Armenian Genetics

[Anonymouse]

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/tcga/tcgapdf/Weale-HG-01-Armenia.pdf

[jgk3]

Re: Armenian Genetics

very insightful. I've already come into contact with the conclusions this study suggests, but it's always nice to have a well conducted study to support it.

[yerazhishda]

Re: Armenian Genetics

This thread belongs on Stormfront.

[jgk3]

Re: Armenian Genetics

This thread belongs on Stormfront.

lol, Syunik and Artsakh Armenians are the only non-mongrelized variety :P

[artined2]

Re: Armenian Genetics

I am trying to track down my Armenian heritage. Can anybody offer any help? My surname, before my father ran off, would have been Kariyan. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

[yerazhishda]

Re: Armenian Genetics

There exists no Armenian ‘race.’ There is only an Armenian people, an Armenian nation. This is why we need to fight. The Armenian people in the diaspora are losing their identity as a cultural-national entity, succumbing to the centrifugal effects of cultural assimilation. If Armenians of the diaspora do not claim their right to live in their homeland they will gradually lose their common cultural identity. And if this happens, the white massacre of our nation will have succeeded.”

--Monte Melkonian, “Our Origins: True and False,” article originally written in mid-1981, and later included in The Right to Struggle (San Francisco: Sardarabad Press, 1993) (henceforth RTS), pp. 3-6. The quoted passage appears on p.6.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Armenian Genetics

There exists no Armenian ‘race.’ There is only an Armenian people, an Armenian nation. This is why we need to fight. The Armenian people in the diaspora are losing their identity as a cultural-national entity, succumbing to the centrifugal effects of cultural assimilation. If Armenians of the diaspora do not claim their right to live in their homeland they will gradually lose their common cultural identity. And if this happens, the white massacre of our nation will have succeeded.”

--“Our Origins: True and False,” article originally written in mid-1981, and later included in The Right to Struggle (San Francisco: Sardarabad Press, 1993) (henceforth RTS), pp. 3-6. The quoted passage appears on p.6.

That is a matter of opinion and also depends on how one defines 'race'. As you know, language is fungible.

[yerazhishda]

Re: Armenian Genetics

The point is that genetics is nice and all, and should be all means researched and looked into as scientifically as possible, but it is not the 'be all, end all' of our nation by any stretch of the imagination.

A lot of this type of research is also hypothesis, guesswork, and shots in the dark.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Armenian Genetics

The point is that genetics is nice and all, and should be all means researched and looked into as scientifically as possible, but it is not the 'be all, end all' of our nation by any stretch of the imagination.

A lot of this type of research is also hypothesis, guesswork, and shots in the dark.

The logical conclusion of your opinions means that a Chinaman can be "Armenian" and I disagree.

There is little to no "guesswork" when they measure your blood types and genotypes. If you disagree, please point out what part of the study is hypothesis, guesswork, and shots in the dark. .

[Hye_Psycho]

Re: Armenian Genetics

from what i have read, the 'Nation' is can be catagorised into 3 strata of analysis; Biology (anthropology), Culture and Language. One or two or three can be combined to accurately trace the ethnology or define the 'race' of a particular group of people.

Biological Succession indicates a direct physical decent from one certain group of forefathers to a succeeding unit. It is simply expressed in the transmission of definite racial features. It is important to underscore the biology is a process of succession, and not one nation alive today’s is completely “pure” but in fact a hybrid blend of many different racial types. Not withstanding, racial types can dominate any given ethnic unit, and from this we can begin (from biological sense) trace the ethnic units, which participated in the ethnogenisis of a given nation. Once again consider that anthropology can have everything to do with culture and language, but at the same time (and most probably) have little links to the socio-historical role in defining the nation.

For example the Turks that inhabit Asia Minor today are ‘genetically’ closer to the indigenous populations of that region, but instead exhibit for the most part an alien culture. However Armenians do have a increased level of Biological succession from very ancient populations – and still practice age-old customs. Only a case-by-case analysis will suffice. For me having the right Genetics and being ‘Armenian’ are closely linked. Some will naturally disagree.

Linguistic Succession points to a historical connection between a given ethnic unit and the ethnic groups, which were native speakers of this language (or its predecessor) at the earlier stages of history (Diakonoff, 1983). Few things to consider:
- The historical connection mentioned above, my no means articulates a direct link
- The spreading of language from one unit to another who has completely different anthropological, cultural and historical features is in fact very common (note the significance of this for the Armenians)
- The spreading of language to a new territory is not akin to mass movement of that group of people to the said territory. The converse is true. Usually smaller populations migrate and spread their language, a language that becomes dominant because of prevailing political and social conditioning.
- This is the opposite of biology, where a majority ethnic unit is needed to transform the anthropology of one unit of people
- In sum, history has revealed that language often indicates that minority socially and politically stronger ethnicities have superior linguistic influence, where larger mass populations constitute stronger biological tenets of a nation. This however is a trend not a forgone fact


Cultural succession perhaps is a best indicator of ‘national character’. Simply put that although people change languages, a given culture and civilisation traits allows us to actually see if a new ethnic group has been introduced or not, thus providing us a superior mode of analysis. For example a certain group may achieve a certain level of institutional civility. This civility is set to continue irrespective of language change. Linguistics only matter when there is definitive proof that a completely new ethnic unit has migrated in large numbers to a new territory, is on a different socio-economic level, and has completely annihilated the previous population.

Like I said, I believe a mix of all 3 categories make the ‘nation’ with special emphasis on genetics/biology and culture. i dont believe you can be 'armenian' without the right genetic make up.