And lastly to the topic about some mythical «red-haired peoples» we repeat the conclusion that the myth is a theory about some Indo-European peoples in the depths of Asia, in the image of which the ideas about Europeans of modern Europe and ancient inhabitants of Siberia are mixed. Adherents of this myth correlate modern Europeans (i.e. Germans, Anglo-Saxons and other Euros) with prehistoric archaeological cultures of deep Eurasia. By studying these archaeological cultures, they claim that they were created by some Indo-Europeans.
So, show the studies that can substantiate this on the linguistic material, that is, show evidence of the linguistic affiliation of the ancient Asian archaeological cultures of Siberia …
In previous publications we have found out that the very term «Cumans» is, if not an outright falsification, then an artificial construction distorting the name of the Kipchaks. But worse, this terminological mythology distorts the true history of this ancient people with its «color constructions».
Of course, no one denies that there is also «Red Asia». But let it be red, but not in the same supposed huge Cumans. It — is! And among the Turks (which is a super-ethnos of complex genesis) there have always been and are red-haired, and shaten, and even albinos. But this light-hairedness does not speak about the notoriously massive Caucasoid and monotonously light-eyed Kipchaks, who could be called «yellow-haired» as an ethnonym for «Polovtsians».
So where did the myth about red-haired Asians come from? And it did not come from nowhere, it was invented because of the far-fetched external nickname of the Kipchaks. Well, there are no grounds for the whole people to be called «red-haired» Kipchaks. After all, there is no «red-haired people» and among his descendants. And even if there are certain grounds for such a myth, but how deep are they?
Mythical exclusively blue-eyed Kypchaks of the Middle Ages
So, about «yellow-haired Kipchaks». The Kypchak history has been covered with so many legends that, starting from the invented external name for them, these insinuations have grown to the myth about some exceptionally blue-eyed «steppe Vikings», oh, pardon me, Asians of Viking type!
This theory is so caught up in itself that it became similar to the situation when «the tail wags the dog». Therefore, let us briefly dwell on the origins of these myths.
Here, for example, what N.A. Aristov says: «The basis of the theory about the belonging of the Kipchaks by their appearance to the Caucasoid racial type is their name, which they received in the South Russian steppes — Polovtsians».
To this, in fact, it is speculated that since we called the Kipchaks redheads, they must be light-haired Europeans, only on Asian horses! That is, the thought develops linearly, but goes not from the self-name, but in reverse order (or «backwards»). And what is there for them to think: if they were called «Polovtsians», they are redheads, and if they are redheads, they are Europeans. The thought was simple, but funny and lucid. And now it was formed in some science-like theory, which can not be called scientific, because it contradicts archeology and anthropology….
Realizing the exceptional speculative nature of his hypothesis, N.A. Aristov in the preface to it added that: «the light coloration of a part of Kipchaks should be attributed to the mixing of their part with western Dinlins…, i.e. with the people having signs of Caucasoidity since ancient times».
That is, in the prologue N.A. Aristov states just a subjective assumption about «red-haired» Dinlins, and in the epilogue he has already reduced everything to the name of some yellow-skinned Polovtsians. So, the process looks primitive way: first the name is invented, and then to it own speculations that since they are called red-haired people, they should be considered as blue-eyed blondes. This already leads Euro-siders to such a conclusion, which is akin to the fact that «the dog always goes tail first»!
In addition to this conclusion about the extreme mythological character of the theory about «blue-eyed ancestors of Kazakhs», it is necessary to reveal, at least in general terms, quite a scientific question about the recessive gene of light-eyedness. In the case of the Kipchaks, this myth begins with some light-eyed, yellow-faced Polovtsians, in connection with which they assume some mythical «blondness» of the nomads.
Supporters of this myth are not persuaded even by solid anthropological data, although uncovered burials are an objective confirmation of the clear Mongoloidity of the skulls of the Kipchaks from the Polovtsian graves. Mongoloid faces of Slavic princes do not convince them: reconstruction of a face of Kiev Andrey Bogolyubsky and a shroud of Novgorod Alexander Nevsky, born from Kypchak tsarevnas. Why these restored images of Princes are resulted. Yes because that mythmakers and especially their adherents ostensibly inaccessible anthropo-archaeological monographs. Even seeing them, they pass to «bare» negation. Thanks to this «nihilism», they have an internal ideological space for denial, that, like the laboratories, they have tampered with something.
And here, if not to convince them, then for objective refutation there are only visual effects, and, moreover, multiple visual series. I suggest to put in a row Cuman Balbals or their photos and to look intently into their narrow eyes and to search in them such sought «blue eyes»… In this process it is possible to search blue-eyedness till infinity, or till blueing of own eyes.
Diversion against the Kazakh people
The historical fate of the Western Kipchaks, called by a foreign name, is instructive for the Kazakhs. The people, called by a foreign name, is «lost» in history. So it happened with the Polovtsians. According to the official version, the Cumans language is a dead language, the people itself supposedly has no direct living descendants and its land, called «Wild Field» of culturelessness, etc., became supposedly «no one’s land». But we know that «peoples do not appear out of nowhere and do not disappear into nowhere». The Kipchaks did not disappear either, one of their direct descendants is the Kazakhs.
Actually, the term «Kazakh» is an exo-ethnonym, but Kazakhs as peoples are alive and keep their native name «Gazag», live in their country Gazagstan, speak their Kipchak language. By their Kypchak language Kazakhs are connected with their native brothers Nogai, Bashkirs, Tatars, Kumyks and many other peoples of the Kypchak steppe. So the Kypchaks are not dead. They live on in their descendants. In addition to the general continuity, the tribe of Kypchaks lives and lives in the Turkic peoples. What else is needed to confirm the right to the Kipchak heritage. Everything is obvious, it remains only to put a notarial seal.
However, there is ideologically subversive activity against the Kipchak heirs. For them the myth about blond-haired Kipchaks was invented, which, in fact, breaks the direct connection between the Kipchaks and their descendants. This myth is unnatural for Asia. Nomads arrived from Asia in waves: Huns, Avars, Turks, Oguzes, Bulgars, Khazars, Pechenegs and, finally, came the Kipchaks. And now let’s imagine that after seven waves of Mongoloid Asians, Euro-Asians — Kipchaks with Scandinavian appearance — finally arrived. Let’s start with the first reliable Turks that Jordan wrote about the Huns: they have narrow slits instead of eyes. Then follows the information of Ahmed ibn-Fadlan (921-922) about the Pechenegs: «They are dark brunettes…». And what, after such characters from the same deep Asia came blondes!
So the very idea of blond-haired Polovtsians is a historical anecdote. Nevertheless, in social networks (especially in various Zen and YouTube videos) there is now a massive non-normative outburst of this very nonsense. If earlier it was spread as an anecdote, now the anecdote no longer looks like an anecdote and no longer causes special amazement. On the contrary, this anecdote has become particularly widespread in recent times. And it has even acquired the character of propaganda, widely deployed online by our «do-gooders» — ostensibly «researchers» of the «ancient times», but in fact — our hidden ill-wishers.
They invented two extremes of Kipchak appearance: one — for internal consumption (that they are allegedly Aryans, Hyperboreans, b Arkaimians, and, finally, Kipchaks), and the second — for export for us that Kazakhs are allegedly not real Kipchaks.
The first internal myth proceeds from the fact that the great Kipchaks (and their heirs — Cossacks) are the ancestors-descendants of Euro-blondes, but not of these black-haired Turks. The second myth imposes some mythical fair-haired and light-eyed mythical «Aryans», who built an ancient civilization to the Kazakhs. In this regard, one would like to direct them away, namely to India, to look at the descendants of these very Aryans — dark-haired Hindus.
As we see from the above arguments, the Kipchaks — one of the ancestors of Kazakhs — were not massively red-haired Caucasoids. Adherents of Caucasoidity emphasize the presence of haplogroup «R». However, it is not a priori Caucasoidity, as evidenced by the ethnic portraits of Turkic Aryans — Kyrgyz, Turkmens….
And to all we should add that the above haplogroup is a generation of Eastern Siberia, where it was merged with «Asian» haplogroups from birth. Thus, it is not European, but Eurasian belonging. And what happened to it racially when moving to Scandinavia and further is another story.
There is and other genetic history that Princes — Rurikovich — «not real». Genetic research of 130 hereditary Rurikovich has shown on an example of descendants of Princes Shakhovsky, Gagarin, Rzhevsky, Shuisky, Volkonsky and others, that their genotypes belong to haplogroup N1c1 of the Central Asian origin. It turns out, that Princes are as if Swedes, but Finno-Siberian origin «with slanted and predatory eyes».
And as a «living example» of anti-scientific propaganda and agitation: I was once amazed by a «lecture» of a physical education teacher in one of the gymnasiums of Almaty city, narrated to me by pupils. The «historian» explained to schoolchildren that the ancestors of Kazakhs were blondes, and then everything was spoiled by Mongols! Not only such rants are not historical, they are the same «good old» but covered racism.
But these are just «flowers», but they are trying to put «berries» into our collective consciousness. There is a subtle but deep game here. Like real Kazakhs are like this alone, and those who are not like this, they are not real! This ideology «first pace» is aimed at demoralization of the nation, but its deeper meaning is aimed at division of Kazakhs.
It should be noted that this inferiority complex is imposed on us from the outside, like earlier Kazakhs were all light-eyed blondes like Vikings, and then Mongols came and spoiled everything Viking-like. It’s kind of a complex. But let me tell you, it’s not our complex, you know.
Yes, Kazakhs are heirs of the Aryans, Andronovs, Scythians, and many other ethnic groups, including the «Celts» of Eurasia. All of them are our ancestors, and all people and all nations are good in their own way. So let’s leave them in our memory with gratitude, thanks to their lives we live too.
Kazakh portrait
For ourselves we emphasize that the nomads have been the «rotary civilization» of Eurasia since ancient times. This is recognized by many scholars of the Western world not only with regard to the «Celtic nomads», but also with regard to the Asian Turks. The recognition of the civilization of the Turks has long ago taken place in Europe. And against this background, the humiliation of nomadic Türks in the works of the Soviet school looks like a complete anachronism, which is still trying to teach people of the 21st century. In many respects they were scientists, but they also carried the ideological charge of Stalinist historiography to deny the civilization of nomadic states. So soon we expect from the post-Soviet historiography academic recognition of the contribution of the Turkic nomads themselves to the Eurasian civilization, which after a long imperial neglect and Soviet denigration began to be announced by Russian and Ukrainian professors. They cannot be blamed for pan-Turkism, and therefore their monographs became the basis for subsequent articles in the cycle «Kypchaks».
And lastly, completing a brief ethnographic review of historical Eurasia, we note that the Kazakhs are a people of Turanian origin, mixed in the most ancient generations of different ancestors. But there are practically no blondes among us, and, in fact, not so many redheads. And here who, really, is visible — it is shaten, or rather, shaten women. And this is easily explainable from the point of view of popular genetics.
According to genetic data, according to historian J. Sabitov: the diversity of mitochondrial DNA among Kazakhs «is three times higher than in Russian women». And now compare the extent of the territory of settlement and the number of the two ethnic groups. Paradox, but it is confirmed scientifically: the smaller ethnos is more diverse genetically! Let’s add to it that among Kazakhs there are MT-chromosomes of so-called «Scottish» origin! What does this tell us?
Firstly, it shows that the ancestors of Kazakhs and Kazakhs themselves never carried out «ethnic cleansing». Peoples and ethnoses that fell into the «zone of influence» of the Turks were not exterminated, but were included in the new nomadic states, and therefore their descendants are in the composition of modern Kazakhs. And the most obvious popular explanation of such phenomenon is that Attila’s warriors after the death of his empire were not completely exterminated, but retreated to their steppes and took their wives with them. Even more ancient version is that at departure of Celts, Picts and others with them from the Black Sea region, a part of them remained and mixed with the subsequent conquerors-settlers. Here from them and left light-colored eyes as a recessive trait.
And, by the way, as an illustrative example, you can talk to any Kazakh (or in our intra-Eurasian case with the Turk of Central Asia), then almost anyone will say that in his family environment (about 50 — 100 close relatives) will necessarily find one or two blue-eyed or red-haired.
There will be five or more relatives with shades. And the rest are «classical» brown-eyed Kazakhs of Asian type. And, indeed, the natural majority of Kazakhs are black-haired Asians. And the color of their «natural» skin is bronze, which was also noted by Russian travelers in the portrait of Kazakhs. It could not be otherwise. It is enough for any man to fly in the Steppe, as he «bronzes» like the same Indians of prairies or gauchos of pampas.
So, among Kazakhs a certain number of people have so-called blond hair. But they are not redheads or fair-haired Scandinavians, they are Eurasian shatenes. And what is really interesting: among young Kazakh children of the 21st century generation there are obviously noticeable shatenes, but it is among girls — a lot of shatenes with hair shades: from light blond to dark brown. Over time, their hair darkens to a dark brown color. At last, what I would like to say in connection with it: these children in their appearance carry genetic inheritance of ancient people of Central Eurasia, those who created civilization of charioteers and children of the Sun! Eurasians!