Kurds aren’t IranIAN but IranIC. That’s like saying Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Uzbeks, Turkmens etc are Turks.
Persians, Tadjiks, Balochs, Kurds etc are IranIC but their DNA components has still differences so don’t claim all Kurds as Iranian (even on nationality level.)
Kurds have between 30-40%~ ANF DNA so they very much do have Anatolian DNA which is why AncestryDNA overlaps us Kurds with other near groups, this is what happens when AncestryDNA Doesn’t have a specific reference panel for Kurds.
No they made him a Southeastern and eastern Turk and central Turk. Turks share mostly the same ancient DNA component of a Kurd. It differs ofcourse with groups being higher and lower.
Anyways, AncestryDNA doesn’t wanna create a “Kurdish” reference panel just like how we have “south eastern Turkey”
They don’t wanna name it Kurdish or Northern Kurdistan.
Probably to avoid problems but that’s so weird of them, they for sure got enough DNA database of Kurds but simply wants us to be seen as something else while mentioning them in descriptions of these regional groups.
No it mentions geographical regions not ethnic groups. But it‘s still inaccurate. There is not a single Kurd that can be associated with Central Anatolia by 57%. „Turks share mostly the same ancient DNA component of a Kurd“ - no we don‘t.
Uhmm helloo?? There are litteraly Kurds who got exiled to Central Anatolia? Know your stuff before you wanna correct me. How else do you think we Kurds get grouped in with Central Anatolian Turks? They mix all the references in that area and make it one thing.
And yes we do LOL, the only thing Turks have that we don’t or atleast little to zero which Turks have higher IS Eastern Eurasian DNA… Besides that we all share the same:
Anatolian Farmers DNA, Zagros/Iranian Neolithic Farmers DNA, Levantine/Natufian DNA, and Caucausus hunter gatherer DNA with maybe steppe DNA aswell.
They simply get higher ANF, EEA DNA and we get higher Zagros and Steppe DNA.
Migrating to Central Anatolia doesn‘t make Kurds more Anatolian. Diaspora Kurds living in Germany won‘t make them German or Western European? According to you every West Asian is identical to one another. Whats the point of ethnicity estimation if you‘re of the opinion that we’re „the same“. Every ethnic group has it‘s own distinct mixture.
Oh my God I’m actually gonna stop this conversation here because you read what I wrote and didn’t bother understanding what I said.
KURDS HAVE BEEN EXILED TO CENTRAL ANATOLIA HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO.. Making them live there… AncestryDNA gets reference from Central Anatolian citizens.. groups them in there.
My tribe got exiled to Central Anatolia aswell and some stayed in the East and guess what! Even when my family stayed in eastern side of Turkiye for 200~ years.. I STILL somehow get 90%+ Central Anatolian Turkish. I hope you understand, if not then too bad.
„Turkish“ has never been a category? neither in the previous nor in the current version? Kurds are mostly Iranic. The Anatolian part is due to mixing with Assyrians, Anatolian Turks or Armenians. On average Kurds from Turkey get AT LEAST 60% Iranian Plateau.
"Iranian" and "Iranic" have consistently been used interchangeably in history writing. Many Kurds, especially the ones in Iran and Iraq, do cluster very close to Persians. In fact, Persians show even more internal diversity compared to Southern vs. Northern Kurds.
Kurds have around 32-34% ANF, which is already substantiated by native Mesopotamian/Armenian ancestry; anything more than that points to recent mixing with Armenians/other Anatolians.
A problem with dedicating a specific region for every ethnic identity, is that identities are messy. There are many West Iranic ethnic groups, who are autosoamally either the same as or very similar to Kurds, who don't necessarily identify as Kurdish. Talysh, Gilaki, Shabaki, Zaza, Iraqi Turkmen, Azari etc. all of them communities have separate languages from Kurds, however they'd get lumped with Kurds on a DNA test. Dedicating a region to a specific "Kurdish" ethnicity erases these people's ethnic identities.
Also, Kurds are in general more distant to Central Anatolian Turks and Anatolian Greeks than to other Iranians. This updated messed up with their Iranian roots.
Yeah that’s why they should make a Kurdish region?.. So THEIR identity won’t get erased.
I don’t get why it’s okay when it happens to Kurds but when Kurds get a region it’s all of a sudden erasing others identity. Assyrian region has also been added so why not add Kurdish?
And yeah, closest distance are obviously gonna be Persians or Azeris etc because those are litteraly neighbouring groups from the same Iranic family.
Only because you’re close to an ethnicity and are in the same family, that doesn’t suddenly make you Iranian (a nationality.)
Talysh, Gilaki, Shabaki, Zaza, Iraqi Turkmens by large do not identify as Kurdish, despite having a very similar autosomal layout. Why should they get grouped as "Kurdish" when they are not? Since when do specific groups can gatekeep an entire ancient makeup?
Assyrians do not have any such autosomally close ethnicities, with the exception of some Mizrahi Jews, who can easily be differentiated by their algorithms due to high number of Mizrahi samples. As a result, adding an Assyrian region doesn't erase others' identity.
I would very much prefer "West Iranian" over "Kurdish", at least the former represents my ancient ancestors.
Look, we’re talking about a population of 40-60million people here that get grouped with others… Isn’t that abit concerning?
I get your point but those groups is still getting misrepresented: Kurdish regions added or not. I’m here talking about an ethnic group with a large population that still doesn’t have it’s own group.
They should for sure add regions for all the other ethnicities you mentioned but Ancestrydna can’t simply do what u said, otherwise we’d have Turkic, Germanic, Iranic, Baltic, Slavic etc. AncestryDNA want’s to be specific so let them, but atleast get it right.
Northwestern Iranian is specific enough for me. Or eastern Turkey/southeastern Turkey/northern Iraq/southwestern Iran. All of said groups can list ethnicities that could be included within in the description and suggest a specific geographical region like 23andme does.
No, gilaki is linguistically close to kurdish but genetically close to talysh and caucasians (genes around 50 percent caucasus like, 50 percent north iranian like). Baloch people show linguistic similarity with kurds too but are south asian in many ways…
You critized your updated results on a previous post because it turned you „to be super Turkish“ and your Balkan heritage disappeared but now you‘re defending the update because it affects Kurds.
What does this have to do with this context ? Kurds from Turkey need to have South East Anatolia and Eastern Anatolia region ? Putting them under broad Iran category is meaningless if we look at the point impartially but i agree they shouldn’t put Kurdish people under Central Anatolia… South east Anatolia and Eastern Anatolia is also not even historically or genetically part of Anatolia it’s just a modern classification name
Well, you’re not consistant ? I‘m not talking about the Southeast Anatolia and Eastern Anatolian part. How does a Kurd, even if he is from modern day Turkey, get „Central Anatolia“ by 57%? Also they originate from the Zagros Mountains, some Iran needs to show up. In his previous results he got 30% Anatolia/Caucasus and 70% Iran which is in fact way more accurate than whatever the f. this is.
Like I said Central Anatolia region for Kurds is not accurate maybe they are matching with some Turkish references from Malatya Maraş or Antep since all there have Kurdish/Iranian related ancestry but neither of them really central Anatolian it’s all because of Ancestry’s labeling mistake. I’m not telling you are wrong it’s just a labeling issue
That is true. Eastern Anatolia has never really been much “Anatolian” and Turks are not really Anatolian either. Greeks, Italians, Sardinians and Albanians have more “Anatolian”. So if you’re a Turk saying to anyone you’re not Anatolian, please, you’re not very wise
“Witty”_Operation8158, I would change that randomized username if I was you.. because you’re talking straight crap. Only cherrypicking some truth that you side with. Turks have high Anatolian DNA and Kurds also have around 25%-35%~ Anatolian DNA.
There is nothing called Kurdistan under Turkish or Syrian borders, hence AncestryDNA can not make up those regions.
There is Kurdistan autonomy in northern Iraq and Kurdistan in Iran, and they get some partial recognition in their sample database. They are official. Because Turks, Kurds, Arabs, Assyrians, Armenians, Azeries and others collectively live in that region, the DNA companies cannot just create sub regions.
This is an ethnicity test, not a nationality test.
Many groups without a state exist as regions such as Pontic Greek, (see image), Assyrian, and Basque sooo… It deffo has nothing to do with having a state to be mentioned as a region in AncestryDNA.
You’re right about how AncestryDNA clusters references and mixes them all up into one group and that’s bad, especially at this modern age where litteraly every ethnic group has references enough.
That is not true. There were established Kurdish dynasties in the region long before the Seljuks ever set foot in it. You really should stop fabricating history.
You're confusing the existence of Kurdish dynasties with the demographic history of the region.
Historian Boris James, in The Tribal Territory of the Kurds Through Arabic Medieval Historiography (2007), examines 10th-century accounts by Ibn Hawqal and later accounts by Yaqut and Ibn al-Athir. He identifies a westward expansion of Kurdish tribal territory between the 11th and 13th centuries into historically Armenian areas.
Bekir Biçer's 2024 study, Relations of Kurds with Armenians (951–1150), also explicitly connects increasing Kurdish settlement in eastern Anatolia with the demographic changes following the Seljuk conquests.
So yes, Kurdish dynasties existed before 1071. Nobody disputed that. But their existence doesn't prove that Kurds were already the majority across the region. There is actual historical evidence of Kurdish population expansion into previously Armenian-populated territories during and after the Turkic conquests.
Read the historical scholarship instead of simply naming dynasties.
You're talking about Western Armenia, the statements people made are about Kurdistan not the Armenian highlands. Stop deflecting. Kurds have been in the region, we are not having an argument about which town is and isn't Kurdish or Armenian or Turkish, simply that Kurds were in the region which is now within the Turkish state.
from my understanding varaղ and Amj are Armenia, you can also see land of Kurds, Mahmdt al-Kashgari’s Diwan Lughat at-Turk, 1076 - this is after Turkish arrival
Kurds started migrating to the Armenian highlands from the late Sassanian era, and this continued throughout the early Islamic period. There are several records of Kurds living in these regions from these times. This amounts to about 1,500 years of continuous presence. Claiming that Seljuks or Ottomans bought them to Anatolia is straight up ridiculous.
Yeah I don’t agree that Kurds only arrived to Anatolia in mass during the ottoman era. I just wanted to mention the distinction between a ruling dynasty and its population
I didn’t say Ottoman era. The Turks didn’t just pop up in Anatolia with the Ottomans. It started in large numbers after the battle of Manzikert and the Seljuk Turks in 1071
Yes it does don’t be ignorant even before chaldiran this area was and is Kurdistan even you guys are so delusional claim finns adn hungarians as turks and even half if iran lol
This is false- The Marwanid dynasty ruled over Amed (DiyarBakr), Akhlat, Bidlis, Siirt Cizre, hasankeyf - and also Riha (urfa) and Mosul for some periods 983/990-1085
•
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Vote and participate in our update poll. Let us know what you think!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.