Bozur
Amicus
Posts: 5,515
|
Post by Bozur on Dec 16, 2011 13:08:32 GMT -5
September 03, 2011 Who Are the Anatolian Turks? A Reappraisal of the Anthropological Genetic Evidence (Yardumian & Schurr 2011)
This is a rather comprehensive overview of the issue of Turkish origins from an archaeological/anthropological/historical and genetic perspective. It should serve as a nice overview of the literature on the subject for anyone interested in the topic. The authors don't estimate a % estimate of the impact of incoming Turkic speakers vs. pre-Turkic Anatolians, but marshall enough evidence to show that massive migration into Anatolia from the east was not responsible for the linguistic Turkicization of the peninsula.
A minor observation on the genetic aspects of the paper is that the authors reference the old claim that Y-haplogroups G and J share common ancestry; this is not our current understanding of the Y-chromosome phylogeny which puts haplogroup J with haplogroup I in the IJ clade and more generally the IJK clade at the exclusion of G. In any case, this does not materially affect the paper's conclusions as both G and J originated in West Eurasia and may only have entered Anatolia with Turkic speakers as back-migration together with haplogroups typical of East Eurasia.
Related:
The Central Asian element in Turks (part 3) dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/05/central-asian-element-in-turks-part-3.html
Variation in four Central Anatolian settlements dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/04/variation-in-four-central-anatolian.html
The Turkic cline dodecad.blogspot.com/2011/05/turkic-cline.html
Multidimensional scaling and ADMIXTURE across Northern Eurasia corresponds to geography and language dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/11/multidimensional-scaling-and-admixture.html
Anthropology & Archeology of Eurasia Issue: Volume 50, Number 1 / Summer 2011Pages: 6 - 42
DOI: 10.2753/AAE1061-1959500101 Who Are the Anatolian Turks?A Reappraisal of the Anthropological Genetic Evidence Aram Yardumian and Theodore G. Schurr
Abstract:Due to its long-term geographic position as gateway between Europe and Asia, the genetic constitution of Anatolia is highly complex. In spite of its overwhelming diversity, most citizens of the Republic of Turkey are firstlanguage Turkish-speakers and consider themselves ethnic Turks. This was not the case during the early Middle Ages and the time of the Byzantine Empire. Although we are able to identify four successive Turkic empires, Islamicization, and post-World War I nationalization as the essential steps toward ethnic homogenization, from historical texts alone we cannot determine to what extent mass migration from Central Asia and Siberia is responsible for Turkish dominance in Anatolia today. To assess the extent of gene flow from lands east of the Caspian, we examined the patterns of genetic variation in Turkic-speaking populations from Anatolia to Siberia. This analysis allows us to build the case for incommensurable, long-term, and continuing genetic signatures in both Anatolia and Siberia, and for significant mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome divergence between the regions, with minimal admixture. We supplement the case against mass migration with correlative archeological, historical, and linguistic data, and suggest that it was irregular punctuated migration events that engendered large-scale shifts in language and culture among Anatolia's diverse autochthonous inhabitants. mesharpe.metapress.com/app/home/main.asp?referrer=defaultdienekes.blogspot.com/2011/09/who-are-anatolian-turks-reappraisal-of.html
|
|
|
Post by missanthropology58 on Dec 16, 2011 13:11:25 GMT -5
Yörük Turkmen of Anatolia and Balkan / Anadolu'nun ve Balkanların Yörük Türkmenleri en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YorouksThe Yorouks, also Yuruks or Yörüks (Greek: Γιουρούκοι, Bulgarian: юруци, Macedonian: Јуруци, Turkish: Yörük) are immigrants, ultimately of Thracian descent,[1]some of whom are still nomadic, primarily inhabiting the mountains of Anatolia and partly Balkan peninsula. Their name derives from the Turkish verb yürü- (yürümek in infinitive), which means "to walk", with the word yorouk or Yuruk designating "those who walk, walkers".[2][3] Istanbul=Istanpolis Istan going to Polis city. Anatolian Turks are mostly Thracians
|
|
Bozur
Amicus
Posts: 5,515
|
Post by Bozur on Dec 16, 2011 16:38:21 GMT -5
December 29, 2007 How Turkish are the Anatolians? (new Alu insertion polymorphism study)
In my 2005 blog post How Turkish are the Anatolians, I estimated, based on Y chromosome frequencies the Central Asian Turkic contribution to the modern-day Anatolians.
Using the figure of 38.5%, the paternal contribution of Turks to the Anatolian population is estimated to about 11%. In lieu of the approximation, allowing for 33% relative error in either direction for both the true frequency of Mongoloid lineages in Anatolia and in early Turks, we obtain a range of 6-22%. It would thus appear that the Turkish element is a minority one in the composition of the Anatolians, but it is by no means negligible.
In a subsequent post on Non-Caucasoid admixture in Turks I estimated that the combined (bi-parental) contribution of Mongoloids in Turks:
Based on these numbers, the non-Caucasoid admixture in Turks can be quantified as 1.87% Negroid, and 6.18% Mongoloid, total 8.05%. Given that Central Asians, including the likely Turkic ancestors of modern-day Turkish-speaking Anatolians are partly Mongoloid, this later estimate is compatible with a genetic contribution similar to that quoted above.
So, I was pleased to see a new study based on a different set of autosomal Alu insertion polymorphisms from a group of Turkish scientists that arrived at a similar estimate of the Central Asian admixture in Anatolians. So, it appears that about 1/8 of ancestry of Anatolians (equivalent to one great grandparent) came from a Central Asian Turk.
It is very refreshing to see a paper by Turkish scientists who acknowledge what exactly that other 7/8 of the Anatolians' ancestry actually consists of:
Before Seljuks, Anatolia was under the rule of Eastern Romans but was mainly inhabited by people of Greek origin for nearly two millennia (Toynbee, 1970). The process of change of language and religion by the Seljuks that is assimilation of the residents but not the invaders in Anatolia, was one of the puzzles of history (Toynbee, 1970). As the part of puzzle, estimation of the relative size of arriving nomads was the concern of many studies.
American Journal of Physical Anthropology (online early) 10.1002/ajpa.20772
Alu insertion polymorphisms and an assessment of the genetic contribution of Central Asia to Anatolia with respect to the Balkans
Ceren Caner Berkman et al.
In the evolutionary history of modern humans, Anatolia acted as a bridge between the Caucasus, the Near East, and Europe. Because of its geographical location, Anatolia was subject to migrations from multiple different regions throughout time. The last, well-known migration was the movement of Turkic speaking, nomadic groups from Central Asia. They invaded Anatolia and then the language of the region was gradually replaced by the Turkic language. In the present study, insertion frequencies of 10 Alu loci (A25 = 0.07, APO = 0.96, TPA25 = 0.44, ACE = 0.37, B65 = 0.57, PV92 = 0.18, FXIIIB = 0.52, D1 = 0.40, HS4.32 = 0.66, and HS4.69 = 0.30) have been determined in the Anatolian population. Together with the data compiled from other databases, the similarity of the Anatolian population to that of the Balkans and Central Asia has been visualized by multidimensional scaling method. Analysis suggested that, genetically, Anatolia is more closely related with the Balkan populations than to the Central Asian populations. Central Asian contribution to Anatolia with respect to the Balkans was quantified with an admixture analysis. Furthermore, the association between the Central Asian contribution and the language replacement episode was examined by comparative analysis of the Central Asian contribution to Anatolia, Azerbaijan (another Turkic speaking country) and their neighbors. In the present study, the Central Asian contribution to Anatolia was estimated as 13%. This was the lowest value among the populations analyzed. This observation may be explained by Anatolia having the lowest migrant/resident ratio at the time of migrations.
dienekes.blogspot.com/2007/12/how-turkish-are-anatolians-new-alu.htmlonlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20772/abstract
|
|
|
Post by missanthropology58 on Dec 16, 2011 16:48:08 GMT -5
Anatolians are Thracians. Turks are just Muslims.
|
|
Bozur
Amicus
Posts: 5,515
|
Post by Bozur on Dec 16, 2011 18:18:51 GMT -5
February 11, 2005 How Turkish are the Anatolians?
The Anatolians are the ethnic descendants of both the indigenous populations of Asia Minor who converted to Islam (and were thus spared from the genocidal campaign of the Ottomans and Kemalists during the early 20th century), and also of non-indigenous populations from the Balkans, the Middle East, and Central Asia. From Central Asia came the Turks, who were the main agent for the Islamization and during the last century Turkification of Asia Minor.
To what extent are the Anatolians descended from Central Asian Turks? The study of Cinnioglu et al. (2004) discovered an occurrence of 3.4% of Mongoloid Y-chromosomal haplogroups in Anatolia (haplogroups Q, O, and C).
According to Tambets et al. (2004) the occurrence of Mongoloid haplogroups in present-day Central Asian Turkic Altaic speakers (Altaians) is at least 40%, with an additional 10% which might belong to haplogroup O which was not tested in this study. According to Zerjal et al. (2002) this percentage is for various Turkic speakers: Kyrgyz (22%), Dungans (32%), Uyghurs (33%), Kazaks (86%), Uzbeks (18%).
It is clear that the percentage of Mongoloid ancestry among the Turkic speakers is very variable, yet it is clear that the Proto-Turks must have been partially Mongoloid in lieu of the fact that all current Turkic speakers possess some Mongoloid admixture. The average of the six Central Asian population samples listed above is 38.5% and may serve as a first-order estimate of the paternal contribution of early Turks, who (judging by their modern descendants in Central Asia) were more Caucasoid paternally and more Mongoloid maternally.
Using the figure of 38.5%, the paternal contribution of Turks to the Anatolian population is estimated to about 11%. In lieu of the approximation, allowing for 33% relative error in either direction for both the true frequency of Mongoloid lineages in Anatolia and in early Turks, we obtain a range of 6-22%. It would thus appear that the Turkish element is a minority one in the composition of the Anatolians, but it is by no means negligible.
dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/02/how-turkish-are-anatolians.htmlwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14586639?dopt=Abstractwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145751?dopt=Abstract
|
|