Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 170

Thread: Turks are Anatolians under the hood?

  1. #1
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,863
    Points
    311,408
    Level
    100
    Points: 311,408, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.

    Turks are Anatolians under the hood?

    Razib Khan has been running an analysis on their data sets versus Greeks and Armenians.

    https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2018/...medium=twitter

    He concludes they're about equidistant between Anatolian Greeks and Armenians. Is that right?

    See:
    https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2018/...medium=twitter

    "To my mild surprise, the Anatolian Greeks and Cypriots cluster together, at the end of the Greece cline toward West Asians. :

    I disagree with his following conclusion. I would think there are other reasons why Bulgarians, even Bulgarian Turks, might have some East Asian other than inter-marriage with Ottoman Turks. Perhaps Eastara will see this and opine.

    "
    Additionally, there are two Balkan Turk samples. Even on the PCA it’s pretty clear that they’re genetically very different from the other Turks (one of them is from what has become Bulgaria), though the shift toward East Asians indicates that Turkification is very rarely a matter purely of religious conversion to Islam and assimilation of the Turkish language (obviously it initially is for many people, but these people then intermarry with those with some East Asian ancestry)."

    "
    One of the major problems is that the Armenian sample and the Anatolian Greek/Cypriot sample are genetically very close. This is obvious in the Fst distance. This is also totally reasonable since both populations occupy Anatolia, and historically there would have been a lot of gene flow between the two groups through isolation-by-distance dynamics."

    "
    In terms of drift the Turks seem about as far from Anatolian Greeks as Armenians. There’s the gene flow you’d expect, there are two from East Asians to Turks. I think that’s due to the East Asian source being somewhat heterogeneous, and the Dai outgroup not modeling the source populations perfectly."

    "
    Finally, there’s the f3 statistics. They basically show what I’m saying above: Armenians and Anatolian Greeks are both good model sources for Turks. The likely truth is that there is gene flow from all across Anatolia into these Turkish samples."


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  2. #2
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,739
    Points
    28,095
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,095, Level: 51
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 555
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    1 members found this post helpful.
    I think that isn't surprising. I find it a bit baffling that so many Turks, as I've had some discussions on this topic on the web, still struggle to accept that, even though, as I reminded them more than once, this fact is actually a positive thing about their ancestors, since it suggests that they weren't genocidal murderers that engaged in massive ethnic cleansing. But it seems that some peoples are still to concerned with outdated ideas of nationalist essentialism, with the necessary myth of a continuous and permanent chain of ancestral lineages until the present world, something that would make their nation completely unique and distinct from others. As we all know, that's not how the past of humankind and the ethnogenesis of most nations happened.

    I've read some sensible comments by Turks on the inadequacy of using the Northeast Asian or East Asian admixture to infer the degree of genetic impact of the Turkic migration into Anatolia, and that really makes some sense.

    If we want to determine how much of the Proto-Turkic ancestry is still found in modern Anatolian Turks, then it is fair to use those admixtures mainly found among overwhelmingly Mongoloid peoples like the Yakut, but one must bear in mind that the Proto-Turks were definitely very different from the medieval Turks of Central Asia, so even though the language and much of the characteristic Turkic culture came from Northeast Asia it isn't right to say that most of the expansion of Turkic languages came from there. The bulk of the expansion was done by the heavily mixed Turks of Central Asia, migrating and making warfare on all sides, north, west, east and south, and those were peoples that were already perhaps only 50% similar to their Proto-Turkic forebears of the Altai and near the Baikal.

    What makes it tricky, then, to establish the real degree of Turkic introgression into Anatolia in the Middle Ages is mainly that, if they came mostly from present-day Turkmenistan, it must be difficult to distinguish what is "Turkic" from what is actually "Iranian Plateau admixtures" or broadly "West Asian".

    The Turks who conquered Turkmenistan must've absorbed a lot of Iranic-speaking peoples, peoples who already had close genetic links especially with the eastern Anatolians, in the Armenian Highlands. The peoples of Central Asia probably descended in high proportions from those in Anatolia/Caucasus/Iranian Plateau, and those in Anatolia, after the Bronze Age, also had a lot of that mixed ancestry. Even today Turks often appear very close to Iranian samples on PCAs. How can we then determine whether some Iranian-like ancestry was already dwelling in Anatolia for centuries before the arrival of Turks or it in fact arrived with the mixed, heavily Iranian-shifted Turkmen? I wonder...

  3. #3
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-09-17
    Posts
    115
    Points
    1,573
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,573, Level: 11
    Level completed: 8%, Points required for next Level: 277
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Turkish,Albanian
    Country: Turkey



    because we are mixed before ottoman on seljuks. seljuks are turko-persian empire. if you can see our historic leaders, ertugrul gazi or other ottoman leaders you can't see mongoloid or turkic face. greeks dont fight with mongoloid turks they fight persians always only name is change.

    now we are close more greeks now and fight persians again. anatolia history always like this. just names is different.

    and have some reality about asian hablogroups. they are not dominant. where you go you look like native peoples.

    i live in turkey i can say turkey people not looking like real turks. west anadolia is greek/rum middle anatolia greek/semitic/mongoloid east anatolian kurds pers/arab.

    but have slanted eyes peoples too. but not so much.

    and this is a true about our history we are not genociders like some european invaders.

    our beliefs and cultures dont accept this.

  4. #4
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,396
    Points
    48,660
    Level
    68
    Points: 48,660, Level: 68
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 1,090
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    The peoples of Central Asia probably descended in high proportions from those in Anatolia/Caucasus/Iranian Plateau, and those in Anatolia, after the Bronze Age, also had a lot of that mixed ancestry. Even today Turks often appear very close to Iranian samples on PCAs. How can we then determine whether some Iranian-like ancestry was already dwelling in Anatolia for centuries before the arrival of Turks or it in fact arrived with the mixed, heavily Iranian-shifted Turkmen? I wonder...
    I would rather think that Central Asians and the populations of Anatolia/Caucasus/Iranian Plateau had common ancestors.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    DuPidh's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-07-15
    Posts
    445


    Country: Cuba



    This is what I have said all the time and getting banned from the forum for telling the truth. That Greeks and Turks are genetic cousins. If you talk privately Greeks admit that they are almost the same with Turks. Genetics of Turkey is more complicated than that of Italy. Western Turkey is mixed Euro-Asian-Middle Eastern because of recent large population movements. Western Turkey is industrialized and large number of people from everywhere have moved in the west of Turkey. Istanbul and its immediate surroundings house 1/33 of Turkish population. So any genetic study in this part of Turkey is meaningless.

    Also Turks moved in the Balkans way before the Ottoman times. They were part of Byzantium and at that time there are many large Turkish population movements in Bulgaria, Greece, or Albanians to Thessaly, etc. So not all Turkish genes in the Balkans are legacy of Ottomans

  6. #6
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-09-17
    Posts
    115
    Points
    1,573
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,573, Level: 11
    Level completed: 8%, Points required for next Level: 277
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Turkish,Albanian
    Country: Turkey



    Quote Originally Posted by DuPidh View Post
    This is what I have said all the time and getting banned from the forum for telling the truth. That Greeks and Turks are genetic cousins. If you talk privately Greeks admit that they are almost the same with Turks. Genetics of Turkey is more complicated than that of Italy. Western Turkey is mixed Euro-Asian-Middle Eastern because of recent large population movements. Western Turkey is industrialized and large number of people from everywhere have moved in the west of Turkey. Istanbul and its immediate surroundings house 1/33 of Turkish population. So any genetic study in this part of Turkey is meaningless.

    Also Turks moved in the Balkans way before the Ottoman times. They were part of Byzantium and at that time there are many large Turkish population movements in Bulgaria, Greece, or Albanians to Thessaly, etc. So not all Turkish genes in the Balkans are legacy of Ottomans
    i agree. anatolia people totally mixed. i am half albanian and half turkish. i have curly hair white skin and slanted eyes. we are mixed of everything and central asian peoples better mixed than us.

    because we live on nomadic area and we are nomadic peoples.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    DuPidh's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-07-15
    Posts
    445


    Country: Cuba



    Quote Originally Posted by XipeTotek View Post
    i agree. anatolia people totally mixed. i am half albanian and half turkish. i have curly hair white skin and slanted eyes. we are mixed of everything and central asian peoples better mixed than us.

    because we live on nomadic area and we are nomadic peoples.
    I am not an expert of Turkey, you know better. But I said the big cities of western Turkey are, because of industrialization. Cities like Istanbul, Bursa, Izmir and many others. But I don't see why Eastern and Central Turkey should be mixed. Over there genetics of people is local. The original inhabitants of Turkey were not nomads. The central Asia Turks were.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    09-03-17
    Posts
    110
    Points
    1,744
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,744, Level: 11
    Level completed: 65%, Points required for next Level: 106
    Overall activity: 14.0%


    Country: Greece



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Razib's analysis is good (though I still don't think he should have pooled Cypriot and Cappadocian Greeks together, even though they're relatively close) and this is a nice augmentation to it:

    https://oghuzturksdna.blogspot.gr/20...a-from_21.html

    Considering they're already rather close to the western Anatolia_BA, my guess is Cappadocian Greeks will end up being very close to ancient Central Anatolians. Despite migrations over time, the Aegean-Anatolian area overall retained a more robust population in medieval times unlike, say, the more depopulated mainland Balkans which were much more influenced by northern intrusions. We still need much more sampling but that's my current guess. Turks seem to be modelled well as Cappadocian Greeks + something East Asian but as mentioned, the exact proportions will depend on early samples of the period, how East Asian the Turkic populations were like and what pre-Turkic post-BA Western Anatolians looked exactly like.


    DuPidh, do you actually have a coherent narrative in your mind at least or do you post just whatever you can think up in every topic? You wrote this a while ago:

    Quote Originally Posted by DuPidh View Post
    Knowing all this stuff, had Hellenes been a majority, today's Greeks genetically should have been closer to Armenians, Western Turks, Syrians, Lebaneese
    Now you write

    Quote Originally Posted by DuPidh View Post
    This is what I have said all the time and getting banned from the forum for telling the truth. That Greeks and Turks are genetic cousins. If you talk privately Greeks admit that they are almost the same with Turks.
    You're incoherent, at least partially because you don't seem to understand these studies at all, and your additions to these topics are anything but useful.

  9. #9
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,863
    Points
    311,408
    Level
    100
    Points: 311,408, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by LATGAL View Post
    Razib's analysis is good (though I still don't think he should have pooled Cypriot and Cappadocian Greeks together, even though they're relatively close) and this is a nice augmentation to it:

    https://oghuzturksdna.blogspot.gr/20...a-from_21.html

    Considering they're already rather close to the western Anatolia_BA, my guess is Cappadocian Greeks will end up being very close to ancient Central Anatolians. Despite migrations over time, the Aegean-Anatolian area overall retained a more robust population in medieval times unlike, say, the more depopulated mainland Balkans which were much more influenced by northern intrusions. We still need much more sampling but that's my current guess. Turks seem to be modelled well as Cappadocian Greeks + something East Asian but as mentioned, the exact proportions will depend on early samples of the period, how East Asian the Turkic populations were like and what pre-Turkic post-BA Western Anatolians looked exactly like.


    DuPidh, do you actually have a coherent narrative in your mind at least or do you post just whatever you can think up in every topic? You wrote this a while ago:



    Now you write



    You're incoherent, at least partially because you don't seem to understand these studies at all, and your additions to these topics are anything but useful.
    Couldn't have said it better myself. I would add anti-Greek Albanian agenda to the mix.

  10. #10
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,739
    Points
    28,095
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,095, Level: 51
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 555
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by XipeTotek View Post
    and have some reality about asian hablogroups. they are not dominant. where you go you look like native peoples.
    Is that even such a thing as "non-dominant" haplogroups? I really mean this question. As far as I know, those are just genetic markers of the Y chromosome or mytochondrial DNA, not as actively selected as those alleles that are directly related to some function.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    18-03-17
    Posts
    325
    Points
    2,045
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,045, Level: 12
    Level completed: 65%, Points required for next Level: 105
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Ethnic group
    swiss,italian
    Country: Germany



    this probably isn't a question for the topic but i sometimes hear that modern day greeks are closer related to swedish people than they are to modern day turkish and other middle eastern people. does anyone know better? my guess is, that this is absolute rubbish.

  12. #12
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,739
    Points
    28,095
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,095, Level: 51
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 555
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Ailchu View Post
    this probably isn't a question for the topic but i sometimes hear that modern day greeks are closer related to swedish people than they are to modern day turkish and other middle eastern people. does anyone know better? my guess is, that this is absolute rubbish.
    As all other genetic studies and also Razib Khan's analyses comparing Greeks from 3 different regions of Greece with Turks clearly demonstrate, yes, that is absolutely rubbish. Greeks are nowadays more shifted to affinities with Northern Europeans (mostly Slavs, not Swedes anyway), but that was just a matter of relative, not absolute, numbers, since ancient Greeks certainly had a quite minor Northern European contribution.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    12-05-16
    Posts
    110
    Points
    2,326
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,326, Level: 13
    Level completed: 59%, Points required for next Level: 124
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: Austria



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by LATGAL View Post
    Razib's analysis is good (though I still don't think he should have pooled Cypriot and Cappadocian Greeks together, even though they're relatively close) and this is a nice augmentation to it:

    https://oghuzturksdna.blogspot.gr/20...a-from_21.html
    I am 100% Cappadocian Greek and can confirm the values that this guy on the link used for Cappadocian Greeks, I score very close to this.

    The fact that the first study clusters Cappadocians and Cypriots thought, I don't find it that wrong, since we tend to score similar. My first population reference is always Cypriots, when Greek subclusters are not included. If yes then Cretans pop up first for some reason.

    I generally agree to what you say here guys about the whole Anatolian, Greek, Armenian, Turkish thing. Indeed the Turks have absorbed a lot of this ancestry but still we can't say accurately how much Turkic they are, relying only on their East Asian numbers.
    Seems that their profile had been seriously different from their Uhrheimat source population, when they finally reached Anatolia, because of the long stay in Central Asia and Persia.

    Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    ihype02's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    300
    Points
    2,092
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,092, Level: 12
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 58
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Albania



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Razib Khan has been running an analysis on their data sets versus Greeks and Armenians.

    He concludes they're about equidistant between Anatolian Greeks and Armenians. Is that right?
    Here are some additional specific literary historical testimonies and sources which certify us of the multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, and multi-lingual character of Cyprus through the centuries.

    0) The Jews lived well in Cyprus during the Roman rule. During this period, Christianity was preached in Cyprus among the Jews at an early date, St Paul being the first, and Barnabas, a native of Cyprus, the second. They attempted to convert the Jews to Christianity under the ideas of Jesus. Under the leadership of Artemion, the Cypriot Jews participated in the great rebellion against the Romans ruled by Trajan in 117 AD. and they are reported by Dio Cassius to have massacred 240,000 Greeks.

    http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4825-cyprus
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...Jews_in_Cyprus

    1) In 578 AD, 10000 Armenians moved to Cyprus for colonization purposes, given that the island was almost deserted at this time. ("History of the Greek nation," ed "Publishing Athens", Vol. H, pp. 183-4).

    "Thus", says Evagrius, "land, which had been previously untilled, was everywhere restored to cultivation. Numerous armies also were raised from among them that fought resolutely and courageously against the other nations. At the same time every household was completely furnished with domestics, on account of the easy rate at which slaves were procured". (Quote from P. Charanis)

    2) A History of Cyprus, Volume 1 By George Hill. Page 261: "...certainly there was a coast-guard of Albanians in Cyprus under Venetian rule.." --> In the footnote of the same page, we read the following: "The Albanians formed a race apart, until they disappeared in the sixteenth century".

    3) More Armenians arrived during the reign of Armenian-descended Emperor Heraclius (610-641). Source: The Armenians of Cyprus book, page 10.

    Link:
    https://books.google.ca/books?id=6jH...Cyprus&f=false

    Page 11 of the same book: "Emperor John II Comnenus moved the entire population of the Armenian city of Tell Hamdun to Cyprus. When Isaac Comnenus was self-declared 'Emperor of Cyprus' in 1185 and married the daughter of the Armenian prince Thoros II, he brought with him Armenian nobles and warriors...".

    Futhermore, on page 12 of this book we read: "...about 30000 Armenian refugees found shelter in Cyprus.." and "A new wave of Armenians arrived in 1335 and 1346 to escape the Mamluk attack." Additionally, on the same page 12: "In 1403, 30000 Armenians fled to Cyprus, while in 1421 the entire population of the Sehoun region was transferred here. In 1441 the authorities of Famagusta encouraged Armenians and Syrians from Cilicia and Syria to settle here."

    Still on page 12: "Armenian was one of the eleven official languages of the Kingdom of Cyprus, and one of the five official languages during the Venetian Era."

    Moving to page 13: "...about 40000 Ottoman Armenian craftsmen were recruited .. , and many of the ones who survived settled in Cyprus".

    4) Turkish Cypriots were the majority of the population between 1777 and 1800. In terms of numbers, in 1777 there were only 37000 Greeks and 47000 Turks. In 1800, there were 30524 Greeks and 67000 Turks.

    5) - "Martin Kruzius, (1526-1607), an author who was well familiar with Greek, states that the following 5 languages were spoken in Cyprus: Greek, Chaldean, Armenian, Albanian and Italian. Another writer, who lived in 1537-1590, Stephen Lusignan, says that the following 12 languages were spoken in Cyprus, during his day: Latin, Italian, Greek, Armenian, Coptic, Jacobine, Maronine, Assyrian, Indian, Georgian, Albanian and Arabian. (See "Description de toute l'isle de Cypre et des roys ..."


  15. #15
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    cybernautic's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-03-18
    Posts
    33
    Points
    1,070
    Level
    8
    Points: 1,070, Level: 8
    Level completed: 60%, Points required for next Level: 80
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Ethnic group
    Greek
    Country: UK - England



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ygorcs View Post
    As all other genetic studies and also Razib Khan's analyses comparing Greeks from 3 different regions of Greece with Turks clearly demonstrate, yes, that is absolutely rubbish. Greeks are nowadays more shifted to affinities with Northern Europeans (mostly Slavs, not Swedes anyway),.
    Greeks don't have much affinities with Slavs

    They never did and they still don't have nowadays.

    They are much closer to other Southern European and South East European countries than to any Eastern European country.

  16. #16
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,739
    Points
    28,095
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,095, Level: 51
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 555
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by cybernautic View Post
    Greeks don't have much affinities with Slavs

    They never did and they still don't have nowadays.

    They are much closer to other Southern European and South East European countries than to any Eastern European country.
    I said they are SHIFTED TO AFFINITIES WITH NORTHERN EUROPEANS, not that they are CLOSER to Northern Europeans (e.g. if a people was 5% like Northern Europeans in the past, and now their affinity with them is 15%, they were shiftd toward a closer affinity with them, even though it's still minor). That's what the data demonstrate, there was an increasing influence of Northern European admixture onto the Greek population, especially the mainlanders as opposed to the Greek islanders. And, yes, that Northern European admixture is historically and genetically most clearly related to the Eastern European population that are now mostly Slavic-speaking. Saying that "they are much closer to other Southern European and Southeast European countries" is as true as it is honestly quite irrelevant on this matter, because that fact doesn't negate that the increased Northern European affinity of Modern Greeks, as opposed to the Mycenaean and Minoan Greeks whose DNA were analyzed until now, is still relatively minor, but what can be found is mostly related to Eastern Europe, mostly inhabited by Slavs, and that fits nicely with the very well documented (and still very visible in the Balkans) impact of Slavic and (northern) Turkic migrations during the Middle Ages. You don't need to believe me, you can search in many other topics on this very forum and also in genomic studies.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tutkun Arnaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-03-18
    Posts
    335

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2a2a(m223)(L801)

    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by cybernautic View Post
    Greeks don't have much affinities with Slavs

    They never did and they still don't have nowadays.

    They are much closer to other Southern European and South East European countries than to any Eastern European country.
    Also I would say Greeks have a close genetic and cultural affinity with Levant. Their music, food, etc...

  18. #18
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-11-16
    Posts
    115
    Points
    1,106
    Level
    8
    Points: 1,106, Level: 8
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 78.0%


    Ethnic group
    United Kingdom and Baltic
    Country: United States



    Turks are Anatolians under the hood?

    I would agree that any more Northern/Western affinity would most likely be due to modern introgressions. The Balkan tribes consisted of some Alpine Celtic peoples (bringing others with them of course) who have since mixed into the rest of the Balkan population. We should expect some intermarriage there back down into the Medieval Northern Greeks and Byzantines. Also the Byzantines and Northern Greek cultural sphere had interactions with Romans, Germanic, Frankish, Rus, Norse, Khazar, Turkic, Balkan, Thrassian, Danubian, pre-Slavic, Gothic, Vandal et al tribes. If we removed all those additional elements, and then Turkic, et al Middle Eastern from Western Anatolia, we’d find a pretty solid case for a fairly simple original population spectrum.

  19. #19
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,863
    Points
    311,408
    Level
    100
    Points: 311,408, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tutkun Arnaut View Post
    Also I would say Greeks have a close genetic and cultural affinity with Levant. Their music, food, etc...
    I'm getting pretty tired of the nonsense you're posting.

    Read the paper on the Mycenaeans and the comparisons drawn to modern Greeks.
    https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/...ure23310_0.pdf

  20. #20
    Elite member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Hauteville's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-11-14
    Posts
    824
    Points
    9,640
    Level
    29
    Points: 9,640, Level: 29
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 310
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-S185
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    The PCA is not that clear but Treemix and F3 statistic yes.

    Inviato dal mio SM-G531F utilizzando Tapatalk
    Sicilians and mainlander Southern Italian phenotype galleries.

    http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/1111/Re-Groups-of-Sicilians
    http://italicroots.lefora.com/topic/375/Southern-italians-how-we-really-look

  21. #21
    Elite member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Hauteville's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-11-14
    Posts
    824
    Points
    9,640
    Level
    29
    Points: 9,640, Level: 29
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 310
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-S185
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Sakattack View Post
    I am 100% Cappadocian Greek and can confirm the values that this guy on the link used for Cappadocian Greeks, I score very close to this.

    The fact that the first study clusters Cappadocians and Cypriots thought, I don't find it that wrong, since we tend to score similar. My first population reference is always Cypriots, when Greek subclusters are not included. If yes then Cretans pop up first for some reason.

    I generally agree to what you say here guys about the whole Anatolian, Greek, Armenian, Turkish thing. Indeed the Turks have absorbed a lot of this ancestry but still we can't say accurately how much Turkic they are, relying only on their East Asian numbers.
    Seems that their profile had been seriously different from their Uhrheimat source population, when they finally reached Anatolia, because of the long stay in Central Asia and Persia.

    Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk
    While Pontian Greeks often cluster close with Armenians and Assyrians.

    Inviato dal mio SM-G531F utilizzando Tapatalk

  22. #22
    Elite member Achievements:
    OverdriveThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Hauteville's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-11-14
    Posts
    824
    Points
    9,640
    Level
    29
    Points: 9,640, Level: 29
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 310
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I-S185
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2b

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by ihype02 View Post
    Here are some additional specific literary historical testimonies and sources which certify us of the multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, and multi-lingual character of Cyprus through the centuries.

    0) The Jews lived well in Cyprus during the Roman rule. During this period, Christianity was preached in Cyprus among the Jews at an early date, St Paul being the first, and Barnabas, a native of Cyprus, the second. They attempted to convert the Jews to Christianity under the ideas of Jesus. Under the leadership of Artemion, the Cypriot Jews participated in the great rebellion against the Romans ruled by Trajan in 117 AD. and they are reported by Dio Cassius to have massacred 240,000 Greeks.

    http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4825-cyprus
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...Jews_in_Cyprus

    1) In 578 AD, 10000 Armenians moved to Cyprus for colonization purposes, given that the island was almost deserted at this time. ("History of the Greek nation," ed "Publishing Athens", Vol. H, pp. 183-4).

    "Thus", says Evagrius, "land, which had been previously untilled, was everywhere restored to cultivation. Numerous armies also were raised from among them that fought resolutely and courageously against the other nations. At the same time every household was completely furnished with domestics, on account of the easy rate at which slaves were procured". (Quote from P. Charanis)

    2) A History of Cyprus, Volume 1 By George Hill. Page 261: "...certainly there was a coast-guard of Albanians in Cyprus under Venetian rule.." --> In the footnote of the same page, we read the following: "The Albanians formed a race apart, until they disappeared in the sixteenth century".

    3) More Armenians arrived during the reign of Armenian-descended Emperor Heraclius (610-641). Source: The Armenians of Cyprus book, page 10.

    Link:
    https://books.google.ca/books?id=6jH...Cyprus&f=false

    Page 11 of the same book: "Emperor John II Comnenus moved the entire population of the Armenian city of Tell Hamdun to Cyprus. When Isaac Comnenus was self-declared 'Emperor of Cyprus' in 1185 and married the daughter of the Armenian prince Thoros II, he brought with him Armenian nobles and warriors...".

    Futhermore, on page 12 of this book we read: "...about 30000 Armenian refugees found shelter in Cyprus.." and "A new wave of Armenians arrived in 1335 and 1346 to escape the Mamluk attack." Additionally, on the same page 12: "In 1403, 30000 Armenians fled to Cyprus, while in 1421 the entire population of the Sehoun region was transferred here. In 1441 the authorities of Famagusta encouraged Armenians and Syrians from Cilicia and Syria to settle here."

    Still on page 12: "Armenian was one of the eleven official languages of the Kingdom of Cyprus, and one of the five official languages during the Venetian Era."

    Moving to page 13: "...about 40000 Ottoman Armenian craftsmen were recruited .. , and many of the ones who survived settled in Cyprus".

    4) Turkish Cypriots were the majority of the population between 1777 and 1800. In terms of numbers, in 1777 there were only 37000 Greeks and 47000 Turks. In 1800, there were 30524 Greeks and 67000 Turks.

    5) - "Martin Kruzius, (1526-1607), an author who was well familiar with Greek, states that the following 5 languages were spoken in Cyprus: Greek, Chaldean, Armenian, Albanian and Italian. Another writer, who lived in 1537-1590, Stephen Lusignan, says that the following 12 languages were spoken in Cyprus, during his day: Latin, Italian, Greek, Armenian, Coptic, Jacobine, Maronine, Assyrian, Indian, Georgian, Albanian and Arabian. (See "Description de toute l'isle de Cypre et des roys ..."
    Evidence of Indian presence in Cyprus?

    Inviato dal mio SM-G531F utilizzando Tapatalk

  23. #23
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,739
    Points
    28,095
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,095, Level: 51
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 555
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Tutkun Arnaut View Post
    Also I would say Greeks have a close genetic and cultural affinity with Levant. Their music, food, etc...
    Cultural, maybe, they've been part of a cosmopolitan Eastern Mediterranean environ for milennia. But genetically? No way. They may have some minor genetic affinity, but it's definitely much less relevant than their affinity with other Southern Europeans, Western Anatolians and, yes, Central/Northern Europeans. Just look at their admixture composition (using various different proxies). They're much more like Italians and other Balkanic peoples than like Levantines.


  24. #24
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,212
    Points
    41,358
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,358, Level: 62
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 292
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Hauteville View Post
    While Pontian Greeks often cluster close with Armenians and Assyrians.

    Inviato dal mio SM-G531F utilizzando Tapatalk
    the strange with Pontian Greeks and Cretans is this
    If rememember correct the numbers

    Pontian Greeks J2a1d7
    Cretans J2a1d4 (autochthonus)

    or the oposite can't remember well and very late to search

    I AM EXPECTING MYCENEANS TO BE J2a1D-?
    ΟΘΕΝ ΑΙΔΩΣ OY EINAI
    ΑΤΗ ΛΑΜΒΑΝΕΙΝ ΑΥΤΟΙΣ
    ΥΒΡΙΣ ΓΕΝΝΑΤΑΙ
    ΝΕΜΕΣΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΙΣΗ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΟΥΣΙ ΔΕ

    When there is no shame
    Divine blindness conquers them
    Hybris (abuse, opprombium) is born
    Nemesis and punishment follows.

    Εχε υπομονη Ηρωα
    Η τιμωρια δεν αργει.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    ihype02's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    300
    Points
    2,092
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,092, Level: 12
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 58
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Albania



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hauteville View Post
    While Pontian Greeks often cluster close with Armenians and Assyrians.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazia_(Pontus)

    Pontus was an Hellenized Christian Lazi kingdom.
    1. The so-called Satrapy of Pontus of the Hellenistic period, was a Persian state created by the Persian dynasty of Mithridates, while the medieval falsified "Empire of Trebizond" of the Great-Comneni was an Armenian-Georgian protectorate hostile to "Byzantium".

    2. The novel term "Pontians" was historically non-existent before the 20th century. Pontians are also now (very recently) called “Ελληνοπόντιοι” - Hellenopontians.

    3. In 1923 only 20% of the inhabitants of Pontus fled to Greece. This percentage corresponded to the total Christian population of the region (Vilayets Trebizond, Kerasounta and Kastamonos). The remaining 80% remained in Turkey because of their attachment to Islam.

    4. The only criterion of expatriation was Christianity, attachment to the Patriarchate, and the ensuing, almost avid, philhellenism.

    5. Half of the Pontus refugees were Turkish-speaking, known as Μπαφραλήδες (Bafrali), the rest of them spoke the Pontic dialect as well as the Laz language. Mixtures with the Turks were innumerable. Apart from the Seljuks who penetrated the Pontus in the 11th century, Chepnis, a Turkmen branch of the Oghuz branch (Ogouzis) who settled in the area of ​​Trebizond in the 13th century, have a strong historical presence.

    6. These Pontian exiles in Greece and especially in Macedonia do not have the slightest genealogical relationship with the Ionian settlers of the Black Sea. They are population-medley of Armenians, Seljuks, Georgians and mainly Lazes, mixed with the innumerable native peoples of the area. Armenian presence was particularly strong. According to Ronald C. Jennings at the beginning of 16th c. the Armenians of Trebizond constituted 13% of the population.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •