Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
51Cds9RRYbL._SX382_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

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/Military_of_Mycenaean_Greece#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
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
 
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.
 
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).
 
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!
 
@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
 
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?
 
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
 
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.
 
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

51Cds9RRYbL._SX382_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg


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/Military_of_Mycenaean_Greece#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

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.
 
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/thread...rn-Italy/page7?p=512521&viewfull=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.
AqIG3Oy.png



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

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
 
Bari region:


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


http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...rn-Italy/page7?p=512521&viewfull=1#post512521





I see, so it would be within this gap.
AqIG3Oy.png



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

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.
 
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
 
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?
 
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.
 

This thread has been viewed 1161769 times.

Back
Top