Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Genetic impact of Ottoman Occupation on Central and SE Europe

  1. #1
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,862
    Points
    368,451
    Level
    100
    Points: 368,451, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    3 members found this post helpful.

    Genetic impact of Ottoman Occupation on Central and SE Europe

    See:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6585392/

    "History of East-Central Europe has been intertwined with the history of Turks in the past. A significant part of this region of Europe has been fallen under Ottoman control during the 150 years of Ottoman occupation in the 16–17th centuries. The presence of the Ottoman Empire affected this area not only culturally but also demographically. The Romani people, the largest ethnic minority of the East-Central European area, share an even more eventful past with Turkish people from the time of their migration throughout Eurasia and they were a notable ethnic group in East-Central Europe in the Ottoman era already. The relationship of Turks with East-Central European ethnic groups and with regional Roma ethnicity was investigated based on genome-wide autosomal single nucleotide polymorphism data. Population structure analysis, ancestry estimation, various formal tests of admixture and DNA segment analyses were carried out in order to shed light to the conclusion of these events on a genome-wide basis. Analyses show that the Ottoman occupation of Europe left detectable impact in the affected East-Central European area and shaped the ancestry of the Romani people as well. We estimate that the investigated European populations have an average identity-by-descent share of 0.61 with Turks, which is notable, compared to other European populations living in West and North Europe far from the affected area, and compared to the share of Sardinians, living isolated from these events. Admixture of Roma and Turks during the Ottoman rule show also high extent."

    It's rare that I get so turned off by a paper that I stop even skimming it, but this is one of those times. Still talking in terms of undifferentiated "RIb and RIa"? "E1b", which in this case is probably E-V13 is a sign of "African" migration?

    Trying to track Ottoman genetic "influence" by looking at Turkic populations, without any seeming awareness that this ancestry could have arrived at multiple times, and that Ottomans, like the inhabitants of Turkey today, have very little "Turkic"?

    Enough.
    Last edited by Angela; 22-09-19 at 00:19.


    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
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-09-19
    Posts
    13


    Country: Denmark



    There isn't much influence from what I have seen, atleast not in Albanians, I think there is more influence the opposite and also some Turks in the Balkans are Turkified natives.

    There might be some very small influence and also some very small gypsy influence in Balkan nations but nothing that can be considered even remotely significant.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-09-19
    Posts
    13


    Country: Denmark



    2 members found this post helpful.
    I looked at the study and these people don't even have any idea about Y-DNA and their sub clades and can't even break them down.

    If I also understood it correctly, They also are comparing Balkanites to non-Balkan South European populations and claiming the difference must be due to Ottoman rule. Claiming IBD sharing must be from Turkish influence when it could and is much more the other way around.

    A lot of these studies are amateurish made by amaterus, same thing for a lot of written history. One study by Yugoslavs claimed Albanians cluster outside other Europeans when actually Albanians are the most Western shifted Balkanites , Bulgarians, Macedonians, Romanians all shift more East on average

    There were other studies that basically showed Balkanites have no significant Turkish or Near Eastern influence from the recent except for maybe some Greeks due to Pontic Greeks.

    Turks have Balkan influence and ancestry from the Balkans and some of their Y-DNA's go back to the Balkans.


    Anyway, looking at the graph they made. Basically Albanians show no East Asian ancestry but other South Slavs seem to show this but this isn't neccessarily due to Turkish influence but from earlier Avars, Hun and other populations for example.

    The West Asian in the Balkans is also ancient like it is in Italy. They derive from Bronze Age people that probably carried some West Asian.


    The E3b and J Y-DNA they claim isn't even recently Middle Eastern.

    J2a and J2b2-L283 have been there since like the Bronze Age, EV13 probably even earlier.

    Only one I can think of that could of come later is J2b1



    Of course maternal influence could be also possible.


    There might be also East Asian influence in Romanians and Bulgarians but this isn't necessarily from Ottoman rule.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered10000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Johane Derite's Avatar
    Join Date
    21-06-17
    Posts
    1,049
    Points
    18,562
    Level
    41
    Points: 18,562, Level: 41
    Level completed: 57%, Points required for next Level: 388
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13>Z5018>FGC33625
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U1a1a

    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Absurd "study"
    "As we have already stressed, the mass evacuation of the Albanians from their triangle is the only effective course we can take. In order to relocate a whole people, the first prerequisite is the creation of a suitable psychosis. This can be done in various ways." - Vaso Cubrilovic

  5. #5
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-06-18
    Posts
    657
    Points
    10,028
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,028, Level: 30
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 522
    Overall activity: 35.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-M269 (LDNA)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a1b

    Ethnic group
    Thracian
    Country: Greece



    There was a lot of Turkification in the Balkans as in local populations converting to Islam and adopting the Turkish language. There was also some migration of Muslims from Turkey to the Balkans. The exchange of populations after WW I was based on religion so most of the Muslims were exchanged for Christians from Turkey except for pockets in Western Thrace, Bulgaria, Bosnia and of course Albania. It would be interesting from a genetic point of view to test and see if those are natives that were Turkified or Anatolian Turks that stayed. My own opinion without anything to support it is that the majority were Turkified natives.

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

    Join Date
    09-06-17
    Posts
    77
    Points
    1,659
    Level
    11
    Points: 1,659, Level: 11
    Level completed: 37%, Points required for next Level: 191
    Overall activity: 17.0%


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by xzit View Post
    I looked at the study and these people don't even have any idea about Y-DNA and their sub clades and can't even break them down.

    If I also understood it correctly, They also are comparing Balkanites to non-Balkan South European populations and claiming the difference must be due to Ottoman rule. Claiming IBD sharing must be from Turkish influence when it could and is much more the other way around.

    A lot of these studies are amateurish made by amaterus, same thing for a lot of written history. One study by Yugoslavs claimed Albanians cluster outside other Europeans when actually Albanians are the most Western shifted Balkanites , Bulgarians, Macedonians, Romanians all shift more East on average

    There were other studies that basically showed Balkanites have no significant Turkish or Near Eastern influence from the recent except for maybe some Greeks due to Pontic Greeks.

    Turks have Balkan influence and ancestry from the Balkans and some of their Y-DNA's go back to the Balkans.


    Anyway, looking at the graph they made. Basically Albanians show no East Asian ancestry but other South Slavs seem to show this but this isn't neccessarily due to Turkish influence but from earlier Avars, Hun and other populations for example.

    The West Asian in the Balkans is also ancient like it is in Italy. They derive from Bronze Age people that probably carried some West Asian.


    The E3b and J Y-DNA they claim isn't even recently Middle Eastern.

    J2a and J2b2-L283 have been there since like the Bronze Age, EV13 probably even earlier.

    Only one I can think of that could of come later is J2b1



    Of course maternal influence could be also possible.


    There might be also East Asian influence in Romanians and Bulgarians but this isn't necessarily from Ottoman rule.
    Actually Greeks have the among the lowest ''turanic'' ''siberian'' blood in europe according to K13 ethnicities avarages.
    West Asian East Med West Med South Asian Red Sea Baltic North Atlantic Siberian Amerindian East Asian Oceanian Northeast African Sub-Saharan
    Bulgarian 11.91 20.12 17.91 0.11 1.95 24.06 21.75 0.43 0.57 0.52 0.41 0.11 0.16
    Serbian 9.37 15.63 15.84 0.33 2.50 27.32 27.10 0.75 0.03 0.57 0.38 0.11 0.06
    Romanian 11.28 18.04 17.09 0.55 2.14 24.49 24.37 0.83 0.60 0.27 0.18 0.09 0.06
    Greek 15.56 27.94 21.34 0.87 3.84 12.53 17.09 0.08 0.07 0.22 0.07 0.32 0.04
    South_Italian 14.44 31.89 21.80 0.50 6.61 4.52 17.55 0.00 0.01 0.35 0.35 1.56 0.42
    North Europeans have between 1-2% finno-hugric/eskimo/uralic DNA for the obvious historical and geographical reasons.
    Russians and Ukrainians have even higher than that, between 3-4 %, which ,since the Turkomongolic tribes were of mixed ancestry too, it can mean anything between 5 to 10% Turanic ancestry.
    In respect to Greeks(and south italians), if the K13 spreadsheets are reflective, then the small asiatic influence,must have come mainly from other sources, other than the Turkic or Finno-ugric populations since it is mainly east asian(by k13) whereas Ottoman Turks Turanic DNA is a combination of the three groups more or less at the same ratio between the three groups as it is found in Central asia.

    West Asian East Med West Med South Asian Red Sea Baltic North Atlantic Siberian Amerindian East Asian Oceanian Northeast African Sub-Saharan
    Kirgiz 12.69 2.05 1.15 4.21 0.34 7.94 5.81 37.77 2.56 24.46 0.91 0.04 0.08
    Kazakh 12.28 0.99 1.47 3.34 0.86 11.87 7.42 36.11 2.22 22.47 0.91 0.05 0.03
    Uzbeki 20.42 6.92 1.72 11.85 1.05 11.98 4.87 23.17 1.39 15.99 0.11 0.35 0.19
    Uygur 18.93 4.66 0.87 10.42 0.18 9.70 7.18 20.48 2.35 24.33 0.42 0.26 0.21
    Turkmen 32.73 19.76 2.52 11.21 1.31 5.91 7.21 10.08 1.88 6.87 0.32 0.08 0.11
    Turkish 30.83 28.97 12.01 4.05 5.46 4.32 7.12 3.63 0.28 2.41 0.56 0.34 0.01

    As you can see inspite Turks having 1 tenth of the Turanic DNA of Kazakhs they maintain a similar ratio of the 3 groups.Turkmen have 2 to 3 times more siberian ancestry probably cause they arrived in a different wave and from further north than the rest of the central asian Turkomongols, as the Y-DNA suggests..
    Sames goes for the Turanic influence in near by iraninc and iranic speaking populations, they maintain the ''Turkic'' ratio of the 3 asiatic groups.
    Of course all these on the premise that K13 populations avarages are reflective of the populations.

Posting Permissions

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