Systematic methodology

Systematic ethnology

 Systematic anthropology

Systematic linguistics

Population geogenetics

Systematic poetics

Systematic folkloristics                    




Prehistoric tribes

 Prehistoric races

Prehistoric languages

Prehistoric archaeology

  Prehistoric religions

Prehistoric folklore












*     Racial taxonomy

*     Ethnical taxonomy

*     Europe

*     Asia

*     Anatolia

*     Caucasus

*     Africa

*     Arabia

*     India

*     China

*     Indonesia

*     Indochina

*     Polynesia

*     Australia

*     North America

*     South America



*     Spain                France

*     Italy       Schweiz

*      Britain         Celts

*      Scandinavia  

*     Germany

*     Balts        Slavs

*     Greece

*     Anatolia



                    The Ancient Tribes of Asia

                         Clickable terms are red on yellow background






Map 29. The distribution of races in Asia (after Eickstedt) 

Extract from Pavel Bělíček: The Differential Analysis of the Wordwide Human Varieties, Prague 2018, Table 29, pp. 85





The Traditional Classification of Asiatic Races

   A good starting-point for tackling the taxonomy of principal boreal races of Mongoloids was provided by Eickstedt’s classification of areal zones. It reckoned with compartments for the Northern and Southern Mongolids, Palaeo-Europids, Indianids and two racial zones. Dark inhabitants of the subtropical zone fell into the class of ‘brown races’, while the rest of tribes residing in highlands defined the partition of ‘mountainous races’. In addition, it applied the classificatory groupings of Vedoids, Negritos, Tungids, Southern Asiatic races and Eastern Asiatic varieties.


Mediterranide, Grazilmediterranide, Eurafrikanide, Berberide, Orientalide, Indide, Grazilindide, Nordindinide, Indobrachide, Pazifide, Polineside, Mikroneside

Tungide, Sinide, Nordsinide, Mittelsinide, Südsinide 


Alpinide, Westalpinide, Lappide, Dinaride, Armenide, Turanide, Aralide, Pamiride


Palämongolide, Palaungide, Neside 


Weddide, Wedda, Gondide, Malide, Toalide, Ostweddide, Ainuide


VEDOID: Gondid - Malid - Ceylonid – East Weddid

NEGRITO:  Andamanid - Toalid - AetidSemangid

SOUTH ASIA: Palaungid - Shanid - Deuteromalaid - ProtomalayidNepalid

EAST ASIA: North - Middle and South Sinid - Chosonid - Coshu – Satsuma - CipangidQiangid

TUNGIDS: Talgid - Kumid - Aralid - Pamirid - West Sibirid - East Sibirid - EskimidSakhalinid

Table 19. Eickstedt’s subcategorisation of areal zones and racial groups

   In Biasutti’s subcategorisation3 Mongoloids include Siberids, Tibetids, Eskimids, Tungids, Turanids, Sinids and South Mongolids (Palaeo-Mongolids). A critical realistic view can, however, acknowledge only independent racial varieties of Uralids, Ugrids, Tungids and Turanids, other groups are mixed ‘mesoraces’ or heterogeneous groupings. The worst blunder consists in classifying Sinids as Mongolids: they only share some traits because their homeland lies in the intersection of Mongolids in the north, Tungids in the northeast and the Negrito in the south. The principal core of Asians is seen in Mongolids encompassing most races of Central Asia, Siberian and the Far East. Unfortunately, they form one of the vaguest controversial categories of current anthropology.


Uralo-Siberian macrofamily: Palaeo-Siberian macrofamily, Finno-Ugric macrofamily

Palaeo-Siberian macrofamily: Chukotkan family, Kamchatkan family, Yukaghir family

Chukotkan family: Alyutor, Chukchi, Kerek, Koryak

Kamchatkan family: (Western) Itelmen, Eastern Kamchadal

Yukaghir family: Chuvan, Omok

Finno-Ugric macrofamily: Baltic group, Volga group, Permic group, Samoyedic, Ugric group, Hungarian

Baltic Finnic group: Chud, Estonians, Finns, Izhorians, Karelians, Livonians, Setos, Veps, Votes

Volga group: Burtas, Mari, Merya, Meshchera, Mokshas, Mordvins, Murom, Sami (Lapps)

Permic group: Besermyan, Komi, Komi-Permyaks, Udmurts

Samoyedic group: Enets, Nenets, Nganasan, Selkup

Sayan Samoyedic: Kamassian, Koibal, Karagas, Motor, Soyot, Taigi

Ugric group: Khanty, Mansi, Yugra

Hungarian group: Székely, Csángó, Magyarab, Jász, Kun, Palóc

Table 20. The traditional classification of Finno-Ugric peoples



The Anthropocenology and Ethnonymic Associations of Uralic Tribes


   Uralic nations live in isolated inhospitable ends of the Old World and their seats can easily induce us to think that they played a marginal role in the Eurasian ethnogeny. This impression is superficial and misleading because they were heirs of Palaeolithic megafauna-hunters and launched several worldwide colonisations. In the prehistoric past they conquered many continents but had to search for new lands because they soon exterminated most species of big mammals. Their ancestors were Palaeo-Mongolids akin to Clactonians, Tayacians, Tabunians and Mousterians. Their hordes swept the world in several waves culminating with the last revival in the Bronze Age (from 3000 BC to 1200 BC). Its main bearers were the Megalithic Ogres in western Eurasia and the Mycenaean Cyclopes in the Balkans. About 6,000 BC the Old World saw an amazing diaspora of their younger brothers nicknamed as Neo-Mongolids. Their cultural identity was discerned according to the spread of the western and eastern Combed Ware.

   Fatal disasters in their history came in the Mesolithic after the extinction of mammoths. Their rarefication made big-mammal hunters retreat to the boreal regions of northern Eurasia and later also to America. As their makeshift they had to do with hunting the moose. In Europe, Siberia, Australia as well as in America their hunting activities had detrimental effects, about 40 per cent of big-mammal species were irrevocably extirpated. These conditions make us realise that the Finno-Ugric settlements in northern Russia do not represent original homelands but only isolated temporary refuges. As a result their toponomastics has to cope with crossings of several migrations: the Palaeolithic spread in civilised centres, the Mesolithic diffusion to the northeast ends, the Neolithic pastoralist revolution and the triumphal return to the south. Table 23 reconstructs their ethnogeny in schematic descendancy relations.   

    Mongolids = Palaeo-Mongolids (diaspora 60,000 BC) + Neo-Mongolids (diaspora 6,000 BC)

    Ugrids = Palaeo-Mongolids Ugrians, Mansi, Khanty, Ingrians, Izhorians, Veps, Varangians

    Neo-Mongolids = Western Uralids Cheremis, Mari, Murom, Merya, Estonians, Mordvins

    Eastern Uralids (eastern diaspora in the 6th mill. BC) Mongolian Mergids, Ostyaks, Chinese

    Yuezhi, Koreans, Japanese, Moro in the Philippines

Table 23. The schematic plan of Mongolic and Finno-Ugric subdivisions

   Millennia of regional cohabitation intermingled Finno-Ugric languages into indistinguishable clusters. None of them is a pure extraction of Proto-Uralic ethnicity, they are all amalgamated concoctions degenerated into hybrid mixtures. Degeneration transformed independent tribal languages into one chaotic blend. Their original layout can be reconstructed only by the preparation of residual anomalous elements. The pure remains of prehistoric traits have usually been retained only in irregular conjugations, declinations and plural endings. Classic comparative linguistics wasted time by questing for lexical similarities though its proper duty was to search for structural irregularities.

URALIANS k-Ugric + t-Uralian + i-Saamic + s-Permian+ l-Bulgarian

k-Ugrids (Basco-Scythoids) Ingrian, Chudic, Vepsa (Vesi), Varyags, Magyars, Xanty, Mansi

t-Uralian Uralids (Sarmatids) Finnish, Estonian, Mordvin, Ostyaks, Murom, Merya, Meru

l-Bulgarian Pontids (Tungids) Upper Mari, Lower Mari, Karelian, Bashkir, Volga Bolgars

i-Saamic Lappids Lappish, Samoyedic, Selkup, Nenets, Enets

s-Permian Gothids (Corded Ware Nordids) Uglichi, Komi, Perm (← Barmia), Udmurt 

Table 24. The Uralic language family classified by plural endings











































A Systematic Reclassification of Uralic Nations


Uralo-Siberians Palaeo-Siberians + Eteo-Ugrids + Eteo-Estonids

Eteo-Ugric cultures (dome-shaped beehive dwellings, circular enclosures and huddles of huts, eventual

     horizontal access corridors, Mongolic chums, Eskimo igloos, big-game hunting, hunting moose,

     burials in kurgans and mounds out of piles of stones, polygynous exogamy, where each wife may

     have her own hut; mummification rites with anointment and binding the corpse into a long piece of

     cloth; epi-Mousterian industry with retouched leaf-shaped lance heads, globular amphorae, bear cults)

Eteo-Ugric language type: k-plurals, definite articles, dental stops and sonorants, fricatives β, γ, θ, ð, χ  

Eteo-Ugrids: tall large-headed brachycephals, convex, hooked and aquiline noses, reddish skin, red hair

Eteo-Ugric languages (with Ugric ethnonyms in Ugr-, Chud-, Set-, Ves-, Mas-, Mat- and k-plurals)

     Ingrian, Chudic, Vepsa (Vesi), South Estonian (plurals in -q /ʔ/), Varyags, Magyars, Yugra,

    Khanty (plural Kantek), Mansi, Yugra tongues

Eteo-Estonic cultures (the Narva Pit-Comb Ware culture, 6000 BC, egg-shaped round-bottomed pots,

     four-pitch-roof marquee tents, winter bases with hillforts, bastions, towers and rich crenellations,

     moose-hunting, raw meat drying, marital exogamy, kidnapping brides, lycanthropy, wolfine

     totemism, impaling enemies on palisades)

Estono-Marids: taller stature, large-headed brachycephaly, convex noses and other Ugroid traits

Eteo-Estonic language type: t-plurals, fortis-lenis consonantism, no voiced plosives, fortis initial stops

     vs. geminated intervocalic stops, locative cases, dental plosives and fortis sonorants, perfect tenses

     out of analytic constructions with auxiliaries and past participles 

Eteo-Estonic t-plurals: plural endings in -t, Erzyans, autonymic plural Erzyat, Moksha, plural Mokshet

Eteo-Estonic languages and groups Finnish, Estonian, Mordvin, Ostyak, Murom, Merya, Meru

Exo-Estonic culture: Eastern Comb ware, Yunggimun culture (Japan, 10,000 BP), Chulmun/Jeulmun  

     comb-patterned pottery (Korea, 8000 BC), the eastern propagation of Estono-Marids

Exo-Estonic languages with t-plurals → Korean, Mongolian, Japanese

Table 21. A new systematic reclassification of Uralids and Ugrids

   The dominant role of Eteo-Uralic tribes (Ugrids and Estono-Marids) should not overshadow a great number of subdominant ethnicities that were drowned in their peripheral surrounding. They took over the main core of the Uralic lexical word stock but retained a number of irregularities that betray heterogeneous origin and distinguish them from alien neighbours.

Allo-Uralic subfamilies, subdominant pseudo-Uralids and non-Uralic tribes of heterogeneous origin that

    were absorbed secondarily into the Uralic macrofamily in the Siberian area

Plural typology: Finno-Ugric Uralians k-Ugric + t-Uralian + i/e-Saamic + s-Permian+ l-Bulgarian

Allo-Uralians s-Permian (Gothids) + i/e-Saamic (Lappids) + l-Bulgarian (Tungids)

Uralo-Gothic Udmurts (Uralised remains of Gotho-Frisian Corded Ware absorbed in the Uralic area)

Komi-Permian culture: the Fatyanovo-Balanovo culture (3200 BC–2300 BC) with Corded Ware pottery

Komi-Permyaks Votic, Permian, Udmurt/Otyak/Votyak, Yodzyak, Kudymkar and Inva dialects

Etymology: Russians called Udmurts Chud Otyatskaya (чудь отяцкая), OtyaksWotyaks or Votyaks 

Gotho-Frisian s-plurals: Udmurts, plural autonym Udmurt’jos, Удмуртъёс; Komi, plural autonym

     Komiyas, plurals in -ias, -ies, sp-/st-/sk-clusters, voiced-surd consonant stop opposition, abundant 

     diphthongs and triphthongs in Karelian and other mixed Uralic languages

Uralo-Langobardian Permyaks, agriculturalists dwelling in longhouses in the style of half-timber

     architecture, descent from the Ananyino culture (c. 750 BC) with row burials (Reihengräber) of

     Langobardian type, influence and cultural affiliation with the Koban battle-axe culture in Ingushetia,

     Perm (from medieval Barmia), Permian plurals in -ez

Uralo-Lappids (Uralised remains of cremation cultures1 coming from the Anatolian and Levantine Epi-

     Gravettian or the Altaic Sayan Mountains and China, probable origin from Sinids in Southeast Asia)

Uralo-Lappic language type:  palatalisation, abundant affricates, satemisation, Nenets-Enet satem shift,

     palatalisation k > ,  s > , Nganasan, Selkup and Kamassian palatalisation k > ʃ

Samoyedic etymology: Samoyedic does not mean ‘cannibal self-eater’ but Saami+Gothic/Jutic

Uralo-Lappic i/e-plural languages: Saamic/Lappish, Saami plurals in -k, -i, -e, Samoyedic Selkup,

     Nenets, Enets, plural form Entsi, palatalised -plurals in Mordvin

Karelian Uralo-Tungids (Uralised remains of Aurignacian Palaeolithic lacustrine nomadic fishers and

     sedentary lake-dwellers, affiliated with the Mediterranid Pontids settled north of the Black Sea,

     Tungusic tepee tents retained in the lavvu huts and Finnish tall A-shaped roofs)

Uralo-Karelian language type: there is little evidence of Tungusic Evenk plurals in -l, today Karelians 

     use plurals in -t, Pontic Bulgarians and Bashkirs apply composite plural in -lar, e.g. Bashkir ata

     ‘father’, pl. atalar ‘fathers’1, composite plurals may be seen also in the Mari ending -vlak

Uralo-Karelian languages Karelian, Olonets Karelian, Ludic, Upper Mari, Lower Mari, Bashkir

Table 22. The hypothetical ethnogeny of eastern Uralic and Mongolic tribes



Extract from Pavel Bělíček: The Differential Analysis of the Wordwide Human Varieties, Prague 2018, pp. 84-89

































































































































3 R. Biasutti: Razze e i popoli. Torino, vol. 1, pp. 268-271.

1 Noel D. Broadbent: Lapps and Labyrinths, Saami Prehistory, Colonization and Cultural Resilience. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press, 2010, p. 34.

1 J. Németh: Türkische Grammatik. Berlin 1916, p. 26.