Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

Interesting where the Alawites plot. I wonder if the Syrian ones would be the same.
I think they would in relative terms. After all, the Cypriots are close to Alawites but they aren't touching. I would say the same distance they have from Cretans they also have from Alawites, who by they way are a coastal population.
622px-Alawite_Distribution_in_the_Levant.png


Also, look again at the PCA i shared in post #2059. You can also find it in page 26 of this paper if you would like to zoom-in,
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2018/05/16/322347.full.pdf. You see Syrians (green Xs) having a relatively broad distribution, with some being closer to Cypriots (probably the coastal Alawites) and some having the same distance as Cypriots have from mainland Greeks. Still though, where you would expect to find them based on geographical distribution.
PCA.png

 
:LOL:

It should also be noted that the orange component is EHG + eneolithic Steppe, which has CHG subsumed within it.

nCb1Pyg.jpg


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-08220-8/figures/5

I6ZWkwE.png
Here is another interesting presentation of that. Again, from the superb paper, "The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus (2018)".
CHG component
CHG.png

Iran-Neolithic.png


EHG component
EHG.png


WHG component
WHG.png


Ukraine Mesolithic samples ranging between 9,000-5,927 BCE and Ukraine Neolithic samples ranging between 7,446-4,000 BCE

Ukraine-Mesolithic-and-Ukraine-Neolithic.png


Samara Eneolithic samples ranging (all three of them) between 5,200-4,000 BCE (?) and Ukraine Eneolithic samples ranging between 4,045-3,377 BCE

Samara-Eneolithic-and-Ukraine-Eneolithic.png


Yamnaya samples ranging between 3,339-2,143 BCE
Yamnaya-samples.png


Additional samples from the broader region of Caucasus that relate.

pre-Maykop-related-samples.png

 
Interesting where the Alawites plot. I wonder if the Syrian ones would be the same.

Yeah, I noticed that also. I also noticed a lot of overlap of Albanians with Greek_Thessaly but not Greek_Peloponnese.
 
Yeah, I noticed that also. I also noticed a lot of overlap of Albanians with Greek_Thessaly but not Greek_Peloponnese.

Yes, it's also another data point supporting the fact that a lot of the Peloponnese shifts toward Southern Italy and/or Sicily and thus toward Mycenaeans to some extent. So maybe the Mani are right. Perhaps they, and some of the surrounding peoples, are indeed partly descended from the Spartans. What a kick in the teeth for Nordicists. Remember when Eurogenes said the Mycenaean people would be duplicates of northern, doubtless Polish, Corded Ware?

As to the Alawites, they're not just religiously different from other Syrians; it extends to genetics as well. That explains a lot of the politics of Syria.

The interior was settled by Bedouin tribes, wasn't it? So, the Alawites may be closer to the original population.
 
Last edited:
:LOL:

It should also be noted that the orange component is EHG + eneolithic Steppe, which has CHG subsumed within it.

nCb1Pyg.jpg


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-08220-8/figures/5

I6ZWkwE.png

Yes, 37% according to their calculations, if I'm reading it correctly.

That's ok, he would explain it all away with his typical oh, those people, because they traveled to the steppe early on, magically lost all their genetic similarity to the people who dominated the Caucasus and then the rest of the Near East and then came into Europe.

How many times have we discussed the fact, based on numerous papers, that the movement of ancestry from around the Caucasus entered Europe in a two pronged movement from the east over the steppe, and from the southeast, perhaps mostly through the Aegean?

How many times can someone be wrong about major issues before he loses credibility? He was totally wrong about the Mycenaeans, he was totally wrong about the Etruscans, he was wrong about when "southeastern" like ancestry entered Italy, and he's wrong about this.
 
I think they would in relative terms. After all, the Cypriots are close to Alawites but they aren't touching. I would say the same distance they have from Cretans they also have from Alawites, who by they way are a coastal population.
622px-Alawite_Distribution_in_the_Levant.png


Also, look again at the PCA i shared in post #2059. You can also find it in page 26 of this paper if you would like to zoom-in,
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2018/05/16/322347.full.pdf. You see Syrians (green Xs) having a relatively broad distribution, with some being closer to Cypriots (probably the coastal Alawites) and some having the same distance as Cypriots have from mainland Greeks. Still though, where you would expect to find them based on geographical distribution.
PCA.png


Thanks, Demetrios
 
Here is another interesting presentation of that. Again, from the superb paper, "The genetic prehistory of the Greater Caucasus (2018)".
CHG component
CHG.png

Iran-Neolithic.png


EHG component
EHG.png


WHG component
WHG.png


Ukraine Mesolithic samples ranging between 9,000-5,927 BCE and Ukraine Neolithic samples ranging between 7,446-4,000 BCE

Ukraine-Mesolithic-and-Ukraine-Neolithic.png


Samara Eneolithic samples ranging (all three of them) between 5,200-4,000 BCE (?) and Ukraine Eneolithic samples ranging between 4,045-3,377 BCE

Samara-Eneolithic-and-Ukraine-Eneolithic.png


Yamnaya samples ranging between 3,339-2,143 BCE
Yamnaya-samples.png


Additional samples from the broader region of Caucasus that relate.

pre-Maykop-related-samples.png


I'd forgotten about that graphic. Thanks.

So, just eyeballing it, the difference between the most different "CHG" and "Iran Neo" samples is maybe 20%, while at the other end of the comparison it's like 10%?

Of course, that makes one "European" and one "Near Eastern". :)

Amazing how much "green" Yamnaya came to have.

Clearly they were only looking at the Greater Caucasus, but it would have been nice to see Corded Ware and Bell Beaker analyzed this way.
 
I'd forgotten about that graphic. Thanks.

So, just eyeballing it, the difference between the most different "CHG" and "Iran Neo" samples is maybe 20%, while at the other end of the comparison it's like 10%?

Of course, that makes one "European" and one "Near Eastern". :)

Amazing how much "green" Yamnaya came to have.

Clearly they were only looking at the Greater Caucasus, but it would have been nice to see Corded Ware and Bell Beaker analyzed this way.
Yeah, i agree with your estimation on CHG/Iran-Neolithic. It seems like it.

Based on these samples we see that the green (CHG) component appears to have made a strong appearance sometime between 5,200-4,000 BCE (especially as we observe sample I0434); an appearance that must have come from the south since it is slightly unrelated with what we see for the EHG and mostly unrelated with what we see for the Ukraine Mesolithic/Neolithic samples. Unfortunately nothing seems to exist for the early stages of Transcaucasia for example, which i would really like to know more of. For me the big question/bet is what a representative sample from the Shulaveri-Shomu (Transcaucasian) culture would show for the periods between 6,000-5,000/5,000-4,500 BCE. And, i would also like for the 3 "Samara Eneolithic" samples to have a lesser than 1,200 years gap concerning their date. Other than that, the paper is really great. It also complements other things i have seen. For example, have a look at the Global 25 maps of the three "Eneolithic steppe" samples shared above (last image), from Vonyuchka and Progress. And also, the respective map of Yamnaya Samara below them. Interestingly enough, all show the highest autosomal affinity to Caucasian Nakh-speaking regions, such as Dagestan, Chechnya, Ingushetia, etc.. I also included a broader map of the Yamnaya Samara, which shows that certain regions of Central Asia also have a high autosomal affinity, but still not the highest.
A7EGzIY.png

m9zUJ71.png

ezYRNih.png

8ArXY1D.png
 
Yes, it's also another data point supporting the fact that a lot of the Peloponnese shifts toward Southern Italy and/or Sicily and thus toward Mycenaeans to some extent. So maybe the Mani are right. Perhaps they, and some of the surrounding peoples, are indeed partly descended from the Spartans. What a kick in the teeth for Nordicists. Remember when Eurogenes said the Mycenaean people would be duplicates of northern, doubtless Polish, Corded Ware?

Spartans were outnumbered by Helots, and they left little behind. But they were genetically, probably, the same as the other Peloponnesians and Athenians too IMO.
As for Sicilians and South Italians they must overlap towards Greek_Crete in that PCA, in the direction of mainlanders. Peloponnese is nearly the same as the rest of mainland but somewhat more Mediterrean shifted.
cj4xzt5.jpg
 
Spartans were outnumbered by Helots, and they left little behind. But they were genetically, probably, the same as the other Peloponnesians and Athenians too IMO.
As for Sicilians and South Italians they must overlap towards Greek_Crete in that PCA, in the direction of mainlanders. Peloponnese is nearly the same as the rest of mainland but somewhat more Mediterrean shifted.
cj4xzt5.jpg

Of course, PCAs are only two dimensions, and each one will vary depending on the included populations, but...This also has the benefit of having a lot of specifically Peloponnese samples, not just mainland including Peloponnese. The PCA on the left is probably more accurate, given that it includes pull from Northern Europe, Central Europe, and Lithuanians as well.
Stamatoyannopoulos2017_Fig2.png
 
Of course, PCAs are only two dimensions, and each one will vary depending on the included populations, but...
Stamatoyannopoulos2017_Fig2.png
Sicilians are practially overlapping a bit with Tuscans (at least three triangles) in PC2. It's just that TSL is covering it.
What TSL stand for?

Greeks from Argolis come as 95% Sicilian-like and 4% Polish on average. It only reaches 2 digits (14% maximum) when including Russians.
 
Sicilians are practially overlapping a bit with Tuscans (at least three triangles) in PC2. It's just that TSL is covering it.
What TSL stand for?

Greeks from Argolis come as 95% Sicilian-like and 4% Polish on average. It only reaches 2 digits (14% maximum) when including Russians.
It's TSI, pertaining to Tuscans, namely "Toscani in Italia". I have seen it in other papers as well. The samples are collected from a small town near Florence in the Tuscany region of Italy. They are samples from the Coriell repository, https://www.coriell.org/1/NHGRI/Collections/HapMap-Collections/Toscani-in-Italia-TSI.
 
Sicilians are practially overlapping a bit with Tuscans (at least three triangles) in PC2. It's just that TSL is covering it.
What TSL stand for?

Greeks from Argolis come as 95% Sicilian-like and 4% Polish on average. It only reaches 2 digits (14% maximum) when including Russians.

TSI means Tuscans in Italy(It's a big group of about 100 samples from supposedly near Florence; you can see how much variation there is from north to south, some being close to Northerners and some drifting south), so they included two sets of Tuscan samples, with the second one being much smaller.

It's two Sicilian samples drifting north toward Tuscans, and one Tuscan drifting south. That space in between Toscana and Sicilia would probably be filled with Lazio, Napoli, Apulia etc. That's only in the PCA on the right, however, which only includes Southern Europeans. The purple squares are North Italians, of course.

The PCA on the left is more of the Europe wide perspective because it gives the Northern and Slavic pull. Don't know why they didn't include Tuscans on that one.
 
@Angela, the PCA on the left shows a broad spread on the Hungarians, any explanation for that?
 
I think that mycenaeans is mostly native and like minoans. They are mostly J2-J1-G2a-E1b and They have little R1b-R1a. I think minoans and native anatolians(hattians....) is very similar Y DNA.
 
Sicilians are practially overlapping a bit with Tuscans (at least three triangles) in PC2. It's just that TSL is covering it.
What TSL stand for?

Greeks from Argolis come as 95% Sicilian-like and 4% Polish on average. It only reaches 2 digits (14% maximum) when including Russians.

That seems odd. Russians would be further away in terms of similarity, so wouldn't we expect their percentage to be less than that of Poles?

In other words, shouldn't it be the other way around?
 
@Angela, the PCA on the left shows a broad spread on the Hungarians, any explanation for that?

Yes, I noticed that too. The Hungarians almost always place near that French sample, so most of it makes sense.

Hungary was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, with migration coming in from all areas, so I would expect some variety. (A lot of migration took place from southern Germany and Austria to Hungary even before that in the Middle Ages to the best of my recollection, but I'd have to check.) The two listing near Italy might make sense for that reason. Those people could have picked up some ancestry from Istria etc. Or it could be some Romanian ancestry affecting them which was picked up by the large Hungarian minority in Romania and brought back to Hungary.

What I don't understand is the ones listing way off by themselves. I do know that in Hungary there are quite a few remaining isolated ethnic groups. Could that be a segment of them? Drift could have caused them to move away like that. It's what happened with the Sardinians.

https://minorityrights.org/country/hungary/

"Outliers" do show up in academic samples. They're not going to throw them out the way the amateur bloggers might.
 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yeah those 6 samples are way out there by themselves. Also the French seem to overlap a lot with Hungarians which is surprising
 
That seems odd. Russians would be further away in terms of similarity, so wouldn't we expect their percentage to be less than that of Poles?

In other words, shouldn't it be the other way around?
Yes I wanted to mention that. I could believe it for Poles but for Ukrainians it seems a little strange.
 

This thread has been viewed 1158571 times.

Back
Top