Genetics of the Greek Peleponessus

[DuPidh]

The results of one unknown person are meaningless for this kind of analysis, even if the topic were the similarities between the Peloponnese and Albania, which it isn't. I can't even say good try.

I wonder when they conducted the study about the genetics of Peloponnese, why the comparison was done to Sicilians and Italians and not Anatolian Greeks who supposedly were not touched by Slavic invasions? That wood have been more convincing if they proved that Anatolian Greeks untouched by slavic invasions are genetically identical with people from Peloponnese. Since both are parts of the same national body.Sicilians are a mixture of a number of non Greek ethnicity so the comparison with them is not quite normal. Why did they not take as Slavic homeland Bulgaria?

 

[spartan owl]

to angela
the last three dots in the south are from neapoli valley, (called vatika valley).
The trouth is that the inhabitants of those three villages look different and have different culture from the inhabitants of the mountains fourther south from the valley
(the first are farmers and shepards while the others are sea people, so they behave differently they listen to different music etc) but of course i can not tell if they are different also in terms of dna.
What you have to understand is that peloponnese is very mountainous and fragmentated both geograficaly as in terms of how someone defines his subgroup.
In laconia for example maniots are different from other laconians and all the sea side people are different from the spartan valley and mountains maybe even anthropologically but in the end of the day we all are laconians culturaly as well in terms of dna.

 

[spartan owl]

I wonder when they conducted the study about the genetics of Peloponnese, why the comparison was done to Sicilians and Italians and not Anatolian Greeks who supposedly were not touched by Slavic invasions? That wood have been more convincing if they proved that Anatolian Greeks untouched by slavic invasions are genetically identical with people from Peloponnese. Since both are parts of the same national body.Sicilians are a mixture of a number of non Greek ethnicity so the comparison with them is not quite normal. Why did they not take as Slavic homeland Bulgaria?

you should read the study before talking!
it does compare peloponneseans with anatolian greeks and they are different but they are both different with slavs.
Reguarding bulgarians: as mentioned before the bulgarians have a strong mediterranean component so comparing them with the greeks wont proov anything.
And bulgarians are not true slavs to begin with but a small turkic-mongolian tribe mixed with a lot of slavs moovig to the balkans and getting "balkanized"

 

[Angela]

to angela
the last three dots in the south are from neapoli valley, (called vatika valley).
The trouth is that the inhabitants of those three villages look different and have different culture from the inhabitants of the mountains fourther south from the valley
(the first are farmers and shepards while the others are sea people, so they behave differently they listen to different music etc) but of course i can not tell if they are different also in terms of dna.
What you have to understand is that peloponnese is very mountainous and fragmentated both geograficaly as in terms of how someone defines his subgroup.
In laconia for example maniots are different from other laconians and all the sea side people are different from the spartan valley and mountains maybe even anthropologically but in the end of the day we all are laconians culturaly as well in terms of dna.

Thank you for catching that, Spartan Owl.







So the Lakonia sample here is similar to or identical with the S.E.Lakonia sample in Paschou et al.

Given the PCA and Admixture analysis, it looks like they group with the rest of the Peloponnesians, and not with Deep Mani, Tayetos, or Tsakonia, although the authors say they are slightly closer to Deep Mani and the Tsakones.

"Laconia is fairly closely related to both Deep Mani and to the Tsakones".

Yes, I think there is so much substructure here because like Italy, there is lots of rugged, mountainous terrain.

 

[Yetos]

I wonder when they conducted the study about the genetics of Peloponnese, why the comparison was done to Sicilians and Italians and not Anatolian Greeks who supposedly were not touched by Slavic invasions? That wood have been more convincing if they proved that Anatolian Greeks untouched by slavic invasions are genetically identical with people from Peloponnese. Since both are parts of the same national body.Sicilians are a mixture of a number of non Greek ethnicity so the comparison with them is not quite normal. Why did they not take as Slavic homeland Bulgaria?

Simple, Minor Asian Greeks are closer to Ionians and Aeolians and not Doric of Peloponese

 

[Blanco]

I wouldn't be so sure about this. The Greek islands were populated by many non-Greek populations (Carians, Minoans, and so on) and were colonized by the mainland the same way Cyprus, Sicily, and southern Italy were. Without ancient samples we cannot say if the people there were ever mostly 'Greek' by blood, or Hellenized. They may have changed comparatively less over the millennia, though.

Also, I would be surprised if all the Aegean islands are genetically the same as one another. There may be a gradient there too.

What proofs do you have that "Greek Islands" are less Greek than those living on the Mainland. If anything i would think it's the other way around because Mainland Greece was connected to the Balkans and thousands of Bulgarians, Arvanites, Serbians had settled down in Mainland Greece and most likely blended among the locals. On family finder some Greeks have 3rd cousins from Serbia, Ukraine and many are 1/4 Bulgarian even.... There's no any historical link that would support your idea. Minoans most likely died out and the island was replaced by Hellenes from the Mainland and surrounding regions.
The reason South Italy is a bit more Mediterranean shifted than Inland Greece is because South Italy was free from "Northern migrations" so they remained more pure Mediterraneans, and the Greeks who settled down in Italy, Cyprus and the whole Mediterranean basin were most likely "purer" and more native Mediterranean stock than Greeks living on the Mainland today except Pontic Greeks who seem to be more Near Eastern and carrying Byzantine stock.

All South Europeans including Sicilians, Sardinians, Greeks, Iberians arrived through the Neolithic period to Europe, so it's logical that these populations share more or less the same genetic make up.

 

[DuPidh]

you should read the study before talking!
it does compare peloponneseans with anatolian greeks and they are different but they are both different with slavs.
Reguarding bulgarians: as mentioned before the bulgarians have a strong mediterranean component so comparing them with the greeks wont proov anything.
And bulgarians are not true slavs to begin with but a small turkic-mongolian tribe mixed with a lot of slavs moovig to the balkans and getting "balkanized"

You are making my point! Slavs that invaded the Balkans have never been true Slavs. The invasion did not happen over night. It lasted 2 centuries. On they way of conquering new lands the Slavs absorbed many Balkans Mediterranean tribes who became culturally Slavs. Some of them invaded Peloponnese, which means even though a folk can be E-v13 it does not mean the individual was ever Greek ethnically. If you see the Serb DNA they have a high percentage of E, J, G, etc. Some of them made it down to Greece in search of warm weather. That's why Fallmeraye was right when said that replacement of populations in Peloponnese have happened.

 

[Blanco]

Here is what a biologist wrote about the study

Peloponneseans are clearly distinguishable from the populations of the Slavic homeland and are very similar to Sicilians and Italians. Using a novel method of quantitative analysis of ADMIXTURE output we find that the Slavic ancestry of Peloponnesean subpopulations ranges from 0.2 to 14.4%. Subpopulations considered by Fallmerayer to be Slavic tribes or to have Near Eastern origin, have no significant ancestry of either. This study rejects the theory of extinction of medieval Peloponneseans and illustrates how genetics can clarify important aspects of the history of a human population.

^^

What strikes the most the very low green component which peaks in Slavic groups but it's almost absent in Greeks, while the French like component is clearly more dominant just like in the Italian sample at K=8

 

[MarkoZ]

What's the "aboriginal Pelasgians" promulgation? How is it Nordicist?

I guess I missed this one.

What I mean is the widespread idea that Pelasgians were the original pre-Indo-European population of Greece, based on a remark by Herodotus about their alleged autochthony (he nevertheless goes on to say that they came from Samothrace, a point that is usually ignored). The Indo-European immigration to Greece is usually grafted onto the hypothesis of a Dorian invasion and the semi-mythical Return of the Heracleidae, even though all of these must have been seperate events insofar as they actually occurred.

Most importantly, the northern invaders are of course held to be blond and the Pelasgians dark.

 

[spartan owl]

You are making my point! Slavs that invaded the Balkans have never been true Slavs. The invasion did not happen over night. It lasted 2 centuries. On they way of conquering new lands the Slavs absorbed many Balkans Mediterranean tribes who became culturally Slavs. Some of them invaded Peloponnese, which means even though a folk can be E-v13 it does not mean the individual was ever Greek ethnically. If you see the Serb DNA they have a high percentage of E, J, G, etc. Some of them made it down to Greece in search of warm weather. That's why Fallmeraye was right when said that replacement of populations in Peloponnese have happened.

so your point is that people geneticaly similar to greeks, like "slavisized" greek macedonians for example, replaced the peloponnesean greeks and thats why dna research can not prove any big slavic component in them?!
even if that is the case what is the point that?!
that geneticaly speaking peloponneseans are greeks but lingusticaly speaking were not pure during some time in history?!
that is even more stupid.

 

[Dibran]

so your point is that people geneticaly similar to greeks, like "slavisized" greek macedonians for example, replaced the peloponnesean greeks and thats why dna research can not prove any big slavic component in them?!
even if that is the case what is the point that?!
that geneticaly speaking peloponneseans are greeks but lingusticaly speaking were not pure during some time in history?!
that is even more stupid.

I think the idea of holding anyone as a pure bred people is the stupid thing.

 

[spartan owl]

Here is what a biologist wrote about the study

^^

What strikes the most the very low green component which peaks in Slavic groups but it's almost absent in Greeks, while the French like component is clearly more dominant just like in the Italian sample at K=8

so what?
the study must be wrong?
if you have an IQ above 100 and take a look at k=8 you just posted you will notice that slavs have higher DARK GREEN AND REDcomponent not LIGHT GREEN that is big even in andalusians.
The dark green is a little bit bigger in france, but italians have it low as the greeks and maybe even a little bit lower.

 

[Angela]

What I mean is the widespread idea that Pelasgians were the original pre-Indo-European population of Greece, based on a remark by Herodotus about their alleged autochthony (he nevertheless goes on to say that they came from Samothrace, a point that is usually ignored). The Indo-European immigration to Greece is usually grafted onto the hypothesis of a Dorian invasion and the semi-mythical Return of the Heracleidae, even though all of these must have been seperate events insofar as they actually occurred.

Most importantly, the northern invaders are of course held to be blond and the Pelasgians dark.

Thanks. Yes, that I knew.

Some people are going to have heartburn if the Mycenaean Lord turns out to resemble his reconstruction in terms of pigmentation.

See:http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ent-Greece?highlight=Mycenaean+reconstruction

 

[LABERIA]

I think the idea of holding anyone as a pure bred people is the stupid thing.

The discussion here is not about purity, but about continuity.

 

[ngc598]

Some people are going to have heartburn if the Mycenaean Lord turns out to resemble his reconstruction in terms of pigmentation.

See:http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ent-Greece?highlight=Mycenaean+reconstruction

Pfft! Who's this squint-eyed hunk anyway?

Achilles was blond - Ilias I, 197-199

στῆ δ' ὄπιθεν, ξανθῆς δὲ κόμης ἕλε Πηλείωνα
οἴῳ φαινομένη· τῶν δ' ἄλλων οὔ τις ὁρᾶτο·
θάμβησεν δ' Ἀχιλεύς, ...

... and Menelaos as well - Odys. III, 324-326

εἰ δ' ἐθέλεις πεζός, πάρα τοι δίφρος τε καὶ ἵπποι,
πὰρ δέ τοι υἷες ἐμοί, οἵ τοι πομπῆες ἔσονται
ἐς Λακεδαίμονα δῖαν, ὅθι ξανθὸς Μενέλαος.

... and I don't want to plough through the whole epos to show more of them among the Greeks.
To all people in denial ... Greek tribes introduced the Blondie to old Hellas.:bigsmile:

 

[spartan owl]

to angela
i have two questions
1.i have noticed that even if the laconians share dna with both the maniots and the tsakonians that have the lowest shared ancestry with the italians.
And even if in the north of laconia there is arcadia that shares shares the 3rd lowest shared ancestry with the italians, laconia non the less haves a slight higher shared ancstry with the italians than every one else.
do you think that this is caused by the existance of some small hot spot (like sparta or malvasia for example) that haves even higher shared ancestry or is it just explained by the s.d
2.the difference of tsakonians and maniots from the rest of the peloponneseans is explained by a founder effect because of the isolation or because they are more pure?
i belive that both cases are true but mainly because of the founder effect

 

[Blanco]

so what?
the study must be wrong?
if you have an IQ above 100 and take a look at k=8 you just posted you will notice that slavs have higher DARK GREEN AND REDcomponent not LIGHT GREEN that is big even in andalusians.
The dark green is a little bit bigger in france, but italians have it low as the greeks and maybe even a little bit lower.

Italians and Sicilians have more West European (light green) and around the same levels of Dark Green as Greeks or slightly lower the rest of their ancestry look similar.

 

[Angela]

Pfft! Who's this squint-eyed hunk anyway?

Achilles was blond - Ilias I, 197-199



... and Menelaos as well - Odys. III, 324-326



... and I don't want to plough through the whole epos to show more of them among the Greeks.
To all people in denial ... Greek tribes introduced the Blondie to old Hellas.:bigsmile:

First of all, who cares? Certainly not me. I was just making an observation about the large cadre of Nordicists in this hobby. For the record I don't think that's a very good reconstruction even of the facial features, and the pigmentation is based on wall paintings. We'll see what the dna shows. He's also too brutal looking to be attractive, at least for my tastes, which are, of course, subjective. Honestly, this whole fixation on blondes within this community quite startled me when I first became interested in this topic. I come from a family half of whom are fair and half of whom are more stereotypically "Med" looking, and I never once heard it discussed as being of any moment.

Second of all, for anyone who does care, do we really have to go through the whole litany about the precise translation of the phrases used by the ancients? People should take some courses in ancient Greek.

Third of all, Southern Italians and Greeks have blondes among them today. Does that mean it's the prevailing phenotype among them? That's a rhetorical question.

Domenico Criscito:

The very fact that some ancient Greeks are described as "bright" haired indicates to me that it was unusual enough to be noticed. Otherwise, why bring it up if all or the majority of them were "bright" haired.

Believe me, I spent an entire semester reading Homer and all the ancient Greek writers, and the number of such descriptions is by no means overwhelming.

Ed. I don't doubt, btw, that those genes might have been brought to Greece by Indo-European", i.e. "Greek" speakers. However, those Indo-European speakers didn't get them from Yamnaya or Catacomb culture, which are the original "Indo-European" cultures. They picked them up in Europe. So, one has to be careful with terminology. The original Indo-Europeans seem to have been darker than any current Europeans, and more within the variation pattern of parts of the Near East.

 

[Angela]

to angela
i have two questions
1.i have noticed that even if the laconians share dna with both the maniots and the tsakonians that have the lowest shared ancestry with the italians.
And even if in the north of laconia there is arcadia that shares shares the 3rd lowest shared ancestry with the italians, laconia non the less haves a slight higher shared ancstry with the italians than every one else.
do you think that this is caused by the existance of some small hot spot (like sparta or malvasia for example) that haves even higher shared ancestry or is it just explained by the s.d
2.the difference of tsakonians and maniots from the rest of the peloponneseans is explained by a founder effect because of the isolation or because they are more pure?
i belive that both cases are true but mainly because of the founder effect

I don't think there are any "pure" ethnic groups. Every group is a mixture of prior groups. If you mean do I think that the Tsakonians and the Maniots (including the Tayetos) are more similar to the ancient Greeks than other groups, I don't know. We need ancient dna to figure that out. If that turns out to be the case then it would probably indeed be because of their isolation. Isolation lets certain populations remain more "pure" in that sense. A further complication is that those two groups are different from one another. If they were both just descendants of Classical Era Greeks, why the difference?

As to Lakonia, it covers a wide stretch of the Peloponnesus. The Lakonian samples from Paschou et al were labeled South East Lakonia, so maybe only from the isthmus in the southeast?

Click to enlarge.
View attachment 8570

On the PCA you can clearly see the separation of the Maniotes and the Tsakones from each other and from other Peloponnesians. The Lakonians are in between. A few of them are pretty close to some Tayetos samples, but the majority seem to cluster with the rest of the Peloponnesians. This may be just a north/south plus terrain difference. Are the Lakonian samples from the center north from a more accessible area?



In the body of the paper the authors say that it's the Maniots, including the ones from the Tayetos, who share the most ancestry with Sicilians and Italians. From the paper:
"The Maniots differ from all other Peloponneseans by PCA (Figure 1b) and ADMIXTURE (Figure 1e) analysis. They also differ from mainland, island and Asia Minor Greek populations (data not shown) and from all the other populations of Supplementary Figure 4, which have been compared by PCA analysis, but they partially overlap with the Sicilians and the Italians.

So, I don't see how it can be the Lakonians minus the Maniots who are the most similar, if that's what you mean.

Table 2 seems to be based on the Admixture run, and they have divided the Peloponnesus up into the major areas, so I think Laconia here might mean all of Laconia, including Tayetos, Mani, Tsakonia etc. They have the highest similarity, 96% and Arcadia the lowest, at 85%. Of course it would have been much better had they explained the samples better for this and all their other tables and charts. I'm assuming also, that going by the Admixture run upon which they say this is based, "Italians" includes Italians and Sicilians.

Click to enlarge.



As I said, the authors really left a lot of ambiguity because of poor labeling. Perhaps they should be contacted for clarification about which specific samples are included in specific graphs and charts.

 

[ngc598]

Offtopic:
Seeing that there is an aura of deadly seriousness here, I'm trying to adapt and argue as serious as possible.
[sobriety on]

Second of all, for anyone who does care, do we really have to go through the whole litany about the precise translation of the phrases used by the ancients? People should take some courses in ancient Greek.

I know, I'm the only one who translates 'xanthos' with 'yellow'. Neither German Voss nor Anglo-Saxon Pope could imagine a blonde Greek (what a Nordicist phantasm!), so they rightfully burnished them in their epos translations. And they are so right! When you roast onions, that's called 'xanthitsein'. And we all know how it ends in the hands of qualified cooks. So we can translate 'xanthos' with 'charred'. We can prove this even more. A dun-coloured horse is called 'xanthippos' as well, and as is well known, they have black manes. So altogether we can safely translate 'xanthos' with black, even raven-black, right?

The very fact that some ancient Greeks are described as "bright" haired indicates to me that it was unusual enough to be noticed. Otherwise, why bring it up if all or the majority of them were "bright" haired.

Believe me, I spent an entire semester reading Homer and all the ancient Greek writers, and the number of such descriptions is by no means overwhelming.

Must have been an intense one! In my 'course' I hardly worked through the Iliad in one semester. Well, slow courses for slow thinking people!

If you have to describe Uma Thurman your first attribute would likely be that she is blond, but not because this is so excessively rare in Hollywood, but because she IS blonde. The same goes for Homer. He gave descriptions, nothing more, often even casually (the Achilles quote above). If somebody interprets more into it - everybody is entitled to have their own opinion.

Anyway, that's not even my point. It's just funny to watch the reactions whenever somebody even touches on some blonde classical Greek (grammatical singular, if any doubts). It's of course completely ridiculous to state that Greek tribes brought, among many other traits, some blonde colour into the Aegean region as well.
[sobriety off]