“The earliest human ancestors appeared in the vast expanses of Southern Siberia more than 300,000 years ago. The arrival of Homo sapiens in the territory of Khakassia, as dated by the Upper Paleolithic site of Malaya Syya, occurred no later than 34,000 years ago.
By the end of the Stone Age (4th millennium BCE), Neolithic hunters and fishermen began transitioning to a productive economy in the form of pastoralism. The first early metal culture—Afanasevo—emerged in the mid-3rd millennium BCE.
This center of metalworking is the oldest known in all of Northern and Eastern Asia. The end of the Bronze Age saw the flourishing of the Karasuk culture (13th–8th centuries BCE), which reached a high level in mining and metallurgy, as well as in dairy-oriented animal husbandry.
By the 7th century BCE, during the Early Iron Age, the sedentary agricultural Tagar culture (7th–3rd centuries BCE) developed in Khakassia and the adjacent forest-steppe regions. It was part of the Scytho-Siberian cultural-historical community.
This was an era of emerging class relations, which in the 4th–3rd centuries BCE led to the formation of the first South Siberian state. Ancient Chinese chronicles referred to its creators as the Dingling people, and their state as Dingling-guo. Southern neighbors wrote:
“There is the kingdom of Dingling.
The people there grow hair below their knees,
(they have) horse hooves,
(they) love to walk.”
The ancient inhabitants of Khakassia were thus portrayed as legendary centaurs. However, the dwellings of the Tagar people—log-built wooden houses, special enclosures for livestock, and numerous agricultural tools—attest to their settled way of life.
The Tagar period is also marked by impressive burial monuments, including the “royal” tombs in the protected Salbyk Basin. The largest burial mound originally stood 25–30 meters high, with massive stone blocks transported from distances of 20 to 70 km to form the base of this earthen pyramid.
Around 201 BCE, the Dingling state was destroyed by the Xiongnu armies. The Turkic-speaking Kyrgyz tribe moved into the Khakas-Minusinsk Basin. Thus, for the first time in written sources (in the works of Sima Qian), the Kyrgyz appear in descriptions of Xiongnu conquests (rendered in traditional Russian transcription as Gegun).
The ethnonym later appears in references to events in 49 BCE (as Gyangu), in 553 CE (Kigu), in 638 CE (Gegu), in 648 CE (again as Gyangu), and between 758 and 843 CE (Hyagas). It is important to note that the Kyrgyz are the first people whose Turkic language affiliation is reliably attested in Chinese historical records.
The Chinese depicted the subsequent situation as follows: “The tribes of the Gyegu (Gyan-Gun) merged with the Dingling.” The Kyrgyz became the military-aristocratic elite of this new ethno-political entity. They established an institution of interethnic domination, a system known in many historical states: the Genghisids among the peoples of Central Asia, the Norman Rus in Kievan Rus, the Manchus in China from the 17th to the 19th centuries, and so on.
This situation persisted into the 17th century when Russian settlers in Siberia encountered fierce resistance from the local population, led by the beks of the Yenisei Kyrgyz.
The first mention of the Kyrgyz in Western sources dates back to the 6th century, in the writings of the Byzantine historian Menander Protector, who referred to them as Cherkis.
In the Orkhon inscriptions (early 8th century), the term qїrqїz appears multiple times in various contexts. The Kyrgyz were one of the four main Turkic ethno-social groups (alongside the Turks, Oghuz, and Kipchaks) that emerged almost simultaneously between the 5th and 7th centuries and influenced the history of Central and Middle Asia for nearly a millennium.
The first half of the 1st millennium BCE saw the emergence of a new statehood in the territory of Khakassia. In historical literature influenced by Professor L.R. Kyzlasov, the term “ancient Khakas” is used alongside “Kyrgyz” to refer to the early medieval population of modern Khakassia.
Linguistic, archaeological, and ethnographic evidence suggests that the indigenous ethnic group of the Republic of Khakassia—the Khakas—are direct heirs of the traditions of the Kyrgyz state that existed from the 6th to the 13th centuries.
The Kyrgyz fought relentlessly to defend their independence against aggressive neighbors. The powerful kaganates (from the Turkic kagan—emperor, “khan of khans”) of the Turks and Uighurs repeatedly launched devastating campaigns against Khakassia. According to their own inscriptions on stone steles, these raids yielded “mountains of grain, countless horses and livestock, weapons and jewelry, gold, and slaves.”
In 568, the Turkic kagan gifted a captive woman from the “Herghis” people (i.e., the Kyrgyz) to a Byzantine imperial envoy.
The Kyrgyz sought allies in their struggle against invaders. In 632, a Chinese envoy, Wang Yi-Hong, arrived on the banks of the Yenisei. In 643, a Kyrgyz delegation sent a return gift to the Chinese emperor consisting of “sable coats and sable pelts.”
From 648 onward, Kyrgyz rulers and merchants regularly visited China. In 711, an embassy from the Yenisei even reached Tibet. During this period, the greatest threat to the early medieval Kyrgyz came from the Orkhon Turkic kaganate (named after the Orkhon River in Mongolia, where the Turkic kagan’s capital was located).
The Kyrgyz ruler, Bars-beg, secured support from the Chinese and the Türgesh (a Turkic-speaking people of Central Asia) and proclaimed himself kagan, a declaration of full sovereignty for the Kyrgyz state. The Turks saw this as a dangerous challenge and decided to preemptively crush the alliance.
In the winter of 710–711, under the leadership of the fierce Kül Tegin and the wise Tonyukuk, the Turks launched a military campaign across the Sayan Mountains. A guide from the “steppe Az” people deliberately led the invading forces into the impassable, snow-covered taiga, where he was subsequently slain.
By the tenth day, “cutting a path through snow as deep as a spear’s length,” the Turks reached the upper reaches of the Ona River. Launching a sudden attack on the Kyrgyz army in the valley of the Son River, the Turks emerged victorious, killing Bars-kagan.
Satisfied with their spoils, the Turks soon withdrew. However, the Kyrgyz state on the Yenisei was quickly restored, as evidenced by new Kyrgyz embassies to China in 722 and 723, led by the grown sons of Bars-kagan. It is noteworthy that they were related to the Turkic rulers as dayis (maternal uncles), since Bars-kagan’s wife was the younger sister of Kül Tegin and Moqilyan (Bilge Kagan).
In the 740s, the Turks were defeated by the Uyghurs, who established their own kaganate and, from 745 onward, became the dominant power in Central Asia. They seized the territory of Tuva, constantly threatening the existence of the Kyrgyz state, isolating it from external relations and trade.
However, over time, the Kyrgyz managed to strengthen their position. Research by the Khakas archaeologist Y.I. Sunchugashev indicates that during this period, the number of smelting furnaces for iron ore doubled. By the early 9th century, the Kyrgyz had grown strong enough for their ruler to once again declare himself kagan, sparking a twenty-year war.
Finally, in 840, the Kyrgyz army, reinforced by Uyghur defectors, attacked the Uyghur capital, Ordu-Baliq. The Uyghur kagan fell in battle, and his army was scattered. Pursuing the remnants of the Uyghurs, the Kyrgyz and Khakas advanced as far as the Irtysh and the Amur rivers, even invading the oases of Eastern Turkestan. The historian V.V. Bartold referred to this period as the “Kyrgyz Great Power.”
Let us briefly examine the internal life of the most powerful state in Central Asia at the time. The Kyrgyz provided the state’s highest military and administrative leaders. They were connected dynastically and through marriage ties to the ruling houses of China and neighboring states.
Service to the “divine state” and its ruler was considered the highest honor for the warrior class. The ruler bore the title of kagan, while his wife held the title of katun. The imperial couple was revered as the earthly embodiment of the divine pair—Tengri (the Sky) and Umay, the goddess of childbirth and children.
According to Rashid al-Din, noble individuals held the title idi (meaning “lord” or “master”), which in the modern Khakas “z-language” is preserved as eezi.
The state had a unified calendar—a cyclical system with periods of 12, 60, and more years, which has been preserved among modern Khakas people. Interestingly, the first known mention of what later became a nearly universal zodiac system appears in a Chinese account of the Kyrgyz. At that time, the Chinese were not yet familiar with the “animal” calendar.
A state-run, runic-like script, derived via Sogdian influence from Middle Eastern alphabetic systems (such as Aramaic), was one of the Kyrgyz’ major cultural achievements.
Some of the population was likely sedentary, as evidenced by the cultivation of various agricultural crops, including wheat, millet, barley, hempseed, fruit trees, oats, and rye. While grain was primarily ground using hand mills, there are also records of the use of a complex water mill.
Plow-based agriculture and an extensive irrigation network enabled good harvests despite the dry summers and harsh winters. The supreme authority of the kagan was supported by a state apparatus based on military power.
A powerful army was organized into tumens (divisions of 10,000 troops), and during major wars, additional levies were called up. The core of the cavalry was the armored Kyrgyz knight—alyp—armed with a spear, saber, mace, or war hammer. The army was commanded by sanguns (generals), while other titles included bek, tarkhan, tutuk, and jargan (judge), among others.
The Kyrgyz nobility resided in fortified citadels. Sources offer conflicting accounts regarding the existence of cities in medieval Khakassia. However, it is possible that such references pertain to other regions of Kyrgyz settlement.
Trade relations were extensive, with caravans arriving in Khakassia from the cities of Eastern Turkestan, Afghanistan, Central Asia, China, and Tibet.
The 13th century marked a turning point in the independent development of the Sayan-Altai region. The Great Mongol Ulus, led by Genghis Khan and his descendants, crushed the independence and unique culture of the Yenisei Kyrgyz. The population suffered physical extermination and forced deportations under Yuan China.
Very little information is available about Khakassia’s history from the late 14th to the late 16th century. This period, known as the “Dark Ages,” was filled with dramatic events that are primarily preserved in folklore.
Professor V.Ya. Butanaev, who conducted a special study on this topic, proposed the hypothesis that during the late medieval period, various tribes of the Khakas-Minusinsk Basin (and possibly an even larger region) united under the leadership of the Kyrgyz who remained after the Mongol conquest, forming a single ethno-social community known as Khongor or Khongorai/Khoolai.
If we accept that Khakas historical folklore has preserved an actual ethnonym rather than a toponym or another term, further research must take into account a wide range of written sources from the 17th–18th centuries. Butanaev suggests that the Khoorai community can be considered the initial stage in the formation of the Khakas people.
By the 17th century, Khakassia was fragmented into four principalities (ulus): Altysarsky, Ezersky (Isarsky), Altyrsky, and Tubinsky. The Altysarsky ulus derived its name from the Khakas term “altynzarkhy”, meaning “northern” or “lower” (relative to the Yenisei River).
In a narrow sense, only its population was referred to by Russians as Kyrgyz or Greater Kyrgyz. This ulus included the following aimaks (subgroups): Kyzyl, Shuy, Aje, Tumat, and others.
The Isarsky ulus (from Khakas “issarkhy”, meaning “inner”) was located in the central part of the Khakas-Minusinsk Basin, stretching from the mouth of the Abakan River to the Ogur River. Its primary population consisted of the Izirs (Ezerts) and Kereits.
The Altyrsky ulus (possibly from Khakas “aldyra”, meaning “forward” or “upper”) was the southernmost and highest along the Yenisei. It had an ethnically diverse population, including Sagai, Beltir, Taban, Sayan, Irgit, Chistar, and others.
The Tubinsky ulus covered the right bank of the Yenisei, comprising the Tuba and Modar peoples, who were considered by the Kyrgyz to be “one people, one kin, one tribe.” Their vassal groups (kyshtyms) included the distant Tofalars of the Sayans and Tuba people of northern Altai.
In Russian documents from the 17th century, this united territory under Kyrgyz rule was referred to as “the Kyrgyz Land.” Representatives of all four ulus (with the Kyrgyz holding decisive influence) could convene an assembly to elect the “best prince,” who handled external political affairs.
The population was divided into two social classes:
•“Khaskha sook” (“white bone”)—the elite, which included the Kyrgyz.
•“Pora sook” (“gray bone”)—the lower class, composed of kyshtyms (vassal groups).
This social stratification was further reflected in the presence of two distinct groups:
•Chayzans (“best people”), who governed the administrative officials.
•Harachy (commoners).
Judicial matters were handled by yarguchi (judges) on behalf of the bek (local ruler). In peacetime, a bek maintained a personal guard of up to 40 batyrs (Khakas: matyr). In wartime, these batyrs commanded military detachments recruited from both the ulus population and their kyshtyms.
Among the peoples of southern Siberia, the Kyrgyz were noted for their military prowess and fierce temperament. Russian sources recorded that “one must always be wary of the Kyrgyz, who number about a thousand but are exceptionally warlike.”
The Khakas still use the expression “khyrgystyn khyrgychy” (Kyrgyz militancy), and they refer to the medieval period as “Khyrgys chaazy” (the era of Kyrgyz wars). Many Siberian peoples used the Kyrgyz as a means of frightening children: “The Kyrgyz will come, capture you, and eat you.”
Nevertheless, the Kyrgyz themselves were vassals of the Mongol Altan-khans, and later, of the Dzungars.
The first encounters between the Kyrgyz and Russians began in 1604 with the construction of Tomsk Fortress on the land of the Eushta Tatars, who were tributaries (piglery) of the Kyrgyz beks. Over the next century, the complex and painful process of Khakassia’s integration into the Russian state unfolded.
The first Russian fortresses were established in the sub-taiga zone, at the northern periphery of the Kyrgyz lands. Attempts at deeper penetration into historical Khakassia—driven by the greed of Siberian voivodes—were met with fierce resistance, which was supported by the Dzungar Khanate.
The imbalance of military power, the expanding Russian presence in southern and western Siberia, and events in the early 18th century—such as the forced relocation of part of the Khakas population to Dzungaria and the demarcation of the Russian-Chinese border—led to Khakassia’s final annexation into Russia.
The events of 1703 are typically interpreted as a mass deportation of the Khakas population beyond the Altai, closer to the Dzungar khans’ capital, possibly in collusion with the Russian authorities, who later sought to prevent the Kyrgyz from returning to their homeland.
The remaining population—now mostly composed of kyshtyms—was disarmed, subjected to Russian taxation (yasak), and administratively reassigned.
By the 19th century, the ethnic consolidation of the Khakas groups was complete, forming the following subgroups:
•Kachins (12,000 people in 1897).
•Sagai (13,900 people).
•Kyzyl (8,000 people), who assimilated Siberian Tatar and Kazakh Argyn groups that had settled in the Altysarsky ulus in the 16th or early 17th century.
•Koibals (1,000 people), descendants of Turkicized Mators and Baykots, who in the 18th century were under the rule of the princelet Koibal.
•Beltirs (4,800 people), descendants of migrants from Tuva who settled at the mouth of the Abakan River, from which their name Beltir (meaning “people of the river mouth”) is derived.
This period marked the final stage of the transformation of the Yenisei Kyrgyz into the modern Khakas people, as the once-powerful Kyrgyz state dissolved under external pressures and internal fragmentation.
Thus, although the majority of the Kyrgyz population was relocated to the Dzungar Khanate in 1703, those who remained or returned in the second half of the 18th century became part of the emerging Khakas people. The active agricultural colonization of Khakas territories, along with the establishment of imperial administration, deprived the Khakas of self-governance for two centuries.
However, the extension of Speransky’s 1822 reform to the indigenous population of Minusinsk allowed the Khakas to retain most of their ethnic territory, where by the early 20th century, they constituted up to 98% of the population.
The Khakas aristocracy (bai elite), through cooperation with Russian authorities, managed to maintain its economic dominance over the population. It played a key role in tax collection, enforcement of legal decisions, and mass Christianization.
With the establishment of schools in Minusinsk in the mid-19th century and later in Khakas villages, the children of wealthy Khakas families gained access to literacy. A small but highly influential group pursued higher education, including:
•Nikolai Fedorovich Katanov, a renowned scholar, doctor of comparative linguistics, and professor at Kazan University, who mentored Turkologist Sergey Malov and Bashkir educator and nationalist Zeki Velidi Togan.
•Mikhail Ivanovich Raykov, a linguist.
•Stepan Dmitrievich Maynagashev, an ethnographer.
By the late 19th century, the number of Khakas industrial workers in iron ore and other industries had increased. Together with Russian workers, they participated in political movements.
During the 1905 Russian Revolution, the “Union of Siberian Indigenous Peoples” was formed, advocating for a nationalist-liberal program in support of the State Duma. The revolutionary period in Khakassia was marked by tragedy, as in the rest of Russia. The civil war claimed thousands of lives in southern Siberia.
In Minusinsk Uyezd, the Red partisan army of Kravchenko and Schetinkin expelled White Guards and foreign interventionists. However, the deep societal divide was further exacerbated by the brutality of both opposing forces—the Soviet government and peasant rebels.
Amidst bloodshed and suffering, Khakas self-governance was reborn. On November 14, 1923, the Presidium of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee (VTSIK) issued a decree establishing the Khakas Uyezd with its center in Ust-Abakanskoye. On May 25, 1925, the Khakas Uyezd was reorganized into the Khakas Okrug, and on October 20, 1930, VTSIK decided to transform the Khakas Okrug into the Khakas Autonomous Oblast (AO) within its existing borders.
Later, for “economic-administrative reasons,” several northern districts were removed from Khakassia, where due to Soviet repressions, the Khakas population had already become a minority. After the liquidation of the Gorno-Shorsky Autonomous District, its western part was annexed to the Khakas AO.
During industrialization, Khakassia saw the development of extractive industries and the construction of a railroad. Agriculture underwent dramatic changes, leading to the tragic consequences of “dekulakization” and forced collectivization”.
Efforts were made to eradicate illiteracy, and a national education system was established. Unfortunately, the repressions of the 1920s–1930s affected not only the broader population but also the small but talented intelligentsia of the Khakas people.
The Great Patriotic War (World War II) inflicted severe hardships on Khakassia. Of the 57,311 draftees (one in five pre-war Khakas residents), 18,830 soldiers died in battle.
In 1944, the Khakas Research Institute of Language, Literature, and History was established, becoming the center of scholarly development in the region. That same year, the RSFSR government approved the opening of a Khakas National Boarding School and the Khakas Institute for Teacher Training.
In the postwar period, modern industrial enterprises began to fill the region. The rapid development of major industrial energy and non-ferrous metallurgy giants in the 1970s and 1980s significantly altered the demographic composition of the population. The time had come to elevate Khakassia’s state and legal status.
Between 1990 and 1991, the transformation of the Khakas Autonomous Oblast into the Republic of Khakassia took place, and its status was officially recognized in the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation.
The sub-ethnonyms of Khakas ethnic groups continue to exist at the level of internal ethnic consciousness, although the proportion of each group within the Khakas people has changed significantly over the past 80 years. Some groups have merged into the Sagai people, including the Beltirs, most of the Koibals, and Shor groups that ended up within Khakassia’s borders.
For example, in 1897, the Sagai made up 35% of the “Minusinsk Tatars” (officially recognized as Khakas from 1917), but by 1977, they accounted for 70%. The Kachins decreased from 30.2% in 1897 to 23% in 1977. The Kyzyls fell from 20% to 5%, and the Koibals remained nearly unchanged (2.6% to 2%). Meanwhile, by 1977, no one identified as Beltir, despite their 12.2% share in 1897.
At present, the consolidation of the Khakas ethnic identity continues in two main directions:
•The disappearance of distinct subgroup identities (such as Kachins, Sagais, etc.).
•The revival of traditional cultural practices that are shared by all Khakas.”
-S.A. Ugdyzhekov – A Historical and Ethnic Essay on Khakassia
Generics of Kyrgyz and Khakas
Joo-Yup Lee and Shuntu Kuang, University of Toronto, Canada - “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, “A Comparative Analysis of Chinese Historical Sources and Y-DNA Studies with Regard to the Early and Medieval Turkic Peoples’
Volkov V.G., Kharkov V.N., Stepanov V.A. - “The Southern Altaians and the Tian Shan Kyrgyz are descendants of close relatives of the Yenisei Andronovans, most likely the descendants of the Altai Andronovans.
It is well known that linguists and ethnographers have long established a close linguistic and ethnic kinship between the Kyrgyz and the Southern Altaians.
Some historians believe that the Kyrgyz and the Southern Altaians once belonged to a single community and that the migration of the Kyrgyz from the Altai to the Tian Shan occurred relatively recently (Abramzon, 1959: 34; Abdumanapov, 2007: 95, 114).
It is also highly probable that the spread of Indo-Iranian languages in this region is linked specifically to the R-L342.2 subclade.
At the same time, there is virtually no doubt that representatives of this subclade formed the core of the Indo-Aryans who ‘invaded’ India approximately 3,500 years ago.
The haplotypes of the carriers of the Andronovo and Tagar cultures show the greatest similarity with the haplotypes of the Southern Altaians and the Tian Shan Kyrgyz.
Preliminary results indicate the following: while the distribution range of the SNP marker L342.2 is significant, it remains confined within Asia.
In Europe, this SNP marker is practically absent, except among populations of clear Asian origin, such as Ashkenazi Jews, as well as Lithuanian and Volga Tatars.
This SNP marker is more frequently found among the following population groups: Arabs (primarily those living on the border with Iraq), Turks, Pakistanis, North and South Indians, Afghans, Southern Altaians, Tian Shan Kyrgyz, and Bashkirs.
According to most researchers specializing in Aryan studies, the semi-nomadic pastoralist tribes of the Srubnaya and Andronovo cultural-historical communities represent the Indo-Iranian group of the Indo-European language family.
These tribes are possibly the legendary Aryans who, in the middle of the 2nd millennium BCE, entered ancient Iran, crossed the Hindu Kush mountains in Afghanistan, and invaded the Indus Valley.
The modal 15-marker haplotype of one of the Southern Altaian groups within haplogroup R1a1a, as presented in O.A. Balaganskaya’s study (Balaganskaya, 2011: 22), fully coincides with the modal haplotype of the most numerous R1a1a cluster among the Tian Shan Kyrgyz.”
Wen, Shao-qing - “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), "Dual origins of the Northwest Chinese Kyrgyz: the admixture of Bronze age Siberian and Medieval Niru'un Mongolian Y chromosomes", Nature
#archeology #archeologist #civilizations #archeological #castle #ancient #history #historyfacts #historynerd #scythians #huns #kyrgyz #turks #nomads #empires #sarmatians #история #археология #цивилизации #скифы #сарматы #тюрки #киргизы #гунны #pasyryk #kazakh #massagetean #cumans #kipchaks #GoldenHorde #RussianEmpire #Yenisei #Siberia #Khoton #mongolia
Comments