PDA

View Full Version : The Bronze Age Collapse and its possible ancient DNA implications



Tomenable
07-05-16, 18:02
Watch this very interesting documentary:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH8Ln4j3X0Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH8Ln4j3X0Q)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH8Ln4j3X0Q

There were apparently still some >90% EEF populations in the Balkans in Late Bronze Age.

Autosomal comparison of two women buried in the same cemetery, but few centuries apart:

Woman RISE595 (Late Bronze Age Montenegro - Velika Gruda site):

Neolithic_Balkan_Farmers ------- 93.44%
Afanasievo_Yamnaya ------------- 0.00%

Woman RISE596 (Iron Age Montenegro - same site, Velika Gruda):

Neolithic_Balkan_Farmers ------- 49.57%
Afanasievo_Yamnaya ------------- 50.42%

Maybe it had something to do with the Bronze Age collapse in that region?

But didn't Indo-Europeans come to the Balkans already in Coppe Age / Early Bronze Age?

So how is it possible that RISE595 LBA woman had no Steppe admixture.

Montenegro = full of mountains = one of last refuges for Non-IEs descended from EEF?

ElHorsto
07-05-16, 18:16
Woman RISE595 (Late Bronze Age Montenegro - Velika Gruda site):

Neolithic_Balkan_Farmers ------- 93.44%
Afanasievo_Yamnaya ------------- 0.00%

Woman RISE596 (Iron Age Montenegro - same site, Velika Gruda):

Neolithic_Balkan_Farmers ------- 49.57%
Afanasievo_Yamnaya ------------- 50.42%

Maybe it had something to do with the Bronze Age collapse in that region?

But didn't Indo-Europeans come to the Balkans already in Coppe Age / Early Bronze Age?

So how is it possible that RISE595 LBA woman had no Steppe admixture.

Montenegro = full of mountains = one of last refuges for Non-IEs descended from EEF?

Some time ago there was also a discussion about one Iron Age Thracian sample from Bulgaria with apparently Sardinian autosomals:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29957-Genome-of-Iron-Age-Thracian?highlight=thracian+iron+age
(http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29957-Genome-of-Iron-Age-Thracian?highlight=thracian+iron+age)

Tomenable
07-05-16, 18:20
I think something about that necropoly in Velika Gruda can be found here (but I haven't read it yet):

https://www.academia.edu/6372214/Bronze-Age_stone_tumuli_on_Planinica_hill_obs._Tuzi_Monte negro

Tomenable
07-05-16, 18:24
Some time ago there was also a discussion about one Iron Age Thracian sample from Bulgaria with apparently Sardinian autosomals:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29957-Genome-of-Iron-Age-Thracian?highlight=thracian+iron+age
(http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29957-Genome-of-Iron-Age-Thracian?highlight=thracian+iron+age)

We have a few Bronze and Iron Age Thracians.

Indeed it seems that there were some substantial autosomal differences between them:

"Sample V2 was found in a flat cemetery dating to the Late Bronze Age (1500–1100 BC) near the village of Vratitsa, Bulgaria. Nine inhumation burials were excavated between 2003 and 2004."

"Sample T2G2 was found in a Thracian tumulus (burial mound) near the village of Stambolovo, Bulgaria. Two small tumuli dating to the Early Iron Age (850–700 BC) were excavated in 2008."

"Sample P192-1 was found at the site of a pit sanctuary near Svilengrad, Bulgaria, excavated between 2004 and 2006. The pits are associated with the Thracian culture and date to the Early Iron Age (800–500 BC) based on pottery found in the pits. A total of 67 ritual pits, including 16 pits containing human skeletons or parts of skeletons, were explored during the excavations."

"Sample K8 was found in the Yakimova Mogila Tumulus, which dates to the Iron Age (450–400 BC), near Krushare, Bulgaria. An aristocratic inhumation burial containing rich grave goods was excavated in 2008."

=========

Uniparental DNA:

Sample K8 - Y-DNA haplogroup J2a1a1b2 (PF5197); mtDNA haplogroup U

Sample P192-1 - Y-DNA haplogroup E1b1b1a1b (Z1919); mtDNA haplogroup U3b

Sample T2G2 - mtDNA haplogroup HV; Y-DNA unknown but not E, J, I, G - maybe R1b or R1a

Sample V2 - Y-DNA haplogroup unknown; mtDNA haplogroup U2e

=========

I have found the following links related to those Thracians:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3824117/
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/05/more...nomes-from.html (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/05/more-info-on-two-thracian-genomes-from.html)
http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2013/10...c-bulgaria.html (http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/ancient-dna-from-prehistoric-bulgaria.html)
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30000...genetic-origins (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30000-Two-Iron-age-Thracians-found-to-have-totally-different-genetic-origins)
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30020...s-from-Bulgaria (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30020-New-autosomal-DNA-of-two-ancient-Thracian-Iron-Age-individuals-from-Bulgaria)
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/...e-age-bulgaria/ (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/more-y-snp-calls-from-iron-and-bronze-age-bulgaria/)
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/...age-bulgarians/ (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/06/12/mt-snp-calls-for-iron-and-bronze-age-bulgarians/)
http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/arti...al.pgen.1004353 (http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1004353)
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php...ll=1#post136599 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6322-aDNA-of-South-Eastern-Europe-Catalogue-of-results-amp-impact-in-modern-groups&p=136599&viewfull=1#post136599)

LeBrok
07-05-16, 18:41
It makes sense. Bronze Age invaders couldn't conquer South Europe till end of Bronze Age/Collapse period. South depopulated and opened to big invazions from North. Bronze Age Armadello-Italy looks mostly EEF too, like Balkans.

Hauteville
07-05-16, 19:05
I think yes.

Angela
07-05-16, 19:14
It makes sense. Bronze Age invaders couldn't conquer South Europe till end of Bronze Age/Collapse period. South depopulated and opened to big invazions from North. Bronze Age Armadello-Italy looks mostly EEF too, like Balkans.

You're absolutely correct...there were areas that received steppe input much later. I don't know the reason, although I could speculate that perhaps population density was greater in the south. Also, perhaps, if Remedello is any indication, they adoped the culture and so weren't sitting prey as much as the MN cultures of Central Europe.
(I can't resist, LeBrok...It's not an armadillo culture; it's Remedello.:grin: Don't be mad. )

@Board,
We have some dedicated threads to the Bronze Age Collapse:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30089-The-Bronze-Age-Collapse?highlight=Bronze+Age+collapse

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31895-Bronze-Age-Collapse-and-Recovery-in-the-Aegean?highlight=Bronze+Age+collapse

I don't think it's connected to what we're talking about...the Greek/Aegean Bronze Age was Indo-European. Of course, we don't have ancient dna from them. If the Indo-Europeans came by way of North Anatolia, as some older scholars used to hold (Drews, for one), they might have had "attenuated" steppe influences.

Hauteville
07-05-16, 21:06
You're absolutely correct...there were areas that received steppe input much later. I don't know the reason, although I could speculate that perhaps population density was greater in the south. Also, perhaps, if Remedello is any indication, they adoped the culture and so weren't sitting prey as much as the MN cultures of Central Europe.
(I can't resist, LeBrok...It's not an armadillo culture; it's Remedello.:grin: Don't be mad. )

@Board,
We have some dedicated threads to the Bronze Age Collapse:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30089-The-Bronze-Age-Collapse?highlight=Bronze+Age+collapse

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31895-Bronze-Age-Collapse-and-Recovery-in-the-Aegean?highlight=Bronze+Age+collapse

I don't think it's connected to what we're talking about...the Greek/Aegean Bronze Age was Indo-European. Of course, we don't have ancient dna from them. If the Indo-Europeans came by way of North Anatolia, as some older scholars used to hold (Drews, for one), they might have had "attenuated" steppe influences.
If you remember the study of Stefania Sarno, it said that there was a bronze age connection between Aegean and Southern Italy/Sicily who carried Y-DNA J (both J1 and J2). So I think she was referred to bronze age collapse inlcuded many of these movements.

LeBrok
07-05-16, 21:17
(I can't resist, LeBrok...It's not an armadillo culture; it's Remedello.:grin: Don't be mad. ) Ah, I hate you now. lol I guess dyslexia kicked in again.

Tomenable
07-05-16, 22:14
What about the invasions by the "Sea Peoples"?

Some archaeologists have linked them to the Bronze Age battle in North-East Germany (Tollense):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32164-Bronze-Age-war-in-northern-Germany-1250-BCE?p=477658&viewfull=1#post477658

Here is what one professional archaeologist wrote about the Tollense battle on another forum:

Quote:

"Fantastic discovery!

In several next days from now I will try to search through available reports, especially seeking information or photographs concerning military items and equipment found at Tollense battlefield. And these military items can be of key importance assuming, that the dating of the site to period BrD or maybe III OEB in chronology by Montelius is correct. I am especially interested in melee weapons.

First of all, we are talking here about a period in which Tumulus cultures were being replaced by Urnfield cultures. It was also the beginning of a revolution in military technology, associated with the beginnings of such type of European swords which could be used for both cutting and stabbing. The question is, were those swords - likely of Reutlingen type - present there? Theoretically it is a bit too far to the north of territories until now considered as their place of origin, but considering the scale of this battle, I would not be surprised. Especially, that some single specimen have been found even in Southern Scandinavia. If we accept the date of 1250 BC, the age is correct.

Another issue are evident climate changes. Climate changes, which in the end culminated in Southern Europe in what is known from written sources as migrations of the Sea Peoples. Today we have no doubts, that what we know as the Sea Peoples was just the last episode of large-scale population movements. Perhaps now we have discovered one of the first episodes of that process [in Tollense area]. I have always been suggesting that those population movements had originated in areas of modern Czech Republic or Germany. So if what I suppose gets confirmed, it will be an argument supporting my theory."

Tomenable
07-05-16, 22:20
From wikipedia: "The Sea Peoples were a confederacy of naval raiders who harried the coastal towns and cities of the Mediterranean region between c. 1276-1178 BCE, concentrating their efforts especially on Egypt."

Angela
07-05-16, 22:22
Ah, I hate you now. lol I guess dyslexia kicked in again.

Now that would make me very sad. :)

When I look back and see some of my posts and the spelling and grammar mistakes I made in them, I feel like typing oops, do over, and writing a whole new post! I blame it on early onset Alzheimers. :) Actually, we're both trying to do too many things at once. My mistakes are never so endearingly funny, though.

@Hauteville, I think that's right, about perhaps a lot of the J coming into Italy around that time, I mean, but did she say it was as a result of the collapse, or during the Bronze Age itself? I thought it was the latter, but I could be wrong. I don't remember precisely.

Hauteville
07-05-16, 22:26
From wikipedia: "The Sea Peoples were a confederacy of naval raiders who harried the coastal towns and cities of the Mediterranean region between c. 1276-1178 BCE, concentrating their efforts especially on Egypt."
Some historians think that the Sea people were a confederations of Italic and proto-Italic tribes (Siculi, Sardi, Lucani, Etruschi, Liguri etc).

Angela
07-05-16, 22:48
Now that would make me very sad. :)

When I look back and see some of my posts and the spelling and grammar mistakes I made in them, I feel like typing oops, do over, and writing a whole new post! I blame it on early onset Alzheimers. :) Actually, we're both trying to do too many things at once. My mistakes are never so endearingly funny, though.

@Hauteville, I think that's right, about perhaps a lot of the J coming into Italy around that time, I mean, but did she say it was as a result of the collapse, or during the Bronze Age itself? I thought it was the latter, but I could be wrong. I don't remember precisely.

I think we have to remember the time differences. The Bronze Age Collapse is around 1200 BC.

Remedello is much, much earlier and is a Copper Age culture. We have no ancient dna from Italy from later except some low coverage Etruscan mtDna.

The Thracian samples are from the right time period, but I don't know how we'd determine whether the one that is "EEF like" is some refugee or victim of the collapse that got captured and sacrificed by more recent arrivals from the steppe versus a normal part of the variation in the area at that time, perhaps from the peasantry perhaps.

MOESAN
07-05-16, 23:18
I don't thinkmetals discovering and use s a typically Steppes phenomenon I think it c

Yetos
07-05-16, 23:59
It makes sense. Bronze Age invaders couldn't conquer South Europe till end of Bronze Age/Collapse period. South depopulated and opened to big invazions from North. Bronze Age Armadello-Italy looks mostly EEF too,
like Balkans.

but that is surely oposite against Mycenean culture, whom we know were already at Mycaene at 1730 BC and surely much earlier at more North parts,
Iωλκος should be much earlier to that,

troyan war is estimated around 11-12 century BC
Sea peoples are after troyan war,
many believe that troyan war was the start

Yetos
08-05-16, 00:05
Watch this very interesting documentary:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH8Ln4j3X0Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH8Ln4j3X0Q)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH8Ln4j3X0Q

There were apparently still some >90% EEF populations in the Balkans in Late Bronze Age.

Autosomal comparison of two women buried in the same cemetery, but few centuries apart:

Woman RISE595 (Late Bronze Age Montenegro - Velika Gruda site):

Neolithic_Balkan_Farmers ------- 93.44%
Afanasievo_Yamnaya ------------- 0.00%

Woman RISE596 (Iron Age Montenegro - same site, Velika Gruda):

Neolithic_Balkan_Farmers ------- 49.57%
Afanasievo_Yamnaya ------------- 50.42%

Maybe it had something to do with the Bronze Age collapse in that region?

But didn't Indo-Europeans come to the Balkans already in Coppe Age / Early Bronze Age?

So how is it possible that RISE595 LBA woman had no Steppe admixture.

Montenegro = full of mountains = one of last refuges for Non-IEs descended from EEF?

no
much later,
at least at south Balkans is much after,
the earliest purely IE entrance at south is estimated around and before 4ky from now,
mycenean clearly evidence at south is 1730 BC so add 1-2 centuries before to Epirus and Thessaly,

LeBrok
08-05-16, 01:10
I think we have to remember the time differences. The Bronze Age Collapse is around 1200 BC.

Remedello is much, much earlier and is a Copper Age culture. We have no ancient dna from Italy from later except some low coverage Etruscan mtDna.

The Thracian samples are from the right time period, but I don't know how we'd determine whether the one that is "EEF like" is some refugee or victim of the collapse that got captured and sacrificed by more recent arrivals from the steppe versus a normal part of the variation in the area at that time, perhaps from the peasantry perhaps.
Youngest Remedello was Bronze Age.

Greying Wanderer
08-05-16, 08:29
Interesting documentary.

They seem to be ignoring the possibility of the Sea Peoples coming from the Black Sea. If the PIE/IE gradually grew powerful on the steppe then it seems plausible to me that they might have displaced the people living around the Black Sea and started a volkwanderung.

One interesting thing about that idea is people often say ancient samples are like modern samples from the near or mid east but what if the near and/or mid east had a population turnover from further north?

A. Papadimitriou
08-05-16, 14:38
From wikipedia: "The Sea Peoples were a confederacy of naval raiders who harried the coastal towns and cities of the Mediterranean region between c. 1276-1178 BCE, concentrating their efforts especially on Egypt."
In my opinion they were Mediterranean islanders, probably related to Phoenicians, Sardinians, Anatolian IEs, and maybe Greeks later. I believe they were mostly pre-Greek though.



the Denyen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denyen), identified by some with the Greek Danaoi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danaoi) and by others with the Israelite tribe of Dan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribe_of_Dan);
the Ekwesh, possibly a group of Bronze Age Greeks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greeks) (Achaeans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaeans_(tribe)));[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] problematic as this group was clearly described as circumcised (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision) by the Egyptians, and according to Manuel Robbins: "Hardly anyone thinks that the Greeks of the Bronze Age were circumcized..."[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples#cite_note-14)
the Lukka (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lukka), an Anatolian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolians) people of the Aegean who may have given their name to the region of Lycia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycia) and the Lycian language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycian_language);
the Peleset, whose name is generally believed to refer to the Philistines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines);[not in citation given (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability)][15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples#cite_note-Ganor-15)
the Shekelesh, identified possibly with the Italic people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_tribe) called Siculi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siculi) (from Sicily (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicily));[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]
the Sherden, possibly Sardinians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardinians) or people of Sardis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardis);[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]
the Teresh, i.e. the Tyrrhenians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrrhenians),[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] possibly ancestors of the Etruscans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscans), or maybe Trojans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy), people of Troas;
the Tjeker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tjeker), possibly Greek Teucrians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teucrians) and;
the Weshesh, who have not been strongly linked to a people documented in other sources.

Yetos
08-05-16, 15:07
In my opinion they were Mediterranean islanders, probably related to Phoenicians, Anatolian IEs, and maybe Greeks later. I believe they were mostly pre-Greek though.



the Denyen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denyen), identified by some with the Greek Danaoi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danaoi) and by others with the Israelite tribe of Dan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribe_of_Dan);
the Ekwesh, possibly a group of Bronze Age Greeks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greeks) (Achaeans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaeans_(tribe)));[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] problematic as this group was clearly described as circumcised (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision) by the Egyptians, and according to Manuel Robbins: "Hardly anyone thinks that the Greeks of the Bronze Age were circumcized..."[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples#cite_note-14)
the Lukka (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lukka), an Anatolian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolians) people of the Aegean who may have given their name to the region of Lycia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycia) and the Lycian language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycian_language);
the Peleset, whose name is generally believed to refer to the Philistines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines);[not in citation given (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability)][15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples#cite_note-Ganor-15)
the Shekelesh, identified possibly with the Italic people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_tribe) called Siculi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siculi) (from Sicily (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicily));[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]
the Sherden, possibly Sardinians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardinians) or people of Sardis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardis);[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]
the Teresh, i.e. the Tyrrhenians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrrhenians),[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] possibly ancestors of the Etruscans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscans), or maybe Trojans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy), people of Troas;
the Tjeker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tjeker), possibly Greek Teucrians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teucrians) and;
the Weshesh, who have not been strongly linked to a people documented in other sources.




Thyrenians are the one Greeks call Pelasgians,
Athens spoke thyrrenian before Dorian descent south, Attica is Pelasgian word
Θησεας is the Hercules of pelasgians
Miltiades hunt the last Thyrenians from Lemnos (lemnean stele)
Thyrrenianspelasgians are probaly connected with Hatti people
Peleset could also be pelasgians,
the connectiong pelasgians and philistines is well known, god Dragon, Dracon's law, Pentapolis etc etc
θηρα might be a center of Pelasgians,
there is a work about not only Lemnos but also at Cyclades islands and especially andros were they found godess Atun, an Etruscan godess,
as also Serden could be also from minor Asia and not Sardinia, and moved there with Etruscans

the connections of sea people with Pelasgians/Etruscans is obvious,
the problem is that they came from Italy to Aegean and Crete or they moved from minor Asia to Aegean to Italy?
the most possible from me that they moved from minor Asia, living space to the 1rst Greek colonization to coach of minor Asia.
until that time the only devastation known is the Arcadians (Arzawa) that moved from minor Asia to Peloponese
words like ωκεανος τιταν ταρταρος Αττικα παρνασσος Ανθρωπος Λαρισσα Λαβυρινθος (la = stone) Are from pelasgian origin and possibly hatti (ko no so =κνωσσος hatti co no = Αττικον)

A. Papadimitriou
08-05-16, 16:30
I believe the pre-Greek population was diverse* and the term 'Pelasgian' was applied inconsistently. (Sometimes for ancestors of Hellenes also)

*In my opinion possibly Etruscan-like, IE Anatolian, Semetic-like, other Paleo-Balkan

bicicleur
08-05-16, 17:15
I wonder wether there realy was a population replacement or a large invoasion for that matter.
It was a very turbulent period with lots of destruction, but few cities were actually abondonned.
Some scholars say it was just a replacement of the power structures.
In Greece the palaces of the people in power were destroyed, but not the cities.
There was no language shift, the classic Greeks basically spoke still the same language as the Mycaeneans, even though the Dorians, Ionians and Aeolians from the Balkans had joined them.

Pax Augusta
08-05-16, 17:25
Thyrenians are the one Greeks call Pelasgians,
Athens spoke thyrrenian before Dorian descent south, Attica is Pelasgian word
Θησεας is the Hercules of pelasgians
Miltiades hunt the last Thyrenians from Lemnos (lemnean stele)
Thyrrenianspelasgians are probaly connected with Hatti people
Peleset could also be pelasgians,
the connectiong pelasgians and philistines is well known, god Dragon, Dracon's law, Pentapolis etc etc
θηρα might be a center of Pelasgians,
there is a work about not only Lemnos but also at Cyclades islands and especially andros were they found godess Atun, an Etruscan godess,
as also Serden could be also from minor Asia and not Sardinia, and moved there with Etruscans

the connections of sea people with Pelasgians/Etruscans is obvious,
the problem is that they came from Italy to Aegean and Crete or they moved from minor Asia to Aegean to Italy?
the most possible from me that they moved from minor Asia, living space to the 1rst Greek colonization to coach of minor Asia.
until that time the only devastation known is the Arcadians (Arzawa) that moved from minor Asia to Peloponese
words like ωκεανος τιταν ταρταρος Αττικα παρνασσος Ανθρωπος Λαρισσα Λαβυρινθος (la = stone) Are from pelasgian origin and possibly hatti (ko no so =κνωσσος hatti co no = Αττικον)

All you're saying is questionable and not supported by modern research, this is still a section of ancient DNA. An argument like this deserves more balanced tones and less one-sided conclusions.

The connections of Sea peoples with Pelasgians/Etruscans is not obvious and still not proven and you're referring to obsolete hypothesis, theories and authors.

Not to mention that Pelasgian is a broad term, it means everything and nothing at the same time and it was used for pre-Hellenic people as much as for Hellenic people, while Etruscan is an exonym and is not even proved an etymological link to Tyrrhenian.

Considering that there is no archaeological evidence of a mass migration, the study of modern populations shows that there are no meaningful relationships.

Also an autosomal DNA from 2,500-year old Etruscan samples doesn't support a minor Asian or Aegean origin.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1rfyRUeQKSE/VUp1FtC48DI/AAAAAAAAKE0/aprJv89-94k/s1600/etruscans.jpg

A. Papadimitriou
08-05-16, 17:34
I wonder wether there realy was a population replacement or a large invoasion for that matter.
It was a very turbulent period with lots of destruction, but few cities were actually abondonned.
Some scholars say it was just a replacement of the power structures.
In Greece the palaces of the people in power were destroyed, but not the cities.
There was no language shift, the classic Greeks basically spoke still the same language as the Mycaeneans, even though the Dorians, Ionians and Aeolians from the Balkans had joined them.

A Dorian invasion never happened. It is not accepted today by archaeologists. It was either a 'migration' or 'return' and probably they came from Northwestern Greece at that time (the migration from the steppes happened much earlier). Maciamo says that Dorian 'invaders' where R1b while Myceneans R1a. There's no real evidence for that speculation. I believe the Proto-Greeks (I include Macedonians) and the Proto-Phrygians belonged originally to the same groups of IE migrants/invaders but they split and and mixed with different groups of Pre-Greeks. (The Phrygians in Asia Minor mixed with Anatolian IEs and Thracians and were perceived as barbarians during classical antiquity but anyone who knows ancient Greek can understand what the following means "Midai lavagtaei vanaktei" ​for example)

Yetos
08-05-16, 20:05
Considering that there is no archaeological evidence of a mass migration,

Νο
the archaiology has proved the oposite,
that there was a connection,
so probably was a migration,
now how massive i can not say.

Pax Augusta
08-05-16, 20:11
Νο
the archaiology has proved the oposite,
that there was a connection,
so probably was a migration,
now how massive i can not say.

Can you show me this archeological evidence? And exactly, migration from where or connection?

Yetos
08-05-16, 20:12
I wonder wether there realy was a population replacement or a large invoasion for that matter.
It was a very turbulent period with lots of destruction, but few cities were actually abondonned.
Some scholars say it was just a replacement of the power structures.
In Greece the palaces of the people in power were destroyed, but not the cities.
There was no language shift, the classic Greeks basically spoke still the same language as the Mycaeneans, even though the Dorians, Ionians and Aeolians from the Balkans had joined them.


not exactly, Mycaenae palace was not build by Myceneans, it was captured, some parts are old enough, i read many extra-facultated theories from whoever, but surely were older before 2500 BC and to some 3500 BC
the megalithic structure of mycaenae palace/walls is a kind of para-Vinca megalithic structure,
although circular tomb B or A if remember correct around 1730 is purely IE Mycenean
same exist in many other places in Greece,

Maleth
08-05-16, 20:16
It makes sense. Bronze Age invaders couldn't conquer South Europe till end of Bronze Age/Collapse period. South depopulated and opened to big invazions from North. Bronze Age Armadello-Italy looks mostly EEF too, like Balkans.

Wasnt this the time when E-V13 expanded? It is more or less agreed that E-V13 expanded during the Bronze age and one of the major haplogroups of these regions. So would E-V13 be part of the collapse or part of the invaders?

Yetos
08-05-16, 20:17
Can you show me this archeological evidence? And exactly, migration from where?

since you are Italian,
then check villanovan culture swords,
not a socket, but nails correct? mainly 3?
then go to Arne Furumark, the archaiologist of Etruscans

I will bring you more linguistic and archaological I have to leave now,

Maleth
08-05-16, 20:38
Wasnt this the time when E-V13 expanded? It is more or less agreed that E-V13 expanded during the Bronze age and one of the major haplogroups of these regions. So would E-V13 be part of the collapse or part of the invaders?

The data we have from King et al. of E-V13, Places the expansion of this haplogroup squarely in the Aegean Bronze Age. It has to be well connected with these events one way or the other.

bicicleur
08-05-16, 20:53
not exactly, Mycaenae palace was not build by Myceneans, it was captured, some parts are old enough, i read many extra-facultated theories from whoever, but surely were older before 2500 BC and to some 3500 BC
the megalithic structure of mycaenae palace/walls is a kind of para-Vinca megalithic structure,
although circular tomb B or A if remember correct around 1730 is purely IE Mycenean
same exist in many other places in Greece,

so that makes the palace about as old as Troy
could the palace have been build by people related to the founders of Troy?
or do you see a connection with Vinca?
Vinca did not build stone houses in the Balkans, it were wooden houses
is it possible that the Mycaeneans were only rulers taking over power and leaving the original population intact and not mass invaders?

bicicleur
08-05-16, 20:57
The data we have from King et al. of E-V13, Places the expansion of this haplogroup squarely in the Aegean Bronze Age. It has to be well connected with these events one way or the other.
yFull TRMCA estimate 4300 years
the Greek expansion does not explain the wide spread of E-V13 over almost all Europe
E-V13 must have expanded before

Angela
08-05-16, 22:55
I wonder wether there realy was a population replacement or a large invoasion for that matter.
It was a very turbulent period with lots of destruction, but few cities were actually abondonned.
Some scholars say it was just a replacement of the power structures.
In Greece the palaces of the people in power were destroyed, but not the cities.
There was no language shift, the classic Greeks basically spoke still the same language as the Mycaeneans, even though the Dorians, Ionians and Aeolians from the Balkans had joined them.

That's indeed what the modern scholarship seems to show. There doesn't seem to be any indication in the archaeology of major population movements in that area with the end of the Bronze Age. Even in terms of language there wasn't an overall shift, and the languages are all Greek. People forget that Doric wasn't spoken all over Greece, and even in areas where there was a transition, the scholarship seems to indicate not even a "replacement" of the elites, but a "blending" of the elites.

There's also numerous books on the subject. However, who knows what the dna will actually show.

I thought I'd mention that there's the recent genetics work from, I think, the Bean Project, the same group that revealed that the mtDna of Greek Mesolithic hunter-gatherers had no mtDna "U". Unfortunately the abstract itself isn't very informative.

"The origin of the Aegean palatial civilizations from a population genetic perspective

Unterlander etal

Focusing on the Neolithic 6600-3200BCE and the Bronze Age, after 3200BCE
A place of early urbanization, palaces, coastal settlements, an exchange networks. "

"http://meeting.physanth.org/program/2015/session18/papageorgopoulou-2015-the-origins-of-the-aegean-palatial-civilizations-from-a-population-genetic-perspective.html

"The present paper investigates the origins of the Aegean pre-palatial civilizations (5th-3rd millennium BC) by applying cutting-edge methods of molecular biology and population genetics. The term Aegean Civilizations refers to the novel human lifeway (agriculture and craft specialization, redistribution systems, intensive trade) that appeared during the end of the Neolithic and the beginning of the Bronze Age in the Aegean. Although many studies exist on archaeological constructions of ethnic and cultural identity on mainland Greece, the Cyclades and Crete, not enough efforts have been made to explore this direction on a population history basis. We have investigated Late, Final Neolithic and Early Bronze Age human skeletons (n=127) from the Aegean using ancient DNA methods, next generation sequencing (NGS) technology and statistical population genetic inferences to i) gather information on diversity, population size, and origin of the pre-palatial Aegean Cultures, ii) to compare them on a genetic basis, in terms of their cultural division (Helladic, Cycladic, Minoan) and iii) to investigate their ancestral/non-ancestral status to the Early and Middle Neolithic farmers from Greece. In addition to mitochondrial DNA genomes, by applying a capture-NGS approach we collected information on functional traits of the early Aegean communities in southeastern Europe. Considering the International Spirit that overwhelms the Aegean during the 3rdmillennium BC, seen by the wide distribution of artifacts, this palaeogenetic approach provides valuable new insights on population structure of the groups involved in the Neolithic-Bronze Age transition and the spread of specific alleles in this part of Europe."

From articles in the news about the paper that was presented: "The village residents of the Bronze Age (2500 BC-1850 BC) Xeropigado Valley Kozani were lactose intolerant and therefore could not digest milk. Moreover they had brown eyes and dark skin. The new data is revealed by DNA analysis of skeletal remains found in the Bronze Age cemetery, one of the few of this period investigated systematically in ​​the Macedonian region."

"An equally important finding for Greece is the recovery of entire genomes of three prehistoric farmers who lived in northern Greece 7500-5500 thousand years ago. These farmers were from Neolithic settlements in Paliampela Kolindrou and Revenia Korinou Pieria and the Kleitos Kozanis."

To my knowledge they've never published any details.

However, didn't one of the guys who posts at Eurogenes contact her, and didn't she say that the biggest change in the genetics was from the early to the mid-late Neolithic? Of course, since this conclusion is apparently only based on mtDna sequences, it's hardly "conclusive" . :)

Still, in central Europe it was a folk movement of both men and women so I don't know why it would have been different here. Since mid-late Neolithic is when we find E-V13 and J2 showing up in Europe, perhaps it's the same movement. Then, apparently there was some change from late Neolithic to Bronze Age, but still with low FST between them. (I think she dated Bronze Age to 3200 BCE) So, was Drews right all along and the "Indo-European Greeks" entered Greece from the east instead of the north-east from the steppe via the Balkans, thereby having passed through northern Anatolia? Or was it a case of the Mycenaeans only being a small group? I don't know. I thought the Bean project would clear all this up, but they're slow as molasses. Maybe it was sort of like Remedello and the culture changed before any major genetic change.

There's just no way of knowing until we get the ancient dna.

I know that's a little off topic as it doesn't directly relate to the Iron Age transition, but I think it shows that it may be wrong to try to transpose what happened in central and northern Europe to southern Europe. The "Indo-Europeanization process may have been different in the two areas, so you may be looking at slightly different base line "Bronze Age" genetics in the two areas.

LeBrok
09-05-16, 01:03
"An equally important finding for Greece is the recovery of entire genomes of three prehistoric farmers who lived in northern Greece 7500-5500 thousand years ago. These farmers were from Neolithic settlements in Paliampela Kolindrou and Revenia Korinou Pieria and the Kleitos Kozanis."

To my knowledge they've never published any details.

However, didn't one of the guys who posts at Eurogenes contact her, and didn't she say that the biggest change in the genetics was from the early to the mid-late Neolithic? Of course, since this conclusion is apparently only based on mtDna sequences, it's hardly "conclusive" . :)

Still, in central Europe it was a folk movement of both men and women so I don't know why it would have been different here. Since mid-late Neolithic is when we find E-V13 and J2 showing up in Europe, perhaps it's the same movement. Then, apparently there was some change from late Neolithic to Bronze Age, but still with low FST between them. (I think she dated Bronze Age to 3200 BCE) So, was Drews right all along and the "Indo-European Greeks" entered Greece from the east instead of the north-east from the steppe via the Balkans, thereby having passed through northern Anatolia? Or was it a case of the Mycenaeans only being a small group? I don't know. I thought the Bean project would clear all this up, but they're slow as molasses. Maybe it was sort of like Remedello and the culture changed before any major genetic change. Interesting. Perhaps they found a village of newcomers E-V13. LP negative and of darker skin. Makes some sense on the surface.

Greying Wanderer
09-05-16, 01:30
In my opinion they were Mediterranean islanders, probably related to Phoenicians, Sardinians, Anatolian IEs, and maybe Greeks later. I believe they were mostly pre-Greek though.



the Denyen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denyen), identified by some with the Greek Danaoi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danaoi) and by others with the Israelite tribe of Dan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribe_of_Dan);
the Ekwesh, possibly a group of Bronze Age Greeks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greeks) (Achaeans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaeans_(tribe)));[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] problematic as this group was clearly described as circumcised (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision) by the Egyptians, and according to Manuel Robbins: "Hardly anyone thinks that the Greeks of the Bronze Age were circumcized..."[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples#cite_note-14)
the Lukka (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lukka), an Anatolian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolians) people of the Aegean who may have given their name to the region of Lycia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycia) and the Lycian language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycian_language);
the Peleset, whose name is generally believed to refer to the Philistines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines);[not in citation given (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability)][15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples#cite_note-Ganor-15)
the Shekelesh, identified possibly with the Italic people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_tribe) called Siculi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siculi) (from Sicily (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicily));[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]
the Sherden, possibly Sardinians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardinians) or people of Sardis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardis);[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]
the Teresh, i.e. the Tyrrhenians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrrhenians),[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] possibly ancestors of the Etruscans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscans), or maybe Trojans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy), people of Troas;
the Tjeker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tjeker), possibly Greek Teucrians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teucrians) and;
the Weshesh, who have not been strongly linked to a people documented in other sources.



I wonder if that's a list of where they came from or where they settled?

Could the groups who failed to take Egypt have sailed further west to Sicily etc.

holderlin
09-05-16, 05:44
but that is surely oposite against Mycenean culture, whom we know were already at Mycaene at 1730 BC and surely much earlier at more North parts,
Iωλκος should be much earlier to that,

troyan war is estimated around 11-12 century BC
Sea peoples are after troyan war,
many believe that troyan war was the start

Yep, many think that the Homer was none other than tales from this period. It would have been a huge series of upheavals that people remembered for thousands of years.

I know we sort of snicker at the notion of "ages", but they really were significant. In this particular transition even art changed it's basic forms from more geometric to curved over a vast region. This is fascinating to me. It means that people's fundamental view of the world had changed.

holderlin
09-05-16, 05:52
One thing that grabbed me about this was that in ash layers on the Levant they find some of the first real bronze slashing weapons (legit sword, Naue II type) that originate in central Europe. So whatever happened was wide reaching, it's not some hiccup where we may be misinterpreting things.

Maleth
09-05-16, 09:56
I thought I'd mention that there's the recent genetics work from, I think, the Bean Project, the same group that revealed that the mtDna of Greek Mesolithic hunter-gatherers had no mtDna "U". Unfortunately the abstract itself isn't very informative.

probably it would be very difficult to determine correctly mtdna due to contamination. Remember at the great part we are dealing with DNA found in more temperate areas were dna extraction is more possible (at least thats whay I heard) Some bones were tested in Mycenae tombs and this is what was stated. (no link provided sorry but the write up looks professional enough). Unfortunatly when we come to Southern European ancient dna it seems that there is alot of shooting in the dark.

quote - The sequences obtained from
G55 and G58 corresponded to mitochondrial haplogroup UK, those
from Z59 corresponded to haplogroup U5a1 or U5a1a, and those
from A62 matched the Cambridge Reference Sequence, compatible
in the region sequenced with various haplogroups including H,
HV1, J, U, U3 and U4 (but not UK, U5a1 or U5a1a). Details of all
sequences and the deduction of haplogroups are given in Supplementary
Material. - end quote

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?49966-Ancient-DNA-from-Mycenae-Grave-circle

Maleth
09-05-16, 10:22
Interesting. Perhaps they found a village of newcomers E-V13. LP negative and of darker skin. Makes some sense on the surface.

We are talking about events happening 7500 -5500 we know E-V13 has been roaming around in Europe at least for 7000 ybp. and it seems that melanin levels during this period were not a detrimental issue to distinguish particular groups as perhaps it is today and Lactose tolerance only started around 4000 ybp Correct me if Im wrong.

bicicleur
09-05-16, 11:13
We are talking about events happening 7500 -5500 we know E-V13 has been roaming around in Europe at least for 7000 ybp. and it seems that melanin levels during this period were not a detrimental issue to distinguish particular groups as perhaps it is today and Lactose tolerance only started around 4000 ybp Correct me if Im wrong.

that 7000 ybp was based on STR
he was related to the forefathers of E-V13, but he was not E-V13

Maleth
09-05-16, 12:30
that 7000 ybp was based on STR
he was related to the forefathers of E-V13, but he was not E-V13

Why would it always be mentioned as such if it was just related? wouldn't a forefather (its precursor) be termed as E-M78? Studies have also shown that its well related i to the Balkan E-V13

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26980-G2a-and-E-V13-in-Neolithic-Spain-(5000-BCE)

bicicleur
09-05-16, 15:10
Why would it always be mentioned as such if it was just related? wouldn't a forefather (its precursor) be termed as E-M78? Studies have also shown that its well related i to the Balkan E-V13

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26980-G2a-and-E-V13-in-Neolithic-Spain-(5000-BCE)

when the study, based on STR was published details of the tree like the E-L618 branch were not even known
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-Z1919/
and according to YFull, TRMCA of E-V13 is just 4300 years

Yetos
09-05-16, 16:38
since you are Italian,
then check villanovan culture swords,
not a socket, but nails correct? mainly 3?
then go to Arne Furumark, the archaiologist of Etruscans

I will bring you more linguistic and archaological I have to leave now,


quoting my shelf

I continue to answer that there are archiological evidences

https://html1-f.scribdassets.com/669orjgzeo2xuuyd/images/7-0701677120.jpg

https://html2-f.scribdassets.com/669orjgzeo2xuuyd/images/9-b3a45bf766.jpg


Gods Tinia Ethausva etc
the peagon gods are not Greek culture,
Mc Laughlin sets connections among Voiotia (Βοιωτια) with cyclades
Βοιωτια is next to Attica a well known center of Pelasgians, although clearly not Greek,
as Ερετρια Eretria,

no need to mention about Lemnean stele,


now for more
https://html1-f.scribdassets.com/669orjgzeo2xuuyd/images/16-371daec24a.jpg

watch that helmet,
reminds you something?
Surely not IE, not Mycenean, but?
they first apear at Avantis Euboea then Corinth then Etruria, late Vilanovan
as also the swords structure,
and although Villanovan has the burial system of IE and probaly is, at early phases, later seems to effected by non IE Etruscan, wich strangely show connectivity with areas around Attica, like Corinthian style helmets,

Angela
09-05-16, 20:43
Is the yDna "E" found during the transition from the mid-to-late Neolithic a precursor then, or just a related branch? Unless we find "E" in earlier Neolithic contexts, the arrival of ydna "E" and "J2" could still herald the arrival of a new group, an arrival that we already saw in the mtDna, yes?

If the former, then I think we could still speculate that the specific E-V13 mutation perhaps took place in Europe. If the latter, perhaps there's another possibility, i.e. that a brother clade made its first entrance during the Bronze Age?

Expansion dates would be something different again.

@LeBrok
I'm not sure how to interpret that data from the Bean Project. They give some information about LP and skin color for these Bronze Age villages, but they don't tell us the corresponding information about the Neolithic villages to which they were compared. They do say, however, that the fst between the mid-to-late Neolithic villagers and the Bronze Age villagers is low, although we have to keep in mind that this is based only on mtDna.


@Yetos,
No one is denying that there were extensive contacts between Italy and the broader Aegean area, some entering via Sardinia. We discussed it extensively in a number of threads. The question is whether this entailed a broad folk movement or even a substantial movement of elites.

The reason it's a difficult question to answer without ancient dna is that there is no sign of destruction of settlements, etc., and there is evidence for a great deal of continuity from Villanova. On the other hand, we do see the building of different kinds of hilltop settlements. You can find Italian researchers taking various positions, and some even started out supporting the idea of an intrusion and then changed their minds. This was the case in terms of the analysis of ancient mtDna from the Etruscans. Some of the researchers found a link between the mtDna in a few Tuscan villages and some found in Turkey. Subsequent research showed that the lineages were so old that they could have entered Italy in the Neolithic. Of course, this was not based on complete sequencing of the mtDna, so the conclusion could change again. What the research did show was that generally, based on the mtDna of these elite Etruscans, there wasn't a lot of continuity from the ancient elite Etruscans to modern Tuscans, although there is continuity between medieval Tuscans and modern Tuscans. Now, I find that disappointing, since having ancestry from an area that abuts the Etruscan areas, and being a bit obsessed with their culture, I've always hoped I'd be a bit related to them. We'll see what more modern analyses show.

Ydna would give us more information. Again, though, we'd need a very complete analysis down to subclade levels, good dating, and a comparison to other, older samples in Italy. Let's say, for example, that it turns out they carried J2. It's possible. However, we have J2 already in Europe in the mid-to-late Neolithic. Was it also in Italy? Even if it was, was it the same kind? Could it be J2a which came via Crete? Could it be some form of R1b L23? We just don't know yet.

Autosomally, all we have is that PCA posted upthread by Pax Augusta. The authors never posted the data, just the PCA. It was from a poster. This is a link to the Dienekes' post where he discussed it.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/05/2500-year-old-etruscans.html

I agree with the conclusion that they basically look like modern Southern Europeans. I don't know how we can say definitively much more than that. One clusters with Spaniards, one right near modern Tuscans but a little north and east, and one more north and east again? Perhaps Bulgarian? Or could it be between Bulgarian and North Italian? I don't think that sample can be plotting with mainland Greeks, because in every plot I've seen they plot slightly south of Tuscans, but who knows what more samples will show. Also, it has to be kept in mind that these are elite people. What was the mass of the population like? Were they more or less EEF like? Also to be kept in mind is that roughly speaking we have a Neolithic sample from Spain that was described as modern "Tuscan" like.

The bottom line is that this, like a lot of other things, is going to have to wait for ancient dna.

See the following thread for the most recent discussion of the genetics of the Etruscans.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30917-The-Sea-Peoples-Were-Italic-Speakers-From-Sicily-Sardinia-and-Mainland-Italy?highlight=Etruscan+dna

Etruscan culture:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31242-Etruscan-culture?highlight=Etruscans

These are nice, fresh, uncontaminated Etruscan remains. We wouldn't get a ydna, but we might get a good autosomal analysis.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32110-Elite-Etruscan-burial-of-young-girl-discovered-near-Vulci?highlight=Etruscans

Maleth
10-05-16, 13:03
when the study, based on STR was published details of the tree like the E-L618 branch were not even known
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-Z1919/
and according to YFull, TRMCA of E-V13 is just 4300 years

From the paper:- Analysis of shared haplotypes showed that the G2a haplotype found in ancient specimens is rare in current populations: its frequency is less than 0.3%(Table S3). The haplotype of individual ave07 is more frequent (2.44%), particularly in southeastern European populations (up to 7%). The Ave07 haplotype was also compared with current Eb1b1a2 haplotypes previously published (10–14). It appeared identical at the seven markers tested to five Albanian, two Bosnian, one Greek, one Italian, one Sicilian, two Corsican, and two Provence French samples and are thus placed on the same node of the E1b1b1a1b-V13 network as eastern, central, and western Mediterranean haplotypes (Fig. S1).

http://dienekes.blogspot.com.mt/2011/11/y-haplogroups-e-v13-and-g2a-in.html

The TMRCA represents the time of the Most Recent Common Ancestor of everyone who has tested for a given haplogroup. That doesnet mean that the haplogroup was mutated then. The actual date is when the mutation occured. In fact it is stated Formed 7700 ybp. The difference between TMRCA and original date (formed) is because only one descendant (of the original ancestor with the SNP) from the time of the MRCA has been found to have descendants today.

If indeed its the case of being just E-Z1919 then it would be unfairly labled as E-V13 (like its presented in most articles) as E-Z1919 could also be E-V22 which formed over 4000 years prior to E-V13 and E-Z1919 is parent for both subclades.

E-Z1919 was found in an Iron age site in todays Bulgaria (Thracian) living some 2450 to 2850 ybp which could very possibly fall under E-V13 when one considers that E-V13 is one of the major haplogroups in this region currently (16%)

Tomenable
06-08-16, 04:03
Maciamo says that Dorian 'invaders' where R1b while Myceneans R1a.

I made a map showing the distribution of R1a in modern Greece, if it helps:

b.d. = no data used

https://s31.postimg.org/jkt8tday3/R1a_in_Greece.jpg