Genetics of the Greek Peleponessus

With these results , the real question that one needs to ask is:

Are Myceneans and Dorians related ?..................the Greek claim is yes
If the Greek claim is correct , then the Albanians ( or a majority of them ) have Greek ancestry
If the Greek claim is wrong , then the Albanians are either from Mycenean or Dorian ancestry and that Mycenean and Dorian are not related to each other.

It is either one or the other,

Sile the Dorians were Hellenes Greeks
Myceneans were pre-proto-Greeks, Minoans were pre-proto-Greeks

AND THE QUESTION IS
If Albanians cluster with Myceneans then they should cluster with Minoans
as last Lazarides papper

DO THEY?


Greek civilization and unification starts at 911 BC
But uses and continues the substractum left by Earlier,it is like to say that all modern Italians are Latino-Roman epigoni?
or Thyrrenians?
or both?
 
@ Johane Derite

IF Lazarides papper is correct
as he claims at 2016
"farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia."[43] They further note that ANI "can be modelled as a mix of ancestry related to both early farmers of western Iran and to people of the Bronze Age Eurasian steppe,"

so If Haak (2015) or Lazarides (2016) gives tottaly different positions,

considering also the Satem-Centum old split and the P-Q changes in Mycenean and Celtic
then the problem is bigger,

we have to think again Cavalli Sforza :

i:f the expansions began at 9,500 years ago from Anatolia and at 6,000 years ago from the Yamnaya culture region, then a 3,500-year period elapsed during their migration to the Volga-Don region from Anatolia, probably through the Balkans. There a completely new, mostly pastoral culture developed under the stimulus of an environment unfavourable to standard agriculture, but offering new attractive possibilities. Our hypothesis is, therefore, that Indo-European languages derived from a secondary expansion from the Yamnaya culture region after the Neolithic farmers, possibly coming from Anatolia and settled there, developing pastoral nomadism.



we Speak about a non Steppe IE population, and linguistic Group
a non Yamnaa IE branch
Hettit
tocharian
Greek
Armenian
by Lazarides papper expand to linguistic are not Yamnaa neither steppe IE linguistic groups,

the problem is Latin, pure core of Latin, or some other IE languages of Italia
cause we might have also Latin from that group
see ikkos and equus and ippos and Hephew,

the P-Q change today to me seems as 're-union' of IE of Yamnaa and non Yamnaa IE





so the most correct map is this

F1.large.jpg




until now I believe that this map is the most correct conserning Mycenean Language
 
@ Johane Derite


so the most correct map is this

F1.large.jpg


I don't think so. Celtic separated earlier than both Germanic and Italic? And last two more closely relatred than Italic and Celtic?
Illyrian / Albanian had common ancestor with Indo-Aryan? And more closely related to it than to Greeks?
 
I don't think so. Celtic separated earlier than both Germanic and Italic? And last two more closely relatred than Italic and Celtic?
Illyrian / Albanian had common ancestor with Indo-Aryan? And more closely related to it than to Greeks?

that is the problem with Latin and P-Q change

WHICH HAPPENS ONLY IN GREEK AND LATINO-CELTIC

If early Italian peninsulla IE speakers used Q instead of P like Myceneans
Then pre-proto-Latin belong to the same Group with Myceneans
a non Yamnaa group, maybe the myth of Troyan Aeneas :confused:

BESIDES
linguistic maps are results of an algorythmos according the model and the hypothesis,

and the last lazarides papper fits correct with
Gray Atkinson Greekhill linguistic map, at least as concerns Mycenean

remember Greco-Aryan Theory
Greek next To Aryan
 
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...cenaeans/page5?p=516273&viewfull=1#post516273

KkfyNO7.png


Speaking of which, how close genetically are Tuscans to Mycenaeans? They look like they're even closer than Albanians.

Ay5z7wb.jpg

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/...1718f2.html?foxtrotcallback=true#figure-title

Question: What is TSI? Tuscan is already on the map legend.

I would think they are slightly closer, but unfortunately I don't think that Lazaridis et al did a specific comparison in the numerical analysis in the paper or supplement with Albanians. At any rate, the Sicilians do seem to be closest, which I've been saying since years ago when I was on Dna-forums and 23andme, and which was always vociferously opposed by the likes of Sikeliot and his cronies.

Just as an aside, I've been told he has claimed that Sicilians are closer to Minoans than are are modern Greeks. Not. At least not according to the analysis in Lazaridis et al graphed in the paper.

https://images.nature.com/full/nature-assets/nature/journal/v548/n7666/images/nature23310-f2.jpg
nature23310-f2.jpg


TSI is, so far as I know, the large cohort of samples taken in a small village northeast of Florence. The other Tuscan samples are from further south toward Lazio.
 
The paper shows 85-96 percent similarity between south Italy and peloponesians.
Why do people ignore hard numbers published in scientific journals?

I've asked before, but why, according to those fst charts, are northwest Africans and Sephardic Jews in turkey so insanely close to the Mycenaeans and Minoans?

We got 25 pages of arguments and hurt feelings. Let's break a record shall we?
 
that is the problem with Latin and P-Q change
WHICH HAPPENS ONLY IN GREEK AND LATINO-CELTIC
If early Italian peninsulla IE speakers used Q instead of P like Myceneans
Then pre-proto-Latin belong to the same Group with Myceneans
a non Yamnaa group, maybe the myth of Troyan Aeneas :confused:
Latins are not related to Greeks, proto-Greeks and Myceneans. The myth of Troyan Aeneas is a just a myth who Latins borrowed from others, and it was an anti-Greek myth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italo-Celtic

TSI is, so far as I know, the large cohort of samples taken in a small village northeast of Florence. The other Tuscan samples are from further south toward Lazio.

I think southeast of Florence.
 
The paper shows 85-96 percent similarity between south Italy and peloponesians.
Why do people ignore hard numbers published in scientific journals?

I've asked before, but why, according to those fst charts, are northwest Africans and Sephardic Jews in turkey so insanely close to the Mycenaeans and Minoans?

We got 25 pages of arguments and hurt feelings. Let's break a record shall we?

What "insanely" high similarity? The color is YELLOW for a comparison with Mycenaeans at North African locations, unless you mean the island off the coast of Africa? Isn't that the Canary Islands? Those people are Iberians with some North African sub-structure. The similarity is due to high Neolithic farmer, some CHG via northern Near Eastern diffusion, and little to, in the case of North Africa, no steppe.
 
At any rate, the Sicilians do seem to be closest, which I've been saying since years ago when I was on Dna-forums and 23andme, and which was always vociferously opposed by the likes of Sikeliot and his cronies.

IRL, I've actually mentioned this revelation about Mycenaeans to a couple of people who are not genetic hobbyists, or into anything like that. One of them is an Italian guy engaged to an Albanian girl. The other was a Puerto Rican guy.

Both of them pretty much said the same thing, "well yea, isn't it kind of obvious." and "I'm surprised that this is a shock."

Nevertheless, as long as the experts agree on a consensus, that's all I care about.
 
What "insanely" high similarity? The color is YELLOW for a comparison with Mycenaeans at North African locations, unless you mean the island off the coast of Africa? Isn't that the Canary Islands? Those people are Iberians with some North African sub-structure. The similarity is due to high Neolithic farmer, some CHG via northern Near Eastern diffusion, and little to, in the case of North Africa, no steppe.
Thanks Angela, I was referring to the Canary Islands but my lack of knowedge of those islands led me to believe they are North Africans.

And could you or anyone else offer an idea as to why Sephardic Jews in turkey are as close as they are to Mycenaeans and Minoans in the fst charts? I wonder if they mixed with Greeks.
 
Latins are not related to Greeks, proto-Greeks and Myceneans. The myth of Troyan Aeneas is a just a myth who Latins borrowed from others, and it was an anti-Greek myth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italo-Celtic

Maciamo doesn't completely rule it out as just a myth.

[FONT=&quot]According to the [/FONT]founding myth of Rome[FONT=&quot], Romulus and Remus descended from the Latin kings of Alba Longa, themselves descended from Trojan prince Aeneas, who fled to the Latium after the destruction of Troy by the Greeks. Troy may well have been founded by the early M269 and/or L23 branches of R1b, representing the first expansion of R1b from the Pontic Steppe to the Balkans (see [/FONT]R1b history[FONT=&quot]).If there is any truth in the myth (as there usually is), the Trojans might have brought M269 or L23 (probably with other haplogroups, notably J2) to central Italy circa 1200 BCE, around the same time as U152 invaded from the north. The Etruscans, who are thought to have originated in western Anatolia, not far from Troy, might also have brought R1b-L23 to Italy, also blended with other haplogroups (see below). Nowadays R1b-L23 is the second most common subclade of R1b in Italy ([/FONT]see map[FONT=&quot]), although well behind R1b-U152. L23 has a remarkably uniform distribution over all the Italian peninsula, making between 5% and 10% of the male lineages. It is found at a slightly higher frequency in Campania and Calabria due to the Greek colonies, and decreases under 5% of the population only around the Alps.

[/FONT]
http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
 
Latins are not related to Greeks, proto-Greeks and Myceneans. The myth of Troyan Aeneas is a just a myth who Latins borrowed from others, and it was an anti-Greek myth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italo-Celtic



I think southeast of Florence.

Pax I do not say about Latins and Greeks

I say about clear proto-core of Latin and Mycenean language,
which uses Q K for horse,
while Italo-Celtic and Greek use the P Ph
 
Latin and Greek are both Indo-European languages, so, of course, there will be some similarities. At the same time, they are on totally different branches of the Indo-European languages.

However, this is not a linguistics thread. Take extended posts about it to the linguistics section. Some discipline, please, gentlemen; people are coming to this thread for a discussion of the genetics of a particular area, not to read about linguistics in any detailed way.
 
Personally, I think using language as a proxy could be an illusory correlation, no less arbitrary as shared culture. Nevertheless, I find that both the theory of R1b-U152 (Hallstatt culture), and R1b-M269/L23 (Trojan myth) are both compelling arguments. But until we get DNA from ancient Patricians, we will never know.

*Maybe because I'm R1b-M269, I'm exhibiting a bit of bias leaning towards the Trojan myth. :innocent:

Joking aside, I will defer to whatever the facts may be, when they come out one day. :)
 
We don't even know what ydna the Trojans carried, and we may never know. We also don't know whether they were really similar to Greeks in the first place. They might have been and they may not have been.

Lots of groups claimed descent from the Trojans, including the Scots. Everyone wanted an illustrious ancestry. It may be nothing more than that. As has been said, it was a way for the Latins to differentiate themselves from the Greeks, with whom they were in conflict.
 
We don't even know what ydna the Trojans carried, and we may never know. We also don't know whether they were really similar to Greeks in the first place. They might have been and they may not have been.

Lots of groups claimed descent from the Trojans, including the Scots. Everyone wanted an illustrious ancestry. It may be nothing more than that. As has been said, it was a way for the Latins to differentiate themselves from the Greeks, with whom they were in conflict.

I see, oh well. I was just going by what I read from the Italian DNA section. But I guess it's just speculation in regards to the myth.
 
Myth or what, the Greek sources practically say that the Romans were Albani (+ maybe natives and other 'barbarians') and that those Albani were Hellenes.

The Albans were a mixed nation composed of Pelasgians, of Arcadians, of the Epeans who came from Elis, and, last of all, of the Trojans who came into Italy with Aeneas, the son of Anchises and Aphroditê, after the taking of Troy. It is probable that a barbarian element also from among the neighbouring peoples or a remnant of the ancient inhabitants of the place was mixed with the Greek. But all these people, having lost their tribal designations, came to be called by one common name, Latins, after Latinus, who had been king of this country. The walled city, then, was built by these tribes in the four hundred and thirty-second year after the taking of Troy, and in the seventh Olympiad.(*752/1 BC) The leaders of the colony were twin brothers of the royal family, Romulus being the name of one and Remus of the other. On the mother's side they were descended from Aeneas and were Dardanidae; it is hard to say with certainty who their father was, but the Romans believe them to have been the sons of Mars.

Now that's written by Dionysius from Halicarnassus who lived much later than the time of Trojan War (almost 1200 years later),
but for me a movement of a population from NW Anatolia to Italy after the Trojan War (supposedly c. 1200 BC) is possible
 
I see, oh well. I was just going by what I read from the Italian DNA section. But I guess it's just speculation in regards to the myth.
Porto Badisco or Castro
L'approdo di Enea in Italia
Secondo un'interpretazione ricorrente fu Badisco il primo approdo di Enea, descritto nell'Eneide di Virgilio: l'eroe vi avrebbe fatto scalo nel suo viaggio in Italia dopo la fuga da Troia......
https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porto_Badisco
 
@ Angela,

What is your opinion on the Etruscans? Maciamo speculates they are of Greek or West Anatolian origin.

Another key player in the make-up of Iron Age Italy were the Etruscans, who appeared circa 750 BCE apparently out of nowhere. Some have postulated that they came from Anatolia, but their origins remain uncertain to this day. Although their territory matches closely the extent of the Italic haplogroup R1b-U152, the Etruscans were non-Indo-European speakers, and their language is unrelated to any other known ancient languages apart from the Raetic language of the Alps and the Lemnian language of the Aegean Sea. It is likely that the Etruscans came from somewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean and imposed their language on the Italic tribes living in Tuscany, then to the Po Valley, thus splitting Indo-European-speaking tribes in two. Based on the non-Indo-European halogroups found in central and southern Tuscany today, the original Etruscans probably belonged to an compound of haplogroups J2, E1b1b, G2a, and R1b-M269 (or R1b-L23) in that order of frequency. This would appear to support of Greek or West Anatolian origin. The high frequency of R1b-U152 found in Tuscany today can be attributed to Italic tribes absorbed by the Etruscans, and to the Romans who resettled part of Etruria.

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml
 

This thread has been viewed 368033 times.

Back
Top