BAMAD no.15

 DNA and 
 Anthropology Updates 

Updates in DNA studies along with Anthropological Notes of general interest with a particular emphasis on points pertinent to the study of Ancient Israelite Ancestral Connections to Western Peoples as explained in Brit-Am studies.



Brit-Am Anthropology and DNA Update
28 Tebet 5768, 6 January 2008
1. How Turkish are the Turks of Turkey?
2. A New DNA Test Can ID a Suspect's Race, But Police Won't Touch It
3. R1b1c in Central Asia

Site Contents by Subject Home
Site Map
Contents in Alphabetical Order
This Site


1. How Turkish are the Turks of Turkey?
The present-day country of Turkey includes what is known as Anatolia
or Asia Minor which is in Asia and to the west a portion of ancient Thrace
in Europe.
The population of this region was conquered by Turkish peoples who imposed their language, culture,
and ethnic consciousness.
It appears however that the majority of the population of present-day are physically descendants of the
inhabitants prior to the Turkish conquest.
The articles below suggest that the proportion of "real" Turks" amongst the "Turkish"
does not exceed ca. 15%.

How Turkish are the Anatolians?
posted by Dienekes
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. ...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.

2. A New DNA Test Can ID a Suspect's Race, But Police Won't Touch It

3. R1b1c in Central Asia
From: "R. Stevens" <>
List-Archive: <>

Subject: [DNA] The Yueh-chih or "White Huns" and R1b1c

A brief article on a recent Russian genetic study entitled, Genetic Landscape of the Central Asia and Volga-Ural Region, by Khusnutdinova, et al, appears in the book, Biosphere Origin and Evolution:

The study found high rates of R1b1c among some Central Asian and Volga-Ural peoples, as follows:

the Bashkirs of the Volga-Ural  >82%
the Kyrgyz  >50%
the Tajiks  >50%
the Altai  >50%

It seems likely these folks belong to the ht35 "Eastern" variety of R1b1c, but they are M269+, after all, and those high frequencies occur within a total population of around 32+ million (over three times as large as the Basque population).

Ancient Chinese documents like Shih-chi (c. 123 BC) mention that the Hsiung-nu (believed to have been the Huns) defeated another nomadic group, the Yueh-chih, in battle and forced them out of western China. The Yueh-chih settled in the area of what are now Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and thereabouts. The Yueh-chih are believed to have been the Tocharians, who spoke Tocharian, a centum Indo-European language.

The Yueh-chih were sometimes called the "White Huns," presumably because they were Europoid in appearance, or Epthalites (also spelled Ephthalites). Some ancient Chinese documents mention a people living in NW China who had long, blond hair and white skin. Some scholars believe these Yueh-chih were the ancestors of many of the Avars (which could account for the apparent distribution of ht35 R1b1c in the region of the old Avar Khaganate in SE Europe).

Doesn't it seem significant that the apparent descendants of a centum Indo-European-speaking people, the Yueh-chih or Tocharians, are mostly R1b1c?

The nearby Uyghurs of NW China also have a fairly high rate of R1b (I don't know how much of it is R1b1c; some of it is R1b1b).

There in East Central Asia we have the 32+ million descendants of a distinctly Europoid, IE-speaking population, and they are predominantly R1b1c, at frequencies that exceed those of some W. European countries.

That seems like it should mean something, somehow.



See also:
BAMAD Archives
DNA Refuted. The "Cohen Gene"
R1b The Western Japhet?? or not?
haplogroup I
Brit-Am DNA
Queries about Race

BAMAD Archives

Join the Brit-Am Ephraimite Discussion Group
Just Send an
with "Subscribe"
in the Subject Line

Main Page

Offerings and Publications

Return to
Question and Answer
Table of Contents