# Population Genetics > Paleogenetics > Bronze Age >  Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

## Angela

YEAH! Finally.

See: Lazaridis et al
https://www.nature.com/articles/natu...o4hKeBf7fel4E9



"The origins of the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures have puzzled archaeologists for more than a century. We have assembled genome-wide data from *19 ancient individuals, including Minoans from Crete, Mycenaeans from mainland Greece, and their eastern neighbours from southwestern Anatolia. Here we show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean*1, 2, and *most of the remainder from ancient populations related to those of the Caucasus**3 and Iran4, 5*. However, the *Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia**6, 7, 8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1, 6, 9 or Armenia4, 9*.* Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry.* Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations."

Admixture analysis- See:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...re23310_SF1.html

Y dna from page 52 of the supplement:
Y dna from Lazardis et al on ancient Greek dna.PNG

The Bronze Age Anatolia individual:
"This individual wasancestral for the major subclade3 P58 (J1a2b; previously designated3 J1e) and could thus bedesignated as J1a(xJ1a2b)."

"I0070 (Minoan from Lasithi)This individual was derived for mutation M319:15467785T->A (J2a1d) as well as upstream mutationsL26:22942897T->C (J2a1) and M410:2751678A->G, L212:22711465T->C (J2a). He was not foundto be ancestral for any downstream mutations and could be designated as J2a1d. Haplogroup M319was found4 at a frequency of 8.8% in one sample set of 193 present-day Cretans (95% confidenceinterval from the binomial distribution 5.2-13.7%) and 5.4% in another set5 of 168 Cretans (95% C.I.:2.5-10%), but no examples were found in a combined sample set of 171 Greeks from three locationsnear early Neolithic settlements in mainland Greece (95% C.I: 0-2.1%). A re-analysis4 of large set of523 present-day Anatolian males6 revealed only 2 examples of M319 in this population (95% C.I.: 0-1.4%). Thus, it appears plausible that this represents a Y-chromosome lineage that existed in MinoanCrete but was at a lower (or absent) frequency in neighboring mainland Greece and Anatolia and itsoccurrence in present-day Cretans represents continuity with those of the Bronze Age."

"I0073 (Minoan from Lasithi)This individual was derived for mutation L26:22942897T->C (J2a1) as well as upstream mutationsM410, L559, L152 (J2a). He was ancestral for several downstream haplogroups: M322:15469740C->A (J2a1a), L560:21899860C->T (J2a1b1a), M166:21764694C->T (J2a1b2), M68:21878700A->G(J2a1c), M339:2881367T->G (J2a1e), L24:14286528G->A (J2a1h), L88.2:17595842T->C andL198:17595861A->C (J2a1i). He could thus be designated as J2a1(xJ2a1a, J2a1b1a, J2a1b2, J2a1c,J2a1e, J2a1h, J2a1i)."

"I9130 (Minoan from Moni Odigitria)This individual was derived for mutations CTS946:7100848A->G (G2a2b2a) and upstream mutationsF3088:20813445G->A and M3397:21605685G->C (G2a). He was ancestral for downstreammutations CTS4803:15833180G->A (G2a2b2a1b1a2a) and Z3423:19251438G->T (G2a2b2a1c1a).He could thus be designated as G2a2b2a(xG2a2b2a1b1a2a, G2a2b2a1c1a). G2a2 Y-chromosomeswere common in Neolithic Europe7, western Anatolia8,9, and Neolithic mainland Greece9. We havealso re-analyzed data from a recent study of central Anatolian Neolithic genomes10, determining thatthey were present there during both the Aceramic phase at Boncuklu (2 G2a2b2b samples) and later atTepecik-Çiftlik (1 G2a2a sample). Plausibly, the Minoan from Moni Odigitria who belonged to thislineage was also related to the same group of early Neolithic farmers as those from Europe, mainlandGreece, and Anatolia."

"I9041 (Mycenaean from Galatas Apatheia in the Peloponnese)This individual was derived for mutations L26:22942897T->C and F4326:23021978A->G (J2a1) aswell as upstream mutations M410:2751678A->G, L559:21674327A->G, L152:22243566C->T,L212:22711465T->C (J2a). He was ancestral for M322:15469740C->A (J2a1a), M260:15025506G->A and M92:21904023T->C (J2a1b1), M166:21764694C->T (J2a1b2), L210:16492197A->T(J2a1b3), M68:21878700A->G (J2a1c), M339:2881367T->G (J2a1e), P81:6739856G->A (J2a1g),L207.1:6753448A->G and L24:14286528G->A (J2a1h), L88.2:17595842T->C andL198:17595861A->C (J2a1i). He could thus be designated as J2a1x(J2a1a, J2a1b1, J2a1b2, J2a1c,J2a1e, J2a1g, J2a1h, J2a1i)."

"More sampling of ancient populations is needed to establish the presence (and frequency) ofhaplogroup J in the Aegean and neighboring regions). However, (i) the great time depth of itspresence in the Caucasus/Iran, together with (ii) its low frequency/absence in NeolithicGreece/Anatolia, and (iii) its appearance in the samples of our study, lead us to believe that it mayhave accompanied the genetic admixture (Neolithic Iran/Caucasus-hunter-gatherer related) that seemsto have affected all populations in our study (Supplementary Information, section 2). Thus, the Ychromosometurnover that occurred in central Europe during the Bronze Age7,19 may also haveoccurred in the Aegean, with a different set of incoming lineages."

So we've been saying here for a long time. Perhaps it's time to put some of the more exotic explanations to rest.

----------


## Angela

For those interested in phenotypic data:

The actual snp data is on page 59 of the Supplement.
https://images.nature.com/full/natur...re23310-s1.pdf

Attachment 8993

"Present-day Europeans are almost fixed for the derived (light pigmentation) allele G atrs1426654, but the ancestral allele occurred in western European hunter-gatherers3,4. Werecord no copy of the ancestral allele in 9 individuals with at least one sequence. We alsoexamined the rs16891982 SNP in SLC45A2, the second strongest signal of selection inEuropeans discovered in a genome-wide scan3. The overall frequency of the C allele could beestimated as 24% (C.I.: 8-47%) in the Aegean Bronze Age. The frequency of the minor Callele in present-day Greeks is 14% (95% C.I.: 11-17%)5. The C allele has decreased infrequency in eastern Europe6 or Europe in general3 due to likely selection since the BronzeAge, but with the available data, the Bronze Age frequency is consistent with its modernprevalence."

"Classic blond hair has been associated with the C allele in the rs12821256 SNP in KITLG9.We have reads covering this site in 11 individuals and do not detect the C allele."

"The rs12913832 SNP in HERC2 is a major determinant of blue eye color in humans7. Thefrequency of the A allele could be estimated as 86% (C.I.: 64-98%) in the Bronze AgeAegean. The G allele was present in Anatolia since Neolithic times3and our results suggest itspresence in all studied Bronze Age groups at a low frequency."

"These results suggest that ancient Bronze Age individuals from the Aegean and southwesternAnatolia had mostly dark (brown or black) hair and brown eyes. Blue eyes were uncommonas predicted by the lack of homozygotes for the G allele at rs12913832 which is the majorpredictor of this trait, however, this allele did occur in all studied populations (Table S4.1),thus the phenotype would have been uncommon but not unknown in the region. The browneye phenotype is still the most common in present-day Greeks occurring in ~3/4 of them, withthe remainder split between blue and intermediate shades1. Similarly, ~79% of present-dayGreeks have light or dark brown hair, with the remainder split between blond and black."

So much for blonde-blue eyed Mycenaeans.

I guess this reconstruction of the Mycenaean "Griffin warrior" may be pretty accurate, despite all the naysayers.

----------


## Jovialis

This means us too.  :Great: 

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...southern-Italy

----------


## Diomedes

Nice, the continuity of the groovy Greeks is proven once more. For those "naysayers", Greece strong!

----------


## Diomedes

Does this article also prove the "Dorian Invasion" in a sense?

----------


## bicicleur

Minoan and Mycenean culture and people are percieved as different from each other.
The later Mycenean culture is not derived from the Minoan culture.

Yet the genetic difference is small :

However, the *Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia**6, 7, 8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1, 6, 9 or Armenia4, 9.

*Did these few EHG shape the Mycenean culture? Where they a small ruling elite?
Well, they had charriots and swords ..

btw, is there a way to go around the paywall?

----------


## Pax Augusta

> btw, is there a way to go around the paywall?


Downloadable full paper

http://sci-hub.cc/10.1038/nature23310

or this version shared by Lazaridis

https://www.nature.com/articles/natu...o4hKeBf7fel4E9

----------


## Angela

Here are some more goodies:
Attachment 8994

Admixture modeling was done every which way. The discussion starts on page 27 of the Supplement.
https://images.nature.com/full/natur...re23310-s1.pdf

"The successful models agree that Mycenaeans have most of their ancestry from the Neolithicsubstratum (~74-79%), with the remainder from both the Eastern European/Siberian set ofpopulations (~5-16%), and the Iran/Caucasus populations (~9-18%). These results do not, of coursedetermine whether the non-Anatolian Neolithic-related admixture in Mycenaeans was introduced by asingle population that was itself a mix of the Eastern European/Siberian and Iran/Caucasus sources, orby separate admixtures that reached the Aegean presumably from the north and east. They do,however, show that admixture from only a single of those sources is insufficient to properly model theancestry of Mycenaeans (as the failure of any 2-source model in Table S2.1 indicates)."

"We were concerned that the admixture from these three sources could be driven by heterogeneitywithin the Mycenaean population itself. Mycenaeans do appear to form a tight cluster in PCA (Fig.1b) and to have similar admixture proportions in ADMIXTURE analysis."

"More formally, we tested all (42) = 6 pairs of Mycenaean individuals in our dataset as a Left list,using the All as the Right list. All 6 pairs were consistent with forming a clade with respect to the Allset to the limits of our resolution (p-value for rank=0 ≥0.08)."

So, we're talking about, say, 10% "steppe" admixture. I don't know what they'll say about this later, but this doesn't seem like a typical amount for a population coming straight down from the steppe, does it? Does this leave open the whole "Greeks from the east" scenario?

"Minoans from Moni OdigitriaMinoans from Moni Odigitria in the Heraklion regional unit (south-central Crete) do not form a cladewith any single (N=1) population of the All set. The best single population is Neolithic Anatolians, forwhich rank=0 can be rejected with p=9.13e-05, with all others being rejected much more strongly(p<1e-16). We can model Minoans from Moni Odigitria as a 2-way mixture of Anatolian Neolithicand Caucasus hunter-gatherers or Neolithic Iran (Table S2.4), with most ancestry (~86%) derivedfrom a Neolithic Anatolian-related population."

Minoans from Lashiti:
"We can model them as a 3-way mixture(Table S2.5) of ~84-85% Neolithic Anatolians, ~15% CHG, and <1% MA1 or Mota (the third typeminor ancestry is within 1 standard error of zero). The mixture proportions for Lasithi Minoans arethus practically the same as with the Moni Odigitria Minoans (Table S2.4). The lack of differentiationbetween these two Bronze Age Cretan populations can also be shown by their clustering in PCA."

"Cretan from ArmenoiThis individual has only 42,052 SNPs covered in the HOIll dataset and it belongs to a later period(Late Minoan III A-B ~ 1400-1200 BC) than the samples from Moni Odigitria and Lasithi. It does notform a clade with any single (N=1) population of the All set (p-value for rank=0 < 0.001). There areseveral models that fit (p-value for rank=1 > 0.05) for N=2 that agree on this individual having mostof its ancestry from Anatolian Neolithic-related population with additional ancestry from easternEuropean/North Eurasian hunter-gatherers (Table S2.7), as also suggested by the shift of thisindividual in PCA relative to other Minoans and indeed even the Mycenaeans (Fig. 1b). Weacknowledge the possibility that there was geographical structure in the Bronze Age Cretanpopulation (the Armenoi sample comes from northwestern Crete; Fig. 1a), or that population changehad occurred between the time of the samples from Moni Odigitria and Lasithi and the time of thisindividual, however, the lack of high quality data does not allow us to test these hypotheses further."

That makes sense to me; in later periods there was some movement north to south.

It seems to me that perhaps more J2 came to Crete and mainland Greece before the Bronze Age proper for the CHG/Iran type ancestry to be so low. That, or like Bronze Age migrations in Europe, they were more male dominated, because the Minoans seem to be largely Neolithic Anatolians, which is what I always suspected and proposed. 

Of course, they always think of everything, so they thought of this too.:)

". However, all the Bronze Age populations also have ancestry related to the Caucasusor Iran, consistent with their shift in PCA (Fig. 1b). This shift began in Anatolia no later than theChalcolithic (3943-3708 calBCE)16 and was not evident in Greece by the time of the Final Neolithic(4,230–3,995 calBCE) individual from Kleitos14 that resembled (like all other Greek Neolithicindividuals) Anatolian farmers (Fig. 1b). The newly reported Neolithic individual from Diros Cave inthe Peloponnese (where most of the Mycenaean samples are from) did not have this ancestry as late as5479-5338 calBCE (Extended Data Table 1). (Future studies may show when the transformationoccurred in Greece, but by the time of the Minoan and Mycenaean samples, both populations tracedsome ancestry to this eastern source, as did the southwestern Anatolians from Harmanören Göndürle.

"Bronze Age AnatoliaThe population from Bronze Age southwestern Anatolia does not form a clade with any single (N=1)population of the All set (p-value for rank=0 < 1e-25). It cannot be modelled as any 2-way mixture(Table S2.8), with the best ones involving a mixture of Anatolian Neolithic and either Iran Neolithicor Caucasus hunter-gatherers. This population can be modelled as a 3-way mixture (Table S2.9) of~62% Neolithic Anatolian, ~32% Caucasus hunter-gatherer (CHG), and ~6% Levantine Neolithicancestry. This extra Levantine Neolithic ancestry parallels the PCA (Fig. 1b) that shows that theBronze Age Anatolian sample is to the “east” (towards the Levant) relative to the Minoans andMycenaeans.""

----------


## Angela

> This means us too. 
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...southern-Italy


Indeed. The Mycenaeans seem to be clustering with Sicilians. Ashkenazi too, so I wonder if it's possible that the Philistines will turn out to be pretty close to Mycenaneans, and the Philistines started the change we see in Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews.

----------


## berun

It's a new trick merging EHG with WHG in all admixture analysis... what was done with EHG?

By the way if the common difference between Neolithic Greece and pre-Mycenean + Minoan is the CHG and their old languages were not IE but Minoan and Pelasgian, the CHG side is not supporting much a "Caucasian" IE urheimat.




> However, the *Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia**6, 7, 8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1, 6, 9 or Armenia4, 9*


Sintashta

----------


## Angela

> *Minoan and Mycenean culture and people are percieved as different from each other.
> The later Mycenean culture is not derived from the Minoan culture.*
> 
> Yet the genetic difference is small :
> 
> However, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia6, 7, 8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1, 6, 9 or Armenia4, 9.
> 
> Did these few EHG shape the Mycenean culture? Where they a small ruling elite?
> Well, they had charriots and swords ..
> ...


I'd agree with the first sentence but not with the last.

Greeks from the east is still on the table?

"Mycenaeans do not form a clade (N=1) with any population of the All+ set (p-value for rank=0 < 1e-6). They can only be modelled as a 2-way mixture of Neolithic Anatolia and Chalcolithic orMiddle/Late Bronze Armenia (Table S2.13). This suggests that Mycenaeans could be a mixture ofearly Neolithic people (represented by the Neolithic Anatolian population) and further input from theeast related to populations of Armenia. This seemingly contradicts the results of our earlier modelingas a 3-way mixture of Anatolian Neolithic, Iran Neolithic or Caucasus hunter-gatherers, and EasternEuropean hunter-gatherers or Upper Paleolithic Siberians (Table S2.2), which suggests input fromboth the east (related to Iran) and north. However, populations of Armenia themselves have someEHG-related ancestry16, so it is possible that Mycenaeans received both the Iran-related and EHGrelatedancestry together from a population similar to that which inhabited Armenia. Thus, it ispossible that Mycenaeans received ancestry from these sources separately (from the north and the eastt; Table S2.2), or in a population that had ancestry from both, as in the populations of Armenia.Note that a combination of EHG-related and Iran-related ancestry also existed on the Eurasiansteppe16 in roughly equal proportions. However, we cannot model Mycenaeans as a mixture ofAnatolian Neolithic and steppe populations (Table S2.13). This is due to the fact that Mycenaeanshave more Iran-related than EHG-related ancestry (Table S2.2). It is possible that there were otherpopulations along the Iran/EHG “northeastern interaction sphere13” than the ones sampled here.

Note that when modeling Mycenaeans as a mixture of Anatolian Neolithic- and Armenia-relatedpopulations (Table S2.13) we infer that they have ~56-63% Anatolian Neolithic-related ancestry,which is smaller than the ~74-80% of such ancestry when modeling them without the laterpopulations as a source (Table S2.2). This is due to the fact that populations from Armenia themselveshave Anatolian Neolithic-related ancestry16. Since such ancestry existed in both Anatolia andNeolithic Europe, it is likely that any migrations from either east or north would introduce some of itinto the Aegean; thus some Anatolian Neolithic-related ancestry may correspond to the preMycenaeaninhabitants of Greece, while some of it may have arrived together with later migrationsfrom the north or east from populations that already possessed some of it.Nonetheless, if it arrived with populations like those of Armenia, it is still inferred that the majority(~56-63%) of the ancestry of Mycenaeans was Anatolian Neolithic-related, and so while non-trivialgenetic turnover occurred in Greece, it was not as significant as in central Europe where ~3/4 of theancestry of the Corded Ware people was of steppe origin1."

----------


## I1a3_Young

Big news. Does the northern Iran/Caucus/Steppe mix referenced get explained by Kura Axes seed population? 

Sent from my XT1080 using Eupedia Forum mobile app

----------


## davef

> Indeed. The Mycenaeans seem to be clustering with Sicilians. Ashkenazi too, so I wonder if it's possible that the Philistines will turn out to be pretty close to Mycenaneans, and the Philistines started the change we see in Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews.


Ha!!! I wonder how Nordicists feel about Mycenaens being closer to Ashkenazim/Sephardic Jews and South Italians! There will be many tears shed on Stormfront over this paper.

----------


## Diomedes

^ They are crying, losing hope.

----------


## Diomedes

Actually this article is really important. I even saw it in a Greek news website, y'all.

----------


## Angela

> Big news. Does the northern Iran/Caucus/Steppe mix referenced get explained by Kura Axes seed population? 
> 
> Sent from my XT1080 using Eupedia Forum mobile app


I haven't found any reference to a specific archaeological culture yet.

See above post #11 for info on Mycenaens.

As far as the Minoans are concerned:

"Minoans from Moni OdigitriaMinoans from Moni Odigitria do not form a clade (N=1) with any population of the All+ set (p-valuefor rank=0 < 1e-6). The best 2-way mixture models (N=2) involve a pairing of Anatolian Neolithicwith an eastern population from Armenia, Iran, or the Caucasus (Table S2.14). We can successfullymodel them as 3-way mixtures composed primarily of these two components with a minor (~2-3%and not significantly different from zero) contribution from the Levantine Neolithic (Table S2.15)."

Minoans from Lashithi:

"This might suggest an earlier formation of the Minoans by arelatively simple admixture of the Anatolia-related substratum with an eastern (CHG-like) population,or back-flow from a Minoan-related populations into the ancestors of populations in the All+ set.Sampling of earlier populations from Crete and eastern populations may find a better surrogate for theeastern ancestry in this population than the CHG."

"Bronze Age AnatoliaBronze Age Anatolians do not form a clade (N=1) with any population of the All+ set (p-value forrank=0 < 1e-17), except with a Chalcolithic northwestern Anatolian13 (p=0.072). The rather low pvaluetogether with the fact that the Chalcolithic Anatolian (Anatolia_ChL) does not cluster with theBronze Age southwestern Anatolians led us to also test statistics of the form f4(Anatolia_BA,Anatolia_ChL; Ancient, Chimp) for all other Ancient populations (Extended Data Fig. 3). These donot reach significance at the |Z|=3 level, but statistics involving Ancient as CHG, EHG, SHG, or MA1approach this level, which appears to be consistent with the more “northern” position of theChalcolithic Anatolian in the PCA (Fig. 1b). Overall, we believe that it is reasonable to think thatthese differences are real, although it is unclear whether they reflect spatial structure (as the twopopulations were sampled ~260 km apart) or a temporal change (as the two populations lived >1,000years apart). A more thorough sampling of ancient Anatolian variation may clarify this. When wemodel Bronze Age Anatolians as 2-way mixtures (N=2), the best models (Table S2.18) involveChalcolithic Anatolians and populations from the Levant (Natufians, Neolithic and Bronze Age Levantines), as do the best N=3 models (Table S2.19). Recall that we could model this population as amixture of Neolithic Anatolians, Caucasus hunter-gatherers, and Levantine Neolithic (Table S2.9).

----------


## Angela

> Ha!!! I wonder how Nordicists feel about Mycenaens being closer to Ashkenazim/Sephardic Jews and South Italians! There will be many tears shed on Stormfront over this paper.


They're not the only ones.

Whatever will a certain person do if it turns out that Sicilians are indeed very close to ancient Greeks? 

It doesn't bear thinking about!!! :)

----------


## Angela

"The amount ofsteppe ancestry is about ~13% when the Early/Middle Bronze Age group(“Yamnya/Afnasievo/Poltavka-related”) is used as a source (Steppe_EMBA), which is in harmonywith our finding of ~7% EHG ancestry in Mycenaeans, as this group has about half of its ancestryfrom the EHG1,8,16. The proportion is slightly higher when the Middle/Late Bronze Age(Steppe_MLBA) group (“Srubnaya/Andronovo/Sintashta-related”) is used as a source, and higher stillwhen the Late Neolithic/Bronze Age populations from mainland Europe (Europe_LNBA) are used asa source, reflecting the fact that these have substantial European/Anatolian Neolithic-relatedancestry1,8,20 which dilutes their EHG-related ancestry further. We cannot distinguish which of thesepopulations was a source for Mycenaeans (whether there was a migration directly from the steppe,from populations related to the Early, Middle/Late Bronze Age steppe, or an indirect migration fromcentral Europe from steppe-influenced populations that were formed there during the Late/NeolithicBronze Age)."

"Thus, while we cannot distinguish between the differentsource populations of ‘northern’ ancestry, our results do not depend strongly on the sampledpopulations, as quantitatively similar estimates of their impact on Mycenaeans are inferred when weeither use any of them, or use none of them, but simply infer ancestry from an unsampled “ghost”population from either the eastern European-Iran continuum that formed the early populations of thesteppe1,10,13, or the steppe-European farmer continuum of the Middle/Late Bronze Age8,20."

"While both ‘eastern’ and ‘northern’ 2-way mixture models fit the data statistically, we were curiouswhether a more complicated model could provide additional insight, so we tested 3-way mixturemodels with Anatolia_N or Minoan_Lasithi as the substratum population and both steppe-related‘northern’ ancestry (Steppe_EMBA, Steppe_MLBA, or Europe_LNBA) and Armenia-related‘eastern’ ancestry (Armenia_MLBA or Armenia_ChL). The results are presented in Table S2.26.Anatolian Neolithic/Minoans make up the majority of the ancestry (~59-90%) in all these models.Most of the coefficients for the ‘northern’ and ‘eastern’ ancestry are positive, suggesting that there ismigration from both sources, but many of these positive coefficients do not significantly differ fromzero (explaining why the simpler 2-way mixture models fit the data adequately without taking intoaccount a 3rd ancestral source). Interestingly, the proportion of ‘eastern’ and ‘northern’ ancestry inTable S2.26 are anti-correlated (r=-0.95) suggesting again that they both capture the same underlyingphenomenon.Table S2.26: 3-way mixture models. Left = (Mycenaean, A, B, C). The Right set is All++"

"However, we do notice that the model79%Minoan_Lasithi+21%Europe_LNBA tends to share more drift with Mycenaeans (at the |Z|>2level). Europe_LNBA is a diverse group of steppe-admixed Late Neolithic/Bronze Age individualsfrom mainland Europe, and we think that the further study of areas to the north of Greece mightidentify a surrogate for this admixture event – if, indeed, the Minoan_Lasithi+Europe_LNBA modelrepresents the true history."

There's a large section on the implications for language change...too large to copy and paste. It starts on page 49.

Certain people won't be at all happy.

----------


## Johane Derite

This is such an exciting paper, science is awesome.

From *Page 4*:

"We estimated the fixation index, FST, of Bronze Age populations with present-day West Eurasians, finding that Mycenaeans were *least differentiated* from populations from *Greece, Cyprus, Albania, and Italy* (Fig. 2), part of a general pattern in which Bronze Age populations broadly resembled present-day inhabitants from the same region(Extended Data Fig. 7)"

*Figure 2: 
*


*Extended Figure 7: 
*

----------


## blevins13

> "The amount ofsteppe ancestry is about ~13% when the Early/Middle Bronze Age group(“Yamnya/Afnasievo/Poltavka-related”) is used as a source (Steppe_EMBA), which is in harmonywith our finding of ~7% EHG ancestry in Mycenaeans, as this group has about half of its ancestryfrom the EHG1,8,16. The proportion is slightly higher when the Middle/Late Bronze Age(Steppe_MLBA) group (“Srubnaya/Andronovo/Sintashta-related”) is used as a source, and higher stillwhen the Late Neolithic/Bronze Age populations from mainland Europe (Europe_LNBA) are used asa source, reflecting the fact that these have substantial European/Anatolian Neolithic-relatedancestry1,8,20 which dilutes their EHG-related ancestry further. We cannot distinguish which of thesepopulations was a source for Mycenaeans (whether there was a migration directly from the steppe,from populations related to the Early, Middle/Late Bronze Age steppe, or an indirect migration fromcentral Europe from steppe-influenced populations that were formed there during the Late/NeolithicBronze Age)."
> 
> "Thus, while we cannot distinguish between the differentsource populations of ‘northern’ ancestry, our results do not depend strongly on the sampledpopulations, as quantitatively similar estimates of their impact on Mycenaeans are inferred when weeither use any of them, or use none of them, but simply infer ancestry from an unsampled “ghost”population from either the eastern European-Iran continuum that formed the early populations of thesteppe1,10,13, or the steppe-European farmer continuum of the Middle/Late Bronze Age8,20."
> 
> "While both ‘eastern’ and ‘northern’ 2-way mixture models fit the data statistically, we were curiouswhether a more complicated model could provide additional insight, so we tested 3-way mixturemodels with Anatolia_N or Minoan_Lasithi as the substratum population and both steppe-related‘northern’ ancestry (Steppe_EMBA, Steppe_MLBA, or Europe_LNBA) and Armenia-related‘eastern’ ancestry (Armenia_MLBA or Armenia_ChL). The results are presented in Table S2.26.Anatolian Neolithic/Minoans make up the majority of the ancestry (~59-90%) in all these models.Most of the coefficients for the ‘northern’ and ‘eastern’ ancestry are positive, suggesting that there ismigration from both sources, but many of these positive coefficients do not significantly differ fromzero (explaining why the simpler 2-way mixture models fit the data adequately without taking intoaccount a 3rd ancestral source). Interestingly, the proportion of ‘eastern’ and ‘northern’ ancestry inTable S2.26 are anti-correlated (r=-0.95) suggesting again that they both capture the same underlyingphenomenon.Table S2.26: 3-way mixture models. Left = (Mycenaean, A, B, C). The Right set is All++"
> 
> "However, we do notice that the model79%Minoan_Lasithi+21%Europe_LNBA tends to share more drift with Mycenaeans (at the |Z|>2level). Europe_LNBA is a diverse group of steppe-admixed Late Neolithic/Bronze Age individualsfrom mainland Europe, and we think that the further study of areas to the north of Greece mightidentify a surrogate for this admixture event – if, indeed, the Minoan_Lasithi+Europe_LNBA modelrepresents the true history."
> 
> There's a large section on the implications for language change...too large to copy and paste. It starts on page 49.
> ...


I don't understand, what is the reason to be unhappy.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Yetos

> "The amount ofsteppe ancestry is about ~13% when the Early/Middle Bronze Age group(“Yamnya/Afnasievo/Poltavka-related”) is used as a source (Steppe_EMBA), which is in harmonywith our finding of ~7% EHG ancestry in Mycenaeans, as this group has about half of its ancestryfrom the EHG1,8,16.


Correct

the estimation of Triantafilides of Auth was 10% bronze age in all Greece,
it means 10% of what in the forum we call IE,
but has 59% post glacial and 20% Neolithic Anatolian
THAT CLEAR MEANS THAT GREEK LANGUAGE as IE MIGHT COME FROM THE 10 % of Bronze age
*But from the rest % of the other groups

*many times I said that Kurgan etc and other IE like steppe theories, 
might not fit in Greece,

so is it time to reconsider the Farmers possibility of IE speakers?

anyway

the results which were expected
show many things

one of this is that Myceneans (10%) probably were a warriors class, that become elite by protecting people
since in many Neolithic we do not even found fortifications

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Ha!!! I wonder how Nordicists feel about Mycenaens being closer to Ashkenazim/Sephardic Jews and South Italians! There will be many tears shed on Stormfront over this paper.


Exactly, not only the Nordicists, but also some nordicist who pretends to be a mediterranicist. :)

----------


## Yetos

> Does this article also prove the "Dorian Invasion" in a sense?



Dorian Invasion is an inner ddevastation on NW Greeks to S Greeks
and is much much younger for at least 1500 years from the bellow
Maybe you reffering to the Mycenean descent that came from Istros (Δουναβης)

----------


## Yetos

Interesting for me is *Villabruna* which marks +- 0 in a sample of Minoans
that certifies the connection of the area with Aegean,
as some archaiological founds I mention in previous posts,

----------


## Angela

The usual suspects seem to be trying to spread disinformation.

From the paper:

"The elite Mycenaean individual from the 'royal' tomb at Peristeria in the western Peloponnese did not differ genetically from the other three Mycenaean individuals buried in common graves."

So, no, the "royal" or otherwise elite Mycenaeans were not any different from the "peasants" in terms of "steppe" ancestry. 

When are these people going to give it a rest? It's over. 

Other stupidity from another usual suspect. No, neither the Mycenaeans nor the Minoans had a "ton" of CHG/Iran type autosomal ancestry, although they did have a lot of J2a, at least based on this sample. They're majority Anatolian Neolithic. 

Real the paper or at least the excerpts printed here, people.

For yet another usual suspect, we already have a pretty good idea from the Greek paper how much "Slavic" admixture there is in modern Greeks, and it's on a north/south cline. People from the Peloponnese have less than people from Thessaly. And no, it's not because of any mythical huge population movement from Sicily to the Peloponnese, for which I have yet to see any source whatsoever other than the fevered brains of agenda driven ****** or one ***** and several alter-egos.:) Now we have ancient Mycenaeans clustering with Sicilians, Mycenaeans from thousands of years before that bogus large migration. When are people going to stop being so gullible when reading posts from certain people?

If people want to get a handle on "Slavic" admixture one way to go is to figure out "Slavic" R1a and what used to be called I2a-Din, and estimate downwards from there as there was probably some male bias to the immigration.

----------


## Yetos

> I don't care about the sheer amount (however a dozen or so is not "tiny"), what is important is that steppe ancestry was present. Every model shows it. And this steppe ancestry is the only thing which differentiates Non-Indo-European Minoans from Greek-speaking Mycenaeans. So ask yourself where did the Proto-Greeks come from. And obviously shortly after coming, they had to have more of steppe ancestry. But after mixing with the locals, their steppe ancestry got dilluted.
> 
> It is likely that some of Early Mycenaeans were much more steppe than others. Because, you know, when two populations mix, initially there are big differences between individuals. Only after some generations everyone is similar to everyone else, as proportions of admixtures homogenize across the population - assuming that they intermarry freely.
> 
> But it is unlikely that those Proto-Mycenaeans came directly from the steppe.
> 
> So when they entered Greece, they were not 100% steppe but much less.


Tomenable
try to understand it,

the previous thought was that Myceneans came from Danube at 2200 Bc about,
Lazarides papper turns upside NOT ONLY for Greece,
he is kicking ass of Malory's theories,

that is an earthquake even in what you believe until today, and most of us,

the North Agenda might be over for Greece, and not only,
do you understand how many PHD may get ruined?
Myceneans came with low steppe, and minoans got almost none.

all the results were expected from me,
except the scenario that Lazarides provides,
that Myceneans steppe came from Armenia,

try to understand,

----------


## holderlin

> "Mycenaeans do not form a clade (N=1) with any population of the All+ set (p-value for rank=0 < 1e-6). They can only be modelled as a 2-way mixture of Neolithic Anatolia and Chalcolithic orMiddle/Late Bronze Armenia (Table S2.13). This suggests that Mycenaeans could be a mixture ofearly Neolithic people (represented by the Neolithic Anatolian population) and further input from theeast related to populations of Armenia. *This seemingly contradicts the results of our earlier modelingas a 3-way mixture of Anatolian Neolithic, Iran Neolithic or Caucasus hunter-gatherers, and EasternEuropean hunter-gatherers or Upper Paleolithic Siberians (Table S2.2), which suggests input fromboth the east (related to Iran) and north.* "
> 
> "*Interestingly, the proportion of ‘eastern’ and ‘northern’ ancestry inTable S2.26 are anti-correlated (r=-0.95) suggesting again that they both capture the same underlyingphenomenon.* Table S2.26: 3-way mixture models. Left = (Mycenaean, A, B, C). The Right set is All++""
> 
> I doubt they would have included it at all if it wasn't the best model.


This is a classic case of genetics blinders. You're saying that MycenAeans are representative of a mixture of Anatolian Neolithic and BA Armenia. So Mycenaeans after, for some reason, appearing in central mainland Greece by way of Armenia, and after having crossed the Aegean and living for hundreds of years, the would be purely a binary blend of Armenian BA and Anatolian Neo? Highly highly highly unlikely. And also it was Anatolian BA when Armenians would have been moving through, which had already taken up some percentage of Iranian Neolithic, so it doesnt make sense on timing alone. 

Mycenaeans are steppe/WHG + Minoan which is essentially Bronze age Anatolia/Aegean. 

WE HAVE A YAMNAYA BURIAL WITH 40% Anatolian Neo in 3000BC in the balkans. This is clear evidence of cultural dominance rather than population replacement during the IEization of the balkans and Greece. The Mycenaean samples are no different.

----------


## bicicleur

> Sorry I didn't get back to you on this Bicicleur; My only excuse is that I totally forgot about it. 
> 
> Anyway, I think it's questionable that the intrusive element which appeared in Greece proper around 1600 could have brought chariots with them into Greece if they came from the north.
> 
> 
> 
> As for the bronze swords, in the interest of time, I'll just use Wiki as it accords with everything I've ever read about the subject:
> 
> "Before bronze, stone (such as flint and obsidian) was used as the primary material for edged cutting tools and weapons. Stone, however, is very fragile, and therefore not practical to be used for swords. With the introduction of copper, and subsequently bronze, daggers could be made longer, leading to the sword.Thus, the development of the sword from the dagger was gradual, and in 2004 the first "swords" were claimed for the Early Bronze Age (c. 33rd to 31st centuries), based on finds at Arslantepe by Marcella Frangipane, professor of Prehistory and Protostory of the Near and Middle East at Sapienza University of Rome.[1][2][3] A cache of nine swords and daggers was found; they are composed of arsenic-copper alloy. Among them, three swords were beautifully inlaid with silver.
> ...





> What? Alaca Höyük is quite conservative with regards to the first swords. There are also Maykop and Arslantepe (there's a whole stash dated to >3k BC). Later swords are found in Syria and Transcaucasia, then the Aegean. Not sure where you got the Carpathian thing from. It's just not true.
> Later slashing swords spread in the opposite direction from North Italy.


sorry, I spoke a bit before my time
I did some extra checking and the picture remains rather blurry

for the chariots, the map is consistant with the picture in the middle east as I told you about introduction of chariots by Indic people via the Mitanni and subsequent copies made by the Hitites and the Egyptians

in the Carpathian Basin no actual complete chariots have been found, but items that go along with it, like disk-like cheeckpieces
these items were also found in Greece, Mycenean era, but on a slightly later date

also models of spoked wheels were found in the Carpathian Basin and a clear illustration of 2 chariots pulled by horses in Slovakia

this is my source

 

the Myceneans had 2-horse chariots at least in the 16th century BC, which is not shown in the map and which was before the Mitanni

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milita...reece#Chariots

as for swords I was not aware the Minoans had the same swords as the Myceneans
they were probably the best swords at that time
but the swords found in the Apa and Hajdusamson hoards show that there was also local know how and craftmanship to produce swords in the Carpathian Basin

by the 13th century BC the Myceneans switched to Naue II type swords, who probably originated in Urnfield

----------


## Dianatomia

> The so called "Dorian Invasion" (doubtful if it occured at all) was around 1200. In Crete, even a little later. Here Lazaridis is talking about 1300-1400. 
> 
> So you are only 100-200 years close :P Good effort!
> 
> The quality is not the worst, but is by far the worst among the samples, which I don't see you commenting at... There are GEDmatch kits for them too, in case you missed it!


Crete_Armenoi is post-Mycenean according to Lazaridis, right? The Dorian invasion marks the end of the Mycenean era. So it can be associated with Dorians. The thing is that we don't have more specimens. But we have 1 out of 1 post -Mycenean specimen and it differs from Myceneans because it has more northern ancestry. This does give some hints. Moreover, the specimen is from Crete. Who knows what would have wandered around in parts of Thessaly/Epirus by that time? We'll just have to wait and see.

----------


## berun

The DNA results are simply matching finely all prehistorical events, but some people come to get bizarre pictures from it. 

The first EEF came with Neolithic people, the second CHG + J2 Y-DNA came with the second wave from Trans-Caucasus or Kurdistan which delivered in Europe Minoan, Pelasgian, Lemnian, Etruscan... the third wave provided WHG, which in fact is steppe EHG + additional CHG + additional EEF, came from Sintashta, delivering the IE languages in the area, so Greek Mycaenean, written in Linear B script, is linked to an EHG component which lacks in Minoan Crete, but is seing in the island after the Mycaenean conquest of the island; wiki:




> By about the 15th century BC a massive volcanic explosion known as the Minoan eruption blew the island of Thera apart, casting more than four times the amount of ejecta as the explosion of Krakatoa and generating a tsunami in the enclosed Aegean that threw pumice up to 250 meters above sea level onto the slopes of Anaphi, 27 km to the east. Any fleet along the north shore of Crete was destroyed and John Chadwick suggests that the majority of Cretan fleets had kept the island secure from the Greek-speaking mainlanders. The sites, save Knossos, were destroyed by fires. Mycenaeans from the mainland took over Knossos, rebuilding some parts to suit them. They were in turn subsumed by a subsequent Dorian migration.


if the Minoan-Myceanean sample is providing an unexpected high level of WHG (in fact EHG) it could be attributed to being a low quality sample (with much more of her EEF component lost, and if so it would mean that such admixture event would be quite recent).

----------


## Sakattack

> Crete_Armenoi is post-Mycenean according to Lazaridis, right? The Dorian invasion marks the end of the Mycenean era. So it can be associated with Dorians. The thing is that we don't have more specimens. But we have 1 out of 1 post -Mycenean specimen and it differs from Myceneans because it has more northern ancestry. This does give some hints. Moreover, the specimen is from Crete. Who knows what would have wandered around in parts of Thessaly/Epirus by that time? We'll just have to wait and see.


Well, if I am not mistaken, the sample is around 1340, so definitely preDorian period. The so called "Dorian invasion" (I would suggest that there is just a movement from the periphery of the Mycenaean world to the centers, of some other Greek-speaking people - many would agree) is dated not before 1200 and in Crete they put it even a bit later. 

Not to mention again the low quality of the sample and the fact that was a woman. 

In any case, we wait and see.

----------


## Dianatomia

> Well, if I am not mistaken, the sample is around 1340, so definitely preDorian period. The so called "Dorian invasion" (I would suggest that there is just a movement from the periphery of the Mycenaean world to the centers, of some other Greek-speaking people - many would agree) is dated not before 1200 and in Crete they put it even a bit later. 
> 
> Not to mention again the low quality of the sample and the fact that was a woman. 
> 
> In any case, we wait and see.


Yes indeed, I double checked that. Well, it is a Cretan from the Mycenean era then. And it is shifted considerably close to modern Greeks. Since the Minoans absorbed these newcomers from the steppes, we can already detect some rate of genetic variety in the Mycenean era. In any case, I doubt that the Greek Dark Ages will have no impact whatsoever on the Greeks. My guess is that classical and Hellenistic Greeks will be somewhat different from Myceneans. I never considered these people to be entirely identical. I see the Myceneans as the bulk of later Greek populations to come.

----------


## Sakattack

> Yes indeed, I double checked that. Well, it is a Cretan from the Mycenean era then. And it is shifted considerably close to modern Greeks. Since the Minoans absorbed these newcomers from the steppes, we can already detect some rate of genetic variety in the Mycenean era. In any case, I doubt that the Greek Dark Ages will have no impact whatsoever on the Greeks. My guess is that classical and Hellenistic Greeks will be somewhat different from Myceneans. I never considered these people to be entirely identical. I see the Myceneans as the bulk of later Greek populations to come.


The authors don't take that sample seriously because of it's low quality and I think also because of what this admixture shows. Is highly unlikely for an individual at that age to show up like this, especially comparing her with the other better samples that they have. Also, I would not agree that it is close to modern Greeks; it's only it's "steppe" component that is somehow close (considerably higher though), all the other components are far off. In GEDmatch terms that's sth like 24+ distance. 

As for what the Classical will show up (hopefully at some point), I don't expect much difference between them and the Mycenaeans. Consider that the Minoan -> Mycenaean dif was expected to be huge, and in fact we end up we two really close pops, slightly different by a 10% "steppe" or so. And we are talking about Minoans, a pop with very deep Neolithic roots, located really southern, with no connection with the Balkans, many centuries older, with no Greek language. Many would bet big amounts that they would probably be really Levantine-like and a lot different from the Proto-Greeks. They would have failed big time. 

The Mycenaean -> Classic transition from what we know and can assume was also smooth in terms of civ but now were are talking about the same territory and the same language. IMO, not much genetic change is expected. But of course we have to wait and see, this science is full of surprises.

----------


## markoz2

> This is a classic case of genetics blinders. You're saying that MycenAeans are representative of a mixture of Anatolian Neolithic and BA Armenia. So Mycenaeans after, for some reason, appearing in central mainland Greece by way of Armenia, and after having crossed the Aegean and living for hundreds of years, the would be purely a binary blend of Armenian BA and Anatolian Neo? Highly highly highly unlikely. And also it was Anatolian BA when Armenians would have been moving through, which had already taken up some percentage of Iranian Neolithic, so it doesnt make sense on timing alone. 
> 
> Mycenaeans are steppe/WHG + Minoan which is essentially Bronze age Anatolia/Aegean. 
> 
> WE HAVE A YAMNAYA BURIAL WITH 40% Anatolian Neo in 3000BC in the balkans. This is clear evidence of cultural dominance rather than population replacement during the IEization of the balkans and Greece. The Mycenaean samples are no different.


That's not what I was saying at all. I do think the Balkans will produce a population that will provide an even better fit.

----------


## davef

> sorry, I spoke a bit before my time
> I did some extra checking and the picture remains rather blurry
> for the chariots, the map is consistant with the picture in the middle east as I told you about introduction of chariots by Indic people via the Mitanni and subsequent copies made by the Hitites and the Egyptians
> in the Carpathian Basin no actual complete chariots have been found, but items that go along with it, like disk-like cheeckpieces
> these items were also found in Greece, Mycenean era, but on a slightly later date
> also models of spoked wheels were found in the Carpathian Basin and a clear illustration of 2 chariots pulled by horses in Slovakia
> this is my source
>  
> the Myceneans had 2-horse chariots at least in the 16th century BC, which is not shown in the map and which was before the Mitanni
> ...


Whoa, did horses grow horns back then? Is that some sort of extinct species?
;)
Seriously though, can someone run gedmatch against the other samples? This is really fun

----------


## Dianatomia

> The Mycenaean -> Classic transition from what we know and can assume was also smooth in terms of civ but now were are talking about the same territory and the same language. IMO, not much genetic change is expected. But of course we have to wait and see, this science is full of surprises.


The Mycenean to Classic transition can easily be as considerable as the Minoan vs Mycenean transition. The Minoan civilization was almost completely extinguished in the Greek Dark Ages, there were very few cities left and a lot of population was displaced. Some argue that this is indeed the case, because there have been invasions(Myceneans did not go down for no good reason). Perhaps these people who invaded were also Mycenean like. Perhaps not. But there was certainly some mobility in the Greek world during the Greek Dark Ages. And also, by the era of classical Greece, northern Greek tribes in Epirus, Macedonia were becoming more sophisticated and were encompassed in the Greek world, while there was more mobility between Western Asia Minor and Greece proper. To think that this did not impact the Greek gene-pool at least to an extent would be quite remarkable. So, if we consider that the Greeks are a work in progress, we can only deduce from this that Classical Greeks were not entirely similar to Mycenean Greeks. I would bet on more genetic variety. A thousand years is a thousand years.

----------


## LATGAL

Yeah, the low-coverage, 'high-steppe' woman is from a Minoan necropolis that dates to the LMIII, i.e. around the time of the Mycenaean infiltration of the island. She's definitely not 'Dorian' unless you subscribe to a probably more fringe scenario like Chadwick's that saw the Dorians as a low class present in southern Greece already in Mycenaean times that later rebelled against their more Minoan-influenced Mycenaean masters. But this scenario must be rejected since it'd make the higher steppe woman part of the low class (just teasing).

----------


## Sakattack

> The Mycenean to Classic transition can easily be as considerable as the Minoan vs Mycenean transition. The Minoan civilization was almost completely extinguished in the Greek Dark Ages, there were very few cities left and a lot of population was displaced. Some argue that this is indeed the case, because there have been invasions(Myceneans did not go down for no good reason).


I agree with this, even though I have some doubts about the last sentence. 
First of all, we know that the Mycenaeans had contacts with the Minoans from their beginning and we also know that the Minoan Civ was a culture of peace. And peace it was. There have been intermarriages, trades, maybe some sort of taxes under the Minoan rule. So no "invasion". No war signs. Migration into the Hellenic soil, yes, and further interaction with that was there. After the Minoan fall, basically because of end of resources + some natural disaster (these scenarios or a combo of those are the most possible scenario now) looks like the Mycenaeans took their place, they even used the same palace for some period, and developed further with their means. Does not sound like brutal invasion to me. 




> Perhaps these people who invaded were also Mycenean like. Perhaps not. But there was certainly some mobility in the Greek world during the Greek Dark Ages. And also, by the era of classical Greece, northern Greek tribes in Epirus, Macedonia were becoming more sophisticated and were encompassed in the Greek world, while there was more mobility between Western Asia Minor and Greece proper. To think that this did not impact the Greek gene-pool at least to an extent would be quite remarkable. So, if we consider that the Greeks are a work in progress, we can only deduce from this that Classical Greeks were not entirely similar to Mycenean Greeks. I would bet on more genetic variety. A thousand years is a thousand years.


Again, we cannot talk with accuracy about "invasion", because we don't have enough data to support it. It is a movement. 
What you say, maybe true about the Classical Age Northerns, but to support they have been importantly different than their Southern brothers, we have to accept either that a) it has been a second wave of Greek speakers to the Greek land (from wherever we like to put it), after the Achaeans, which IMO is really unlikely or b) that these people have been with extensive contact and genetic sharing with their neighbors (plausible), with the neighbors being not only considerably, but almost nothing close to them (not that possible). 

About the mobility that you say in Asia Minor etc is really not relevant genetically, because we talk about very similar pops in both sides of the Aegean (so minor change), plus any really serious further contact with them would have brought some additional EEF/Iran. I doubt that their CHG proportions at that time was so significantly higher than the Greeks.

Thousand years it is. But I said before, during double period of time (2k years) and between - till last week believed - "irrelevant" populations, with different tongues and Gods, we see only a slight difference, only a weak 10%! I don't believe that from the Greek Mycenaeans to the Greek Classics of the same lands and the same Gods, we will see bigger difference. 

Maybe I am wrong and you get it right, maybe sth else that right now crossed noone's mind happened, we simply don't know. We all can make predictions and suppositions, though, and these are my two cents!

----------


## Yetos

> @Angela, which one is supposedly horrible at predicting Italian ancestry?
> 
> Please PM me your K36 results and we will see how well I can predict it.
> 
> 
> 
> But there were already Slavic-like genes (though it is possible that ethnic-specific drift increased their frequency in populations directly ancestral to Proto-Slavs only later). At K36 for example East-Central Euro and Central Euro are typically Slavic admixtures (they are named after their modern distribution) and as you can see Crete_Armenoi scores them.


Tomenable

at that Time, Slavs as etnicity might not even exist,
I BELIEVE THAT NOT EVEN SLAVIC LANGUAGE WAS FORMED,
but spoke other IE languages, maybe some of them today are dead

so now plz evaporate in thin air with your panSlavism, 
we know Modern Greece has Slavic marks,
but that does mean Greeks are Slavs

so now make 2 steps back, turn around and go for a coffee break

----------


## Yetos

> I don't care about the sheer amount (however a dozen or so is not "tiny"), what is important is that steppe ancestry was present. Every model shows it. And this steppe ancestry is the only thing which differentiates Non-Indo-European Minoans from Greek-speaking Mycenaeans. So ask yourself where did the Proto-Greeks come from. And obviously shortly after coming, they had to have more of steppe ancestry. But after mixing with the locals, their steppe ancestry got dilluted.
> 
> It is likely that some of Early Mycenaeans were much more steppe than others. Because, you know, when two populations mix, initially there are big differences between individuals. Only after some generations everyone is similar to everyone else, as proportions of admixtures homogenize across the population - assuming that they intermarry freely.
> 
> But it is unlikely that those Proto-Mycenaeans came directly from the steppe.
> 
> So when they entered Greece, they were not 100% steppe but much less.


Tomenable,

When you realize this,
the work is Giving Armenian Greek/Anatolian and Iranian not steppe,
meaning North of Summerians, 
both Zagros mts and Iranian Plateau.

ONE IS CERTAIN FOR THAT AREA 
*THEY HAVE GEDROSIAN COMPONENT

now take your calcualtors
and learn them that IE speakers had Gedrosian component
and run again your algorythmoi.

Do you know HOW MUCH GEDROSIAN HAVE your steppe populations? or Your Slavic, or your East/Central Europe?

so cut it out,
cause if not Gedrosian maybe not IE.


PS
*at least can you tell us which European Y-DNA HGs show the Gedrosian component?

----------


## Yetos

> This is a classic case of genetics blinders. You're saying that MycenAeans are representative of a mixture of Anatolian Neolithic and BA Armenia. So Mycenaeans after, for some reason, appearing in central mainland Greece by way of Armenia, and after having crossed the Aegean and living for hundreds of years, the would be purely a binary blend of Armenian BA and Anatolian Neo? Highly highly highly unlikely. And also it was Anatolian BA when Armenians would have been moving through, which had already taken up some percentage of Iranian Neolithic, so it doesnt make sense on timing alone. 
> 
> Mycenaeans are steppe/WHG + Minoan which is essentially Bronze age Anatolia/Aegean. 
> 
> WE HAVE A YAMNAYA BURIAL WITH 40% Anatolian Neo in 3000BC in the balkans. This is clear evidence of cultural dominance rather than population replacement during the IEization of the balkans and Greece. The Mycenaean samples are no different.


that is the point,

if myceneans score only 7-13 % of Steppe,
we must reconsider who is the IE, and who was Yamnaa,
we must search the Gedrosian component,
a total upside down,

it means Rudna Glava was running by Anatolians,
we speak the road of mettalurgy of gold which is oposite of Bronze

----------


## Yetos

> Well, if I am not mistaken, the sample is around 1340, so definitely preDorian period. The so called "Dorian invasion" (I would suggest that there is just a movement from the periphery of the Mycenaean world to the centers, of some other Greek-speaking people - many would agree) is dated not before 1200 and in Crete they put it even a bit later. 
> 
> Not to mention again the low quality of the sample and the fact that was a woman. 
> 
> In any case, we wait and see.


Sakattack,

at 1928 an American searcher found archaiological connectivity among Vucedol and Mycenae,
that was named Dorian descent that time,

the theory has collapsed at 1980's

today we know that there is an arcahiological connection among Vucedol Vucacar vatin etc
with Mycenae, and that was explained as a Yamnaa effect, either R1b either R1a, year is +-2200 BC

after Mycenae we have Sea peoples, from 1100 to 950 BC
after sea people we have Dorian descent which is 911 BC
But it is an inner devastation from Thessaly and Epirus 

now the Lazarides papper gives that myceneans came from deep in of minor Asia nearby Armenia
that makes things difficult, almost divine problematic.

----------


## Angela

> sorry, I spoke a bit before my time
> I did some extra checking and the picture remains rather blurry
> 
> for the chariots, the map is consistant with the picture in the middle east as I told you about introduction of chariots by Indic people via the Mitanni and subsequent copies made by the Hitites and the Egyptians
> 
> in the Carpathian Basin no actual complete chariots have been found, but items that go along with it, like disk-like cheeckpieces
> these items were also found in Greece, Mycenean era, but on a slightly later date
> 
> also models of spoked wheels were found in the Carpathian Basin and a clear illustration of 2 chariots pulled by horses in Slovakia
> ...


I agree it's a bit murky, Bicicleur, as once these things were invented they spread like wildfire because the trade routes were so much better.

However, all things considered, the academic timelines seem to me to point just as much, if not more so to an entrance of both technologies into the Aegean and Greece from the east.

I'm certainly willing to change my mind if anything more definitive shows up in the Carpathians that pushes those dates forward.

----------


## Jovialis

> Central Apulia is Bari-Brindisi? NG test said that your first reference population was Greek, and the second Tuscan, because they have no South Italian reference population there. Apulians usually plot with other Southern Italians.



Bari region:


This specific post talks about the towns my mother and father are from:


http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post512521





> In every PCA I've ever seen, southern mainland Italians from Puglia, Campania, etc. plot in the gap between Tuscans and Sicilians. There used to be a pretty decent PCA on 23andme where you could see where you and your shares plotted, and the only southerners who plotted anywhere close to that were the ones from the Abruzzi.



I see, so it would be within this gap.



I wish they had a PCA chart made for the genetic tests I've done. I should send this as a suggestion to them.

----------


## Ygorbr

> the third wave provided WHG, which in fact is steppe EHG + additional CHG + additional EEF, came from Sintashta, delivering the IE languages in the area, so Greek Mycaenean, written in Linear B script, is linked to an EHG component which lacks in Minoan Crete, but is seing in the island after the Mycaenean conquest of the island; wiki:.


How can WHG derive from a Sintashta mixing if it predates Sintashta by thousands of years and was concentrated in Western Europe? Is this just a typo of yours? Also, I find it very unlikely that the Mycenaean came directly from a steppe population. Their appearance in Greece proper is not dated earlier than 2,000 BC. By then, by the more credible hypotheses, Yamna-like people were already diverging into several distinct cultures for hundreds of years, and Late PIE must've ceased to exist for at least 500, probably 1,000 years. I would be surprised if Mycenaeans came directlyh from the steppe, and not from the Balkans, Carpathians or the Danube region. That would also fit nicely with the fact that "steppe" component is so little in BA Greece: the conquering people weren't so few in numbers, they just weren't from the steppe, but an admixed people with hundreds of years living away from those lands.

----------


## blevins13

> Sakattack,
> 
> at 1928 an American searcher found archaiological connectivity among Vucedol and Mycenae,
> that was named Dorian descent that time,
> 
> the theory has collapsed at 1980's
> 
> today we know that there is an arcahiological connection among Vucedol Vucacar vatin etc
> with Mycenae, and that was explained as a Yamnaa effect, either R1b either R1a, year is +-2200 BC
> ...


How you know that Doric invasion was a devastation, this is on hypothetical level.... nobody really knows.....why you draw conclusion so quickly....wait and see more surprises might come. I never understood why you call yourself Macedonian original, does that mean that Macedonians were G2 (how you know that)..... ?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Angela

> Bari region:
> 
> 
> This specific post talks about the towns my mother and father are from:
> 
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post512521
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, I think you'd be somewhere in there probably.

These are academic PCAs so they're not using samples/results from commercial tests. They're using samples that were collected in approved random fashion from people with at least four grandparents from the same exact place. That's why their results are much more reliable than those from commercial collection companies. The very simplistic PCA that 23andme used to have was indeed based on their own samples.

Hopefully, at some point you can get your raw data in a format that will allow you to use the gedmatch calculators, but I wouldn't expect any surprises, truthfully.

----------


## Yetos

> How you know that Doric invasion was a devastation, this is on hypothetical level.... nobody really knows.....why you draw conclusion so quickly....wait and see more surprises might come. I never understood why you call yourself Macedonian original, does that mean that Macedonians were G2 (how you know that)..... ?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


man plz

why you call yourshelf Albanian?

as for Dorian descent, search all modern books,
not the Falmeraier ones as did your friend.

if you are tired to search on real kastrioti history family and alliances
at least read this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorian_invasion

----------


## Angela

> Yes, I think you'd be somewhere in there probably.
> 
> These are academic PCAs so they're not using samples/results from commercial tests. They're using samples that were collected in approved random fashion from people with at least four grandparents from the same exact place. That's why their results are much more reliable than those from commercial collection companies. The very simplistic PCA that 23andme used to have was indeed based on their own samples.
> 
> Hopefully, at some point you can get your raw data in a format that will allow you to use the gedmatch calculators, but I wouldn't expect any surprises, truthfully.


Hopefully I'm going to be able to squeeze in a few days in Puglia quite soon, but it will be in the Salento. It's such a great place to be in the summer.

@Yetos and Blevins,

If you're going to discuss these matters, provide reputable academic sources and leave out the sniping. Understood?

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Yes, I think you'd be somewhere in there probably.
> These are academic PCAs so they're not using samples/results from commercial tests. They're using samples that were collected in approved random fashion from people with at least four grandparents from the same exact place. That's why their results are much more reliable than those from commercial collection companies. The very simplistic PCA that 23andme used to have was indeed based on their own samples.
> Hopefully, at some point you can get your raw data in a format that will allow you to use the gedmatch calculators, but I wouldn't expect any surprises, truthfully.


In Sazzini's PCA samples from Apulia (Lecce) range from Sicily (Catania) to Campania (Benevento). They don't even fill the gap between Tuscans and Southern Italians, Apulians from Lecce are just in the South Italy cluster along with Sicilians, Calabrians and Campanians. I doubt that those from Bari are so different from those from Lecce.

----------


## Angela

> In Sazzini's PCA samples from Apulia (Lecce) range from Sicily (Catania) to Campania (Benevento). They don't even fill the gap between Tuscans and Southern Italians, Apulians from Lecce are just in the South Italy cluster along with Sicilians, Calabrians and Campanians. I doubt that those from Bari are so different from those from Lecce.


I doubt there would be a lot of difference too, although from memory of older studies the yDna is a bit different.

----------


## Yetos

I wonder what *Stamatogiannopoulos* from Seatlle has hidden in his sleeves,
and what participation he had to this work,

anyway I think Next work-publication will give full results of connectivity among paleolithic - Mythical (bronze age) - Archaic (dorian) Historical (classical) Greece and Modern Greeks,

*The big relief the last years is that 'some propagandists' who used Fallmeraier went home.
*Let them rest, may Gods reward them and meet *king Minos* himshelf at the underworld to see by their own eyes

for the *'to be continued'* from the Mythical civilizations when Gods had human face, and humans challenge Gods is still going on, 
here in the same place milleniums after with the sons of the semi-Gods.

----------


## blevins13

> man plz
> 
> why you call yourshelf Albanian?
> 
> as for Dorian descent, search all modern books,
> not the Falmeraier ones as did your friend.
> 
> if you are tired to search on real kastrioti history family and alliances
> at least read this
> ...


DNA research has proven false a lot of myths.... or hypotheses....so this might be another of those cases. Still not clear to me why you call yourself original Macedonian....no body really know who the Ancient Macedonian were genetically....so how do you know that they were G2? 


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Diomedes

Yes Yetos, we've been around for thousands of years in that place we call home!




> I wonder what *Stamatogiannopoulos* from Seatlle has hidden in his sleeves,
> and what participation he had to this work,
> 
> anyway I think Next work-publication will give full results of connectivity among paleolithic - Mythical (bronze age) - Archaic (dorian) Historical (classical) Greece and Modern Greeks,
> 
> *The big relief the last years is that 'some propagandists' who used Fallmeraier went home.
> *Let them rest, may Gods reward them and meet *king Minos* himshelf at the underworld to see by their own eyes

----------


## Yetos

> DNA research has proven false a lot of myths.... or hypotheses....so this might be another of those cases. Still not clear to me why you call yourself original Macedonian....no body really know who the Ancient Macedonian were genetically....so how do you know that they were G2? 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


if you do not know what and when is G2a3a,
*then I suggest search your own R1b1b* 

And don't put words in my mouth.

----------


## Leandros

God, some people really want to believe their ancestors were Greeks.
Oh well...

----------


## Yetos

BTW

*today is a fullmoon and has an eclipse

*this year I was not so lucky to have time off to enjoy the divine vision of August fullmoon,

in about an hour the eclipse of the moon will start,
relax and enjoy it,
and try to recognise a star or a formation

I am leaving to find a hill to watch it, *as my ancestors did, in the same lands.*

my bad luck continues, my wife is not here, to share the sacred moment.

----------


## LATGAL

Jeez Yetos, some off-topic commentary is nice and all but you're overdoing it. Half the posts in the two last pages are personal ramblings.

----------


## Jovialis

> The modern PCA:
> 
> Then take a look at the PCAs in this section:
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...23310_SF5.html
> 
> *Extended Data Figure 5: Correspondence of qpAdm estimates with PCA.*

----------


## Angela

> Jeez Yetos, some off-topic commentary is nice and all but you're overdoing it. Half the posts in the two last pages are personal ramblings.


Couldn't agree more...a little relief is fine, but enough is enough. Genetics and history gentlemen, please, and supporting documentation if your point is controversial. Thank you.

----------


## blevins13

> if you do not know what and when is G2a3a,
> *then I suggest search your own R1b1b* 
> 
> And don't put words in my mouth.


I have done my research, and this is the reason you I don't dare to claim original anything.... still not clear to me why you call yourself Macedonian original.....probably we never know. Enjoy the moon watching BTW.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Angela

> 


Very interesting. So, no Island Greeks in the academic samples, just variations within mainland Greeks? Clinal or because of relatively recent changes in more northern areas because of population exchanges?

----------


## holderlin

> that is the point,
> 
> if myceneans score only 7-13 % of Steppe,
> we must reconsider who is the IE, and who was Yamnaa,
> we must search the Gedrosian component,
> a total upside down,
> 
> it means Rudna Glava was running by Anatolians,
> we speak the road of mettalurgy of gold which is oposite of Bronze


I don't think so

Yamnaya almost certainly spoke an IE language. The debate is whether or not it was PIE or Indo-Iranian. The Yamnaya burial with 40% EEF in Bulgaria was almost certainly among IE speakers.

Then we see steppe in Mycenaeans, but not in Minoans. And the Mycenaeans look like Minoans + steppe. I don't think this paper is some huge indication that Greeks came from Armenia.

I'm still open to it though, more so since the SE Europe paper.

*EDIT* actually after the Scythian paper we know FOR CERTAIN that Yamnaya spoke either PIE or Indo-Iranian. So we have IE speakers in the Balkans in 3000BC with 40% EEF.

----------


## Jovialis

> Very interesting. So, no Island Greeks in the academic samples, just variations within mainland Greeks? Clinal or because of relatively recent changes in more northern areas because of population exchanges?


Not sure, but it was taken from the PCA you posted. I just labeled the markers for clarity, to compare it to where the Mycenaeans are placed.

Edit:

I think that it would be relatively recent exchanges to bring them so close to one another on the chart.

There was this article about the increase of admixture with other Balkan people in the middle ages. It said there's the difference between the mainland and the islands; who are more like the southern Italians and Sicilians. We see on the PCA chart the original Mycenaean are close to this. I think the Greek islanders are probably very close to the Sicilians, if they were on the PCA. You had mentioned they are mostly from Thessaly on this particular PCA. Nevertheless, It is possible they were getting pulled in that direction, more and more over time, due to the sheer proximity of the populations, at least to a small degree before the middle ages.

Post regarding the article:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post512990

----------


## Dianatomia

> I agree with this, even though I have some doubts about the last sentence. 
> First of all, we know that the Mycenaeans had contacts with the Minoans from their beginning and we also know that the Minoan Civ was a culture of peace. And peace it was. There have been intermarriages, trades, maybe some sort of taxes under the Minoan rule. So no "invasion". No war signs. Migration into the Hellenic soil, yes, and further interaction with that was there. After the Minoan fall, basically because of end of resources + some natural disaster (these scenarios or a combo of those are the most possible scenario now) looks like the Mycenaeans took their place, they even used the same palace for some period, and developed further with their means. Does not sound like brutal invasion to me. 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we cannot talk with accuracy about "invasion", because we don't have enough data to support it. It is a movement. 
> What you say, maybe true about the Classical Age Northerns, but to support they have been importantly different than their Southern brothers, we have to accept either that a) it has been a second wave of Greek speakers to the Greek land (from wherever we like to put it), after the Achaeans, which IMO is really unlikely or b) that these people have been with extensive contact and genetic sharing with their neighbors (plausible), with the neighbors being not only considerably, but almost nothing close to them (not that possible). 
> 
> About the mobility that you say in Asia Minor etc is really not relevant genetically, because we talk about very similar pops in both sides of the Aegean (so minor change), plus any really serious further contact with them would have brought some additional EEF/Iran. I doubt that their CHG proportions at that time was so significantly higher than the Greeks.
> ...


Still, the tested Myceneans are Southern Greeks and mainly Cretans. If Northern admixture reached the island of Crete, it can mean that there is more of it in the mainland. Would still like to see the remains of Bronze Age Northern Greeks to see whether there is a difference there. Also like to see DNA from classical Greeks tested and see who is responsible for the Greek Dark Ages. Right now I am thinking of some J2b fellows up north with some additional steppe ancestry.

See how much of this is true:

----------


## Diomedes

A man has to speak his mind. It relieves stress broette.




> Jeez Yetos, some off-topic commentary is nice and all but you're overdoing it. Half the posts in the two last pages are personal ramblings.

----------


## Ygorbr

> that is the point, if myceneans score only 7-13 % of Steppe,
> we must reconsider who is the IE, and who was Yamnaa,
> we must search the Gedrosian component,
> a total upside down,


Must we? If my perceptions of archaeology + linguistics + genetics end up being right, the 7-13% Steppe admixture differentiating Mycenaeans from Minoans and other non-Indo-European peoples in the Aegean right in the first centuries of Indo-European-speaking history in Greece are absolutely expected, and there is no need to turn things upside down because of those results. What's definitely proved is that a Corded Ware-style expansion of IE languages doesn't apply in more populous regions like Southern Europe.

But we have so many historic, documented examples of mixed expansionist peoples causing language shift in a few hundred years without leaving major genetic impact (Turkish in Turkey, Arabic in Lebanon, . In all those cases, the demographic impact of the incoming powerful conquerors wasn't larger than 20% of the population, and that's also what we see here in the case of Mycenaeans if they came from the north Balkans or even from Anatolia. Their 10%-13% Steppe probably mean that their genetics account for 20% to 25% of the BA Greek pool. That's more than enough to trigger language shift.

Until now, in all regions that experienced Indo-Europeanization during the Bronze Age, steppe-like components (and above all EHG admixture) previously absent have been found, even if in small percentages, so there's a clear link between this and Indo-European languages. Remember that Romance languages spread in the Americas through a people (Iberians) with a minor % of steppe admixture and also a low % of Italian-derived ancestry.

----------


## Tomenable

"Below are derived allele counts and total numbers of reads for SNPs that have a large effect on phenotype for 19 Minoan, Mycenaean, Neolithic Greek, and Bronze Age Anatolian genomes. Nonzero derived allele counts are highlighted. Note that small derived allele counts may be due to DNA damage:"


https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2017...nd-mycenaeans/


At least one the Minoans had brown skin, while all of the Mycenaeans had light skin:


*SLC45A2, rs16891982, Caucasoid light skin*


Sample Population Date BC Derived/Total


I2937 Neolithic Greek 5460–5378 2/3
I9130 Minoan 2900–1900 1/1
I0070 Minoan 2000–1700 7/7
*I0071 Minoan 2000–1700 0/36 ---> darker skin*
I0073 Minoan 2000–1700 13/13
I0074 Minoan 2000–1700 3/3
I9005 Minoan 2000–1700 13/13
I9010 Mycenaean 1700–1200 4/4
I9041 Mycenaean 1700–1200 5/12
I9033 Mycenaean 1416–1280 2/3
I9006 Mycenaean 1411–1262 9/10
*I2499 Bronze Age Anatolian 2836–2472 0/1 ---> darker skin*
I2495 Bronze Age Anatolian 2558–2295 12/13
I2683 Bronze Age Anatolian 2500–1800 6/23


And another gene which lightens skin pigmentation:


*TYR, rs1042602, lighter skin, absence of freckles*


Sample Population Date BC Derived/Total


*I2937 Neolithic Greek 5460–5378 0/1 ---> less light skin
I9130 Minoan 2900–1900 0/1 ---> less light skin*
I9131 Minoan 2900–1900 1/1
I0070 Minoan 2000–1700 5/5
*I0071 Minoan 2000–1700 9/22 ---> a bit less light skin
I9005 Minoan 2000–1700 2/9 ---> a bit less light skin*
I9010 Mycenaean 1700–1200 3/3
I9041 Mycenaean 1700–1200 4/5
I9033 Mycenaean 1416–1280 3/3
I9006 Mycenaean 1411–1262 11/11
*I2499 Bronze Age Anatolian 2836–2472 0/1 ---> less light skin
I2495 Bronze Age Anatolian 2558–2295 0/1 ---> less light skin
I2683 Bronze Age Anatolian 2500–1800 0/6 ---> less light skin*


So the Mycenaeans had - on average - slightly lighter skin than the Minoans.

----------


## Diomedes

^ Even nowadays people in Crete have a bit darker color, as they have more exposure to sun.

----------


## Angela

> "Below are derived allele counts and total numbers of reads for SNPs that have a large effect on phenotype for 19 Minoan, Mycenaean, Neolithic Greek, and Bronze Age Anatolian genomes. Nonzero derived allele counts are highlighted. Note that small derived allele counts may be due to DNA damage:"
> 
> 
> https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2017...nd-mycenaeans/
> 
> 
> At least one the Minoans had brown skin, while all of the Mycenaeans had light skin:
> 
> 
> ...


As always, you don't play it straight. That's one Minoan out of the set, plus that's not what the paper showed when they ran the samples through special programs, as I pointed out at the very beginning of the thread.

You have totally destroyed your credibility over the past months, and it's a difficult thing building trust back up again. 

Minoan youth at Knossos...




Maiden:


Men are usually portrayed as darker,probably to show tanning from being outdoors.

People working in the fields would also be darker. My husband can turn ten shades darker after a couple of days in the sun. It's good protection.

What the snps have told us is that the Minoans and the Mycenaeans basically looked the same, and portrayed themselves accurately.

Mycenaean women...body shape is the same too...

----------


## davef

> Not sure, but it was taken from the PCA you posted. I just labeled the markers for clarity, to compare it to where the Mycenaeans are placed.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I think that it would be relatively recent exchanges to bring them so close to one another on the chart.
> 
> There was this article about the increase of admixture with other Balkan people in the middle ages. It said there's the difference between the mainland and the islands; who are more like the southern Italians and Sicilians. We see on the PCA chart the original Mycenaean are close to this. I think the Greek islanders are probably very close to the Sicilians, if they were on the PCA. You had mentioned they are mostly from Thessaly on this particular PCA. Nevertheless, It is possible they were getting pulled in that direction, more and more over time, due to the sheer proximity of the populations, at least to a small degree before the middle ages.
> 
> Post regarding the article:
> ...


Given where they plot, I found the small amt of extra "sardinian" found by the gedmatch calculators surprising. But they're notorious for not being all that reliable so its best to not take them all that seriously. This pca was designed by professors at Harvard, I'll trust their readings more than results from an amateur calculator.

----------


## Cato

> Etruscans DNA will show no or little Steppe ancestry. Ancient IE Italians will show a significant dose of Steppe. Ancient DNA from Italy and India will confirm Steppe people spread some IE languages.


Anthropologically speaking Etruscans were more "Northern" than IE Romans, Etruscans were much more brachy (like most modern Tuscans and North Italians) than Romans, who were almost totally dolico-mediterraneans till the Republican period, according to Giuseppe Sergi. I know that old anthropology is not always reliable but...




> But only Hittite DNA can confirm PIE originated in the Steppe.


True..

----------


## Jovialis

The Romans borrowed their alphabet from the Etruscans. Which the Etruscans borrowed from the Greeks.




> *Latin or Roman script is a set of graphic signs (script) based on the letters of the classical Latin alphabet, which is derived from a form of the Cumaean Greek version of the Greek alphabet, used by the Etruscans.*


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_script

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Anthropologically speaking Etruscans were more "Northern" than IE Romans, Etruscans were much more brachy (like most modern Tuscans and North Italians) than Romans, who were almost totally dolico-mediterraneans till the Republican period, according to Giuseppe Sergi. I know that old anthropology is not always reliable but...


Giuseppe Sergi isn't particularly reliabe.

----------


## Tomenable

@Maciamo,

Do you have good data on % of various subclades of R1a, R1b, I2 and I1 in modern Greece?

----------


## JajarBingan

> Crete_Armenoi in Eurogenes K13:


WE wuz the elite rulers of the ancient Greeks, Boris.
Come on, that's just larping at this point. The authors have clearly stated that the Armenoi sample has a low quality. Not to mention that she's a woman and political intermarriages by sending daughters to foreign courts have pretty much been a tradition since forever.

I wouldn't be so sceptical if it weren't for the other samples that differ quite a bit from her.

----------


## Fire Haired14

@Tomenable,

It's actually pretty surprising how much 374f Minoans had. It indicates they had pretty light skin but then there are paintings depicting people with brown skin. Like I've said before there's no super accurate way to determine someone's skin color from DNA. 

IMO, ancestral-info makes it clear Steppe-rich groups are the source for the European blonde/blue eye complex but that doesn't mean they're the source for light skin. 

And stop ranking people's worth according to color. Everyone can see what you're suggesting. 

@Angela, 

The female-light skin, male-dark skin thing obviously wasn't meant to reflect reality. Didn't the Egyptians do the same thing?

----------


## halfalp

I think with the recent datas, we can have some sort of a picture of the patern of south est europe and somehow indo-european languages. 1: R1b is found in mesolithic moesia so middle balkans and latvia and steppe, coming from, maybe anatolia and middle east or pontic steppe. 2: We've got specific sublades of G2a and various minor haplogroups coming from, somehow anatolia and maybe too greece, wich seems to have puch north R1b but not I2a and C1a2 wich somehow seems to being shown in ancient neolithic contexte. We can call this second part the first neolithic wave into europe. 3: Chalcolithic or maybe late neolithic with a chaclcolithic transition append both north ( in steppe ) R1a,R1b and south ( anatolian, armenian plateaux, north iran ) J2a. But, the steppe chalcolithic shows a genetic link with the south, maybe with J2b coming from south caucasus directly in steppe. However maybe with kura-araxes complexe J2a seems to profuse chalcolithic in west anatolia and greece and south balkans, were it can have mingled with steppe R1b and change cultural traits like ( cremating in jar coming from south caucasus and making is way throught europe ). So about indo-european languages, if it comes from south caucasus with that second chalcolithic wave c.f. kura-araxes. It would mean that Anatolian languages would be coming from armenia, tocharian going through caucasus, steppe, and north china with the wheel and carts coming from south caucasus. And Italo-Celtic would come from the mingle in balkans wich doesn't really have sens. If we assume that etruscians were those J2a coming from kura araxes throught anatolia, balkans, italy. We see some indo-european loan connections... So we can assume that a large substrat of the indo-european loanwords, come from the steppe, but also that it was really influenced, by various wave of demic or cultural migrations.

----------


## Yetos

> Must we? If my perceptions of archaeology + linguistics + genetics end up being right, the 7-13% Steppe admixture differentiating Mycenaeans from Minoans and other non-Indo-European peoples in the Aegean right in the first centuries of Indo-European-speaking history in Greece are absolutely expected, and there is no need to turn things upside down because of those results. What's definitely proved is that a Corded Ware-style expansion of IE languages doesn't apply in more populous regions like Southern Europe.
> 
> But we have so many historic, documented examples of mixed expansionist peoples causing language shift in a few hundred years without leaving major genetic impact (Turkish in Turkey, Arabic in Lebanon, . In all those cases, the demographic impact of the incoming powerful conquerors wasn't larger than 20% of the population, and that's also what we see here in the case of Mycenaeans if they came from the north Balkans or even from Anatolia. Their 10%-13% Steppe probably mean that their genetics account for 20% to 25% of the BA Greek pool. That's more than enough to trigger language shift.
> 
> Until now, in all regions that experienced Indo-Europeanization during the Bronze Age, steppe-like components (and above all EHG admixture) previously absent have been found, even if in small percentages, so there's a clear link between this and Indo-European languages. Remember that Romance languages spread in the Americas through a people (Iberians) with a minor % of steppe admixture and also a low % of Italian-derived ancestry.



the Turkish example is something I can discuss,
The % Turkish in Turkey is a result of 2 tribes, or maybe one,
the how much Turkish % must be search in Seljuk Turk,
Seljuk must score Bigger than 20-25% Turkish,

the difference among Turkish and Latin America is this,
Latins were not simmilar to native Americans, at least as concerns the Genetic pool,
here we see connectivity among Minoans and Myceneans,
which might mean that the7-13% of steppe of myceneans also IEpised Minoans,
which makes it even smaller than 7% 
and the rest big Anatolian gene pool (I do not know how much) but surely multiply at least x4 was assimilated by at least 1/5?
the main problem here is that we do not know the language of Minoans,
and we all consider them as non IE, 
but imagine the scenario that Minoans spoke IE but another unknown form,

----------


## Yetos

> "Below are derived allele counts and total numbers of reads for SNPs that have a large effect on phenotype for 19 Minoan, Mycenaean, Neolithic Greek, and Bronze Age Anatolian genomes. Nonzero derived allele counts are highlighted. Note that small derived allele counts may be due to DNA damage:"
> 
> 
> https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2017...nd-mycenaeans/
> 
> 
> At least one the Minoans had brown skin, while all of the Mycenaeans had light skin:
> 
> 
> ...



you little white rat,

all the paleolithic results in Greece gives more than average brown hair and eyes and 2 tones darker skin
and secondary black (shinny black) hair and black eyes with again 2 tones darker today
2 tones darker to some is visual, to others not,
consider how many tones of dark/white or dark/transparrent have human race,

Besides, Blondism is not IE mark, rather an old mutation that sprunk around N Europe and Baltics,
*BUT white is after Forests, the more the Forest, the more whiter Skin,*
and I ask you, DO STEPPES HAVE FORESTS? ARE STEPPE PEOPLE WHITE AS EUROPEANS?

and I will give some photos 

Kallash 


Afganistan




and since you are good in Genetics and colour skins

*WHICH ARE MORE WHITE?
STEPPE PEOPLE OR TAIGA PEOPLE?*

even if IE is a steppe language it can not be whiter than the forests of the North,
plz realize that,

*IE is a language of white skin North Asian Forests? 

*and you still own me an answer,
*what about Gedrosian component?

*
and the wplz do your calculations again and tell us which and how much Gedrosian have the 'white North Europe Forest IEans' Hf's
and European does not mean Nordic neither Slav *but* Nords and Slavs are Europeans

----------


## Leandros

> @Maciamo,
> 
> Do you have good data on % of various subclades of R1a, R1b, I2 and I1 in modern Greece?


All 4 are way higher in modern Greece than they were in ancient Greece.

----------


## davef

In terms if phenotype, the Mycenaens were extremely "Med" looking. I've seen my share of South Italian women who resemble the Mycenaean women in this pic:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4wga1oYBbp...cenaeans+C.jpg

In spite of their pale skin, they are super super Med looking.

----------


## Leandros

> In terms if phenotype, the Mycenaens were extremely "Med" looking. I've seen my share of South Italian women who resemble the Mycenaean women in this pic:
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4wga1oYBbp...cenaeans+C.jpg
> 
> In spite of their pale skin, they are super super Med looking.


Meds are pale naturally. We get tanned due to sun exposure.

I posted my photos, see im tanned, but if you see my body parts that get no sun, they are like milk.

----------


## Jovialis

I think it's interesting to compare this study to this chart that was made for the study on Ancient Egyptian DNA.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694









> Most Ashkenazi Jews are descendants of European women who converted to Judaism, possibly around the time of the early Roman empire, concludes a new genetic study that casts doubt on many prevailing theories about the origins of Ashkenazim.
> The study, published Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications, analyzed samples of mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down only from the mother, taken from more than 3,500 people throughout the Near East, the Caucasus and Europe, including Ashkenazi Jews. The researchers found that more than 80 percent of the maternal lineages of Ashkenazi Jews could be traced to indigenous Europeans, with four maternal “founders” responsible for 40 percent. Although Jewish men may have migrated into Europe from Israel around 2,000 years ago, they brought few or no wives with them, according to the researchers, who suggest that the men married and converted European women, first along the Mediterranean and later in western and central Europe.
> The study was conducted by Martin Richards of the University of Huddersfield in England, who led a team of researchers from Russia, the Czech Republic, Portugal and the United States. They examined mitochondrial DNA, which is contained in the cytoplasm of the egg. “Like Judaism, mitochondrial DNA is passed along the maternal line,” notes the report.
> The finding flies in the face of previous research and the commonly accepted wisdom that European Ashkenazim are descended from ancestral mothers of Jews who left Israel and the Middle East some 2,000 years ago, or in later migrations. *The study suggests instead that large numbers of European women converted to Judaism and points to the European women and the Jewish community of the early Roman Empire as the possible source of the Ashkenazi ancestors.*
> *“These analyses suggest that the first major wave of assimilation probably took place in Mediterranean Europe, most likely in the Italian peninsula, with substantial further assimilation of minor founders in west/central Europe,” the study concluded.*
> The discovery also tends to debunk the theory that Ashkenazi Jews descend from the North Caucasus during the time of the Khazar empire, whose rulers turned to Judaism around the 10th century CE. The study found no maternal lineages that could be traced to the North Caucasus.
> "These results point to a significant role for the conversion of women in the formation of Ashkenazi communities, and provide the foundation for a detailed reconstruction of Ashkenazi genealogical history," states the report.
> “Here we show that all four major founders, about 40 percent of Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA variation, have ancestry in prehistoric Europe, rather than the Near East or Caucasus,” said Richards. “Furthermore, most of the remaining minor founders share a similar deep European ancestry. Thus the great majority of Ashkenazi maternal lineages were not brought from the Levant, as commonly supposed, nor recruited in the Caucasus, as sometimes suggested, but assimilated within Europe."
> Many other geneticists have criticized the research questioned the findings. The study is just the latest in a long list of similar research, often with contradictory results, on the question of the origin of Jews in general and Ashkenazi Jews in particular - and whether today's Jews are genetically related.
> ...


The Ashkenazi Jews seem to cluster a lot closer to the Mycenaeans than they did to their ancestors in the middle East. Which means they must have heavily assimilated during the Roman times. The same may have been the case with the other Jewish groups within the empire. Note how close the Turkish Jews are as well; which I speculate comes from assimilation during the Byzantine Empire.

What does the Ashkenazi Jewish population's assimilation into Ancient Rome, bringing them closer to the Mycenaeans, tell us about the Romans? Perhaps Romans were close to the Mycenaeans.

----------


## Pax Augusta

> The Ashkenazi Jews seem to cluster a lot closer to the Mycenaeans than they did to their ancestors in the middle East. Which means they must have heavily assimilated during the Roman times. The same may have been the case with the other Jewish groups within the empire. Note how close the Turkish Jews are as well; which I speculate comes from assimilation during the Byzantine Empire.


There are many threads about the Ashkenazi Jews. 

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...nd-Haplogroups
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...Ashkenazi-Jews





> What does the Ashkenazi Jewish population's assimilation into Ancient Rome, bringing them closer to the Mycenaeans, tell us about the Romans? Perhaps Romans were close to the Mycenaeans.


Romans were the citizens of Rome, they could have been very varied. The original Latins of the Latial culture are thought to be an offspring of the Proto-Villanovan culture. They practiced cremation, so, as I understand, we don't have bones or skulls.

----------


## bicicleur

> and I ask you, DO STEPPES HAVE FORESTS? ARE STEPPE PEOPLE WHITE AS EUROPEANS?
> 
> and I will give some photos 
> 
> Kallash 
> 
> 
> Afganistan
> 
> ...


these pics don't represent IE tribes that were on the steppe 6 - 3 ka
they were repleced by Turkish tribes

----------


## Jovialis

> Romans were the citizens of Rome, they could have been very varied. The original Latins of the Latial culture are thought to be an offspring of the Proto-Villanovan culture. They practiced cremation, so, as I understand, we don't have bones or skulls.


True, in regards to the Latins. I hate to mis-speak in regards to Romans as a legal term, and the original Latins, who founded Rome.

However, wouldn't Ashkenazi Jews moving so close on the PCA to the Mycenaean, from their Middle Eastern origin, indicate something about the population in Italia at large? particularly after 70 AD.

Also, I found this to be interesting, when looking at all of this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor..._Jews_in_Italy




> It is known more certainly that an embassy was sent later by Simon Maccabeus to Rome to strengthen the alliance with the Romans against the Hellenistic Seleucid kingdom. The ambassadors received a cordial welcome from their coreligionists already established in Rome.
> Large numbers of Jews lived in Rome even during the late Roman Republican period. *They were largely Greek-speaking and poor.* As Rome had increasing contact with and military/trade dealings with the Greek-speaking Levant, during the 2nd and 1st centuries BCE, *many Greeks, as well as Jews, came to Rome as merchants or were brought there as slaves*.

----------


## Pax Augusta

> True, in regards to the Latins. I hate to mis-speak in regards to Romans as a legal term, and the original Latins, who founded Rome.


According to ancient writers Rome was founded by three tribes: Ramnes, Tities and Luceres. Ramnes (from Romulus) could be a Latin tribe, Tities (from Titus Tatius) a Sabine tribe, and Luceres (from Lucumon or from lucus, "sacred grove") an Etruscan tribe.




> However, wouldn't Ashkenazi Jews moving so close on the PCA to the Mycenaean, from their Middle Eastern origin, indicate something about the population in Italia at large? particularly after 70 AD.


It's just a coincidence that Ashkenazi Jews are so close on that PCA to the Mycenaean, due to similar components proportions. I don't even know how much it's really accurate and implies something else.

----------


## Tomenable

> What does the Ashkenazi Jewish population's assimilation into Ancient Rome, bringing them closer to the Mycenaeans, tell us about the Romans? Perhaps Romans were close to the Mycenaeans.


Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Levantine / MENA and European populations. They plot close to the Mycenaeans because of their mixture proportions, not due to being descended from a Mycenaean-like population. If ancient Italians ancestral to Jews were Mycenaean-like, modern Jews would be plotting halfway between the Levant and the Mycenaeans, rather than close to the latter. European ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews is more genetically northern than Mycenaeans.

----------


## Dianatomia

> Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Levantine / MENA and European populations. They plot close to the Mycenaeans because of their mixture proportions, not due to being descended from a Mycenaean-like population. If ancient Italians ancestral to Jews were Mycenaean-like, modern Jews would be plotting halfway between the Levant and the Mycenaeans, rather than close to the latter. European ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews is more genetically northern than Mycenaeans.


Exactly, Sicilians have, along side Greek ancestry, received mixtures from both Southern (Phoenician, Arab) as well as Northern populations (Dorians?, Normans, Romans etc) and have as such retained the same North-Southern analogy as the Myceneans. Jews were obviously more Southern and received Northern admixtures to come close to the Myceneans. Western Anatolia has received (among others) Turkic admixture, so Western Turks plot quite far away from Myceneans/Minoans. Mainland Greece has had mainly northern (Dorian? and Slavic) admixture and they plot more Northern. Although we still need more Mycenean samples from different parts of Greece. Because that female example with more northern ancestry raises some question marks.

----------


## davef

Don't want to sound bossy, but we need to stay on topic. Let me end the discussion about Jews with a brief summary about European Jewish genetics based on the various articles I've read...

.50 levant (common sense Levant would be a source).
.35 Southern European (not Italian due to no IBD sharing with italians, it is most likely from an ancient Aegian islander population). 
.15 Western and Eastern European from people who lived in those areas.

----------


## LeBrok

> I think it's interesting to compare this study to this chart that was made for the study on Ancient Egyptian DNA.
> https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694
> 
> 
> The Ashkenazi Jews seem to cluster a lot closer to the Mycenaeans than they did to their ancestors in the middle East. Which means they must have heavily assimilated during the Roman times. The same may have been the case with the other Jewish groups within the empire. Note how close the Turkish Jews are as well; which I speculate comes from assimilation during the Byzantine Empire.
> 
> What does the Ashkenazi Jewish population's assimilation into Ancient Rome, bringing them closer to the Mycenaeans, tell us about the Romans? Perhaps Romans were close to the Mycenaeans.


Experts say that assimilation of Ashkenazi, mixing Jews with South European, happened after Roman Empire. Probably Early Medieval times. Where they plot today is helped by 15% of their North European autosomal. Otherwise they would plot closer to Turkish Jews or Sephardic.

----------


## Tomenable

> Don't want to sound bossy, but we need to stay on topic. Let me end the discussion about Jews with a brief summary about European Jewish genetics based on the various articles I've read...


http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...63099.full.pdf

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthre...l=1#post253600

----------


## Sakattack

> Exactly, Sicilians have, along side Greek ancestry, received mixtures from both Southern (Phoenician, Arab) as well as Northern populations (Dorians?, Normans, Romans etc) and have as such retained the same North-Southern analogy as the Myceneans. Jews were obviously more Southern and received Northern admixtures to come close to the Myceneans. Western Anatolia has received (among others) Turkic admixture, so Western Turks plot quite far away from Myceneans/Minoans. Mainland Greece has had mainly northern (Dorian? and Slavic) admixture and they plot more Northern. Although we still need more Mycenean samples from different parts of Greece. Because that female example with more northern ancestry raises some question marks.


I really don't understand why - with no facts - we label the Dorians "northern", when we are taking taking about a Greek pop. We simply have no clue, we only know they were Greeks.

Also, check modern Greeks from the de facto Dorian settlements of the antiquity: Dodecanese, Crete, Mani etc. This of course is speculation, but I don't see anything more "northern" on them, comparing with the other Greek groups. I would say the opposite. 



Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

----------


## MOESAN

> Giuseppe Sergi isn't particularly reliabe.


Based on what?
The labelling more 'northern' or 'mediterranean' can be uncertain and prove the anthropologist is not too serious or precise, or he is biased (concerning Sergi I don't know), but the cephalic indexes data are reliable by themselves as a whole, what ever the period and the anthropology school. ATW we are a bit far from the topic here. And the anthropologic aspect, possibly misguiding, is not the node of this topic, which is DNA.

----------


## Maciamo

> Which "J2b" do you mean?
> J2b2a-L283 found in Bronze Age Dalmatia, or J2b1-M205 found multiple times in Bronze Age Levant? Keep also in mind they split from each other ca. 15,900 ybp, so it's almost like lumping all R1a and R1b into "R1".


J2b2a-L283 obviously.

----------


## Maciamo

> @Maciamo,
> 
> Do you have good data on % of various subclades of R1a, R1b, I2 and I1 in modern Greece?


I don't have the exact frequencies for the subclades, but I can tell you which deep clades are present in Greece. For R1a it's mostly M458 and CTS1211. R1a-Z93 is rare in Greece and I haven't seen any Germanic R1a yet. For I2, the vast majority is the Slavic I2a1b-CTS10228 + a bit of I2c. There is very little data for Greek I1, but it seems to be mostly Z63+. As for R1b, there is definitely U152, DF27, U106 and Z2103. The highest are U152 and Z2103.

----------


## IronSide

@Tomenable This post might helpful for you 

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post495469

----------


## Jovialis

> Southern (Phoenician, Arab) Northern populations (Dorians?, Normans, Romans etc)


Could you please elaborate on how you are grouping these populations?

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Based on what?
> The labelling more 'northern' or 'mediterranean' can be uncertain and prove the anthropologist is not too serious or precise, or he is biased (concerning Sergi I don't know), but the cephalic indexes data are reliable by themselves as a whole, what ever the period and the anthropology school. ATW we are a bit far from the topic here. And the anthropologic aspect, possibly misguiding, is not the node of this topic, which is DNA.


Based on the fact that Giuseppe Sergi was the counterpart of Nordicism, he was anti-Nordicist and a Fascist-Mediterranean who thought that the Mediterranean race was superior. 

About Sergi
_"Sergi è rievocato come precursore del razzismo fascista e pioniere della selezione artificiale della razza sulla rivista "la difesa dalla razza" diretta da Telesio Interlandi. Cfr. G. Landra, Gli studi della razza in Italia prima del razzismo, in "la difesa della razza" 8, 1939, pp 19-23."_

("Sergi was recalled as the forerunner (precursor) of fascist racism and pioneer of artificial breed selection in the magazine "The Defense of Race" directed by Telesio Interlandi.")

There are so many Italian essays about him. If you read Italian, I can send you some title and link.
Generally speaking on the old anthropological studies, I recently read an anthropologist essay (of a guy who just finished his PhD 4/5 years ago). It explores the major studies of the past on ancient people of Italy, and what it says is that many data are useless because there is no consistency in the methodologies used even for craniometric measurements.

----------


## Dianatomia

> I really don't understand why - with no facts - we label the Dorians "northern", when we are taking taking about a Greek pop. We simply have no clue, we only know they were Greeks.
> 
> Also, check modern Greeks from the de facto Dorian settlements of the antiquity: Dodecanese, Crete, Mani etc. This of course is speculation, but I don't see anything more "northern" on them, comparing with the other Greek groups. I would say the opposite. 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk


The Dorians brought colonizers to Crete and the Dodecanese. They never displaced the essentially Minoan types on those islands. But they could have brought more Northern admixture there. Even though this may not be visible vis a vis other Greeks. 
Basically, the Dorians came from the North of the mainland and displaced many populations of Greece. Many people migrated to the islands and went overseas to Western Anatolia. Aside from the fact that they came from the North, we do know that they spoke Indo-European, like the Myceneans. And the Myceneans did bring some Northern ancestry with them as well. Also, the Dorians were lesser developed than the Myceneans and they had no writing, which indicated to me that at least in part they were not local, or they didn't have any contact with the Southern Minoan people. In any case, they were Indo-European speakers. And two Indo-European waves is always more Indo-European ancestry than one Indo-european wave. Even if the Indo-European ancestry is deluded. 

It is very difficult to know what happened after the Mycenean era, but this decline took several centuries. I think it may have had at least some impact on the population. I guess we have to wait for more results. Actually we need a lot more results from different localities to draw some conclusions.

----------


## Yetos

> these pics don't represent IE tribes that were on the steppe 6 - 3 ka
> they were repleced by Turkish tribes


Kalash and other tribes in Afganistan, Turks?

----------


## Jovialis

> "The origins of the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures have puzzled archaeologists for more than a century. We have assembled genome-wide data from 19 ancient individuals, including Minoans from Crete, Mycenaeans from mainland Greece, and their eastern neighbours from southwestern Anatolia. Here we show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean1, 2, and most of the remainder from ancient populations related to those of the Caucasus3 and Iran4, 5. However, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia6, 7, 8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1, 6, 9 or Armenia4, 9. Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry. Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations."
> 
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...tcallback=true




least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia.CaucasusIranhunter–gatherers of eastern Europe or Siberia, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe or Armenia.





> Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Levantine / MENA and European populations. They plot close to the Mycenaeans because of their mixture proportions, not due to being descended from a Mycenaean-like population. If ancient Italians ancestral to Jews were Mycenaean-like, modern Jews would be plotting halfway between the Levant and the Mycenaeans, rather than close to the latter. European ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews is more genetically northern than Mycenaeans.


I see what you're saying

Because Bronze Age Levantines, had strong Anatolian_N, and Iranian admixture as well. No doubt, the Jewish people in the bronze did too, in addition to Natufian. Hence why Ashkenazi Jews would plot closely on the PCA, despite not being directly related.

I guess the main difference is the lack of the Natufian component in the Mycenaeans, with even more Anatolian_N. As well as the other contributions that differentiate them.

Is it possible indo-Iranian contributed to Greek?




> The Andronovo culture is the suggested candidate for the common Indo-Iranian culture ca. 2000 BC.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_languages


Mycenaean Greece (c. 1600–1100 BC).




> https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694

----------


## Angela

> @Tomenable,
> 
> It's actually pretty surprising how much 374f Minoans had. It indicates they had pretty light skin but then there are paintings depicting people with brown skin. Like I've said before there's no super accurate way to determine someone's skin color from DNA. 
> 
> IMO, ancestral-info makes it clear Steppe-rich groups are the source for the European blonde/blue eye complex but that doesn't mean they're the source for light skin. 
> 
> And stop ranking people's worth according to color. Everyone can see what you're suggesting. 
> 
> @Angela, 
> ...


Precisely how do you know that it didn't reflect reality?

Most modern Southern Europeans possess snps which allow them to turn much darker after exposure to the sun. 

The same man:






Men, who would usually be doing the majority of the field work, would be on the training field, or on ships, would be constantly exposed to the sun, while women, especially the elite women or priestesses, much less so.

This was as true in Egypt as it was in ancient Greece. 

There have also been papers that find a slight dysmorphia in terms of pigmentation between men and women.

It's certainly evident to me in populations like the Tuscans, for example, where, in my personal experience, women tend to be, on average, fairer than the men. 

Anyway, the main point is that, based on the snps and on the predictive tool, the Mycenaeans (and the Minoans) accurately represented themselves in their art.

I'm not going to derail this thread by going into an extended rehash of de-pigmentation. I will just say that if the intrusive "mixing agent" that created the Mycenaeans came directly from the steppe/Yamnaya it absolutely didn't "lighten" the local population, which was relatively "light" already. As you note, the Minoans already had a lot of 374f. 

You clearly seem to have forgotten what you used to know, and said, about pigmentation and Yamnaya in the past.

For the record, I certainly don't believe that people from Sintashta, who were indeed lighter, or Corded Ware people, took a jet from their areas to the Peloponnese. If the mixing agent came by way of the Balkans instead of Anatolia, which I think is probably more likely, then these people were mixed Balkanite populations.

----------


## Sakattack

@ Dianatomia

All these that you describe as facts, are just speculation. 

The Dorians were a Greek population. We know nothing more. 

I doubt they have been anything northern. But I also don't have facts to support it. In this, case, though, you are the one that should bring the facts on the table of their "Nothern" affinity ;) 

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

----------


## bicicleur

> Precisely how do you know that it didn't reflect reality?
> 
> Most modern Southern Europeans possess snps which allow them to turn much darker after exposure to the sun. 
> 
> The same man:


Angela, I have it too.
I don't have my DNA tested but afaik there is no connection with southern Europe.
This feature is more outspoken for me than for other members of my family.
I don't get it by working the fields, it's by riding my bicycle.  :Cool V:

----------


## blevins13

> @ Dianatomia
> 
> All these that you describe as facts, are just speculation. 
> 
> The Dorians were a Greek population. We know nothing more. 
> 
> I doubt they have been anything northern. But I also don't have facts to support it. In this, case, though, you are the one that should bring the facts on the table of their "Nothern" affinity ;) 
> 
> Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk


What you have is some fairy tale from the past that might be true...but since no hard prove has been found yet ....there is room other hypotheses. I suspect that Doric tribes have more northern affinity as well...


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Milan.M

Many times i have said in this forum that the Greek language most probably came from Armenian territory somewhere in the Balkans,while all others were assuming directly from the steppe,now Lazaridis paper seem to support my hypothesis.
My quotes;



> I favor the Greco-Aryan hypothesis,used in tandem with the Graeco-Armenian hypothesis, the Armenian language would also be included under the label Aryano-Greco-Armenic, splitting into proto-Greek/Phrygian and "Armeno-Aryan" (ancestor of Armenian and Indo-Iranian)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Aryan
> 
> So i think that the migration to Greece came from Anatolia,if this speakers will be associated with R1b,it will be with this subclade,but i doubt that they weren't admixed with other haplogroups.





> That is what make more geographical sense to me,movement of people,language spread and historical sources as i believe to be true,including this subclade of R1b.At the end is irrelevant whether migration came from east or north,but they might have come from north of Caucasus into the Armenian teritory and that area around,but from there they moved in Greece already as different languages.The Greek-Armenian-Indo Iranian split i mention prior.Greek into West,whereas Armenian(middle) Indo Iranian in East migration,they most probably covered vast area of the steppes too with different haplogroups but same language group.





> I agree that Armenian did not came from the Balkans,moreover I think that proto Greeks too arrived from that territory somewhere.

----------


## Dianatomia

> @ Dianatomia
> 
> All these that you describe as facts, are just speculation. 
> 
> The Dorians were a Greek population. We know nothing more. 
> 
> I doubt they have been anything northern. But I also don't have facts to support it. In this, case, though, you are the one that should bring the facts on the table of their "Nothern" affinity ;) 
> 
> Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk


There is only but one way to prove it. It's DNA. Other than that, we can only speculate.

----------


## Angela

> Angela, I have it too.
> I don't have my DNA tested but afaik there is no connection with southern Europe.
> This feature is more outspoken for me than for other members of my family.
> I don't get it by working the fields, it's by riding my bicycle.


There you go, and I'm as Southern European as it gets genetically, and all I do is burn, blister, and peel. It's totally unfair as I love the sun and particularly the beach. Thank God for modern sunscreens and even so I wear the sun hats with the biggest brim I can find. 

The snps involved do have a south/north, or even more so, a south/northwest distribution, but it's not always going to apply in individual cases.

----------


## Sile

> True, in regards to the Latins. I hate to mis-speak in regards to Romans as a legal term, and the original Latins, who founded Rome.
> 
> However, wouldn't Ashkenazi Jews moving so close on the PCA to the Mycenaean, from their Middle Eastern origin, indicate something about the population in Italia at large? particularly after 70 AD.
> 
> Also, I found this to be interesting, when looking at all of this.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor..._Jews_in_Italy


who are the latins?

We know by history that up to to celtic invasion of northern italy ~530BC........the etruscans held Rome and Naples , all these lands where under the etruscans.

Some old historians claim the latins as a southern branch of the etruscans , especially since etruscans owned this land for over 200 years

----------


## Sile

I find it astonishing that people state the term south european, north european etc based on todays national borders .............very problematic ...............it should reflect the latitude and longitude of Europe to reference these terms

----------


## Angela

> I find it astonishing that people state the term south european, north european etc based on todays national borders .............very problematic ...............it should reflect the latitude and longitude of Europe to reference these terms


Please see post #338 above or any history/archaeology book of ancient Italy.




> I find it astonishing that people state the term south european, north european etc based on todays national borders .............very problematic ...............it should reflect the latitude and longitude of Europe to reference these terms


I find it astonishing how little you know about anything, including genetics.

----------


## Sile

> Please see post #338 above or any history/archaeology book of ancient Italy.
> 
> 
> 
> I find it astonishing how little you know about anything, including genetics.


tick for top

likewise for you on bottom

----------


## bicicleur

> Many times i have said in this forum that the Greek language most probably came from Armenian territory somewhere in the Balkans,while all others were assuming directly from the steppe,now Lazaridis paper seem to support my hypothesis.
> My quotes;


don't jump to conclusions to hastily
Greeks don't have to come from Armenia in order to be related
Greeks and Armenians may have a common ancestor
and Greeks went to Greece and Armenians to Armenia

many scenarios are possible

----------


## Sakattack

> What you have is some fairy tale from the past that might be true...but since no hard prove has been found yet ....there is room other hypotheses. I suspect that Doric tribes have more northern affinity as well...
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


True. We don't have anything proven, we just know that the Dorians we of Greek stock, because of the language. Nothing more. We can freely express our suppositions, alongside with some arguments, but up to a point. 
For the Mycenaeans it has been the same more or less, and many (including myself) were surprised that they were so much Minoan-like. 


> There is only but one way to prove it. It's DNA. Other than that, we can only speculate.


True. So before we take anything as granted and group populations like you had, according to zero evidence, let's wait for DNA to speak. 

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

----------


## Milan.M

> don't jump to conclusions to hastily
> Greeks don't have to come from Armenia in order to be related
> Greeks and Armenians may have a common ancestor
> and Greeks went to Greece and Armenians to Armenia
> 
> many scenarios are possible


I do not jump to conclusions it is what i believe to be true,it is what make sense to me,people jump to conclusions about steppe too *but many scenarios are possible.*

----------


## Sile

> True. We don't have anything proven, we just know that the Dorians we of Greek stock, because of the language. Nothing more. We can freely express our suppositions, alongside with some arguments, but up to a point. 
> For the Mycenaeans it has been the same more or less, and many (including myself) were surprised that they were so much Minoan-like. True. So before we take anything as granted and group populations like you had, according to zero evidence, let's wait for DNA to speak. 
> Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk


thanks
based on homers info.........we can conclude that the myceneans are solely based on linguistics as this was how it was done in the past ( ancient times ).
the map below shows the only mycenean areas .........( the added ones by me , ie, Dorians, macedonians are based on liinguistic)
url=https://postimages.org/][/url]
since dorian is based on what some call NW-greek , then we must assume as you state, the Dorians are Greek and are where I placed them on the map

----------


## Sakattack

> thanks
> based on homers info.........we can conclude that the myceneans are solely based on linguistics as this was how it was done in the past ( ancient times ).
> the map below shows the only mycenean areas .........( the added ones by me , ie, Dorians, macedonians are based on liinguistic)
> url=https://postimages.org/][/url]
> since dorian is based on what some call NW-greek , then we must assume as you state, the Dorians are Greek and are where I placed them on the map


We have no proof that the Dorians we Nothern or Western Greeks. Homer doesn't say so. 
What we have is their presence in the Mycenaean Centers after the latter civilization collapsed. 
As for the map you posted, says "Turkiye" in Asia Minor, how funny for that period? 
Don't run to conclusions my friend. 

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

----------


## bicicleur

> Kalash and other tribes in Afganistan, Turks?


should they look like 3-6 ka IE steppe people?

----------


## bicicleur

> I do not jump to conclusions it is what i believe to be true,it is what make sense to me,people jump to conclusions about steppe too *but many scenarios are possible.*


you're free to believe and to speculate
and it might be the truth
as long as you realise it might be false too

that's all I'm saying

----------


## Angela

> don't jump to conclusions to hastily
> Greeks don't have to come from Armenia in order to be related
> Greeks and Armenians may have a common ancestor
> and Greeks went to Greece and Armenians to Armenia
> 
> many scenarios are possible


Indeed. I don't see how we amateurs can pick one scenario over another when the researchers, after extensive statistical modeling, aren't sure. We need the long awaited dna from the Caucasus, as well as testing of more proximate populations from the Balkans and Anatolia. 

Unfortunately, linguistics can only tell us so much, because there's no gene for languages that we can track through ancient dna. It's all supposition. Knowing that Armenian is close to Greek won't give us the answers. All it tells us is that the people who spoke those precursors of the Indo-European languages at one time lived in proximity to one another. They could both have traveled down through the Balkans on route to their ultimate destinations as many linguists have believed, they could both have moved from eastern Anatolia (after moving down through the Caucasus), or they could have split and gone in different directions.

It's too early to come to conclusions, in my opinion. 

The Kalash, Afghans, etc. are probably at most half steppe; the remainder is local ancestry, so obviously, no, they're not good proxies.

----------


## Ygorbr

> We know by history that up to to celtic invasion of northern italy ~530BC........the etruscans held Rome and Naples , all these lands where under the etruscans.


AFAIK the Celtic invasion of Northern Italy (at least the Gaulish one, which was the last big wave of Celtic expansion associated with the La Tène culture) happened later, around the 4th century BC. Also, lands like Rome and Naples were under Etruscan rule and influence, but weren't Etruscan in language and culture. They possibly were Etruscan or more generally Tyrrhenian-speaking (especially in the case of Rome, so close to Etruscan Veii and other important Etruscan cities) before the Italic expansion, which doesn't seem to have happened very early in Central/Southern Italy, rather after 1,000 BC. It's likely that Latins established over an Etruscan substrate, but their forebears (part of them, anyway) definitely came from northern and possibly northeastern lands (Austria, Slovenia, Croatia?).

----------


## Ygorbr

> these pics don't represent IE tribes that were on the steppe 6 - 3 ka
> they were repleced by Turkish tribes


I don't know if that's right. I mean, firstly, Central Asian Turks heavily diluted into Scytho-Sarmatian genes (in general Turkic peoples of the Eurasian steppes, except for Kazakhs and a few others, have at least 40%-50% West Eurasian ancestry and are heavy in R1a Y-DNA). Then, secondly, the Kalash and Iranic Afghans weren't replaced by Turks at all, but mixed with them. Anyway, I also don't think Kalash and Afghans are a good representation of what IE tribes must've looked like. Their admixture isn't found in any modern people, AFAIK. But if I had to bet on how they looked like in terms of pigmentation, I'd definitely go for a typical Caucasian look: white, but not very pale and relatively sun-tanned; dark eyes and dark hair with the occasional light hair/eyes. We already know they were definitely less depigmented than CW people and modern Europeans, so I'm pretty sure they looked more like Armenians and Bulgarians than Brits or Poles.

----------


## Pax Augusta

> AFAIK the Celtic invasion of Northern Italy (at least the Gaulish one, which was the last big wave of Celtic expansion associated with the La Tène culture) happened later, around the 4th century BC.


The invasion of 4th century BC is Gaulish, and is the last wave of Celtic migrations to north Italy. Proto-Celtic cultures flourished in north Italy from 14th/13th century BC: Scamozzina and Canegrate and then Golasecca, oftern merged with the local Ligurians. Scamozzina and Canegrate likely from Hallstatt culture, Golasecca from La Tène culture.




> Also, lands like Rome and Naples were under Etruscan rule and influence, but weren't Etruscan in language and culture. They possibly were Etruscan or more generally Tyrrhenian-speaking (especially in the case of Rome, so close to Etruscan Veii and other important Etruscan cities) before the Italic expansion, which doesn't seem to have happened very early in Central/Southern Italy, rather after 1,000 BC.


Naples was never under the Etruscan rule and influence, Etruscans controlled other towns in Campania. The Etruscan rule in Campania was a conseguence of the earlier Villanovian expansion to south Italy, it's not due to a presumed Tyrrhenian element. Just as it occurred roughly in northern Italy, cities controlled by the Etruscans in Campania coincide with the previous Villanovian settlements. But unfortunately the Etruscans were defeated and expelled around 4th century BC from Oscans and other local populations.

----------


## davef

It would be neat if someone created a gedmatch Mycenaean/Minoan calculator

----------


## Yetos

> should they look like 3-6 ka IE steppe people?


Certainly Not Turks,

if they should look like steppe as Before 6 000 years?

who knows?
But Surely are IE till Today, offcourse more Indo than 6ky and more N Europe than 6ky
certainly not Turkic as in Khazakstan or Uzbekistan steppe,

----------


## Aaron1981

I suspect the Mycenaean element is still Europe_LNBA + local Minoan from the previous phases. That's why it's not full on steppe, nor can it be modeled full EHG. The Central European population at the time already had large amounts of EEF, such as the Bell Beaker ones. I think Bell Beaker will be a far better approximation of this ancestry than Corded Ware, but perhaps that just my biased take on it.

----------


## Yetos

οκ

I am about to pass some Data from wiki,
about Cretans,

Cretan languages, 

Homer writes

ἄλλη δ' ἄλλων γλῶσσα μεμιγμένη· ἐν μὲν Ἀχαιοί,
ἐν δ' Ἐτεόκρητες μεγαλήτορες, ἐν δὲ Κύδωνες
Δωριέες τε τριχάϊκες δῖοί τε Πελασγοί· 

Achaioi Eteo-Cretans Kydones Dorians Pelasgians

by Strabo 
Kydones Dorians Eteo-Cretans.

----------


## MOESAN

> Based on the fact that Giuseppe Sergi was the counterpart of Nordicism, he was anti-Nordicist and a Fascist-Mediterranean who thought that the Mediterranean race was superior. 
> 
> About Sergi
> _"Sergi è rievocato come precursore del razzismo fascista e pioniere della selezione artificiale della razza sulla rivista "la difesa dalla razza" diretta da Telesio Interlandi. Cfr. G. Landra, Gli studi della razza in Italia prima del razzismo, in "la difesa della razza" 8, 1939, pp 19-23."_
> 
> ("Sergi was recalled as the forerunner (precursor) of fascist racism and pioneer of artificial breed selection in the magazine "The Defense of Race" directed by Telesio Interlandi.")
> 
> There are so many Italian essays about him. If you read Italian, I can send you some title and link.
> Generally speaking on the old anthropological studies, I recently read an anthropologist essay (of a guy who just finished his PhD 4/5 years ago). It explores the major studies of the past on ancient people of Italy, and what it says is that many data are useless because there is no consistency in the methodologies used even for craniometric measurements.


OK for Sergi, thanks for well tempered answer (it's not always the case). BTW I think I mistook him for another old antrhopologist of Italy.
Concerning cephalic index, the most of the methodologies errors don't change dramatically the results as a whole, when pops are different enough. It's true the statement was a bit unprecise and too general, but southern Italy presented for the most lower cephalic indexes; what is not sufficient to help to settle reliable evaluations of mixtures in pops. 
I can understand "intellectual" italian (so close to french or the reverse) but I don't need to read about Sergi, I rely on you.

----------


## Aaron1981

> Crete Armenoi is more southeastern than Tuscans (Tuscans are a western version of Greek_Thessaloniki in Lazaridis' PCA). Crete Armenoi is closer to modern Greeks, or just intermediate between Greek_Thessaloniki and Sicilians. Anyway, Lazaridis has said that Crete Armenoi is a low quality sample, can't be labelled Minoan or Mycenaean.


I suppose, but please point out to me a U5a rich Middle Eastern population. I'll give you some time to get back to me..no rush or anything.

I found this post from Dienekes' blog relevant. It wouldn't surprise me if they were genomically similar to the Cretan_Armenoi.
http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2008/05/...ycenae_07.html

----------


## Angela

I could quickly lay my hands on these ancient mtDna results from Bronze Age Armenia. There are 8 of them, with one U4c1a. How many more are there? Does anyone know? Minus the snarkiness, if you please.

http://aramepal.blogspot.com/2015/06...nd-others.html

----------


## Tomenable

Here is a map of all U4 mtDNA samples in ancient DNA:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...8079999992&z=3

The map has five layers (from Mesolithic to Medieval).

All of Mesolithic and Neolithic U4 samples are in Europe.

----------


## Ygorbr

> The invasion of 4th century BC is Gaulish, and is the last wave of Celtic migrations to north Italy. Proto-Celtic cultures flourished in north Italy from 14th/13th century BC: Scamozzina and Canegrate and then Golasecca, oftern merged with the local Ligurians. Scamozzina and Canegrate likely from Hallstatt culture, Golasecca from La Tène culture.


How's that possible if Hallstatt and especially La Tène postdate the 14th century BC by several centuries? By the 14th century BC, those peoples were still branching from the Urnfield culture, which was possibly Proto-Celtic. But, granted, those peoples could be Proto-Celtic or, as I honestly believe is quite likely, a Para-Celtic branch, since the Urnfield culture and successor societies were certainly not monolingual through their large territories, and Proto-Celtic must've been only one, the most successful, among many ancient Celto-Italic languages. In my opinion, Ligurian - with many links to Celtic and regarded by some even as a branch of Celtic - must've been associated with one of these earlier Proto-Celto-Italic waves into Italy.





> Naples was never under the Etruscan rule and influence, Etruscans controlled other towns in Campania. The Etruscan rule in Campania was a conseguence of the earlier Villanovian expansion to south Italy, it's not due to a presumed Tyrrhenian element. Just as it occurred roughly in northern Italy, cities controlled by the Etruscans in Campania coincide with the previous Villanovian settlements. But unfortunately the Etruscans were defeated and expelled around 4th century BC from Oscans and other local populations.


Thanks for your informative post. But then, in other words, it does seem to me like you're precisely confirming that there was a pre-Italic Tyrrhenian element in those areas (though I was really misled about Naples, the Etruscan rule of which was assumed by another Eupedia member in this topic). The Tyrrhenian-speaking cultural elements could've been not very ancient, not predating the Italic tribes by milennia, but the Villanovan expansion was certainly earlier than the expansion of Italic tribes and above all of the Latins. Sorry if I misunderstood what you said.

----------


## Pax Augusta

> How's that possible if Hallstatt and especially La Tène postdate the 14th century BC by several centuries? By the 14th century BC, those peoples were still branching from the Urnfield culture, which was possibly Proto-Celtic. But, granted, those peoples could be Proto-Celtic or, as I honestly believe is quite likely, a Para-Celtic branch, since the Urnfield culture and successor societies were certainly not monolingual through their large territories, and Proto-Celtic must've been only one, the most successful, among many ancient Celto-Italic languages. In my opinion, Ligurian - with many links to Celtic and regarded by some even as a branch of Celtic - must've been associated with one of these earlier Proto-Celto-Italic waves into Italy.


To be honest, you're pretending not to understand. In fact, as I said, those are considered proto-Celt cultures. Even though maybe it's a bit forced for Scamozzina.

14th-13th century BC Scamozzina (or Scamozzina-Alba and Viverone), then the rest. Urnfield culture>Hallstatt culture>La Tène culture.




> Thanks for your informative post. But then, in other words, *it does seem to me like you're precisely confirming that there was a pre-Italic Tyrrhenian element in those areas* (though I was really misled about Naples, the Etruscan rule of which was assumed by another Eupedia member in this topic). The Tyrrhenian-speaking cultural elements could've been not very ancient, not predating the Italic tribes by milennia, but the Villanovan expansion was certainly earlier than the expansion of Italic tribes and above all of the Latins. Sorry if I misunderstood what you said.


Not really, just the opposite. There were other elements though. I challenge you to find these elements. But I have the impression that you are not really interested in finding them.

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

> I suppose, but please point out to me a U5a rich Middle Eastern population. I'll give you some time to get back to me..no rush or anything.
> 
> I found this post from Dienekes' blog relevant. It wouldn't surprise me if they were genomically similar to the Cretan_Armenoi.
> http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2008/05/...ycenae_07.html


There's a Minoan female with mtDNA U5a1 (I0071, Hagios Charalambos Cave, Lasithi, Crete 2400-1700 BC) along with J2a1 males.
What doesn that mean for you?

----------


## Angela

> Here is a map of all U4 mtDNA samples in ancient DNA:
> 
> https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...8079999992&z=3
> 
> The map has five layers (from Mesolithic to Medieval).
> 
> All of Mesolithic and Neolithic U4 samples are in Europe.


How is that on point? We're talking about the Bronze Age. The mtDna U4 could have moved down through the Caucasus in the early Bronze and then west into Greece.

The paper where it can be found is Allentoft et al 2015. 

https://www.nature.com/nature/journa...14507_SF6.html

@Papadimitriou,
I thought I remembered an mtDna U4 in Neolithic Anatolia, but now I can't find it. It would make sense, though, given the y Dna I2a found there. That WHG like genetic material found in them came into Anatolia from the Balkans, or it was spread between the Balkans and Anatolia during the Mesolithic.

----------


## Cato

> Giuseppe Sergi isn't particularly reliabe.


It's very old, but he provided pictures of the skulls cited in his books so i don't think that he made-up his data

https://archive.org/details/italialeoriginia00serg

but i understand that i'm OT..

----------


## Ygorbr

> Not really, just the opposite. There were other elements though. I challenge you to find these elements. But I have the impression that you are not really interested in finding them.


Then your impressions aren't very accurate, so you should rely less on feelings and more on what is actually being stated here. I wouldn't be talking about this subject if I wasn't interested in learning more, so I don't understand why you can't inform us all better if you think you have more knowledge about the subject. That's better than negative subjective impressions.

----------


## Angela

Gentlemen, this isn't a thread on Italian genetics, so detailed discussions of it should go to the appropriate thread.

----------


## I1a3_Young

> Using D-stats here's what modern mainland Greeks get...
> 
> Anatolia Neolithic-58%
> CHG/Iran Neo-21%
> EHG-18%
> WHG-3%
> 
> Here's what Mycenaean get.
> 
> ...


Take this in context with a post by Angela on page 1, who was quoting the authors who stated that the steppe mixture appears to have been through both a north and east route.

If the Steppe increase was a singular invasion through the Balkans, then they would have brought a EHG/Neolithic farmer mix. That would have reduced the Iranian chalcolithic percentage and increased the Neolithic farmer and EHG. However, the Minoan to Mycenaean transition kept a stable amount of Iran_Chalcolithic and increased EHG while reducing Neolithic farmer.

Wouldn't that point towards a more easterly source of the mix? Yet the authors say there's more common drift with Europe LBNA.

As is the usual case, there are probably multiple waves at play here. Perhaps the Minoan weakening was due to pressure from both sides and the chaos and moving is too hard to track.

The explanations are usually not simple but the fact remains that a significant amount of Steppe was introduced.

What if we flipped the map upside down and pretend ancient Greece was where ancient Sweden was. Think of the increasing Steppe in Greece as the increasing Neolithic farmer in Sweden. First it was only ~8% then it increased and stabilized. Nobody is claiming EEF takeover of Sweden but look at it as rather a natural drift of people. Sweden also experienced R1B-U106 incursion with no apparent takeover, unless I'm mistaken.

The single Mycenaean Y-DNA sample is a bit frustrating.

----------


## Angela

@Young,
Everything is relative. I wouldn't call the Yamnaya in even modern Greeks very significant...They Mycenaens had about 13%...they don't look to have gotten all that much more from the Slavs or other later migrations, although they got some (and these are mostly or all mainland Greeks)


Just a reminder that this graph is *not* based on a simple admixture run.

What is inescapable, imo, is that the processes that affected the Balkans, Greece, Iberia, (and perhaps Italy, although we have to wait for adna) are very different from what happened in central and even more in northern Europe (and perhaps in India). The same seems to be true for the Near East (i.e. Hittite and other Indo-European languages.)

In these latter areas the Indo-European speakers entered densely populated areas with advanced cultures. In northern and central Europe the territories were either empty or relatively depopulated because of population crashes caused by climate change, environmental degradation of the soil, and perhaps disease brought by the newcomers.

As a result, the total effect genetically in the Balkans and Greece was much smaller (75% replacement in the north originally, versus either 13 or 21% in the Mycenaeans depending on the group being examined.) Culturally there was a big difference as well. The newcomers in Greece, while changing the language, adopted a lot of the culture.

----------


## Fatherland

> tick for top
> 
> likewise for you on bottom


You are wrong.

----------


## Angela

> I suppose, but please point out to me a U5a rich Middle Eastern population. I'll give you some time to get back to me..no rush or anything.
> 
> I found this post from Dienekes' blog relevant. It wouldn't surprise me if they were genomically similar to the Cretan_Armenoi.
> http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2008/05/...ycenae_07.html


Even the "modelers" seem to admit this is a terrible sample. Give it up. This is the height of special pleading.


Let's all try to be objective, people.

----------


## I1a3_Young

> @Young,
> Everything is relative. I wouldn't call the Yamnaya in even modern Greeks very significant...They Mycenaens had about 13%...they don't look to have gotten all that much more from the Slavs or other later migrations, although they got some (and these are mostly or all mainland Greeks)
> 
> 
> Just a reminder that this graph is *not* based on a simple admixture run.
> 
> What is inescapable, imo, is that the processes that affected the Balkans, Greece, Iberia, (and perhaps Italy, although we have to wait for adna) are very different from what happened in central and even more in northern Europe (and perhaps in India). The same seems to be true for the Near East (i.e. Hittite and other Indo-European languages.)
> 
> In these latter areas the Indo-European speakers entered densely populated areas with advanced cultures. In northern and central Europe the territories were either empty or relatively depopulated because of population crashes caused by climate change, environmental degradation of the soil, and perhaps disease brought by the newcomers.
> ...



Accepted. Do you know of a way to put an individual on a chart like this? Side question: Why are Norwegians and Scottish rated with more Yamnaya than Ukraine?

----------


## Angela

> Accepted. Do you know of a way to put an individual on a chart like this? Side question: Why are Norwegians and Scottish rated with more Yamnaya than Ukraine?


I'm sorry, I don't. I wish they'd take up a side job and analyze my dna with the new methods they have and are developing, especially in comparison to whatever ancient Italian dna is published, but I won't be holding my breath. :) 

If you're interested, the methodology they did use is in the Supplement to Haak et al 2016.

As to your second question, to the best of my recollection the current populations of the Ukraine are not the original ones of the Bronze Age or even the Iron Age. There were subsequent migrations in the early Medieval period, and then quite extensive de-population at one time followed by re-settlement from areas in Belarus and Poland. Don't take my word for it, though, East European history wasn't my area of concentration so I can't vouch for the reliability of the data in a site like Wiki either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ukraine

----------


## ThirdTerm

The full list of mtDNA and Y-DNA haplogroups reported in this study. Two samples have U5a1 and one Minoan sample has U3b3. The Anatolia_BA sample listed at the bottom belongs to T2b. Yamnaya mtDNA haplogroups are known to be T1a and U2e (Wilde 2014) and there is no exact match in these ancient samples.

----------


## Angela

> The full list of mtDNA and Y-DNA haplogroups reported in this study. Two samples have U5a1 and one Minoan sample has U3b3. The Anatolia_BA sample listed at the bottom belongs to T2b. Yamnaya mtDNA haplogroups are known to be T1a and U2e (Wilde 2014) and there is no exact match in these ancient samples.


I think Maciamo has always viewed U3 as a Near Eastern lineage. 

There are more Yamnaya steppe mtDna than that, yes?

Jean Manco's sheet of ancient dna is not totally up to date any longer: perhaps she's given up on it. However, there are a lot of mtDna there that you can take a look at...
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/cop...zeagedna.shtml

You have to go down the whole list because it's not just Yamnaya, and it's grouped by time period.

It would be interesting to look at the Copper and Bronze Age Balkan samples and compare as well.

These are the Armenian ones that I linked to above:
Sample Name
Site
Culture
14C Date BP
cal BC low
yDNA
mtDNA

RISE396
Kapan
LBA
1192 BC
937 BC


H6b

RISE397
Kapan
LBA
1048 BC
855 BC
R1b1a2a2
T1a2

RISE407
Norabak
LBA
1115 BC
895 BC


H8a

RISE408
Norabak
LBA
1209 BC
1009 BC
J2b-Z580
I5c

RISE412
Noratus
LBA
1193 BC
945 BC


U4c1a

RISE413
Nerquin Getashen
MBA
1906 BC
1698 BC
R1b-P297
T2c1f

RISE416
Nerquin Getashen
MBA
1643 BC
1445 BC
E-M84
K1a17a

RISE423
Nerquin Getashen
MBA
1402 BC
1211 BC
E-M84
T2a

----------


## Fire Haired14

If y'alls have questions about mtDNA just ask [email protected]

----------


## Fire Haired14

Maciamo already did a pretty good analysis of the mtDNA results here. I dis agree with only a few things he said. He claimed the U5a1 is a link to Neolithic Greece but U5a1 is not associated with anything Neolithic Europe/Anatolia. 20% of Yamnaya had U5a1, maybe 1% in Neolithic Europe had U5a1. 

I wouldn't call mHG I5 a Caucasian/CHG lineage. mHG I was found in Neolithic Levant, is found in East Africa today, so it isn't an exclusively CHG lineage like Maciamo thinks. I5 today has a strange distribution I'm still working out with peaks in Italy, Balkans, and Near East. 

Btw, I've been arguing over the past year Minoan mtDNA published in 2013 indicate they were overwhelmingly EEF.

----------


## davef

This may be due to not understanding FST, but I find it interesting that Turkish Jews and Northwest Africans are among the populations that score the lowest with respect to the mycenaean and Minoan samples. Weirder still is Southern Italy's fst score being high enough to be on par with Scandinavians.

We don't need to delve into a long winded discussion about the genetic history of the aforementioned populations, a simple explaination all in one post would suffice.

----------


## Ralphie Boy

Here is the PCA analysis from a study of modern Peloponnesians, Sicilians and Italians published earlier this year, by the author of this study. I like the study because it covers a lot of ground, geographically, from one end of the Peloponnese to the other. I wonder how these Greeks would plot in this study's PCA.

----------


## I1a3_Young

Ancient texts that reference supernatural beings? Sounds like a legit reason to toss aside all reasonable scientific analysis.

----------


## Odysseus

> Ancient texts that reference supernatural beings? Sounds like a legit reason to toss aside all reasonable scientific analysis.


Yes , I know totally legit.

----------


## Jovialis

> Here is the PCA analysis from a study of modern Peloponnesians, Sicilians and Italians published earlier this year, by the author of this study. I like the study because it covers a lot of ground, geographically, from one end of the Peloponnese to the other. I wonder how these Greeks would plot in this study's PCA.


Here's a link to the study it belongs to.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v...l#figure-title

----------


## Angela

@Odysseus,
Take your racist ******** elsewhere

@Young,
I apologize for editing your post to remove the offensive material by Odysseus to which you were replying. It's obviously no reflection whatsoever on you.

----------


## IronSide

I thought Odysseus was sarcastic .. maybe I'm just stupid LOL

----------


## blevins13

> man plz
> 
> why you call yourshelf Albanian?
> 
> as for Dorian descent, search all modern books,
> not the Falmeraier ones as did your friend.
> 
> if you are tired to search on real kastrioti history family and alliances
> at least read this
> ...


Yetos, I read on Euripedia that Dorians brought R1b Z2103, which is the same DNA as mine http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplog...html#Anatolian

So it seems that I am Doric original after all....If DNA is the criteria of selection. So what do you think about this unaccepted turn of events.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## IronSide

> Yetos, I read on Euripedia that Dorians brought R1b Z2103, which is the same DNA as mine http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplog...html#Anatolian
> 
> So it seems that I am Doric original after all....If DNA is the criteria of selection. So what do you think about this unaccepted turn of events.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


I read that too, and with all due respect to Maciamo, there is no reason to think the Dorians were different on the Y-haplogroup from other Greeks, because they spoke Greek? a different dialect but the same language, therefore they descend from the same culture as other Greeks, maybe they were just situated to the north relative to other Greek tribes.

An extreme view is that the Dorians descended from Hallstatt !!

----------


## blevins13

> I read that too, and with all due respect to Maciamo, there is no reason to think the Dorians were different on the Y-haplogroup from other Greeks, because they spoke Greek? a different dialect but the same language, therefore they descend from the same culture as other Greeks, maybe they were just situated to the north relative to other Greek tribes.
> 
> An extreme view is that the Dorians descended from Hallstatt !!


Man, please don't ruin my moment with Yetos it is on hypothetical level....originality has not been proven yet.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Angela

In terms of yDna for these intrusive elements in general, someone has told me that Roy King, who wrote a paper on this topic, says that R1a Z93 is .6% in Mainland Greece and 1% in Crete.

Color me skeptical that the Greek language was brought by people who were primarily R1a. R1b Z2103 is a better bet, I think, and probably mixed with other lineages by the time they arrived.

----------


## IronSide

> In terms of yDna for these intrusive elements in general, someone has told me that Roy King, who wrote a paper on this topic, says that R1a Z93 is .6% in Mainland Greece and 1% in Crete.
> 
> Color me skeptical that the Greek language was brought by people who were primarily R1a. R1b Z2103 is a better bet, I think, and probably mixed with other lineages by the time they arrived.


R1b-Z2103 and E-V13, the first one was in Yamnaya so no question but the second is so young and so widespread in Greece and surroundings that it couldn't have increased in number if it wasn't the lineage of the proto-Hellenes, basically my argument is E-V13 people were so few before 2000BC, their expansion in numbers happened in the Hellenistic era of the Aegean, and not, for example, the Minoans or other previous peoples.

----------


## Cato

> An extreme view is that the Dorians descended from Hallstatt !!


It has been suggested that Dorians were partly mixed with the Illyrians. The Dorian tribe of the Hylleis in particular may was an Illyrian tribe related to the Hylloi of central Dalmatia. Illyrians in turn mixed the Hallstatt folks from the north. If this was true then it can explain in part why Post-Mycenaeans Greeks were more "Northerners"

The Dorian homeland was likely located in Epirus, a region that bordered with Illyria
dorians.PNG

----------


## IronSide

> It has been suggested that Dorians were partly mixed with the Illyrians. The Dorian tribe of the Hylleis in particular may was an Illyrian tribe related to the Hylloi of central Dalmatia. Illyrians in turn mixed the Hallstatt folks from the north. If this was true then it can explain why Post-Mycenaeans Greeks were more "Northerners"
> 
> dorians.PNG


Sorry Cato, but I can't read Italian  :Sad:  I'm currently in an early phase of learning it, baby steps.

I call upon Occam's razor to counter this claim, among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. They spoke Greek, they weren't different from other Greeks.

----------


## Angela

> R1b-Z2103 and E-V13, the first one was in Yamnaya so no question but the second is so young and so widespread in Greece and surroundings that it couldn't have increased in number if it wasn't the lineage of the proto-Hellenes, basically my argument is E-V13 people were so few before 2000BC, their expansion in numbers happened in the Hellenistic era of the Aegean, and not, for example, the Minoans or other previous peoples.


It's certainly possible. We've known for a long time that E-V13 had a major expansion in the Bronze Age.

----------


## Dianatomia

> R1b-Z2103 and E-V13, the first one was in Yamnaya so no question but the second is so young and so widespread in Greece and surroundings that it couldn't have increased in number if it wasn't the lineage of the proto-Hellenes, basically my argument is E-V13 people were so few before 2000BC, their expansion in numbers happened in the Hellenistic era of the Aegean, and not, for example, the Minoans or other previous peoples.


I suppose you are well aware that the Hellenistic era is after Alexander. But Italy, Magna Graecia, the Balkans, Western Anatolia and other places were Greeks and Romans have left their footprint is full of it. So this haplogroup being spread only in the Hellenistic era seems a bit too late. However, around or after the Mycenean age seems more likely. Thessaly has very high rates of EV-13. More than other Greeks. It could be that some tribe picked it up, and spread it all over the Aegean as it went South, while others went North. But it doesn't explain that it was present in Italy as well. And Cretans relatively have far smaller rates of it than other Greeks. I would say that Minoans had none of it, Myceneans had some of it, and Dorians had a lot of it. If the Dorians were different from other Greeks to begin with.

----------


## Dianatomia

> In terms of yDna for these intrusive elements in general, someone has told me that Roy King, who wrote a paper on this topic, says that R1a Z93 is .6% in Mainland Greece and 1% in Crete.
> 
> Color me skeptical that the Greek language was brought by people who were primarily R1a. R1b Z2103 is a better bet, I think, and probably mixed with other lineages by the time they arrived.


Right now, I am beginning to doubt that any R1 people brought the Greek language. Wouldn't be surprised if the Minoans spoke an IE proto-Greek language. I mean, they had the more advanced civilization.

Phrygian was very similar to Greek. And Phrygians resided in Anatolia. Probably a people very much like Minoans.

----------


## berun

> In terms of yDna for these intrusive elements in general, someone has told me that Roy King, who wrote a paper on this topic, says that R1a Z93 is .6% in Mainland Greece and 1% in Crete.
> 
> Color me skeptical that the Greek language was brought by people who were primarily R1a. R1b Z2103 is a better bet, I think, and probably mixed with other lineages by the time they arrived.


Z2103 is yet as it was, in the steppes, so it can't be trusted the IE expansion to it. Instead R1a is relied to EHG (all IE samples have it much or less) and they are related to the demuc expansion in Asia, the Indo-Iranian one. I see that Greek -polis is the same as Indic -pur. Both branches share a lot of cultural cases... where it's possible to look at the first IE cities? in Arkhaim

----------


## IronSide

> I suppose you are well aware that the Hellenistic era is after Alexander. But Italy, Magna Graecia, the Balkans, Western Anatolia and other places were Greeks and Romans have left their footprint is full of it. So this haplogroup being spread only in the Hellenistic era seems a bit too late. However, around or after the Mycenean age seems more likely. Thessaly has very high rates of EV-13. More than other Greeks. It could be that some tribe picked it up, and spread it all over the Aegean as it went South, while others went North. But it doesn't explain that it was present in Italy as well. And Cretans relatively have far smaller rates of it than other Greeks. I would say that Minoans had none of it, Myceneans had some of it, and Dorians had a lot of it. If the Dorians were different from other Greeks to begin with.


Oh no, I meant by the Hellenic age from the coming of the proto-Hellenes (Myceneans?), I didn't mean the period after Alexander.

I should be more careful the next time.

----------


## Dianatomia

> Oh no, I meant by the Hellenic age from the coming of the proto-Hellenes (Myceneans?), I didn't mean the period after Alexander.
> 
> I should be more careful the next time.


Well, your supposition does make some sense at this point.

----------


## Sile

> It has been suggested that Dorians were partly mixed with the Illyrians. The Dorian tribe of the Hylleis in particular may was an Illyrian tribe related to the Hylloi of central Dalmatia. Illyrians in turn mixed the Hallstatt folks from the north. If this was true then it can explain in part why Post-Mycenaeans Greeks were more "Northerners"
> The Dorian homeland was likely located in Epirus, a region that bordered with Illyria
> dorians.PNG


I agree
I have been stating that illyrians originate around noricum ( east austria ) and modern eastern slovenia for a long time.
and yes these illyrians are part of celtic Halstatt 
I never heard of the dorians in Dalmatia, but always wanted to know who the illyrians pushed south as they moved south from noricum

----------


## Milan.M

> Phrygian was very similar to Greek. And Phrygians resided in Anatolia. Probably a people very much like Minoans.


Phrygians resided in Macedonia prior migrating to Anatolia,the garden of Phrygian king Midas with his golden touch was in the feet of Mount Bermion where Macedonian elite later will emerge.
I would even assume Phrygian to be close to ancient Macedonian but we know very little of both languages so we can't say anything apart that they dwelled on same teritory according to ancient sources,the gardens of Midas the "Mygdonian king" the Phrygian "Mygdon" the region "Mygdonia" and later Makedonia bear some similarities to me.Some made Armenians to be Phrygians or closely related but in my opinion this two languages are not similar at all,also some attested Phrygian words are totally lacking of Greek language,only some shared features.

The Phrygians were advanced people even in Anatolia they had their alphabet,prosperous cities etc

----------


## Yetos

> should they look like 3-6 ka IE steppe people?


are you expecting young people look like the Tocharian or Altai mummies?

----------


## Yetos

> Indeed. I don't see how we amateurs can pick one scenario over another when the researchers, after extensive statistical modeling, aren't sure. We need the long awaited dna from the Caucasus, as well as testing of more proximate populations from the Balkans and Anatolia. 
> 
> Unfortunately, linguistics can only tell us so much, because there's no gene for languages that we can track through ancient dna. It's all supposition. Knowing that Armenian is close to Greek won't give us the answers. All it tells us is that the people who spoke those precursors of the Indo-European languages at one time lived in proximity to one another. They could both have traveled down through the Balkans on route to their ultimate destinations as many linguists have believed, they could both have moved from eastern Anatolia (after moving down through the Caucasus), or they could have split and gone in different directions.
> 
> It's too early to come to conclusions, in my opinion. 
> 
> The Kalash, Afghans, etc. are probably at most half steppe; the remainder is local ancestry, so obviously, no, they're not good proxies.


ok I accept that partially Kallash have more Indian
But Afganistan?

and who is steppe?
khazaks Uzbeks Turkmen?

Don't tell me Samara

----------


## Ygorbr

> Right now, I am beginning to doubt that any R1 people brought the Greek language. Wouldn't be surprised if the Minoans spoke an IE proto-Greek language. I mean, they had the more advanced civilization.
> 
> Phrygian was very similar to Greek. And Phrygians resided in Anatolia. Probably a people very much like Minoans.


That could happen, a J2-majority or another people shifting to an IE language somewhere in Anatolia or northern Balkans and then bringing it to the Aegean, but I still find it unlikely. That hypothesis wouldn't explain why IE languages always seem to have appeared in any European region when at least EHG (and mostly EHG+CHG) admixtures increase in relation to EEF. Also, Minoans still look very heavy in Neolithic EEF, which was certainly pre-IE. Besides, that wouldn't quite explain why Linear B could be identified as Greek (and it was used only by Mycenaeans), but Linear A used by Minoans could never be identified as Proto-Greek or even another similar IE language. And the fact that there was a non-IE language, Eteocretan, spoken after the demise of the Minoan civilization in Crete seems to suggest that it was a remnant substrate of an ancient linguistic landscape that was overrun by Greek dialects.

----------


## IronSide

> Phrygians resided in Macedonia prior migrating to Anatolia,the garden of Phrygian king Midas with his golden touch was in the feet of Mount Bermion where Macedonian elite later will emerge.
> I would even assume Phrygian to be close to ancient Macedonian but we know very little of both languages so we can't say anything apart that they dwelled on same teritory according to ancient sources,the gardens of Midas the "Mygdonian king" the Phrygian "Mygdon" the region "Mygdonia" and later Makedonia bear some similarities to me.Some made Armenians to be Phrygians or closely related but in my opinion this two languages are not similar at all,also some attested Phrygian words are totally lacking of Greek language,only some shared features.
> 
> The Phrygians were advanced people even in Anatolia they had their alphabet,prosperous cities etc


Is there any chance that the Phrygians didn't migrate from Europe? now I know that this is very controversial, I should start a thread discussing this some day, but for now, a quote from this book (The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe Ca. 1200 B.C.):



> Although many historians continue to believe in a Phrygian migrationfrom Europe to Asia Minor ca. 1200 B.C, the idea has been generally
> abandoned by Anatolian archaeologists. Maspero's Phrygian migration
> was widely accepted when excavations first showed that Hattusas, Alishar,
> and other Hittite sites were destroyed ca. 1200. Eventually, however, it
> became clear that at none of the Hittite was there any evidence for 
> newcomers after the destruction. As a result, by the 1960s Hittitologists
> were generally agreed that no "new people" had brought down the Hittite
> empire. The history of western Anatolia is less clear, but the evidence that
> has been advanced for a new population there is exiguous. A few shreds of
> ...


The Kingdom of Hayassa existed from 1500 to 1290 BC to the east of the Hittite Empire had very interesting kings and chiefs names, like Midas and Karranis, Midas was a common name in the royal house of Phrygia, and Karranis is comparable to Caranus, a legendary king of Macedonia.

----------


## Yetos

> That could happen, a J2-majority or another people shifting to an IE language somewhere in Anatolia or northern Balkans and then bringing it to the Aegean, but I still find it unlikely. That hypothesis wouldn't explain why IE languages always seem to have appeared in any European region when at least EHG (and mostly EHG+CHG) admixtures increase in relation to EEF. Also, Minoans still look very heavy in Neolithic EEF, which was certainly pre-IE. Besides, that wouldn't quite explain why Linear B could be identified as Greek (and it was used only by Mycenaeans), but Linear A used by Minoans could never be identified as Proto-Greek or even another similar IE language. And the fact that there was a non-IE language, Eteocretan, spoken after the demise of the Minoan civilization in Crete seems to suggest that it was a remnant substrate of an ancient linguistic landscape that was overrun by Greek dialects.


Ygor the p[roblem is not Linear A 
neither the 2 lost tablets of WW2

the problem is Kydoneans and eteo-Cretans,

If Kydoneians = Minoans then might be IE 
if Eteo-Cretans = Minoans then surely not IE
that is the problem from Homers time,

I mention in previous post in the thread

----------


## Yetos

> Is there any chance that the Phrygians didn't migrate from Europe? now I know that this is very controversial, I should start a thread discussing this some day, but for now, a quote from this book (The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe Ca. 1200 B.C.):
> 
> 
> The Kingdom of Hayassa existed from 1500 to 1290 BC to the east of the Hittite Empire had very interesting kings and chiefs names, like Midas and Karranis, Midas was a common name in the royal house of Phrygia, and Karranis is comparable to Caranus, a legendary king of Macedonia.


Alexander and Gordium
Brygians are the Mygdonians by history

----------


## Yetos

> Yetos, I read on Euripedia that Dorians brought R1b Z2103, which is the same DNA as mine http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplog...html#Anatolian
> 
> So it seems that I am Doric original after all....If DNA is the criteria of selection. So what do you think about this unaccepted turn of events.
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


what unaccepted? what criteria? what events? what Doric? 
First make up your mind what you are, and not what you would like to be.

----------


## IronSide

Sorry if I'm flooding the place with quotes, this is the last time I promise.

Honestly, I don't remember where I found this, I think it was Armenian perspectives, maybe




> And here rises another problem: who precisely lived in Hayasa-Azzi? In my opinion,the recent work of G.Jahukian on toponomastic data are of some value. He
> concludes that the population of this political unity was in all probability not
> homogenous but consisted instead of unidentified Anatolian, Thracian as well as
> Armenian ethnic elements. Furthermore, Jahoukian proposes that those IE stems of
> Armenian which were not borrowed directly from the original IE language must have
> from these languages of Hayasa-Azzi.to this argument we may add the
> name of Mita, ruler of Pahuwa, the Hayasean land, who is attested in the redated 
> Hittite text of the 15th century BC -- he bears the same name as the famous king of
> the Mushku-Phrygia.
> ...

----------


## Milan.M

> Is there any chance that the Phrygians didn't migrate from Europe? now I know that this is very controversial, I should start a thread discussing this some day, but for now, a quote from this book (The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe Ca. 1200 B.C.):
> 
> 
> The Kingdom of Hayassa existed from 1500 to 1290 BC to the east of the Hittite Empire had very interesting kings and chiefs names, like Midas and Karranis, Midas was a common name in the royal house of Phrygia, and Karranis is comparable to Caranus, a legendary king of Macedonia.


From where is this quote? 



> _Although many historians continue to believe in a Phrygian migrationfrom Europe to Asia Minor ca. 1200 B.C, the idea has been generally_
> _abandoned by Anatolian archaeologists. Maspero's Phrygian migration_
> _was widely accepted when excavations first showed that Hattusas, Alishar,_
> _and other Hittite sites were destroyed ca. 1200. Eventually, however, it_
> _became clear that at none of the Hittite was there any evidence for_ 
> _newcomers after the destruction. As a result, by the 1960s Hittitologists_
> _were generally agreed that no "new people" had brought down the Hittite_
> _empire. The history of western Anatolia is less clear, but the evidence that_
> _has been advanced for a new population there is exiguous. A few shreds of_
> ...


Based on Herodotus and Macedonians themselves the Phrygians were called Bryges while living in Europe (Macedonia) and later migrated in Anatolia.If one question such migration the entire geography of Troj and Trojan war should be questioned in my opinion,Mygdon of Phrygia migrated there shortly before Trojan war i think so,A part of the Phrygians are said to have been called after him Mygdonians,since we have Dardania in Europe,Dardanelles in Anatolia,Phrygians in Europe,Phrygians in Anatolia,Mysians in Anatolia,Moesians in Europe.

I doubt we can challenge written history.Maybe only genetic testing from different epochs can confirm this.

----------


## blevins13

> what unaccepted? what criteria? what events? what Doric? 
> First make up your mind what you are, and not what you would like to be.


Read Eupedia, first and let me know what you think, do you believe z2103 is Doric?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Milan.M

> Also, Minoans still look very heavy in Neolithic EEF, which was certainly pre-IE. Besides, that wouldn't quite explain why Linear B could be identified as Greek (and it was used only by Mycenaeans), but Linear A used by Minoans could never be identified as Proto-Greek or even another similar IE language. And the fact that there was a non-IE language, Eteocretan, spoken after the demise of the Minoan civilization in Crete seems to suggest that it was a remnant substrate of an ancient linguistic landscape that was overrun by Greek dialects.



In Crete in my opinion people of different origins lived,since it was trading center you could have find traders from "elsewhere",like in the island of Samothrace for example,which in myth is connected to Cadmus,man that brought alphabet to Greece,there lived Greeks,Thracians,Pelasgians,Phoenicans etc.
The Linear A is undeciphered yet i guess so.

----------


## Yetos

> Read Eupedia, first and let me know what you think, do you believe z2103 is Doric?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


your post and your game smells badly,

and I ask,
did you decide what you are and what you would like to be?

----------


## Dianatomia

> In Crete in my opinion people of different origins lived,since it was trading center you could have find traders from "elsewhere",like in the island of Samothrace for example,which in myth is connected to Cadmus,man that brought alphabet to Greece,there lived Greeks,Thracians,Pelasgians,Phoenicans etc.
> The Linear A is undeciphered yet i guess so.


The DNA of the remains suggests that Minoans were genetically similar to each other. They even were genetically quite similar to the Myceneans in the Southern mainland. This doesn't suggest a multicultural society.

----------


## Milan.M

> The DNA of the remains suggests that Minoans were genetically similar to each other. They even were genetically quite similar to the Myceneans in the Southern mainland. This doesn't suggest a multicultural society.


Here is some quotes of Greek authors;



> There is a land called Crete in the midst of the wine-blue sea,a beautiful and fertile land, seagirt; in it are manypeople, innumerable, and there are ninety cities.Language with language is mingled together. There are Akhaians,there are great-hearted Eteocretans, there are Kydones,and Dorians in their three clans, and noble Pelasgians





> Of them [the peoples in the above passage] Staphylos says that the Dorians occupy the region towards the east, the Kydones the western part, the Eteocretans the southern, whose town is Prasos, where the temple of Diktaian Zeus is; and that the Eteocretans and Kydones are probably indigenous, but the others incomers


Maybe even the kingdom of Candia doesn't existed a Venetian trading center on Crete in middle ages? that does not imply there wasn't any Greeks but ruling elite,the traders were Venetians,and in Minoan time we can know much less.
Entire Balkans is similar genetically a land much waste than island of Crete yet we are multicultural,Balkans always was multiculural if you are reffering to language.

----------


## blevins13

> your post and your game smells badly,
> 
> and I ask,
> did you decide what you are and what you would like to be?


Yetos why you turn it personal, it is no a matter of decision...., it is a simple question, your opinion is valuable since you know a lot about Greek history, as I said my DNA turn z2103 and I am asking you, do you think is Doric....? My nationality is Albanian in the process of becoming Us Citizens since you need this answer very badly. Ignore this post if it smells badly to you.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## IronSide

> From where is this quote? 
> 
> Based on Herodotus and Macedonians themselves the Phrygians were called Bryges while living in Europe (Macedonia) and later migrated in Anatolia.If one question such migration the entire geography of Troj and Trojan war should be questioned in my opinion,Mygdon of Phrygia migrated there shortly before Trojan war i think so,A part of the Phrygians are said to have been called after him Mygdonians,since we have Dardania in Europe,Dardanelles in Anatolia,Phrygians in Europe,Phrygians in Anatolia,Mysians in Anatolia,Moesians in Europe.
> 
> I doubt we can challenge written history.Maybe only genetic testing from different epochs can confirm this.


The quote is from this book *The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe Ca. 1200 B.C.
https://books.google.com.sa/books/ab...8C&redir_esc=y page 65
*
Couldn't all of these peoples migrated from Anatolia to Europe? * 




*

----------


## davef

> There is something I don't understand in the admixture analysis from the paper. Modern Greeks from Thessaloniki are shown as having 20% of red EHG, 20% of pink CHG, 59% of blue ENF and 1% of dark green Natufian, but they completely lack the purple admixture that makes up 35-100% of Neolithic Greeks, 15-30% of Minoans and 25-45% of Mycenaeans. It's also missing from other modern Greeks and Cypriots. What happened to that admixture? It couldn't simply have vanished like that. Is that because they didn't re-run those samples using the same K17 parameters? If so that would be highly unprofessional of them for a published peer-reviewed paper. If not, that raises a lot of questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also disagree with Lazaridis and al. when they say that "_Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry"_. Mycenaeans are much closer to the Minoans than to Modern Greeks. Modern Greeks have 3x more EHG (about 20%) than Mycenaeans (7%), but they also have WHG (3% according to D-stat). This suggests that numerous waves of European invaders (Dorians, Celts, Romans, Goths, Slavs) contributed to a large share of modern Greek DNA. Since obviously no invader to Greece were pure EHG, and none had more than 50% of EHG in average (30-35% might be more realistic as the Romans had comparatively low EHG), to increase from 7% to 20% of EHG, the percentage of post-Mycenaean DNA from European invaders must be comprised between 25% and 40%. Most of it will be blue ENF and pink CHG that won't be identifiable using these relatively simple admixtures. What we see is only the clear increase in EHG, which is only one third to half of the new invaders' DNA.
> 
> In other words modern Greeks are nothing like Mycenaean Greeks, and even less Minoan Greeks. Modern Greeks have much more European ancestry. Y-DNA alone suggests 40 to 45% of European lineages (as opposed to Near Eastern), and over 60% if we included E-V13 (E1b1b came from the Near East but E-V13 clearly emerged in Europe). Greeks possess lineages that are clearly Germanic (3.5% of I1, so about 10% of Germanic overall with I2a2-L801, R1b-U106 and R1a-L664), Slavic (11% of R1a, which is overwhelmingly M458 and CTS1211) and Italo-Celtic (about 7% of R1b-U152 and 1% of G2a-L497).


I think if you notice, the modern greek samples resemble Minoan Lashi more with a little extra Natufian for the cypriots and extra Steppe for the Coriels and the Thessalonikis. Does anyone else find this interesting? 

Note: I'm not flat out saying that modern Greeks have no Mycenaean ancestry. Let's keep this professional.

----------


## Ygorbr

> Here is some quotes of Greek authors;



Those Greek authors were speaking from the point of view of post-Minoan, post-Mycenaean Crete (Odysseus' narratives were most likely written in the late Dark Ages of Greece, transitioning toward Classical Greece). We know for sure that two of those foreign elements, Akhaians and Dorians, were IE tribes arrived from mainland Greece. Eteocretans, who were probably a minority in Classical times, were called "true Cretans", "original Cretans" or something like that, and I don't think that must be only a coincidence in that they weren't IE speakers and were named "true Cretans".

----------


## Milan.M

> Those Greek authors were speaking from the point of view of post-Minoan, post-Mycenaean Crete (Odysseus' narratives were most likely written in the late Dark Ages of Greece, transitioning toward Classical Greece). We know for sure that two of those foreign elements, Akhaians and Dorians, were IE tribes arrived from mainland Greece. Eteocretans, who were probably a minority in Classical times, were called "true Cretans", "original Cretans" or something like that, and I don't think that must be only a coincidence in that they weren't IE speakers and were named "true Cretans".


Yes it is post-Minoan authors and post-Mycenaean but if you read carefully you will notice Eteocretans and Kydones who are counted as original inhabitants and the Pelasgians elsewhere known as pre-Greeks that's all together three different "ethnicities" or communities.
The ancient authors did not care who was IE or not,they weren't linguists to give name accordingly,Eteocretans were named so because were the old inhabitants of Crete probably.
I am not arguing that Eteocretans or Minoans were IE or not.

Eteocretan language may not be related to Minoan after all



> The language, which is not understood, is probably a survival of a language spoken on Crete before the arrival of Greeks and may or may not be derived from the Minoan language preserved in the Linear A inscriptions of a millennium earlier. Since that language remains untranslated, it is not certain that Eteocretan and Minoan are related.

----------


## Milan.M

> The quote is from this book *The End of the Bronze Age: Changes in Warfare and the Catastrophe Ca. 1200 B.C.
> https://books.google.com.sa/books/ab...8C&redir_esc=y page 65
> *
> Couldn't all of these peoples migrated from Anatolia to Europe?


The written sources say otherwise but in my opinion they could if not all some of them,for example i think that Greek language came from there,maybe i am not right about that but i'm more inclined to think that way now.
That's interesting insight in that book.

----------


## IronSide

> The written sources say otherwise but in my opinion they could if not all some of them,for example i think that Greek language came from there,maybe i am not right about that but i'm more inclined to think that way now.
> That's interesting insight in that book.


They explain the written sources as:




> _The lack of_
> _archaelogical support for a Phrygian migration from Europe ca. 1200 is_
> _hardly surprising since, as noted previously, Maspero's thesis rested_
> _entirely on statements by two Greek authors of the fifth century. Analysis will_
> _show that the statements in question--one from Herodutos and one from_ 
> _the Lydiaka of Xanthus--have no value as evidence for Bronze Age history._ 
> *Contradicting the earlier Greek view that the Phrygians had "always"
> lived in Phrygia, the texts seem to have been occasioned by a late fifth-
> century* _controvercy_* about the identity of the legendary king Midas.*


I wonder where can we find this earlier Greek view? what sources?

----------


## Angela

If we should have learned anything in the last five or so years it's to take the ancient authors' stories with a big grain of salt. 

If we want to get a reasonable handle on population migrations in ancient history we have to combine ancient dna with archaeology, with some input from linguistics, but I think it's turning out that genetics will change linguistic analysis more than the other way around.

We should also have learned that admixture runs are very unreliable, if for no other reason than that with every K the clusters reform and new ones can even appear.

----------


## davef

> If we should have learned anything in the last five or so years it's to take the ancient authors' stories with a big grain of salt. 
> 
> If we want to get a reasonable handle on population migrations in ancient history we have to combine ancient dna with archaeology, with some input from linguistics, but I think it's turning out that genetics will change linguistic analysis more than the other way around.
> 
> We should also have learned that admixture runs are very unreliable, if for no other reason than that with every K the clusters reform and new ones can even appear.


Got it. I guess I shouldn't think too deeply about the admixture chart.

----------


## Cato

> I agree
> I have been stating that illyrians originate around noricum ( east austria ) and modern eastern slovenia for a long time.
> and yes these illyrians are part of celtic Halstatt 
> I never heard of the dorians in Dalmatia, but always wanted to know who the illyrians pushed south as they moved south from noricum


More precisely an Illyrian tribe that later, perhaps, mixed with the Dorians came, maybe, from Dalmatia or Illyria in general...a migration from the North-West (of Greece) in the Sub-Mycanean period was detected even by the famous anthropologist J.L. Angel in _Skeletal material from Attica_




> And increase in European Alpine, Dinaric-Mediterranean, and Nordic-Iranian types over their frequencies in Late Helladic III suggests that the amazing Submycenaean type diversity obvious in Plates XLVII to L is a result of the arrival of invaders. 105 (note:Probably from the north and northwest judging by the Iron Age crania from Illyria and Classical Macedonians from Olynthus. Cf. 1. L. Angel, in D. M. Robinson, Necrolynthia, Table IV.) Except for too definite an Iranian element the new tendencies in Attica approximate the Alpine and Dinaric (-Nordic) combination which present material suggests as typical of the Dorians, though such a combinationw as probably typical of many North or West Greek and Illyrian-speaking peoples at this time.

----------


## blevins13

> It has been suggested that Dorians were partly mixed with the Illyrians. The Dorian tribe of the Hylleis in particular may was an Illyrian tribe related to the Hylloi of central Dalmatia. Illyrians in turn mixed the Hallstatt folks from the north. If this was true then it can explain in part why Post-Mycenaeans Greeks were more "Northerners"
> 
> The Dorian homeland was likely located in Epirus, a region that bordered with Illyria
> Attachment 9013


Cato chi e l'autore di questo studio....perche non vedo il nome.....


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## davef

To whoever neg rated me: relax! :) I did warn that I wasn't stating that modern Greeks don't have Mycenaean ancestry. I just wanted someone to clear up the confusion behind the chart.

----------


## Yetos

> They explain the written sources as:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder where can we find this earlier Greek view? what sources?


Makedonians consider Phrygians as their brothers
and mygdonians the Phrygians that left behind,

that is what history writes,

expecting more from geneticks

----------


## Yetos

> More precisely an Illyrian tribe that later, perhaps, mixed with the Dorians came, maybe, from Dalmatia or Illyria in general...a migration from the North-West (of Greece) in the Sub-Mycanean period was detected even by the famous anthropologist J.L. Angel in _Skeletal material from Attica_


That is the problem,

The archaiological found suggest that Myceneans, Not the dorians descent from Vucedol

But the geneticks show oposite,

----------


## ΠΑΝΑΞ

> Oh no, I meant by the Hellenic age from the coming of the proto-Hellenes (Myceneans?), I didn't mean the period after Alexander.


I suppose you meant "Helladic" instead of "Hellenistic"
We have "Helladic" for the continent, as well "Cycladic" for the Aegean and "Minoan" for Crete.
So, we have for example at early Bronze Age the early Helladic, early Cycladic, etc, as also Middle and Late with subdivisions to each one (i) (ii) (iii) and on.




> I should be more careful the next time.


Next time be more carefull. I almost was ready to downrate you... You test my generosity this time.  :Grin:

----------


## ΠΑΝΑΞ

> Relatively high.
> 
> High steppe in modern Greeks *compared to* what Mycenaean peasants had. Modern Greeks have way more of steppe ancestry than Mycenaean commoners. Look at the PCA graph. *Mycenaeans cluster with Sicilians*, not with mainland Greeks - who are ca. 1/4 more shifted in the direction of Russians.
> 
> Why did you remove my satirical picture (Greek Nationalist's Dilemma)?:


How much fun...  :Laughing: 


But the true is that is not what "modern Greeks" bother about. I think they mostly have pride for their language mostly.
An other think is the "slavic"genetic imput as mentioned, it profited us and not damaged us. 
It is interesting to see how other people (barbarians, Lol) consider about the Greeks.


Hey it;s a catchy thread and running wild... Nice conversation guys, I wish to have more time, thanks.

----------


## Dianatomia

> More precisely an Illyrian tribe that later, perhaps, mixed with the Dorians came, maybe, from Dalmatia or Illyria in general...a migration from the North-West (of Greece) in the Sub-Mycanean period was detected even by the famous anthropologist J.L. Angel in _Skeletal material from Attica_


There are plenty of indications that Greece was being settled by other tribes from the North even in the Mycenean era and the Greek Dark Ages. This is what the authors of this research also have mentioned in the first place. It's just that some people wanted to baptize Mycenean Greeks as the Ancient (i.e Classical) Greeks in general. Surely the two were related. But there certainly may have been some differences.

----------


## Dianatomia

> Relatively high.
> 
> High steppe in modern Greeks *compared to* what Mycenaean peasants had. Modern Greeks have way more of steppe ancestry than Mycenaean commoners. Look at the PCA graph. *Mycenaeans cluster with Sicilians*, not with mainland Greeks - who are ca. 1/4 more shifted in the direction of Russians.
> 
> Why did you remove my satirical picture (Greek Nationalist's Dilemma)?:


There is no dilemma in the Greek mindset. Where the Slavs in any way aristocrats in Medieval Greek society? Certainly not. The ones who settled lands of modern Greece were Hellenized, Christianized and thus absorbed into the Greek cultural mainframe. What makes you think that it would have been any different for possible earlier steppe related invasions in Greece? 

I can't imagine that this is an issue for the Greek nationalists as you say. Rather, it is an issue for Nordicist who insist that aristocracy in Greece somehow was Nordic, while all the evidence points to the opposite. Don't get me wrong. I can certainly imagine that steppe related invaders were rougher, and could have been more war-like etc. But they were certainly not more refined and baptized as aristocrats just for the sake of it. Some invasions could have been peaceful, some less so. But at the end of the day, they accepted the superior indigenous culture and were soon absorbed. Creating a slightly new blend with a little bit more steppe related admixture. All the rest is a delusion.

----------


## Sile

> More precisely an Illyrian tribe that later, perhaps, mixed with the Dorians came, maybe, from Dalmatia or Illyria in general...a migration from the North-West (of Greece) in the Sub-Mycanean period was detected even by the famous anthropologist J.L. Angel in _Skeletal material from Attica_


I do not see it that way..............if you want to favour the scenario you present then one must agree also that vucedol culture was proto-illyrian as some have suggested, but consensus states that the origin of illyrians is basically noricum and as far south as istria. 
this leaves the question of who lived in modern croatia and bosnia in the bronze-age.
To me the illyrian push going south reaching macedonia by the time of Phillip II would indicate that the illyrians could not have been direct neighbours of the macedonians before 400BC as they would have clashed earlier................note: no illyrian joined Phillip or alexander's armies 
The push going south ( beginning in the bronze-age could only have happened due to celtic pushing of illyrians in noricum ( which is why we see Halstatt as a celtic-illyrian mix ), the illyrian who where not absorbed into celtic society where moving south and must have pushed someone south of them. A scenario could be that these where dorians...............who in turn entered mycenean greece .
Vucedol culture is the key .............was it proto-illyrian, proto-dorian or neither 
This is my theory

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

> Read Eupedia, first and let me know what you think, do you believe z2103 is Doric?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


I will answer. It isn't.

----------


## Angela

> Z2103 is yet as it was, in the steppes, so it can't be trusted the IE expansion to it. Instead R1a is relied to EHG (all IE samples have it much or less) and they are related to the demuc expansion in Asia, the Indo-Iranian one. I see that Greek -polis is the same as Indic -pur. Both branches share a lot of cultural cases... where it's possible to look at the first IE cities? in Arkhaim


Do you actually believe this stuff?

----------


## Cato

> Cato chi e l'autore di questo studio....perche non vedo il nome.....
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


from this book

http://ita.calameo.com/read/000150262f61a760a117a

I don't know if it's completely reliable, i don't know him but what he wrote seems plausible




> I do not see it that way..............if you want to favour the scenario you present then one must agree also that vucedol culture was proto-illyrian as some have suggested, but consensus states that the origin of illyrians is basically noricum and as far south as istria. 
> this leaves the question of who lived in modern croatia and bosnia in the bronze-age.
> To me the illyrian push going south reaching macedonia by the time of Phillip II would indicate that the illyrians could not have been direct neighbours of the macedonians before 400BC as they would have clashed earlier................note: no illyrian joined Phillip or alexander's armies 
> The push going south ( beginning in the bronze-age could only have happened due to celtic pushing of illyrians in noricum ( which is why we see Halstatt as a celtic-illyrian mix ), the illyrian who where not absorbed into celtic society where moving south and must have pushed someone south of them. A scenario could be that these where dorians...............who in turn entered mycenean greece .
> Vucedol culture is the key .............was it proto-illyrian, proto-dorian or neither 
> This is my theory


I don't know much about _Yugoslavian_ archaeology but i believe that when Hallstatt Illyrians settled south encountered other Illyrians (may we can call them Southern Illyrians) maybe driving them south in Epirus where they intermingled with Dorians ?? (who knows)...i doubt that there were Greek tribes there in the north at that time.




> There are plenty of indications that Greece was being settled by other tribes from the North even in the Mycenean era and the Greek Dark Ages. This is what the authors of this research also have mentioned in the first place. It's just that some people wanted to baptize Mycenean Greeks as the Ancient (i.e Classical) Greeks in general. Surely the two were related. But there certainly may have been some differences.


Every barbarian European wanted to live in Mycenaean Greece, it was the California of the times

----------


## PaschalisB

Since everyone talks about Dorians, I believe they brought E-S2979 into Greece judging from the subclade's distribution (mainly in southern Greece as well as Albania, the Balkans and Central Europe)

----------


## Diomedes

The Greek way, that is to say the Greek civilization was the greatest in that area. It comes to me as a surprise to believe that some people reckon that a foreigner who was hellenized would keep the old, yet barbaric ways.

----------


## Angela

One analogy might be the Goths in Italy. They weren't large enough as a group, imo, for them to have much impact on the genetics, but they had even less impact on the culture. Instead, they adopted not only the culture of the inhabitants in many areas, but even adopted their language, eventually discarding their own Germanic one. The Lombards probably had more effect, but even they dropped their language.

This is a very recent review of the Gothic presence in Italy. I don't present it to de-rail the discussion into a discussion of Italy, but as an example of the kind of processes which are possible when a numerically and culturally "simpler" group invades a long settled and advanced culture:

https://www.academia.edu/25092699/Go...gothic_Kingdom

"Even those who hold that Goths lived largely among each other in regionalclusters, monopolized the military, and maintained their own cultural andpolitical identity still recognize that Gothic and Roman societies were in theprocess of merging in Italy. The mixed marriages of Brandila and Proculaand Patza and Regina have already been mentioned.������������ Various inscriptions andpapyri also attest to other unions between partners with barbarian and Romannames.������������ Certain individuals seem to have been known by both Roman andGothic names, and there are instances of parents with Gothic names givingtheir children Roman ones.������������ Classical learning was adopted by some of theGothic elite. Gothic geographers are attested in the
 Ravenna Cosmography
.������������Theoderic’s nephew Theodahad was versed in Latin literature, Platonic phi-losophy, and ecclesiastical writings, and the king’s daughter Amalasuentha was ������������uent in Greek, Latin, and Gothic, and sought to provide her son Athalaric with a similar Roman education.������������ "

People have to stop expecting every migration to be like that of Corded Ware to northern Europe.

----------


## Yetos

> How much fun... 
> 
> 
> But the true is that is not what "modern Greeks" bother about. I think they mostly have pride for their language mostly.
> An other think is the "slavic"genetic imput as mentioned, it profited us and not damaged us. 
> It is interesting to see how other people (barbarians, Lol) consider about the Greeks.
> 
> 
> Hey it;s a catchy thread and running wild... Nice conversation guys, I wish to have more time, thanks.



I like that dilemma
*
But instead of only Slavs should say also Romans Aromani Arbanites Thracians 
*so the creator must rewrite correct all the add-mixtures,

some people are proud for nothing

----------


## berun

> Do you actually believe this stuff?


Of course, just quoting Pokorny:




> B. pel “castle” in O.Ind. pū́ r, gen. purás “castle, town, city”, pura- n., newer puri-, purī ds.,
> compare Singapur “Löwenstadt”, Gk. (Eol.) πόλις “castle, town, city, Staat” (*peli-s), Hom.
> Cypr. πτόλις ds., Lith. pilìs, Ltv. pile “castle, Schloß” (see Schwyzer, Gk. 1, 325, 344,
> Specht KZ 59, 65f., 11 f., Trautmann 217).


from the same root Latin plenus and English full. The common meaning for 'town' is shared so once proto-Indoiranians and proto-Greeks dwelt in the same cities.

----------


## Sakattack

IMO the key is to define where the Mycenaeans came from. 

Can't be that one Greek group came one way and an other one (name it Dorians etc) came from somewhere else. Can't happen. 

These groups should have lived in very very close proximity and popped out from the same civ, before entering Greece. Imagine at some point, even genetically, they should have been identical (with a normal variation between same groups). 

If not Bronze Age, then only some centuries earlier.

So if the case is Balkans, then all these suppositions (Dorians from the "North" Mycenaeans from Vucedol etc etc) may turned out true. 

If the case is Anatolia/S. Armenia, we have to think elsewhere. 

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

----------


## blevins13

> I will answer. It isn't.


Is there a logical reasoning behind your answer....I would like to understand your point of view.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Jovialis

> For those interested in phenotypic data:
> 
> The actual snp data is on page 59 of the Supplement.
> https://images.nature.com/full/natur...re23310-s1.pdf
> 
> Attachment 8993
> 
> "Present-day Europeans are almost fixed for the derived (light pigmentation) allele G atrs1426654, but the ancestral allele occurred in western European hunter-gatherers3,4. Werecord no copy of the ancestral allele in 9 individuals with at least one sequence. We alsoexamined the rs16891982 SNP in SLC45A2, the second strongest signal of selection inEuropeans discovered in a genome-wide scan3. The overall frequency of the C allele could beestimated as 24% (C.I.: 8-47%) in the Aegean Bronze Age. The frequency of the minor Callele in present-day Greeks is 14% (95% C.I.: 11-17%)5. The C allele has decreased infrequency in eastern Europe6 or Europe in general3 due to likely selection since the BronzeAge, but with the available data, the Bronze Age frequency is consistent with its modernprevalence."
> 
> ...




This app is actually really interesting.

----------


## davef

> This app is actually really interesting.


OMG lmao I never even heard of this app, I'm so trying this!!!

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

> Is there a logical reasoning behind your answer....I would like to understand your point of view.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum


There isn't any logical reasoning behind the point of view that it is Dorian. You consider facts things an internet persona writes on Eupedia. Present your arguments.

----------


## blevins13

> There isn't any logical reasoning behind the point of view that it is Dorian. You consider facts things an internet persona writes on Eupedia. Present your arguments.


If you read my previous posts, I stated that this is an hypothesis....presented by Maciamo. I just wanted to consider the opposing arguments for this hypothesis since i have a vested interest on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Milan.M

In my opinion so called Dorian invasion came from within Greece,you don't really need to look very north and imagine Nordic origin or Central European origin of the invaders,they most probably "invaded" from the region of Doris just north of Mycenae,Peloponesus.They replaced the old ruling elite and made themselves new masters,maybe similar like the Macedonians later.

----------


## Cato

i'm of the same opinion, Dorians were just northern Greeks, originally, probably from Epirus. There are some chances that they absorbed a bit of Illyrian blood which could explain why classical Greeks where - probably - more northeners than Mycenaeans...other Northern genes came with the Slavs and so you have modern Greeks

----------


## bicicleur

> In my opinion so called Dorian invasion came from within Greece,you don't really need to look very north and imagine Nordic origin or Central European origin of the invaders,they most probably "invaded" from the region of Doris just north of Mycenae,Peloponesus.They replaced the old ruling elite and made themselves new masters,maybe similar like the Macedonians later.


afaik they spoke a similar language
is that correct?

----------


## Dov

> Z2103 is yet as it was, in the steppes, so it can't be trusted the IE expansion to it. Instead R1a is relied to EHG (all IE samples have it much or less) and they are related to the demuc expansion in Asia, the Indo-Iranian one. I see that Greek -polis is the same as Indic -pur. Both branches share a lot of cultural cases... where it's possible to look at the first IE cities? in Arkhaim


Without touching haplogroups, you raised an interesting discussion.
It has long been known that similar bits and meander patterns were found in Sintashta-Andronovo and Mycenae. Also noticeable traces of horse breeding in Mycenaeus, which characteristic in general for the Indo-Iranians. Perhaps bits and meander came to Mycenae not from Sintashta, but from the Babyno culture (Multi-cordoned ware), which is possible associated with proto-greeks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-...d_ware_culture

Also Arkaim is not considered a city in the classical sense, because there was no stratification of the population. But nevertheless, the polis theme of Indo-Iranians and Greeks finds parallels. As well as their mythology. Starting from centaurs / gandhavers to cerberus / carbaras.

----------


## Jovialis

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5003663/





This one shows where the ancient Iranian, and Armenian populations are.

----------


## Angela

> afaik they spoke a similar language
> is that correct?


Yes, that's right. It's just one of the ancient Greek dialects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_dialects

What we see in Anatolia is the movement of Greek speakers from different parts of Greece. We can see the same thing in what they called "Magna Graecia" or Greater Greece, by which I think they meant "expanded Greece". 



The following, as to the "Doric migration", is obviously speculative. 





The only thing that will settle the questions is ancient dna, imo.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> You answered your own question in the previous post, of which I agreed with. There is no modern population that has the same admixture rates as Minoans. Also, there is no WHG or Natufian in Minoans, so that point is moot. *Minoans are however ancestral to some modern populations, for example Modern Greeks.*


Help me wrap my head around this.
First there is no modern population close to Minoans, the closest are 4 Jewish groups, and even they are far.
Then "some modern populations" are ancestral according to you, for example Greeks, yet they don't appear in the calculators at all, at least for the two Minoan samples in the preceding posts.

Am I missing something?
I mean, I am not contesting it. If anyone would be related ancestrally to Minoans it would have to be Greeks, or people from around that region. But I do not see evidence to back it up?

In the calculators I have seen Southern Italians (off memory I believe one of them was Palermo Trapani, could be misremembering) on MTA fall the closest to Minoans, from the results some Italian members have shared in this forum. Would be revealing if some of the Greek members ran calculators to see this hypothesis tested.

I ran mine for and Log 4 was the closest followed by Log 2, the other samples were quite far away. The results are in this thread.

----------


## Jovialis

> Help me wrap my head around this.
> First there is no modern population close to Minoans, the closest are 4 Jewish groups, and even they are far.
> Then "some modern populations" are ancestral according to you, for example Greeks, yet they don't appear in the calculators at all, at least for the two Minoan samples in the preceding posts.
> 
> Am I missing something?
> I mean, I am not contesting it. If anyone would be related ancestrally to Minoans it would have to be Greeks, or people from around that region. But I do not see evidence to back it up?
> 
> In the calculators I have seen Southern Italians (off memory I believe one of them was Palermo Trapani, could be misremembering) on MTA fall the closest to Minoans, from the results some Italian members have shared in this forum. Would be revealing if some of the Greek members ran calculators to see this hypothesis tested.
> 
> I ran mine for and Log 4 was the closest followed by Log 2, the other samples were quite far away. The results are in this thread.


The "Greek" sample in Dodecad doesn't account for all Greeks. The sample set is limited, and doesn't represent all modern populations. There are in fact Greeks that are closer to Minoans than these Jews:

​


Frankly, it is a bit odd to insist that these African Jewish populations are close to Minoans when:


A: the study dismisses African and Levantine admixture in Minoans. Which are elements that distinguish these Jews from Minoans.


B: Their autosomal admixture is very different as I have shown in previous posts.


C: These calculators are not estimating IBD. This is just measuring how far the algorithm places them on the PCA plot. Which is why it requires mental gymnastics to understand that it doesn't make sense.

Also, Southern Italians are closer to Mycenaeans, not Minoans.

----------


## Ailchu

> The "Greek" sample in Dodecad doesn't account for all Greeks. The sample set is limited, and doesn't represent all modern populations. There are in fact Greeks that are closer to Minoans than these Jews:
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> Frankly, it is a bit odd to insist that these African Jewish populations are close to Minoans when:
> 
> 
> A: the study dismisses African and Levantine admixture in Minoans. Which are elements that distinguish these Jews from Minoans.
> ...



A: that isn't needed for similarity

B: as you can see from the distances they are all far away. 

C: that is a point. the paper of this thread has a graphic with fst distances for Minoan samples. there modern greeks are closest, followed by italians and then levant.

----------


## Jovialis

> A: that isn't needed for similarity
> 
> B: as you can see from the distances they are all far away. 
> 
> C: that is a point. the paper of this thread has a graphic with fst distances for Minoan samples. *there modern greeks are closest*, followed by italians and then levant.


Do you have a reading comprehension problem? That is what I have been saying.

Also check your attitude, because you are one step away from being thrown out of here. This is your final warning.

----------


## Palermo Trapani

> Help me wrap my head around this.
> First there is no modern population close to Minoans, the closest are 4 Jewish groups, and even they are far.
> Then "some modern populations" are ancestral according to you, for example Greeks, yet they don't appear in the calculators at all, at least for the two Minoan samples in the preceding posts.
> 
> Am I missing something?
> I mean, I am not contesting it. If anyone would be related ancestrally to Minoans it would have to be Greeks, or people from around that region. But I do not see evidence to back it up?
> 
> In the calculators I have seen Southern Italians (off memory I believe one of them was Palermo Trapani, could be misremembering) on MTA fall the closest to Minoans, from the results some Italian members have shared in this forum. Would be revealing if some of the Greek members ran calculators to see this hypothesis tested.
> 
> I ran mine for and Log 4 was the closest followed by Log 2, the other samples were quite far away. The results are in this thread.


ArchetypeOne: As Jovialis noted, people whose ancestors are 100% South of Lazio (Southern Italian mainland and Sicily) are generally closer to Mycenaean Greeks. This is true for me which while is anecdotal evidence, I think my results are in line with what the extant research has shown and other folks here whose ancestors are from Campania, Calabria, Puglia, Basilicata and Sicily. Here are 4 calculators where I used my NAT GENO DNA, which is supposed to be capture ancient DNA history if I remember correctly (they shut down DNA sample collections). While there are differences across the 4 Calculators, all of them are consistent with me being closer to Mycenaeans vs. Minoans.

Dodecad K7

Distance to:
PalermoTrapani_NATGENO

3.58104733
Mycenaean:I9041

5.59454198
Mycenaean:I9033

6.94345735
Mycenaean:I9006

11.52864259
Mycenaean:I9010

13.83789363
Minoan_Lasithi:I0071

14.23595799
Minoan_Odigitria:I9130

15.19697009
Minoan_Lasithi:I0074

16.87355623
Minoan_Odigitria:I9127

16.88117591
Minoan_Odigitria:I9129

16.98849905
Minoan_Lasithi:I0073

18.23899668
Minoan_Lasithi:I9005

19.00771685
Minoan_Lasithi:I0070

19.94972180
Minoan_Odigitria:I9131

20.09297638
Minoan_Odigitria:I9128



Dodecad Global 13 

Distance to:
PalermoTrapani_NATGENO

8.22581303
Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Galatas_Apatheia_Peloponnese_ :I9041

9.21547611
Bronze_Age_Armenoi_Crete_:I9123

11.49940868
Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Peristeria_Tryfilia_Peloponne se_:I9033

11.93504085
Log02

14.02505258
Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Galatas_Apatheia_Peloponnese_ :I9010

15.49826765
Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Agia_Kyriaki_Salamis_:I9006

15.84660216
Bronze_Age_Harmanören-Göndürle_Höyük_Isparta_Province_:I2495

17.75115489
Kou03

18.12690818
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_Lasithi_ Crete_:I0071

18.26382490
Kou01

18.74373495
Pta08

18.88493315
Bronze_Age_Harmanören-Göndürle_Höyük_Isparta_Province_:I2499

18.91741261
Mik15

19.35323746
Log04

20.47262074
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_Lasithi_ Crete_:I0074

20.99498035
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_Crete_: I9130

21.18151317
Bronze_Age_Harmanören-Göndürle_Höyük_Isparta_Province_:I2683

21.91315587
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_Crete_: I9128

22.07728924
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_Crete_: I9131

22.21065285
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_Lasithi_ Crete_:I9005

22.25308518
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_Lasithi_ Crete_:I0073

22.90734380
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_Crete_: I9129

23.12924988
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_Lasithi_ Crete_:I0070

23.15987478
Greece_Neolithic_Diros_Alepotrypa_Cave_:I2937

27.74930990
Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_Crete_: I9127



Dodecad K12

Distance to:
PalermoTrapani_NATGENO

11.04334641
I9123_Bronze_Age_Armenoi_Crete

11.72534434
I9010_Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Galatas_Apatheia_Pelopo nnese

11.93793952
I9041_Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Galatas_Apatheia_Pelopo nnese

12.58136320
MBA_Helladic_Logkas:Log02

13.41464871
I9033_Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Peristeria_Tryfilia_Pel oponnese

18.20228008
I9006_Bronze_Age_Mycenaean_Agia_Kyriaki_Salamis

18.23089137
I9005_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Hagios_Charalambos_Cave_La sithi_Crete

18.37221544
EBA_Helladic_Manika:Mik15

19.10626599
I9131_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_C rete

19.20580641
MBA_Helladic_Logkas:Log04

20.25517712
EBA_Cyclade_Koufanisi:Kou03

20.34000246
EBA_Minoan_Petras:Pta08

20.88118771
I9130_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_C rete

20.90179657
I9129_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_C rete

21.67007845
EBA_Cyclade_Koufanisi:Kou01

26.98719511
I9128_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_C rete

31.95776431
I9127_Bronze_Age_Minoan_Moni_Odigitria_Heraklion_C rete



Eurogenes K13

Distance to:
PalermoTrapani_NATGENO

9.54838730
I9041_Greece_Mycenaean_3250_ybp

10.18505768
I9033_Mycenaean_1352_bc_M_

11.29046058
Greece_MBA_Log02

14.31854741
EBA:Greece_EBA_Kou03

14.34987108
I9010_Mycenaean_1351_bc_

14.91310162
I9006_Greece_Mycenaean_3287_ybp

15.93369700
I9005_Greece_Minoan_Lassithi_4000_ybp

19.95983216
Greece_MBA_Log04

20.14409839
I0071_Greece_Minoan_Lassithi_4000_ybp

20.54011441
I0070_Greece_Minoan_Lassithi_4000_ybp

20.97182157
Greece_MBA_Mik15

21.20804093
I2499_Anatolia_EBA_4604_ybp

21.23122465
EBA:Greece_EBA_Kou01

21.26966384
Greece_EBA_Pta08

22.38982581
I2495_Anatolia_EBA_4377_ybp

23.13734643
I0074_Greece_Minoan_Lassithi_4000_ybp

24.05961554
I0073_Greece_Minoan_Lassithi_4000_ybp

25.74974369
I2937_Greece_Peloponnese_N_7359_ybp

----------


## Archetype0ne

Thanks for sharing the results Palermo. It seems I remembered you correctly. Just mixed up Myceneans with Minoans. My bad.

Jovialis you answered all my questions. Agree with all of the points.
Just want to make clear I am not insisting that these "African Jewish populations are close to Minoans". Was more of an observation on the calculators, whom as you recall we both criticized earlier in the thread for the same reason you pointed out in the graphical posts. I really don't know why my post is being interpreted that way. Just wanted to make sure there is no misunderstanding.

Alichu thanks for pointing out I forgot about that graphic of the paper. The thread is quite old. Must have confused it with some other thread I have been active in recently.

PS: Palermo, it still blows my mind your genetic distance to those Myceneans given the timeframe, everytime I see your calculator results. Truly astounding. I do not even have that close of a distance on most calculators using 1 way calculation to my own modern reference people (IIRC).

----------


## Archetype0ne



----------


## Palermo Trapani

> Thanks for sharing the results Palermo. It seems I remembered you correctly. Just mixed up Myceneans with Minoans. My bad.
> 
> Jovialis you answered all my questions. Agree with all of the points.
> Just want to make clear I am not insisting that these "African Jewish populations are close to Minoans". Was more of an observation on the calculators, whom as you recall we both criticized earlier in the thread for the same reason you pointed out in the graphical posts. I really don't know why my post is being interpreted that way. Just wanted to make sure there is no misunderstanding.
> 
> Alichu thanks for pointing out I forgot about that graphic of the paper. The thread is quite old. Must have confused it with some other thread I have been active in recently.
> 
> PS: Palermo, it still blows my mind your genetic distance to those Myceneans given the timeframe, everytime I see your calculator results. Truly astounding. I do not even have that close of a distance on most calculators using 1 way calculation to my own modern reference people (IIRC).


ArchetypeOne: Your welcome. Those calculators are all in agreement with my MTA results as well. I get deep dive matches for I9041 (Mycenean, 83% closer than matching users), Minoan I0073 (78% closer than matching users), I9006 (Mycenean, 69% closer than other matching users), I0071 (Minoan, 46% closer to other matching users), I0005 (Minoan, 32% closer), , I0074 (Minoan, 23% closer) and I0070 (Minoan, 9% closer). The MTA results below use a combined Ancestry/23Me file which Gedmatch allows you to to. Unfortunately, I can't run my NATGENO through MTA due to formatting of the data that I saved from their site.

Some of those new ancient Greek samples are now at MTA, I get some deep dives with them as well:

Early Helladic Manika Euboa Island Greece, 2827 BC (MIK_wgs) 72% closer than other matching users.

Ancient Petras SIteias Crete, 2735 BC, Pta_08wgs 71% closer.

Early Helladic Manika Euboae Island Greece, 2827 BC MIK_wgs_trimp5bp, 25% closer

With respect to these last 3 samples, I am not sure what the difference is between the 2 MIK_wgs. Did one sample not make it to the paper due to quality control?

----------


## Archetype0ne

@ Jovialis. I got an answer looking at the paper. What is your interpretation of this, since the country lines/modern populations are not demarkated.



2 Things I take away are:

1. Even North Italians and Albanians seem to be related to a) Myceneans and b) Lasinthi Minoans as much as mainland Greeks, however less than Greek Islanders / Sicilians.

2. Albanians seem to be related to Minoan Odigritia as much as Peloponnese Greeks. Both groups more than Greek Islanders (Marginally more than Crete, substantially more than Cyprus).

Want your thoughts on this analysis. Might be a good checkup for any color blindness I might have.

For better resolution. Even I am not too sure of the colors.







Notice Canary Islands. LOL

----------


## Jovialis

> @ Jovialis. I got an answer looking at the paper. What is your interpretation of this, since the country lines/modern populations are not demarkated.
> 
> 
> 
> 2 Things I take away are:
> 
> 1. Even North Italians and Albanians seem to be related to a) Myceneans and b) Lasinthi Minoans as much as mainland Greeks, however less than Greek Islanders / Sicilians.
> 
> 2. Albanians seem to be related to Minoan Odigritia as much as Peloponnese Greeks. Both groups more than Greek Islanders (Marginally more than Crete, substantially more than Cyprus).
> ...


There's a lot of discussion on this graphic earlier in the thread. Their affinity has to do with overlapping source populations; i.e. levels of Anatolian_N and CHG. There are also issues with that graphic too, notice the south Italian sample is blue, yet we know there is a relatively high affinity compared to the others that are redder.

----------


## Jovialis

^^Another aspect of the graphic that doesn't make sense is the fact that is shows that Anatolian_BA is closer to Northern Italian, than South Italian. Which is completely backwards, according to Raveane et al 2018.

----------


## Archetype0ne

Okay so now either or. Either this proves there is genetic continuity between Greeks and Myceneans and Minoans. Or it is just an overlap of Anatolian_N and CHG. Can not really have it both ways.






> The "Greek" sample in Dodecad doesn't account for all Greeks. The sample set is limited, and doesn't represent all modern populations. There are in fact Greeks that are closer to Minoans than these Jews:
> 
> 
> C: These calculators are not estimating IBD. This is just measuring how far the algorithm places them on the PCA plot. Which is why it requires mental gymnastics to understand that it doesn't make sense.





> Minoans are however ancestral to some modern populations, for example Modern Greeks.



Knowing the Y DNA of my Maternal Grandfather was found in Heraklion Crete 4.9-3.9 kya, I have my own opinions. But lets be honest here. Some things are mutually exclusive. 

I would go on a rant that it is hard to just find pure bred (100%) Anatolian_N and CHG and just somehow go through the generational permutations to create a false positive, false positives mind you for populations that are historically known to have had population movements as well as trade connections. That's a rabbit hole I am not willing to go down on.






> There are also issues with that graphic too, notice the south Italian sample is blue, yet we know there is a relatively high affinity compared to the others that are redder.





> ^^Another aspect of the graphic that doesn't make sense is the fact that is shows that Anatolian_BA is closer to Northern Italian, than South Italian. Which is completely backwards, according to Raveane et al 2018.




Alas. there are three populations in South Italy, two around Palermo, one gulf of Taranto. Two of them have more affinity with these ancient populations than North Italians.

Nevertheless, I am not here to defend these guys 
I am sure peer reviewers did that.

----------


## Jovialis

> Okay so now either or. Either this proves there is genetic continuity between Greeks and Myceneans and Minoans. Or it is just an overlap of Anatolian_N and CHG. Can not really have it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


WTF are you even talking about? I have it both ways? I just told you there was problems with the graphic. North Italians are not closer to Anatolian_BA than South Italians. Nor are they closer to Myceneans, and Minoans than south Italians. I AM NOT THE ONE USING THIS GRAPHIC TO PROVE ANYTHING!

----------


## Jovialis

Why don't you read the study, instead of having me explain it to you? That is not what I am here for.

----------


## Jovialis

> WTF are you even talking about? I have it both ways? I just told you there was problems with the graphic. North Italians are not closer to Anatolian_BA than South Italians. Nor are they closer to Myceneans, and Minoans than south Italians. I AM NOT THE ONE USING THIS GRAPHIC TO PROVE ANYTHING!


Listen to the lecture video part with Lazaridis, he explains the issue with that graphic. FST is affected by genetic drift.

----------


## Ailchu

> Do you have a reading comprehension problem? That is what I have been saying.
> 
> Also check your attitude, because you are one step away from being thrown out of here. This is your final warning.


and my point was that the numbers from Dodecad can make sense and that the simple fact that jewish people have a different autosomal composition doesn't negate this, because every modern population has a different autosomal composition too. if there is Natufian or not doesn't matter if you don't also look at the exotic admixtures in the other populations.

i mentioned the Fst graphics to support your point not to attack you. but of course, it's not proof that the numbers of Dodecad make no sense. you question the Fst values yourself. Drift probably has a strong effect especially in jewish populations.

----------


## Ralphie Boy

> Nevertheless, I am not here to defend these guys 
> I am sure peer reviewers did that.


Are you implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial.

----------


## ihype02

Ok, I wanted to add that most of Mycenean-like DNA in Peloponnese comes from Classical Greeks themselves because there was never any substantial alternation in the population of Peloponesse with some people very similar to old Greeks genetically.

But for places like Macedonia it's different because Thracians were very numerous there.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> Are you implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial.


The what now? Where did you get such a wild idea?
The paper is in line with exactly what I am saying... Just look at the graphics. I am not the one saying 10 + world renowned geneticist don't have a clue and made mistakes in their graphics.

Please re read my posts, and when you find me "Implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial." quote it in your reply.

Else stop slandering me ad hominem, and start looking at my arguments here.

----------


## Jovialis

> The what now? Where did you get such a wild idea?
> The paper is in line with exactly what I am saying... Just look at the graphics. I am not the one saying 10 + world renowned geneticist don't have a clue and made mistakes in their graphics.
> Please re read my posts, and when you find me "Implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial." quote it in your reply.
> Else stop slandering me ad hominem, and start looking at my arguments here.


There is no mistake, it is because of genetic drift. Which is why you can really compare ancient to modern populations solely with FST, and not cross examine with other tools, and disciplines. Please see the lecture video, as the main author clarifies why the graphic is as such.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> There is no mistake, it is because of genetic drift. Which is why you can really compare ancient to modern populations solely with FST, and not cross examine with other tools, and disciplines. Please see the lecture video, as the main author clarifies why the graphic is as such.


Could you provide a timestamp, lack 2+ hours right now. Will watch the whole thing later.

Did they discuss the Canary Islands? Or North Italians and Albanians for that matter?

----------


## Jovialis

@ 1: 27 : 00 around that time.

----------


## Ralphie Boy

> The what now? Where did you get such a wild idea?
> The paper is in line with exactly what I am saying... Just look at the graphics. I am not the one saying 10 + world renowned geneticist don't have a clue and made mistakes in their graphics.
> 
> Please re read my posts, and when you find me "Implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial." quote it in your reply.
> 
> Else stop slandering me ad hominem, and start looking at my arguments here.


Sorry, but if I want to libel/slander you I would make a direct accusation, not ask a question. I would have also said “is” conspiratorial instead of “sounds.” It’s not my intention. Peer reviewers are supposed to ensure published papers meet scientific standards, not defend them regardless of accuracy or veracity, which is how I interpreted the statement.

Eurogenes has a new post about Greek/Aegean continuity, saying though it probably exists it has not been proven thus far, or something like that. Technically that may be correct, because we don’t have samples from key post-Mycenaean eras, or we have few, like Empuries. But we can still question hypotheses, such as Anatolia Neolithic ancestry in modern Greeks is a result of other similar people completely replacing ancient Greeks. That would be quite a feat, if true.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> @ 1: 27 : 00 around that time.


Thanks.

So: "*Genetic drift... I do not think there is anything particularly weird going on with South Italy.*" Lazaridis 1:30:00

1:25-1:26:30 Was particularly revealing. Since he describes what we can and can't deduce using these specific methods in correlation with an appropriate sample size. And also how genetic samples differ from other samples.

----------


## Jovialis

^^No problem

----------


## Archetype0ne

> Sorry, but if I want to libel/slander you I would make a direct accusation, not ask a question. I would have also said “is” conspiratorial instead of “sounds.” It’s not my intention. Peer reviewers are supposed to ensure published papers meet scientific standards, not defend them regardless of accuracy or veracity, which is how I interpreted the statement.
> 
> Eurogenes has a new post about Greek/Aegean continuity, saying though it probably exists it has not been proven thus far, or something like that. Technically that may be correct, because we don’t have samples from key post-Mycenaean eras, or we have few, like Empuries. But we can still question hypotheses, such as Anatolia Neolithic ancestry in modern Greeks is a result of other similar people completely replacing ancient Greeks. That would be quite a feat, if true.


Indeed, it seems like a misunderstanding from both our sides. I was neither defending nor criticizing the researchers, combined they probably have longer CVs in the field than all my posts in this thread. Hence I am not qualified to cast criticism on their methods, of which I have superficial understanding. I was simply interpreting their data, which reading the paper is 100% in line with what I said in my posts. Hence why I thought you were slandering me, saying that I am some conspiracy theorists accusing them of bias. Sure I could criticize them on something if I was properly trained in the field and knew what I was talking about, but I guarantee that if you read my posts at no point I did.

Yeah the Eurogenes development is interesting.




> yes
> i now saw that would be cool 
> 
>  A said...Is this the Greek paper you mentioned a while ago, or is there another one coming out?
> May 14, 2021 at 4:19 AM
> 
>  Davidski said...*There's at least one more paper coming soon about Greece or the Balkans and Greece, with samples from the Iron Age, Classical period, Middle Ages, etc*.
> 
> 
> ...



PS: 




> *Eurogenes has a new post about Greek/Aegean continuity, saying though it probably exists it has not been proven thus far, or something like that.* Technically that may be correct, because we don’t have samples from key post-Mycenaean eras, or we have few, like Empuries. But we can still question hypotheses, such as Anatolia Neolithic ancestry in modern Greeks is a result of other similar people completely replacing ancient Greeks. That would be quite a feat, if true.


That was indeed my point some posts ago. And if we can take the current data to prove genetic continuity for Greeks to these samples, a big if till we get more samples and publications, then we would have to clump Sicilians, North Italians(?) and Albanians in that group as well. Else that would be the bias I was being accused of.

----------


## Constantine

> Sorry, but if I want to libel/slander you I would make a direct accusation, not ask a question. I would have also said “is” conspiratorial instead of “sounds.” It’s not my intention. Peer reviewers are supposed to ensure published papers meet scientific standards, not defend them regardless of accuracy or veracity, which is how I interpreted the statement.
> 
> Eurogenes has a new post about Greek/Aegean continuity, saying though it probably exists it has not been proven thus far, or something like that. Technically that may be correct, because we don’t have samples from key post-Mycenaean eras, or we have few, like Empuries. But we can still question hypotheses, such as Anatolia Neolithic ancestry in modern Greeks is a result of other similar people completely replacing ancient Greeks. That would be quite a feat, if true.


He's just grasping at straws since the "Slavic Theory house of cards" is crumbling.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> He's just grasping at straws since the "Slavic Theory house of cards" is crumbling.


Now I am interested. What is this Slavic Theory?  :Embarassed:

----------


## Constantine

> Now I am interested. What is this Slavic Theory?


You know what it is, and it's almost dead. Back in the grave with Fallmerayer.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> You know what it is, and it's almost dead. Back in the grave with Fallmerayer.


I tried googling, the only thing I found was "https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2020/11/slavic-like-medieval-germans.html"... That cant be it given we are talking about Minoans and Myceneans. To lazy to go over thousands of comments just to find out some theory that as you say seems to be the butt of a joke.

Edit: Nvm, searched fallmerayer and I think I got what's up.  :Confused: 

Edit2: After checking this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...-900-AD)/page2 ... I would not say its almost dead. It was never alive to begin with.

----------


## Palermo Trapani

> Now I am interested. What is this Slavic Theory?


Well My take on the "Slavic Theory" is that it is a Slavic version of the Nordicist or WASP theory regarding the two great civilizations of European Antiquity, Greece and Rome. It is just hard,, its a hard, its harrrrrrd (to borrow from Joan Baez's version of A Hard Rain's -Gonna Fall") for some folks to have those civilizations being Southern Europeans, whose ancestry is predominantly Anatolian EEF and Not Steppe Herder.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> Well My take on the "Slavic Theory" is that it is a Slavic version of the Nordicist or WASP theory regarding the two great civilizations of European Antiquity, Greece and Rome. It is just hard,, its a hard, its harrrrrrd (to borrow from Joan Baez's version of A Hard Rain's -Gonna Fall") for some folks to have those civilizations being Southern Europeans, whose ancestry is predominantly Anatolian EEF and Not Steppe Herder.


Since I ran out of upvotes. Yeah it makes sense. Having tried to watch genetic history videos on youtube I get fremdschämen reading some comments or even analyze my own posts and attitude from years ago. And it is not even just limited to Slavs, Nordicists etc, feel you can find such nuts on any tree. Bit hard to see it from people who clearly know their ways around the Y Tree and Autosomal genetics, that always felt weird. At least I could blame my younger self on ignorance.

----------


## real expert

> Well My take on the "Slavic Theory" is that it is a Slavic version of the Nordicist or WASP theory regarding the two great civilizations of European Antiquity, Greece and Rome. It is just hard,, its a hard, its harrrrrrd (to borrow from Joan Baez's version of A Hard Rain's -Gonna Fall") for some folks to have those civilizations being Southern Europeans, whose ancestry is predominantly Anatolian EEF and Not Steppe Herder.


To be honest, in school, at least in my case, we were taught that ancient Greeks or Romans were Southern European. Therefore, I think Nordicism is an internet phenomenon or more present in the USA. Plus, Italy is still exporting lots of great things all over the world and has a pretty strong industry.

----------


## Jovialis

I think the Fallmerayer theory is actually equally offensive to Slavs. Because it implies that the _"glorious ancestry"_ Ancient Greek, was supplanted by the _"inferior ancestry"_, Slavs. Which Nazis would use to rationalize why Greece is not as prominent as it was in antiquity. It is actually Slavophobic, which is ironic for a pro-slav to employ it.




> Fallmerayer's theory was popular as part of the Nazi propaganda in Axis occupied Greece (1941–1944) during World War II, when classically educated Nazi officers used it as an excuse to commit numerous atrocities against the Greek population.[61]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakob_Philipp_Fallmerayer

----------


## Jovialis

> To be honest, in school, at least in my case, we were taught that ancient Greeks or Romans were Southern European. Therefore, I think Nordicism is an internet phenomenon or more present in the USA. Plus, Italy is still exporting lots of great things all over the world and has a pretty strong industry.


It is true that most regular people, not involved in pop gen, already assume that the Greeks and Romans are southern Europeans, which genetics proves is true. They know better than some of these self-appointed expert-hobbyists, who pollute their minds with propaganda.

----------


## ihype02

> He's just grasping at straws since the "Slavic Theory house of cards" is crumbling.


The impact of Slavs seem to be higher now than it was back in 2017.
For example many of us assumed a northern shift in Peloponnese after the Bronze Age collapse, that likely did not happen considering the Empuries sample.
Second many of us assumed the impact of say northern neighbors like Thracians, but 2 different samples prove that they were not that northern either.
And third many of us assumed that Slavs were Polish-like yet there are rumours that they were Serb or even Romanian-like (not to say those rumours are correct).

So yes this nearly complete replacement Fallmerayer theory is out of question, but let's not ignore what is REALLY happening here.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> *[1]The impact of Slavs seem to be higher now than it was back in 2017*.
> For example many of us assumed a northern shift in Peloponnese after the Bronze Age collapse, that likely did not happen considering the Empuries sample.
> Second many of us assumed the impact of say northern neighbors like Thracians, but 2 different samples prove that they were not that northern either.
> *[2]And third many of us assumed that Slavs were Polish-like yet there are rumours that they were Serb or even Romanian-like (not to say those rumours are correct).*
> 
> So yes this nearly complete replacement Fallmerayer theory is out of question, but let's not ignore *[3]what is REALLY happening here*.


1. Why?
2. Any evidence to support such rumors, personally I have seen none. But its not like I was looking.
3. What is really happening?

----------


## ihype02

> 1. Why?
> 2. Any evidence to support such rumors, personally I have seen none. But its not like I was looking.
> 3. What is really happening?


1.)
You asked why for something that I answered above in what you quoted me.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> 1.)
> You asked why for something that I answered above in what you quoted me.


Tbh I don't get it. So because Thracians, and Illyrians might not have been "that" northern shifted as compared to Slavo Baltic populations, or genetically polar opposites of these Aegean ancient peoples, in a region like the Balkans where God knows how many migrations have happened in the last 3-4k years, it means that the theory that Slavs were the cause of it in modern Greeks? Is that how I am to interpret the quote you said answered my question ? It was a genuine question, cause I did not see the quote of you as an answer. But whatever.

Edit: Seeing what you think is an answer for my 1), I lost interest in 2), and 3).

----------


## Ralphie Boy

> Indeed, it seems like a misunderstanding from both our sides. I was neither defending nor criticizing the researchers, combined they probably have longer CVs in the field than all my posts in this thread. Hence I am not qualified to cast criticism on their methods, of which I have superficial understanding. I was simply interpreting their data, which reading the paper is 100% in line with what I said in my posts. Hence why I thought you were slandering me, saying that I am some conspiracy theorists accusing them of bias. Sure I could criticize them on something if I was properly trained in the field and knew what I was talking about, but I guarantee that if you read my posts at no point I did.
> 
> Yeah the Eurogenes development is interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: 
> 
> ...


It’s very interesting with Albanians, who have substantial EEF/Anatolia Neolithic ancestry and appear indigenous going back to ancient times. Ancient Greek historians said the Hellenes grew large and powerful due to absorption of different non-Hellenic peoples. These peoples, including earlier Greeks, may still form a significant part of modern south Balkan ancestry. Greeks were very populous in the region. Something has to account for the relatively high Anatolia Neolithic input.

----------


## Jovialis

Davidiski:




> (2017) I can't wait for more ancient DNA from Greece and Italy, especially from the Bronze and Iron Ages. Based on my experiences with many Greeks and Italians, it's sure to be a big eye opener for them, and a *beautiful thing*...
> 
> (2021) To me this suggests that most present-day Greeks harbor significant levels of Slavic ancestry and some sort of recent Cypriot-related ancestry, and in large part they're only coincidentally similar to ancient Aegeans, including those from the MBA (labeled Greece_Helladic_MBA in my graphs).


TBH, This seems like bias to me.

A beautiful thing? That's a bizarre thing to say.

----------


## Constantine

> The impact of Slavs seem to be higher now than it was back in 2017.
> For example many of us assumed a northern shift in Peloponnese after the Bronze Age collapse, that likely did not happen considering the Empuries sample.
> Second many of us assumed the impact of say northern neighbors like Thracians, but 2 different samples prove that they were not that northern either.
> And third many of us assumed that Slavs were Polish-like yet there are rumours that they were Serb or even Romanian-like (not to say those rumours are correct).
> 
> So yes this nearly complete replacement Fallmerayer theory is out of question, but let's not ignore what is REALLY happening here.


Many people on these types of forums keep lauding the Empuries samples as some sort of Gold Standard for "Greekness." I believe these colonists came from Phocaea--which was in Asia Minor for crying out loud. Not to mention the fact the this city had already fallen under Persian rule; not to mention the fact that the native Iberian-type people were already Mycenaean-like.

Many of these anthro-nerds are very quick to label any Greek outside modern Greece as "Hellenized" yet in pretty much the same breath will cite the Empuries. Somehow, given the above, only these "pure ancient Greeks" survived trip and settlement across almost the entire Med unmolested LOL

The northern influence is western, not eastern Balkan (not to say that there was no contact with Thracians). Even today the eastern side of the Balkans is more Med than the western.

And rumors don't count for anything.

----------


## Jovialis

SO this is the "beautiful thing" according to Davidiski? Because of his _experiences_ with Greeks?



It is a beautiful thing to try prove a theory that Nazis used as an excuse to kill people in Greece?

----------


## blevins13

> SO this is the "beautiful thing" according to Davidiski? Because of his _experiences_ with Greeks?
> 
> 
> 
> It is a beautiful thing to try prove a theory that Nazis used as an excuse to kill people in Greece?


This seems logical considering history sources.
Let’s leave the Nazis out of this discussion. Triggering emotions does not help rational discussions.

Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Jovialis

> This seems logical considering history sources.
> Let’s leave the Nazis out of this discussion. Triggering emotions does not help rational discussions.
> 
> Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum


That's funny, because you are defending a person that seemingly _wants_ this to be the case, because of his "experience". In spite of what academic studies say, including the one this thread is based on. That sounds emotive to me. That doesn't sound rational or unbias, actually.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> It’s very interesting with Albanians, who have substantial EEF/Anatolia Neolithic ancestry and appear indigenous going back to ancient times. Ancient Greek historians said the Hellenes grew large and powerful due to absorption of different non-Hellenic peoples. These peoples, including earlier Greeks, may still form a significant part of modern south Balkan ancestry. Greeks were very populous in the region. Something has to account for the relatively high Anatolia Neolithic input.


Thing is Albanians and Greeks are on a genetic continuum. Neither one or the other have substantially more EEF/Anatolian Neolithic admixture, in fact Greeks have slightly more.






You can check most studies providing PCAs, autosomal admixtures, or even amateur PCAs some Greek members on Anthrogenica are kind enough to provide, I personally was overlapping with some members.

----------


## blevins13

> That's funny, because you are defending a person that seemingly _wants_ this to be the case, because of his "experience". In spite of what academic studies say, including the one this thread is based on. That sounds emotive to me. That doesn't sound rational or unbias, actually.


I am not defending this person, I am say that what he said seems rational considering the history of the region. If you say that sllav migration left no trace in the modern Greeks that will be un logical, and why that happened. To prove him wrong samples will be needed from Mycenaean till Modern Greece. Leave Nazis out of this.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Jovialis

> I am not defending this person, I am say that what he said seems rational considering the history of the region. If you say that sllav migration left no trace in the modern Greeks that will be un logical. To prove him wrong samples will be needed from Mycenaean till Modern Greece. Leave Nazis out of this.
> 
> 
> Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum


He is not saying they left no trace, he is saying they are heavily Slavic, combined with recent-Cypriots, which is preposterous.


Why? It is a theory promoted by them, so I think it is salient to the conversation. The Fallmerayer theory was promoted by Nazis to abuse Greeks for apparent Slavic admixture, it is a fact.


It wasn't just Greeks, but other Slavs and Slav-mixed people in the Balkans were brutally murdered by Nazis, because they were considered sub-human.

----------


## Jovialis

> I am not defending this person, I am say that what he said seems rational considering the history of the region. If you say that sllav migration left no trace in the modern Greeks that will be un logical, and why that happened. *To prove him wrong samples* will be needed from Mycenaean till Modern Greece. Leave Nazis out of this.
> 
> 
> Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum


_To prove him wrong_, who is he? God?

I trust more in what the actual papers say.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> Are you implying that peer reviewers are biased toward the Greek continuity theory and Lazaridis et al, in opposition to ethical and scientific principles? That sounds conspiratorial.


PS: It is funny people upvoted (+2) the quoted comment. When I wasn't implying anything really. Cause Lazaridis conclusion as I said already many times, agrees with my interpretation of the data, the issue was I saw the comments in this thread and only the supplements, not reading the verbatim agreement, and getting in arguments due to some highly nuanced comments.

If you put one egg in the basket, put them all.


*Courtesy of Johane earlier in the thread.

----------


## Philjames100

> The Fallmerayer theory was promoted by Nazis to abuse Greeks for apparent Slavic admixture, it is a fact.


So if the 'Fallmerayer theory' turned out to be correct, would that justify Nazi actions? No, obviously not, so it's irrelevant.

----------


## blevins13

> _To prove him wrong_, who is he? God?
> 
> I trust more in what the actual papers say.


He laid down a statement (an hypothesis), to prove that wrong, studies of the Greek population from Mycenaean to modern are needed. You said it yourself in other post “can compare modern with ancient”. You have to see what happened in between.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## bicicleur 2

whatever, it's better to leave Nazi's out of the discussion, let's stick to the facts

----------


## Jovialis

> So if the 'Fallmerayer theory' turned out to be correct, would that justify Nazi actions? No, obviously not, so it's irrelevant.


It is relevant when a man who dislikes Greeks uses sophistry to "prove it".

----------


## blevins13

> He is not saying they left no trace, he is saying they are heavily Slavic, combined with recent-Cypriots, which is preposterous.
> 
> 
> Why? It is a theory promoted by them, so I think it is salient to the conversation. The Fallmerayer theory was promoted by Nazis to abuse Greeks for apparent Slavic admixture, it is a fact.
> 
> 
> It wasn't just Greeks, but other Slavs and Slav-mixed people in the Balkans were brutally murdered by Nazis, because they were considered sub-human.


The mix of Nazis and genetic is explosive. People have different reason for defending or promoting a certain idea. It’s is more productive to focus on the idea true or wrong, than on the reasons. Depending what is considered heavy, I will expected high in lowlands and low in the mountains, as in Albania.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Archetype0ne

I think we might have gone off track, this thread feels a bit like facebook, youtube comments at this point.

I think this thread needs a clean up for the last couple of comments. 
Jovialis you can even start with this one.
Then we all can pick were we left off, discussing genetics.

----------


## blevins13

> I think we might have gone off track, this thread feels a bit like facebook, youtube comments at this point.
> 
> I think this thread needs a clean up for the last couple of comments. 
> Jovialis you can even start with this one.
> Then we all can pick were we left off, discussing genetics.


I agree 


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Jovialis

We are not off track.

We are discussing the eurogenes opinion of the formation of modern Greeks, that matches the Fallmerayer theory. If it makes people uncomfortable and triggered that Nazis believed it too, well I don't care. This is supposedly a beautiful thing according to Davidiski.

----------


## kingjohn

https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/...gifts.html?m=1

----------


## Archetype0ne

> 


I am not uncomfortable at all. My mind is open. Even a broken clock can be right twice a day.
So which part of the Davidski post do you disagree with? 

I haven't even read the Nazi propagandas or the author from the 1800s they were supporting since I do not need more propaganda in my life. If Lazaridis says that Greeks along with Albanians, Cypriots and Italians are closest to these ancient populations, I take the data, use my brain and come to the same conclusion.

But now tell me beside the fact you think Nazis argued what Davidski is, what point of the quoted statement you posed you disagree with and why?

Lazaridis argues there is Mycenean component.
History tells us there were population swaps between Anatolia (Ottoman Empire) and Greece.
We have historical sources for the Slavic migrations to the area.

I am trying to wrap my head around which part of that statement is incorrect?

----------


## Archetype0ne

> https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/...gifts.html?m=1


"That's a very optimistic view. In fact, there's no evidence whatsoever in the paper that there's even 1% genetic continuity between present-day Greeks and any ancient Greek population, let alone the MBA northern Aegeans." - Davidski

That's some serious delusion. Not even 1%? LMAO. I wonder why he is so salty at Greeks. The name of the post too," beware of Greeks bearing gifts"  :Laughing:  :Laughing:  :Laughing:  . That is cringe.
The very paper of this post proves some continuity.
Then this paper "The genomic history of the Aegean palatial civilizations" https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...92867421003706 proves continuity, which he even quoted.
Don't know what to say.

----------


## Jovialis

> I am not uncomfortable at all. My mind is open. Even a broken clock can be right twice a day.
> So which part of the Davidski post do you disagree with? 
> 
> I haven't even read the Nazi propagandas or the author from the 1800s they were supporting since I do not need more propaganda in my life. If Lazaridis says that Greeks along with Albanians, Cypriots and Italians are closest to these ancient populations, I take the data, use my brain and come to the same conclusion.
> 
> But now tell me beside the fact you think Nazis argued what Davidski is, what point of the quoted statement you posed you disagree with and why?
> 
> Lazaridis argues there is Mycenean component.
> History tells us there were population swaps between Anatolia (Ottoman Empire) and Greece.
> ...


Why do the academic studies support continuity, with only some dilution than? There is no doubt some admixture from Slavs. But to suggest that the authors are wrong, many of whom are not Greek (so you can't claim bias there), is frankly pathetic. Also, which Greeks are we talking about? There is no doubt more Slavic admixture in the north, but _all_ modernGreeks? Furthermore, I'd like to see those historical sources.

----------


## Jovialis

> "That's a very optimistic view. In fact, there's no evidence whatsoever in the paper that there's even 1% genetic continuity between present-day Greeks and any ancient Greek population, let alone the MBA northern Aegeans." - Davidski
> 
> That's some serious delusion. Not even 1%? LMAO. I wonder why he is so salty at Greeks. The name of the post too," beware of Greeks bearing gifts"  . That is cringe.
> The very paper of this post proves some continuity.
> Then this paper "The genomic history of the Aegean palatial civilizations" https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...92867421003706 proves continuity, which he even quoted.
> Don't know what to say.


See what I mean now?

----------


## Jovialis

> That's some serious delusion. Not even 1%? LMAO. I wonder why he is so salty at Greeks. The name of the post too," beware of Greeks bearing gifts"  .



_Davidski wrote in (2017) "I can't wait for more ancient DNA from Greece and Italy, especially from the Bronze and Iron Ages. Based on my experiences with many Greeks and Italians, it's sure to be a big eye opener for them, and a_ *beautiful thing..."

*What ever his experiences are, I don't think he means it in a good way. Which is why I think he is being bias. This is a man who questions even 1% of continuity, as if the Ancient Greeks were all kidnapped by aliens, and the entire country was re-populated by Slavs and recent-Cypriots.

He doesn't even consider the fact that maybe they don't line-up on the PCA, could be due partly to genetic drift. We have seen from the Iceland paper, that a population can markedly change from it's founder populations, without any admixture events, overtime.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> Why do the academic studies support continuity, with only some dilution than? There is no doubt some admixture from Slavs. But to suggest that the authors are wrong, many of whom are not Greek (so you can't claim bias there), is frankly pathetic. Also, which Greeks are we talking about? There is no doubt more Slavic admixture in the north, but _all_ modernGreeks? Furthermore, I'd like to see those historical sources.


Yo, Jovialis. I asked you about the quote. The quote didn't even mention continuity. I am not defending Davidski here. As you should know by now we kind of are backing the same horse(hypothesis) here.

The quote stated Myceneans + Anatolians/Levant imigrants + Slavs.
And it all checks out.
As for the 0 genetic continuity from his other quotes, you can see my response to that in the previous post, aka :facepalm: .



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popula...ece_and_Turkey



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic...to_the_Balkans

Let me know if you want more sources.

PS: 1.22 Million "Orthodox Greeks" came from Anatolia in a single exchange as close to today as 1922. The 400 000 "Turkish Muslims" were mostly Albanians. You do the math 1.2/5.3mln how much dilution that is.

----------


## Jovialis

> Yo, Jovialis. I asked you about the quote. The quote didn't even mention continuity. I am not defending Davidski here. As you should know by now we kind of are backing the same horse(hypothesis) here.
> 
> The quote stated Myceneans + Anatolians/Levant imigrants + Slavs.
> And it all checks out.
> As for the 0 genetic continuity from his other quotes, you can see my response to that in the previous post, aka :facepalm: .
> 
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popula...ece_and_Turkey
> ...


No, I was addressing that point, this study (Lazaridis et al. 2017) determines this:

_Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry. Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations.

_We know from other places in the world, that just because these invasions and population movements happen, it doesn't mean there is a significant change to the population. For example, the Lombards did not leave much of a genetic impact on Northern Italy.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> No, I was addressing that point, this study (Lazaridis et al. 2017) determines this:
> 
> _Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry. Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations.
> 
> _We know from other places in the world, that just because these invasions and population movements happen, it doesn't mean there is a significant change to the population. For example, the Lombards did not leave much of a genetic impact on Northern Italy.


Then I guess we are in agreement. Not that it matters when 2 papers now confirm what we both are saying.



https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/...ure23310_0.pdf

 "Present-day Greeks - who also carry Steppe-related ancestry - share ~90% of their ancestry with MBA northern Aegeans, suggesting continuity between the two time periods."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867421003706

See we can discuss these things without brining up Nazi's and their propaganda. And also future readers of the thread wont be confused and agitated by emotional appeals.
Who really cares what some "anthropologist" in the 1800s said, or what Hitler used as propaganda to murder people.
This way we separate the wheat from the chaff.

----------


## kingjohn

Jovialis 
Can you explain to me his (davidski)
Motives u know he admire the steppe propganda and we were great r1a and all...
But how does it connect to modern greeks 
They do have some slavic admixture and part
Of there steppe should be partly from slavic migrations... 
Remember that davidski is polish ( west slav by himself) 
So how is he connected to fallmerayer propaganda

----------


## Jovialis

> Then I guess we are in agreement. Not that it matters when 2 papers now confirm what we both are saying.
> 
> 
> 
> https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/...ure23310_0.pdf
> 
>  "Present-day Greeks - who also carry Steppe-related ancestry - share ~90% of their ancestry with MBA northern Aegeans, suggesting continuity between the two time periods."
> 
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867421003706
> ...


Pardon me, but there are no _emotional appeals_ when pointing out that there are bias analysis from people like Eurogenes. I find the last part of your post condescending.

We have actually been over this topic before in this thread, btw. It just needed to be clamped down on again.

----------


## Jovialis

The only emotional appeals I see are people that cry about subjects that make them uncomfortable, begging to change the topic.

Just so people here don't think I am picking on the poor little German Nazis, there were plenty of Italians that murdered Slavs in the Balkans as well. Not a proud history!



_An emaciated male inmate suffering from severe malnutrition at the Italian Rab concentration camp on the island of Rab in what is now Croatia. This camp largely detained Slavs._

----------


## Jovialis

Now we can get back on topic.

----------


## blevins13

> "That's a very optimistic view. In fact, there's no evidence whatsoever in the paper that there's even 1% genetic continuity between present-day Greeks and any ancient Greek population, let alone the MBA northern Aegeans." - Davidski
> 
> That's some serious delusion. Not even 1%? LMAO. I wonder why he is so salty at Greeks. The name of the post too," beware of Greeks bearing gifts"  . That is cringe.
> The very paper of this post proves some continuity.
> Then this paper "The genomic history of the Aegean palatial civilizations" https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...92867421003706 proves continuity, which he even quoted.
> Don't know what to say.


I don’t really see anything wrong in what he says:

Last paragraph:

Obviously, it's fair enough to assume that there's been some genetic continuity in the Aegean from the Iron Age, Bronze Age, and even the Copper Age and Neolithic era to the present-day. But the point I'm making is that no one has yet proved this, or even attempted to measure it properly.




Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Çerç

Greek continuity from the BA cannot be evaluated properly with the crumbs of data that has been made available so far. Data from IA to the Late Middle Ages is completely lacking. We only have a limited amount of BA samples, and modern samples from Greece (very few used in studies for some reason).

The Antonio et al paper on Rome showed how modern results overlapping with IA or BA ones are not necessarily indicative of the former being descendant of the latter, as modern samples there overlap with IA and Republic-era results, but the intermediate periods show significant south-eastern and then north-western shifts. The authors attributed this to migrants from the East Mediterranean first, and from Central Europe later (which was not well-taken here I remember). So the overlap between IA and modern samples was at least partially coincidental. If we had from Rome, only the amount of data we have from Greece, many would now be speaking about genetic continuity from the Iron Age to today.

So far, it can only be said that modern Greeks are among the European peoples who plot near samples from BA Greece. This hints, at the very least, to shared ancestry between modern Greeks and those samples, but this could be due to either modern Greeks descending of those BA populations, or of other populations that had similar ancestry components, or (more likely) both. But it does not prove either possibility. Just like in Rome, it may be that the modern and BA similarity has a more complex explanation.

There are already small hints that favor a similar scenario in mainland Greece, while the islands may have been largely unaffected. We now know that Steppe-related ancestry arrived to the Aegean during MBA, as it is missing from earlier periods. Therefore, new samples from MBA mainland Greece likely represent some of the most Steppe-like prehistoric populations of the region, and such ancestry was almost certainly subsequently diluted through admixture with non-Steppe peoples of the Aegean. In fact, Mycenean samples of the Late Bronze Age already show diminished Steppe-related ancestry, and this trend probably continued through the IA and into Antiquity. So if the latest study showed that modern mainland Greeks can be modeled as the heavily Steppe MBA samples with some additional Steppe ancestry, it is probable that a larger Steppe-related component is required to model them with IA or Classical period Ancient Greeks, which would suggest important influxes from the north in subsequent periods.

----------


## ihype02

> Many people on these types of forums keep lauding the Empuries samples as some sort of Gold Standard for "Greekness." I believe these colonists came from Phocaea--which was in Asia Minor for crying out loud. Not to mention the fact the this city had already fallen under Persian rule; not to mention the fact that the native Iberian-type people were already Mycenaean-like.
> Many of these anthro-nerds are very quick to label any Greek outside modern Greece as "Hellenized" yet in pretty much the same breath will cite the Empuries. Somehow, given the above, only these "pure ancient Greeks" survived trip and settlement across almost the entire Med unmolested LOL
> The northern influence is western, not eastern Balkan (not to say that there was no contact with Thracians). Even today the eastern side of the Balkans is more Med than the western.
> And rumors don't count for anything.


You can make excuses but nothing progressive to prove your case has ever been found since 2017. Maybe you are right but still but there is no evidence yet.
Iberians were not at all Mycenaean-like even Bronze Age Sicilian were not LOL.
I don't think Anatolian or Iberian admixture would help Classical Greeks come closer to Mycenaeans (assuming they were different) but that is just me. 
If those Empuries samples were more northern shifted they would be the Gold Standart for you.

----------


## lacreme

> Yo, Jovialis. I asked you about the quote. The quote didn't even mention continuity. I am not defending Davidski here. As you should know by now we kind of are backing the same horse(hypothesis) here.
> 
> The quote stated Myceneans + *Anatolians/Levant imigrants* + Slavs.
> And it all checks out.
> As for the 0 genetic continuity from his other quotes, you can see my response to that in the previous post, aka :facepalm: .
> 
> 
> 
> *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popula...ece_and_Turkey*
> ...


Do you know if by Anatolian migrants he means ancient/pre-turkic conquest Anatolians or the migrants of the population exchange ? 
If he means the latter... Probably he doesn't know that the majority of Western Anatolian/Ionian Greeks that were exchanged in 1923 descent from people from all over the Greek speaking world ( mostly from the Aegean Islands and the southern half of the mainland ) that poured there after the 17th century...

----------


## iluvatar

> Do you know if by Anatolian migrants he means ancient/pre-turkic conquest Anatolians or the migrants of the population exchange ? 
> If he means the latter... Probably he doesn't know that the majority of Western Anatolian/Ionian Greeks that were exchanged in 1923 descent from people from all over the Greek speaking world ( mostly from the Aegean Islands and the southern half of the mainland ) that poured there after the 17th century...


The discussion is about classical Greek samples, some of which cluster with Cypriots.

----------


## Leopoldo Leone

> The discussion is about classical Greek samples, some of which cluster with Cypriots.


I think we can say "some of which cluster with Cypriots" if and only if some do after the paper has been published. 
For now they are just a rumours for a guy who hasn't shown himself to be trustworthy.

----------


## ihype02

> I think we can say "some of which cluster with Cypriots" if and only if some do after the paper has been published. 
> For now they are just a rumours for a guy who hasn't shown himself to be trustworthy.


There were some Anatolians in Classical Greece, Herodotus himself was half Carian. Depends on which place, for example Classical Age Epirus probably had pratically no post-Bronze Age Anatolian ancestry, while many Aegean Islands did.
Were those Anatolians outliers? If not where they limited to only some regions? Which regions? How populous were those regions? In most eastern shifted regions of Classical Greece were those Anatolian-like profiles 50% or 10%? So many questions. I don't think those can be solved. This is why I dislike heterogenous results.

----------


## Jovialis

> I do not need more propaganda in my life.


People should start by not reading Eurogenes.

----------


## lacreme

> The discussion is about classical Greek samples, some of which cluster with Cypriots.


So, using bronze age and some possibly classical antiquity samples with little to no Steppe and then adding a late antiquity/early middle ages NE population like Slavs to suck up all the excess "Steppe" in modern Greek populations ? 
I don't doubt that they were important contributors to the genetic makeup of Greeks (and Albanians ) but with so few samples and the, as I understand, inherent difficulty of separating Steppe sources wouldn't it be better to wait at least until the official publication of the upcoming papers ?

----------


## Jovialis

The "Levantine" canard that anthrogenica/eurogenes that is pushing falls flat against reality. The Sarno et al. 2017 paper that they use even verifies what I have been saying,

"we identify _traces_ of Post-Neolithic Levantine- and Caucasus-related ancestries (Sarno et al. 2017)"

This is not the +20% garbage some bad actor have been peddling.

----------


## Pax Augusta

> There were some Anatolians in Classical Greece, Herodotus himself was half Carian. Depends on which place, for example Classical Age Epirus probably had pratically no post-Bronze Age Anatolian ancestry, while many Aegean Islands did.
> Were those Anatolians outliers? If not where they limited to only some regions? Which regions? How populous were those regions? In most eastern shifted regions of Classical Greece were those Anatolian-like profiles 50% or 10%? So many questions. I don't think those can be solved. This is why I dislike heterogenous results.


That's exactly the point. 


It should be noted that Herodotus was considered Greek in his own right. But people with his mixed profile were not at all uncommon in the Greek world. 


Not to mention Greeks from Ionia who settled for centuries in Anatolia. It is impossible that they had not at least partly mixed with the Luwians, Lycians, Lydians, Carians.

----------


## kingjohn

Don't understand the point 
Modern greek do have slavic admixture
Its not like davidski discover america 😅

----------


## Dianatomia

I think we are missing the point. In looking at the difference between the Mycenaean and modern Greek samples we clearly notice that the modern Greeks have more Steppe and more Eastern Mediterranean ancestry. Now Dawidski claims that some classical Greeks were Cypriot like. We also know that modern Cypriots resemble Ancient Anatolians. So the EEF admixture could have come from Anatolia. It makes sense. Mycenaen Greece was largely in the South of mainland Greece. In the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age, the western part of Anatolia became part of the Greek cultural mainframe. Starting 1000 B.C. the Greek world consisted of both sides of the Aegean. The Trojans and other Anatolian people were absorbed into the Hellenic mainframe. Indeed, there may have been ancient Greeks who had Trojan (Dardanian) ancestry. Another factor could be the Dorians. Some historians mentioned that they were descendants of the Trojans. Perhaps they had lots of East Med ancestry. 
We have to understand that Greeks have always been in the making. The Greek world of Alexander or Plato was not the exact same world as that of Achilles and Odysseus. And so their genetics was not static, but slowly shifting, adding new elements into their genetic mainframe. 

Either way, we have a missing link of the puzzle. We know that some classical Greeks had East Med (Cypriot-like) ancestry. So it is only logical the modern Greeks should have elevated East Med levels compared to the Mycenaeans. It seems to me that the more pieces of the puzzle we have, the closer we get to the modern Greeks. 

I also notice on the eurogenes blog that some people have no good understanding of Greek history. Some argued that the East Med in modern Greeks came with the population exchange. While in reality there were whole regions in Greece which did not receive any influx of these Greek refugees from Asia Minor.There are many Greeks who are aware of not having any ancestry from the refugees from Asia Minor. Yet, all Greeks have elevated East Med levels compared to Mycenaens. So do some classical Greeks according to Davinski.

----------


## Archetype0ne

At this point I feel Greek Academy of Genetics/Anthropology or its equivalent is to blame. I do not bu*y that they do not have ancient samples from LBA/Classical(Iron)/Late Classical/ Early Middle Ages / Middle Ages etc from such a region with rich historical baggage.

One thing I do not agree with Davidski is that we don't even have 1% proof of continuity. Statistically speaking, getting to an autosomal mix similar to modern Greeks without at least 1% (realistically much much more) Ancient local DNA is impossible (0% probability). That's what I find ridiculous. Finding properly mixed ANE/STEPPE/CHG etc populations to go through the generational permutations without some local component I find impossible to believe.

Is the proof enough for proper continuity atm, or to gauge the level of continuity? Not enough to convince everyone aparently. So what would be proof enough? As many in this thread have pointed out we need more samples analyzed across the timeline from the region. The samples are there, or at least they have to be. When the Greek agencies, anthropologists and geneticist make the data available everything will be clear.

And I guarantee you there will be much more than <1% continuity, as Davidski is claiming right now. Thinking otherwise is disingenuous.

----------


## Dianatomia

> At this point I feel Greek Academy of Genetics/Anthropology or its equivalent is to blame. I do not bu*y that they do not have ancient samples from LBA/Classical(Iron)/Late Classical/ Early Middle Ages / Middle Ages etc from such a region with rich historical baggage.
> 
> One thing I do not agree with Davidski is that we don't even have 1% proof of continuity. Statistically speaking, getting to an autosomal mix similar to modern Greeks without at least 1% (realistically much much more) Ancient local DNA is impossible (0% probability). That's what I find ridiculous. Finding properly mixed ANE/STEPPE/CHG etc populations to go through the generational permutations without some local component I find impossible to believe.
> 
> Is the proof enough for proper continuity atm, or to gauge the level of continuity? Not enough to convince everyone aparently. So what would be proof enough? As many in this thread have pointed out we need more samples analyzed across the timeline from the region. The samples are there, or at least they have to be. When the Greek agencies, anthropologists and geneticist make the data available everything will be clear.
> 
> And I guarantee you there will be much more than <1% continuity, as Davidski is claiming right now. Thinking otherwise is disingenuous.


I think you are being a little bit hard on Greek academies.
Not many academies have done extensive research on DNA of the inhabitants of the Bronze Age in their region. Where would Greek universities get the funding for these kinds of research post 2010 Greek economic crisis? Not that simple. There were many Greek cities in Albania or Turkey. They could easily extract ancient Greek DNA.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> I think you are being a little bit hard on Greek academies.
> Not many academies have done extensive research on DNA of the inhabitants of the Bronze Age in their region. Where would Greek universities get the funding for these kinds of research post 2010 Greek economic crisis? Not that simple. There were many Greek cities in Albania or Turkey. They could easily extract ancient Greek DNA.


Correct. But as you know the cost of sequencing genomes and Y-DNA deep test has exponentially plummeted since 2010.



Meanwhile the first genome sequence "At the lower bound, it would seem that this cost figure is at least $500 million; at the upper bound, this cost figure could be as high as $1 billion. The truth is likely somewhere in between." --- "The originally projected cost for the U.S.'s contribution to the HGP was $3 billion; in actuality, the Project ended up taking less time (~13 years rather than ~15 years) and requiring less funding - ~$2.7 billion." --- "based on these data, NHGRI estimated that the hypothetical 2003 cost to generate a 'second' reference human genome sequence using the then-available approaches and technologies was in the neighborhood of $50 million."

https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Sequencing-Human-Genome-cost



If amateur projects can raise funds to sequence genomes as a hobby. I do not see how a 200 bln GDP economy can not fund 50k-100k projects.

Besides that point. I get what you mean.

----------


## bigsnake49

> I think you are being a little bit hard on Greek academies.
> Not many academies have done extensive research on DNA of the inhabitants of the Bronze Age in their region. Where would Greek universities get the funding for these kinds of research post 2010 Greek economic crisis? Not that simple. There were many Greek cities in Albania or Turkey. They could easily extract ancient Greek DNA.


I totally agree with this. First comes the funding. The Greeks don't have to prove anything to Daviski or the regional Balkanites that are desperately trying to prove that they were here even before the Greeks and they are pure. There were a lot of artists, pottery artisans, sculptors, goldsmiths that came from all over the known world to Athens and the other major urban centers of the Ancient Greek World. I am sure that they were admixed with the locals. They all contributed to the Ancient Greek culture and were absorbed into the mainstream. I am sure that in the mountainous villages of Greece and elsewhere you can find pure locals but in the urban centers fat chance.

Also all of these studies and the commercial ancestry sites use reference groups that are at least 3 generations local on both sides to filter out recent migrants. It is not just Pontic Greeks and Cappadocian Greeks that cam over from what is now Turkey although some people like to concentrate on those. There were Greek speaking people from the Aegean Coast of Turkey and Constantinople, Eastern Thrace and Northern Thrace (East Romylia). All of those bring a different genetic makeup.

----------


## Jovialis

> Not heavily ..
> But it is for sure there ( slavic admixture)
> Lowest in maniots and geting higher as you go north...
> Historically there were slavic tribes in greece
> They were not able to change the language completely like in bulgaria with the thracians 
> But they left genetic mark ... 
> 
> Let us wait for this paper and see were classical greek samples will be autosomally... 
> 
> ...


Yes, that was the point I was making. I think to deny some Slavic ancestry in some Greeks, especially in the north is wrong. But to broadly say Modern Greeks are basically a two-way mix of Slavs and recent-Cypriots, while questioning even 1% of continuity to the ancient past, is just weird, and dubious.

----------


## kingjohn

> Yes, that was the point I was making. I think to deny some Slavic ancestry in some Greeks, especially in the north is wrong. But to broadly say Modern Greeks are basically a two-way mix of Slavs and recent-Cypriots, while questioning even 1% of continuity to the ancient past, is just weird, and dubious.



Here is a dna paper who extriminate fallmayer theory  :Smile: 

https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201718

----------


## Ralphie Boy

What the Fallmerayer people would have to argue now is that nearly 100% of Anatolia Neolithic in modern Greeks is a proxy for ancient Greeks, brought by foreign invaders and settlers who substantially resembled them—a nearly complete replacement by substantially similar people. That seems improbable for at least two reasons: Greek population size in the region and language/culture continuity. 

Lazaridis et al argue for continuity, not declare it as indisputable and final. In science the door is open to refutation. We still have big gaps in our knowledge, such as the genetic makeup of pre-Slavic Byzantine Greeks. If they had very little Steppe ancestry, it may mean the Slavic input was greater.

It’s also fair to question if some non-Greeks in the southern Balkans have ancient Greek ancestry, based on the number of historical Greek settlements.

----------


## bigsnake49

With respect to the Fallmayer theories it points out the pitfalls of depending on ancient and some medieval authors. What I would like is ancient tax records from the Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires that list the number of settlers that were moved to an area to repopulate it and census records before and after.

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Here is a dna paper who extriminate fallmayer theory 
> https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201718


Those are all theoretical models, there is no smoking gun.


The paper is not really so credible

"The average shared ancestry with French ranges from 39 to 42%; with Andalusians from 53 to 62%; and with the Italians from 85 to 96%. In contrast, the average shared ancestry with the Slavic populations is always <15%. Therefore, the Peloponneseans are genetically much more distinct from the Slavic populations and are much more similar to Southern European populations."

In any case it minimizes the supposed Slavic contribution

"the Slavic ancestry of Peloponnesean subpopulations ranges from 0.2 to 14.4%."

----------


## kingjohn

> Those are all theoretical models, there is no smoking gun.
> The paper is not really so credible
> "The average shared ancestry with French ranges from 39 to 42%; with Andalusians from 53 to 62%; and with the Italians from 85 to 96%. In contrast, the average shared ancestry with the Slavic populations is always <15%. Therefore, the Peloponneseans are genetically much more distinct from the Slavic populations and are much more similar to Southern European populations."
> In any case it minimizes the supposed Slavic contribution
> "the Slavic ancestry of Peloponnesean subpopulations ranges from 0.2 to 14.4%."


Well his theory is that modern greek people in south peloponnesea
Are slavic tribes who are hellenized later by orthodox church ....
Next to him davidski sound logic .... :Laughing:

----------


## Angela

> He is not saying they left no trace, he is saying they are heavily Slavic, combined with recent-Cypriots, which is preposterous.
> 
> 
> Why? It is a theory promoted by them, so I think it is salient to the conversation. The Fallmerayer theory was promoted by Nazis to abuse Greeks for apparent Slavic admixture, it is a fact.
> 
> 
> It wasn't just Greeks, but other Slavs and Slav-mixed people in the Balkans were brutally murdered by Nazis, because they were considered sub-human.


Don't you remember that HUGE migration from Cyprus to Greece??? Were you sleeping during history class??? :Grin: 

You know what the answer always is, right? It was all those TURKISH AND LEVANTINE admixed "Greeks" who came in the exchange!!! :Laughing: 

Pity there's a HUGE problem with that, which no matter how many times I've personally brought it up is conveniently forgotten. The paper on the Peloponnese by used VERY carefully chosen samples only from people who were very elderly and whose four grandparents from the area would therefore have been alive BEFORE the exchanges. :Rolleyes: 

WHEN are people going to stop assuming some samples from Thessaly represent ALL mainland Greeks?

As for that comment by Polako in 2017, he thought all Southern Italians (for Northern Italians for that matter) would break out crying when they discovered they have a significant amount of Anatolian Bronze Age. That tells you a lot more about HIS attitudes toward Anatolian Bronze and Anatolian Neolithic for that matter than it says about ITALIAN attitudes. Why do some people assume everyone looks at the world the way that they do?

He also apparently doesn't know that the SLAVIC input into Greeks was considered by the Nazis to make them subhuman. Still thinks it was a good idea for some Poles to have joined battalions which fought for the Nazis. No accounting for some people's values or how they're able to reconcile seemingly contradictory facts.

Oh, since you don't seem to know, the Nazis are a sensitive subject in the Balkans since so many Balkan countries cooperated with, and fought with them. I don't get it. Italians are deeply ashamed of their alliance with Hitler, and express it at every opportunity. That's one reason why they lionize the partisans. Maybe it's different in the Balkans? I really don't know enough about the topic to express an opinion.


Wow, I see you have a new moderator on board. That's good; now I don't feel badly about being around so seldom. :)

----------


## kingjohn

Well angela ...
Some south slavs from balkan cooperated with 
The nazis ( croatians, bosnians) so sometimes history
Is not balck or white but rather grey 
Infact me as a jewish know well enough
That even the nazis were amazed by the brutality of the ustache in croatia and bosnia 
Thwords jews and also serbs ...
They built extrimination camp for god sake....🤨

P.s
But i am off topic sorry 🤔

----------


## Çerç

How any individual felt years ago, or today, is irrelevant.

If we are discussing the possibility of Greek continuity since BA, modern closeness with samples recently arrived from the Steppe (or related to others who had), especially considering that the modeling requires an extra Steppe-related component, suggests that modern Greeks have significantly more Steppe ancestry than LBA Greeks, and very likely even more so than the Ancient Greeks of IA, Classical Antiquity and Roman period.

What population brought this important component is yet to be discovered, but Slavs are among the main candidates.

----------


## blevins13

> Don't you remember that HUGE migration from Cyprus to Greece??? Were you sleeping during history class???
> 
> You know what the answer always is, right? It was all those TURKISH AND LEVANTINE admixed "Greeks" who came in the exchange!!!
> 
> Pity there's a HUGE problem with that, which no matter how many times I've personally brought it up is conveniently forgotten. The paper on the Peloponnese by used VERY carefully chosen samples only from people who were very elderly and whose four grandparents from the area would therefore have been alive BEFORE the exchanges.
> 
> WHEN are people going to stop assuming some samples from Thessaly represent ALL mainland Greeks?
> 
> As for that comment by Polako in 2017, he thought all Southern Italians (for Northern Italians for that matter) would break out crying when they discovered they have a significant amount of Anatolian Bronze Age. That tells you a lot more about HIS attitudes toward Anatolian Bronze and Anatolian Neolithic for that matter than it says about ITALIAN attitudes. Why do some people assume everyone looks at the world the way that they do?
> ...


The history tell us that the war with Greece was started by Italians without Nazi approval, from that time Albania is still at war with Greece even though we were invaded ourselves. Nazis came to help the Italians that were being beaten by the Greek Army in the mountains of Epirus. These are old stories, and are not relevant at all to this topic. A criminal might use whatever pretext to justify its slaughter, that does not make what Fallmayer said wrong. A criminal that reads your posts here might use your ideas as a justification for a crime, can that make what you said right or wrong? In my modest understanding it is to early to jump to conclusions without more samples from every historical period. Personally I expect continuity but with major Slavic contribution. It will illogical to think that Slavic tribes stoped at the Greek borders for some reason and did not advance further.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## blevins13

> Well angela ...
> Some south slavs from balkan cooperated with 
> The nazis ( croatians, bosnians) so sometimes history
> Is not balck or white but rather grey 
> Infact me as a jewish know well enough
> That even the nazis were amazed by the brutality of the ustache in croatia and bosnia 
> Thwords jews and also serbs ...
> They built extrimination camp for god sake....🤨
> 
> ...


You are right, in Albania for example, the pro nazi Albanian government was instrumental in saving the Jewish community. 


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Constantine

I could be out of the loop here, but I don't recall a lot of "subhuman" treatment of Greeks and Balkanites by the Nazis (at least greater than other invaded countries). Anybody have sources on this? Greeks were actually admired, I believe, for their ability to defend themselves (and crushing the initial Italian invaders in short order). I remember skimming through a copy of a "manual" of sorts the Nazi troops were given about the Balkan people where it explicitly states "The modern Greeks have roots in ancient Greece." Sure Hitler hated Slavs, but Many Balkanites collaborated with Nazis. There was even a Muslim Albanian division. 

I've also heard from not-untrustworthy sources that Greeks of "good stock" (more often women) were actually taken for creepy breeding programs.

----------


## ihype02

^ You are right Hilter considered Greeks as Aryan but below Germans like Aryan class B.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> You are right, in Albania for example, the pro nazi Albanian government was instrumental in saving the Jewish community. 
> 
> 
> Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum


Since we are talking about this, and its not considered off topic might as well.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/albani...rotected-jews/

*Albania, only country with more Jews after the Holocaust, inaugurates memorial*


Not that Albania had many Jews before the war, but still it was the only country with more Jews after than before the War in Europe.

----------


## Jovialis

> Those are all theoretical models, there is no smoking gun.
> The paper is not really so credible
> "The average shared ancestry with French ranges from 39 to 42%; with Andalusians from 53 to 62%; and with the Italians from 85 to 96%. In contrast, the average shared ancestry with the Slavic populations is always <15%. Therefore, the Peloponneseans are genetically much more distinct from the Slavic populations and are much more similar to Southern European populations."
> In any case it minimizes the supposed Slavic contribution
> *"**the Slavic ancestry of Peloponnesean subpopulations ranges from 0.2 to 14.4%."*


Thanks for pointing out those figures. Perhaps some people should consider reading papers on the topic, instead of giving personal opinions based on assumptions.

----------


## Jovialis

> ^ You are right Hilter considered Greeks as Aryan but below Germans like Aryan class B.


Purely political, and strategic. Just like their alliance with Japanese, the "honorary Aryans". Nazis believed the ancient Greeks were Nordics.




> This book was born of a surprising discovery: some preliminary research on youth movements and the idea of Europe led me to the speeches of Alfred Rosenberg, in which he claimed that the Greeks were a Northern people. As it turns out, this curious textual artifact merely repeated the canonical work of National Socialist doctrine: Hitler wrote in _Mein Kampf_that there was a “racial unity” (_Rasse-Einheit_) that linked Greeks, Romans, and Germans, and that these three peoples were united in fighting the same millenarian war...The primary effect of this new rhetoric on racial origins, a reimagining of the old Aryan myth, was to draw Greece and Rome into the orbit of the Nordic race and its civilization. The Nordicism of the Greeks and Romans was confirmed by historians and racial scientists and publicized in a number of ways, not all of them scholarly. This rhetoric was also adopted by the regime’s political leaders, to a surprising degree—surprising, that is, for the level of interest they displayed in a seemingly abstract, academic subject. Yet this issue assumed a singular importance for the Nazi leadership,...
> 
> https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt1f5g5m8

----------


## bigsnake49

We are not trying to minimize slavic genetic input but it is what it is, 10-15% average genetic input is huge for a country. I do not see dinaric phenotypes among the Greeks but then I have not visited Veria lately.

----------


## blevins13

> Purely political, and strategic. Just like their alliance with Japanese, the "honorary Aryans". Nazis believed the ancient Greeks were Nordics.


“Nazis believed the ancient Greeks were Nordics.” Using you logic for Falmerajer, Can we say that if the Nazis say this, is wrong?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Jovialis

> “Nazis believed the ancient Greeks were Nordics.” Using you logic for Falmerajer, Can we say that if the Nazis say this, is wrong?
> 
> 
> Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum


No, the Nazis believed the Ancient Greeks were Nordic, and were racially degenerated by Slavs and Avars according to their adoption of the Fallmerayer Theory. Which was taught to Nazi officers in the Axis occupation of Greece.

----------


## Jovialis

The reality is, the Ancient Greeks were Southern Europeans, and the later Greeks are still Southern Europeans, augmented by some degree Slavic admixture. Some a bit more than others.

----------


## Çerç

> The reality is, the Ancient Greeks were Southern Europeans, and the later Greeks are still Southern Europeans, augmented by some degree Slavic admixture. Some a bit more than others.


Both are southern Europeans of course, and fairly similar, but the question is how much of modern Greeks' ancestry comes from Ancient Greeks. The answer is not known, but it should be considerably lower than the models we have seen so far.

----------


## Jovialis

> Both are southern Europeans of course, and fairly similar, but the question is how much of modern Greeks' ancestry comes from Ancient Greeks. *The answer is not known, but it should be considerably lower than the models we have seen so far.*


Why is that so?

----------


## blevins13

> No, the Nazis believed the Ancient Greeks were Nordic, and were racially degenerated by Slavs and Avars according to their adoption of the Fallmerayer Theory. Which was taught to Nazi officers in the Axis occupation of Greece.


So did The Greeks came from north as the Nazi has promoted or not? Or did they come from Anatolia? What is your position?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Jovialis

> So did The Greeks came from north as the Nazi has promoted or not? Or did they come from Anatolia? What is your position?
> 
> 
> Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum


Even if the Northern model is correct, it doesn't mean they were Nordic. It also doesn't mean they had a ton of steppe ancestry, by the time they got there.

I think the Northern model is possible, as there are links to Catacomb culture and Mycenaeans. But as it stands, it is currently unresolved.

----------


## Çerç

> Why is that so?


Because, as I explained above, the model from the last paper shows modern mainland Greeks are most similar to MBA samples with recently arrived Steppe-related ancestry, but moderns have even higher Steppe-related %. Periods following MBA will very likely have diluted Steppe-like ancestry as the MBA populations were gradually absorbed by Anatolia and Iran ancestry peoples of the Aegean. You can already notice this in LBA Myceneans, which of course are not as similar to modern Greeks as those MBA samples, and this genetic homogenization will have continued through the IA (maybe somewhat mirroring the cultural one). So the difference in Steppe-like ancestry between modern mainland Greeks and Ancient mainland Greeks is likely greater than that between modern Greeks and Myceneans, and far greater than that between modern mainland Greeks and the MBA samples presented in the latest models.

The islands may be a different story.

----------


## Yetos

> Both are southern Europeans of course, and fairly similar, but the question is how much of modern Greeks' ancestry comes from Ancient Greeks. The answer is not known, but it should be considerably lower than the models we have seen so far.


The answer well known, if you read genetics, especially from the side of Matriarchical side.

----------


## Yetos

> So did The Greeks came from north as the Nazi has promoted or not? Or did they come from Anatolia? What is your position?
> 
> 
> Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum


you already know the answer, it is provited many times in Forum.

----------


## Yetos

> Because, as I explained above, the model from the last paper shows modern mainland Greeks are most similar to MBA samples with recently arrived Steppe-related ancestry, but moderns have even higher Steppe-related %. Periods following MBA will very likely have diluted Steppe-like ancestry as the MBA populations were gradually absorbed by Anatolia and Iran ancestry peoples of the Aegean. You can already notice this in LBA Myceneans, which of course are not as similar to modern Greeks as those MBA samples, and this genetic homogenization will have continued through the IA (maybe somewhat mirroring the cultural one). So the difference in Steppe-like ancestry between modern mainland Greeks and Ancient mainland Greeks is likely greater than that between modern Greeks and Myceneans, and far greater than that between modern mainland Greeks and the MBA samples presented in the latest models.
> 
> The islands may be a different story.


your answer is obvious, here,

----------


## blevins13

> Even if the Northern model is correct, it doesn't mean they were Nordic. It also doesn't mean they had a ton of steppe ancestry, by the time they got there.
> 
> I think the Northern model is possible, as there are links to Catacomb culture and Mycenaeans. But as it stands, it is currently unresolved.


It is a plausible option, the problem is that the link with Armenian is not quite clear in the Northern model of Greeks.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## blevins13

> you already know the answer, it is provited many times in Forum.


Since was promoted by Nazis, I thought maybe there was a change of hearts. I know your position. Your activity has diminished, how come?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## kingjohn

> The reality is, *the Ancient Greeks were Southern Europeans, and the later Greeks are still Southern Europeans, augmented by some degree Slavic admixture.* Some a bit more than others.



yes* probably* greeks from thessaly and macedonia should have more slavic admixture 
than greeks from peloponnese

----------


## ihype02

> We are not trying to minimize slavic genetic input but it is what it is, 10-15% average genetic input is huge for a country. I do not see dinaric phenotypes among the Greeks but then I have not visited Veria lately.


There are more Slavic placenames in Peloponnese than Germanic placenames in Lombardy. And Lomardy is many times larger in both size and population than Peloponnese.

We will see where that 15% will stand after 10 years.

----------


## Dianatomia

> yes* probably* greeks from thessaly and macedonia should have more slavic admixture 
> than greeks from peloponnese


Macedonia and Thessaly may have had more Steppe influence to begin with, as shown by the MBA samples.




> We will see where that 15% will stand after 10 years.


I think that 15% is overrated for Greeks overall.

----------


## kingjohn

> Macedonia and Thessaly may have had more Steppe influence to begin with, as shown by the MBA samples.
> 
> 
> 
> I think that 15% is overrated for Greeks overall.



i wonder where would* byzantine period greeks* will cluster autosomally ...... :Thinking:

----------


## bigsnake49

> i wonder where would* byzantine period greeks* will cluster autosomally ......


Is this from a Slav wet dream?

----------


## ihype02

> Is this from a Slav wet dream?


Slavs overran most of mainland Greece.

The 10th century Byzantine anonymous epitomizer of Strabo wrote:

«Καὶ νῦν δὲ πᾶσαν Ἤπειρον καὶ Ἑλλάδα σχεδὸν καὶ Πελοπόννησον καὶ Μακεδονίαν Σκύθαι Σκλάβοι νέμονται»

"And now most of Epirus and Hellas and Peloponnesus and Macedonia are inhabited by 'Scythian' Slavs"

Vgl. Müller, Geographi Graeci Minores II S. 574.

And for Western Peloponnese in particular:

«Νῦν δὲ οὐδὲ ὄνομά ἐστι Πισατῶν καὶ Καυκώνων καὶ Πυλίων· ἅπαντα γὰρ ταῦτα Σκύθαι νέμονται»

s. Müller, Geogr. Graeci Minores II S. 583.

"And now not even the names of the Pisatans, the Caucones or the Pylians survive. All these regions are inhabited by 'Scythians'".

----------


## bigsnake49

> Slavs overran most of mainland Greece.
> 
> The 10th century Byzantine anonymous epitomizer of Strabo wrote:
> 
> «Καὶ νῦν δὲ πᾶσαν Ἤπειρον καὶ Ἑλλάδα σχεδὸν καὶ Πελοπόννησον καὶ Μακεδονίαν Σκύθαι Σκλάβοι νέμονται»
> 
> "And now most of Epirus and Hellas and Peloponnesus and Macedonia are inhabited by 'Scythian' Slavs"
> 
> Vgl. Müller, Geographi Graeci Minores II S. 574.
> ...


And yet even in northern Greece we only have 20% slavic input. If they replaced all the existing population according to these writers then Greeks would be almost 100% Slavic. But they are not. Did some of them make it all the way down, certainly. Did they coexist with the locals, sure.

----------


## Dianatomia

> i wonder where would* byzantine period greeks* will cluster autosomally ......


Something in between modern and Classical Greeks. Not too far off from the Mycenaeans.

----------


## ihype02

> And yet even in northern Greece we only have 20% slavic input. If they replaced all the existing population according to these writers then Greeks would be almost 100% Slavic. But they are not. Did some of them make it all the way down, certainly. Did they coexist with the locals, sure.


Never said they replaced the whole population or even most. There is a study regarding Macedonia and it's Slavic input according to Davidski. Those type of studies are nearly 99% finished (the rumoured ones) I don't know why it takes so long for them to be published.
The Mycenaean samples were probably finished in 2016 or 2015 until they got published. It's so wierd to me.

----------


## kingjohn

how far south they go ..... 









p.s
but i do agree with what people say here 
that even if the slavic admixture exist in modern greeks 
it is not that high ...
and they are for sure not heavilly slavic as davidski think

----------


## Dianatomia

> Slavs overran most of mainland Greece.
> The 10th century Byzantine anonymous epitomizer of Strabo wrote:
> «Καὶ νῦν δὲ πᾶσαν Ἤπειρον καὶ Ἑλλάδα σχεδὸν καὶ Πελοπόννησον καὶ Μακεδονίαν Σκύθαι Σκλάβοι νέμονται»
> "And now most of Epirus and Hellas and Peloponnesus and Macedonia are inhabited by 'Scythian' Slavs"
> Vgl. Müller, Geographi Graeci Minores II S. 574.
> And for Western Peloponnese in particular:
> «Νῦν δὲ οὐδὲ ὄνομά ἐστι Πισατῶν καὶ Καυκώνων καὶ Πυλίων· ἅπαντα γὰρ ταῦτα Σκύθαι νέμονται»
> s. Müller, Geogr. Graeci Minores II S. 583.
> "And now not even the names of the Pisatans, the Caucones or the Pylians survive. All these regions are inhabited by 'Scythians'".


Quotes are always open to interpretation. People then were writing contradictions as we do today on these forums. There were Slavs for sure. But no more than 8% overall. And if I am not mistaken. Nicephorus deported many Slavs to Anatolia, sothat they could be absorbed by the masses there. In the 9th century, the Slavs laid siege to Patras and lost. A few decades later we have documents of some Slavs revolting. Laying siege and revolting is indicative of a minority exogroup. The same is true for deportation. How can some people come and deport you against your will you have significant numbers. You only allow that to happen if you don't have significant power. And sometimes the Slavs fought with assistance. I.e. in the siege of Patras they were accompanied by Saraces. Why would they need Sarances to share the spoils if they were numerous enough?

It also caught my attention that the Greeks in the 10th century reffered to the Slavs as Scythians. So I don't think they were very Balkanic. As the Scythians are identified with the region of the Ukraine. Paleo-Balkan people however were pary of the Hellenic sphere by that time. Genetically they were quite similar to Greeks, and culturally they would have been Christians. These Slavic 'Scythian' newcomers were certainly not. Hence the term Scythian. 

The Slavic numbers are vastly overrated. Mainland Greeks are related to other Balkaners mostly due to early migrations. Because Greeks colonized these areas, migrating tribes in ancient times and because the overlap from Hellenic/Aegean to Thracian/Illyrian was very gradual and overlapping.

----------


## ihype02

^ I find it hard to believe that Slavs that reached Greece were Serb-like. I have always assumed them to be more like Slovenes.

----------


## bigsnake49

> ^ I find it hard to believe that Slavs that reached Greece were Serb-like. I have always assumed them to be more like Slovenes.


Definitely no Slovenian beauties made it down, I can guarantee you that.

----------


## Constantine

> Quotes are always open to interpretation. People then were writing contradictions as we do today on these forums. There were Slavs for sure. But no more than 8% overall. And if I am not mistaken. Nicephorus deported many Slavs to Anatolia, sothat they could be absorbed by the masses there. In the 9th century, the Slavs laid siege to Patras and lost. A few decades later we have documents of some Slavs revolting. Laying siege and revolting is indicative of a minority exogroup. The same is true for deportation. How can some people come and deport you against your will you have significant numbers. You only allow that to happen if you don't have significant power. And sometimes the Slavs fought with assistance. I.e. in the siege of Patras they were accompanied by Saraces. Why would they need Sarances to share the spoils if they were numerous enough?
> 
> It also caught my attention that the Greeks in the 10th century reffered to the Slavs as Scythians. So I don't think they were very Balkanic. As the Scythians are identified with the region of the Ukraine. Paleo-Balkan people however were pary of the Hellenic sphere by that time. Genetically they were quite similar to Greeks, and culturally they would have been Christians. These Slavic 'Scythian' newcomers were certainly not. Hence the term Scythian. 
> 
> The Slavic numbers are vastly overrated. Mainland Greeks are related to other Balkaners mostly due to early migrations. Because Greeks colonized these areas, migrating tribes in ancient times and because the overlap from Hellenic/Aegean to Thracian/Illyrian was very gradual and overlapping.


Yes. And I've also always wondered if the term "Slav" is just a corruption/adaptation of the Greek word for "Scythian."

----------


## ihype02

One thing that I was wondering is that Slavs in places like Croatia did replace the bulk the population and the Mainland Byzantine Greece was saparated in 4 themes. How did Slavs manage to reach Peloponnese why didn't they stop at Macedonia or Epirus?

----------


## bigsnake49

> One thing that I was wondering is that Slavs in places like Croatia did replace the bulk the population and the Mainland Byzantine Greece was saparated in 4 themes. How did Slavs manage to reach Peloponnese why didn't they stop at Macedonia or Epirus?


Croatia and Bosnia Herzegovina was depopulated because the Romans slaughtered the local Illyrians and the ones that did survive they dispersed. If I am not mistaken Avars & Slavs were invited to repopulate that part of the Balkans by the Byzantine emperors.

----------


## Ralphie Boy

In terms of place names, some older Greeks were calling their villages by their Turkish names, decades after they were officially changed and over a century after the Ottomans were gone. Perhaps place names are not always accurate indicators of ethnic make-up, especially after many centuries.

Also, Greeks are more southern-shifted than Balkan Slavs, which implies Slavs had a smaller genetic impact.

----------


## td120

> One thing that I was wondering is that Slavs in places like Croatia did replace the bulk the population and the Mainland Byzantine Greece was saparated in 4 themes. How did Slavs manage to reach Peloponnese why didn't they stop at Macedonia or Epirus?


There were territories that got settled later (either by Slavic newcomers or resettled Slavic tribes). The Slavic invaders would just sweep through the land on their way south.
For example according to Ivan Mikulcic the Slavic settlement of the territory of Republic of Macedonia is a late event (mid-IX c. on ) -when this process was just starting the Slavic tribes had been present in Mainland Greece for two centuries and some of them had already been displaced/resettled or "pacified" in the process of reestablishment of the Imperial authority.


https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9...3/BP000004.xml

----------


## lynxbythetv

at some stage i expect a fair amount of steppe heavy R1B to be found. 

they came down the coast and not from the northern balkans nor from anatolia. 

they werent nordic and would have resembled the british. 

albanian is q celtic, that should offer up some hints. 

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

----------


## lynxbythetv

> Something in between modern and Classical Greeks. Not too far off from the Mycenaeans.


based on what exactly, im not sure how educated greeks can reconcile with the fact that ancient myceneans were just like nodern greeks when its clear as day that the myceneans were invaders. 

invaders from the steppe were not like modern greeks. 

and im not trying to insult greeks here either. 


Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

----------


## Bill7

Well that's the story pretty match for all of Europe(with the exception of sardinia) indo Europeans were the invaders

----------


## Bill7

Delete double post

----------


## Leopoldo Leone

> based on what exactly, im not sure how educated greeks can reconcile with the fact that ancient myceneans were just like nodern greeks when its clear as day that the myceneans were invaders. 
> 
> invaders from the steppe were not like modern greeks. 
> 
> and im not trying to insult greeks here either. 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk


You are forgetting the hundreds, if not thousand years that separate the coming of IE speakers with the birth of the Greeks and other ancient European peoples: at least if we take the case of Spain as paradigmatic, it is true that north European-like folks invaded and provoked a large genetic turnover in the regions they settled in, bringing IE languages and culturess, but that happened around 2500-2000 B.C. (at least a first invasion wave that wasn't the same that brought the classical languages we know, for example there is some evidence that before the Celtic languages other IE tongues were spoken in both Great Britain[Pictish] and Iberia, and it might well be the case that before the Italic languages other IE languages might have been spoken in Italy, as the Sicanian language that might have been brought from Iberia into west Sicily). Already by the time of the Myceneans the levels of IE admixture were similar to those of southern Europeans, and even the "proto-greeks" we have (if they are proto-greeks, though I think it is likely they are) were at best "north southern European"-like; it is likely that the "proto-proto-greeks" were more northern european-like but it was their more southern european descendants that built the classical world much later. 
Also, this observation is irrelevant because the question was about Byzantines: a priori it is likely they must have been between ancient Myceneans and modern Greeks.

----------


## Vallicanus

> based on what exactly, im not sure how educated greeks can reconcile with the fact that ancient myceneans were just like nodern greeks when its clear as day that the myceneans were invaders. 
> 
> invaders from the steppe were not like modern greeks. 
> 
> and im not trying to insult greeks here either. 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk


Mycenaean DNA clearly shows them as much more South European than North European.

In fact they were just like Minoans with a minor Steppe addition.

----------


## bigsnake49

Again, if we were so inundated with Slavs, how come we don't look slavic/dinaric, don't have more percentage of blonde/blue eyes? Did we get the dark slavs?

----------


## Bill7

Is eurogenes reliable?? I have heard that over the years he has claimed many things but many of them were never confirmed or were rejected so can we trust him suggesting that many Greeks were anatolian like during the iron age??

----------


## kingjohn

> Again, if we were so inundated with Slavs, how come we don't look slavic/dinaric, don't have more percentage of blonde/blue eyes? Did we get the dark slavs?


i was in greece back in the day in a trip 
from south to the north and i would say 
that generally speaking you are correct 
most greek look like regular med people to me ( but i am no expert in anthropology)
and dna not always going inline with the way a person look .....
greek woman look nothing like slavic woman .....
same goes for the man if you will put a greek in streets of krakow poland 
hw will be spoted very fast for sure ..... :Thinking:

----------


## bicicleur 2

> Mycenaean DNA clearly shows them as much more South European than North European.
> 
> In fact they were just like Minoans with a minor Steppe addition.


it looks like Myceneans and Minoans were rivals, to say the least

the Myceneans were influenced by the Minoans, but they didn't share the same culture and language

----------


## Vallicanus

> it looks like Myceneans and Minoans were rivals, to say the least
> 
> the Myceneans were influenced by the Minoans, but they didn't share the same culture and language


The culture and language may have been different but the Mycenaeans were genetically about 80pc Minoan-like.

----------


## Angela

Genetic similarity and even descent are OBVIOUSLY different from culture and language, which can change with one invasion.

Mycenaeans were Minoan like (Anatolia Neolithic plus some Anatolian Bronze) plus a minor steppe addition as Vallicanus so correctly said above. 

The minority steppe input eventually spread to Crete as well, as the later sample shows.

----------


## bigsnake49

Did we not have a thread about the Y-DNA breakdown of modern Greeks somewhere? Does anybody remember what were the numbers for R1a1-Din (M-417?) and I2A1-Din? I vaguely remember that the Y-DNA numbers did not support wholesale replacement.

----------


## Angela

I'm sure the following needs to be updated. I also don't know how you would distinguish R1a Z93 from the "Eastern European" variety.

https://www.eupedia.com/europe/europ...logroups.shtml

----------


## bicicleur 2

> The culture and language may have been different but the Mycenaeans were genetically about 80pc Minoan-like.


just saying that having similar DNA doesn't make them the same people

----------


## Vallicanus

> just saying that having similar DNA doesn't make them the same people


Indeed, but they are* fairly similar* people and more like modern South Europeans.

----------


## Angela

> Indeed, but they are* fairly similar* people and more like modern South Europeans.


I'll have to look it up again, but didn't they say in the paper on the palatial civilizations of Greece that the people of Crete and of mainland Greece and the islands were basically the same people until the steppe people arrived in mainland Greece? Did they define them as something like "Aegean peoples"?

The Anatolian Neolithic people went to Crete and the rest of the islands and they also went to the mainland. Same goes for the Anatolian Bronze Age. 

I don't see the big distinction some people are making. They're all descended from the same migration waves. The only difference is that steppe admixture arrived first on the mainland. It certainly got to Crete later.

----------


## Angela

> I'll have to look it up again, but didn't they say in the paper on the palatial civilizations of Greece that the people of Crete and of mainland Greece and the islands were basically the same people until the steppe people arrived in mainland Greece? Did they define them as something like "Aegean peoples"?
> 
> The Anatolian Neolithic people went to Crete and the rest of the islands and they also went to the mainland. Same goes for the Anatolian Bronze Age. 
> 
> I don't see the big distinction some people are making. They're all descended from the same migration waves. The only difference is that steppe admixture arrived first on the mainland. It certainly got to Crete later.


Goodness! It couldn't be more obvious. It's right in the summary. How could I forget? :)

"We sequenced six Early to Middle BA whole genomes, along with 11 mitochondrial genomes,* sampled from the three BA cultures of the Aegean Sea*. *The Early BA (EBA) genomes are homogeneous and derive most of their ancestry from Neolithic Aegeans, contrary to earlier hypotheses that the Neolithic-EBA cultural transition was due to massive population turnover. EBA Aegeans were shaped by relatively small-scale migration from East of the Aegean, as evidenced by the Caucasus-related ancestry also detected in Anatolians. "

*For anyone who doesn't remember, the three Bronze Age cultures of the Aegean are described by the authors as: *Helladic (mainland), Minoan (Crete), and Cycladic (rest of the islands).* 
*
They are saying the genomes were homogeneous.* Now, the graphic does show the tiniest sliver of WHG in EBA Helladic and but it's barely worth mentioning. These were the same peoples. 

So, as we said above. Same people. What changed things was the Middle Bronze Age arrival of some steppe or steppe admixed people on the mainland.

----------


## lynxbythetv

> Again, if we were so inundated with Slavs, how come we don't look slavic/dinaric, don't have more percentage of blonde/blue eyes? Did we get the dark slavs?


well greeks from the islands match up with lebanese and you also recieved alot of anatolians aswell so if there was at one stage a more slavic look its not evident anymore. 


Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

----------


## lynxbythetv

> Genetic similarity and even descent are OBVIOUSLY different from culture and language, which can change with one invasion.
> 
> Mycenaeans were Minoan like (Anatolia Neolithic plus some Anatolian Bronze) plus a minor steppe addition as Vallicanus so correctly said above. 
> 
> The minority steppe input eventually spread to Crete as well, as the later sample shows.


was there a population turnover in crete ? 

how could an already minor ancestry impact an area where there is none ? 

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

----------


## Archetype0ne

I have an uniformed question...
Can IBD be used for such cases? I mean where the time frame is as distant as Minoans and Myceneans?

----------


## Angela

> was there a population turnover in crete ? 
> 
> how could an already minor ancestry impact an area where there is none ? 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk


I don't have the faintest clue what you're asking and how it relates to the discussion.

----------


## ihype02

All 5 Maniote Y-DNA in Anthrogenica are J2a too.
I have started to suspect that E-V13 was increased in Mainland Greece during the Dark Ages (with Slavs).

----------


## bigsnake49

> well greeks from the islands match up with lebanese and you also recieved alot of anatolians aswell so if there was at one stage a more slavic look its not evident anymore. 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk


What Lebanese? Levant_N? Anatolia EEF?

----------


## Jovialis

^^Don't listen to lynxbythetv. He's a t-roll who has made other foolish posts like this in the past. Frankly, he should be removed from the website, imo.

----------


## Hawk

> All 5 Maniote Y-DNA in Anthrogenica are J2a too.
> I have started to suspect that E-V13 was increased in Mainland Greece during the Dark Ages (with Slavs).


Nope, couple of them are E-V13 as well.

----------


## ihype02

> Nope, couple of them are E-V13 as well.


Yeah I just saw them after I made the post. But:
1.) Maniotes are surrounded by E-V13 people.
2.) E-V13 was obviously present in ancient Peloponnese but I don't think it was greater than J2a. 
3.) Calabria, Eastern Sicily and Crete have around 7%-9% EV-13 and nearly 30% J2a.
4.) E-V13 does not appear in any of the Roman samples until the Germanic invasions. 

One hypothesis of mine is that E-V13 could've been more dominant in northern regions of Greece and Thrace and after northern Greeks and Thracians adopted the koine language the E-V13 started spearding in the south more due to migration and mixture.

----------


## bigsnake49

> All 5 Maniote Y-DNA in Anthrogenica are J2a too.
> I have started to suspect that E-V13 was increased in Mainland Greece during the Dark Ages (with Slavs).


I did not know that E-V13 was a characteristic haplogroup of the Slavs.

----------


## ihype02

> I did not know that E-V13 was a characteristic haplogroup of the Slavs.


Slavicised Balkanites.

----------


## bigsnake49

> Slavicised Balkanites.


Or locals that changed their language or religion. Genetics are one thing, language and religion is another. Now once you speak the same language and have the same religion it's easier to get absorbed into the general population.

----------


## ihype02

> Or locals that changed their language?


It was just a hypothesis. I gave another hypothesis about Northern Greeks. Thracians were enriched with E-V13 as shown in ancient samples from Serbia. I have also seen some screenshot about lot's of E-V13 in a Thracian zone in an upcomming study.

----------


## Hawk

Why E-V13 only, where are the other Y-DNA?

----------


## bigsnake49

> It was just a hypothesis. I gave another hypothesis about Northern Greeks. Thracians were enriched with E-V13 as shown in ancient samples from Serbia. I have also seen some screenshot about lot's of E-V13 in a Thracian zone in an upcomming study.


People have to remember that the Greeks encountered both Pelasgians and Thracians in mainland Grece when they came down.

----------


## Hawk

> People have to remember that the Greeks encountered both Pelasgians and Thracians in mainland Grece when they came down.


For Thracians i am pretty sure they didn't encounter, for Pelasgians again it's discutable, Marija Gimbutas proposed that Pelasgians were Late Bronze Age invaders from Grla-Mare Dubovac Culture in Serbia/Romania borders and ancient Greeks just got it totally wrong.

----------


## bigsnake49

> For Thracians i am pretty sure they didn't encounter, for Pelasgians again it's discutable, Marija Gimbutas proposed that Pelasgians were Late Bronze Age invaders from Grla-Mare Dubovac Culture in Serbia/Romania borders and ancient Greeks just got it totally wrong.


So the ancient Greeks that were 800-1000 years removed got it wrong but somebody 3500 years removed with no evidence is right? OK. Now I don't think that everything that Herodotus or other geographers and historians said is right but come on...

----------


## Hawk

> So the ancient Greeks that were 800-1000 years removed got it wrong but somebody 3500 years removed with no evidence is right? OK. Now I don't think that everything that Herodotus or other geographers and historians said is right but come on...


Somebody who had access to extensive archeological evidence and informations, we are also removed far more years and have more informations than Herodotus had who relied more on stories being passed, subjective viewpoints. Not trying to undermine him, on contrary, he is considered the father of History for a reason, someone needs to start from beginning.

----------


## bicicleur 2

> Somebody who had access to extensive archeological evidence and informations, we are also removed far more years and have more informations than Herodotus had who relied more on stories being passed, subjective viewpoints. Not trying to undermine him, on contrary, he is considered the father of History for a reason, someone needs to start from beginning.


and what were Herodotos' sources on this?
Herodotos always mentioned his sources and added what he believed personnaly

----------


## lynxbythetv

> ^^Don't listen to lynxbythetv. He's a t-roll who has made other foolish posts like this in the past. Frankly, he should be removed from the website, imo.


im not a troll. im not wrong if there at one stage was a higher slavic input its not as evident because during the ottoman persecutions many anatolian greeks moved to greece proper and many islanders have moved to the mainland. 

i dont actually think greece was all that slavic in the past anyway but you cant discount wars, famines, migrations and plagues having a demographic impact. 

its the same for much of anatolia aswell, many of those turkic conquerors put whole cities to the sword. 

take for example armenia, the steppe admixture was higher at one stage and then came the mongols who wiped much of it out, allegedly. 

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

----------


## lynxbythetv

> I don't have the faintest clue what you're asking and how it relates to the discussion.


if the myceneans only had a small precentage of steppe admixture then that admixture would be heavily diluted in the cretans. 

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

----------


## bigsnake49

> Somebody who had access to extensive archeological evidence and informations, we are also removed far more years and have more informations than Herodotus had who relied more on stories being passed, subjective viewpoints. Not trying to undermine him, on contrary, he is considered the father of History for a reason, someone needs to start from beginning.


I can't wait to hear his evidence. If it is linguistics, forget it. So much quackery!

----------


## Jovialis

> im not a troll. im not wrong if there at one stage was a higher slavic input its not as evident because during the ottoman persecutions many anatolian greeks moved to greece proper and many islanders have moved to the mainland. 
> 
> i dont actually think greece was all that slavic in the past anyway but you cant discount wars, famines, migrations and plagues having a demographic impact. 
> 
> its the same for much of anatolia aswell, many of those turkic conquerors put whole cities to the sword. 
> 
> take for example armenia, the steppe admixture was higher at one stage and then came the mongols who wiped much of it out, allegedly. 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk


You're pulling nonsense out of your backside. Now you can either substantiate your claims with legitimate genetic papers, or you reframe from speaking. This is your final warning.

----------


## Hawk

> I can't wait to hear his evidence. If it is linguistics, forget it. So much quackery!


What evidence? We know next to nothing about Pelasgians, Gimbutas just hypothesized about Pelasgians being synonymous for Peleset/Philistines, and they in turn showing similarities with Vatin-related culture. It's not verified, but neither negated. We don't even have any archeological site defined as Pelasgian in order to define them clearly, they must have been in chunks here and there already being assimilated into Hellenic identity during Herodotus time.

Otherwise, Pelasgians very well might have been descended from earlier Helladic/Cycladic cultures, being packed with J2a and G2a.

----------


## bigsnake49

> What evidence? We know next to nothing about Pelasgians, Gimbutas just hypothesized about Pelasgians being synonymous for Peleset/Philistines, and they in turn showing similarities with Vatin-related culture. It's not verified, but neither negated. We don't even have any archeological site defined as Pelasgian in order to define them clearly, they must have been in chunks here and there already being assimilated into Hellenic identity during Herodotus time.
> 
> Otherwise, Pelasgians very well might have been descended from earlier Helladic/Cycladic cultures, being packed with J2a and G2a.


Yeah, I am not aware of any Pelasgian archaeological, anthropological or genetic studies. We only have the writings of Ancient Greek and Roman authors which are contradictory. Here is what Strabo said of the ancient pre-Greek inhabitants:

_'Hecataeus of Miletus says of the Peloponnesus, that, before the time of the Greeks, it was inhabited by barbarians. Perhaps even the whole of Greece was, anciently, a settlement of barbarians, if we judge from former accounts. For Pelops brought colonists from Phrygia into the Peloponnesus, which took his name; Danaus brought colonists from Egypt; Dry- opes, Caucones, Pelasgi, Leleges, and other barbarous nations, partitioned among themselves the country on this side of the isthmus. The case was the same on the other side of the isthmus; for Thracians, under their leader Eumolpus, took possession of Attica; Tereus of Daulis in Phocaea; the Phoenicians, with their leader Cadmus, occupied the Cadmeian district; Aones, and Temmices, and Hyantes, Boeotia. Pindar says, `there was a time when the Boeotian people were called Syes.' Some names show their barbarous origin, as Cecrops, Codrus, Ceclus, Cothus, Drymas, and Crinacus. Thracians, Illyrians, and Epirotae are settled even at present on the sides of Greece. Formerly the territory they possessed was more extensive, although even now the barbarians possess a large part of the country, which, without dispute, is Greece. Macedonia is occupied by Thracians, as well as some parts of Thessaly; the country above Acarnania and Aetolia, by Thesproti, Cassopaei, Amphilochi, Molotti, and Athamanes, Epirotic tribes. Book
7, ch. 7, frg. 1.''


_

----------


## bigsnake49

> For Thracians i am pretty sure they didn't encounter, for Pelasgians again it's discutable, Marija Gimbutas proposed that Pelasgians were Late Bronze Age invaders from Grla-Mare Dubovac Culture in Serbia/Romania borders and ancient Greeks just got it totally wrong.


According to Strabo the Thracians occupied Attica. According to Herodotus the Pelasgians were the original Athenian dwellers.

----------


## Yetos

Pelasgians, may be an alter name for non Dorian Greeks, 
Possibly Mynians, Minoans, and Myceneans.

----------


## MOESAN

according to someones (B. Sergent among them), the name Pelasgian could be related to the Phillistins, but this name could have been misused (abusive extension) to name several pre-Greek people, among them among them Anatolian I-Eans and non-I-Ean people -

----------


## Dianatomia

> It was just a hypothesis. I gave another hypothesis about Northern Greeks. Thracians were enriched with E-V13 as shown in ancient samples from Serbia. I have also seen some screenshot about lot's of E-V13 in a Thracian zone in an upcomming study.


Highest rates of E-V13 in Greece is Thessaly. Reaches up to 40% in that region. It has far higher rates that the South Slav countries. So we have to look deeper for its origins. Thessaly was the home of the Pelasgians. 

So either the people invading from the Steppe from the North mixed with E-V13 Balkanoids along the way South in the Balkans. 
Or maybe these people from the Steppe mixed with Thessalian Pelasgians and the went further south, spreading E-v13. It didn't show up yet in Mycenaeans because they have little Steppe, and as such less E-v13. The Dorians may have been one of these waves who brought E-v13 as well.

-6000.jpg

E-v13 could be an element of Thessalian cultures, prior to the arrival of peoples from the Steppe.

----------


## ihype02

> Highest rates of E-V13 in Greece is Thessaly. Reaches up to 40% in that region. It has far higher rates that the South Slav countries. So we have to look deeper for its origins. Thessaly was the home of the Pelasgians. 
> 
> So either the people invading from the Steppe from the North mixed with E-V13 Balkanoids along the way South in the Balkans. 
> Or maybe these people from the Steppe mixed with Thessalian Pelasgians and the went further south, spreading E-v13. It didn't show up yet in Mycenaeans because they have little Steppe, and as such less E-v13. The Dorians may have been one of these waves who brought E-v13 as well.
> 
> -6000.jpg
> 
> E-v13 could be an element of Thessalian cultures, prior to the arrival of peoples from the Steppe.


The Dorians very likely brought some E-V13 in the Peloponnese but I don't think it was as mainstream in the Classical period as it is now. (I explained the reasoning why before) 
I believe that northern Greeks (including Thessalians) and Thracians made it the dominant Y-DNA in the region, it is the most rational explanation I can come up with. 
The Slavic hypothesis is a very weak one, not impossible though highly unlikely.




> Yeah I just saw them after I made the post. But:





> 1.) Maniotes are surrounded by E-V13 people.
> 2.) E-V13 was obviously present in ancient Peloponnese but I don't think it was greater than J2a.
> 3.) Calabria, Eastern Sicily and Crete have around 7%-9% EV-13 and nearly 30% J2a.
> 4.) E-V13 does not appear in any of the Roman samples until the Germanic invasions.
> 
> One hypothesis of mine is that E-V13 could've been more dominant in northern regions of Greece and Thrace and after northern Greeks and Thracians adopted the koine language the E-V13 started spearding in the south more due to migration and mixture.



Something extra
5.) All regions of Italy (expect for one in north West) outside of Magna Greacia have +5% E-V13 which is not far away from Magna Greacian regions.

----------


## Yetos

> according to someones (B. Sergent among them), the name Pelasgian could be related to the Phillistins, but this name could have been misused (abusive extension) to name several pre-Greek people, among them among them Anatolian I-Eans and non-I-Ean people -



You are refering to the old testament book of Iezekiel. 
and the translation of 70. 
''διὰ τοῦτο τάδε λέγει Κύριος· ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐκτείνω τὴν χεῖρά μου ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀλλοφύλους καὶ ἐξολοθρεύσω *Κρῆτας* καὶ ἀπολῶ τοὺς καταλοίπους τοὺς κατοικοῦντας τὴν παραλίαν·''

which in hebrew is 
*טז לָכֵן, כֹּה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה, הִנְנִי נוֹטֶה יָדִי עַל-פְּלִשְׁתִּים, וְהִכְרַתִּי אֶת-כְּרֵתִים; וְהַאֲבַדְתִּי, אֶת-שְׁאֵרִית חוֹף הַיָּם.* 

which in Hebrew is Heret or Harit from Caphthor

----------


## Nikos80

Hello,

according to this paper, what percentage of the Late Bronze Era Myceneans and Minoans were J2a?

----------


## ihype02

> Hello,
> 
> according to this paper, what percentage of the Late Bronze Era Myceneans and Minoans were J2a?


2 Mycenaeans were J2a out of 4. Also 4 Empuries samples that were Mycenean-like were all J, probably all J2a too. 
J2a is very high in Sicily, especially Eastern Sicily, Calabria, Crete, and it is higher in Maniots than in other Peloponnesians.

----------


## Nikos80

> 2 Mycenaeans were J2a out of 4. Also 4 Empuries samples that were Mycenean-like were all J, probably all J2a too. 
> J2a is very high in Sicily, especially Eastern Sicily, Calabria, Crete, and it is higher in Maniots than in other Peloponnesians.


Thank you for your answer.
Could that mean that the Myceneans were a more or less homogeneous people regarding their Y Dna ancestry?
The pie chart with the various haplogroups would be like modern day Ireland, if that is the case.


Is any research done on what haplogroup were the classical Greeks and what were the percentages of each haplogroup?


Empuries was an Ionian colony in the antiquity. If they were predominantly J2, then the classical Athenians could possibly be predominantly J2 too.


I wonder what haplogroup the Spartans and the Macedonians were.

----------


## ihype02

> Thank you for your answer.
> Could that mean that the Myceneans were a more or less homogeneous people regarding their Y Dna ancestry?
> The pie chart with the various haplogroups would be like modern day Ireland, if that is the case.
> 
> 
> Is any research done on what haplogroup were the classical Greeks and what were the percentages of each haplogroup?
> 
> 
> Empuries was an Ionian colony in the antiquity. If they were predominantly J2, then the classical Athenians could possibly be predominantly J2 too.
> ...


"The pie chart with the various haplogroups would be like modern day Ireland, if that is the case."
Ireland is 70%-80% R1b.
I suppose something like that but more diverse. J2a, G, T and the Anatolian R1b IMO were 95%-99% of Mycenaean Y-DNA. With J2a being on top.
Maybe Peloponnese in Bronze Age was 50%-60% J2a.



"Is any research done on what haplogroup were the classical Greeks and what were the percentages of each haplogroup?"
No, that's a very hard one.

----------


## Ralphie Boy

One R1b was found in Ambracia, in Classical Greece (unpublished result). On the mtDNA side, several haplogroup H samples were found, and one haplogroup W. It would not be surprising to find more R1b in Classical Greece or later, given how widespread it is.

----------


## kingjohn

> One R1b was found in Ambracia, in Classical Greece (unpublished result). On the mtDNA side, several haplogroup H samples were found, and one haplogroup W. It would not be surprising to find more R1b in Classical Greece or later, given how widespread it is.


Do you know the other y haplogroups 
From classical greece ( unpublished) ?

P.s
Should be e-v13 and j2 ..

----------


## Ralphie Boy

> Do you know the other y haplogroups 
> From classical greece ( unpublished) ?
> P.s
> Should be e-v13 and j2 ..



None yet except for the one R1b sample shared by another Eupedia member in a video, that I posted above. It was also said some R1b was found in Mycenaeans.

Eurogenes says some unpublished classical Greece samples are heterogenous but he will not provide any details (except for some close to Cyprus). Heterogenous how, I wonder, south to north, closer to Levant or Caucasus, more west or northwest, etc?

----------


## Dianatomia

> Eurogenes says some unpublished classical Greece samples are heterogenous but he will not provide any details (except for some close to Cyprus). Heterogenous how, I wonder, south to north, closer to Levant or Caucasus, more west or northwest, etc?


The outliers would probably be close to the MBA North Greek samples all the way to samples which are close to Cyprus. 

Do we have Autosomal DNA of the unpublished Greek sample? Or just the haplogroup? When will the research be published?

----------


## Jovialis

> The outliers would probably be close to the MBA North Greek samples all the way to samples which are close to Cyprus. 
> 
> Do we have Autosomal DNA of the unpublished Greek sample? Or just the haplogroup? When will the research be published?


Indeed, autosomal context is important. I'd imagine Iran_N/CHG is far more likely, than Levantine input. Based on what we have already seen. For example, the Greek input in Calabria and the rest of Southern Italy in Sarno et al. 2021 shows Iran_N/CHG input, not Levantine.

----------


## kingjohn

> None yet except for the one R1b sample shared by another Eupedia member in a video, that I posted above. It was also said some R1b was found in Mycenaeans.
> 
> Eurogenes says some unpublished classical Greece samples are heterogenous but he will not provide any details (except for some close to Cyprus). Heterogenous how, I wonder, south to north, closer to Levant or Caucasus, more west or northwest, etc?



r1b is the *alpha male* of ancient remains 
we see it everywhere and in high number dominant  :Smile:

----------


## Jovialis

> Indeed, autosomal context is important. I'd imagine Iran_N/CHG is far more likely, than Levantine input. Based on what we have already seen. For example, the Greek input in Calabria and the rest of Southern Italy in Sarno et al. 2021 shows Iran_N/CHG input, not Levantine.


Greek colonization began to slowly accrue between 800 BC - 700 BC:

----------


## Ralphie Boy

> The outliers would probably be close to the MBA North Greek samples all the way to samples which are close to Cyprus. 
> 
> Do we have Autosomal DNA of the unpublished Greek sample? Or just the haplogroup? When will the research be published?


Eurogenes says (just trying to report, not giving or taking away validity) that a study should come out soon, showing Greek DNA from different ancient periods and the Middle Ages. Looking very forward to it, but we know these studies take a long time.

To my knowledge the material I referenced above shows only uniparental markers, though the screenshot I took of the video says aDNA. Here is the video from which the samples came.

https://youtu.be/HGKZKoH4yv0

Eurogenes does say that the Classical Greek DNA samples are broadly Mycenaean and Anatolia/Levant, but heterogenous. When asked if there is overlap with modern Greeks, he said Slavs came from the north and did not give a direct yes or no answer.

----------


## Constantine

I honestly don't see them being in any great hurry to release Classical Greek samples (at least legit ones).

----------


## ihype02

> Eurogenes says (just trying to report, not giving or taking away validity) that a study should come out soon, showing Greek DNA from different ancient periods and the Middle Ages. Looking very forward to it, but we know these studies take a long time.
> To my knowledge the material I referenced above shows only uniparental markers, though the screenshot I took of the video says aDNA. Here is the video from which the samples came.
> https://youtu.be/HGKZKoH4yv0
> Eurogenes does say that the Classical Greek DNA samples are broadly Mycenaean and Anatolia/Levant, but heterogenous. When asked if there is overlap with modern Greeks, he said Slavs came from the north and did not give a direct yes or no answer.


Yes you took the words from my mouth. When he was asked about whenever there will be some sort of a northern shift in Classical Greeks he a left a vague response: "from the north came the Slavs".
He also said that most Balkan samples are like the Thracian sample but with more Steppe. Probably not refering to old Greek samples he has seen.

I am not so sure that is the same study (in the Youtube link) that Davidski is talking about.

----------


## Bill7

> Yes you took the words from my mouth. When he was asked about whenever there will be some sort of a northern shift in Classical Greeks he a left a vague response: "from the north came the Slavs".
> He also said that most Balkan samples are like the Thracian sample but with more Steppe. Probably not refering to old Greek samples he has seen.
> I am not so sure that is the same study (in the Youtube link) that Davidski is talking about.


But eurogenes wasn't the guy that claimed that mycaeneans were going to turn out pure corded ware and yamnaya like? Should his words taken for granted?

----------


## ihype02

> But eurogenes wasn't the guy that claimed that mycaeneans were going to turn out pure corded ware and yamnaya like? Should his words taken fot granted?


He has seen the samples but that might not be the full picture. Maybe those were just from Peloponnese or the South.
Nobodies predictions should be taken for granted. Most people thought years ago that I2a was mostly Illyrian in Dalmatia and that turned out to be a big error. I used to suspect that Bronze Age Sicilians were very close to old Greeks before the colonization that turned out to be false.

----------


## kingjohn

I wonder how davidski knows
All this 
..
Does he got friends in those labs 
That leak information for him .... :Thinking: 


p.s
i wish i would have this kind of friends  :Laughing:

----------


## Bill7

> He has seen the samples but that might not be the full picture. Maybe those were just from Peloponnese or the South.
> Nobodies predictions should be taken for granted. Most people thought years ago that I2a was mostly Illyrian in Dalmatia and that turned out to be a big error. I used to suspect that Bronze Age Sicilians were very close to old Greeks before the colonization that turned out to be false.


 I see we will wait to see the full picture my prediction is that iron age Greeks are going to be mycaenean like maybe with an extra 5-15% steppe plus some anatolian admixture I guess

----------


## bigsnake49

> Yes you took the words from my mouth. When he was asked about whenever there will be some sort of a northern shift in Classical Greeks he a left a vague response: "from the north came the Slavs".
> He also said that most Balkan samples are like the Thracian sample but with more Steppe. Probably not refering to old Greek samples he has seen.
> 
> I am not so sure that is the same study (in the Youtube link) that Davidski is talking about.


The study in the Youtube video is from Ambrakia, a colony of the Corinthians in Epirus. There were only two Y-DNA haplogroups identified, one r1b and the other G. There was damage to the other male samples so they could not determine their haplogroup.

----------


## kingjohn

> The study in the Youtube video is from Ambrakia, a colony of the Corinthians in Epirus. *There were only two Y-DNA hapless identified, one r1b and the other G*. There was damage to the other male samples.



thanks  :Good Job: 
so it was cornithian colony  :Cool V: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambracia
but 2 samples is extremely low number 
bummer  :Sad 2:

----------


## bigsnake49

> thanks 
> so it was cornithian colony 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambracia
> but 2 samples is extremely low number 
> bummer


Yeah, people don't understand how few samples are actually usable from all the tombs. Then you have funding issues and graduate student schedules, etc.

----------


## Hawk

> He has seen the samples but that might not be the full picture. Maybe those were just from Peloponnese or the South.
> Nobodies predictions should be taken for granted. Most people thought years ago that I2a was mostly Illyrian in Dalmatia and that turned out to be a big error. I used to suspect that Bronze Age Sicilians were very close to old Greeks before the colonization that turned out to be false.


There was never any doubt on it, 10-12 years ago Kenn Nordvedt clearly explained that I2a-Din is a Slavic marker through and through. because people didn't bother to read it, that's another story.

Also, on 2008 Dienekes Pontikos explained that E-V13 has a Late Bronze Age expansion, but he couldn't pinpoint from which direction.

----------


## real expert

> But eurogenes wasn't the guy that claimed that mycaeneans were going to turn out pure corded ware and yamnaya like? Should his words taken fot granted?



He was dead wrong concerning the Mycenaeans. However, Davidski's leak about the Roman paper turned out to be overall right.

----------


## Archetype0ne

> There was never any doubt on it, 10-12 years ago Kenn Nordvedt clearly explained that I2a-Din is a Slavic marker through and through. because people didn't bother to read it, that's another story.
> 
> Also, on 2008 Dienekes Pontikos explained that E-V13 has a Late Bronze Age expansion, but he couldn't pinpoint from which direction.


Have we found out later which direction? It seems east right?

----------


## brick

> He was dead wrong concerning the Mycenaeans. However, Davidski's leak about the Roman paper turned out to be overall right.


It was other people who leaked some results of the paper on Ancient Rome, not him.

----------


## Bill7

I would like to ask something. Is it possible to say how much slavic ancestry Greeks have? I have seen many users on anthrogenica claiming that Greeks and Albanians have atleast 35-40% balto-slavic dreaft but that seems an exaggeration what do you think?

----------


## ihype02

> I would like to ask something. Is it possible to say how much slavic ancestry Greeks have? I have seen many users on anthrogenica claiming that Greeks and Albanians have atleast 35-40% balto-slavic dreaft but that seems an exaggeration what do you think?


Compared to Myceneaen and *Slovaks*. You can use a ruler with academic PCAs you can see that Greek Macedonians are shifted 1/3 on average towards Poles. Slovaks are more southern than Poles plus when taking in consideration some negligible Anatolian ancestry which influences a southern shift, you get similar percentages 35%-40%.
But it's not all just Slavic but also more 'northern' ancestry.

----------


## Bill7

> Compared to Myceneaen and *Slovaks*. You can use a ruler with academic PCAs you can see that Greek Macedonians are shifted 1/3 on average towards Poles. Slovaks are more southern than Poles plus when taking in consideration some neglible Anatolian ancestry which influences a southern shift, you get similar percentages 35%-40%.
> But it's not all just Slavic but also more 'nothern' ancestry.


Yeah I agree this northern ancestry is not all slavic some of it might be present in Greece prior to slavs or it could be from hellenized thracians, illyrians, paeonians. I also believe that ancient Macedonians were more northern shifted than mycaeneans. I personally doubt that Greeks have more than 20% actual slavic ancestry

----------


## Jovialis

> Greek colonization began to slowly accrue between 800 BC - 700 BC:


Sarno et al. 2021 attributes some of the ancestry in south Italians to Ancient Greeks. Why would some of the ancestry survive there, and not in Greece itself, according to eurogenes, questioning even 1%? I personally get 43% "Greek & Albanian", and only "2% Cyprus" according to Ancestry DNA. The Greeks of this age would not be substantially Cypriot.



Edit: 3% Cyprus

----------


## ihype02

> Sarno et al. 2021 attributes some of the ancestry in south Italians to Ancient Greeks. Why would some of the ancestry survive there, and not in Greece itself, according to eurogenes, questioning even 1%? I personally get 43% "Greek & Albanian", and only "2% Cyprus" according to Ancestry DNA. The Greeks of this age would not be substantially Cypriot.


In amateur calculators they show up as 5% Anatolian. But I don't even automatically trust the interpretations of scientists let alone some forum members. I only take strict facts for granted like : "Old Greeks carried J2a." "Old Greek plot close to Southern Italians." 
Those statements are facts. Now you can use those facts and derive a complete different story from another.

----------


## Hawk

> Yeah I agree this northern ancestry is not all slavic some of it might be present in Greece prior to slavs or it could be from hellenized thracians, illyrians, paeonians. I also believe that ancient Macedonians were more northern shifted than mycaeneans. I personally doubt that Greeks have more than 20% actual slavic ancestry


Helladic Middle Bronze Age Log_2 had tones of Steppe, so some cherry picked samples don't picture the whole mosaique.

----------


## Bill7

> Helladic Middle Bronze Age Log_2 had tones of Steppe, so some cherry picked samples don't picture the whole mosaique.


some "insiders" said that we are gonna see more steppe heavy paleobalkan samples. I also thought that we had ancient thracian and illyrian remains which clustered with modern Bulgarians and Romanians

----------


## Hawk

> some "insiders" said that we are gonna see more steppe heavy paleobalkan samples. I also thought that we had ancient thracian and illyrian remains which clustered with modern Bulgarians and Romanians


These calculators are very basic, nested if's and else's in JavaScript. They just compare a very basic percentage splits between components.

----------


## Jovialis

> In amateur calculators they show up as 5% Anatolian. But I don't even automatically trust the interpretations of scientists let alone some forum members. I only take strict facts for granted like : "Old Greeks carried J2a." "Old Greek plot close to Southern Italians." 
> Those statements are facts. Now you can use those facts and derive a complete different story from another.




Reconstruction of Greek from Magna Grecia. If you ask me this man could fit right in South Italy, but also modern Greece, and Albania.

----------


## Dianatomia

> Compared to Myceneaen and *Slovaks*. You can use a ruler with academic PCAs you can see that Greek Macedonians are shifted 1/3 on average towards Poles. Slovaks are more southern than Poles plus when taking in consideration some neglible Anatolian ancestry which influences a southern shift, you get similar percentages 35%-40%.
> But it's not all just Slavic but also more 'nothern' ancestry.


After seeing that in the EBA there was much more steppe ancestry in places like the Thesally/Macedonia border area than the South of Greece, and taking into consideration the rumors that there were also Cypriot like classical Greeks, we shouldn't take anything for granted.

----------


## Bill7

> After seeing that in the EBA there was much more steppe ancestry in places like the Thesally/Macedonia border area than the South of Greece, and taking into consideration the rumors that there were also Cypriot like classical Greeks, we shouldn't take anything for granted.


But it should be next to impossible for thessalian epirotans and Macedonian Greeks during the iron age to be log_2 like and southern Greeks to be cypriot - anatolian like. Modern mainland Greeks even today are close to each other genetically and cluster closely

----------


## bigsnake49

> But it should be next to impossible for thessalian epirotans and Macedonian Greeks during the iron age to be log_2 like and southern Greeks to be cypriot - anatolian like. Modern mainland Greeks even today are close to each other genetically and cluster closely


Greeks were not totally homogeneous. There were of different tribes or clans. Then they mixed with the locals and we don't know how differentiated they were from each other.

----------


## Çerç

> Sarno et al. 2021 attributes some of the ancestry in south Italians to Ancient Greeks


In what part of the paper exactly?

You keep misquoting this paper. They only leave it open as a possibility, while not finding any evidence of it. It was shared ancestry from Neolithic populations that they found.

----------


## Çerç

Here is their main conclusion on the topic:


"_Importantly, the same ancestral sources are equally shared both by the present-day “open” (i.e. not-isolated) Southern Italian populations of Benevento, Castrovillari and Catanzaro, as well as by the geographically and linguistically-isolated communities of the Aspromonte mountain area, thus signaling a common genetic background that possibly predates the linguistic hypotheses originally suggested about the times of formation of the Greco language in Southern Italy. Accordingly, we hypothesize that the genetic continuity between Southern Italian populations and the other Mediterranean groups may date back to these Neolithic and post-Neolithic events and may have been subsequently maintained and in some cases reinforced by continuous and overlapping gene flows following similar paths of diffusion and interaction between populations, among which the migrations of Greek-speaking people during the classical era (Magna Graecia) and/or in Byzantine and subsequent times_."

Only to a connection that predates Magnia Graecia has been evidenced, but they hypothesize interaction may have continued, which has not been detected yet.

----------


## Jovialis

> In what part of the paper exactly?
> 
> You keep misquoting this paper. They only leave it open as a possibility, while not finding any evidence of it. It was shared ancestry from Neolithic populations that they found.


I have misquoted nothing, you are begging the question with a decidedly negative approach. Excuse me, but it is extremely likely that SOME of the ancestry in southern Italy is attributed to the Ancient Greeks. Considering the FACT that they colonized the area, and were a significant presence.

_"It was shared ancestry from Neolithic populations that they found."
_

So you draw a hard and fast conclusion solely on this, but not the possibility of ancient Greek contributions?


I strongly dislike the tone of your post, and from the looks of your profile, I think you may be one of that retarded "Romanian" t-roll's socks.

Previous surveys on the ancient genetic legacy of Southern Italy pointed to genetic contributions linking Southern Italy and Mediterranean Greek islands with Anatolia and the Caucasus tracing back to migratory events occurred during the Neolithic and the Bronze Age, in which the Mediterranean served as a preferential crossroad3,13,27. In particular, while the expansion of Anatolian Neolithic farmers significantly impacted all the Peninsula, differential Bronze-Age contributions were observed for Southern Italy with respect to Northern Italian populations. Bronze Age influences in the gene pool of Southern Italians have been in fact associated to a non-steppe Caucasian-related ancestry carried along the Mediterranean shores at the same time, but independently from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe migrations that occurred through Continental Europe. Consistently with this viewpoint, genetic analyses performed by comparing our modern populations with the main ancient ancestral sources have displayed the clustering of analysed Southern Italian groups with Neolithic and Bronze Age samples from Anatolian, Aegean Minoan and Mycenaean populations, as opposed to the affinity of Northern Italy with Late-Neolithic and Bronze-Age samples from continental Europe (Suppl. Figure S8). Accordingly, both _f3-outgroup, qpGraph and qpAdmixture analyses (Fig. 4, Suppl. Figure S9, Suppl. Figure S10) revealed influences related to a Steppe ancestry in the Northern Italian groups, instead paralleled in Southern Italy by an analogous Caucasian-related contribution from a non-Steppe CHG/Iran_N source. Importantly, the same ancestral sources are equally shared both by the present-day “open” (i.e. not-isolated) Southern Italian populations of Benevento, Castrovillari and Catanzaro, as well as by the geographically and linguistically-isolated communities of the Aspromonte mountain area (Fig. 4, Suppl. Table S8), thus signaling a common genetic background that possibly predates the linguistic hypotheses originally suggested about the times of formation of the Greco language in Southern Italy. Accordingly, we hypothesize that the genetic continuity between Southern Italian populations and the other Mediterranean groups may date back to these Neolithic and post-Neolithic events and may have been subsequently maintained and in some cases reinforced by continuous and overlapping gene flows following similar paths of diffusion and interaction between populations, among which the migrations of Greek-speaking people during the classical era (Magna Graecia) and/or in Byzantine and subsequent times. Therefore, the observed patterns could be linked to a tendency to mobility that has always characterized these populations, resulting in continuous cultural and genetic exchanges over time. That being so, the Calabrian Greek ethno-linguistic minorities of Southern Italy may be interpreted as the remnants of a wider area of Greek influence, that by virtue of their geographic isolation have preserved and evolved a unique variety of Greek which has survived through centuries in the mountains of the Aspromonte area. At this respect, the communities showing higher signatures of genetic isolation (Roghudi, Gallicianò, Condofuri and Roccaforte del Greco; Suppl. Figure S4, Suppl. Figure S5) are also the ones located in the more impervious areas of the Aspromonte, at the same time still conserving a certain number of Greco speakers (Suppl. Table S1)40,41._

----------


## Çerç

> I strongly dislike the tone of your post, and from the looks of your profile, I think you may be one of that retarded "Romanian" t-roll's socks.


There you go again with personal attacks, responding to substantive comments with language for which you give infractions to regular members. Nobody is interested in your tone preferences btw.




> I have misquoted nothing, you are begging the question with a decidedly negative approach. Excuse me, but it is extremely likely that SOME of the ancestry in southern Italy is attributed to the Ancient Greeks. Considering the FACT that they colonized the area, and were a significant presence.
> 
> _"It was shared ancestry from Neolithic populations that they found."
> _
> 
> So you draw a hard and fast conclusion solely on this, but not the possibility of ancient Greek contributions?


First, please do not change what I said. I did not contest the truthfulness of Ancient Greek ancestry in South Italians, which in my opinion, despite not having been detected yet, will likely be captured in future studies, maybe once IA samples emerge.

I contested your claim that "_Sarno et al. 2021 attributes some of the ancestry in south Italians to Ancient Greeks_", which is simply untrue, and thus a misquote. They did not attribute any ancestry in South Italians to Ancient Greeks. They only hypothesized about it in the conclusion and left it as an open-ended question to be researched further in the future.

----------


## Jovialis

> There you go again with personal attacks, responding to substantive comments with language for which you give infractions to regular members. Nobody is interested in your tone preferences btw.
> 
> 
> 
> First, please do not change what I said. I did not contest the truthfulness of Ancient Greek ancestry in South Italians, which in my opinion, despite not having been detected yet, will likely be captured in future studies, maybe once IA samples emerge.
> 
> I contested your claim that "_Sarno et al. 2021 attributes some of the ancestry in south Italians to Ancient Greeks_", which is simply untrue, and thus a misquote. They did not attribute any ancestry in South Italians to Ancient Greeks. They only hypothesized about it in the conclusion and left it as an open-ended question to be researched further in the future.


There I go again? Have we spoken before? Is this some kind of ban evasion you are pulling?

You don't contest the truthfulness, then what are you saying? You don't believe it, yet you believe it? You are being needlessly contrarian.

----------


## Jovialis

Why is it that two socks of the "Romanian" t-roll always circulate around the same set of Albanian members profiles? This is highly peculiar, I am starting to think these members are colluding in trying to disrupt the website.



Pandatoteu




I can see who sees what, who messages who, and who upvotes who. Don't think you are so slick...

----------


## Çerç

Don't lie. I have no messages besides your infraction notices and one from Giannicus. I have no idea who those two are.

----------


## Jovialis

It is unwise to suggest that using the word "attribute" and the authors suggesting in a hypothesis with a very likely scenario is not basically the same thing. You are not the policing language here, enough with the denialism, go to Eurogenes for that. It is a PATHETIC grasp at straws.

----------


## Çerç

> It is unwise to suggest that using the word "attribute" and the author's suggesting in a hypothesis with a very likely scenario is not basically the same thing.


This is not semantics. They did not attribute Ancient Greek ancestry to South Italians. That is the simple truth, yet you keep claiming they did.

----------


## Jovialis

> This is not semantics. _They did not attribute Ancient Greek ancestry to South Italians_. That is the simple truth, yet you keep claiming they did.


You are speaking out of both sides of your mouth, because you said that you believe they did.




> What I am saying is very clear: South Italians may have some ancestry from Ancient Greeks

----------


## Jovialis

> First, please do not change what I said. I did not contest the truthfulness of Ancient Greek ancestry in South Italians, which in my opinion, despite not having been detected yet, will likely be captured in future studies, maybe once IA samples emerge.


And again here

----------


## Çerç

> You are speaking out of both sides of your mouth, because you said that you believe they did.





> 




Believe it or not, it is possible to have beliefs without claiming a paper supported them.

- It is my own belief that South Italians have some Ancient Greek ancestry.
- It is a fact that Sarno et al did not state that South Italians have some Ancient Greek ancestry.

I don't know if such a simple distinction can be made any clearer than this.

----------


## Jovialis

> Believe it or not, it is possible to have beliefs without claiming a paper supported them.
> 
> - It is my own belief that South Italians have some Ancient Greek ancestry.
> - It is a fact that Sarno et al did not state that South Italians have some Ancient Greek ancestry.
> 
> I don't know if such a simple distinction can be made any clearer than this.


They only proposed it as a likely hypothesis that they ATTRIBUTED it to them. You are being insufferable!

_Accordingly, we hypothesize that the genetic continuity between Southern Italian populations and the other Mediterranean groups may date back to these Neolithic and post-Neolithic events and may have been subsequently maintained and in some cases reinforced by continuous and overlapping gene flows following similar paths of diffusion and interaction between populations, among which the migrations of Greek-speaking people during the classical era (Magna Graecia) and/or in Byzantine and subsequent times. 
_

----------


## Jovialis

> Greek continuity from the BA cannot be evaluated properly with the crumbs of data that has been made available so far. Data from IA to the Late Middle Ages is completely lacking. We only have a limited amount of BA samples, and modern samples from Greece (very few used in studies for some reason).
> 
> The Antonio et al paper on Rome showed how modern results overlapping with IA or BA ones are not necessarily indicative of the former being descendant of the latter, as modern samples there overlap with IA and Republic-era results, but the intermediate periods show significant south-eastern and then north-western shifts. The authors attributed this to migrants from the East Mediterranean first, and from Central Europe later (which was not well-taken here I remember). So the overlap between IA and modern samples was at least partially coincidental. If we had from Rome, only the amount of data we have from Greece, many would now be speaking about genetic continuity from the Iron Age to today.
> 
> So far, it can only be said that modern Greeks are among the European peoples who plot near samples from BA Greece. This hints, at the very least, to shared ancestry between modern Greeks and those samples, but this could be due to either modern Greeks descending of those BA populations, or of other populations that had similar ancestry components, or (more likely) both. But it does not prove either possibility. Just like in Rome, it may be that the modern and BA similarity has a more complex explanation.
> 
> There are already small hints that favor a similar scenario in mainland Greece, while the islands may have been largely unaffected. We now know that Steppe-related ancestry arrived to the Aegean during MBA, as it is missing from earlier periods. Therefore, new samples from MBA mainland Greece likely represent some of the most Steppe-like prehistoric populations of the region, and such ancestry was almost certainly subsequently diluted through admixture with non-Steppe peoples of the Aegean. In fact, Mycenean samples of the Late Bronze Age already show diminished Steppe-related ancestry, and this trend probably continued through the IA and into Antiquity. So if the latest study showed that modern mainland Greeks can be modeled as the heavily Steppe MBA samples with some additional Steppe ancestry, it is probable that a larger Steppe-related component is required to model them with IA or Classical period Ancient Greeks, which would suggest important influxes from the north in subsequent periods.


Seemingly your entire existence on this board is to deny Greeks and Italians any continuity to their ancestors, why is it that some Albanians are obsessed with doing this? Perhaps if you read the paper from Antonio et al. 2019, you would see how deeply flawed your paragraph is. The Eastern Immigrants did not contribute to the later populations, dying out according to their sample set in the middle ages. Funny how you are absolutely certain of something which is false, but fits your prejudice. FYI there are samples from the Iron Age in Italy that are near both Northern, and Southern Italians; within the same haplotype-sharing groups. Your ignorance is a disgrace!

----------


## Çerç

> They only proposed it as a likely hypothesis that they ATTRIBUTED it to them. You are being insufferable!
> 
> _Accordingly, we hypothesize that the genetic continuity between Southern Italian populations and the other Mediterranean groups may date back to these Neolithic and post-Neolithic events and may have been subsequently maintained and in some cases reinforced by continuous and overlapping gene flows following similar paths of diffusion and interaction between populations, among which the migrations of Greek-speaking people during the classical era (Magna Graecia) and/or in Byzantine and subsequent times.
> _


Yes, this is the exact paragraph I quoted earlier. The part mentioning the Neolithic is what they have detected, the part talking about later periods is what they think may be detected in the future. Note the difference, it's clearly stated.




> Seemingly your entire existence on this board is to deny Greeks and Italians any continuity to their ancestors, why is it that some Albanians are obsessed with doing this? Perhaps if you read the paper from Antonio et al. 2019, you would see how deeply flawed your paragraph is. The Eastern Immigrants did not contribute to the later populations, dying out according to their sample set in the middle ages. Funny how you are absolutely certain of something which is false, but fits your prejudice. FYI there are samples from the Iron Age in Italy that are near both Northern, and Southern Italians; within the same haplotype-sharing groups. Your ignorance is a disgrace!


Personal attacks and stereotypes once again... No, Greek-Italian connections are not my main focus, but it is the most commonly and actively discussed topic here, by far, so I participate. Also, I don't aim to deny this connection altogether, just understand it and discuss it within the limits of scientific findings.

Of course I have read the paper, many times actually. I think it is one of the best papers on Mediterranean archaeogenetics. Maybe you misunderstood my points in the post you quoted. Which part did you find inaccurate?

Take it easy btw.

----------


## Jovialis

> Yes, this is the exact paragraph I quoted earlier. The part mentioning the Neolithic is what they have detected, the part talking about later periods is what they think may be detected in the future. Note the difference, it's clearly stated.
> 
> 
> 
> Personal attacks and stereotypes once again... No, Greek-Italian connections are not my main focus, but it is the most commonly and actively discussed topic here, by far, so I participate. Also, I don't aim to deny this connection altogether, just understand it and discuss it within the limits of scientific findings.
> 
> Of course I have read the paper, many times actually. I think it is one of the best papers on Mediterranean archaeogenetics. Maybe you misunderstood my points in the post you quoted. Which part did you find inaccurate?
> 
> Take it easy btw.


FWIW, I have long said on this website that I speculate that there are native Greek-like populations, that have been in southern Italy, prior to arrival of the Greeks. However, they were re-enforced by Greek colonization. I think the Sarno et al. 2021 hypothesis shares this sentiment. In fact, I suggested that the so-call Latin outliers from Antonio et al. 2019, who cluster with southerners, may be representative of this populations. As well as many of the C6 haplotype cohort that is present in the Imperial era, and subsequent eras.


Perhaps I have been a bit harsh, so in a show of good faith, I will reverse your infractions.

----------


## Çerç

> FWIW, I have long said on this website that I speculate that there are native _Greek-like_ populations, that have been in southern Italy, prior to arrival of the Greeks. However, they were re-enforced by Greek colonization. *I think the Sarno et al. 2021 hypothesis shares this sentiment*.


This is something I agree with, and I think sooner or later there will be a paper which traces the ancestry of southern Italians, or at least some regions or groups, partially to Ancient Greeks. Until now, if you ask me, the strongest and maybe only direct evidence for that in a scientific paper, is not from Sarno et al but the Finocchio et al, 2018: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-25912-9

_J2a-L397 is tightly associated with a typical DYS445 6-repeat allele. This has been hypothesized as a marker of the Greek colonizations in the Mediterranean55, based on its presence in Greek Anatolia and Provence (France), a region with attested Iron Age Greek contribution... ...The ages of the three lineages (2.0–3.0 kya) are compatible with the beginning of the Greek colonial period, in the 8th century BCE..._

I don't think all of J2a-L397 (J-L70) in the Mediterranean is linked to the Ancient Greeks, and if they had a larger sample from other countries they may have evidenced that, but at least some of its subclades should be.

----------


## Salento

Although many consider one of the Latins an Outlier, no Latins made it into (M.L. Antonio) Table S27 (Significant genetic outliers for each time period … )

If it was highly unusual the authors would have added it in the table. 

https://science.sciencemag.org/conte...Antonio_SM.pdf

----------


## Palermo Trapani

Jovialis/Salento/Cerc:

I put my MTA map. The Greek colonization in Southern Italian Mainland and Sicily we all agree started around 800 BC. Otzi is my best ancient Match on MTA but I get several ancient Greeks, including some from the most recent study (Clemente et al 2021 "The genomic history of the Aegean palatial civilizations") along with R850 (Antonio et al 2019). I also get a match to R437 but it fell out of my top 100 for this Kit (It is still in an older Kit run that I have kept to document it is a Deep Dive match). But I think in my case, which is anecdotal, there are 5 ancient Greeks that I get deep matches with in period well before 800 BC, and of course Otzi a Late Neolithic Italian along with 2 Republican Romans and numerous Imperial Romans.

I don't think either of my Y and mtdna Haplogroups can be categorized as Greek per se so it seems in my case there is some common ancestry in both ancient Sicily and mainland Southern Italy and Greece that existed well before the Greek Colonization circa 800 BC.

----------


## Jovialis

> This is something I agree with, and I think sooner or later there will be a paper which traces the ancestry of southern Italians, or at least some regions or groups, partially to Ancient Greeks. Until now, if you ask me, the strongest and maybe only direct evidence for that in a scientific paper, is not from Sarno et al but the Finocchio et al, 2018: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-25912-9
> _J2a-L397 is tightly associated with a typical DYS445 6-repeat allele. This has been hypothesized as a marker of the Greek colonizations in the Mediterranean55, based on its presence in Greek Anatolia and Provence (France), a region with attested Iron Age Greek contribution... ...The ages of the three lineages (2.0–3.0 kya) are compatible with the beginning of the Greek colonial period, in the 8th century BCE..._
> I don't think all of J2a-L397 (J-L70) in the Mediterranean is linked to the Ancient Greeks, and if they had a larger sample from other countries they may have evidenced that, but at least some of its subclades should be.


I don't think this is a better study than Sarno et al. 2021, considering they don't even use ancient DNA for autosomal analysis.

----------


## MOESAN

@Jovialis
I regret the tone taken by your opposition to Cerç (you 'chilled' down a bit, what I find correct), because you're an educated man and very often competent and open minded. I 'm not taking too much part in this interesting thread, but on the little I 've read of his arguments, and his doubts, I think they are kind of legitimate prudence in front of diverse affirmations of continuity, here and there, for more than a pop. Whatever which side has the truth, I find we can and may exchange our oppositions of views without it would be taken as a try to sink a thread down. We need calm and to distinguish intellectual opposition and trolling.
I hope my words will not be taken as an offense.

----------


## Dianatomia

> But it should be next to impossible for thessalian epirotans and Macedonian Greeks during the iron age to be log_2 like and southern Greeks to be cypriot - anatolian like. Modern mainland Greeks even today are close to each other genetically and cluster closely


Obviously not. They are probably the outliers of the Greek genetic mainframe. Most classical Greeks will be anywhere between those two groups.

----------


## Jovialis

> @Jovialis
> I regret the tone taken by your opposition to Cerç (you 'chilled' down a bit, what I find correct), because you're an educated man and very often competent and open minded. I 'm not taking too much part in this interesting thread, but on the little I 've read of his arguments, and his doubts, I think they are kind of legitimate prudence in front of diverse affirmations of continuity, here and there, for more than a pop. Whatever which side has the truth, I find we can and may exchange our oppositions of views without it would be taken as a try to sink a thread down. We need calm and to distinguish intellectual opposition and trolling.
> I hope my words will not be taken as an offense.


Ironically, he and I generally agree. However, if you look back at the origin of this dispute, it was his tone which I found to be less than civil. At any rate, the issue is moot, all is good.


Nevertheless, there is a kind of Albanian-click that is constantly causing conflicts here. Not all Albanian members, some of whom I actually like reading posts from, like iHype. Further I don't think Cere is one of them. I will not name, names, but I find some of the activity behind the scenes, highly suspicious. Which I suspect is connected to a very disruptive t-roll. Please understand, there is more context to this issue. Further, who knows if these actors are even Albanian? They could be using it as a cover, to sow conflict, which would not surprise me. I don't want people to feel as though I am targeting people based on their ethnicity. If you look back thread you will see I try to be as open as possible to all members. I myself have a commonality with Albanians (and Greeks) according to the Ancestry DNA breakdown, which I think is pretty cool.

----------


## Jovialis

> Reconstruction of Greek from Magna Grecia. If you ask me this man could fit right in South Italy, but also modern Greece, and Albania.


Like the saying goes ”Una Faccia, Una Razza.”

PEACE

----------


## bigsnake49

> Like the saying goes ”Una Faccia, Una Razza.”
> 
> PEACE


And we both like to talk with our hands and are loud and expressive and loving.

----------


## matadworf

A lot of folks want to claim some sort of affinity with the Ancient Greeks but I do think genetically Southern Italians and Eastern Aegean Greek Islanders are the closest. I'm a mainland Greek with deep roots in the Peloponnese but from my observations of various models (G25) I find to have a closer genetic link to Illyrians (usually the biggest component) and/or other Paleo-Balkanites than the heavier CHG, decreased Steppe ancient pops.

----------


## Bill7

> A lot of folks want to claim some sort of affinity with the Ancient Greeks but I do think genetically Southern Italians and Eastern Aegean Greek Islanders are the closest. I'm a mainland Greek with deep roots in the Peloponnese but from my observations of various models (G25) I find to have a closer genetic link to Illyrians (usually the biggest component) and/or other Paleo-Balkanites than the heavier CHG, decreased Steppe ancient pops.


 If Iron age Greeks turn out log_2 like I think your close affinity with illyrians is going to be replaced by these samples. Also I believe that when we get ancient Macedonians and epirotans mainland Greeks are going to be really close genetically to them

----------


## Constantine

> If Iron age Greeks turn out log_2 like I think your close affinity with illyrians is going to be replaced by these samples. Also I believe that when we get ancient Macedonians and epirotans mainland Greeks are going to be really close genetically to them


This. It's also interesting that on 23andMe these days I notice many Balkanites getting Peloponnesian as part of their Ancestry.

----------


## Hawk

> This. It's also interesting that on 23andMe these days I notice many Balkanites getting Peloponnesian as part of their Ancestry.


I think 23andme autosomal breakdown model is a bit skewed. Notice, i said model, they can improve that a lot though.

----------


## ihype02

> Also for the record i do believe there is substantial slavic admixture in greece. Something like 30% for most of the mainland from a Serbian like source would make sense.


Seems like it, when using Sicilians versus Serbs for Peloponnese:
Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 1.6654% / 0.01665386

67.6
Sicilian_East



32.4
Serbian

----------


## ihype02

Target: Greek_Trabzon
Distance: 1.5673% / 0.01567298

83.8
Georgian_Laz



16.2
Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2

----------


## lacreme

> Seems like it, when using Sicilians versus Serbs for Peloponnese:
> Target: Greek_Peloponnese
> Distance: 1.6654% / 0.01665386
> 
> 67.6
> Sicilian_East
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But Peloponnesians as Serbs do carry native paleobalkan admixture which in this 2-way model can only be expressed by inflating the latter...
It rises by almost 15 points if you choose Serbs instead of Poles/Ukrainians. 

It's even more evident in your national average which gets modelled as 52% Sicilian_east and 48% Serbian whereas the NE signal is reduced by almost 23! points when choosing Poles/Ukrainians.
Do you believe that you really are almost half Serbian like ? Personally I don't think so ...

----------


## ihype02

> But Peloponnesians as Serbs do carry native paleobalkan admixture which in this 2-way model can only be expressed by inflating the latter...
> It rises by almost 15 points if you choose Serbs instead of Poles/Ukrainians. 
> 
> It's even more evident in your national average which gets modelled as 52% Sicilian_east and 48% Serbian whereas the NE signal is reduced by almost 23! points when choosing Poles/Ukrainians.
> Do you believe that you really are almost half Serbian like ? Personally I don't think so ...


Well I choosed Sicilians instead of Empuries for one reason.
If you use Empuries it's roughly 50/50 for Serbs. Also I find it hard to believe that Slavs that reached Greece in the early stage were Serb-like. Even if they turn to be that way we need to make sure that they are not outliers before comming up with the conclusions. 

What do you think of using Croats as an admixture for Ballkanic-related ( Albanian, Thracian, Venetian etc), Germanic and Slavic admixture combined together for post-Classical Age Peloponnese versus Empuries? 


Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 2.3217% / 0.02321709

58.4
Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2



41.6
Croatian

----------


## blevins13

> But Peloponnesians as Serbs do carry native paleobalkan admixture which in this 2-way model can only be expressed by inflating the latter...
> It rises by almost 15 points if you choose Serbs instead of Poles/Ukrainians. 
> 
> It's even more evident in your national average which gets modelled as 52% Sicilian_east and 48% Serbian whereas the NE signal is reduced by almost 23! points when choosing Poles/Ukrainians.
> Do you believe that you really are almost half Serbian like ? Personally I don't think so ...


Beautiful things are happening, Greeks reducing the Slavic influence of Albanians as an argument in their continuity theory in mainland. For the record, I believe that Modern Greeks have continuity from the Ancient ones, but probably not in mainland.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Ralphie Boy

> Seems like it, when using Sicilians versus Serbs for Peloponnese:
> Target: Greek_Peloponnese
> Distance: 1.6654% / 0.01665386
> 
> 67.6
> Sicilian_East
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If modern Peloponnesians are a proxy for old Greek genes and have near zero ancient continuity, and Sicilians are a good representative of ancient Greek ancestry, they have quite a bit in common with Sicilians. The replacement populations are pretty “Greek-like,” if Sicilians are among the closest to ancient Greeks (using the few Mycenaean and Empuries samples).

----------


## ihype02

Now I even doubt E-V13 existed at all among Classical Age Peloponnesians. Let's wait and see. 
There is something strange with Peloponnesians being so northern shifted and close to Greek Macedonians when they have half of I2a and R1a that Greek Macedonians have.

----------


## Riverman

> Now I even doubt E-V13 existed at all among Classical Age Peloponnesians. Let's wait and see. 
> There is something strange with Peloponnesians being so northern shifted and close to Greek Macedonians when they have half of I2a and R1a that Greek Macedonians have.


It is absolutely for sure E-V13 did exist among classical age Peleponnesians, the question is just which subclades and frequency! Because Psenichevo, the main Thracian group, directly to the North, covering a portion of modern Greece, was packed with E-V13. And we know that the Greeks mixed with Thracians. Historical Greek people had Thracian fathers, Thracian soldiers were mentioned in various armies and cities, and they were common among the Greek slaves as well. This means there is practically no way V13 was absent from classical Greece, including the Peleponnese, but it could have been fairly low. That's possible, a very low percentage and that almost none of the old lineages did survive into modernity. E-V13 was definitely picked up and incorporated by Slavs at different stages, from the Proto-Slavic to the Balkan Slavic stage. So they picked up E-V13 constantry, from starting point to destination. This means that they too brought a lot of E-V13 to Greece, presumably. 
Its even possible that more of the classical era E-V13 survived in Anatolian and Cypriotic Greeks, as well as Southern Italians, than in modern Northern Greece. Because V13 is not V13 in this context. Its the subclades which really matter, since V13 was present since about 1.300-1.000 BC in Greece, but some lineages died out, others came in with different people. Just like R1b is not R1b for the Germanic vs. Celtic context, comparing e.g. U152 vs. U106. The same applies to some subclades of E-V13, but the problem is its timing is much shorter, and the original expansion involved all major lineages, so we really have to look for more recent subclades to know. In this case, early Greek and Thracian lineages in Greece should have no TMRCA with obvious Albanian, Vlach and Slavic lineages after 0 AD or better earlier. There are a lot which meet this requirement, but that's probably just because the sampling is insufficient. If it holds, there should be Greek lineages with no more recent TMRCA with other Balkan groups, but only Anatolian, Cypriotic and Southern Italian matches after 0 AD and preferably a last common ancestor even earlier. Ideally from the first expansion phase up to Hallstatt, so no later than 500 BC.

----------


## ihype02

> It is absolutely for sure E-V13 did exist among classical age Peleponnesians, the question is just which subclades and frequency! Because Psenichevo, the main Thracian group, directly to the North, covering a portion of modern Greece, was packed with E-V13. And we know that the Greeks mixed with Thracians. Historical Greek people had Thracian fathers, Thracian soldiers were mentioned in various armies and cities, and they were common among the Greek slaves as well. This means there is practically no way V13 was absent from classical Greece, including the Peleponnese, but it could have been fairly low. That's possible, a very low percentage and that almost none of the old lineages did survive into modernity. E-V13 was definitely picked up and incorporated by Slavs at different stages, from the Proto-Slavic to the Balkan Slavic stage. So they picked up E-V13 constantry, from starting point to destination. This means that they too brought a lot of E-V13 to Greece, presumably. 
> Its even possible that more of the classical era E-V13 survived in Anatolian and Cypriotic Greeks, as well as Southern Italians, than in modern Northern Greece. Because V13 is not V13 in this context. Its the subclades which really matter, since V13 was present since about 1.300-1.000 BC in Greece, but some lineages died out, others came in with different people. Just like R1b is not R1b for the Germanic vs. Celtic context, comparing e.g. U152 vs. U106. The same applies to some subclades of E-V13, but the problem is its timing is much shorter, and the original expansion involved all major lineages, so we really have to look for more recent subclades to know. In this case, early Greek and Thracian lineages in Greece should have no TMRCA with obvious Albanian, Vlach and Slavic lineages after 0 AD or better earlier. There are a lot which meet this requirement, but that's probably just because the sampling is insufficient. If it holds, there should be Greek lineages with no more recent TMRCA with other Balkan groups, but only Anatolian, Cypriotic and Southern Italian matches after 0 AD and preferably a last common ancestor even earlier. Ideally from the first expansion phase up to Hallstatt, so no later than 500 BC.


There are some Asiatic haplogroups in Europe with negligible percentages <1%, given were are in the time of globalization those numbers might increase I would say this "X" clade came during the 21/22th century not the Middle Ages. :P
I was being hyperbolic with my words. There was an Eastern African in Balkans.

----------


## anglo-jew

in one of your comments i saw a 75 percentage affinity of modern greeks with myceans i would like to know where in the article it says so ,

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

> in one of your comments i saw a 75 percentage affinity of modern greeks with myceans i would like to know where in the article it says so ,


I made this model for Greeks using G25. The calculator really likes Helladic_MBA for the Greeks. Its located in Northern Greece on the border of Thessaly and Greek Macedonia



```
Target: Greek_Cypriot
Distance: 0.7589% / 0.00758885


51.0
Levant_BA



26.0
Aegean_BA_IA



22.6
Anatolia_BA



0.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.7455% / 0.00745474


38.4
Aegean_BA_IA



16.6
Early_Slav_EMA



15.4
Anatolia_BA



14.8
Illyria_MBA



9.0
Levant_BA



2.8
Latium_IA



2.2
Thracia_IA



0.8
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman



Target: Greek_Dodecanese
Distance: 0.7874% / 0.00787367


41.8
Anatolia_BA



21.8
Levant_BA



21.6
Aegean_BA_IA



7.4
Early_Slav_EMA



5.0
Balkan_East_IA



1.6
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman



0.4
Ancient_SouthAfrican



0.4
Etruscan_IA


Target: Greek_Crete
Distance: 0.5979% / 0.00597931


30.6
Anatolia_BA



30.4
Aegean_BA_IA



25.4
Levant_BA



12.0
Early_Slav_EMA



1.2
Balkan_East_IA



0.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 0.8039% / 0.00803941


29.8
Aegean_BA_IA



27.4
Levant_BA



23.4
Early_Slav_EMA



12.0
Illyria_MBA



5.4
Anatolia_BA



2.0
Latium_IA


Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 0.4596% / 0.00459566


24.2
Early_Slav_EMA



20.4
Aegean_BA_IA



17.0
Levant_BA



15.6
Anatolia_BA



8.6
Balkan_East_IA



7.6
Illyria_MBA



5.2
Thracia_IA



1.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


Target: Greek_Macedonia
Distance: 0.6995% / 0.00699533


32.6
Early_Slav_EMA



25.6
Aegean_BA_IA



23.8
Anatolia_BA



8.2
Levant_BA



3.2
Thracia_IA



3.0
Balkan_East_IA



2.4
Latium_IA



1.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


Target: Greek_Central_Macedonia
Distance: 0.4905% / 0.00490495


32.2
Early_Slav_EMA



24.4
Aegean_BA_IA



13.2
Anatolia_BA



12.4
Levant_BA



8.8
Thracia_IA



7.6
Illyria_MBA



1.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman



0.2
Ancient_WestAfrican


Target: Greek_Kos
Distance: 0.6891% / 0.00689052


47.4
Anatolia_BA



21.2
Levant_BA



13.2
Aegean_BA_IA



9.0
Early_Slav_EMA



7.8
Illyria_MBA



1.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman



0.2
Thracia_IA


Target: Bulgarian
Distance: 1.1122% / 0.01112202


43.0
Early_Slav_EMA



12.8
Thracia_IA



11.0
Aegean_BA_IA



9.4
Anatolia_BA



9.0
Levant_BA



7.0
Balkan_East_IA



4.0
Latium_IA



2.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman



1.6
Illyria_MBA



```


If i only add Mycenaean the calculator replaces Aegean with Illyrian for Thesally but if i remove all ancient Balkan and Italian samples then this happens:
Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 1.5835% / 0.01583461


35.4
Early_Slav_EMA



35.0
GRC_Mycenaean



25.6
Anatolia_BA



3.8
Levant_BA



0.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman





And this is with only Illyrian for Balkans and Mycenaean for Aegean
Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 1.0310% / 0.01031024


34.8
Illyria_MBA



22.2
Early_Slav_EMA



22.2
Anatolia_BA



10.0
GRC_Mycenaean



9.6
Levant_BA



1.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman





And this shows which exact samples the calculator picked:


```
Target: Greek_Cypriot
Distance: 0.7589% / 0.00758885


31.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733



26.0
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



20.8
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



14.6
Levant_BA:ISR:Ashkelon_IA2:ASH8



5.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730



1.8
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Ovaoren_EBA



0.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87



0.4
Levant_BA:Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003


Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.7455% / 0.00745547


31.4
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



16.6
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



15.4
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



8.8
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4331



6.0
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4332



5.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733



4.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003



2.6
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2



2.4
Latium_IA:Boville_Ernica_IA:RMPR1021



2.2
Thracia_IA:UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12



2.0
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208



1.2
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9033



1.2
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215



0.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karluk:DA230



0.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87



0.4
Latium_IA:Rome_Latini_IA:RMPR1016


Target: Greek_Dodecanese
Distance: 0.7874% / 0.00787443


24.6
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



18.0
Levant_BA:ISR:Ashkelon_IA2:ASH8



16.8
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Ovaoren_EBA



16.6
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



7.8
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



5.8
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208



4.8
Balkan_East_IA:BGR_IA:I5769



3.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733



1.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87



0.8
Levant_BA:Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003



0.4
Ancient_SouthAfrican:Khoisan_Hunter-Gatherers


Target: Greek_Crete
Distance: 0.5973% / 0.00597293


30.2
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



20.4
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733



17.8
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



11.8
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



7.0
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Ovaoren_EBA



5.4
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA



4.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730



1.4
Balkan_East_IA:BGR_IA:I5769



1.0
Levant_BA:ISR:Ashkelon_IA2:ASH8



0.6
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:West_Turkic:KAZ_Kipchak:DA179



0.4
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9033


Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 0.8039% / 0.00803922


28.4
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215



23.4
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



19.8
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730



8.8
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4332



7.6
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790731



5.6
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



3.0
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4331



2.2
Latium_IA:Rome_Latini_IA:RMPR1016



1.2
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Cycladic_EBA


Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 0.4595% / 0.00459529


24.4
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



15.6
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



8.8
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



8.4
Balkan_East_IA:BGR_IA:I5769



7.4
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4331



7.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730



6.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790731



5.0
Thracia_IA:UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12



4.0
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215



4.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003



3.0
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2



1.8
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208



1.8
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Minoan_Lassithi



1.4
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Minoan_EBA



1.0
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:West_Turkic:KAZ_Kipchak:DA179



0.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87


Target: Greek_Macedonia
Distance: 0.6995% / 0.00699515


32.6
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



20.8
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



13.2
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



12.2
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208



8.4
Levant_BA:Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003



3.4
Thracia_IA:UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12



3.2
Balkan_East_IA:BGR_IA:I5769



2.6
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA



2.4
Latium_IA:Boville_Ernica_IA:RMPR1021



1.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87


Target: Greek_Central_Macedonia
Distance: 0.4895% / 0.00489452


32.0
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



12.4
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



9.6
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



9.6
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Minoan_Lassithi



9.4
Thracia_IA:UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12



7.4
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4331



6.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730



5.6
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215



5.4
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733



1.0
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:West_Turkic:KAZ_Kipchak:DA179



1.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003



0.4
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790731



0.2
Ancient_WestAfrican:Benue_Cereal_Farmer


Target: Greek_Kos
Distance: 0.6891% / 0.00689054


27.4
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



15.6
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Ovaoren_EBA



13.6
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



8.8
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



8.6
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733



6.6
Levant_BA:ISR:Ashkelon_IA2:ASH8



6.0
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730



4.8
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4332



4.2
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA



2.8
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4331



1.0
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87



0.4
Thracia_IA:UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12



0.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:West_Turkic:KAZ_Kipchak:DA179


Target: Bulgarian
Distance: 1.1122% / 0.01112202


43.0
Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2



12.8
Thracia_IA:UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12



9.4
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA



8.6
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208



7.0
Balkan_East_IA:BGR_IA:I5769



6.6
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730



4.0
Latium_IA:Boville_Ernica_IA:RMPR1021



2.4
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA



2.4
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733



2.0
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87



1.6
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4331



0.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:West_Turkic:KAZ_Kipchak:DA179



```

DNA samples i used:


```
Aegean: GRC_Mycenaean, GRC_Minoan_EBA, GRC_Minoan_Lassithi, GRC_Helladic_EBA, GRC_Helladic_MBA, GRC_Cycladic_EBA, Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2
Anatolian: TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA, TUR_Ovaoren_EBA, TUR_Isparta_EBA
For Anatolians i added Anatolia_East_BA:TUR_Arslantepe_EBA
Slav: HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2
Illyrian: HRV_MBA:I4331, HRV_MBA:I4332
Thracia: UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12
Balkan_East_IA: BGR_IA:I5769
Levant: Levant_Sidon_MBA, ISR:Ashkelon_IA2:ASH8, Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003
South_Semitic_EBA: Arabian_Bedouins:Levant_JOR_EBA
Latium_IA: Boville_Ernica_IA:RMPR1021, Rome_Latini_IA:RMPR1016
Etruscan_IA: Etruscan:RMPR473, ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b
Sardinia_EBA_IA: Sardinia:ORC002, ITA_Sardinia_EBA
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman: West_Turkic:KAZ_Kipchak:DA179, Ottoman_1400ad:MA2195, KAZ_Karakhanid:DA204, KAZ_Karakhanid:DA205, KAZ_Karluk:DA222, KAZ_Karluk:DA230, KAZ_Kimak:DA87 (I checked the Ottoman one and it had no Anatolian ancestry and it was mostly Turkic so i used it.
```

----------


## Jovialis

> I made this model for Greeks using G25. The calculator really likes Helladic_MBA for the Greeks. Its located in Northern Greece on the border of Thessaly and Greek Macedonia
> 
> 
> ```
> Target: Greek_Cypriot
> Distance: 0.7589% / 0.00758885
> 
> 
> 51.0
> ...


I'm tired of these convoluted models. Olalde et al. 2021 provides a clear cut model for places like Northern Greece: Slovenian_IA + Aegean_IA +Kuline.

Anything that doesn't properly reflect that in these calculators is wrong.

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

> I'm tired of these convoluted models. Olalde et al. 2021 provides a clear cut model for places like Northern Greece: Slovenian_IA + Aegean_IA +Kuline.
> Anything that doesn't properly reflect that in these calculators is wrong.


But he doesn't even mention Slav anywhere. My model is not that complex. It also fits perfectly on Cyprus.

Here's what happens if i reduce them to 5 populations:


```
Target: Greek_Cypriot
Distance: 0.7589% / 0.00758885 | R5P


51.0
Levant_BA



26.0
Aegean_BA_IA



22.6
Anatolia_BA



0.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.7818% / 0.00781810 | R5P


42.2
Aegean_BA_IA



17.8
Illyria_MBA



17.0
Early_Slav_EMA



13.2
Anatolia_BA



9.8
Levant_BA


Target: Greek_Dodecanese
Distance: 0.9083% / 0.00908309 | R5P


43.4
Anatolia_BA



23.2
Aegean_BA_IA



22.4
Levant_BA



8.6
Early_Slav_EMA



2.4
Balkan_East_IA


Target: Greek_Crete
Distance: 0.6039% / 0.00603870 | R5P


31.0
Anatolia_BA



30.2
Aegean_BA_IA



25.6
Levant_BA



12.4
Early_Slav_EMA



0.8
Balkan_East_IA


Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 0.8081% / 0.00808143 | R5P


29.8
Aegean_BA_IA



27.2
Levant_BA



23.0
Early_Slav_EMA



14.8
Illyria_MBA



5.2
Anatolia_BA


Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 0.5574% / 0.00557414 | R5P


35.0
Aegean_BA_IA



26.8
Early_Slav_EMA



19.4
Levant_BA



9.8
Anatolia_BA



9.0
Thracia_IA


Target: Greek_Macedonia
Distance: 0.7606% / 0.00760629 | R5P


33.8
Early_Slav_EMA



28.8
Aegean_BA_IA



21.8
Anatolia_BA



8.8
Levant_BA



6.8
Thracia_IA


Target: Greek_Central_Macedonia
Distance: 0.5518% / 0.00551769 | R5P


33.0
Early_Slav_EMA



30.2
Aegean_BA_IA



14.2
Levant_BA



12.4
Thracia_IA



10.2
Anatolia_BA


Target: Greek_Kos
Distance: 0.7452% / 0.00745218 | R5P


48.8
Anatolia_BA



21.2
Levant_BA



12.4
Aegean_BA_IA



10.8
Early_Slav_EMA



6.8
Illyria_MBA


Target: Bulgarian
Distance: 1.1661% / 0.01166086 | R5P


43.4
Early_Slav_EMA



23.4
Aegean_BA_IA



19.4
Thracia_IA



12.2
Levant_BA



1.6
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


```

----------


## Jovialis

My main issue is there is so much overlap with source populations that compose them, and the other samples you used. Levant_BA is about half-(2/3rds Anatolian_N/ 1/3rdIran_N/CHG), the rest being related to Natifuian-like ancestry. Aegean_BA (Mycenaean) is mostly Anatolian_N, with Iran_N/CHG, and some steppe. Anatolian_BA is Mostly Anatolian_N, plus a smaller but significant amount of Iran_N/CHG, and about 5% natufian-like.

Thus, just from those samples in the model, it is hard to untangle the right proportions.

Sorry if I sound dismissive, I don't mean to be so harsh.

----------


## Jovialis

> My main issue is there is so much overlap with source populations that compose them, and the other samples you used. Levant_BA is about half-(2/3rds Anatolian_N/ 1/3rdIran_N/CHG), the rest being related to Natifuian-like ancestry. Aegean_BA (Mycenaean) is mostly Anatolian_N, with Iran_N/CHG, and some steppe. Anatolian_BA is Mostly Anatolian_N, plus a smaller but significant amount of Iran_N/CHG, and about 5% natufian-like.
> 
> Thus, just from those samples in the model, it is hard to untangle the right proportions.
> 
> Sorry if I sound dismissive, I don't mean to be so harsh.


Here is what I mean:

screen shot from a lecture by Lazaridis:




Figure from the Post-Roman Egypt paper:

----------


## Jovialis

^^my philosophy is that calculators need to emulate the results of academic papers, to verify their accuracy. Once a true academic model is replicated, than one can use it to explore other scenarios.

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

The problem is that the Academic artirle doesnt even consider the Slavic input in modern Greeks so their results are obviously flawed. Academic does not always mean right.

I know that these bronze age samples i used are a mix of neolithic people. The calculator tries to figure out how much of that admixture was inherited. For example the ancient proxy might have 10% steppe and your target 2% steppe. The calculator will try to fit that proxy in to increase steppe since there is no other proxy with steppe. (This is an example). 
My model is not perfect of course but you can create an image of where modern Greeks lean. There is. There is a strong Aegean signal with Slavic and Ancient Balkan. But their Aegean signal is much stronger than the Balkan one.

----------


## bigsnake49

Wonder what would happen if you totally take out Levant_BA in your model? After all there does not seem to be any historical or archaeological evidence for any kind of population movement from the Levant during the Bronze Age. You have to have historical and archaeological evidence for a population movement before you put them in the model. For example if you had samples from Greece's pre- Greek population in EBA and then you added Greek samples from MBA and LBA then added Slavs from the early Medieval Era now that would make sense.Or you had Greek samples from the Classical Era and added the Slav samples.
You also have to make sure that the Modern Greek samples are from people whose grandparents have not come from Greek Pontus or Cappadocia.

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

I used Eurogene G25's population averages. My Levant proxy is not meant only for Bronze Age migrations since i'm comparing modern Greeks and Cypriots. I added Levant because originally my calculator was meant for Cypriots since the Phoenicians settled in Cyprus in early Iron Age. Another reason i add proxies that are not historical ancestors is to see if it even detects it because we cannot be 100% sure that other nearby people didn't mix.

Another problem is that G25 might not have some ancient samples i need. 

I should have mentioned that i didn't make my model for an 100% ancestry accuracy model but it is for seeing where modern Greeks shift to. 

Here's What happens if i remove ancient Levant and ancient Italy.
Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.8867% / 0.00886705


40.0
Aegean_BA_IA



25.4
Anatolia_BA



20.4
Early_Slav_EMA



13.2
Illyria_MBA



1.0
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman




Without Levant_BA but with ancient Latium/Etruscan.
Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.8776% / 0.00877554 | R5P


36.0
Aegean_BA_IA



30.6
Anatolia_BA



21.2
Early_Slav_EMA



9.2
Latium_IA



3.0
Illyria_MBA




With my original source:
Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.7821% / 0.00782111 | R5P


41.8
Aegean_BA_IA



17.8
Illyria_MBA



17.2
Early_Slav_EMA



13.4
Anatolia_BA



9.8
Levant_BA

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

One thing i'm curious about. If i wanted to create and ancestry model for Cypriots does removing Anatolia make sense?
This is without Anatolia and Thracia which is similar to North Helladic.

Target: Greek_Cypriot
Distance: 1.0915% / 0.01091517


59.4
Levant_BA



40.2
Aegean_BA_IA



0.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman

----------


## bigsnake49

The model will select those populations that minimize the error no matter whether it make sense or not. The more potential populations you give it, the lower the error. It has to make sense those.
There is a lot of overlap between Aegean BA and Illyrian MBA. I suggest you use only Aegean if you're going to use it to model Greeks. If you want to model Balkanites then use Illyrian. For Cypriots you have to use adjoining populations plus some source for the Myceneans that we know migrated to the islands plus maybe a source for the Eteo-Cretans. Whether the Minoan samples are a good proxy or not I don't know but it would not hurt to try.
For example if you are trying to model Pontian Greeks you might want to use Aegean BA plus Anatolian + Laz.
Or if you were modeling the Athenians of today there has been such a total admix of Pontian Greeks + Arvanites + Asia Minor + people from all over the country. It will be a total mess :).

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

I know that the calculator will just fit anything to get a lower distance. I just add multiple samples from that Period for each proxy because we cannot know for sure how people mixed and also to disprove pseudotheories that Greeks today are just Illyrians or just Anatolians/Arabs. You know. Or that Cypriots are just a Levant Anatolian Arab mix. So since even adding those samples the Aegean one is still present then they must be wrong.
We cannot know if the Mycenaean settlers in Cyprus where from specific cities with a specific admixture.

Yes there is an overlap of Illyrian and Aegean but for the most part the calculator prefers Aegean which is something important.

I'm kinda too lazy right now to make models for each Greek region. I made a post on the Eurogenes forum here with multiple models but i made the same ones for all mainland Greeks.

Here's without Levant, Illyrian and Italian:

Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.9786% / 0.00978563 | R5P


46.8
Aegean_BA_IA



23.2
Anatolia_BA



22.0
Early_Slav_EMA



4.8
Thracia_IA



3.2
Balkan_East_IA





Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 1.6616% / 0.01661626 | R5P


38.0
Anatolia_BA



27.0
Early_Slav_EMA



23.6
Aegean_BA_IA



11.4
Balkan_East_IA




Without Levant, Thracia, Balkan, Illyria, Italian(Etruscan, Latium)
Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.9649% / 0.00964893 | R5P


56.6
Aegean_BA_IA



21.0
Anatolia_BA



21.0
Early_Slav_EMA



1.4
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman




Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 1.6771% / 0.01677115


37.8
Anatolia_BA



33.8
Aegean_BA_IA



28.4
Early_Slav_EMA

----------


## Jovialis

^^This does look better to me, in terms of the samples you chose.

----------


## Jovialis

> I just add multiple samples from that Period for each proxy because we cannot know for sure how people mixed and also to disprove pseudotheories that Greeks today are just Illyrians or just Anatolians/Arabs. You know. Or that Cypriots are just a Levant Anatolian Arab mix. So since even adding those samples the Aegean one is still present then they must be wrong.
> We cannot know if the Mycenaean settlers in Cyprus where from specific cities with a specific admixture.
> 
> Yes there is an overlap of Illyrian and Aegean but for the most part the calculator prefers Aegean which is something important.
> 
> Here's without Levant, Illyrian and Italian:
> 
> Target: Greek_Thessaly
> Distance: 0.9786% / 0.00978563 | R5P
> ...


Thus if Anatolia_BA is 5% Levantine farmer, than in this model giving 23.2% of Anatolia_BA, equals about only 1.2% of verifiable _Levantine_ in the first model. Which is quite significantly different from the amount originally inferred.

----------


## Jovialis

```
Mycenaean:I9006:Lazaridis_2017,3.38,0,1.25,0,36.32,5.47,0,0,7.73,1.07,44.26,0.51
Mycenaean:I9010:Lazaridis_2017,0,0,3.66,1.15,38.24,6.6,0.59,0.65,13.92,0,35.19,0
Mycenaean:I9033:Lazaridis_2017,1.55,1.33,2.36,0,39.11,8.61,2.19,0,7.76,0,34.35,2.74
Mycenaean:I9041:Lazaridis_2017,3.15,0,2.41,0,37.19,8.87,0,0,10.69,0,37.17,0.52
NE_Iberia_Hel_(Empúries2):I8208:Olalde_2019,0.47,0,4.06,0,36.68,5.45,0,0,12.64,0,40.71,0
```

IMO, Empuries2, specifically I8208, despite being found in Iberia, is totally appropriate for Aegean_IA, because it matches the Mycenaeans. Furthermore, it also matches the two Greek_IA found in Campania:

----------


## ihype02

Not using Levantine:

Target: Italian_Veneto
Distance: 1.8577% / 0.01857729

51.0
ITA_Etruscan



33.4
HRV_IA



15.6
DEU_MA_Alemannic




Using Levantine:

Target: Italian_Veneto
Distance: 1.2078% / 0.01207796

30.6
ITA_Ardea_Latini_IA



25.2
DEU_MA_Alemannic



15.6
HRV_IA



14.6
ITA_Etruscan



14.0
Levant_Beirut_Hellenistic




And the fit is not even that different 1.8 to 1.2. This proves that using multiply sources is usually inaccurate, therefore those sort of calculations should be used only for 2 populations in relation with chronological historical events. 
Like for example using 200CE-400CE "Croats" versus Poles (assuming they are an accurate proxy) as an ancestry source for 900CE Slavic Croats as a target is accurate but further than that it get murky.

----------


## bigsnake49

It reminds me of 4 way Oracles under GEDMatch. Great fits but results that don't make sense.

----------


## Jovialis

Indeed, 14% Levant in Veneto should be enough to prove that this modeling with Levantine is erroneous.

----------


## Jovialis

> It reminds me of 4 way Oracles under GEDMatch. Great fits but totally results that don't make sense.


Good analogy, this is precisely what I mean.

----------


## Constantine

Has anybody seen this before? Seems pretty relevant:

https://www.wseas.org/multimedia/jou...605909-068.pdf

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Has anybody seen this before? Seems pretty relevant:
> 
> https://www.wseas.org/multimedia/jou...605909-068.pdf


Seems pretty pseudo-scholarship.

----------


## ihype02

> Seems pretty pseudo-scholarship.


“Isotopic studies suggest that these could have been people hired all the way from the Catalan coast, from the Iberian peninsula, or *from mainland Greece* or even from the Black Sea coast,” says Mario Novak at the Institute for Anthropological Research in Croatia.


https://www.newscientist.com/article...in-key-battle/


What do you think about this? Excuse me for my ignorance but I don't think it is talking about Autosomal DNA. What was the difference between Mainland Greeks and a Sicilian Greeks? Many of Sicilian Greeks came from Mainland.

I think it is on par with study saying South Italians were just Greek-like not influenced genetically by Greeks. 

Also hired people from the Black Sea and Spain? Seriously?

----------


## bigsnake49

> “Isotopic studies suggest that these could have been people hired all the way from the Catalan coast, from the Iberian peninsula, or *from mainland Greece* or even from the Black Sea coast,” says Mario Novak at the Institute for Anthropological Research in Croatia.
> https://www.newscientist.com/article...in-key-battle/
> What do you think about this? Excuse me for my ignorance but I don't think it is talking about Autosomal DNA. What was the difference between Mainland Greeks and a Sicilian Greeks? Many of Sicilian Greeks came from Mainland.
> I think it is on par with study saying South Italians were just Greek-like not influenced genetically by Greeks. 
> Also hired people from the Black Sea and Spain? Seriously?


Isotope analysis has nothing to do with any DNA. However isotope analysis will tell you whether somebody was local or not and DNA analysis would tell you their heritage. I am sure that Greeks as well other powers of the era used mercenaries. I am not a great believer in Herodotus historicity. I think of him as a story teller and a travelogue. I would not use him as my only source.

----------


## Angela

Totally plausible results. Historical sources tell us that my own Ligures went to fight in Greece, in Sicily on both sides, in Italy on Hannibal's side.

Ancient armies, unlike the early armies of ancient Rome, contained lots of mercenaries from, indeed, across the Mediterraneana.

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

Something i'm curious about. Did Ionian Greeks bring Iron Age Anatolian admixture on mainland Greece?

----------


## bigsnake49

> Something i'm curious about. Did Ionian Greeks bring Iron Age Anatolian admixture on mainland Greece?


Not that I know of. However Ionian islanders did bring Greek genetic heritage to the western shores of Asia Minor.

----------


## ihype02

> Isotope analysis has nothing to do with any DNA. However isotope analysis will tell you whether somebody was local or not and DNA analysis would tell you their heritage. I am sure that Greeks as well other powers of the era used mercenaries. I am not a great believer in Herodotus historicity. I think of him as a story teller and a travelogue. I would not use him as my only source.


It's not about Herodotus. It's that the geographical difference is very big. It would not suprise me if they hired some people from Italy or Greece but Spain and Black Sea is way too far away. 
Maybe they were Greeks from Spain and Black Sea. Greeks had colonies there.

----------


## bigsnake49

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Spain is not that far from Sicily if you are talking about the Sicilian wars.

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

I removed the ones that have high overlap, removed Anatolia for Cypriots and southern Greece because it might be just over correcting. What do you think of this? *
1) Model for Cypriots, Crete and Southern Greece:
*with Aegean, Levant, Balkan_east, Illyria, Latium, Sardinia, South Semitic, Early Slav:*
*

```
Target: Greek_Cypriot
Distance: 1.0956% / 0.01095610


60.0
Levant_BA



40.0
Aegean_BA_IA


Target: Greek_Crete
Distance: 1.0963% / 0.01096350


51.4
Aegean_BA_IA



38.2
Levant_BA



10.4
Early_Slav_EMA


Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 0.8220% / 0.00822018


33.4
Aegean_BA_IA



29.4
Levant_BA



23.6
Early_Slav_EMA



11.8
Illyria_MBA



1.8
Latium_IA


Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 0.7043% / 0.00704278


40.6
Aegean_BA_IA



26.2
Early_Slav_EMA



24.2
Levant_BA



9.0
Illyria_MBA



```

 





*2)* *Model for Thessaly and Northern Greeks:
*with Aegean, Thracia, Balkan_East, Illyria, Latium, Early Slav: 


```
 Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 1.5587% / 0.01558661


76.6
Aegean_BA_IA



17.0
Early_Slav_EMA



6.4
Thracia_IA


Target: Greek_Macedonia
Distance: 1.8699% / 0.01869922


64.2
Aegean_BA_IA



29.6
Early_Slav_EMA



6.2
Thracia_IA


Target: Greek_Central_Macedonia
Distance: 1.7044% / 0.01704350


59.0
Aegean_BA_IA



30.4
Early_Slav_EMA



10.6
Thracia_IA


```

*3) Model Without Levant/Illyrian/East_Balkan/ancient Italy for mainland Greeks:*


```
Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 0.9638% / 0.00963832


54.4
Aegean_BA_IA



21.2
Anatolia_BA



21.2
Early_Slav_EMA



2.0
Thracia_IA



1.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 1.6771% / 0.01677115


37.8
Anatolia_BA



33.8
Aegean_BA_IA



28.4
Early_Slav_EMA


Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 1.0207% / 0.01020653


36.4
Aegean_BA_IA



33.4
Anatolia_BA



28.0
Early_Slav_EMA



2.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


Target: Greek_Macedonia
Distance: 0.8531% / 0.00853082


35.6
Early_Slav_EMA



32.2
Anatolia_BA



31.0
Aegean_BA_IA



1.2
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


Target: Greek_Central_Macedonia
Distance: 0.7424% / 0.00742435


34.8
Aegean_BA_IA



34.4
Early_Slav_EMA



26.6
Anatolia_BA



2.2
Thracia_IA



2.0
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman


```

Full source:


```
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:West_Turkic:KAZ_Kipchak:DA179,0.067156,-0.041637,-0.012822,-0.005814,-0.018773,0.002789,0.001645,0.009,-0.0045,-0.011481,-0.01088,3e-04,0.004311,0.000963,0.000271,0.016706,0.012256,-0.007601,0.006159,0.000625,-0.000749,0.002844,0.001849,0.01458,-0.006706
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:Ottoman_1400ad:MA2195,0.072847,-0.144205,0.035449,-0.000969,-0.045855,-0.02008,0.009165,0.004154,-0.014112,-0.011299,-0.006008,-0.006594,-0.001189,-0.013349,0.004072,0.00053,0.005476,0.002914,-0.005405,0.007879,-0.012104,0.000495,-0.011339,-0.006386,-0.004191

Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karakhanid:DA204,0.068294,-0.155376,0.032055,0.014535,-0.05601,0,0.002585,0.003692,-0.010226,-0.015126,-0.018675,-0.002847,0.001189,-0.016928,0.009365,0.00358,-0.01695,0.000887,0.005028,0.001751,-0.018343,0.003215,-0.00456,-0.006627,-0.007185
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karakhanid:DA205,0.05805,-0.199044,0.027907,0.002907,-0.041854,-0.01004,0.00705,0.005307,-0.011862,-0.007472,-0.010555,-0.001199,-0.000446,-0.007156,0.012758,0.007955,0.002086,0.001774,0.000377,0.006003,-0.015348,0.003833,-0.00419,-0.003735,-0.002515
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karluk:DA222,0.064879,-0.158423,0.023004,0.000969,-0.05601,-0.00753,0.00658,0.014999,-0.01493,-0.010934,-0.018188,0.001649,0,-0.004266,0.0076,-0.000928,-0.006519,0.005448,0.01081,0.001501,-0.015473,-0.003586,-0.003328,-0.004579,0.005987
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karluk:DA230,0.061464,-0.145221,0.011691,-0.002584,-0.037545,0.001673,0.00329,0.009461,-0.01718,-0.009476,-0.021922,-0.003297,0,-0.001101,0.013979,-0.006895,-0.020992,0.002914,0.003771,-0.005378,-0.004492,-0.000742,0.00037,0.000602,0.002155
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87,0.080814,-0.140143,0.043746,0.027455,-0.050471,-0.011435,0.00376,0.000462,-0.020043,-0.018224,-0.007632,-0.003147,-0.006244,-0.002064,0.008822,0.007425,-0.019558,0.005448,-0.003142,-0.027013,-0.02533,-0.010387,-0.001479,-0.010363,0.001317

Anatolia_BA:TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA,0.1050018,0.1515678,-0.042332,-0.082365,-0.0040775,-0.0274705,-0.0024088,-0.0077882,-0.011402,0.028429,0.0097435,0.007006,-0.0120788,0.0030965,-0.0138435,-0.004475,0.0116693,-0.0021538,0.0087988,-0.00741,-0.0031817,0.0061828,-0.0048065,0.0030725,-0.001407
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Ovaoren_EBA,0.0990263,0.151991,-0.0452547,-0.0812883,-0.0043087,-0.022776,-0.0019583,-0.0081533,-0.0088627,0.027457,0.0073077,0.0044463,-0.0130327,-0.0065143,-0.0147933,-0.000442,0.0126037,0.003801,0.0043577,-0.0017507,0.0003327,0.0055233,-0.0028757,0.0011247,-0.0024747
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA,0.114582,0.1590993,-0.040226,-0.0802117,-0.004411,-0.024728,7.83e-05,-0.003846,-0.0115897,0.0329847,0.0068207,0.003497,-0.012686,-0.003257,-0.0225297,0.0032263,0.0214267,-0.0024493,0.0070393,-0.0007087,-0.0044507,-0.003215,0.000575,-0.003213,-0.0022353

Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:Average,0.107847,0.1563915,-0.008108,-0.0646808,0.0216962,-0.0271222,-0.0005288,-0.0021345,0.00542,0.047336,0.005521,0.0169352,-0.012785,-0.0006195,-0.0163882,-0.0098118,0.0210245,0.0036108,0.0123188,-0.0039705,-0.0058648,0.0001858,-0.0065935,0.0011448,-0.0007185
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9006,0.119514,0.160454,-0.006788,-0.068476,0.014464,-0.03514,-0.003055,-0.006923,-0.002863,0.050115,0.004384,0.015137,-0.009366,0.00289,-0.019815,-0.005304,0.024643,0.007601,0.020992,-0.000375,-0.007487,-0.012365,-0.010969,-0.000602,-0.001796
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9010,0.110408,0.160454,-0.015462,-0.071383,0.029544,-0.038487,-0.003525,0.004154,0.013499,0.056129,0.018025,0.017235,-0.00223,-0.00234,-0.023208,-0.005038,0.031553,0.003421,0.005908,-0.004002,-0.006613,0.003215,-0.016145,-0.007109,-0.003113
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9033,0.091058,0.150298,-0.004148,-0.050388,0.022773,-0.013387,0.007285,-0.006692,0.003068,0.041003,-0.003573,0.019333,-0.020218,0.005505,-0.006515,-0.026518,0.00678,-0.003167,0.012193,-0.008629,-0.002995,-0.006306,-0.000616,0.005904,0.006945
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9041,0.110408,0.15436,-0.006034,-0.068476,0.020004,-0.021475,-0.00282,0.000923,0.007976,0.042097,0.003248,0.016036,-0.019326,-0.008533,-0.016015,-0.002387,0.021122,0.006588,0.010182,-0.002876,-0.006364,0.016199,0.001356,0.006386,-0.00491

Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2,0.118376,0.158423,-0.009051,-0.0670225,0.0252355,-0.027889,0.001645,-0.005077,0.0049085,0.042552,0.002842,0.01124,-0.016873,0.003578,-0.018526,-0.0157785,0.0035855,0.0003805,0.004588,-0.0126935,-0.008298,0.001546,0.001664,0.0071095,-0.008502
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208,0.1161,0.158423,-0.017348,-0.06783,0.026774,-0.032351,-0.00282,-0.001154,0.007158,0.04319,0.003573,0.015586,-0.017096,0.006468,-0.016965,-0.02559,-0.007693,-0.000253,0.00993,-0.017133,-0.003494,0.000866,0.005053,0.00241,-0.010538
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215,0.120652,0.158423,-0.000754,-0.066215,0.023697,-0.023427,0.00611,-0.009,0.002659,0.041914,0.002111,0.006894,-0.01665,0.000688,-0.020087,-0.005967,0.014864,0.001014,-0.000754,-0.008254,-0.013102,0.002226,-0.001725,0.011809,-0.006466

Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Cycladic_EBA,0.1160995,0.1701015,-0.021119,-0.081073,0.018311,-0.035419,-0.0024675,-0.0050765,0.0076695,0.048657,0.00682,0.0138625,-0.020664,0.0059865,-0.0281615,-0.0046405,0.014342,0.002534,0.0099305,-0.011693,-0.009483,-0.0005565,-0.002095,0.0018675,-0.002395
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_EBA,0.112685,0.179749,-0.000754,-0.08721,0.02739,-0.032351,-0.003995,-0.005769,0.028224,0.06761,0.002111,0.010641,-0.020812,0.005643,-0.030944,-0.021347,0.009127,0.003927,0.00729,-0.014757,-0.007237,0.000742,-0.000986,0.007953,-0.005269
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA,0.1206525,0.1482675,0.0226275,-0.011951,0.022312,-0.010319,-0.0043475,-0.0032305,-0.0011245,0.0132125,0.0017865,0.011315,-0.0136765,0.000963,-0.0094325,-0.0129275,-0.0063885,-0.0008235,0.0072275,-0.0086295,-0.0116045,0.0025965,0.008073,0.005362,-0.0020955
Aegean_BA_IA:Helladic_Cycladic_Mix,0.116479,0.1660393,0.0002515,-0.060078,0.022671,-0.0260297,-0.0036033,-0.004692,0.0115897,0.0431598,0.0035725,0.0119395,-0.0183842,0.0041975,-0.022846,-0.0129717,0.0056935,0.0018792,0.0081493,-0.0116932,-0.0094415,0.0009273,0.001664,0.0050608,-0.0032532
Aegean_BA_IA:Hel_Cyc_Min_EBA,0.1160995,0.1674355,-0.0041484,-0.0679108,0.0238508,-0.028377,-0.001645,-0.0041535,0.0141122,0.0463564,0.0052776,0.0101911,-0.0175789,0.0040771,-0.0255492,-0.0163915,0.0040094,0.0024229,0.0080918,-0.0113649,-0.0095456,0.002674,0.0002928,0.0026209,-0.0020209

Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Minoan_EBA,0.114961,0.171624,-0.017348,-0.091409,0.02739,-0.035419,0.00423,-0.002538,0.02168,0.055946,0.010393,0.004946,-0.015163,0.003716,-0.033659,-0.026651,-0.001043,0.004054,0.007919,-0.01038,-0.009858,0.007914,-0.003821,-0.004699,0.001676
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Minoan_Lassithi,0.1192866,0.170609,-0.0181772,-0.093993,0.0295438,-0.0398256,-0.001316,-0.0034614,0.0103488,0.0598102,0.0029878,0.0153164,-0.0251238,-5.48e-05,-0.0374586,-0.0109518,0.0173934,-0.0012414,0.0088742,-0.0136316,-0.0133764,0.0083836,-0.0050776,-0.0010604,-0.0024428

Thracia_IA:UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12,0.135449,0.138112,0.015462,-0.012274,0.020927,-0.008088,0.00235,-0.007384,-0.006545,0.034625,0.000487,0.008542,-0.008325,-0.008533,-0.014522,0.005171,0.025946,-0.000127,0.011439,0.005878,-0.019091,0.007666,0.004067,0.011929,-0.000239

Balkan_East_IA:BGR_IA:I5769,0.126344,0.157407,0.007165,-0.051034,0.029852,-0.02259,0.00423,-0.001385,0.007772,0.032074,-0.001461,0.005695,-0.013974,-0.003028,-0.015065,-0.001458,0.01369,0.006968,0.006285,-0.014757,-0.006239,0.004699,-0.007888,0.003494,-0.008861

Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4331,0.12862,0.151314,0.028284,-0.007429,0.038776,-0.006972,-0.00705,-0.006,0.003681,0.028064,0.006171,0.010341,-0.017542,-0.003578,-0.0076,0.006497,0.008084,-0.003041,0.006159,-0.011631,-0.005865,-0.001113,-0.00037,0.003856,-0.001197
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4332,0.120652,0.147252,0.034318,-0.012274,0.038469,0.002231,-0.00423,0.001154,0.009613,0.032074,-0.006008,0.01094,-0.012487,-0.014726,-0.005972,0.01074,0.02047,-0.00114,0.000754,-0.011005,-0.001248,0.008656,-0.00419,0.002048,-0.002395

Latium_IA:Boville_Ernica_IA:RMPR1021,0.126344,0.152329,0.034318,-0.014535,0.054164,-0.01506,-0.001175,0.005307,0.019634,0.041914,0.005196,0.01079,-0.011001,-0.005643,0.004479,-0.016441,-0.010822,-0.001394,0.006662,-0.01113,0.007736,0.007172,-0.007641,-0.00241,0.008981
Latium_IA:Rome_Latini_IA:RMPR1016,0.127482,0.147252,0.033187,-0.016796,0.044008,-0.008646,-0.00376,-0.004846,0.026588,0.052666,-0.002761,0.015137,-0.036719,-0.008533,-0.009093,0.013392,0.016037,-0.004687,0.003897,0.004127,0.00262,-0.00272,0.001972,-0.007712,-0.008742
Etruscan_IA:Etruscan:RMPR473,0.127482,0.158423,0.035072,-0.020672,0.046778,-0.005299,0.00094,-0.000923,0.024952,0.03991,-0.002598,0.013188,-0.018434,-0.006606,-0.00665,-0.018828,-0.011865,0.003294,0.01081,0.00025,-0.001747,-0.000495,-0.000986,-0.000361,-0.003592
Etruscan_IA:ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b,0.126344,0.149283,0.034318,-0.007752,0.036622,-0.005299,0.003995,-0.004615,0.014726,0.028793,-0.002111,0.015286,-0.01115,-0.002064,-0.00285,0.003182,0.006258,0.007221,0.012318,-0.002626,-0.003369,0.008037,0.000863,-0.000482,-0.001796

Ancient_Sicilia_LBA:ITA_Sicily_LBA:I10372,0.133173,0.174671,0.00792,-0.065892,0.049855,-0.026216,-0.006815,-0.004384,0.033951,0.063965,-0.003248,0.008542,-0.02438,-0.001514,-0.025244,-0.031822,-0.005607,0.005321,0.01081,-0.015257,-0.009982,-0.00136,-0.005669,-0.013737,0.002155
Ancient_Sicilia_LBA:ITA_Sicily_LBA:I3876,0.1161,0.165531,0.010559,-0.059432,0.0437,-0.022032,-0.00846,-0.003923,0.019839,0.056858,-0.00065,0.013788,-0.017393,0.003303,-0.018051,-0.016309,-0.00339,0.004687,0.006788,-0.001,-0.005366,0.003586,0.001602,-0.010845,0.006706
Ancient_Sicilia_LBA:ITA_Sicily_LBA:I3878,0.119514,0.168578,0.015462,-0.063631,0.049855,-0.029562,-0.00799,-0.005538,0.026997,0.063054,-0.001786,0.01094,-0.019475,-0.011836,-0.019951,0.00053,0.011343,-0.003041,-0.00088,-0.003752,-0.009733,-0.003091,-0.006655,-0.014219,-0.005389

Sardinia_EBA_IA:Sardinia:ORC002,0.119514,0.17264,0.035826,-0.05168,0.074168,-0.026495,-0.00047,-0.001154,0.046631,0.089296,-0.00406,0.020382,-0.038949,-0.013625,-0.016829,-0.007425,0.007823,-0.000127,-0.001885,-0.013632,-0.003619,0.005935,-0.010106,-0.034342,-0.000958
Sardinia_EBA_IA:ITA_Sardinia_EBA,0.1253572,0.1778531,0.0436706,-0.0511417,0.0806305,-0.0266619,-0.0064391,0.0002615,0.058712,0.095431,-0.0010067,0.0160058,-0.0319918,-0.012175,-0.0131377,-0.0052154,0.0081533,0.0006503,0.0050027,-0.0076203,0.0047499,0.0039815,-0.0115524,-0.0290724,0.0011975

Berberes_MA:Canary_Islands_Guanche:gun005,-0.01935,0.125926,0.004148,-0.056848,0.049855,-0.029841,-0.034782,0.005307,0.066675,0.028247,0.00406,-0.006894,0.016204,-0.015276,0.019544,0.001856,0.017993,-0.01761,-0.034567,0.018384,-0.0141,-0.025596,0.020706,-0.006145,-0.011376

Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2,0.134311,0.126941,0.081458,0.065569,0.035391,0.033746,0.00987,0.005769,0.004704,-0.02278,-0.002436,-0.005395,0.01219,0.020643,-0.015201,-0.003845,0.005867,0.004561,0.008673,5e-04,0.001497,-0.00272,0.013804,-0.007109,0.002634

Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790729,0.087644,0.147252,-0.067505,-0.097546,-0.017849,-0.041834,-0.003525,-0.009,0.008999,0.008018,0.021273,-0.007343,0.022002,0.007432,-0.011401,0.000928,-0.011604,-0.002027,0.004777,0.014132,0.011355,0.018548,-0.000123,-0.006145,0.005868
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730,0.084229,0.146236,-0.056945,-0.091732,-0.008309,-0.043786,-0.00658,-0.000923,0.005522,0.005467,0.01088,-0.008243,0.014569,0.000275,-0.012079,0.016574,0.011735,0.003674,-0.001131,0.005628,0.001622,0.005688,-0.003328,0.008194,-0.002155
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790731,0.079676,0.153345,-0.057699,-0.100453,-0.003693,-0.041834,-0.00564,-0.006,0.017794,0.010387,0.007795,-0.017534,0.029137,0.000688,-0.008958,0.009679,0.000913,-0.006714,0.005405,-0.005628,0.001248,0.00507,0.006286,0.004097,0.000599
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790732,0.075123,0.150298,-0.060716,-0.097223,-0.007078,-0.037929,-0.012456,-0.009692,0.017385,0.015126,0.009094,-0.005245,0.021407,0.007432,-0.002307,0.000928,-0.003129,-0.00228,0.001257,0.002001,0.001996,0.002597,-0.00037,0.000843,-0.003832
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733,0.079676,0.137096,-0.063733,-0.102714,-0.015695,-0.029284,0.00423,-0.007384,0.007567,0.011845,0.00341,-0.010491,0.020812,0.011698,-0.003122,0.004508,0.001304,0.001394,-0.002765,0.005127,0.005116,0.005812,-0.008751,0.000964,-0.002994
Levant_BA:ISR:Ashkelon_IA2:ASH8,0.080814,0.145221,-0.066373,-0.101422,-0.021542,-0.029562,-0.003055,-0.012923,0.003272,0.002005,0.012179,-0.008393,0.019475,0.003303,0.001086,0.010872,-0.00339,0.001394,0.007668,-0.003627,0.006988,0.001731,0,0.000241,0.003473
Levant_BA:Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003,0.087644,0.160454,-0.054682,-0.102391,-0.006155,-0.041555,-0.004935,-0.002769,0.026588,0.013668,0.019487,-0.008243,0.016204,0.030139,-0.007329,-0.007823,-0.026077,0.003421,0.006662,0.005753,-0.00861,0.013973,-0.006039,0.003374,-0.002515
Levant_BA:Levant_Megiddo_MLBA,0.0861261,0.1455592,-0.0646134,-0.1002072,-0.014596,-0.0394563,-0.0045434,-0.0097249,0.0131382,0.0089382,0.0103465,-0.0088707,0.0219027,0.0020119,-0.007316,0.005411,-0.0024898,0.004217,0.0036812,0.0073607,0.0047534,0.0040982,-0.0049357,-0.0025361,-0.0014427
Levant_BA:Levant_Megiddo_IA,0.084229,0.150298,-0.060716,-0.091409,-0.014464,-0.044623,-0.00517,-0.005077,0.011658,0.006014,0.012179,-0.007343,0.019177,0.006193,-0.002307,0.002254,-0.026207,0.005828,0.00729,-0.005753,0.001622,-0.002226,-0.006162,-0.000843,-0.005987
Levant_BA:Levant_Megiddo_IBA,0.078538,0.152329,-0.058077,-0.112405,0.001846,-0.044344,-0.01034,-0.009,0.030883,0.00164,0.012829,-0.013038,0.026016,-0.001651,-0.008686,0.013259,-0.005085,0.008868,-0.000126,0.001751,-0.000624,0.006059,-0.008134,0.000241,-0.004431


BedouinA_Arab_North_Modern,0.0285823,0.1335987,-0.047601,-0.0827598,-0.0138829,-0.0323513,-0.0107061,-0.0046408,0.0234522,-0.0016198,0.0081734,-0.0107237,0.0247439,0.0004741,0.0015682,0.0070567,-0.0027381,-0.0022382,-0.0034079,0.008254,0.0002081,0.002528,0.0001916,0.0017672,-0.0015967
BedouinB_Arab_South_Modern,0.041925,0.1439232,-0.0598156,-0.1169808,-0.0093179,-0.0480622,-0.0141008,-0.0087432,0.05154,-0.0052038,0.0158689,-0.0305729,0.0629496,0.004855,0.0043959,0.0288529,-0.0199706,0.00366,-0.0040153,0.029,0.0109668,0.0152299,-0.0039166,0.0071025,-0.0083092


South_Semitic_EBA:Arabian_Bedouins:Levant_JOR_EBA:I1706,0.071709,0.139128,-0.062225,-0.111113,-0.008001,-0.043507,-0.011751,-0.015692,0.041723,0.009476,0.013316,-0.019782,0.049653,-0.00523,0.000814,0.028639,-0.000522,-0.00038,-0.001131,0.020135,0.006364,0.012489,-0.00419,0.003133,-0.002036

Ancient_WestAfrican:West_African_Cereal-Farmer:HGDP00915,-0.599848,0.064994,0.017348,0.008721,0.002462,0.008646,-0.042302,0.034152,-0.03027,0.02606,0.003897,0.004646,0.024975,-0.002477,0.014658,-0.016839,0.007302,0.004561,-0.00264,-0.003126,-0.002496,-0.005317,0.000863,-0.002651,-0.002874
Ancient_WestAfrican:Benue_Cereal_Farmer,-0.627165,0.066009,0.021496,0.015181,0.002462,0.01255,-0.050292,0.05169,-0.046836,0.031891,0.005359,-0.003447,0.027651,0.00234,0.015472,-0.011005,0.006258,-0.002027,0.005028,0.001751,-0.001622,-0.000124,-0.000986,0.001205,0.002155

Bantu_Peoples:Bantu_Cereal_Farmer,-0.613507,0.061947,0.023004,0.010659,0.008001,0.013108,0.009165,-0.000231,-0.019839,0.009476,0.011692,-0.000599,-0.008771,0.012661,-0.008279,0.023071,-0.010561,0.051436,-0.03243,-0.001,0,0.002473,0.00949,-0.011447,-0.003233
Bantu_Peoples:Bantu_Cereal_Farmer,-0.633995,0.054839,0.021873,0.021641,-0.000615,0.008925,0.001645,0.004615,-0.020043,0.007107,0.002923,-0.002248,-0.017839,-0.003165,-0.016015,0.020551,-0.001173,0.033192,-0.009553,0.006878,-0.002246,0.000124,-0.000739,0.002048,0.005987
Bantu_Peoples:Bantu_Cereal_Farmer,-0.623751,0.072103,0.013953,0.015827,0.004616,0.00502,0.007755,-0.003923,-0.024543,0.012392,0.004872,-0.005245,-0.007433,-0.002202,-0.016286,0.01074,-0.005607,0.045355,-0.01898,0.000375,-0.004118,-0.003586,0.002588,-0.004458,0.000479
Bantu_Peoples:Bantu_Cereal_Farmer,-0.631718,0.064994,0.026398,0.014212,0.003693,0.011713,0.00423,0.003923,-0.029451,0.010387,0.003248,-0.004196,-0.007284,0.000138,-0.010043,0.012861,-0.012908,0.037373,-0.01898,0.003627,-0.003494,0.000124,0.002465,-0.00494,0.000838
Bantu_Peoples:East_Bantu_Cereal_Farmer:I2298,-0.616921,0.066009,0.021119,0.011305,0.004001,0.013108,-0.00987,0.016153,-0.020248,0.002187,0.000812,0.007943,-0.014717,0.003165,-0.019272,0.005304,-0.014212,0.00266,-0.006034,0.006503,0.004118,0.003957,0.001849,0.005663,0.003233
Ancient_EastAfrican:Ethiopian_Highland_Farmer,-0.423422,0.076165,-0.011691,-0.042313,0.001231,-0.027889,-0.00282,0.004384,0.107784,-0.089113,-0.017538,0.006744,-0.022299,0.001651,0.015744,-0.024529,0.011604,0.003674,0.012444,-0.007754,-0.000998,0.009521,-0.003697,0.000843,-0.005987
Ancient_EastAfrican:Ethiopian_Highland_Farmer,-0.400657,0.084289,-0.018479,-0.04522,0.003385,-0.025937,-0.016686,0.007384,0.106352,-0.084375,-0.016076,0.000749,-0.015609,0.003578,0.026601,-0.02254,0.018384,-0.004814,0.016718,-0.015632,0.004243,0.008779,-0.006779,-0.004097,0.003712
Ancient_EastAfrican:East_African_Pastoralist,-0.219679,0.1046,-0.033941,-0.076874,0.004001,-0.044065,-0.00329,-0.005077,0.125373,-0.069979,0,-0.015137,0.013379,0.010184,0.028094,-0.019491,0.019166,0.006968,-0.009679,0.003502,0.001747,0.000989,0.009244,0.000482,0.003353
Ancient_EastAfrican:East_African_Pastoralist,-0.311875,0.089367,-0.026021,-0.072675,0.003385,-0.030399,-0.005405,-0.012692,0.119646,-0.092029,-0.002761,-0.009442,-0.000595,0.001376,0.019137,-0.023999,0.02386,0.006334,0.006411,-0.006628,0.003244,0.004822,-0.006655,-0.001325,0.002395
Ancient_SouthAfrican:South_West_African_Hunter-Gatherer,-0.641962,0.057885,0.023381,0.031008,0.001539,0.008925,0.165212,-0.127841,-0.023929,0.039545,0.012179,-0.133831,-0.045787,-0.004129,0.003122,-0.006364,-0.001304,-0.029265,0.005531,-0.003377,0.006863,0.000742,-0.001109,0.000482,0.000359
Ancient_SouthAfrican:Khoisan_Hunter-Gatherers,-0.641962,0.055854,0.026021,0.034884,0.004616,-0.001116,0.267677,-0.210222,0.007567,0.01549,0.006983,-0.06729,-0.019475,0.006881,0.022394,-0.020021,0.038072,0.292144,-0.091885,0.006628,-0.033441,-0.001484,0.003204,0.001566,0.003233
Ancient_SouthAfrican:Khoisan_Hunter-Gatherers,-0.644239,0.058901,0.02489,0.034884,-0.001231,-0.004183,0.262977,-0.202838,0.015135,0.014943,0.010393,-0.06759,-0.020961,0.004266,0.025244,-0.018032,0.031814,0.299238,-0.098673,0.005378,-0.030571,-0.002844,-0.00037,-0.003133,-0.002275
Ancient_SouthAfrican:Khoisan_Hunter-Gatherers,-0.638548,0.052808,0.026776,0.034884,0.000308,-0.003904,0.273552,-0.208607,0.00859,0.015672,0.008769,-0.063094,-0.02438,0.00812,0.023615,-0.022408,0.032726,0.292397,-0.096662,0.006128,-0.037559,-0.007419,0.006655,-0.00723,-0.002155
Ancient_SouthAfrican:Khoisan_Hunter-Gatherers,-0.639686,0.058901,0.025644,0.041344,-0.00277,-0.002789,0.267912,-0.20653,0.011658,0.016766,0.002761,-0.06744,-0.01888,0.005092,0.026058,-0.013392,0.031944,0.289737,-0.092137,0.003752,-0.035188,-0.000495,0.002835,-0.000843,-0.00934
```

----------


## Angela

> It's not about Herodotus. It's that the geographical difference is very big. It would not suprise me if they hired some people from Italy or Greece but Spain and Black Sea is way too far away. 
> Maybe they were Greeks from Spain and Black Sea. Greeks had colonies there.


If Greeks from Spain could make it to Sicily to fight why couldn't Spaniards? The trade route was long established. 

Sorry, that's no logical. 

The only actual way to know, of course, is for the scientists to analyze the dna and give us the autosomal and uniparental results.

----------


## ihype02

> If Greeks from Spain could make it to Sicily to fight why couldn't Spaniards? The trade route was long established. 
> 
> Sorry, that's no logical. 
> 
> The only actual way to know, of course, is for the scientists to analyze the dna and give us the autosomal and uniparental results.


I suppose yes but it's more likely for them to be Greeks than Native Iberians? No?
I was completely unaware that they would hire Mercenaries from Spain for Sicilian wars. It was a suprise. Greek or non Greek.

----------


## ihype02

Angela look:

"The team’s analysis revealed that some historical claims could be validated – there were two battles, about two thirds of the Himeran forces in the first conflict weren’t local while only a quarter in the second battle weren’t from there, and Greek soldiers from outside of the city did fight alongside local Himerans. But the contemporary accounts weren’t entirely accurate: the isotope evidence suggests that many of the non-local soldiers weren’t actually Greek, but came from across the Mediterranean."

“Isotopic studies suggest that these could have been people hired all the way from the *Catalan coast*, from the Iberian peninsula, or from *mainland Greece* or even from the *Black Sea coast*,” says Mario Novak at the Institute for Anthropological Research in Croatia.


All of those 3 regions had a Greek presence. They can be Iberians too. 



“So, this could have been either Greeks but also some Indigenous people that classical sources considered barbarians. Obviously, these ‘barbarians’ were much more incorporated into the everyday lives of the “proper” Greeks than previously thought,” he says.
Again "could have been", I don't think they have Autosomal DNA.

In particular, Herodotus suggests that in 480 BC, during the first Battle of Himera, local soldiers received aid from *other Greek allies* and successfully defeated the Carthaginians. But during a second battle in 409 BC, the *local soldiers went unaided* and the city of Himera fell to the Carthaginians.

The researchers found that only about *one-third of Himera's soldiers* from the first battle were local to the area, *while around three-fourths* *were locals in the second battle*, corroborating the written claims that Himera was more aided by outsiders the first time than in the second battle. However, the evidence also shows that, contrary to written accounts, many outsiders were not Greek allies, but were instead mercenaries hired from beyond Greek territories.

----------


## ihype02

According to Wikipedia:

Gelo and Theron had a well trained, battle tested army at their disposal. In addition to citizens, hired mercenaries from Greeks and Sicels augmented their forces. Gelon took out a loan from citizens to fund his war efforts, which indicates the seriousness of the situation. The Syracusan army at Himera is said to have numbered 50,000 foot and 5,000 horse – perhaps another exaggeration.[26] The size of the army of Theron is not known. The main hoplite force came from the citizens of the Sicilian Greek cities. *They were augmented by mercenary hoplites hired from Sicily and Italy, and even mainland Greece.* Some of the citizens also served as peltasts while the wealthier citizens formed the cavalry units. *Sicels and Sikan soldiers also served in the force*. Mercenaries provided archers, slingers and cavalry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle...ominate_Sicily

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

*The goal is to hit a distance of 0.9-1.1%*, we don't want it below 0.9% because there might be over corrections since the calculator does not care if it makes sense but it just cares for getting the lowest distance. The acceptable distance usually for models like this is below 2% and around 1% are not too low and not too high so i think 0.9-1.1 is more balanced from what i observed.

1) *Reduce the populations to 2*, *if the distance is higher than 1.1%* then the TARGET must be mixed between more populations so *increase it by 1 population*.* 

2)If you get a distance below 0.9%* then there might be over corrections so *increase distance cooldown until you get 0.9-1.1% distance*. *If you still get below 0.9%* then just *keep increasing the distance cooldown until it gets the closest to 0.9-1.1%, if it's above 1.1% with distance cooldown then increase by 1 population*

3)* If you got higher than 1.1% distance with 2 populations* then* you increased the populations by 1* and so *you must repeat the steps above but with the increased populations*,* keep repeating* the steps *until you get a distance between 0.9-1.1%.
*
3) *If you keep getting above 1.1% and below 2%* then *reduce it to 5-6 populations if there are more and try adding 0.25x distance cooldown*.* If the distance changed only by 0.1% then it might have removed over corrections and worked.*  
If it goes above 2% then the model is not good for you either because you are mixed or not a Greek or a Turk, excluding East Anatolian Turks since i didn't add Caucasian proxies.

Target: Greek_Cypriot
Distance: 1.0956% / 0.01095610 | R2P
60.0 Levant_BA
40.0 Aegean_BA_IA

Target: Greek_Crete
Distance: 1.0799% / 0.01079905 | R3P | ADC: 0.5x RC
54.8 Aegean_BA_IA
29.2 Levant_BA
16.0 Anatolia_BA

Target: Greek_Dodecanese
Distance: 1.1191% / 0.01119087 | R3P | ADC: 0.5x RC
38.8 Aegean_BA_IA
35.4 Levant_North_BA
25.8 Anatolia_BA

Target: Greek_Laconia
Distance: 1.0081% / 0.01008117 | R3P | ADC: 0.5x RC
44.4 Aegean_BA_IA
28.2 Levant_BA
27.4 Early_Slav_EMA

Target: Greek_Peloponnese
Distance: 0.8024% / 0.00802394 | R3P | ADC: 0.25x RC
53.8 Aegean_BA_IA
24.0 Early_Slav_EMA
22.2 Levant_BA

Target: Greek_Thessaly
Distance: 1.0050% / 0.01005012 | R3P
53.2 Aegean_BA_IA
23.8 Anatolia_BA
23.0 Early_Slav_EMA

Target: Greek_Macedonia
Distance: 0.9139% / 0.00913891 | R3P | ADC: 0.25x RC
50.0 Aegean_BA_IA
29.0 Early_Slav_EMA
21.0 Levant_North_BA

Target: Greek_Central_Macedonia
Distance: 0.8742% / 0.00874231 | R3P | ADC: 0.5x RC
45.8 Aegean_BA_IA
35.6 Early_Slav_EMA
18.6 Levant_North_BA

Target: Greek_Izmir
Distance: 1.0162% / 0.01016167 | R3P
49.6 Anatolia_BA
25.6 Aegean_BA_IA
24.8 Early_Slav_EMA

Target: Turkish_Northwest
Distance: 0.9892% / 0.00989196 | R3P
48.2 Anatolia_East_BA
35.0 Turkic_West_and_Ottoman
16.8 Early_Slav_EMA



```
Levant_North_BA:TUR_Alalakh_MLBA,0.0965915,0.1477878,-0.0603812,-0.0906553,-0.0162764,-0.0337457,0.0003786,-0.0057946,-0.0039201,0.0126552,0.0068112,-0.0044502,0.0079451,0.0040828,-0.0105598,0.0052299,-0.0008258,0.0020939,0.0050908,-0.00247,0.0018509,0.0040154,-0.0036426,-0.0030559,0.0006421

Anatolia_East_BA:TUR_Arslantepe_EBA,0.1032945,0.1546142,-0.0594908,-0.089552,-0.0198495,-0.0290045,0.0017625,-0.010615,-0.0177422,0.012483,0.0054808,0.0017985,-0.005649,0.003888,-0.0106202,-0.0020882,0.0073667,0.0017735,0.0029852,0.0010945,-0.001435,0.004235,-0.0016332,-0.0043682,-0.000509

Anatolia_BA:TUR_Kaman-Kalehoyuk_MLBA,0.1050018,0.1515678,-0.042332,-0.082365,-0.0040775,-0.0274705,-0.0024088,-0.0077882,-0.011402,0.028429,0.0097435,0.007006,-0.0120788,0.0030965,-0.0138435,-0.004475,0.0116693,-0.0021538,0.0087988,-0.00741,-0.0031817,0.0061828,-0.0048065,0.0030725,-0.001407
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Ovaoren_EBA,0.0990263,0.151991,-0.0452547,-0.0812883,-0.0043087,-0.022776,-0.0019583,-0.0081533,-0.0088627,0.027457,0.0073077,0.0044463,-0.0130327,-0.0065143,-0.0147933,-0.000442,0.0126037,0.003801,0.0043577,-0.0017507,0.0003327,0.0055233,-0.0028757,0.0011247,-0.0024747
Anatolia_BA:TUR_Isparta_EBA,0.114582,0.1590993,-0.040226,-0.0802117,-0.004411,-0.024728,7.83e-05,-0.003846,-0.0115897,0.0329847,0.0068207,0.003497,-0.012686,-0.003257,-0.0225297,0.0032263,0.0214267,-0.0024493,0.0070393,-0.0007087,-0.0044507,-0.003215,0.000575,-0.003213,-0.0022353

Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:West_Turkic:KAZ_Kipchak:DA179,0.067156,-0.041637,-0.012822,-0.005814,-0.018773,0.002789,0.001645,0.009,-0.0045,-0.011481,-0.01088,3e-04,0.004311,0.000963,0.000271,0.016706,0.012256,-0.007601,0.006159,0.000625,-0.000749,0.002844,0.001849,0.01458,-0.006706
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:Ottoman_1400ad:MA2195,0.072847,-0.144205,0.035449,-0.000969,-0.045855,-0.02008,0.009165,0.004154,-0.014112,-0.011299,-0.006008,-0.006594,-0.001189,-0.013349,0.004072,0.00053,0.005476,0.002914,-0.005405,0.007879,-0.012104,0.000495,-0.011339,-0.006386,-0.004191

Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karakhanid:DA204,0.068294,-0.155376,0.032055,0.014535,-0.05601,0,0.002585,0.003692,-0.010226,-0.015126,-0.018675,-0.002847,0.001189,-0.016928,0.009365,0.00358,-0.01695,0.000887,0.005028,0.001751,-0.018343,0.003215,-0.00456,-0.006627,-0.007185
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karakhanid:DA205,0.05805,-0.199044,0.027907,0.002907,-0.041854,-0.01004,0.00705,0.005307,-0.011862,-0.007472,-0.010555,-0.001199,-0.000446,-0.007156,0.012758,0.007955,0.002086,0.001774,0.000377,0.006003,-0.015348,0.003833,-0.00419,-0.003735,-0.002515
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karluk:DA222,0.064879,-0.158423,0.023004,0.000969,-0.05601,-0.00753,0.00658,0.014999,-0.01493,-0.010934,-0.018188,0.001649,0,-0.004266,0.0076,-0.000928,-0.006519,0.005448,0.01081,0.001501,-0.015473,-0.003586,-0.003328,-0.004579,0.005987
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Karluk:DA230,0.061464,-0.145221,0.011691,-0.002584,-0.037545,0.001673,0.00329,0.009461,-0.01718,-0.009476,-0.021922,-0.003297,0,-0.001101,0.013979,-0.006895,-0.020992,0.002914,0.003771,-0.005378,-0.004492,-0.000742,0.00037,0.000602,0.002155
Turkic_West_and_Ottoman:KAZ_Kimak:DA87,0.080814,-0.140143,0.043746,0.027455,-0.050471,-0.011435,0.00376,0.000462,-0.020043,-0.018224,-0.007632,-0.003147,-0.006244,-0.002064,0.008822,0.007425,-0.019558,0.005448,-0.003142,-0.027013,-0.02533,-0.010387,-0.001479,-0.010363,0.001317

Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:Average,0.107847,0.1563915,-0.008108,-0.0646808,0.0216962,-0.0271222,-0.0005288,-0.0021345,0.00542,0.047336,0.005521,0.0169352,-0.012785,-0.0006195,-0.0163882,-0.0098118,0.0210245,0.0036108,0.0123188,-0.0039705,-0.0058648,0.0001858,-0.0065935,0.0011448,-0.0007185
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9006,0.119514,0.160454,-0.006788,-0.068476,0.014464,-0.03514,-0.003055,-0.006923,-0.002863,0.050115,0.004384,0.015137,-0.009366,0.00289,-0.019815,-0.005304,0.024643,0.007601,0.020992,-0.000375,-0.007487,-0.012365,-0.010969,-0.000602,-0.001796
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9010,0.110408,0.160454,-0.015462,-0.071383,0.029544,-0.038487,-0.003525,0.004154,0.013499,0.056129,0.018025,0.017235,-0.00223,-0.00234,-0.023208,-0.005038,0.031553,0.003421,0.005908,-0.004002,-0.006613,0.003215,-0.016145,-0.007109,-0.003113
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9033,0.091058,0.150298,-0.004148,-0.050388,0.022773,-0.013387,0.007285,-0.006692,0.003068,0.041003,-0.003573,0.019333,-0.020218,0.005505,-0.006515,-0.026518,0.00678,-0.003167,0.012193,-0.008629,-0.002995,-0.006306,-0.000616,0.005904,0.006945
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Mycenaean:I9041,0.110408,0.15436,-0.006034,-0.068476,0.020004,-0.021475,-0.00282,0.000923,0.007976,0.042097,0.003248,0.016036,-0.019326,-0.008533,-0.016015,-0.002387,0.021122,0.006588,0.010182,-0.002876,-0.006364,0.016199,0.001356,0.006386,-0.00491

Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2,0.118376,0.158423,-0.009051,-0.0670225,0.0252355,-0.027889,0.001645,-0.005077,0.0049085,0.042552,0.002842,0.01124,-0.016873,0.003578,-0.018526,-0.0157785,0.0035855,0.0003805,0.004588,-0.0126935,-0.008298,0.001546,0.001664,0.0071095,-0.008502
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8208,0.1161,0.158423,-0.017348,-0.06783,0.026774,-0.032351,-0.00282,-0.001154,0.007158,0.04319,0.003573,0.015586,-0.017096,0.006468,-0.016965,-0.02559,-0.007693,-0.000253,0.00993,-0.017133,-0.003494,0.000866,0.005053,0.00241,-0.010538
Aegean_BA_IA:Iberia_Northeast_Empuries2:I8215,0.120652,0.158423,-0.000754,-0.066215,0.023697,-0.023427,0.00611,-0.009,0.002659,0.041914,0.002111,0.006894,-0.01665,0.000688,-0.020087,-0.005967,0.014864,0.001014,-0.000754,-0.008254,-0.013102,0.002226,-0.001725,0.011809,-0.006466

Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Cycladic_EBA,0.1160995,0.1701015,-0.021119,-0.081073,0.018311,-0.035419,-0.0024675,-0.0050765,0.0076695,0.048657,0.00682,0.0138625,-0.020664,0.0059865,-0.0281615,-0.0046405,0.014342,0.002534,0.0099305,-0.011693,-0.009483,-0.0005565,-0.002095,0.0018675,-0.002395
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_EBA,0.112685,0.179749,-0.000754,-0.08721,0.02739,-0.032351,-0.003995,-0.005769,0.028224,0.06761,0.002111,0.010641,-0.020812,0.005643,-0.030944,-0.021347,0.009127,0.003927,0.00729,-0.014757,-0.007237,0.000742,-0.000986,0.007953,-0.005269
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Helladic_MBA,0.1206525,0.1482675,0.0226275,-0.011951,0.022312,-0.010319,-0.0043475,-0.0032305,-0.0011245,0.0132125,0.0017865,0.011315,-0.0136765,0.000963,-0.0094325,-0.0129275,-0.0063885,-0.0008235,0.0072275,-0.0086295,-0.0116045,0.0025965,0.008073,0.005362,-0.0020955
Aegean_BA_IA:Helladic_Cycladic_Mix,0.116479,0.1660393,0.0002515,-0.060078,0.022671,-0.0260297,-0.0036033,-0.004692,0.0115897,0.0431598,0.0035725,0.0119395,-0.0183842,0.0041975,-0.022846,-0.0129717,0.0056935,0.0018792,0.0081493,-0.0116932,-0.0094415,0.0009273,0.001664,0.0050608,-0.0032532
Aegean_BA_IA:Hel_Cyc_Min_EBA,0.1160995,0.1674355,-0.0041484,-0.0679108,0.0238508,-0.028377,-0.001645,-0.0041535,0.0141122,0.0463564,0.0052776,0.0101911,-0.0175789,0.0040771,-0.0255492,-0.0163915,0.0040094,0.0024229,0.0080918,-0.0113649,-0.0095456,0.002674,0.0002928,0.0026209,-0.0020209

Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Minoan_EBA,0.114961,0.171624,-0.017348,-0.091409,0.02739,-0.035419,0.00423,-0.002538,0.02168,0.055946,0.010393,0.004946,-0.015163,0.003716,-0.033659,-0.026651,-0.001043,0.004054,0.007919,-0.01038,-0.009858,0.007914,-0.003821,-0.004699,0.001676
Aegean_BA_IA:GRC_Minoan_Lassithi,0.1192866,0.170609,-0.0181772,-0.093993,0.0295438,-0.0398256,-0.001316,-0.0034614,0.0103488,0.0598102,0.0029878,0.0153164,-0.0251238,-5.48e-05,-0.0374586,-0.0109518,0.0173934,-0.0012414,0.0088742,-0.0136316,-0.0133764,0.0083836,-0.0050776,-0.0010604,-0.0024428

Thracia_IA:UKR_Cimmerian_o:MJ12,0.135449,0.138112,0.015462,-0.012274,0.020927,-0.008088,0.00235,-0.007384,-0.006545,0.034625,0.000487,0.008542,-0.008325,-0.008533,-0.014522,0.005171,0.025946,-0.000127,0.011439,0.005878,-0.019091,0.007666,0.004067,0.011929,-0.000239

Balkan_East_IA:BGR_IA:I5769,0.126344,0.157407,0.007165,-0.051034,0.029852,-0.02259,0.00423,-0.001385,0.007772,0.032074,-0.001461,0.005695,-0.013974,-0.003028,-0.015065,-0.001458,0.01369,0.006968,0.006285,-0.014757,-0.006239,0.004699,-0.007888,0.003494,-0.008861

Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4331,0.12862,0.151314,0.028284,-0.007429,0.038776,-0.006972,-0.00705,-0.006,0.003681,0.028064,0.006171,0.010341,-0.017542,-0.003578,-0.0076,0.006497,0.008084,-0.003041,0.006159,-0.011631,-0.005865,-0.001113,-0.00037,0.003856,-0.001197
Illyria_MBA:HRV_MBA:I4332,0.120652,0.147252,0.034318,-0.012274,0.038469,0.002231,-0.00423,0.001154,0.009613,0.032074,-0.006008,0.01094,-0.012487,-0.014726,-0.005972,0.01074,0.02047,-0.00114,0.000754,-0.011005,-0.001248,0.008656,-0.00419,0.002048,-0.002395

Latium_IA:Boville_Ernica_IA:RMPR1021,0.126344,0.152329,0.034318,-0.014535,0.054164,-0.01506,-0.001175,0.005307,0.019634,0.041914,0.005196,0.01079,-0.011001,-0.005643,0.004479,-0.016441,-0.010822,-0.001394,0.006662,-0.01113,0.007736,0.007172,-0.007641,-0.00241,0.008981
Latium_IA:Rome_Latini_IA:RMPR1016,0.127482,0.147252,0.033187,-0.016796,0.044008,-0.008646,-0.00376,-0.004846,0.026588,0.052666,-0.002761,0.015137,-0.036719,-0.008533,-0.009093,0.013392,0.016037,-0.004687,0.003897,0.004127,0.00262,-0.00272,0.001972,-0.007712,-0.008742
Etruscan_IA:Etruscan:RMPR473,0.127482,0.158423,0.035072,-0.020672,0.046778,-0.005299,0.00094,-0.000923,0.024952,0.03991,-0.002598,0.013188,-0.018434,-0.006606,-0.00665,-0.018828,-0.011865,0.003294,0.01081,0.00025,-0.001747,-0.000495,-0.000986,-0.000361,-0.003592
Etruscan_IA:ITA_Etruscan:RMPR474b,0.126344,0.149283,0.034318,-0.007752,0.036622,-0.005299,0.003995,-0.004615,0.014726,0.028793,-0.002111,0.015286,-0.01115,-0.002064,-0.00285,0.003182,0.006258,0.007221,0.012318,-0.002626,-0.003369,0.008037,0.000863,-0.000482,-0.001796

Ancient_Sicilia_LBA:ITA_Sicily_LBA:I10372,0.133173,0.174671,0.00792,-0.065892,0.049855,-0.026216,-0.006815,-0.004384,0.033951,0.063965,-0.003248,0.008542,-0.02438,-0.001514,-0.025244,-0.031822,-0.005607,0.005321,0.01081,-0.015257,-0.009982,-0.00136,-0.005669,-0.013737,0.002155
Ancient_Sicilia_LBA:ITA_Sicily_LBA:I3876,0.1161,0.165531,0.010559,-0.059432,0.0437,-0.022032,-0.00846,-0.003923,0.019839,0.056858,-0.00065,0.013788,-0.017393,0.003303,-0.018051,-0.016309,-0.00339,0.004687,0.006788,-0.001,-0.005366,0.003586,0.001602,-0.010845,0.006706
Ancient_Sicilia_LBA:ITA_Sicily_LBA:I3878,0.119514,0.168578,0.015462,-0.063631,0.049855,-0.029562,-0.00799,-0.005538,0.026997,0.063054,-0.001786,0.01094,-0.019475,-0.011836,-0.019951,0.00053,0.011343,-0.003041,-0.00088,-0.003752,-0.009733,-0.003091,-0.006655,-0.014219,-0.005389

Sardinia_EBA_IA:Sardinia:ORC002,0.119514,0.17264,0.035826,-0.05168,0.074168,-0.026495,-0.00047,-0.001154,0.046631,0.089296,-0.00406,0.020382,-0.038949,-0.013625,-0.016829,-0.007425,0.007823,-0.000127,-0.001885,-0.013632,-0.003619,0.005935,-0.010106,-0.034342,-0.000958
Sardinia_EBA_IA:ITA_Sardinia_EBA,0.1253572,0.1778531,0.0436706,-0.0511417,0.0806305,-0.0266619,-0.0064391,0.0002615,0.058712,0.095431,-0.0010067,0.0160058,-0.0319918,-0.012175,-0.0131377,-0.0052154,0.0081533,0.0006503,0.0050027,-0.0076203,0.0047499,0.0039815,-0.0115524,-0.0290724,0.0011975

Early_Slav_EMA:HUN_Avar_Szolad:Av2,0.134311,0.126941,0.081458,0.065569,0.035391,0.033746,0.00987,0.005769,0.004704,-0.02278,-0.002436,-0.005395,0.01219,0.020643,-0.015201,-0.003845,0.005867,0.004561,0.008673,5e-04,0.001497,-0.00272,0.013804,-0.007109,0.002634

Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790729,0.087644,0.147252,-0.067505,-0.097546,-0.017849,-0.041834,-0.003525,-0.009,0.008999,0.008018,0.021273,-0.007343,0.022002,0.007432,-0.011401,0.000928,-0.011604,-0.002027,0.004777,0.014132,0.011355,0.018548,-0.000123,-0.006145,0.005868
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790730,0.084229,0.146236,-0.056945,-0.091732,-0.008309,-0.043786,-0.00658,-0.000923,0.005522,0.005467,0.01088,-0.008243,0.014569,0.000275,-0.012079,0.016574,0.011735,0.003674,-0.001131,0.005628,0.001622,0.005688,-0.003328,0.008194,-0.002155
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790731,0.079676,0.153345,-0.057699,-0.100453,-0.003693,-0.041834,-0.00564,-0.006,0.017794,0.010387,0.007795,-0.017534,0.029137,0.000688,-0.008958,0.009679,0.000913,-0.006714,0.005405,-0.005628,0.001248,0.00507,0.006286,0.004097,0.000599
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790732,0.075123,0.150298,-0.060716,-0.097223,-0.007078,-0.037929,-0.012456,-0.009692,0.017385,0.015126,0.009094,-0.005245,0.021407,0.007432,-0.002307,0.000928,-0.003129,-0.00228,0.001257,0.002001,0.001996,0.002597,-0.00037,0.000843,-0.003832
Levant_BA:Levant_Sidon_MBA:ERS1790733,0.079676,0.137096,-0.063733,-0.102714,-0.015695,-0.029284,0.00423,-0.007384,0.007567,0.011845,0.00341,-0.010491,0.020812,0.011698,-0.003122,0.004508,0.001304,0.001394,-0.002765,0.005127,0.005116,0.005812,-0.008751,0.000964,-0.002994
Levant_BA:ISR:Ashkelon_IA2:ASH8,0.080814,0.145221,-0.066373,-0.101422,-0.021542,-0.029562,-0.003055,-0.012923,0.003272,0.002005,0.012179,-0.008393,0.019475,0.003303,0.001086,0.010872,-0.00339,0.001394,0.007668,-0.003627,0.006988,0.001731,0,0.000241,0.003473
Levant_BA:Levant_Yehud_IBA:I7003,0.087644,0.160454,-0.054682,-0.102391,-0.006155,-0.041555,-0.004935,-0.002769,0.026588,0.013668,0.019487,-0.008243,0.016204,0.030139,-0.007329,-0.007823,-0.026077,0.003421,0.006662,0.005753,-0.00861,0.013973,-0.006039,0.003374,-0.002515
Levant_BA:Levant_Megiddo_MLBA,0.0861261,0.1455592,-0.0646134,-0.1002072,-0.014596,-0.0394563,-0.0045434,-0.0097249,0.0131382,0.0089382,0.0103465,-0.0088707,0.0219027,0.0020119,-0.007316,0.005411,-0.0024898,0.004217,0.0036812,0.0073607,0.0047534,0.0040982,-0.0049357,-0.0025361,-0.0014427
Levant_BA:Levant_Megiddo_IA,0.084229,0.150298,-0.060716,-0.091409,-0.014464,-0.044623,-0.00517,-0.005077,0.011658,0.006014,0.012179,-0.007343,0.019177,0.006193,-0.002307,0.002254,-0.026207,0.005828,0.00729,-0.005753,0.001622,-0.002226,-0.006162,-0.000843,-0.005987
Levant_BA:Levant_Megiddo_IBA,0.078538,0.152329,-0.058077,-0.112405,0.001846,-0.044344,-0.01034,-0.009,0.030883,0.00164,0.012829,-0.013038,0.026016,-0.001651,-0.008686,0.013259,-0.005085,0.008868,-0.000126,0.001751,-0.000624,0.006059,-0.008134,0.000241,-0.004431

BedouinA_Arab_North_Modern,0.0285823,0.1335987,-0.047601,-0.0827598,-0.0138829,-0.0323513,-0.0107061,-0.0046408,0.0234522,-0.0016198,0.0081734,-0.0107237,0.0247439,0.0004741,0.0015682,0.0070567,-0.0027381,-0.0022382,-0.0034079,0.008254,0.0002081,0.002528,0.0001916,0.0017672,-0.0015967

BedouinB_Arab_South_Modern,0.041925,0.1439232,-0.0598156,-0.1169808,-0.0093179,-0.0480622,-0.0141008,-0.0087432,0.05154,-0.0052038,0.0158689,-0.0305729,0.0629496,0.004855,0.0043959,0.0288529,-0.0199706,0.00366,-0.0040153,0.029,0.0109668,0.0152299,-0.0039166,0.0071025,-0.0083092

South_Semitic_EBA:Arabian_Bedouins:Levant_JOR_EBA:I1706,0.071709,0.139128,-0.062225,-0.111113,-0.008001,-0.043507,-0.011751,-0.015692,0.041723,0.009476,0.013316,-0.019782,0.049653,-0.00523,0.000814,0.028639,-0.000522,-0.00038,-0.001131,0.020135,0.006364,0.012489,-0.00419,0.003133,-0.002036

Berberes_MA:Canary_Islands_Guanche:gun005,-0.01935,0.125926,0.004148,-0.056848,0.049855,-0.029841,-0.034782,0.005307,0.066675,0.028247,0.00406,-0.006894,0.016204,-0.015276,0.019544,0.001856,0.017993,-0.01761,-0.034567,0.018384,-0.0141,-0.025596,0.020706,-0.006145,-0.011376
```

----------


## Yetos

> Now I even doubt E-V13 existed at all among Classical Age Peloponnesians. Let's wait and see. 
> There is something strange with Peloponnesians being so northern shifted and close to Greek Macedonians when they have half of I2a and R1a that Greek Macedonians have.



Maybe the Dorian blood,
what Makedonians claim.

----------


## TaktikatEMalet

> Maybe the Dorian blood,
> what Makedonians claim.


Macedonia didnt exist at 1200bc - at least not as an ethnic group. Dorian movements seem to line up with that of the illyrians who also crossed the sea to italy

----------


## ihype02

I have changed my mind about E-V13 in Ancient Peloponnese, I think it existed but it was not very mainstream compared to J2a.

----------


## MOESAN

> Seems pretty pseudo-scholarship.


We are living a beautiful and rich time where come to life a lot of "scientific" papers finding cognates everywhere.
Maybe I'm a bit conservative. I know some surprising ties can emerge between words seeming very far one from another but...
these lists of "cognates" don't convince me for the most. It is not thefirst time helas.

----------


## Jovialis

Catacomb Culture + Minoan is a good fit for the Mycenaeans (and me), but not for the northern Greece Logkas samples from Clemente et al. 2021.

Dodecad K12b

Source:



```
Catacomb:MJ-09:Jarve_2019,25.71,4.68,0,0.61,7.93,55.69,0,0,0,0,2.4,2.97
Catacomb:MK3003:Wang_2019,29.97,2.83,0,0.37,3.73,54.49,1.01,0,0,0,5.99,1.62
Catacomb:RK4001:Wang_2019,26.39,2.57,0,0,2.96,54.74,2.09,0,0,0,10.33,0.92
Catacomb:RK4002:Wang_2019,29.4,1.88,0,0,2.25,59.81,0.86,0,0,0,5.54,0.24
Catacomb:SA6003:Wang_2019,28.23,2.3,0,0,0.76,59.25,1.7,0,0,0,6.52,1.23
Minoan:Lasithi:I0070:Lazaridis_2017,0,0,0.62,0.55,37.53,0,0,0,15.52,0,45.7,0.09
Minoan:Lasithi:I0071:Lazaridis_2017,1.16,0,2.96,0,37.9,0.23,0,0,13.01,0,44.59,0.15
Minoan:Lasithi:I0073:Lazaridis_2017,0,0.05,2.92,0.4,36.38,0,0,0,13.48,0,46.7,0.07
Minoan:Lasithi:I0074:Lazaridis_2017,0.58,0,4.33,0,39.44,0,0,0,12.45,0,43.19,0
Minoan:Lasithi:I9005:Lazaridis_2017,1.52,0,5.68,0,37.33,0,0,0,16.14,0,39.25,0.08
Minoan:Odigitria:I9127:Lazaridis_2017,0,0,0,0,40.33,0,0,1.41,8.2,0,50.06,0
Minoan:Odigitria:I9128:Lazaridis_2017,6.38,2.36,3.13,0,48.96,0,0,0,14.8,1.02,23.34,0
Minoan:Odigitria:I9129:Lazaridis_2017,0,0,4.55,0,44.82,0,0,0,13.21,0,37.43,0
Minoan:Odigitria:I9130:Lazaridis_2017,1.38,0,0.19,0,41.77,0,0,0.28,17.61,0,38.77,0
Minoan:Odigitria:I9131:Lazaridis_2017,5.16,0,0,0,36.32,0,0,0,19.19,0,39.01,0.33
Minoan:Petras_EBA:Pta08:Clemente_2021,0,0,3.85,0.33,34.73,0.38,0.14,0.05,14.68,0.48,43.65,1.72
```

Target:



```
Mycenaean:I9006:Lazaridis_2017,3.38,0,1.25,0,36.32,5.47,0,0,7.73,1.07,44.26,0.51
Mycenaean:I9010:Lazaridis_2017,0,0,3.66,1.15,38.24,6.6,0.59,0.65,13.92,0,35.19,0
Mycenaean:I9033:Lazaridis_2017,1.55,1.33,2.36,0,39.11,8.61,2.19,0,7.76,0,34.35,2.74
Mycenaean:I9041:Lazaridis_2017,3.15,0,2.41,0,37.19,8.87,0,0,10.69,0,37.17,0.52
Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017,5.02,0,5.95,0,40.19,14.38,0,0,10.66,0,23.79,0
Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log02:Clemente_2021,2.02,0.51,1.68,0.46,32.46,23.57,0,0.25,7.97,0,30.09,1
Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021,7.05,1.16,0.26,0,31.18,28.21,0,0.13,4.25,0.92,24.07,2.77
```

----------


## Palermo Trapani

Jovialis: Thanks for the data in your post 3207. Using the Minoan coordinates, I quickly ran my distances, and modern Italian samples on Dodecad 12B updated to see what they looked like. I get a good fit as well (Distance of 1.7). Italian regions of Umbria, Molise, Basilicata, Apulia, Calabria, Campania, Lazio, Marche, Romagna and Sicily all get distances < 5. Not using 0.25X adjustment, Lazio and Marche are at 5.5 and 5.7, Umbria and Romagna are at 7.3 and 8.1 respectively, all others still < 5.

Target
Distance | ADC: 0.25x RC
Catacomb
Minoan

PalermoTrapani_Combined
1.64227469
•
23.4
76.6

Italian_Umbria
4.20071798
•
32.4
67.6

Italian_Molise
1.69240073
•
25.9
74.1

Italian_Basilicata
1.71222858
•
26.9
73.1

Italian_Abruzzo
1.68559202
•
27.5
72.5

Italian_Aosta_Valley
14.70491823
•
40.1
59.9

Italian_Apulia
1.87286692
•
29.4
70.6

Italian_Calabria
2.75128617
•
21.5
78.5

Italian_Campania
1.31599825
•
23.8
76.2

Italian_Emilia
7.65005171
•
33.5
66.5

Italian_Friuli_VG
10.15109510
•
42.4
57.6

Italian_Jews
6.10647569
•
17.9
82.1

Italian_Lazio
3.06669424
•
32.8
67.2

Italian_Liguria
8.37222811
•
33.4
66.6

Italian_Lombardy
11.03346138
•
34.4
65.6

Italian_Marche
2.91747465
•
30.8
69.2

Italian_Piedmont
9.81551356
•
37.1
62.9

Italian_Romagna
4.77672029
•
32.3
67.7

Italian_Sicily
1.46602302
•
25.0
75.0

Italian_Trentino
13.39768844
•
40.4
59.6

Italian_Tuscany
6.51064946
•
32.7
67.3

Italian_Veneto
10.26429740
•
38.9
61.1

Sardinian
14.15375411
•
2.1
97.9

Average
6.14175699
•
29.8
70.2

----------


## Jovialis

^^Interesting, the difference in fitness can be primarily explained by different bronze age migrations imo.

----------


## Angela

Distance to:
Angela

8.36580540
Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

10.74503141
Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log02:Clemente_2021

14.02280286
Mycenaean:I9033:Lazaridis_2017

14.26813933
Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

16.01455588
Mycenaean:I9041:Lazaridis_2017

18.14376477
Mycenaean:I9010:Lazaridis_2017

22.89048055
Mycenaean:I9006:Lazaridis_2017

23.21414009
Minoan:Odigitria:I9128:Lazaridis_2017

24.12944881
Minoan:Odigitria:I9129:Lazaridis_2017

25.82338862
Minoan:Lasithi:I9005:Lazaridis_2017

25.93733602
Minoan:Odigitria:I9130:Lazaridis_2017

26.59358381
Minoan:Lasithi:I0074:Lazaridis_2017

26.97469740
Minoan:Odigitria:I9131:Lazaridis_2017

27.44410319
Minoan:Lasithi:I0071:Lazaridis_2017

28.00880040
Minoan:Petras_EBA:Pta08:Clemente_2021

29.34653472
Minoan:Lasithi:I0070:Lazaridis_2017

29.48955069
Minoan:Lasithi:I0073:Lazaridis_2017

30.80163957
Minoan:Odigitria:I9127:Lazaridis_2017

59.00287959
Catacomb:RK4001:Wang_2019

59.28986844
Catacomb:MJ-09:Jarve_2019

61.13042041
Catacomb:MK3003:Wang_2019

64.92419657
Catacomb:SA6003:Wang_2019

65.09018820
Catacomb:RK4002:Wang_2019



Distance to:
Angela

5.86436026
68.60% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017 + 31.40% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

5.94939797
60.40% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017 + 39.60% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log02:Clemente_2021

6.00573213
35.60% Minoan:Odigitria:I9129:Lazaridis_2017 + 64.40% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

6.18070743
36.40% Minoan:Odigitria:I9128:Lazaridis_2017 + 63.60% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

6.56664847
27.60% Minoan:Odigitria:I9128:Lazaridis_2017 + 72.40% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log02:Clemente_2021

6.98150409
50.60% Mycenaean:I9033:Lazaridis_2017 + 49.40% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

7.70561399
5.20% Catacomb:RK4001:Wang_2019 + 94.80% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

7.72873009
42.20% Mycenaean:I9010:Lazaridis_2017 + 57.80% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

7.77107155
4.60% Catacomb:SA6003:Wang_2019 + 95.40% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

7.77729952
4.60% Catacomb:RK4002:Wang_2019 + 95.40% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

7.81619010
32.60% Minoan:Odigitria:I9130:Lazaridis_2017 + 67.40% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

7.81817878
4.80% Catacomb:MJ-09:Jarve_2019 + 95.20% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

7.83891674
4.60% Catacomb:MK3003:Wang_2019 + 95.40% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

8.01435267
17.20% Mycenaean:I9033:Lazaridis_2017 + 82.80% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

8.12049317
8.60% Mycenaean:I9006:Lazaridis_2017 + 91.40% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

8.14629984
46.00% Mycenaean:I9041:Lazaridis_2017 + 54.00% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

8.21653488
10.20% Mycenaean:I9041:Lazaridis_2017 + 89.80% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

8.22556448
31.60% Minoan:Lasithi:I0074:Lazaridis_2017 + 68.40% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

8.24842981
4.40% Minoan:Odigitria:I9127:Lazaridis_2017 + 95.60% Armenoi_Crete:I9123:Lazaridis_2017

8.50655072
16.00% Catacomb:MJ-09:Jarve_2019 + 84.00% Mycenaean:I9033:Lazaridis_2017

8.62659425
31.80% Minoan:Lasithi:I9005:Lazaridis_2017 + 68.20% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

8.74971175
36.20% Mycenaean:I9033:Lazaridis_2017 + 63.80% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log02:Clemente_2021

8.80798243
27.80% Catacomb:MJ-09:Jarve_2019 + 72.20% Minoan:Odigitria:I9129:Lazaridis_2017

8.90561834
30.00% Minoan:Lasithi:I0071:Lazaridis_2017 + 70.00% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log04:Clemente_2021

8.95420844
21.00% Minoan:Odigitria:I9129:Lazaridis_2017 + 79.00% Helladic_Logkas_MBA:Log02:Clemente_2021

----------


## Jovialis

I added Beaker North Italy, and the fits came out a lot better across the board, with the exception of Sardinia. 

Here it is for the original Dodecad populations:





```
Catacomb:MJ-09:Jarve_2019,25.71,4.68,0,0.61,7.93,55.69,0,0,0,0,2.4,2.97
Catacomb:MK3003:Wang_2019,29.97,2.83,0,0.37,3.73,54.49,1.01,0,0,0,5.99,1.62
Catacomb:RK4001:Wang_2019,26.39,2.57,0,0,2.96,54.74,2.09,0,0,0,10.33,0.92
Catacomb:RK4002:Wang_2019,29.4,1.88,0,0,2.25,59.81,0.86,0,0,0,5.54,0.24
Catacomb:SA6003:Wang_2019,28.23,2.3,0,0,0.76,59.25,1.7,0,0,0,6.52,1.23
Minoan:Lasithi:I0070:Lazaridis_2017,0,0,0.62,0.55,37.53,0,0,0,15.52,0,45.7,0.09
Minoan:Lasithi:I0071:Lazaridis_2017,1.16,0,2.96,0,37.9,0.23,0,0,13.01,0,44.59,0.15
Minoan:Lasithi:I0073:Lazaridis_2017,0,0.05,2.92,0.4,36.38,0,0,0,13.48,0,46.7,0.07
Minoan:Lasithi:I0074:Lazaridis_2017,0.58,0,4.33,0,39.44,0,0,0,12.45,0,43.19,0
Minoan:Lasithi:I9005:Lazaridis_2017,1.52,0,5.68,0,37.33,0,0,0,16.14,0,39.25,0.08
Minoan:Odigitria:I9127:Lazaridis_2017,0,0,0,0,40.33,0,0,1.41,8.2,0,50.06,0
Minoan:Odigitria:I9128:Lazaridis_2017,6.38,2.36,3.13,0,48.96,0,0,0,14.8,1.02,23.34,0
Minoan:Odigitria:I9129:Lazaridis_2017,0,0,4.55,0,44.82,0,0,0,13.21,0,37.43,0
Minoan:Odigitria:I9130:Lazaridis_2017,1.38,0,0.19,0,41.77,0,0,0.28,17.61,0,38.77,0
Minoan:Odigitria:I9131:Lazaridis_2017,5.16,0,0,0,36.32,0,0,0,19.19,0,39.01,0.33
Minoan:Petras_EBA:Pta08:Clemente_2021,0,0,3.85,0.33,34.73,0.38,0.14,0.05,14.68,0.48,43.65,1.72
Beaker_Northern_Italy:I2478:Olalde_2018,4.97,0,0,0.15,47.73,28.87,0.74,0,3.49,0.84,12.34,0.86
```

----------


## Malaparte

Jovialis -- please forgive the naive question, but my involvement with this "hobby" is very sporadic and so I tend to miss a lot of basic points -- I take it that you're trying to model Italian ancestry as a 3-way mix of Bell Beaker, Catacomb and Minoan. This suggests that Catacomb ancestry makes no contribution to Bell Beaker and by extension the Italo-Celtic component? So we have, then, something like this ==

Bell Beaker = WHG + Cucuteni-T EEF + Yamnaya-like ---> and this enters Italy from the Alps, after moving up along Danube

Catacomb = whatever was north of Yamnaya in the forest steppe (EHG + ANE ? + maybe SHG ?) ---> this enters Italy by crossing Adriatic (i.e., it moves south into the steppe and then west through modern-day Romania and Serbia)

Minoan = Aegean EEF (WHG + AN + some CHG) ---> enters Italy by way of the Ionian Sea

And is it still safe to say that Romans descend from Bell Beaker and not Catacomb?

----------


## Malaparte

This seems like a strange model, however, because Minoan is basically Minoan when it enters Italy, and Beaker N_Italy is by definition what Bell Beaker was when it entered Italy. However, Catacomb presumably mixes with a lot of stuff before reaching Italy ---> doesn't this throw the model into a dissymmetry?

Or is the extra Catacomb component in all Italians analogous to the extra CHG component in Southern Italy?

----------


## Bekas

Successful qpAdm models for Myceneans and Minoans (with std. errors below 5%, which is usually the threshold for the published papers).

Myceneans= 82.4% Minoans + 12.5% Catacomb + 5% Iran_Ganj_Dareh_N.

Minoans= 91.1% Peloponnese_N + 8.9% Iran_Ganj_Dareh_N.





> qpAdm: parameter file: parqpadm.txt
> ### THE INPUT PARAMETERS
> ##PARAMETER NAME: VALUE
> fstatsname: fstatsa.txt
> popleft: left.txt
> popright: right.txt
> details: YES
> ## qpAdm version: 1520
> seed: 1528841194
> ...

----------


## brick

Interesting, Jovialis. I wonder what would improve the fit of the Sardinians.
I've used both older and updated samples (I don't see any contradictions between the two).

----------


## bigsnake49

> *The goal is to hit a distance of 0.9-1.1%*, we don't want it below 0.9% because there might be over corrections since the calculator does not care if it makes sense but it just cares for getting the lowest distance. The acceptable distance usually for models like this is below 2% and around 1% are not too low and not too high so i think 0.9-1.1 is more balanced from what i observed.
> 
> 1) *Reduce the populations to 2*, *if the distance is higher than 1.1%* then the TARGET must be mixed between more populations so *increase it by 1 population*.* 
> 
> 2)If you get a distance below 0.9%* then there might be over corrections so *increase distance cooldown until you get 0.9-1.1% distance*. *If you still get below 0.9%* then just *keep increasing the distance cooldown until it gets the closest to 0.9-1.1%, if it's above 1.1% with distance cooldown then increase by 1 population*
> 
> 3)* If you got higher than 1.1% distance with 2 populations* then* you increased the populations by 1* and so *you must repeat the steps above but with the increased populations*,* keep repeating* the steps *until you get a distance between 0.9-1.1%.
> *
> 3) *If you keep getting above 1.1% and below 2%* then *reduce it to 5-6 populations if there are more and try adding 0.25x distance cooldown*.* If the distance changed only by 0.1% then it might have removed over corrections and worked.*  
> ...


This is all well and good but the Izmir and Northwest Turkey mixtures, unless there is historical information that supports massive Slav migrations to those two places.

----------


## bigsnake49

I still think that there is a lot of overlap between constituent populations. I think that we need to go back and only select populations that had no overlap like Anatolian EEF and Steppe. As far as we know there is no overlap between the two. If let's say the Early Slavs already mixed with the local populations which themselves were a mix of EEF + Steppe then there will be a lot of overlap with Greek populations which already have those two constituent populations. So we need to use samples for the Slavs that are pure, pre-admixed.

----------


## Angela

> This seems like a strange model, however, because Minoan is basically Minoan when it enters Italy, and Beaker N_Italy is by definition what Bell Beaker was when it entered Italy. However, Catacomb presumably mixes with a lot of stuff before reaching Italy ---> doesn't this throw the model into a dissymmetry?
> 
> Or is the extra Catacomb component in all Italians analogous to the extra CHG component in Southern Italy?


We don't know if Catacomb people just moved directly south west from the steppe or mixed with "Old Europe" type people along the way. 

Those Parma Beaker samples are also mixed with locals if I remember correctly, being more EEF than Central Beaker.

At any rate, Catacomb is just a particular group of steppe people.

----------


## Angela

> *The goal is to hit a distance of 0.9-1.1%*, we don't want it below 0.9% because there might be over corrections since the calculator does not care if it makes sense but it just cares for getting the lowest distance. The acceptable distance usually for models like this is below 2% and around 1% are not too low and not too high so i think 0.9-1.1 is more balanced from what i observed.
> 
> 1) *Reduce the populations to 2*, *if the distance is higher than 1.1%* then the TARGET must be mixed between more populations so *increase it by 1 population*.* 
> 
> 2)If you get a distance below 0.9%* then there might be over corrections so *increase distance cooldown until you get 0.9-1.1% distance*. *If you still get below 0.9%* then just *keep increasing the distance cooldown until it gets the closest to 0.9-1.1%, if it's above 1.1% with distance cooldown then increase by 1 population*
> 
> 3)* If you got higher than 1.1% distance with 2 populations* then* you increased the populations by 1* and so *you must repeat the steps above but with the increased populations*,* keep repeating* the steps *until you get a distance between 0.9-1.1%.
> *
> 3) *If you keep getting above 1.1% and below 2%* then *reduce it to 5-6 populations if there are more and try adding 0.25x distance cooldown*.* If the distance changed only by 0.1% then it might have removed over corrections and worked.*  
> ...


Great, so long as you don't let history and archaeology get in your way.

----------


## Bekas

> I removed the ones that have high overlap, removed Anatolia for Cypriots and southern Greece because it might be just over correcting. What do you think of this?


These "models" and "distance rules" are pure sophistry and comical as the poster above said. Only qpAdm can produce valid results and even that has its shortcomings.

----------


## Jovialis

I posted this in another thread, but it is suitable for this one as well:

----------


## blevins13

> I posted this in another thread, but it is suitable for this one as well:


The connection with Sintashta-Petrovka is well known and largely supported by Drews. I have discussed this in the past here. The difference with you is that he suggests a Caucasian route. Since the Armenian connection, that was used in the past to support Carpathian route does no longer stands, than the opposite maybe true. I am wondering why the Carpathian route seems more logical to you.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Jovialis

> The connection with Sintashta-Petrovka is well known and largely supported by Drews. I have discussed this in the past here. The difference with you is that he suggests a Caucasian route. Since the Armenian connection, that was used in the past to support Carpathian route does no longer stands, than the opposite maybe true. I am wondering why the Carpathian route seems more logical to you.
> 
> 
> Sent from my ****** using Eupedia Forum


Yes, I recall you saying that.

I am not really focused on the specific route, but the genetic and cultural connect between those Steppe cultures and Ancient Greece.

I don't think Lazaridis' lecture graphic is literally meant to be taken as a specific physical route. I think the arrow is just arbitrarily representing a migration from the direction of the steppe. I think this, because the study itself doesn't mention a specific Carpathian route.

At any rate, the Lazaridis lecture graphic shows the Eastern Model route, for the Armenia connection, cutting right through Anatolia:

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

> These "models" and "distance rules" are pure sophistry and comical as the poster above said. Only qpAdm can produce valid results and even that has its shortcomings.



Yeah i realized that some time ago. That "method" i tried to use was really bad.

----------


## Idontknowwhatimdoing

> I still think that there is a lot of overlap between constituent populations. I think that we need to go back and only select populations that had no overlap like Anatolian EEF and Steppe. As far as we know there is no overlap between the two. If let's say the Early Slavs already mixed with the local populations which themselves were a mix of EEF + Steppe then there will be a lot of overlap with Greek populations which already have those two constituent populations. So we need to use samples for the Slavs that are pure, pre-admixed.


Those models i made were just bad and the "method" i used was stupid. Its really hard to make models with such mixed populations on G25 so i stick with neolithic proxies now.

My last attempt here might be better but it's still probably very inaccurate. I used the same proxies for everyone which makes it even worse. Also i used Greek averages from Anthrogenica. The G25 Greek averages seem to have a lot of random outcasts.

unknown.jpg

----------


## RCDNA

Thanks Jovialis...
MTA says I'm in the top 97% of matches with Mik15 which was strange to me, as all 4 of my grandparents were from Punjab, so I wondered about it. I probably match this sample's Iran Neolithic and Steppe ancestry, given your helpful visualisations.

----------


## Jovialis

> Thanks Jovialis...
> MTA says I'm in the top 97% of matches with Mik15 which was strange to me, as all 4 of my grandparents were from Punjab, so I wondered about it. I probably match this sample's Iran Neolithic and Steppe ancestry, given your helpful visualisations.


If I recall, that sample is basically Minoan-like in terms of autosomal DNA. Mik15 is mostly Anatolia_N, with a minority component of CHG, and even smaller component of steppe.

Mik15 is "Early Helladic Bronze-Age".



That result might be due to a lack of appropriate samples that would fit you better. Idk

----------

