What were the origins, identity, and physiognomy of the early and medieval Turkic peoples?
You will find answers to this question in the monumental scientific research paper titled A Comparative Analysis of Chinese Historical Sources and Y-DNA Studies with Regard to the Early and Medieval Turkic Peoples by renowned Canadian scholars Joo-Yup Lee and Shuntu Kuang from the University of Toronto, Canada. The information is mind-blowing!
“In the past 10 years, geneticists have investigated the genetic variation of modern Turkic populations as well as ancient dna of the Xiongnu and others. The accumulated findings of these surveys, however, have not been adequately noted by specialists in Inner Asian history. In order to fill this gap, we conducted a comparative analysis of textual information and genetic survey data on the early and medieval Turkic peoples.
First, we examined the information on the origins, identity, and physiognomy of the early and medieval Turkic peoples contained in the Chinese Standard Histories (zhengshi 正史). We then discussed how the findings of genetic surveys complement the textual information. Both Chinese histories and modern dna studies indicate that the early and medieval Turkic peoples were made up of heterogeneous populations. The Turkicisation of central and western Eurasia was not the product of migrations involving a homogeneous entity, but that of language diffusion.
This article aims to fill this gap by conducting a comparative analysis of textual information and genetic survey data on the early and medieval Turkic peoples. First, we will examine the information on the origins, identity and physiognomy of the early and medieval Turkic peoples contained in the Chinese Standard Histories (zhengshi 正史).
We will then demonstrate in detail how the findings of genetic surveys on the ancient and modern Turkic peoples corroborate or complement the textual information. The conclusions of this article are as follows: both medieval Chinese histories and modern dna studies point to the fact that the early and medieval Turkic peoples were made up of heterogeneous and somatically dissimilar populations.
The Turkicization of central and western Eurasia in the past two millennia was not the product of migrations involving a single, homogeneous Turkic entity, but that of multiple waves of language diffusion involving both Turkic and Turkicized peoples.
The Xiongnu
The Xiongnu were the first nomadic empire-builders in Inner Asian history. Historians have been unable to confirm whether or not the Xiongnu were a Turkic people. According to some fragmentary information on the Xiongnu language that can be found in the Chinese histories, the Xiongnu were Turkic and not Mongolic.
The mid sixth-century work Weishu relates that the language of the Gaoche (高車), a Turkic people who established a nomadic state in modern-day Xinjiang in the late fifth century ad, and that of the Xiongnu were roughly the same with some differences. In addition, the mid seventh-century work Beishi recounts that the language of the Yuwen Xiongnu, a Xiongnu tribe active during the Sixteen Kingdoms Period (304–439 ad) in northern China, was quite different from that of the Xianbei, a Mongolic or Para-Mongolic people (Beishi 98.3270).
However, the linguistic affiliation of the Xiongnu may remain open to speculation even though some of the Xiongnu remnants later may have taken part in the formation and development of various Turkic nomadic confederations. Concerning the origin of the Xiongnu, the Shiji by Sima Qian (司馬遷, d. 86 bc) relates that they were descended from Chun Wei (淳維) (Shiji 110.2879), a legendary figure from the ancient Xia (夏) Dynasty, thus attributing a Xia origin to the Xiongnu.
Such an explanation is of no scientific value in determining the origin of the Xiongnu. Yet it does suggest that the physiognomy of the Xiongnu was not too different from that of Sima Qian’s own Han (漢) Chinese population, who also considered themselves descendants of the Xia. However, the Jie (羯), ‘a separate branch of the Xiongnu (匈奴別部)’, who founded the Later Zhao Dynasty (319–351 ad), appear to have possessed West Eurasian physiognomy, that is, ‘deep-set eyes’, ‘high nose bridges’ and ‘heavy facial hair’.
The Jinshu relates that when the Later Zhao Dynasty was overthrown, the Han Chinese rebel leader Ran Min massacred about 200,000 Jie, or those with ‘high nose bridges’ and ‘heavy beard (高鼻多須)’ (Jinshu 107.2792). Moreover, the Jinshu records the following conversation between a Jie notable and a Han Chinese official:
Sun Zhen, the chamberlain (詹事) of the crown prince, asked the minister (侍中) Cui Yue, ‘I suffer from eye diseases. What is the remedy for it?’ Yue, who had always been informal towards Zhen, teased him saying, ‘if [you] urinate in the middle [of the eye], it will be cured’. ‘How can you urinate in the eye?’ Zhen asked. ‘Your eyes are dented. You can urinate in the middle’, Yue said. Zhen harboured hatred and reported this to [Crown Prince] [Shi] Xuan (石宣). Xuan was the most ‘barbarian (hu 胡)’-looking among the princes. His eyes were deep. Hearing this, he became very angry. He killed Yue and his son.
The Dingling or Tiele
Unlike for the Xiongnu, historians know with certainty that the Dingling (丁零), a nomadic people who inhabited present-day northern Mongolia during the Xiongnu period, were a Turkic people. Chinese histories are unanimous in depicting them as the ancestors of the Tiele (鐵勒), a group of Turkic tribes that became one of the dominant nomadic powers in the Mongolian steppes after the disintegration of the Xiongnu empire (Weishu, 103. 2307; Beishi, 98.3270). According to the Shiji, Maodun (冒顿, r. 209–174 bc), who founded the Xiongnu empire in the late third century bc, subdued the Dingling (Shiji 110.2893), along with the Donghu (東胡), the Yuezhi (or Rouzhi 月氏) (Shiji 110.2889–90) and the Qirghiz (Gekun 鬲昆) (Shiji 110.2893).
The Dingling are mentioned again in the Chinese histories as Han allies who, along with the Wusun (烏孫) and the Wuhuan (烏桓), raided the weakened Xiongnu during the first century bc (Hanshu 94a.3787–88). The Dingling outlived the Xiongnu and re-appear as the Gaoche, or Tiele, in the medieval Chinese histories. As to the origin of the Gaoche, or Tiele, the Weishu and the Beishi describe them as ‘the remnants of the ancient Chidi (古赤狄之餘種)’ (Weishu 103.2307; Beishi 98.3270.), while the Suishu (c. 630s ad) and the Jiu Tangshu (c. 940s ad) merely describe them as ‘the descendants of the Xiongnu (匈奴之苗裔)’ or ‘a separate stock of the Xiongnu (匈奴別種)’ (Suishu 84.1879–80; Jiu Tangshu 199b.5343).
The latter two histories also describe the Tiele as a large and widespread group of tribes that inhabited not only the Mongolian steppes but also the Kazakh steppes. Some of them include Uighur (Huihe 回紇 or Weihe 韋紇), Syr Tarduš (Xueyantuo 薛延陀), Bayegu (拔也古), Hun (渾), Tuva (Doubo 都播), Quriqan (Guligan 骨利幹) and Alan (阿蘭), among others (Suishu 84.1880). Some of these Tiele tribes listed in the Chinese histories seem to have been non-Turkic-speaking groups.
For instance, the mid eleventh-century work Xin Tangshu writes that the language of the Bayegu was somewhat different from that of the Tiele (言語少異) (Xin Tangshu 217b.6140). Furthermore, the Alans were an ancient Iranic people known to classical writers from the first centuries ad. Regarding the Tiele, the Suishu also notes that ‘their custom was similar to that of the Tujue (Kök Türks) (其俗大抵與突厥同)’, but that the two differed in their marriage and burial customs. Importantly, the Chinese histories do not make any particular mention of the physiognomy of the Tiele.
The Kök Türks
The nomadic people who spread the Turkic language and the name Türk beyond the Mongolian steppes were the Kök Türks (Tujue 突厥 in Chinese) led by the Ashina clan. Importantly, Chinese histories do not describe them as descending from the Dingling or as belonging to the Tiele confederation. The Zhoushu (c. 630s ad), for instance, describes them as ‘a separate tribe of the Xiongnu (匈奴之別種)’ (Zhoushu 50.907) or ascribes their origin to the Suo state (suo guo 索國) located to the north of the Xiongnu (Zhoushu 50.908); Suo 索- Sak, Saka according to Schuessler, Pulleyblank, Beckwith).
The Suishu recounts that the Kök Türks are descended from ‘the mixed barbarians (za hu 雜胡) of Pingliang (平涼)’ (Suishu 84.1863). Interestingly, the Zhoushu also relates that the Ashina clan was related to the Kyrgyz (Qigu 契骨) (Zhoushu 50.908), who are described in the Xin Tangshu as possessing ‘red hair’ and ‘blue eyes’ (Xin Tangshu 217b.6147). However, as to their physiognomy, the Kök Türks differed from the Kyrgyz. According to the Jiu Tangshu, an Ashina commander named Ashina Simo (阿史那思摩) was not given a high military post by the Ashina rulers because of his Sogdian (huren 胡人) physiognomy:
Simo was a relative of Xieli. Because his face was like that of the ‘barbarian (huren 胡人)’ and not like that of the Tujue, Shibi [Khagan] and Chuluo [Khagan] were doubtful of his being one of the Ashina. Thus although he always held the title of Jiabi tele[i] (夾畢特勒) during Chuluo and Xieli’s time, he could not become a shad (she 設) in command of the army till the end …
It should be noted that the seventh-century Tang historian Yan Shigu (顏師古), who added a commentary to the Hanshu (c. 80s ad), describes the Wusun (烏孫) as follows:
The Wusun have the weirdest appearance among all the Rong (戎) of the Western Region (西域). Today’s Hu (胡) people, being blue-eyed and red-bearded, and having the appearance of macaques, were originally their progeny.
However, no comparable depiction of the Kök Türks or Tiele is found in the official Chinese histories. The Kök Türks became divided into Eastern Türks and Western Türks in the late sixth century (583 ad). The Western Türks, centred in the Kazakh steppes, developed into an autonomous tribal confederation that included some tribes not found among their eastern counterpart, such as the Qarluq (Geluolu 歌邏祿), the Chuyue (處月), the Türgesh (Tuqishi 突騎施), and perhaps the Khazars (Hesa 曷薩).
These tribes, which would outlive the Ashina clan and the Eastern Türks and play an important role in medieval Central Asian history, had probably incorporated some indigenous, non-Turkic elements of the Kazakh steppes. The Jiu Tangshu (194b.5179) writes that the language of the Western Türks was ‘slightly different’ from that of their eastern counterpart.
Interestingly, the Chinese histories refer to some obscure nomadic tribes residing beyond northern Mongolia as Tujue, i.e., Kök Türk. These include such tribes as the Muma Tujue (木馬突厥) [Wooden-horse Türk], the Xianyu Tujue (鮮于突厥) and the Niuti Tujue (牛蹄突厥) [Ox-hoof Türk], who resided to the east of the Qirghiz. However, not much is known about them and as to why they were designated as Tujue. According to the Xin Tangshu (217b.6148), the Doubo (都播), an ancestral tribe of modern Tuvinians, constituted one of the three Muma Tujue tribes, who ‘mourn their dead like the Kök Türks’.
The Uyghurs
One of the major Tiele tribes that were subdued and ruled by the Kök Türks was the Uighur (Huihe 回紇), who allied with the Qarluq, a Western Türk tribe, and the Basmil, another Tiele tribe, and overthrew the Second Türk Khaghanate in 745 ad. As to the origin and identity of the Uighurs, the Chinese histories describe them as descending from the Xiongnu and previously belonging to the Tiele (Jiu Tangshu 195.5195).
Importantly, they do not associate or identify the Uighurs with the Kök Türks. For instance, whereas the Shatuo tribe is referred to as ‘a separate tribe of the Western Tujue’ in the Xin Tangshu (218.6153), no such mention is made regarding the origin of the Uighurs. In fact, the Uighurs themselves viewed the Kök Türks as aliens,just as the latter had not regarded the Uighurs and Tiele (referred to as Toquz Oghuz in the Orkhon inscriptions) as Türks.
The Kyrgyz
The Kyrgyz, who destroyed the Uighur Khaganate in 840 ad, were centred in the upper Yenisei region, not in the Mongolian steppes. According to the You yang za zu, written by Duan Chengshi in the ninth century ad, the Kyrgyz regarded themselves as progenies of a god and a cow:
The Jiankun (堅昆) Kyrgyz] tribe, [unlike the Türks], is not of wolf descent. Their ancestors were born in a cave located to the north of the Quman Mountain. They themselves say that in the ancient times there was a god who mated with a cow in that cave. The people’s hair is yellow, eyes are green, and beards are red.
The Kyrgyz are distinguished from the Uighurs and other Tiele tribes in Chinese histories. The Xin Tangshu, which provides detailed information on the Kyrgyz and the Tiele tribes, does not include the former among the latter (Xin Tangshu 217b.6139–6145). In addition, while the Xin Tangshu states that ‘their language and script were identical to those of the Uighurs (其文字言語，與回鶻正同)’ (Xin Tangshu 217b.6148), it also notes the peculiar physical phenotype of the Kyrgyz.
The Xin Tangshu relates: ‘The people are all tall and big and have red hair, white faces, and green eyes (人皆長大，赤髮、皙面、綠瞳)’ (Xin Tangshu, 217b.6147).25 According to the Xin Tangshu, their neighbouring tribe named Boma (駁馬) or Bila (弊剌) resembled the Kyrgyz, although their language was different (Xin Tangshu 217b.6146).
This may imply that the Kyrgyz were originally a non-Turkic people who became Turkicized during the Kök Türk period at least partly through inter-tribal marriages. The Xin Tangshu relates that ‘the Kök Türks sent women as wives for the [Kyrgyz] chiefs (突厥以女妻其酋豪)’ (Xin Tangshu, 217b.6149).
In the case of Are (阿熱), the Kyrgyz ruler who destroyed the Uighur Khaganate, his wife was a Qarluq woman, while his mother was a Türgesh (Xin Tangshu 217b.6149). In addition, the Xin Tangshu relates that the Kyrgyz ‘intermixed with the Dingling (其種雜丁零)’ (Xin Tangshu 217b.6146–47). At any rate, the (red-haired) Kyrgyz ‘found dark hair ominous (以黑髮為不祥)’ and ‘regarded those with black eyes as descending from [Li] Ling (李陵)’, a Chinese general who had defected to the Xiongnu.
The Önggüt and the Naiman
From the collapse of the Uighur Khaganate in the mid ninth century ad to the rise of the Mongols in the early thirteenth century ad, the nomadic peoples of the Mongolian steppes remained largely divided and were loosely controlled by the Khitan Liao (907–1125 ad) and the Jurchen Jin (1115–1234 ad). During this period, there was an increase of Mongolic elements in the Mongolian steppes (Golden 1992: 284). The Turkic tribes that were still present in the Mongolian steppes at the turn of the thirteenth century included the Önggüt and the Naiman.
The Önggüt were probably descended from the Chuyue, the above-mentioned Western Tujue tribe. The Yuanshi states that the chief of the Önggüt, Alawusi Tijihuli (阿剌兀思剔吉忽裏), who submitted to Chinggis Khan in 1203, was ‘a descendant of the Shatuo-yanmen (沙陀雁門之後)’ (Yuanshi 118.2923). In turn, the Xin Tangshu relates that the Shatuo (沙陀) were ‘a progeny of the Chuyue, a separate tribe of the Western Tujue (西突厥別部處月種也)’ (ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn ʿAṭā Malik Juvaynī 1958: vol. 1, 55–6).
The origin of the Naiman is not well documented. However, one may speculate that the Naiman were an offshoot of the Uighurs. The name of the Naiman ruler before their defeat by Genghis Khan was Inanch Bilgä Bügü Khan according to Rashīd al-Dīn Hamadānī (1247–1318) (Rashīd al-Dīn Fażlallāh Hamadānī 1988: vol. 1, 97–98; Rashiduddin Fazlullah 1998–99: vol. 1, 69).
In fact, Bügü Khan was the legendary founder of the Uighurs, who was born of two parent-trees. Inanch Bilgä Bügü Khan was named after the Uighur progenitor Bügü Khan maybe because the Naiman also viewed the latter as their ancestor. In addition, the Naiman used the Uighur script, which was later adopted by the Mongols.
Perhaps their relatedness was one of the reasons why the Naiman and the Uighur tribes had special ties in the Uzbek Khanate of Khiva (1511–1804 ad). In the Firdaws al-Iqbāl, a history of the Qunghrat Uzbek Dynasty (1804–1920 ad), the two are described as friend (dūst) tribes (Shīr Muḥammad Mīrāb Mūnīs & Muḥammad Rīżā Mīrāb Āgahī 1988: 103).
As to the physiognomy of the Önggüt and the Naiman, Rashīd al-Dīn relates that the former ‘resembled the Mongols (bi-mughūl mānand)’ (Rashīd al-Dīn Fażlallāh Hamadānī 1988: Vol. 1, 99; Rashiduddin Fazlullah 1998–99: Vol. 1, 70) and that the girls (dukhtarān) of the latter were ‘renowned for their beauty and comeliness (bi-ḥusn va jamāl mashhūr bāshand)’ (Rashīd al-Dīn Fażlallāh Hamadānī 1988: Vol. 1, 99; Rashiduddin Fazlullah 1998–99: Vol. 1, 70).
The Kipchak
The Qipchaq were a Turkic group that formed the dominant nomadic confederation in the Qipchaq Steppe (Kazakh and Black Sea steppes) from the mid eleventh century to the early thirteenth century ad. After being conquered by the Mongols, some of them served the Chinggisids as auxiliary forces in the Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368 ad). The Chinese histories do not provide substantial information on the Turkic tribes of the Qipchaq Steppe but the Yuanshi (c. 1370s ad) offers interesting information on the origin of the Qipchaq clan Ölberli32 in the biography (liezhuan 列傳) of the Yuan general Tutuha (土土哈):
Tuotuoha’s ancestors were originally the tribe of the Andahan Mountain, by the Zhelian River, north of Wuping. At first Quchu migrated to the north-west, to the mountain called Yüliboli, by which they named their clan, and they called their state Qincha (Qipchaq). Its territory is 30,000 li away from China. The summer nights are extremely short.
The sun rises as soon as it sets. Quchu begat Suomona. Suomona begat Yinasi. They were kings of the Qincha from generation to generation.Concerning the physiognomy of the Kipchak tribe, the Zizhi tongjian houbian [Later compilation to the comprehensive mirror to aid in government], a seventeenth-century continuation of Sima Guang’s Zizhi tongjian by Xu Qianxue, states that they had ‘blue eyes and red hair (青目赤髪)’.
Genetic Surveys on the Turkic Peoples: The Genetic Variation of Modern Turkic Populations
The Y chromosome is one of the two gender-determining chromosomes that makes a person male. It is inherited from a man by his sons, who then pass it on to their sons largely intact throughout time until it develops a mutation. When a mutation, which is a permanent structural alteration in the dna sequence, occurs, a man with that mutation will then pass it along to all of his male descendants.
Over time, such mutations accumulate, which allow us to trace relatedness in groups of people. The male group or patrilineal lineage that shares a certain mutation is called a y-dna haplogroup. In other words, a haplogroup is a population descended from a common ancestor who had and passed on a specific mutation. Population geneticists have categorised human y-dna into over 20 major groups, with many sub-groups, to which all males belong.
Interestingly, the dominant y-dna haplogroups among various modern Turkic populations are not uniform, and neither are their haplogroup compositions. While they may share certain haplogroups, the frequencies of these haplogroups vary in general.
This means that various Turkic populations, including the Sakhas (inhabiting northeastern Siberia), the Tuvinians (residing in the Sayan Mountains region), the Altaians (various groups residing in the Russian Altai Mountains region), the Volga Tatars (residing in the Volga-Ural region), the Xinjiang Uighurs and the Uzbeks (inhabiting the Central Asian oasis regions), the Kazakhs (inhabiting the Central Asian steppe region), the Turkmens (residing in the Karakum Desert region), the Azeris (residing in the Caucasus region) and the Turks (inhabiting Anatolia and the Balkans), are not made up of homogeneous patrilineal lineages.
The Sakhas, formerly known as Yakuts, are the easternmost as well as northernmost Turkic people in the world. They were originally a horse-riding people from the western Baikal region. It is believed that the Sakhas descend from the Quriqan (Tokarev 1962: 107; Golden 1992: 143–4, 415), which was a Tiele tribe (see Jiu Tangshu 199b.5343). According to recent genetic surveys, the most typical Y-chromosome haplogroups of the Sakhas and their frequencies are as follows: N1c1 (89~94%) and C2 (2.1~3.6%) (Pakendorf et al. 2006: 346, table 6: N-TatC corresponds to N1c1; Kharkov et al. 2008: 200: N3a corresponds to N1c1).
Haplogroup N1c1 is widespread among the Uralic peoples and Turkic peoples. Haplogroup N originated in East Asia and approximately 8000–10,000 years ago spread from Siberia into eastern/northern Europe (Hong Shi et al. 2013). It is present in northeastern Europe at high frequency: 70.9% and 41.3% among eastern Finns and western Finns, respectively (Lappalainen et al. 2008), and 43% and 17% in northern Russia and central Russia, respectively (Balanovsky et al. 2008)
C2 is the major haplogroup of the Mongols, Kazakhs, and Evenks, who belong to the proposed Altaic language family (for the Evenks, see Pakendorf et al. 2007: 1017, table 5: C-M217 and its subclades C-M48 and C-M86 correspond to C2; for the Mongols and Kazakhs, see Wells et al. 2001: 10245, table 1: M130 and M48 correspond to haplogroup C2; Zerjal et al. 2002: 474: haplogroups 10 and 36 correspond to haplogroup C2).
In northwestern Mongolia and the Sayan Mountains region, now reside the Tuvinians. Perhaps, they are the descendants of the Tiele and/or Muma Tujue (Türks), one of whose three tribes was Doubo (Tuva). The major Y-chromosome haplogroups of the Tuvinians and their frequencies are as follows: N subclades N1c1 and N1b (42.2~45.1%), C2 (16.1~26.5%), Q (4.9~13.9%), and R1a1 (7.8~12.3%) (Gubina et al. 2013: 339; see Kharkov et al. 2013: 1239.
C3 in this article corresponds to C2). The frequencies of each haplogroup may vary depending on the surveys with different samples, but the above two recent surveys show that haplogroups N and C2 are the most prevalent paternal lineages among the Tuvinians. Haplogroups N and C2 are also the main paternal clans among the Buryats (see Kharkov et al. 2014: 183), who are the neighbouring Mongolic people of the Tuvinians.
Haplogroup Q, which is found across Eurasia, is present at significant frequency among the Turkmens, two Siberian peoples (Yeniseinan Kets and Uralic Selkups at 93.7% and 66.4%, respectively) (Tambets et al. 2004: 667), and the Native Americans (at over 90%).
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 Qirghiz (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.
The Western Uyghurs residing in Gansu Province, China, are descended from the remnants of the ancient Uighurs (Golden 1992: 409). Their major Y-chromosome haplogroups are C2 (21.2~30%), D (19.2%), O3 (34.6%), and Q (15%).51 Haplogroup D is the genetic marker of the Tibetans (Shi et al. 2008), while haplogroup O3 is that of East Asians (Xue et al. 2005: table 1). Haplogroup O3 is also found among various Mongolic and Turkic groups at moderate frequency. The low frequency of haplogroup R1a1 (1.9~7%) among the Western Yugurs differentiates them from the Qirghiz (Kyrgyz) and the Altaians.
Haplogroup C2 (formerly known as C3) reaches its highest frequency among the Kazakhs (66~73.7% among the Kazakhs of Kazakhstan, 75.47% among the Kazakhs of Xinjiang (Zhong et al. 2010: figure 1), 78% among the Kazakhs of Karakalpakstan (Balaresque et al. 2015: supplementary figure 1) and 59.7% among the Kazakhs of the Altai Republic in Russia (Dulik et al. 2011, 2–3), whose ancestors include the Qipchaqs and other Turkic groups, and the Mongols, among others.
However, some Kazakh tribes, divided into the Senior Horde (Ulu Jüz), the Middle Horde (Orta Jüz), and the Lesser or Junior Horde (Kishi Jüz), have their own representative Y-chromosome haplogroups. Among the Naiman, belonging to the Middle Horde, haplogroups C2 and O3 are the most common. Among the Argyn, another Middle Horde tribe, haplogroup G1-M285, which is believed to have originated in West Iran, is found at high frequency (57.7%).
The Qipchaq (Karakypshak) tribe, another Middle Horde tribe, is characterised by the R1b subclade R1b1a1a1 (R1b-M73) (63.6%). This is a rare haplogroup that appears at moderate to high frequency only among this Kazakh tribe and some Turkic groups of the Altai Mountains region (35.3% among the Kumandin: Dulik et al. 2012: 234), among others.
In general, the Kazakhs are characterised by a high frequency of haplogroup C2 and a low frequency of haplogroup R1a1, which differentiates them from the Kyrgyz and the southern Altaians.
The Karakalpaks, a Kipchak Turkic-speaking people residing in western Uzbekistan, exhibit a set of haplogroups similar to those of the Kazakhs with relatively lower frequency of haplogroup C2 and higher frequency of haplogroups N and R1a1: C2 (31.5%), G (26%), R1a1 (9.26%), and N1b and N1c1 (7.4%) among the On Tört Uruw grouping; R1a1 (29.6%), N1b and N1c1 (22.2%), C2 (20.4%), and Q (11.1%) among the Qonghrat grouping (Balaresque et al. 2015)
Compared to those of Inner Asian nomadic origins, the Turkic peoples who descend from both the nomadic and sedentary populations of the Central Asian oasis regions, i.e. Transoxiana and the Tarim Basin (which roughly correspond to modern-day Uzbekistan and southern Xinjiang, respectively), have more diverse sets of representative haplogroups.
The Xinjiang Uighurs, who descend from both the ancient Indo-Europeans and the ancient Turkic Uighurs (Golden 1992: 409), exhibit haplogroups R1a1 (21~28.6%), J (18.4~27%), O3 (12.2~17%), C2 (6.1~18%), and N (0~4.1%).
The modern Uzbeks, who also descend from the ancient Indo-European (Iranic) populations and various Inner Asian nomadic peoples (Golden 1992: 407), including the Shibanid Uzbeks, exhibit a set of haplogroups similar to those of the Xinjiang Uighurs: R1a1 (17.6~32%), J (5.9~21.4%), C2 (7~18%, 41.2%59 ), O3 (0~12%) and N (0~5.9%). Haplogroup J is a patrilineal lineage originating in the Middle East and probably reached Central Asia with Neolithic farmers from the Middle East.
As to haplogroup R1a1 among the modern-day Uzbeks and Xinjiang Uighurs, the extent to which it originated from the Bronze Age Indo-European pastoralists and from the Turkic and Turkicized Inner Asian nomadic groups, respectively, remains open to speculation. Haplogroups O3, C2, and N were in all likelihood brought to Transoxiana by various Turkic and Mongolic peoples.
The Qipchaq Turkic-speaking Volga Tatars and the Oghuric Turkic-speaking Chuvashes inhabiting the Volga-Ural region are characterised by high frequencies of haplogroups R1a1 (20.8~34.1% and 29.5~31.6%, respectively) and N (both N1c1 and N1b subclades) (23.1~28.3% and 27~28%, respectively) according to some surveys.
Haplogroups J (15.1% and 15.9%, respectively), I (4~13.2% and 11.4%, respectively), and C (1.6~5.7% and 0~1.3%, respectively) are also found among the Volga Tatars and the Chuvashes (Trofimova et al. 2015; Tambets et al. 2004: 667)
The Bashkirs, another Qipchaq Turkic-speaking people of the Volga-Ural region, are also characterised by the high presence of haplogroups N1c1 (3~65%) and R1a1 (9~48%). R1b subclades R1b1a1a1 (R1b-M73) (0~55%) and R1b1a1a2 (R1b-M269) (0~84%), C (0~17%), J (0~8%), and I (0~2%) also make up the genetic composition of the Bashkirs.
However, it is difficult to assess the extent of the Turkic and non-Turkic genetic contributions to these groups with the given data. In the surveys discussed above, haplogroup R1a1 has not been classified into its subclade R1a1a1b1a (R1a-Z282), which prevails among East Slavs, and subclade R1a1a1b2 (R1a-Z93), which spread across Eurasia by the Bronze Age Indo-European (Iranic) pastoralists and is carried by various modern-day Turkic groups.
One should also note that haplogroup N, found among the Turkic peoples of the Volga-Ural region and Central Asia, has ‘a common Siberian genetic background of Finno-Ugric and Turkic tribes’ (Khusnutdinova et al. 2008: 378).
Unlike the Turkic peoples of Kazakhstan, Tatarstan and Bashkortostan, who speak the Kipchak Turkic language, the Turkmens, the Azeris and the Anatolian Turks speak the Oghuz Turkic languages. The Turkmens descend from the Oghuz, a Turkic nomadic group that inhabited the Aral Sea and Caspian Sea steppes during the ninth and tenth centuries ad.
The founders of the Seljuk and Ottoman empires belonged to this Turkic group. According to dna testing of the Turkmens living in (Jawzjan) Afghanistan and northern Iran, they belong to haplogroups Q (33.8~42.6%), J (14.3~17.6%), R1a1 (14.5~16.2%), L (4~5.8%),67 G (4~5.7%), N and O (2.9~9.45%), E (4.3~5.4%), and C (0~1.35%) (Grugni et al. 2012; Di Cristofaro et al. 2013: 5–7)
While one may attribute Inner Asian origin to haplogroups Q, N, C, and O, it is difficult to determine to what extent haplogroup R1a1 (R1a-Z93) is from Inner Asia, since it is also carried by Iranic-speaking peoples such as modern Iranians (Persians) (4.5~20.3%) (Grugni et al. 2012: 7) and Pashtuns (51.2~56.3%) (Di Cristofaro et al. 2013: 5–7; Haber et al. 2012) At any rate, haplogroup Q also dominates the gene pool of the Turkmens living in Uzbekistan (Karakalpakstan).
More specifically, the Turkmens mostly belonging to the Yomud tribe exhibit haplogroups Q (73%), H (7%),69 R1b1a1a1 (R1b-M73) (5%), R1a1 (4%), G2 (4%), N (2~4%), J (2~4%), and C2 (1~2%) (Skhalyakho et al. 2016: 88). Therefore, one may assume that haplogroup Q is the most prevalent lineage among the Turkmens.
Finally, the Turks of the Republic of Turkey, a successor state to the Ottoman empire, show the highest haplogroup diversity according to an extensive survey of Anatolian Turkish Y-chromosome variation. Their major haplogroups are those common in the Near East and Europe (Cinnioğlu et al. 2004: 130): J (33.5%), R1b (15.86%, including R1b-M73, which makes up 0.76% of the Turkish R1b) (Cinnioğlu et al. 2004: 130), E (11.3%), G (10.9%), R1a1 (6.9%), I (5.3%) and L (4.2%). Haplogroups I, more specifically its subclade I2 (formerly I1b), is most common in the Balkans, reaching its highest incidences among the Croats and Bosnians.
Importantly, haplogroups N (3.8%), Q (1.9%), C (1.3%), and O (0.2%), which must have come from or via Central and Inner Asia, make up less than 10% of the total population (Cinnioğlu et al. 2004: 135).7 The Y-chromosome haplogroup composition of another Oghuz Turkic-speaking nation, the Azeris, is somewhat similar to that of the Anatolian Turks: J (31%), G (mostly G2) (18%), and E (6%) (Nasidze et al. 2003). The same holds true for that of the Azeris of northeastern Iran: J (27.2%), R1a1 (19.0%), R1b (17.5%), E (11.1%), G2 (8%), T (7.9%),73 Q (4.8%), and N (1.6%) (Grugni et al. 2012)
In sum, although they share certain haplogroups, modern Turkic populations exhibit dissimilar sets of Y-chromosome haplogroups with different representative haplogroups. The most prevalent haplogroups among different Turkic peoples are as follows:
-N1c1 among the Sakhas residing in northeastern Siberia;
-N (both N1b and N1c1), C2, Q, and R1a1 among the Tuvinians residing in the Sayan Mountains region;
-R1a1 and C2 among the southern Altaians and the Kyrgyz from the Altai Mountains and the Tien Shan Mountains regions, respectively;
-N and R1a1 among the Khakass from the Yenisei River regions;
-R1a1 (mainly R1a-Z282), N, R1b (mainly R1b-M269), J, and I among the Turkic peoples of the Volga-Ural region;
-R1a1, J, O3, and C2 among the Xinjiang Uighurs and the Uzbeks residing in the Central Asian oasis regions;
-C2, O3, and G1 among the Kazakhs residing in the Inner Asian steppes;
-Q, J, and R1a1 among various Turkmen groups;
-J, R1b (R1b-M269), E, and G2 among the Turks and the Azeris residing in Anatolia and the Caucasus region, respectively.
Such diversity implies that the Turkic peoples living in different regions have heterogeneous paternal origins and that they include linguistically Turkicised indigenous elements. This also indicates that the Turkicisation of many areas of Eurasia did not necessarily involve mass migrations of Turkic peoples.
Analysis of Ancient DNA
Importantly, studies of ancient dna extracted from human skeletal remains reveal that the early and medieval Turkic-speaking peoples also possessed diverse sets of haplogroups. dna analysis of the remains of 62 specimens excavated from a Xiongnu elite cemetery in the Egyin Gol valley reveals that the Xiongnu possessed haplogroups N1c1, Q, and C (Petkovski 2006: 114, 138–40).
According to the dna study of three human remains from another Xiongnu cemetery in Duurlig Nars in northeastern Mongolia, one specimen belonged to haplogroup C and the other to haplogroup R1a1 (Kim et al. 2010).
Interestingly, the Chinese geneticists who studied the dna in the human remains from the pre-Xiongnu and Xiongnu periods conclude that haplogroup Q was the major Xiongnu lineage: four male samples from the Eastern Zhou period (770–221 bc) buried in Pengyang, China, carry haplogroup Q (Zhao et al. 2010: 218). However, the authors do not clearly state that these samples were Xiongnu.
Another Chinese study found only haplogroup Q among the human remains from Barköl, Xinjiang, China. The authors of this Chinese study suggest that the Xiongnu spoke a Yeniseian language, since haplogroup Q is mostly found in Yeniseian and Native American peoples (Kang et al. 2013).76 If the samples studied by the Chinese geneticists are indeed Xiongnu remains, it appears that haplogroups C and Q were the most common Xiongnu patrilineal lineages.
While it may be safe to assume that haplogroup R1a1 was not a major Xiongnu lineage, it probably constituted the majority of the nomads residing in the Altai Mountains during the Bronze Age. A study of 14 human specimens excavated in the westernmost Mongolian Altai Mountains shows that the Bronze Age nomads of the Altai Mountains belonged to haplogroups R1a1a1b2 (R1a-Z93) (44.45%), Q subclade Q1a2a1-L54 (44.45%) and C (11.12%) (Hollard et al. 2014: 201)
One should note here that the above-discussed genetic makeup of the Xiongnu and their neighbouring Altaian nomads, who were probably incorporated into the Xiongnu confederation, corroborates the Xiongnu phenotypical characteristics depicted in Chinese histories.
It is likely that the Inner Asian-looking Xiongnu mostly belonged to Y-chromosome haplogroups C2, Q, and N, while the West Eurasian-looking Jie probably belonged to Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a1.
Alternatively, if the Jie, ‘a separate branch of the Xiongnu’, who founded the Later Zhao Dynasty (319–351 ad), were indeed a Yeniseian-speaking people, they may have been carriers of haplogroup Q and resembled modern-day Kets of Siberia.
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 medieval Sakhas were characterised by haplogroup N1c1 like their modern descendants. The analysis of the Y-chromosome dna extracted from 58 mummified frozen bodies dating from the fifteenth to the nineteenth centuries shows that haplogroup N1c1 accounts for 61% of the Sakha male samples (38% of the samples were unidentifiable. This indicates that the Turkic nomads inhabiting the west Baikal region around the fifteenth century and earlier were also characterised by haplogroup N, perhaps like modern-day Tuvinians.
If the Sakhas are indeed descended from the Quriqan, a Tiele tribe, it may be that the official Chinese histories differentiated between the Yenisei Kyrgyz and the Dingling/Tiele because the two were distinct peoples, perhaps characterised by haplogroup R1a1 and haplogroup N, repectively.
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.
Like the Kök Türks, the Y-chromosomes of the Tiele or the ancient Uighurs have not been tested. Yet we may perhaps infer their genetic markers from the dna testing of the medieval Sakhas, modern-day Western Yugurs, Naimans and Buryats. As discussed above, the Western Yugurs and Naimans are the descendants of the ancient Uighurs and are characterised by moderate to high frequencies of haplogroups C2, O3, and Q and by the absence, or a low frequency, of haplogroup R1a1.
The Buryats are viewed by some historians as (at least partly) descending from the Quriqan (e.g. Tokarev 1962: 106–7), a Tiele tribe, like the Sakhas, and are characterised by the high frequencies of haplogroups C2 (40%) and N (48%) (Kharkov et al. 2014: 183). If the Western Yugurs, Naimans, Sakhas, and Buryats, along with the Tuvinians, are the modern descendants of the medieval Tiele, one may assume that the Tiele (or at least the Tiele who resided in Mongolia) were carriers of haplogroups C2, N, O3, and Q, among others.
The mitochondrial dna extracted from the remains of the Kipchaks (Cumanians) has been tested by Hungarian geneticists. Interestingly, their study reveals that the Kipchaks possessed West Eurasian mitochondrial dna lineages, even though analysis of their skulls shows that the Kipchak specimens possessed Inner Asian physiognomy (Bogácsi-Szabó et al. 2005: 642, 658).
The Y-chromosomes of the Kipchak specimens were not tested in this study. However, the Y-chromosome haplogroup of the medieval Kipchaks may be inferred from those of their modern descendants among the Kazakhs. As discussed above, the Kipchak (Karakypshak) tribe belonging to the Kazakh Middle Horde is characterised by a high frequency of R1b1a1a1 (R1b-M73) (Sabitov 2013: 35).
This may be the reason why the Zizhi tongjian houbian described the medieval Kipchaks (Qincha 欽察) as possessing ‘blue eyes and red hair’ (Zizhi tongjian houbian, chapter 141). Alternatively, we may assume that the modern descendants of the Kipchaks are the western Kazakhs, belonging to the Lesser Horde, who are characterised by a high frequency of C2 subclade C2b1b1 (formerly known as C3c1). This haplogroup may explain why the Kipchak crania excavated from the kurgans (burial mounds) of eastern Ukraine possess Inner Asian physiognomy (Oshanin 1964: 24, 32).
The major Y-chromosome haplogroups of the medieval Turkmens may also be inferred from those of their modern descendants, which are haplogroups Q, R1a1, J and N, among others. The presence of haplogroups R1a1 and J among the Turkmens may explain the reason why the medieval Turkmens were described as having lost their original Turkic physiognomy and as becoming Tajik-looking, i.e., sedentary Iranian-looking, by Muslim writers. At the same time, haplogroups Q and N may explain why al-Masʿūdī wrote that the Oghuz Turks residing in Yengi-kent had ‘slanted eyes’ and ‘dimunitive stature’ (al-Masʿūdī 1962–: Vol. 1:212).
In sum, like the modern-day Turkic peoples, the Xiongnu (who had haplogroups C2, Q, N and R1a1), the Sakhas (characterised by haplogroup N), the Yenisei Kyrgyz (characterised by haplogroup R1a1), the Tiele (who had haplogroups C2, N, O3, and Q, among others), the Turkmens (who had haplogroups Q, J, R1a1 and N), and the Qipchaqs (who probably had haplogroup R1b1a1a1 (R1b-M73) and C2, among others) possessed different representative haplogroups and exhibited dissimilar haplogroup compositions.
It is therefore likely that the early and medieval Turkic peoples themselves did not form a homogeneous entity and that some of them, non-Turkic by origin, had become Turkicised at some point in history. Accordingly, one may also suggest that many of the modern Turkic-speaking populations, who exhibit more diverse haplogroup compositions, are not direct descendants of the early Turkic peoples.
On a final note, one should remember that medieval Chinese historians did not classify the Inner Asian tribes into Turkic-speaking and Mongolic-speaking groups. Likewise, Muslim writers generally viewed the Mongols and other non-Turkic Inner Asian tribes as a branch of Turks. Genetic studies corroborate the fact that drawing a clear line between the historical Mongolic peoples and the Turkic peoples is unrealistic, since the two shared such haplogroups as C2, N, Q, O3 and even R1a1.
The geneticists who analysed the dna of the Xiongnu specimens from the Egyin Gol necropolis and that of modern Mongolians suggest that ‘the impact of the succession of Turkic and Mongolian confederations on the territory of the current Mongolia was a cultural or linguistic process rather than a migratory and/or genetic one’ (Keyser-Tracqui et al. 2006: 279).
Similarly, a comparative study of the autosomal dna of the Mongols and the Tsaatan, a Turkic people residing in northern Mongolia, also concludes that the two, along with the Sakhas, form the same cluster and are genetically distinct from other world populations (Brissenden et al. 2015: 82).
Finally, an extensive study of the genetic legacy of the Turkic nomads across Eurasia based on autosomal dna analysis reveals that the source populations for the Turkic nomads who spread ‘Asian genes’ to non-Turkic peoples were (the ancestors of modern-day) Tuvinians, Mongols and Buryats, despite the fact that the latter two are Mongolic (Yunusbayev et al. 2015).81 In sum, one should note that the early eastern Turkic peoples were in all likelihood genetically closer to their neighbouring Mongolic peoples than to various later Turkic peoles of central and western Eurasia.
Conclusion
In this article, we conducted a comparative analysis of textual information provided in Chinese histories and genetic survey data on the origins, identity and physiognomy of the early and medieval Turkic peoples. As discussed above, the official Chinese histories do not view the Turkic peoples such as the Tiele/Uighur, Kök Türks (Tujue) and Qirghiz as belonging to a single uniform entity called ‘Turks’. Instead, they describe them as forming separate identities.
The Chinese histories also depict the Turkic-speaking peoples as typically possessing East/Inner Asian physiognomy, as well as occasionally having West Eurasian physiognomy. dna studies corroborate such characterisation of the Turkic peoples. While it is true that insufficient amounts of ancient dna samples have been studied, one may still infer from the given genetic data that the early and medieval Turkic peoples possessed dissimilar sets of Y-chromosome haplogroups with different representative haplogroups, some of which were of West Eurasian origin.
This means that the various Turkic peoples did not have a common patrilineal origin or uniform physiognomy. Notably, the Xiongnu themselves, whether they were a Turkic-speaking entity or not, were a hybrid people composed of carriers of both East and Inner Eurasian haplogroups C2, N, and Q and West Eurasian haplogroup R1a1.
The analysis of genetic survey data on the Turkic peoples also allows us to speculate on the Turkic Urheimat. We suggest that it was a geographical region where the carriers of haplogroups C2, N, Q and R1a1 could intermix, since these haplogroups are carried by various past and modern-day Turkic peoples in eastern Inner Asia and the Xiongnu. It has been suggested that the early Turkic peoples probably had contact with Indo-European, Uralic, Yeniseian, and Mongolic groups in their formative period (Golden 2006: 139).
As non-linguists, we are unqualified to discuss the origin of the Turkic languages. However, drawing on the findings of dna studies, we are inclined to think that certain similarities that exist between the Turkic languages and the Mongolic, Tungusic and Uralic languages are at least partly associated with haplogroups C2 and N, among others.
More specifically, we conjecture that the Turkic languages came into existence as a result of the fusion of Uralic groups (characterized by a high frequency of haplogroup N subclades) and Proto-Mongolic groups (characterized by a high frequency of haplogroup C2) who also merged with other linguistic groups, including Yeniseian speakers (characterized by a high frequency of haplogroup Q like the Kets) and Indo-European speakers (characterized by a high frequency of haplogroups R1a1).
The best candidate for the Turkic Urheimat would then be northern and western Mongolia and Tuva, where all these haplogroups could have intermingled, rather than eastern and southern Mongolia or the Yenisei River and the Altai Mountains regions in Russia.
Finally, we suggest that the Turkicisation of central and western Eurasia was the product of multiple processes of language diffusion that involved not only originally Turkic-speaking groups, but also Turkicised (Indo-European) groups. That is, the earliest Turkic groups first Turkicised some non-Turkic groups residing in Mongolia and beyond. Then both Turkic and ‘Turkicised’ groups Turkicised non-Turkic tribes (who were mostly carriers of haplogroups R1a1) residing in the Kazakh steppes and beyond.
Through multiple processes, including the Mongol conquest, the members of the extended Turkic entity spread the Turkic languages across Eurasia. They Turkicised various non-Turkic peoples of central and western Eurasia, including those in the Central Asian oases (who were carriers of haplogroups R1a1 and J, among others).
Importantly, the Turkmens, who were themselves made up of both original Turkic and Turkicised elements (carriers of haplogroups Q, J, R1a1 and N, among others), reached Anatolia and Turkicised the local populations carrying haplogroups J, R1b, G, E, R1a1 and T, among others, who have now become ‘Turks’.” - Joo-Yup Lee and Shuntu Kuang fro, the University of Toronto of 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 fro, the University of Toronto of Canada
Link to the article and academic references:
Comments