Talk:Tocharians

Tadjiks preseve many physical characteristics in common with European while their language has more in common with the Indo branch of the Indo-European language family. The reason for this contradiction is supposed that they are descendants of the European language family group called Tocharians but who over time were linguistically Aryanised.

They are probably the "purest" descendants of peoples whose mummies were found in the Taklamakan desert. They have intermixed much with Turkic peoples who surround them and thus contributed to the special Eurasian physical features of such tribes.

Whether the Yuezhi were an intermediate stage of this development is not an established fact.

-Kaz

The same archaeological work that discovered the original Tokharian documents also discovered a town and harbour works. While the Tokharians may have ended up as nomads, it seems likely that they were lakeside dwellers, (farmers, fishers or townspeople) in earlier times before the Tarim Lake dried up. -- Derek Ross 19:00, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Language

This statement: "Their nearest linguistic relative appears to be Hittite, used in Asia minor from ca. 1600 BC to 1100 BC. "

Was removed because it is dead wrong. Tocharian is not more closely related to Hittite than to other Indo-European languages (a consideration of the geography should point out how implausible this idea is) and some Indo-Europeanists hold (with opposition) that Hittite is less closely related to all of the other I-E languages than they are to each other.

We've already been through this before... Tocharian's nearest relative has been shown to be Hittite time and again, there are numerous references to this fact, just look at the vocabulary charts, and I can come up with plenty of citations if you like. Also, your edit claims of 'consensus' but it looks more like a POV to me. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 02:18, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Your argument is linguistically weak. Of course Tocharian shares some cognates with Hittite; both are Indo-European languages! But those cognates it shares with Hittite it also shares with other Indo-European languages, rendering the probative value of those cognates (for establishing an especially close link between Hittite and Tocharian) nil. As for your bogus claim of POV, what are you affirming? That Tocharian does share crucial early sound changes, like palatalization of the velars and the RUKI rule, with Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian? That's demonstrably false, as is shown by such words as TA känt "hundred", ākär "tear", TB okso "cow, ox".

Judging dead people by appearance is not always accurate

mtDNA of Scytho-Siberian skeleton Human Biology 76.1 (2004) 109-125

Genetic Analysis of a Scytho-Siberian Skeleton and Its Implications for Ancient Central Asian Migrations

François-X. Ricaut et al.

Abstract The excavation of a frozen grave on the Kizil site (dated to be 2500 years old) in the Altai Republic (Central Asia) revealed a skeleton belonging to the Scytho-Siberian population. DNA was extracted from a bone sample and analyzed by autosomal STRs (short tandem repeats) and by sequencing the hypervariable region I (HV1) of the mitochondrial DNA. The resulting STR profile, mitochondrial haplotype, and haplogroup were compared with data from modern Eurasian and northern native American populations and were found only in European populations historically influenced by ancient nomadic tribes of Central Asia.

...

The mutations at nucleotide position 16147 C→A, 16172 T→C, 16223 C→T, 16248 C→T, and 16355 C→T correspond to substitutions characteristic of the Eurasian haplogroup N1a (Richards et al. 2000). The haplotype comparison with the mtDNA sequences of 8534 individuals showed that this sequence was not found in any other population.

...

The N1a haplogroup was not observed among the native American, east Asian, Siberian, Central Asian, and western European populations. The geographic distribution of haplogroup N1a is restricted to regions neighboring the Eurasian steppe zone. Its frequency is very low, less than 1.5% (Table 6), in the populations located in the western and southwestern areas of the Eurasian steppe. Haplogroup N1a is, however, more frequent in the populations of the southeastern region of the Eurasian steppe, as in Iran (but only 12 individuals were studied) and southeastern India (Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh territories). More precisely, in India haplogroup N1a is absent from the Dravidic-speaking population and is present in only five Indo-Aryan-speaking individuals, four of whom belonged to the Havik group, an upper Brahman caste (Mountain et al. 1995).

...

The absence of the Eurasian haplogroup N1a in the 490 modern individuals of Central Asia (Shields et al. 1993; Kolman et al. 1996; Comas et al. 1998; Derenko et al. 2000; Yao et al. 2000; Yao, Nie et al. 2002) suggests changes in the genetic structure of Central Asian populations, probably as a result of Asian population movements to the west during the past 2500 years.

AAPA 2004

East of Eden, west of Cathay: An investigation of Bronze Age interactions along the Great Silk Road.

B.E. Hemphill.

The Great Silk Road has long been known as a conduit for contacts between East and West. Until recently, these interactions were believed to date no earlier than the second century B.C. However, recent discoveries in the Tarim Basin of Xinjiang (western China) suggest that initial contact may have occurred during the first half of the second millennium B.C. The site of Yanbulaq has been offered as empirical evidence for direct physical contact between Eastern and Western populations, due to architectural, agricultural, and metallurgical practices like those from the West, ceramic vessels like those from the East, and human remains identified as encompassing both Europoid and Mongoloid physical types.

Eight cranial measurements from 30 Aeneolithic, Bronze Age, Iron Age and modern samples, encompassing 1505 adults from the Russian steppe, China, Central Asia, Iran, Tibet, Nepal and the Indus Valley were compared to test whether those inhabitants of Yanbulaq identified as Europoid and Mongoloid exhibit closest phenetic affinities to Russian steppe and Chinese samples, respectively. Differences between samples were compared with Mahalanobis generalized distance (d2), and patterns of phenetic affinity were assessed with cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and principal coordinates analysis.

Results indicate that, despite identification as Europoid and Mongoloid, inhabitants of Yanbulaq exhibit closest affinities to one another. No one recovered from Yanbulaq exhibits affinity to Russian steppe samples. Rather, the people of Yanbulaq possess closest affinities to other Bronze Age Tarim Basin dwellers, intermediate affinities to residents of the Indus Valley, and only distant affinities to Chinese and Tibetan samples

A craniometric investigation of the Bronze Age settlement of Xinjiang American Journal of Physical Anthropology (Early View)

Horse-mounted invaders from the Russo-Kazakh steppe or agricultural colonists from western Central Asia? A craniometric investigation of the Bronze Age settlement of Xinjiang

Brian E. Hemphill, J.P. Mallory

Numerous Bronze Age cemeteries in the oases surrounding the Täklamakan Desert of the Tarim Basin in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, western China, have yielded both mummified and skeletal human remains. A dearth of local antecedents, coupled with woolen textiles and the apparent Western physical appearance of the population, raised questions as to where these people came from. Two hypotheses have been offered by archaeologists to account for the origins of Bronze Age populations of the Tarim Basin. These are the steppe hypothesis and the Bactrian oasis hypothesis. Eight craniometric variables from 25 Aeneolithic and Bronze Age samples, comprising 1,353 adults from the Tarim Basin, the Russo-Kazakh steppe, southern China, Central Asia, Iran, and the Indus Valley, are compared to test which, if either, of these hypotheses are supported by the pattern of phenetic affinities possessed by Bronze Age inhabitants of the Tarim Basin. Craniometric differences between samples are compared with Mahalanobis generalized distance (d2), and patterns of phenetic affinity are assessed with two types of cluster analysis (the weighted pair average linkage method and the neighbor-joining method), multidimensional scaling, and principal coordinates analysis. Results obtained by this analysis provide little support for either the steppe hypothesis or the Bactrian oasis hypothesis. Rather, the pattern of phenetic affinities manifested by Bronze Age inhabitants of the Tarim Basin suggests the presence of a population of unknown origin within the Tarim Basin during the early Bronze Age. After 1200 B.C., this population experienced significant gene flow from highland populations of the Pamirs and Ferghana Valley. These highland populations may include those who later became known as the Saka and who may have served as middlemen facilitating contacts between East (Tarim Basin, China) and West (Bactria, Uzbekistan) along what later became known as the Great Silk Road.

...

It appears that neither Han Chinese nor steppe populations played any detectable role in the initial establishment or subsequent interregional biological interactions of Bronze Age Tarim Basin populations.

...

This research confirms that populations from the urban centers of the Oxus civilization of Bactria played a role in the population history of the Bronze Age inhabitants of the Tarim Basin. Yet these Bactrian populations were not the direct, early colonizers envisioned by advocates of the Bactrian oasis hypothesis (Barber, [1999]). None of the analyses document the immediate and profoundly close affinities between colonizers and the colonized expected if the Tarim Basin experienced substantial direct settlement by Bactrian agriculturalists.

...

This study confirms the assertion of Han ([1998]) that the occupants of Alwighul and Krorän are not derived from proto-European steppe populations, but share closest affinities with Eastern Mediterranean populations. Further, the results demonstrate that such Eastern Mediterraneans may also be found at the urban centers of the Oxus civilization located in the north Bactrian oasis to the west. Affinities are especially close between Krorän, the latest of the Xinjiang samples, and Sapalli, the earliest of the Bactrian samples, while Alwighul and later samples from Bactria exhibit more distant phenetic affinities. This pattern may reflect a possible major shift in interregional contacts in Central Asia in the early centuries of the second millennium B.C.

...

"However this books is some what dated since J.P Mallory in the 2004 article above seems to have a more well formed view.In his previous book he does not favour a single theory but states a number of possible theories for the origin of these mummies.Genetic tests on the Y chromosome of the mummies have been done, but not yet published.However recent studies of Central and South Asian populations have shown that "European" markers I,E and Alantic Modal haplotype (AMH ,which accounts fo 60% of Western Europeans males) are completly absent.(See Aryan Invasion Theory for Refs).The physical appearance of individual populations ,especially over thousands of years,is likly to alter,particularly when there is a mixing of populations,(note the presence of "European" female genes in current Turkish and Mongal populations)."

Both theories remain valid. If you wish to dispute the book or the article, please take it up in this discussion only.

Thanks

Where is the evidence

Looking at the mummies Tarim mummies they could be Turkman,Pakistani, Iranian or Indians (not all Indians look like Gandi).What does the word europoid mean, are they slavs, finns. I`ve read Mallorys` book and he only describes one as blond ,then later describes it as brunnete.He also,in my opinion, uses the words Europoid ,caucasoid and caucasian as meaning the same ,or is he sitting on the fench. What evidence is there that there are Indo-European (2500 years is along time,are White/Black Ammerican descended from the Apache,they have both been found in the same area in the last 2500 years)).I think the Beauty of Kroran looks like by mum (yes she looks that bad),David looks like my dad (but fater).Oh yes ,Im not white ,I`m light reddish brown caucasoid ,except when I ended up in A&E,the doctors said I looked very pale,something to the lack of blood to the skin,thankfully I got my color (US spelling) back.Ur david looks very pale to me,lost some blood over the past 4000 years I expect,you`d expect he would be darker considering the time he has spent in the sun,must have got bleached by the sand blasting.Quick,hide the pictures its the Police.

Why does one assume that the presence of "europeans?" gave civilisation to whoever,they could have just been economic migrants;the largest civilisation in ancient times just happened to be over the mountains eg the indus valley ,and don`t forget the BMAC.Does one assume that the chinese,africans,south asian in britain/ammerica gave english to the local population, if 4000 years from now we found negroid skulls in London .The age of these skulls would coincide with a massive production of english writing ,massive industrial and economic growth.It is also possible the the middle east had more `blondes` than it does now, since the arab invasion probably effected local appearance.Why do we assume all blondes came from europe.The Irish and Basques are paleolithic europeans, yet most have dark hair.

Here is a picture of a kalash girl that live Pakistan [1] [1]. The Kalash are unique in that the male genes are no different from other pakistanis,but their female dna consists almost completly of haplogroup J.J originates from the middle east and is wide spread in europe(supposed to have spread with farming).

--"Based upon haplogroup frequencies, 65-88% Greek admixture was estimated for the Kalash, consistent with a Greek origin for a significant proportion of Kalash Y chomosomes."

[Q. Ayub, A. Mansoor, A. Mohyuddin, K. Mazhar, S. Siddiqi, M. Papaioannou, C. Tyler-Smith, S.Q. Mehdi Biomedical and Genetic Engineering Division, Dr. A.Q. Khan Research Laboratories, P.O. Box 2891, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan, Unit of Prenatal Diagnosis, Center for Thalassemia, Laiko General Hospital, Athens, Greece, CRC Chromosome Molecular Biology Group, Department of Biochemistry, University of oxford, Oxford, UK]

--Seems to support this article quite a bit...

On the mountainsides of the Himalayas and the Indian Caucasus and under Pakistani and Afghanistan jurisdiction lives a tribe whose people call themselves Kalash. They claim to be the descendants of Alexander the Great’s soldiers who for various reasons were left behind in the depths of Asia and could not follow the Great General in his new conquests. Having no contact with the outside world for almost 23 centuries, they are quite different from any other neighboring nations. Light complexioned, and blue eyed in the midst of dark skinned neighbors, their language, even though it has been affected and influenced by the many Muslim languages of nations that surround the Kalash tribe, still incorporates vocabulary and has many elements of the ancient Greek language. They greet their visitors with "ispanta" from the Greek verb "ασπάζομαι" (greetings) and they warn them about "heman" from the ancient Greek noun "χειμών" (winter). These indigenous people still believe in the twelve Olympian gods and their architecture resembles very much the Macedonian architecture (National Herald, “A School in the Tribe of Kalash by Greeks", October 11, 1996).

Also note European Genes are a subset of those found in Central Asia and Middle East,hence the first blondes would have originated from these areas with positve selection in europe increasing the frequency of blonds.

--The presence of certain Europid features in modern Middle Eastern and Central Asian populations is due to the fact that at numerous points in history, Europids populated those regions, thus genetic assimilation occurred at various times during invasions and migrations. European genes are not a subset of any modern ME/CA peoples, as it is actually the other way around.

I hope they publish the genetics tests on these mummies soon.I'll be a monkey's uncle and eat my hat (pointed or otherwise)if they find Haplogroup I or AMH.(Just in case,where's that alka seltzer)

"Europids"? To avoid using such a barbarism I would willingly substitute quite a long phrase. I might even be willing to alter my conceptual structure, if "Europids" came too often within hearing distance. --Wetman 06:48, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps you're just a tad bit uptight. Maybe the term 'honkey', 'cracker', or 'whitebread' would suffice, or does it really matter?

Watch yourself, Wetman, there's Boreio-Noto-Meso-Dutico-Anatolico-Europid within earshot! (Haha, I'm putting that the next time it asks "Race" or "Ethnicity" on a test or census form ;) --Jpbrenna 07:14, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

With reference to "europeans being a genetic subset of ME,Central asia",I Include in this group Pakistanis and Turks (Turkey).Take for instance R1b,this marker accounts for about 60% of european males.The diversity of this marker is higher in Turks and Pakistanis (and Indians) than europeans;in fact most Western (French,British,Spanish) is a subset R1b3 (I think this is the correct name),this is because during the last Ice age european R1b was 'modulated' resulting in an expansion of R1b3 from Iberia.The Only marker that is unique to europe is male haplogroup I and female V these have not found in South Asia or in eastern Iran.I will not deny much later admixture in central asia eg Roman,Russian etc.However central asians have western female haplogroups in plenty,from Mongols,Turks, Tajiks.The only controversy is with the origin of R1a,which seems to have originated somewhere between the volga to the Indus.Also as far as I am aware the presence of R1b in Turkman(central Asia) does not contain the AMH which is very common in europe.Much of southern Europe consists of haplogroup J and E these originate from spread of farming(J and E in europe)into europe from central turkey/middle east.Hence Blondes in Asia does not imply blondes from europe.[2][3]

The term europid ,Caucacasoid ,I beleive the authors would like to use the term White,but this would be politically incorrect.These tocharians if they are Indo-Europeans should be referred as Proto-Indoeuropeans not europoid since we do not know their origin or destination.The term Europoid implies they have some connection with Europe,they may have never visited europe at all.A number of population movements have occurred in Central Asia over thousands of years,partly due to the change in climate. There is clear evidence of european admixture in South Ammerica,Afro-Ammmericans,Greenlanders;this can not be said for Central of South Asians,except in relation to females.

The Idea that the Kushans where tocharians is nonsense,all evidence points to an Iranian (bactrian)speaking population eg Coins.see [4].Although I believe these late indo-european tribes were a mix even proto-germanic/slavs;Iranian being used for administration since the Iranian were historically the dominate power,just like the use of English in India today.According to chinese/roman histories the Kushans united 5 tribes ;Iranian,proto-germanic,slavic,turk and tocharian ?.

Also european 'historians' often point out migrations into south asia,yet they have never been able to identify these people in South Asia.So if these Tocharians did enter Afganistan ,pakistan etc who are these people now.If they did enter South Asia then these people should be refered to as Proto-Indic not Europoid.Nordics where often referred to as typically European yet they are one of the most genetically diverse populations in Europe.Norwegians even contain Haplogroup Q which is typical of siberian (Altai) populations.

As far as Nordics are concerned, they had pretty much slavery during their Viking age and frequently sex+offspring from their slaves. This is widely believed to be the reason for this genetic diversity. for comparison take the native population of Tanger, Algier or Tunis. Wandalstouring 17:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

A linguistic argument for Tocharian origins...

I once read somewhere that Tocharian langauges, at least linguistically speaking, seemed to form a family with Hittite...

I only just now did a brief comparison of very short (< 200 words) glossaries for each language, courtesy of wordgumbo.com, and for the very few English meanings that do appear on both lists, I believe I came up with some resemblances that are a little too close and too many to be called coincidence... to wit:

• Fire: Hitt paḫur; Toch A por, B puwar; Greek pyr; English fire
• White: H ḫarki-; TA ārki, B ārkwi; Greek argos
• Tall: H parku (high)?; TA pärkär (long); German berg (mountain, high place)
• Much: H mekki; TAB māk ; Greek megas; English much
• Blood: H ešḫar; TA ysār; Greek ear
• Bones: H ḫaštai; T asta (? TA is āy); Greek osteon
• Illness: H (i)štark- (fall ill); TA särk
• Famine: H kašt- "hunger"; TA kašt
• Extinguish: H kišt?; TA käs
• Drink: H eku-; TA yok-; cf. Latin aqua (water)
• New: H newaḫ- (renew); TA ñu; Greek neos; English new
• Foot: H pata?; TA pe, TB pai; Greek pous; English foot
• Knee: H kenu- [gi.e.nu]; TA kanweṃ; Greek gony; English knee

History: Hittite (native "Nesili") was spoken in the Hittite Empire (Anatolia), that was finally overrun by Phrygians and Sea Peoples circa 1200 BC. After that, apart from a few remnants, Hittites and their language are never heard from again in the area.

My hypothesis: With so much shared vocabulary, it is logical to assume that, when the Phrygians and Sea Peoples overran their empire, many of the Hittite speakers packed up and hoofed it into Central Asia some time around 1200 BC...

Codex Sinaiticus 3 July 2005 01:38 (UTC)

While some words in your list bears a similarity between Tocharian and Hittite, some words, though not as many, also bears the same similarity to English. This is to be expected since the words in the list were handpicked to show resemblances between Toch. and Hitt. and not English. One could (and has) construct similar list to show relationsships between all Indoeuropean languages. So, on linguistics grounds, your theory doesn't hold water. -Asdfgl 19:07, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I've added in a handful of the other IE cognates to demonstrate why the writer's approach doesn't work. I've also corrected the Hittite and Tocharian citations, where I could, and added A and B to identify the languages. The cognates look good, if not always formally exact, for the most part, except for (i)štark-:särk which at first glance looks doubtful. It would be possible to construct a rather longer list of Tocharian words that are cognate with various other Indo-European languages and not Hittite. But not much point to it.

no, your argument just proves that both are IE. To show a closer relationship of Anatolian and Toch, you'd need to show common innovations. dab (ᛏ) 19:54, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

This whole debate reminds me of the Anatolian hypothesis by Renfrew. However, language data suggests a Indo-Hittite division at ~6700BC, which would place the Tocharians in a very unlikely position: a language of the Hittite branch "teleported" to the other end of the Indo-European realm, right beside the main Indo-Aryan branches. Not to mention the fact that Tocharians were not reported at any time contemporary to the Hittite civilization. All of this looks very unlikely, especially for a language written in an alphabet derived from the Brahmi alphabet. An Indo-Aryan origin for Tocharian makes more sense; the Tocharian groups were probably north-bound, scattered remains of the defunct Kushan empire. Hugo Dufort 00:52, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

People using pointed hats in history

This piece of information seems off-topic:

Similar hats were traditionally worn by women of Lapland, and perhaps coincidentally, the Mi'kmaw people of Atlantic Canada. Pointed hats were also worn in ancient times by Saka (Scythians),and shown on Hindu temples and Hittite reliefs.

The subject at hand is the existence of pointed hats among women. If any information here is really relevant, please explain how.--Wiglaf 11:02, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

The point about pointed hats is that they where not unique to Europe.This article continues to imply that the Tocharians where europeans.By including just the 'whitches hats of Europe' re-affirms this white supremist attitude.I therefore have replaced the old entry.212.85.12.211

I disagree with your accusations of white supremacist attitude in this article. You should read assume good faith, and you should also explain this in the text. Moreover, the connections with western Europe are based on textiles and language and not on pointed hats.--Wiglaf 14:30, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

how about a pointy hats and the Aryan nation article? seriously, how about pointed hats? There could be some interesting results in comparing them (ok, so that's OR). dab (ᛏ) 14:35, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Again the point is that scythians had pointed hats who where Iranians? so why should we associate these textiles with Tocharians at all, they could equally be associated with Iranians not Tocharians.Unless one is trying to impose the idea this mummies originate from Europe for which evidence is lacking.212.85.12.211

Oooh, I see. Your main interest in Wikipedia is to combat the theory that any cultural influences, or people, may have spread from Western Europe in pre-historic times. Unfortunatly, you will have to abide to the same cite sources as the rest of us.--Wiglaf 14:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

I base my evidence on current Genetic research, not on European Nationalist dogma.Also you have just proved my point ,your aim is to prove they were.I am on a losing streek here ,since I don't have time to argue ,but just to add the Hittite hats is a valid entry, even in this article a contributer has made a link with Hittite/Tocharian languages.Also the removal of Hittite/Hindu/Scythians hats weakens your argument of Indo-European origin.

I could not care less about European nationalist dogmas. I do care about the quality of Wikipedia articles and your POV-pushing has only done the article damage. Cite sources!--Wiglaf 16:25, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

you base your evidence on Genetic research... soo... you add the Hittite pointy hats? Do you even realize how weird that is? Why the hell would you bother with the shape of their hats if you have conclusive genetic evidence? I would be very interested in these Genetic analyses of the mummies, please do discuss them! dab (ᛏ) 15:27, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Here's a link [5].This supports mallory's recent work above.Theres no Y chromsome data yets,soon to be published.For y chromosome I refer you to the above and this paper[6];notice in this paper that haplogroup I only accounts for 1.5%of central asians (its probably due to russian influence or even Roman).

Frankly, due to the fact that most migrations have been led by warbands/armies, i.e. men, your link has little value. By the same logic most of Latin America was never colonized by Spain, since most of the mtDNA is indigenous.--Wiglaf 16:15, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

agree & looking forward to the Y data. But let's do a pointy hat article, Wiglaf! Beginning with the golden hats dab (ᛏ) 16:38, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Great article on the golden hats Dab! I will check my copy of Barber's book and see what I can find later tonight.--Wiglaf 19:26, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Fascinating. If that is really a hat, it can only be so in the sense the Crown of St. Edward is a hat, i.e., a weighty, topheavy thing used only in a ritual context, and just maybe, like St. Edward's Crown, for a coronation. --FourthAve 10:14, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

indeed, there was much uncertainty whether they had actually been worn as hats, and for some time they were just referred to as 'gold-sheet cones' (Goldblechkegel). But there seems to be a general consensus now, that they were indeed ceremonial priestly hats, see the four extensive German articles I have linked by interwiki... Obviously, they have been linked with the pointy witches' hats of folklore, but that is evidently anybody's guess. dab (ᛏ) 10:30, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

since we're being offtopic, I was wondering about Snorri's "Age of Burning" now referenced at Menhir (Iron Age) because of the standing stones mentioned. Can that comparison be extended to Urnfields? After all, the Tumulus culture seems to have buried their dead, not burned them, while the Urnfields show cremation, but I don't know about a connection with menhirs. The Urnfields are a conspicuous aberration from the usual 'Kurgan' burials, and if tumuli were re-introduced with the Iron Age, wouldn't that hint at migration rather than just evolution (i.e. the Proto-Celts spread from the East (Hallstatt) from about 800, replacing the cremating people with funny golden hats, and re-introducing kurgans)? In this case the golden-hats people wouldn't be pre-Proto-Celts, but a different IE branch altogether, either completely unknown, or maybe the pre-Proto-Italians? did the Italic people practice cremation? Or the pre-Proto-Germans? dab (ᛏ) 10:30, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

That is a difficult question, as burial traditions could vary, within the same culture. Stone circles, ship graves, stone ships, solitary menhirs and barrows were constructed in Sweden during the Age of Burning. But, IIRC, Denmark, including southernmost Sweden used inhumation, at this time, and still the Swedes and the Danes spoke the same dialect.--Wiglaf 11:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I guess the question should be asked as

• when and where did cremation begin (1300 BC? Urnfield? Note that Patroclus is also cremated, at about the same time)? Is there significantly earlier evidence of burning?
• when and where did cremation end. Not in the North, it would appear, since the Vikings burned their dead down to the time of Ibn Fadlan. Are there Celtic cremations, however? Italic?

All I know is that the Beaker people (and the Tocharians/Tarim people, to make a tenuous connection to this talkpage) did not cremate, down to ca. 1900. If cremation arose among the post-PIE tribes, its spread would give priceless information as to migration and cultural influence. People don't change from inhumation to cremation on a whim, there needs to be some significant paradigm shift underlying the change, I imagine. dab (ᛏ) 12:21, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

That sounds like a very interesting lead.--Wiglaf 13:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

• Patroclus was cremated, along with some noble Trojan youths, dogs, etc, the ashes gathered up, put in an urn, then buried in a tumulus, i.e., a Kurgan. But also note that the Mycenaean kings were presumably buried. Also note that the Romans followed both customs, depending on family. I suggest an absorbed substrate is at work; they might become assimilated in just about everything except for a few religious items, of which burial/cremation is certainly one of them. --FourthAve 14:23, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
  • yes, but where is the substrate? afaik, beaker, funnelbeaker, vinca, they all inhumate. is there a neolithic 'ghost' culture somewhere, invisible to us because nobody was ever buried? dab (ᛏ) 14:30, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

• • This is way off topic; perhaps we should cut/paste the whole conversation to Urnfield talk. The appearance of cremation has something to do with this horizon. My suspicion is that it has something to do with religion. --FourthAve 15:33, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

For y chromosome I refer you to the above and this paper[7];notice in this paper that haplogroup I only accounts for 1.5%of central asians (its probably due to russian influence or even Roman).212.85.12.211

Well, this article states that the Central Asians are a pool of populations from Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgystan. This covers a huge area and it would be strange if they could find many Tocharian genes in that mix. Show me a Y-chromosome analysis of the mummies and I may start to take your racially motivated theories seriously.--Wiglaf 13:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

section copy-pasted to Talk:Pointy hat. dab (ᛏ) 16:02, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Well until then here is another paper[8].Notice that uigher only contain 2% (M170 is the same as haplogroups I)they also lack R1b (M173).It seems your nordic males spent 2000 years in the Tarim ,but failed to reproduce.

*sigh*. NO ONE has talked of "Nordic Tocharians".--Wiglaf 15:47, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Us Whitebreads respond

All of the Cavalli-Sforza stuff is ever-interesting but of minimal importance: you have to have a VERY large sample, backed up with legitimate geneologies to really gain any conclusions. Luis Alfonso, heir-male to Hugh Capet, and all of his very noble relatives should submit their DNA just to demonstrate who is really descended from Charlemagne's wife: but they haven't.

Why is my hair still yellow at age 55? --while my previously red beard is now gnarly gray? Why are my eyes blue? Why are there no racist jokes about Scandinavians in English? In fact, why is there no real ethnic humour about Scandinavians?

Ethnic Scandinavian humor. Beyond the Ole and Lena jokes, and the 'drunk Norwegian in the ditch' and the 'dumb Swede' bits, there are no jokes in English that put down Scandinavians. Gawd, I'm so whitebread Scandinavian. [ User:FourthAve [9]

You forgot Swedish Chef. Chocolate moose, anyone? --Jpbrenna 03:38, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Beyond the Ole and Lena jokes, and the 'drunk Norwegian in the ditch' and the 'dumb Swede' bits, oh, and "Swedish chef", "chocolate moose", "bloody Vikings" ... nope, not a single joke making fun of gloomy suicidal terminally drunk depressed unstable unemployed or fake invalid Northerners in the English language! Your point, and the relevance to a Yamna relationship of the Tocharians being... what? dab (ᛏ) 11:35, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

You forgot, there exist no jokes about blonde women. Wandalstouring 17:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Allegedly deliberate vandalization

The faces on these frescos were usually vandalized in the past due to their "European" features.

What exactly is the evidence for this claimed motivation? --SohanDsouza 11:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC) I wont say about vandalisation but Europid guy in the bezelik drawing has a brakisephal skull that no indo-european speakers(but assimilated turks and circassians) have and the indo-european speakers of asia are from indo-iranian stock with dark hair light skinç This drawing is simillar to people called Yörüks in Turkey who are the descending from Oguz, who are the hearth of Turkic Aristocrasy.

European features vandalized due to ...

Just to let you know: those frescos were definitely not vandalised because they exhibited people with european features. They were vandalized by iconoclasts and other folks deeply into superstition since the islamisation of that region's population. Usually the eyes in those fresco images were carved off to prevent magic since these were considered heathen (pre/non-muslim). Islamic fundamentalists and the like consider the visual depiction of humans sin by the way. The person who wrote "due to their European features" and kept reverting this when corrected by someone (two times by myself within a matter of minutes) is trying to create some sort of racist myth. People who inhabit the region that Tocharians lived in - Uyghurs most of all - sometimes though rarely have more european looking features, facial characteristics, even combined with lighter hair and coloured eyes because their ancestors were partly Tocharian who were assimilated. They are usually proud of it too. Please people stick to facts and don't use Wikipedia to falsify facts and history! Don't spread hatred. 134.100.32.213 08:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

According to the logic that the frescos were damaged because of their European features those people from East-Turkestan/Xinjiang wouldn't survive a minute: like the man in the middle on this picture, see [10], or look at that man first from the left [11] 134.100.32.213 08:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Lord Shiva??

Would the Hindu god..Shiva be one?? I know about mythology..and planetary worship.. what i'm asking is... his image of him being fair skinned or "golden" very tall..with red or yellowish hair and light eyes since China is right next to India.. his holy place is said to be the Himalayan mountains. is it possible that Shiva like Buddha was once a human man.. or the Hindus ran into a Tocharian man and thought of him as a god.. much like the natives of the Americas towards the white Spaniards. --Mari

Tocharians in Indian Literature

This section, I think, is a bit doubful, because it is far from certain that the historical people known as the Tocharians (presumably the ones referred to here, and mentioned by Ptolemy), are indeed the same, or were a part of, the people who spoke the Tocharian languages, who seem to be the primary subject of this article. JamesFox 17:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Any genetic studies

on the people of the Tarim basin today and whether they posses the genetic markers the ancient Tocharians likely carried R1a? Manic Hispanic 03:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if there is a link between the high R1b percentage in the populations of Xingjiang and the rather unique Tocharian culture.

Tocharians

The Tocharians were Aryans. They belonged to the Indo-Scythian groups who spoke unlike other aryans a centum language.

Tocharians in Indian literature

This section needs major work to bring it up to Wikipedia standards. I have made quite a number of corrections and given some proper references - but much work needs to be done yet - and I cannot spare the time at the moment. Can someone please help here sorting out the mass of references (not all completed or accurate) and to shorten the whole section and make it readable? Cheera, John Hill (talk) 05:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Note to Satbir Singh

Dear Satbir Singh: It seems we are getting into an "edit war", something I would very much like to avoid. You have already noticed the many edits I have been making to your work on the "Tocharians in Indian Literature" section - and, as I know well, this is always an uncomfortable experience - I am sorry about this - but feel that to bring this section of the page up to Wikipedia standards we need a proper rigorous account with full and reliable references.

Now, I am in agreement with you on many points but, it seems to me, we need to provide the reader with a brief account of the references in Indian literature which may refer to "Tokharians" which allows for the great uncertainty that exists regarding the identification of almost all these ancient peoples. It is fine to say that some scholar believes that, say, the Asiani (of the Western sources) = the Wusun (of the Chinese sources) - or that the Tochari = the Yuezhi, but it should also be pointed out that these identifications are not accepted by many other scholars and so, in fact, must remain in doubt.

Also, some of the references you have given are not complete (for instance, not including the author's name, etc) and you have obviously taken romanised Chinese names from various authors who have used different (and usually now defunct) systems of romanisations - so I have been changing them to Pinyin, which is the most common system used today - and the one preferred for the Wikipedia. However, please do not think I am being critical - I am really just trying to be helpful.

On more minor issues, it is not usual to include an author's title in a reference - therefore one might refer to Victor H. Mair, but would not normally refer to him in a reference as Professor (or Prof.) Victor H. Mair. I believe this is Wikipedia policy as well.

I am going away for about 3 weeks and will at times be out of internet contact. Though I will check for new notes when I can - I may not have the time or opportunity to reply until I return home early next month.

Finally, I am very pleased to see that the references in Indian literature are being dealt with - and I do hope that together (and with help from others) we can make a really useful, accurate and interesting contribution to this page. I will contribute further whenever I can spare the time. All best wishes for the New Year. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 03:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with John that this section is insane clutter and without relevance to this article. The material should be exported to Tushara Kingdom, and then cleaned up for relevance and accuracy. dab (𒁳) 10:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Dab, I think you are the same Dab or Debachman whom Blockinblox (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC) has already mentioned on some other page. Cheers and have a good day!

Satbir Singh (talk) 12:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)