LeBrok
Elite member
- Messages
- 10,261
- Reaction score
- 1,617
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Calgary
- Ethnic group
- Citizen of the world
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b Z2109
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H1c
Keeping in mind that Anatolia was rather populous country compared to steppe/mountainous region like Turkmenistan or Uzbekistan, it would require movement of all the inhabitants of this region to mix in proportions you suggest. It makes it very unlikely. Uzbekistan and farther to the center of Asia, numerous invasion would drastically lower Caucasian admixture in Turkey. So the direct invasion of Central Asiatic Turkish tribes in 30% proportion did not happen. Max is 15% by the numbers. Turkmenistan population is actually similar to Turkey, and it looks like they were the victim of the same conquering force. This more likely than being invaders themselves. Again, looking at massive 50% of caucasian admixture in Turkey, makes them overwhelmingly inhabitants of this caucasian/sub caucasian region almost forever.That's not necessary, they - the Turkic-speaking immigrants - just had to be much less Northest Asian than you think for that. I'm talking about the demographic impact of a migration, not about the intensity of its genetic imprint, bringing alien elements to the local genetic pool. I think that 25% to 30% is more plausible because the bulk of the Turkic migration to Anatolia happened after the 11th century and came not from the northern steppes nor even less so from anywhere near Siberia, but from present Turkmenistan/Uzbekistan, and the Turks had already started to expand extensively in that southern part of Central Asia for at least 500 years before they came in droves to Anatolia.
The only huge replacement of population, from the available samples, I can see, was from late Neolithic to Bronze Age, when Anatolian Neolithic Farmer was replaced by BA Armenian Farmer. Possibly caused by expansion of IEs. Steppe admixture is growing in Armenia and Northern Anatolia at same time.
It might look like it, but it wasn't. Again, when I look at admixture numbers, it would take almost all Turkmenistan to replace contemporary Anatolians to get to modern Turkey numbers. It is hugely unlikely.Besides, the Turks themselves that had expanded southward to Turkmenistan/Uzbekistan had already established important khanates and tribal confederacies in the Eurasian Steppe around modern Kazakhstan, where they definitely mixed with local Europoid tribes and thus arrived the Turan region with their East Asian-like ancestry already a bit diluted. So, in my opinion, the Turks that invaded Anatolia were already much more "West Eurasian" than the Turks that first invaded the Pontic-Caspian steppe and Central Asia centuries earlier. They had dozens of generations for that.
I really think, the invasion was more direct from Central Asia. I have seen pictures of people from some secluded villages in Turkey, and people looked Central Asiatic/Mongolian.So, my position, at least until contrary proofs are presented (I have no strong personal interest in maintaining this opinion of mine), is that if Siberian+East Asian admixture in contemporary Turks account for ~10-15% of their genetic makeup, that must mean a demographic impact from the Turkic migrations between 20% and 30%.
Having said that there is quite a bit speculation on my part, though I'm trying to stay true to numbers. Getting our hands on IA samples from Anatolia, and the ones before Turkish invasion would answer few questions.
Peace out.