Pazaryk culture and Turco-Iranic relations

Sorry, but thats an incorrect assumption.

The variety of Rou names were based on the pronounciation in names those tribes called themselves. To the Chinese it was how it sounded; it had nothing to do with the meaning of the characters. The reason there were several varieties of 'Rou,Rui,Ruan' names was because this grouping including many tribes and spanned for centuries.

 Second, the Rouruans were not Mongolians, this is a misunderstanding because the Ruru were active before and for much longer than the Donghu (ancestors of early Mongolian tribes). They were also located in the north and west of the Chinese, while the Donghu (Eastern Hu) occupied the eastern regions of Mongolia.

By the fact that the Rou's were not called Hu implies that they belonged to a seperate ethnicity. The Rouruan's spoke a Turkic language and among there there might be other extinct languages that might have existed near the Altay regions but were replaced by the much later Mongolian expansion.

This imformation is very important to the identity of the pazaryk because it shows the actual identity of the tribes that were living in these areas for centuries.

This website explains the misunderstanding. And informs us that the only appearence of Indo-Aryans occured much later after the Rouruan's themselves were expanding out west.

http://www.republicanchina.org/Turk_Uygur.html

Alternatively speaking, it is no strange to see non-Chinese websites advocating a school of thought stating that Ruruan [Zhuzhan], like Toba, were people of Eastern Mongolia and Western Manchuria and that "from the IInd and up to the IVth centuries, Altai lived under the influence of Syanbiy tribes. From the end of the IVth century the Altaian tribes were subjugated by the Zhuzhans ... and were to pay tribute to them [by ironware]." Also see http://www.altai-republic.com/history/altai_history_eng.htm for details.)
 
But after the Ruruan founder fled to the Altai Mountains, he conquered and absorbed remnant Hunnic tribes and Gao-che people there. Ruruans and Gao-che people warred with each other as well as allied with each other. Hence, the Ruruans were more Hunnic than anyone else. History Of Toba Wei Dynasty further commented that "Ruruans, though the descendants of the Huns, could not have their exact ancestry traced."

Western history books stated that "in c. 370, the so-called Huns were pressured by the Ruruans into invading Europe from the Central Asian steppe." We could say that the Ruruans were more Hunnic than the Western Huns they drove away towards the Europe, especially so after the Ruruans subjugated the remaining Hunnic tribes in the area. Western history recorded that the Attila Huns were so savage and barbaric that they ate raw meat. This life style was totally different from those eastern Huns who were semi-sinicized and civilized. A brief discussion of the relationship between the Ruruans and the remnant Hunnic statelets to the west and northwest is needed. To the west and northwest of Ruruans will be Hunnic tribes such as Nie-ban [Nirvana], Jian-kun [Kirghisz] and Su-te [Sogdiana] etc.



Edited by CiegaSordomud - 07-Oct-2008 at 00:53

What evidence is there that proto-Turks were Caucasian? What is Caucasian anyway, is the distinction so clear between Caucasian and Mongoloid, can a person not have features of both.

Originally posted by CiegaSordomud That goes back to the question of lineage. Caucasian or westerners are seperated by Mongoloids based on the migration paths their ancestors took. Out of Africa, the lineage that led to the Mongoloids came to India, then S.E. Asia, and differentiated in East Asia. Ancestors of westerners including among them Caucasians did not follow this path. Instead they stayed in West Asia or migrating to Europe and Central Asia. This is supported by genetic and cranial evidence, there is nothing mystifying about it. Read up on it at any genetic anthropology site like Dienekes.

A new theory, I think you should introduce your exact sources here not us, and you can not support your theory like there is nothing mystifying about it. Cause primary sources at hand so far dont even support it.

The Andronovo culture and other sites in central Asia have been up today believed contrary to your saying the earliest cultures related to Indo-Europeans not thosuands of years before them.