For a short period of time I lived with three other men, all fellow George Mason students. One was an Azerbaijani Turk from Baku, one a Turkish citizen from Adana and the other a Turkish citizen from Istanbul. All three were very proud of their Turkish heritage, often condemning what they saw as the fictional narrative of the Armenian Genocide while insulting historical enemies of the Turks such as Greeks and Kurds. The Istanbul individual had a close friend who lived in Belgium and worked for an emerging DNA testing company called GenePlaza. This friend in Belgium said the company was offering free K29 mix results to gain popularity among the general public. Out of pure curiosity we all agreed to undergo the DNA test. Our results were interesting to say the least: the individual from Azerbaijan was of 100% Armenian ancestry, the individual from Istanbul was largely of Greek, Sephardic Jewish, and Bulgarian ancestry, and the individual from Adana was at 50% Georgian, 30% Armenian and 20% Assyrian mix. I returned with a 22% Bashkir Turkish mix, making me, ironically, the only Turk in the house where we lived. The test results caused immediate confusion and panic among my housemates who immediately asked their families about their ancestry. To their surprise they discovered that they could not trace their family trees beyond the 15th century AD, in the case of my Azerbaijani housemate he could not trace his paternal lineage beyond that of the 17th century. To find the answers to this bizarre genetic question we studied the historical context in which these populations became known as Turks due to conflict. What we discovered is that the process of creating what is now Turkish identity was and to some extent is a series of conflicts steeped in denial of basic human needs and structural violence against these “Turkified” communities. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Our first discovery we made through this journey into history was that Asia Minor, today Turkey is not the ancestral homeland of the Turks rather it is the Atlai Mountains in the southeast of Russia. The indigenous people of Asia Minor are the peoples with whom my roommates shared ancestors with Greeks, Georgians, Assyrians, and Armenians who are all primarily of the Orthodox Christian faith unlike modern Turks like my roommates (Yunusbayev et al., 2015). The Turks did not enter Asia Minor until the 10th century AD, when a Muslim Turkic tribe known as the Seljuks invaded what was then the Byzantine Empire (Canby et al., 2016). The Turkish ethnic group, despite having dominion over the native populations, was a minority and therefore to have both a political and demographic hegemony over Asia Minor they employed the use of social, economic and political systems which negatively correlated with associations linked to what is considered non-Turkish and positively correlated with associations related to what is considered Turkish. Correlates that were positively associated with Turkish identity in this regard were practicing Islam, speaking Turkish, and engaging in Turkish cultural practices ( Speros, 1971 ). If an individual left their inherited identity and became Turkish, then they would be socially rewarded with greater rights and privileges, such as not being forced to pay the disbeliever tax or jizyah (Abdel-Haleem, 2010). These systems were further expanded when the Osmanli or as it is known in Europe the Ottoman clan took power in Asia Minor through institutionalizationof the Millet system. The Millet system separated each of the various ethnic groups within the Ottoman Empire by "millahs" or nations where each nation was granted certain rights, privileges and obligations based on their cultural, ethnic and religious composition (Maestri,2009) . The Millet system provides the best example of how structural violence played a role in the Turkification of indigenous populations in Asia Minor. Structural violence can best be defined as “an unnecessary barrier that prevents one from reaching one's potential” (Galtung, 1969). The most famous example of the Millet system is the practice of Devshirme, in which Christian families who did not convert to Islam were required to send their eldest son to a "Devlet". This Devlet would have educated his son about Turkish culture and Islam if his son had done so. If he had not decided to reject his inherited identity and become Turkish, he would have been forced to serve as a Janissary in the Ottoman army. Janissaries were almost always put in situations where they found themselves in the most brutal combat and had restrictions that Turkish soldiers did not have, for example they could not own property, take up another profession or marry until retirement, which was usually when they reached 45 years (Perry, 1979). At first glance, Devshirme appears to only prevent Christian men from reaching their potential, however this niche within the Millet system, however, the system has also limited the potential of Muslim Turkish women as well. By forcing Christian men to spend most of their lives in the army, their access to Muslim Turkish women and vice versa within the Ottoman Empire was greatly reduced. Ottoman law prevented any martial union between non-Muslim men and Turkish Muslim women and those women who engaged in such forbidden actions were not only punished by law but in the eyes of the community lost their Turkish identity. Interestingly, I contain more Turkish alleles than my roommates because these alleles seemed to be of maternal origin, both my bis, bis, etc. grandmother that I would be non-Turkish (Altınbaş, 2014). This aspect of the Millet system may seem outdated due to its medieval origins, however the Turkish Armed Forces-controlled region of Northern Cyprus did not remove this aspect from the Northern Cypriot Constitution until 2009 (Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus, 2009), further evidence of how the Millet system The Millet system maintains Turkish identity through structural violence even today. Burton defines an individual's basic human needs as “identity, recognition, role defense and personal development” (Burton, 1990). To create Turks from the indigenous populations of Asia Minor, the Millet system had to deny all these needs to varying degrees compared to non-Turkized populations. After World War I the Ottoman Empire was in a state of decline and indigenous Christian populations such as the Greeks, Assyrians and Armenians took the initiative to reclaim their sovereignty. In order to prevent the breakup of Asia Minor into separate ethno-states, the Turkish military forcibly expelled individuals of these identities to places such as Syria and Iran in what became known as the Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian Genocides . Keep in mind: This is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Expulsion was not the only option for every native Christian to not be displaced from their homes, many individuals adopted Islam and thus in the eyes of the Turks the government became Turkish (Schaller et al., 2008). Demographers refer to these individuals as "hidden Greeks".