the Yenisey steppes were more isolated. Based on reports from Chinese chronicles, three regions can be distinguished here.
The first, the most eastern region, corresponds to the area located to the west of the Selenga River. Its population did not know horses or sheep. Their domesticated animals were reindeer, which they apparently used for food, transportation in single-wheeled carts, and whose skins were used for clothing. Sable hunting was one of their main trades. They lived in large family communes in low wooden yurts.
Northwest of Kosogol, in the eastern Sayan taiga of the Tuva Autonomous Region and the southern part of Khakassia, lived a population with a different lifestyle, focused on hunting and fishing. They fed on fish, wild game, birds, and also wild-growing sarana, from whose roots they made porridge.
Only a few people owned reindeer and horses, and their dwellings were simple huts. Their way of life was highly primitive. In this region, they knew "neither punishment nor fines," and even theft of personal property was punished simply by double compensation. The culture of the tribes living further north, in the areas of modern Cheremkhovsky, Ziminsky, Nizhneudinsky, and Kansky districts, was more advanced.
According to the Chinese, there, as on the Yenisey, they practiced animal husbandry and, in some places, plow-based agriculture. Their dwellings were more advanced—log cabins covered with birch bark. The social structure was based on independent communes led by elders. However, even these tribes were foreign to the Kyrgyz (Khakass).
Not only did they "often fight with the Hyagas... but they also spoke a different language." It is likely that they should be classified as belonging to the Paleo-Asiatic group. The last representatives of this group, the Arins and Kots, were still encountered by the Russians there in the 17th century. This isolation of the eastern Sayan regions once again indicates the direction of research into the origins of the Kyrgyz (Khakass).
The language of the Kyrgyz inscriptions found on the Yenisey is related to the Orkhon (Altai, at its core) language. The same closeness to the Altai is suggested by the above-discussed legend of the origin of the Altai Turks and Yenisey Kyrgyz from a common ancestor Nishidu, from the So clan.
(KAF supplement: Suo 索 OC: sâk LH: sak MC: sâk (Schuessler, Minimal: 72 [2-33a]); EMC, LMC: sak (Pulleyblank, Lexicon: 298); sak, sak, sag (Coblin, Compendium: 383[0881]).
Harmatta, ‘A türkök eredetmondája’: 391, identified Suo with the ethnonym Saka and noted the connection with Han-era Sai 塞 OC: sək(h) LH: sək, səC (Schuessler, Minimal: 111 [5-28a]) but considered the terms representations of two different Saka groupings.
Beckwith, Empires: 405, n. 53, also argues that Suo renders Saka and cites Menander, History: 116/117: ‘the Turks, who had formerly been called the Sacae’ (ὅτι των Τούρκων τῶν Σακῶν καλούμενων) as evidence for the Saka connection.)
The examination of the Tashtyk monuments on the Yenisey and the Pazyryk monuments in the Altai allows us to speak of a great closeness in the ancient cultural foundation on which the Altai and Kyrgyz tribes were formed. This closeness can be traced back to an even earlier period. As early as the Karasuk period, it reflected the cultural unity of many southern Siberian tribes, which were referred to by the Chinese under the general name of Dinlin."
Examining the Tashtyk Culture materials, we found several forms that persisted later among Kyrgyz antiquities. This continuity is also confirmed by actual Kyrgyz artifacts. However, along with such data on the significance of the local Yenisey tradition in Kyrgyz culture, the Tashtyk monuments indicate a heterogeneity and a mixed composition of the Yenisey tribes around the beginning of the Common Era.
The Tashtyk Culture burial masks most vividly demonstrated this heterogeneity. They showed the spread of Mongoloid features during the Tashtyk period, which contributed to the formation of a new type of Yenisey population that persisted up until modern times.
In the study of the Tashtyk masks, all written evidence of the mixed type of the Yenisey Kyrgyz, who retained ancient Europoid traits to some extent up until the 11th century, was considered. Attention was also drawn to a direct reference in the Chinese chronicles to the origin of the Hyagas (Yenisey Kyrgyz) as a result of the mixing of the Dinlins with the Altai Turks and the Gyan-guns. The connection with the Altai peoples is confirmed by the kinship between the Kyrgyz and the Turks in the legend about the sons of Nishidu.
As for the Gyan-gun, most researchers identify them as tribes that had long borne the name "Kyrgyz," preserved only in a distorted form through Chinese transcription in the History of the Early Han. By mixing with the Yenisey Dinlins during the Tashtyk period, they passed their name "Kyrgyz" to the Yenisey region. However, it would be incorrect to assume that the Gyan-guns had always inhabited the Yenisey region alongside the Dinlins.
This is refuted primarily by the area of their distribution given in the History of the Early Han. It says that the famous Zhi-Zhi Shanyu, in his westward movement, "having conquered the Gyan-gun, established his residence there, 7000 li to the west of the eastern Shanyu's horde, and 5000 li north of Cheshi."
If we accept these coordinates, with the li of the 1st century BCE being approximately 1/3 of a versta (Russian measure of length), and counting, on one side, from the Tola River basin to the west, and on the other, from Turpan to the north, we will not even reach the upper Yenisey.
Instead, the intersection of both lines occurs in the interesting region of northwestern Mongolia, with its center being Lake Kyrgyz-nur. It seems that to the southeast of the Altai and south of the Yenisey — regions that were then Dinlin — the nomadic camps of the Gyan-gun should be located. It is possible that the name of Lake Kyrgyz dates back to this ancient period.
The inhabitants of the southern regions, who lay in the path of the Hun conquests — the Gyan-gun — may have earlier adopted a Mongoloid admixture. Later, they passed it on to their northern neighbors, the Yenisey Dinlins. However, a question arises about the causes of this mixing. In this context, one cannot overlook a certain coincidence.
Judging by the Tashtyk masks, Mongoloid traits began to spread among the Yenisey population around the beginning of the Common Era. Meanwhile, at the same time — in the 40s BCE — Zhi-Zhi Shanyu conquered the Gyan-gun and settled there.
It is easy to imagine what the conquest by the Huns and the prolonged stay of Zhi-Zhi in their country meant for the Gyan-gun. The Huns arrived in considerable numbers. It is enough to recall that, moving towards the Gyan-gun, Zhi-Zhi added to his army 50,000 soldiers from the defeated Ilimu Shanyu."
The invasion of a multi-thousand-strong horde likely caused the significant displacement of the Gyan-gun from their nomadic camps near Lake Kyrgyz. They left their homeland and, using the mountains as cover, migrated to the Yenisey, where they mixed with the Tashtyk Dinlins.
This mixing is documented by the Tashtyk masks. Since then, Chinese sources have associated the Gyan-gun (later the Hyagas), i.e., the Kyrgyz, with the Yenisey. The same placement of the Kyrgyz on the Yenisey in the early 8th century is also recorded in local Central Asian sources—the inscriptions of the Orkhon Turks.
However, not a single "runic" inscription found on the Yenisey, in the region where the Kyrgyz themselves settled, contains their name. The Yenisey inscriptions are dominated by local tribal names, which allow us to map some of the Kyrgyz tribal unions.
For instance, in the modern Tuva Autonomous Region, in the Ulu-Khem and Bey-Khem basins, the Tülbari tribes lived in the 7th-8th centuries, and in the Kemchik Valley, the Kesdim tribe. In the Minusinsk Basin, in the steppes between the Abakan and Yenisey rivers, inscriptions mention the "excellent people of the Bolsar."
As for the more northern regions, the tribes of Ach and Belig lived in the vast area from Uibat to the White Ius River, to the west of the Yenisey. The dominance of local names in the absence of the common name "Kyrgyz" (which, at the same time, was well known to Central Asian and Chinese politicians) clearly points to two factors.
First, it indicates the superiority of the indigenous Yenisey elements, for whom the name "Kyrgyz" remained foreign for a long time. Second, it reflects the political weakness of the Yenisey tribes in the 7th century when the bulk of the inscriptions in the Tuva and Minusinsk steppes were created.
This is further supported by the fact that in the 7th century, the alliance of the Yenisey tribes was not yet considered a significant political force in Central Asia. This is evident, at least, from the fact that during the brief dominance of the Hyagas, the Seyanto house (Orkhon: Tardushi) "had its gelifu for supreme oversight" there. The word gelifu or silifu corresponds to the title elteber in the Orkhon monuments.
In these inscriptions, two types of peoples (*budun*) are clearly distinguished: the more significant khaganates (*qaγanlyγ budun*) and the secondary elteber states (*älteberlig budun*). Thus, if the Seyanto maintained a gelifu (elteber) on the Yenisey, this does not indicate great power for the tribes under his control in the early 7th century.
This is also confirmed by the fact that after the Chinese government took control of the Tugyu lands in 630 and extended its power to neighboring regions, including the Yenisey, it appointed a "chief ruler" over the Yenisey tribes with the same title, silifu. Even when the Yenisey silifu, the most prominent Hyagas elder Shibokuy-Azhan, in 648 made the first diplomatic contact with China, he was awarded various honors and received a ceremonial reception, but he retained his modest title.
The strengthening of the Yenisey tribes coincided with the era of the struggle between the Eastern Turks and China for independence in 679-682. Unfortunately, the sources do not preserve information about the position of the Yenisey people during this struggle.
It is only known that as a result of the Turks' success, Chinese power also collapsed on the Yenisey. However, there is reason to believe that this was not merely a reflection of events in the southern Orkhon.
Apparently, the Yenisey tribes themselves united to actively fight against the foreign invaders. This is suggested by the fact that in the Orkhon inscriptions from the early 8th century, the united Kyrgyz, led by a strong khagan, appear in the north.
Türk Khagan Mochjo (692-716) held great respect for Kyrgyz Khagan Bars-beg. He even gave him the daughter of his predecessor, the liberator Khagan Gudulu (Orkhon: Ilterish), in marriage. Later, the Hyagas Khagan became Mochjo's main enemy, and his defeat was considered Mochjo's greatest achievement.
This is evident from the fact that, according to the Turkish custom of placing images of defeated enemies at the tombs of khans and beys, Bars-beg's image was placed first at the tomb of Mochjo—the Kyrgyz Khagan.
From the inscription of the Orkhon khans' advisor, the "wise Tonyukuk," discovered by D. Klements near Ulaanbaatar, it is clear that under Khagan Bars-beg, the Kyrgyz were indeed a formidable force and full members of the anti-Orkhon triple alliance, which, apart from them, included China and the Western Turks, then led by the Türgesh."
The "wise Tonyukuk" himself led the campaign against the Kyrgyz in the winter of 710-711. It was only thanks to the betrayal of their neighboring Az tribes that the Turks, "cutting a path through snow as deep as a spear and ascending the dark Kogmen mountains (Sayan range), defeated and routed the Kyrgyz people.
We fought their khagan in the Sunga region... We killed the Kyrgyz khagan and subdued his people." However, even after the death of their energetic khagan Bars-beg, the Kyrgyz did not completely lose their independence.
This is evident from the fact that, even after their defeat in 711, their embassies continued to visit China four times during the reign of Emperor Xuanzong (713-755). As is known, the dominance of the Orkhon Turks in Mongolia lasted until 745, when they were defeated by the Uyghurs.
However, it wasn’t until 758 that the Uyghurs decided to campaign against the Kyrgyz. According to the Selenga inscription published by Ramstedt, the Kyrgyz had a khagan again in the 750s. He, however, was not successful—"in 758, the Uyghurs conquered this state."
This time, the blow was stronger than the one under Tonyukuk: "Hyagas embassies could no longer penetrate the Middle Kingdom." The weakening of the Yenisey Kyrgyz is also evident in the fact that the new "Hyagas ruler" received the title of "Pitze Tunge Gin" from the Uyghur khan without the addition of the word "khagan." However, this same account shows that, although the Kyrgyz were subordinated to the Uyghurs, they did not lose a degree of autonomy, which they used in their struggle for liberation.
During the reign of Uyghur Khan Bao-i (808-821), "there were wars between the Uyghurs and the state of the Gyan-gun," i.e., the Kyrgyz, who were already very strong at that time. They had 400,000 warriors armed with bows. This figure is clearly exaggerated, as is the claim of the Uyghur victory over the Kyrgyz, which supposedly led to the destruction of the Kyrgyz state itself.
In fact, from 820 onwards, a new Kyrgyz ruler, Yaglakar, waged war against the Uyghurs for twenty years. In 840, he achieved a decisive victory over the Uyghur khan Zhang-sin.
During this victorious war, Yaglakar restored his khagan title, and after the victory and the destruction of the Uyghur capital on the Orkhon (modern ruins of Khara-Balgas), he moved his base from the Yenisey to the southern slopes of the Du-man mountains (according to Iakinf, to the south of Tannu-Ola).
This marked the beginning of the Yenisey Kyrgyz' dominance in Central Asia. However, it did not last long. The new contenders for supremacy in Central Asia—the Khitan or Kitai—apparently forced the Kyrgyz to abandon their conquests in Mongolia (this "withdrawal" is associated with the Khitan campaign to the west, particularly to the Orkhon in 924).
Nevertheless, even after this, the Kyrgyz retained their state on the Yenisey, distinguished by its independence and strength. The Kyrgyz suffered an irreparable blow only with the conquests of Genghis Khan.
Their resistance is evidenced by the fact that the campaign against the Kyrgyz began immediately after the Kurultai of 1206 and lasted a full two years. It was only by 1209 that the Kyrgyz resistance was crushed. However, they remained a threat. This is evidenced by the fact that Kyrgyz detachments were not included in Genghis Khan's army.
And they justified this distrust—in 1218, at the height of Genghis Khan's western campaign against Khwarezm, the Kyrgyz revolted behind the lines of the Mongol armies, which by then had already moved far to the east and west of the Mongol homelands.
The revolt was suppressed by a special punitive army commanded by the experienced Jochi. The severely punished Kyrgyz were placed under the control of Genghis Khan's youngest son, Tolui. However, they did not lose hope for liberation. The Kyrgyz staged a new uprising in 1254 during the election of Munkh Khan to the throne of Genghis Khan.
The events became so widespread that the Mongols were forced to send 20,000 warriors to the Yenisey. Despite their military strength, the Kyrgyz unrest did not cease. Only in 1270 was Mongol rule fully re-established on the Yenisey, and the Kyrgyz submitted to the Mongol governor.
But even subdued, the Kyrgyz evidently still posed a considerable danger. Therefore, in 1293, Kublai Khan ordered part of the Kyrgyz to be relocated to Manchuria, in the Na-Yan region.
Of course, all these events of the 13th century—the repeated military defeats and the relocation to foreign lands—had a devastating effect on the Kyrgyz and their unique culture, which for hundreds of years had been the foundation of their strength and independence.
The origin and characteristics of this culture, its various aspects, and its connections with the surrounding world should be studied using as much material as possible."
- Sergey Vladimirovich Kiselev, "Ancient History of Southern Siberia."
🧬 DNA Science Data:
“Haplogroup R1a1, more specifically, its subclade R1a1a1b2 (defined by mutation Z93), is the genetic marker of the Indo-European pastoralists, who migrated from modern-day Ukraine to modern-day Iran, India, the Kazakh steppes, the Tarim Basin, the Altai Mountains region, the Yenisei River region, and western Mongolia during the Bronze Age.
Naturally, R1a1, more specifically, its subclade R1a1a1b2 (R1a-Z93), occurs at high frequency among the Turkic peoples now residing in the Yenisei River and the Altai Mountains regions in Russia.
Compared to the Tuvinians, the Khakass (whose name was created by the Soviets from Xiajiasi (黠戛斯), a Chinese name for Kyrgyz, since they were regarded as descending from the Kyrgyz have noticeably higher percentages of R1a1 (35.2%) and much lower percentages of haplogroups C (1.1%) and Q (4%). However, N is also the most prevalent haplogroup (50%) of the Khakass (Gubina et al. 2013: 339; Shi et al. 2013)
As for the Altaians, the Altai-Kizhi (southern Altaians) are characterised by a high percentage of R1a1 (50%) and low to moderate percentages of C2 (20%), Q (16.7%) and N (4.2%) (Dulik et al. 2012: 234).
The major differences between the Khakass and the southern Altaians are the lower frequency of haplogroup N (in another study, haplogroup N is found at high frequency (32%) among the Altaians in general: see Gubina et al. 2013: 329, 339) and the higher frequencies of haplogroups C2 and Q among the latter.
The descent of the Kyrgyz (Kyrgyz) of the Tien Shan Mountains region (Kyrgyzstan) from the Yenisei Kyrgyz is debated among historians.
However, among the modern Turkic peoples, the former have the highest percentage of R1a1 (over 60%). Since the West Eurasian physiognomy of the Yenisei Kyrgyz recorded in the Xin Tangshu was in all likelihood a reflection of their Eurasian Indo-European marker R1a1a1b2 (R1a-Z93), one may conjecture that the Tien Shan Kyrgyz received their R1a1 marker from the Yenisei Kyrgyz. That is, the former are descended from the latter.
The other Y-chromosome haplogroups found among the Kyrgyz (Kyrgyz) are C2 (12~20%), O (0~15%) and N (0~4.5%).50 The lack of haplogroup Q among the Qirghiz (Kyrgyz) mostly distinguishes them from the Altaians.
During the Bronze Age and early Iron Age, the Yenisei River region was inhabited by Indo-Europeans. The dna study of 26 ancient human specimens from the Krasnoyarsk area dated from the middle of the second millennium bc to the fourth century ad shows that the Yenisei pastoralists mostly belonged to haplogroup R1a1 (Keyser et al. 2009: 401)
The high frequency of R1a1 among the modern-day Kyrgyz and Altaians may thus prove that they are descended from the Yenisei Kyrgyz. In addition, this may explain the reason why medieval Chinese histories depict the Kyrgyz as possessing West Eurasian physiognomy.
The Y-chromosomes of the Kök Türks have not been studied. After the collapse of the Second Türk Khaganate in 745 ce, the Kök Türks became dispersed and it is difficult to identify their modern descendants.
If they were indeed descended from the Eastern Scythians aka Saka (Suo) or related to the Kyrgyz, as the Zhoushu states (Zhoushu 50.908), the Ashina (royal Türkic dynasty, possibly related to the Turko-Jewish Khazar Khaganate, according to Peter B. Golden of Rutgers University) may have belonged to the R1a1 lineage.” - Joo-Yup Lee and Shuntu Kuang, University of Toronto, Canada
Source: “A Comparative Analysis of Chinese Historical Sources and Y-DNA Studies with Regard to the Early and Medieval Turkic Peoples’
Authors: Joo-Yup Lee and Shuntu Kuang from, the University of Toronto of Canada
“Kyrgyz are an admixed population between the East and the West. Different patterns have been observed in the patrilineal gene pool of the Kyrgyz. Historically, ancient Kyrgyz were considered to be the Yenisei Kyrgyz that may perhaps be concerned with the Tashtyk culture.
Extremely low Y-diversity and the presence of a high-frequency 68.9% Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a1-M17 (a diagnostic Indo-Iranian marker are striking features of Kyrgyz populations in central Asia. It is believed that this lineage is associated with Indo-Europeans who migrated to the Altai region during the Bronze Age and mixed with various Turkic groups.
Among the Asian R1a1a1b2-Z93 lineages, R1a1a1b2a2-Z2125 is quite common in Kyrgyzstan (68%) and Afghan Pashtuns (40%), and less frequent in other Afghan ethnic groups and some Caucasus and Iran populations (10%). Notably, the basal lineage R1a1a1b2-Z93* is commonly distributed in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia.
According to the published ancient DNA data, we found that, in Middle Bronze Age, Haplogroup R1a1a1b2a2a- Z2125 was mainly found in Sintashta culture population from Kamennyi Ambar 5 cemetery, western Siberia, in Fedorovo type of the Andronovo culture or Karasuk culture population from Minusinsk Basin, southern Siberia, and in Andronovo culture populations from Maitan, Ak-Moustafa, Aktogai, Kazakh Mys, Satan, Oy-Dzhaylau III, Karagash 2, Dali, and Zevakinskiy stone fence, Kazakhstan.” (Wen, Shao-qing; Du, Pan-xin; Sun, Chang; Cui, Wei; Xu, Yi-ran; Meng, Hai-liang; Shi, Mei-sen; Zhu, Bo-feng; Li, Hui (March 2022)
Source: "Dual origins of the Northwest Chinese Kyrgyz: the admixture of Bronze age Siberian and Medieval Niru'un Mongolian Y chromosomes", Nature
Authors: Wen, Shao-qing; Du, Pan-xin; Sun, Chang; Cui, Wei; Xu, Yi-ran; Meng, Hai-liang; Shi, Mei-sen; Zhu, Bo-feng; Li, Hui (March 2022)
“The modern-day descendants of the Yenisei Kyrgyz, the Kyrgyz people, have one of the highest frequencies of haplogroup R1a-Z93. This lineage believed to be associated with Indo-Iranians who migrated to the Altai region in the Bronze Age, and is carried by various Türkic groups. The Zhoushu [the book of the Zhou Dynasty] (Linghu Defen 2003, Chapter 50, p. 908) informs us that the Ashina, the royal clan of the Kök Türks, were related to the Kyrgyz.
If so, the Ashina may have belonged to the R1a1 lineage like the modern-day Tienshan Kyrgyz, who are characterised by the high frequency of R1a1 (over 65%). Haplogroup R1a1, more specifically, its sub- clade R1a1a1b2 defined by mutation Z93, was carried by the Indo-European pastoralists, who reached the Kazakh steppes, the Tarim Basin, the Altai Mountains region, the Yenisei River region, and western Mongolia from the Black Sea steppes during the Bronze Age (Semino et al. 2000, p. 1156, Lee, Joo-Yup (2018)
Source: Lee, Joo-Yup (2018). "Some remarks on the Turkicisation of the Mongols in post-Mongol Central Asia and the Kipchak Steppe ''. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 71 (2): 121–124. doi:10.1556/062.2018.71.2.1. ISSN 0001-6446. S2CID 133847698.
Kazakh DNA researcher Zhaxylyk Sabitov states: “Until the 9th century, the Kyrgyz lived along the Yenisei River in the Minusinsk Basin. In the 9th century, the Yenisei Kyrgyz migrated to the Altai and Irtysh regions.
“From 1326 to 1329, some Altai Kyrgyz moved to Semirechye and the territory of modern Kyrgyzstan.” He also published DNA sample data from the Sintashta culture, which he claims “is related to the Altai and modern Kyrgyz, while the Arban-1 samples from the Karasuk culture are ancestral to modern Kyrgyz. Genetic data from Arzhan complex (8th century BCE) also show parental genes of the Kyrgyz.”
It is known that the structure of Arzhan has similarities with the Sintashta-Andronovo kurgans (M.P. Gryaznov). It is known that Saka tribes lived in the territory of Kyrgyzstan, and later the Wusun tribe arrived from the east. The high percentage of R1a1 among the Kyrgyz appeared through three routes: from the Saka tribes, from the Wusun Sakas, and from the Dingling tribes. There is also a theory about the migration of part of the Yenisei Kyrgyz to the territory of modern Kyrgyzstan.” (Zhaxylyk Sabitov)
Source: “Historical-Genetic Approach in the Study of the Ethnogenesis and Material Culture of the Ancient Kyrgyz” - International Journal of Experimental Education
“The land of Modern Kyrgyzstan, populated at the turn of the eras by the Saka and Wusun tribes, was overrun by the Yenisei Kyrgyzes (Khakasses) in the 8th c. AD.
Since Kyrgyzstan is a natural mountain fortress of the Tian Shan mountains, it is an island similar to the Lithuanian Tatars, with high genetic inertia and limited influences. Essentially, all four are Scythians, the Saka Scythians, Wusun Scythians, Yenisei Kyrgyz Scythians, and the Lithuanian Tatar Scythians.”
Source: “The Lithuanian Tatars: DNA Ancestry Traced To The Eurasian Steppes”, Academy of DNA-Genealogy, Tsukuba, Japan, Igor Rozhanski
"Samples from the burials of the Andronovo, Tagar, and Tashtyk cultures were identified using Y-STR analysis, which allows for the comparison of these samples with each other and with samples from representatives of different populations, both ancient and modern.
The Andronovo haplotypes S10 and S16 have the following structure:
ANDRON S10, S16:
13-25-16-11-11-14-10-14-11-18-15-14-11-16-20-12-23
The greatest number of matches is observed with the Tian Shan Kyrgyz and the Southern Altaians. Complete matches of haplotypes in populations that are geographically close and share a common history are possible only in cases of genetic relationship; random matches are unlikely.
Thus, the Southern Altaians and the Tien Shan Kyrgyz are likely descendants of close relatives of the Yenisei Andronovites, most likely the descendants of the Altai Andronovites. It is well established by linguists and ethnographers that there is close linguistic and ethnic kinship between the Kyrgyz and the Southern Altaians (Baskakov, 1966: 15-16).
These peoples share the same names for their clan divisions (Mundus, Telos-Doolos, Kipchak, Naiman, Merkit, etc.). Kyrgyz legends refer to Altai as the ancestral home of their people. Several historians believe that the Kyrgyz and Southern Altaians once formed a single community and that the migration of the Kyrgyz from Altai to Tien Shan occurred relatively recently (Abramzon, 1959: 34; Abdumanapov, 2007: 95, 114).
Source: Volkov V.G., Kharkov V.N., Stepanov V.A. Andronovo and Tagar cultures in light of genetic data."
Commentaires