I'd like to know the genetic profile over the millenia. I've often wondered how the Anatolian population changed throughout history, and what it ended up as today, as the place was successively overrun by different invaders, pre-Hittite, Hittite, Lydian, Celts, Greeks, Romans, many more, and then the Turkish conquest in the Middle Ages.
Did the underlying population genetics remain more or less the same over the millenia, with only the culture being changed by a relatively thin layer of successive invaders, or were there really major changes in the population genetics?
Studies like that have been done for the British Isles.
No, it was not done with a gentle nudge. It was done by Massacre and Genocide, before the word Genocide existed.
So, yes all those genetic elements exist in Turkey, but not in all groups. Some of these were know from the beginning of Turkey in 1915, but now talked about because of Islamification. But is was always present if you presented a problem for the state, they would threaten or use the records to ruin your life.
Prior to 1915 the Ottoman rulers did the same thing on a whim. But from the beginning neither the Ottoman rulers or the Turks ever admitted a single Massacre.
So, here we are again. Certainly it is in Efrin (Afrin) Syria.
The ancient populations included Lydians, Phrygians, Carians, Lycians, Cappadocians, Cilicians, Armenians, and Galatians (Celtic immigrants in the 3rd century B.C.). In the Middle Ages they were mostly Christian and Greek-speaking.
The current population is also partly descended from Muslims who fled from outlying parts of the Ottoman Empire (Ukraine, Hungary, Serbia, Rumania, etc.) as they came under Christian rule, and from Christian boys who were taken from their families in the "blood tribute" in Ottoman times, or from people enslaved by Turkish pirates.
On the other side, there are many Europeans who have remote ancestry from the Middle East, where agriculture was first developed--it's thought that agriculture was brought into Europe by immigrants from the Middle East.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/02/how-turkish-are-anatolians.html
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 Anatolian, but it is by no means negligible.Most Turks are actually Greek, Armenians, Arab, and others who "went Turk".Remember that as per the Ottoman Millet system, if you converted to Islam, you were no longer classified as Greek or Armenian but as a Turk
You can refer to discover magazine
Turkish samples have non-trivial, though minor, northeast Asian ancestry. The Yakut themselves are a Turkic group situated to the north of Mongolia. The more southerly and central Asian affinities the nomadic ancestors of the Anatolia Turks may have picked up in their sojourns over the centuries between their original homeland in east-central Siberia and Mongolia and West Asia. The rest of ancestry is rather typical of northern West Asian groups. In particular, Armenians!Turks picked up Persian ancestry from living centuries around Persian people and conquering them, intermarriage with rampant, because many of these places were conquered by mostly males warrior bands...yes they also mixed with Greeks, Armenians, Mongols, etc. However as they moved West the more Western they became in biology.
A straightforward one would be that the Muslim Turk population of Anatolia has a strong bias toward having been assimilated Armenians rather than Greeks. The cultural plasticity of Armenians in late antiquity and the early medieval period was clear: individuals of ethnic Armenian to origin rose the pinnacles of the status hierarchy of the Orthodox Christian Greek Byzantine Empire. The Macedonian dynasty of the Byzantines under which the civilizationreached its mature peak were descended from Armenians who had resettled in Macedonia. Just as plausible to me is that eastern Anatolia as a whole exhibited little genetic difference between Greeks and Armenians, and the former were wholly assimilated or migrated, while the Armenians remained. One way to test this thesis would be type the descendants of Greeks who left eastern Anatolia during the population exchange between Greece and Turkey in the 1920s.They are culturally Turkic, but biologically no