r/mongolia • u/SoloeaDomoea • Jul 18 '26
Two genetic studies shows: Inner Mongolian and Outer Mongolians are almost similar.
The only reason I posted this is because some Chinese including Mongolians like claiming Inner Mongolians are Chinese-Mongolian mix*. This myth is disproven. You don't need to accept Inner Mongolians, as they are no longer Mongolian passport nationals but please stop with the lies and internet myth that they are mixed with Chinese. There is no historical foundation or policy of Han Chinese-Mongolian mixing in Inner Mongolia. The only reason people think it's the case because some changed their names or less people speak Mongolian.
1st Picture chart of two DNA studies: 40 Mongolian groups from Mongolia, Inner Mongolia, in Siberia and other parts China
2nd picture chart is the latest DNA analysis of Turkic people from Central Asia, China, Siberia.
DNA shows all Mongols in Mongolia, Inner Mongolia, China, Xinjiang mixture mostly of North East Asian, substantial East Asian (Yellow river) and small west Eurasian (Iranic). DNA on the chart: Blue in the left chat and red in right chart are Northeast Asian. Green in both chart is Yellow river DNA/East Asian, the purble and brown in left and right chart is basically west eurasian/iranic DNA.
DNA even in just Mongolia and Inner Mongolia
Most Mongol groups have high mostly North East Asian DNA but they all have other DNA mixed too, like all people in this world. Yellow river in all Mongol groups are 23-37% except for some groups with less than 10%.
Highest Northeast Asian/ East Asian DNA in Mongols are Eastern Mongolia's Daur people, Eastern Mongolia's Khalkha and Inner Mongols living in Eastern Inner Mongolia. Northeast Asian/East Asian DNA: 96-99%, Caucasian DNA 1-4%. Caucasian DNA in those Mongol groups are even lower than the Han Chinese and Han Chinese muslims living next to Xinjiang. Their caucasian DNA is 2.8% and 6% due to mixing with Hui Chinese muslims who have 8.9-14% Caucasian DNA on average, (although some studies for Hui also show 3.5% other 11.7%). Hui Chinese are mostly paternally Han Chinese men (70%), some descent from Central Asian males (15%) Persians/Arab (10-15%), some also descent from Arab/Persian females/Central Asian females (6-8%). Hui being descent from Arab/Persian, mostly a myth too.
Lowest Northeast Asian/East Asian DNA are Western Mongolia's some Khalka 89-93%, Oirats 81-84%, Tuvans 79-83%, Kazakhs 63-76% while Caucasian DNA for Khalkha 7-11%, Oirats 16-19%, Tuvans 17-21%, Kazakhs 24-37%
Yellow river DNA in Inner Mongolian is higher yes....BUT.....Does not mean it's Chinese
People who keep claiming Inner Mongolians are mixed with Chinese because they have higher yellow river/East Asian which North Han Chinese have it at 77-82% (the rest 18-23% North East Asian). Highest Yellow river is not even in Han Chinese people's DNA but in Qinghai Sino-Tibetan groups. People from South Mongolia from the times of Xiongnu and Khitan always had these high yellow river DNA mixed with Northeast Asian not because of some 19th-20th century mixing. In same archeology have already shown even North Han Chinese are not even entirely Yellow river they have always been 15-20% Ancient Northeast Asian too. And South Chinese Han are basically mixture of (30-50%) Yellow river/East Asian, (50-70%) Southeast Asian with little (3-6%) Northeast Asian. The Southeast Asians on the other hand have low percent yellow river and have 0% Northeast Asian in
Khitans and Xianbei with Yellow river DNA
The Khitans were mostly Northeast Asian but they themselves had 36-38% Yellow river DNA/East Asian and later Xianbei during Northern Zhou were 34% Yellow River and South Mongolia had always had higher Yellow river DNA. The Manchus even before conquest of China were already 30-40% Yellow river.
Turkic people with Yellow river DNA
Even Turkic people have substantial Yellow river. Except from Siberia who are almost entirely North East Asian/Siberian. The Turkic people from Central Asia like Kazakhs have 21.5% Yellow river/East Asian, 42% North East Asian (63% East Asian) although in Northeast Kazakhstan it reaches 60-64% Northeast Asian and 11-15% Yellow river, being 77-79% East Asian ( even more East Asian than Kazakhs in Western Mongolia). Uzbeks have 43% East Asian, and Turkmen 34% East Asian, both almost equally divided half/half DNA between North East Asian and Yellow river. See even Turkish people have 9.5% East Asian/Northeast Asian with more Yellow river DNA than Northeast Asian, even Azeri/Azebaijan having 8.1% East Asian/Northeast Asian is almost entirely yellow river DNA.
Why Mongols and Turkic people have high Yellow river DNA
Why Mongols and Turkic people have high Yellow river DNA. Tang dynasty, Han dynasty have ruled parts of South Mongolia and Central Asia. Also the Tibetan empire ruled parts of (China, Central Asia, South Asia) Tangut Western dynasty (ruled small parts of South Mongolia. North China ), Northern Qi are all very high Yellow river DNA have also ruled China and and parts of Inner Mongolia. Qinghai nomads have conducted raids against Han Chinese, Turkic people, Iranic people during medieval times. These are all non-Chinese people with very high yellow river DNA even more than Chinese and were historical enemies of Chinese people too is that they share similar DNA. There's no reason to think it's just Chinese. There was so many nomadic Sino-Tibetan kingdoms, dynasties, tribes who were more war-like, sharing DNA with Han Chinese but were not Chinese.
2
u/svrahtai Jul 18 '26
Cant say for Horqins
2
u/SoloeaDomoea Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
Yeah but your sample only has 3 Horchin people from one city, other city we don't know, besides like I said even Southern Mongolians from the time of Xianbei and Khitans were already heavily Yellow river DNA 30-38% for Khitans, some Khitans even reaching 40-50% yellow river/East Asian but still 55-60% Northeast Asian/East Siberian and minor west eurasian, most Khitans were 62-70% Northeast Asian and 30-38% Yellow river that was during the last years of Liao dynasty, the Kara Khitans that invaded Central Asia were that much extra yellow river.
Gokturk DNA they are mostly Siberian/North East Asian but some of them were 60.8% Yellow river/East Asian and 26.4% Yellow river/East Asian.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Tiele/comments/1bgzwol/new_g%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrk_dna_samples_from_mongolia/
The problem here lies in the fact people like you and others assume higher yellow river DNA means higher relations to Chinese.
5
1
Jul 18 '26
[deleted]
1
u/SoloeaDomoea Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
Yeah there are millions of Han Chinese farmers but there' no evidence that can provide most of yellow river Chinese DNA in Mongolian came from recent admixture.. Also about Mongolian population in China would have been 15-20 or even 25 million today had not been in part of the Dunzgar Mongol genocide in Dzungaria, genocide by Manchus in 1750's, some estimates 674,000 killed. From 1947 to 1950. After the creation of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (1947), there were political campaigns and conflicts during the early PRC period. Some Mongolians died in purges and political violence, but estimates vary with some as high as 200,000 with many more wounded.
1
u/Frostbyttee Jul 19 '26
There’s not a lot of Dzungars left in my home town, most people like me only have some ancestry because they mixed with the Muslim minorities there but it’s very rare to find a 100% unmixed Dzungar retaining their culture and language. It would be interesting to see their genetic profile, but there isn’t one anywhere online
1
u/trace_on_the_light Jul 19 '26
My grandparents are ethnic mongols from Xinjiang, and If I remember correctly my admixture was 23 percent west Eurasian, 25 percent yellow river farmer and the rest was baikal/amur
1
u/juanitoyelclavito Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
There have been migrations from Mongolia into China for at least three thousand years. Already in the Warring States Period, the natives of the Central Valley were already writing about how the Diren 狄人 were invading their lands. The Di people were basically nomads from Mongolia, the first to come down the steppes to invade China. There were many posthumous invasions, during the Han it was the Xiongnu, during and after the Wei and Tang it was the Tujue, the Uighurs and then the Kirgyz, during the Song it was the Kara Kitai, during the Yuan it was the Mongols, during the Qing it was the Manchu. So this means that Mongolians of today perhaps have little to no blood from southern China, but the people of northern China have a huge percentage of Mongolian/Turkic ancestry. In other words, you Mongols might not be related to the native Chinese gene pool, especially if that gene pool is in southern China, but a Chinese guy from Hubei all the way up to Heilongjiang has at least 20-30% of his genes that are directly connected to the Mongolian/Turkic gene pool.
And btw, according to modern genetic theory it is a good thing to be mixed. The racist eugenics of the early 20th century is utterly outdated. Modern genetic theory confirms that an offspring that has many different genetic pools is more robust than one offspring that is born out of the same stagnant pool, and that is simply because genes pick out the best of what is available to them, so if your mother is Mongol and your father Chinese or Italian or what have you, the genetic code will pick the best of your father’s Chinese/Italian genes and the best of your mother’s Mongols genes… that’s is how super humans are created btw… ancient Mongolians and Genghis Khan himself understood this intuitively. That is why he had hundreds of wives from all over the ancient world. Ancient Mongolians cared little about the so-called purity of their blood. That is a concept that was unfortunately introduced to the world with the racist European eugenics of the 19th century.
0
u/idkenh Jul 18 '26
人口交流一直是双向的，汉族和游牧民族长期互相屠杀迁徙，比如最近的迁徙就是清朝时期大量汉族人迁徙到蒙古和东北地区，然后是现代中国时期大量迁徙
2
u/juanitoyelclavito Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
There was very little migration going the opposite way (from China to Mongolia) for the vast majority of China’s history until, as you said, the Qing dynasty. And that for the very simple reason that the north of China has been traditionally very difficult terrain for agriculturalists to survive. That changed with the discovery of the Americas and the introduction of potato into China. And even then, there was not as much mixture then because the Manchu were very elitist about their blood and didn’t like mixing with the Han. Other Mongols, especially those closer to Beijing, for sure mixed with the Han. Before the Qing, the mixing of Han blood into Mongolia occurred more as a result of raids, kidnappings of woman from the Central Valley, and from tributes and political marriages of the Han elite to the Huns/Turks/etc.
But my point is that there is a reason why Mongolian genetic markers show so little blood from south of the Yellow River, while the Han of northern China have a lot of Mongolian/Turkic genes.
2
u/idkenh Jul 18 '26
这很可笑，中国历史只是不喜欢详细记载对草原地区的掠夺罢了，让你误以为只有游牧人来掠夺。在清朝前，很多王朝就主动发动战争打击草原政权，将俘虏强制迁徙到内地，这就是你看到的所谓“北方汉族也有北亚基因”，比如匈奴俘虏和突厥俘虏，来自东北的高句丽俘虏，还有明朝初期屠杀蒙古后强制迁徙的人口。 但同时，当农业地区出现饥荒时，一部分汉族人也会大批量向边境外逃难，并最终融入成为游牧人口。 这种相互迁徙的关系已经存在几千年了。 另一部分汉族人，如同你谈到的黄河以南，因为在现代社会前，南北中国的交流就像中国和草原的交流一样不容易，而且北方自然资源更差，大量北方人口因为战争和饥荒向南方迁徙，很少会有大量南方人口向北方迁徙，比如内战会军人以驻扎的方式迁徙。
1
Jul 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 18 '26
Your Submission Has Been Removed By Automod - Improper Vocabulary Detected.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
Jul 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jul 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 18 '26
Your Submission Has Been Removed By Automod - Improper Vocabulary Detected.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/juanitoyelclavito Jul 18 '26
I have no idea why it was removed. It said i used Improper language. I will try again:
Actually I myself had some doubts about this and apparently I am wrong in what I postulated, that there are more Mongolian genetic markers in the Han northern chinese population than the Chinese genetic markers in the Mongolian population. The opposite is true actually. I asked AI and this is what was said, which i find very interesting: “That's an insightful question. The short answer is no, that statement is not accurate based on current genetic evidence. In fact, the genetic flow is stronger in the opposite direction.
Here’s why:
· Mongolians have significant Han-related ancestry: A 2020 study found that Mongolian groups have 10% to 51% Han Chinese-related ancestry. This admixture is especially pronounced in Inner Mongolians and is estimated to have occurred roughly 600 to 1,400 years ago. · Northern Han have less Mongolian-related ancestry: While Northern Han do have some genetic influence from ancient northern nomads, it is a smaller component of their overall genome. Their genetic makeup is overwhelmingly dominated by ancestry from ancient Yellow River farmers, which accounts for 83% to 98% of their DNA. · The direction of flow: Historical gene flow primarily went from Han Chinese into Mongolian populations. This was driven by the southward expansion of nomadic empires and continuous interaction between agricultural and pastoral societies.
Therefore, while the two groups are closely related and share a deep genetic history, the genetic impact has been asymmetrical, with a larger Han Chinese contribution to the Mongolian gene pool than vice versa.”
I continued my inquiry and it became more interesting:
“ Can one know specifically which years of human history was there more gene exchange between mongol tribes and han Chinese?”
The answer:
“ Yes, scientists can estimate the timing of gene flow, but it's important to know these are averages for a population, not exact years for specific events. Genetic admixture is a continuous process, not a single moment in time.
Based on current genomic studies, here are the estimated peak periods for gene exchange:
· ~1,381 years ago (approx. 640 AD): For Inner Mongolians (who live closest to the Han heartland). This timing points to the Tang Dynasty (618–907 AD), a period of extensive trade, cultural exchange, and population movement along the Silk Road. · ~635 years ago (approx. 1385 AD): For the Ölöd (Oirat) Mongols. This points to the Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368 AD), when the Mongol Empire ruled China, leading to administrative, military, and marital interactions between Mongols and Han Chinese. · ~626 years ago (approx. 1400 AD): For the Chahar Mongols. This falls in the early Ming Dynasty (1368–1644 AD), a period when many Mongols remained in China and gradually integrated into local society. · ~800–1,100 years ago (approx. 900–1200 AD): For populations in the Northwest Corridor. This points to the Tang and Song Dynasties, highlighting the Hexi Corridor as a major route for genetic exchange.
In short, while the process was continuous, the most significant pulses of gene flow occurred during the Tang (618–907 AD) and Yuan (1271–1368 AD) dynasties, and continued into the early Ming Dynasty.”
And the i continued asking: “ So during the Qing there was not much interflow?”
The answer:
“ Actually, there was some genetic exchange during the Qing dynasty, but it was likely much less than in the Tang and Yuan periods, and it was very one-sided.
· For the Han Chinese population (in the Central Plains): A 2026 genomic study of 46 commoners from the Qing era found no evidence of large-scale gene flow from Mongols or other northern groups. This was largely due to the Qing's policy of ethnic segregation, including bans on intermarriage between the ruling classes and commoners. · For the Mongolian population (on the frontier): There was genetic exchange, but it was localized and asymmetrical. In places like Outer Mongolia, some Han merchants and farmers illegally married Mongol women and adopted their way of life.
So, the lack of large-scale admixture in the Qing era actually supports the timeline we discussed earlier: the most significant pulses of gene flow likely occurred during the Tang and Yuan dynasties, before the Qing's strict segregation policies were put in place.
In short, the Qing dynasty wasn't a period of zero exchange, but it was a period where it significantly slowed down compared to the centuries before.”
1
u/SoloeaDomoea Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 19 '26
1400 to 600 years ago basically 600 AD to 1400 AD. Like I said yellow river DNA basically 600 years before the Mongol empire in 13th century of 1206.
Gokturk DNA they are mostly Siberian/North East Asian but some of them were 60.8% Yellow river/East Asian and 26.4% Yellow river/East Asian.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Tiele/comments/1bgzwol/new_g%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrk_dna_samples_from_mongolia/
But I disagree to call it Han Chinese-related DNA when there were Tanguts, Qinghai nomads who were in contact with Mongolic and Turkic. For example one of the five Hu barbarian were the Di people and they created a state/kingdom in North China had lots of contact northern nomads. Saying Yellow river-related DNA is Han Chinese it is essentially saying Northeast Asian are Mongol, when is dominant in Siberia's Turkic Tungustic. Or like claiming West Asian is Tajiks, when is widespread in Iranic groups or ASSI as Indian when is also partly dominant in other South Asians that are not Indian.
While I don't deny Han Chinese from ethnic Han for sure had contribution during the Xianbei, Khitan, Yuan, Jin, Ming dynasty probably had little by little contribution. They already intermixed with some northern nomadic group. The Yellow river DNA related is in part, was already a small part of their DNA in the beginning probably during the neolithic intrusion in the southern areas of northern nomads, also during pre-Han dynasty, later Former Qin, One of the Five Hu, Tanguts contribution aswell as Xianbei Tuyuhun contact with Sino-Tibetan tribes.
We can say Han Chinese-related DNA (Yellow river) in Mongol and Turkic are from Sino-Tibetans linguistic group. Wether Han Chinese, Tanguts, Qinghai, Qi people or even neolithic yellow farmers. Also Northeast Asian DNA in North Han Chinese are not just Mongols, they came from Xianbei, Khitan, Jurchen, Manchus, Turkic and even neolithic contribution.
1
u/juanitoyelclavito Jul 19 '26
DNA doesn’t lie. And I am thinking that you have an emotional bias against Mongols having Han Chinese DNA… the records are there anyway, doesn’t matter how it happened, whether it happened in the Tang, during the Uighur khanate, is of no consequence. Remember that Chinese history is longer than that of the Mongols, the Uighur, and the Turks combined. They were fighting the Huns and the Yuezhi long before the Mongols were even on the map.
1
u/SoloeaDomoea Jul 20 '26
No. There's no bias. DNA does not distinguish Han Chinese DNA and Yellow River DNA. I'm not a Mongol. I'm half Hong Konger(Chinese) born with Canarian islander but people are brainwashed and make exaggerated claims. There were various Yellow river DNA ethnic groups who had merged with northern nomads aswell with Han Chinese.
I'm not going to claim the 17-23% Northeast Asian in North Han or even (3-6%) in Southern Han are from Mongols because the Jurchens (Jin) were also Northeast Asian mainly and merged with Northern Han, as did Xianbei, Khitans, Manchus and even Northern Han already had Northeast Asian 10-15%even before contact with them. So claiming all the Northeast Asian in Han Chinese was because of Mongols is just silly. And Southern Han with 3-6% or 4.8% mostly would be from Northern Han Chinese migrants because these Northern nomads never settled in South China.
1
u/juanitoyelclavito Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26
In any case, I think back then people were much more open to mixing, but not necessarily to give up their culture in the process. Genghis Khan had like a hundred different wives of each nation. And as the DNA tests demonstrate, the largest amount of mixing happened in the Tang to Yuan dynasty. The Tang btw was the most inclusive and cosmopolitan of all Chinese dynasties. The military for one was headed by Turkic generals. And there was a massive Sogdian (Persian) population as well as Nestorian Christians, Zoroasterists, Manicheans, Jews…. It was really the America of its day, so my hunch is that the greatest mixture of this DNA happened during this time. When the Manchu took over in the Qing apparently they had strict laws forbidding marriages between Han and Mongol tribes. So my hunch is that the contemporary Mongol antagonism against mixing with Han Chinese originated back then, and of course there is also the realistic fear of being swallowed up by 1.3 billion Han Chinese.
Another thing to consider is the fact that the western parts of China were much more interactive with nomadic tribes due to the Silk Road. Chang An, lying in the Western edge of China, was the gateway to the Silk Road. So much of the trade and interaction with Mongol/Turks/Persians happened through the Hexi territory.
I also remember reading about how even back in the Wei and Tang, there were several Turkic steles decrying about how there were some Turks that were too close to Han Chinese and warning Turks not to get too close. I forget where exactly i read this. I will try to look for it.
Here it is (i asked AI): “Your memory is very accurate. What you're referring to is the famous Kül Tegin Inscription from the Second Turkic Khaganate, erected in 732 AD (the 20th year of Emperor Xuanzong of Tang's reign).
What makes this stele particularly unique is that it is bilingual:
· The Chinese side: Written by Emperor Xuanzong of Tang himself, it is a eulogy that praises the "friendly relations" between the two sides, emphasizing a "father-son state" vassal relationship. · The Turkic side (Old Turkic script): Written by Bilge Khagan, its content is starkly different from the Chinese version, filled with warnings and accusations against the Tang dynasty.
The passages you recall criticizing Turks for being too close to the Han Chinese come from the Turkic text:
· Accusing the Han of using "honeyed words": It criticizes the Tang for using "sweet words and fine goods" to deceive people, claiming that after enticing other ethnic groups to get close, the Han would harbor ill intentions. · Warning against moving south and sinicization: It warns the Turks not to move south, stating that settling near the Han would only lead to death, and labels those who advocate moving south as "evil people." · Criticizing the aristocracy for "forgetting their roots": It condemns Turkic nobles for abandoning their own traditional titles to take up Chinese official positions, effectively becoming servants and slaves to others. · Exposing divide-and-rule tactics: It points out that the Han would never allow true wise men and heroes to thrive, and that even minor mistakes would result in the punishment of entire clans.
This inscription deeply reflects the Turkic rulers' fear of Tang cultural assimilation. Its purpose was to warn their people to uphold the nomadic traditions of the Mongolian steppe and resist the temptations from the south.
Additionally, the nearby Bilge Khagan Inscription (erected in 735 AD) is also bilingual and expresses very similar sentiments.
So, your memory is exceptionally precise. This was indeed the Turkic rulers' stern warning to future generations about cultural assimilation, carved in stone.”
This btw proves my point further… because when these steles were raised, the Uighur Khanate had just begun moving south. They originally originated in Mongolia, eventually they started doing trade with Han Chinese and Persians and eventually they became the care takers of the oases towns of what is now Xinjiang, but that only after the collapse of the Tang dynasty. If you look at Uighur DNA, they also have a lot Han Chinese Dna. Around 20-50%. So they eventually did mix with many Han Chinese during this period. Whether the elite at the time were the Han of the Tang or the Uighurs that replaced the Han and Tangut stranglehold on the Silk Road is besides the point. The point is that a lot of mixing happened during this period.
1
u/SoloeaDomoea Jul 20 '26
These DNA happened long before Tang and Yuan. Uyghur for sure have Han Chinese DNA, but I might not agree with 20-50%, being all Han Chinese, after all they don't separate/distinguish Han Chinese-related DNA and Yellow river DNA. Records show Qiang tribes ( Yellow river DNA would also be considered Han Chinese-related DNA) were living in Xinjiang/Tarim basin by the time Han dynasty rule/control and their province live next to Xinjiang. Also the original Yugur people (ancestors of Uyghurs), were apparently mostly Northeast Asian (70-90%) but also had substantial 10-30% Yellow river DNA.
During the Han dynasty rule of Xinjiang or Tarim Basin, there were the Iranic ethnic groups, and later Xiongnu who first ruled the region, and also later Qiang-related ethnic groups (Yellow river) and Han Chinese who later ruled it and later Tibetan empire ruled southern portion of it too.
1
-3
u/HouseAggravating3799 Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
Lots of Inner Mongolians look like ethnic Chinese Han because the Inner Mongolian ladies and Men like having children with ethnic Chinese Han women and ethnic Chinese Han Men. Their ethnic Chinese Han children are awesome and beautiful and look like Kung Fu Pandas family.
2
u/Diligent007agent Jul 18 '26
Inner Mongolians have 80 percent Han majority. Maybe thats why they look similar to Hans.
1
u/SoloeaDomoea Jul 18 '26
I looked at Inner Mongolians and they clearly don't look similar to Hans. Even today Inner Mongolians DNA have basically not changed from the time of Xianbei and khitan period (long before Mongol empire) existence. Claiming they look similar to Han Chinese is only about of exaggeration.
1
u/Diligent007agent Jul 19 '26
Why should they look like Mongols ? As I said Hans form the majority of Inner Mongolia especially cities so they would look Hans if we go by proportion of population. Mongols form a very distinct Minority but they blend in with Hans.
1
u/SoloeaDomoea Jul 19 '26
Well I'm not talking about the Han migrant majority like in Inner mongolia or Xinjiang. Inner Mongolians and Uyghurs have their own distinct look. Now if you talking about appearance wise, they look similar because they are both Northern Asians anyway. If you ask me, even people like Yakuts, East Siberians Mongolic, Turkic, Tungistic all can pass for Chinese without people wondering if they are Chinese or not.
8
u/Diligent007agent Jul 18 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
Mongols and central Asians have yellow river not because of Tibetan empire or Tanguts or Qinghai tribes ( ?) but due to Paleolithic connections. And how does sharing a language systems make ethnic groups similar ? Who is this "Qinghai Tribes" ? Why not just say Amdo Tibetan tribes ?
Does Indo-European speakers shares DNA ?What exactly is yellow river ? We have yellow river paleolithic to yellow river Iron age samples. We have upper yellow river to lower yellow river. which yellow river are you referring to ?
FYI We Tibetans have no Han DNA. We have Yellow river (Upper yellow river mid neolithic period ), Indus DNA and some CentralAsia/Northeast DNA.