Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

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.

Slavic admixtures or "presently Slavic-majority" admixtures, you probably wanted to mean. Slavs are among the most recently expanded Indo-European groups, and because of that we have enough historic (archaeological and written) evidence that the vast majority of Slavs were part of Baltic, Germanic, Illyrian, Dacian, Thracian and Finno-Ugric ethnicities until a mere 1,000-1,500 years ago. If one finds very specific admixtures or subclades of particular haplogroups which have a noticeable peak/concentration and expansion spot from around southern Belarus/northern Ukraine, the most probable origin of Slavic people, then we'd be willing to talk about "Slavic genes" even if only in relative terms.
 
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.

It's quite obvious we need more samples to draw definitive conclusions. And not just for Mycenaeans and Minoans, but for any other historical population.
 
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.
You do care about their steppe percentages. And you care a lot! And - to be honest - you've made so far a huge effort to present it bigger than it is, giving it bigger impact than it has.
You also care about their Y-haplos, sorry, party pooper again...

Of course this 9-13% is important. I guess the rest 87-91% is more important though, makes 8-9 times more than the steppe their genetic make-up.

The authors are not sure, haven't drawn any conclusions, from where it may have arrived. You take for granted that it came through the Steppe via Balkans. We'll see if you are right, but at least don't take it for granted. There are other possible explanations, for some maybe even more plausible...

You also take for granted that the... Dorians a) invaded Greece from the North b) were half-EEF half-Slaviclike people... You really pushing it too far...

You must admit that this paper was a direct punch in some people's faces (yours too?), who had been dreaming, speculating and insisting about the blond haired IEs with their chariots and their horses talking up Greece and writing golden history during the centuries... Well, that's not the case my friend.

IMO based on this paper and not only, the IEs are contributed not more than 20% in Greece's genetic make-up (no more than 15% in antiquity) and I am taking about admixture IN GENERAL (including their ENF etc). Even the IE Greek language has a lot of non IE vocabulary in basic terms as well. And, to make a guess, even these steppe people, were nothing close to the modern East Europeans or Germanics.

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk
 
Hey Angela, can you help me out with this please?
Tomenable, it's cool to take pride in your background, but I don't think the Reich dudes want you to look into the cretan armeloudian queen.

Oh crap, I'm late for something. Gotta go

That's total and utter rubbish. You think Nick Patterson cares about these stupid internet agendas?

Careful, your other "face" is showing.
 
I'm Italian, from central Puglia. I spoke about it in more detail here. NG, is national geographic. But unfortunately, the Helix version doesn't allow you to download the raw data file yet.

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.
 
Of course I am using the "steppe" term meaning IE/PIE.

It's possible that these people have nothing to do with the real Steppe at all, they could possibly only share genes with the real Steppe people, via numerous possible routes and admixtures...

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk
 
Eurogenes K36 inflates its Italian component and it gets a bit unreliable.

Admix-4 Oracle based on K36 shows Greek + Sardinian, but only with Gaussian method:

I9041

1) Gaussian Method:

Gaussian method.
Noise dispersion set to 0,130062


Using 1 population approximation:
1 FR_Corsica @ 4,860315
2 IT_Lazio @ 4,878331
3 GR_Kythera @ 4,933544
4 IT_Campania @ 4,937751
5 IT_Abruzzo @ 4,963038
6 Gr_Kalymnos @ 4,986924
7 IT_Calabria @ 5,05098
8 IT_Apulia @ 5,218651
9 IT_Marche @ 5,252171
10 IT_Tuscany @ 5,287467
11 GR_Dodecanes @ 5,287997
12 Sicily_Messina @ 5,322997
13 Sicily_Trapani @ 5,324955
14 Sicily_Catania @ 5,347346
15 Albania_South @ 5,375962
16 GR_Ikaria @ 5,460638
17 Malta @ 5,496799
18 Sicily_Palermo @ 5,511079
19 Albania_North @ 5,516049
20 Sicily_Caltanisetta @ 5,520629
337 iterations.


Using 2 populations approximation:
1 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Sardinia @ 4,710116
2 GR_Kythera+IT_Sardinia @ 4,755685
3 IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,773085
4 Cyprus+IT_Sardinia @ 4,794487
5 IT_Calabria+IT_Sardinia @ 4,80946
6 GR_Dodecanes+IT_Sardinia @ 4,858273
7 FR_Corsica+FR_Corsica @ 4,860315
8 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio @ 4,878331
9 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio @ 4,890791
10 IT_Campania+FR_Corsica @ 4,89831
11 GR_Kythera+FR_Corsica @ 4,902538
12 GR_Kythera+IT_Lazio @ 4,923158
13 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Lazio @ 4,933047
14 GR_Kythera+GR_Kythera @ 4,933544
15 IT_Campania+IT_Campania @ 4,937751
16 IT_Lazio+FR_Corsica @ 4,940078
17 IT_Calabria+FR_Corsica @ 4,946903
18 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio @ 4,949468
19 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Sardinia @ 4,951643
20 IT_Calabria+IT_Lazio @ 4,957579
56953 iterations.


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Sardinia +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,710116
2 50% IT_Campania +25% IT_Campania +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,721285
3 50% Gr_Kalymnos +25% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,723584
4 50% IT_Campania +25% GR_Kythera +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,745798
5 50% IT_Campania +25% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,746731
6 50% GR_Kythera +25% GR_Kythera +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,747892
7 50% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Campania +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,753109
8 50% GR_Kythera +25% IT_Sardinia +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,755685
9 50% GR_Kythera +25% IT_Campania +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,758602
10 50% IT_Sardinia +25% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Campania @ 4,76319
11 50% IT_Campania +25% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,765475
12 50% IT_Campania +25% IT_Calabria +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,765875
13 50% IT_Sardinia +25% Gr_Kalymnos +25% GR_Kythera @ 4,769419
14 50% IT_Campania +25% IT_Abruzzo +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,771945
15 50% IT_Campania +25% IT_Sardinia +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,773085
16 50% GR_Kythera +25% IT_Calabria +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,77924
17 50% IT_Sardinia +25% GR_Kythera +25% IT_Campania @ 4,77937
18 50% Gr_Kalymnos +25% GR_Kythera +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,781961
19 50% GR_Kythera +25% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Sardinia @ 4,784228
20 50% IT_Sardinia +25% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Calabria @ 4,784297
17455464 iterations.


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,710116
2 IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,721285
3 Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Sardinia @ 4,723584
4 GR_Kythera+IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,745798
5 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,746731
6 GR_Kythera+GR_Kythera+GR_Kythera+IT_Sardinia @ 4,747892
7 Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,753109
8 GR_Kythera+GR_Kythera+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,755685
9 GR_Kythera+GR_Kythera+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,758602
10 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,76319
11 IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Sardinia @ 4,765475
12 IT_Calabria+IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,765875
13 Gr_Kalymnos+GR_Kythera+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,769419
14 IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Sardinia @ 4,771945
15 IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,773085
16 Gr_Kalymnos+GR_Kythera+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,775053
17 GR_Kythera+GR_Kythera+IT_Calabria+IT_Sardinia @ 4,77924
18 GR_Kythera+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,77937
19 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Sardinia @ 4,781759
20 Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+GR_Kythera+IT_Sardinia @ 4,781961
21 GR_Kythera+IT_Calabria+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,78303
22 Gr_Kalymnos+GR_Kythera+GR_Kythera+IT_Sardinia @ 4,784228
23 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Calabria+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,784297
24 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Campania+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Sardinia @ 4,784753
25 Cyprus+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,785062
26 GR_Dodecanes+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,785082
27 Cyprus+GR_Kythera+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,785759
28 Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Lazio+IT_Sardinia @ 4,786706
29 GR_Kythera+IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Sardinia @ 4,786891
30 Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Sardinia @ 4,787425
31 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Calabria+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,788791
32 GR_Kythera+IT_Campania+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Sardinia @ 4,789709
33 GR_Kythera+IT_Calabria+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,789861
34 Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Calabria+IT_Sardinia @ 4,790481
35 GR_Dodecanes+Gr_Kalymnos+Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Sardinia @ 4,794305
36 Cyprus+Cyprus+IT_Sardinia+IT_Sardinia @ 4,794487
37 GR_Kythera+GR_Kythera+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Sardinia @ 4,795735
38 IT_Calabria+IT_Calabria+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,797289
39 GR_Dodecanes+IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Sardinia @ 4,79877
40 GR_Kythera+IT_Calabria+IT_Calabria+IT_Sardinia @ 4,798929
543510244 iterations.

2) Least-squares method:

Least-squares method.


Using 1 population approximation:
1 IT_Lazio @ 19,4018
2 IT_Tuscany @ 20,616302
3 IT_Abruzzo @ 21,156405
4 FR_Corsica @ 21,542647
5 IT_Campania @ 22,15217
6 Albania_South @ 22,40565
7 IT_Marche @ 22,467514
8 IT_Apulia @ 23,24806
9 Sicily_Trapani @ 23,832789
10 IT_Calabria @ 23,940173
11 Albania_FYROM @ 24,12481
12 Albania_North @ 24,164755
13 IT_North @ 24,197524
14 Sicily_Catania @ 24,464497
15 GR_Kythera @ 24,558784
16 Sicily_Ragusa @ 24,671749
17 Gr_Kalymnos @ 24,721003
18 Sicily_Palermo @ 25,071979
19 Greek_Peloponnes @ 25,194446
20 Sicily_Agrigento @ 25,200382
337 iterations.


Using 2 populations approximation:
1 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio @ 19,4018
2 IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,660071
3 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio @ 20,021717
4 IT_Campania+IT_Tuscany @ 20,026295
5 IT_Lazio+FR_Corsica @ 20,072112
6 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Tuscany @ 20,117985
7 IT_Lazio+Albania_South @ 20,281012
8 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio @ 20,281326
9 IT_Abruzzo+FR_Corsica @ 20,494688
10 IT_Campania+FR_Corsica @ 20,594858
11 IT_Lazio+IT_Marche @ 20,615736
12 IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 20,616302
13 IT_Calabria+IT_Tuscany @ 20,71075
14 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Tuscany @ 20,749523
15 IT_Tuscany+Albania_South @ 20,750756
16 IT_Tuscany+FR_Corsica @ 20,770734
17 IT_Apulia+IT_Tuscany @ 20,806292
18 FR_Corsica+Albania_South @ 20,881172
19 IT_Apulia+IT_Lazio @ 20,933217
20 IT_Lazio+Albania_FYROM @ 20,965807
56953 iterations.


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Tuscany @ 19,44019
2 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Campania +25% IT_Tuscany @ 19,61427
3 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Lazio +25% FR_Corsica @ 19,629512
4 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Abruzzo +25% IT_Tuscany @ 19,641765
5 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Abruzzo +25% IT_Lazio @ 19,643418
6 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Tuscany +25% IT_Tuscany @ 19,660071
7 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Lazio +25% Albania_South @ 19,669751
8 50% IT_Tuscany +25% IT_Campania +25% IT_Lazio @ 19,703424
9 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Campania +25% IT_Lazio @ 19,705849
10 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Tuscany +25% Albania_South @ 19,765797
11 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Tuscany +25% FR_Corsica @ 19,784342
12 50% IT_Tuscany +25% IT_Abruzzo +25% IT_Lazio @ 19,820198
13 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Abruzzo +25% FR_Corsica @ 19,822401
14 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Campania +25% FR_Corsica @ 19,84433
15 50% IT_Lazio +25% FR_Corsica +25% Albania_South @ 19,883361
16 50% IT_Lazio +25% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Tuscany @ 19,883893
17 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Calabria +25% IT_Tuscany @ 19,910875
18 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Marche @ 19,920316
19 50% IT_Tuscany +25% Gr_Kalymnos +25% IT_Lazio @ 19,926941
20 50% IT_Lazio +25% IT_Lazio +25% Albania_FYROM @ 19,952047
18502090 iterations.


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio @ 19,4018
2 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,44019
3 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,61427
4 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+FR_Corsica @ 19,629512
5 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,641765
6 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio @ 19,643418
7 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 19,660071
8 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+Albania_South @ 19,669751
9 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 19,703424
10 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio @ 19,705849
11 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+Albania_South @ 19,765797
12 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+FR_Corsica @ 19,784342
13 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 19,820198
14 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+FR_Corsica @ 19,822401
15 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+FR_Corsica @ 19,84433
16 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+FR_Corsica @ 19,869771
17 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+FR_Corsica+Albania_South @ 19,883361
18 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,883893
19 IT_Calabria+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,910875
20 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Marche @ 19,920316
21 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 19,926941
22 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+FR_Corsica @ 19,936748
23 IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+Albania_FYROM @ 19,952047
24 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+IT_Sardinia @ 19,967332
25 IT_Campania+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 19,970891
26 IT_Campania+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,977925
27 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,981194
28 IT_Calabria+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 19,984789
29 IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Tuscany+IT_Sardinia @ 19,987182
30 IT_Apulia+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany @ 19,99741
31 IT_Campania+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Tuscany+IT_Sardinia @ 20,005796
32 IT_Calabria+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio @ 20,015003
33 Gr_Kalymnos+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio @ 20,019032
34 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio+Albania_South @ 20,020145
35 IT_Abruzzo+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Lazio+IT_Lazio @ 20,021717
36 IT_Campania+IT_Campania+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 20,026295
37 IT_Campania+IT_Abruzzo+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany @ 20,026651
38 IT_Campania+IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+Albania_South @ 20,028103
39 IT_Lazio+IT_Tuscany+IT_Tuscany+Albania_South @ 20,039476
40 IT_Campania+IT_Tuscany+IT_Sardinia+Albania_South @ 20,042785
540225922 iterations.
 
There are reasonable people with whom one can have a reasonable debate, and then there are "the others", people whose only interest is in pushing some noxious, race or ethnicity based agenda, who are best just ignored.

As for the Eurogenes calculators, I don't know about Greeks but they're all horrible at predicting Italian ancestry. The best any have ever given me is around 5-6, Bergamo and TSI. That's what happens when you load your calculator to show increased East European for everybody, along with a lot of other problems. It's going to throw all the other calculations off.

MDLP isn't much better in most cases, although one of them does get that I'm closest to the Piemonte/Emilia sample, but still only in the high 4's. Some others say I'm Greek, so totally wrong, given all my "western" ancestry, but most important, it shows there's absolutely no consistency between runs.

The old and now outdated dodecad calculator is still the best for most southern Europeans, imo, giving me around a 2 for best fit.

That's why I don't bother with gedmatch any more. Those calculators don't work for Italians, period. Oh, another example, the Eurogenes 36 ludicrously only gives me 22% Italian.

So, no surprise for me that these are the fits that Dodecad gets for one sample:

Dodecad K12b Oracle results:


#PopulationPercent
1 Atlantic_Med 40.33
2 Caucasus 40
3 Southwest_Asian 9.37
4 North_European 8.38
5 Gedrosia 1.82
6 Northwest_African 0.1

Single Population Sharing:

#Population (source)Distance
1 Sicilian (Dodecad) 11.77
2 S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) 11.83
3 C_Italian (Dodecad) 12.29
4 Tuscan (HGDP) 13.34
5 TSI30 (Metspalu) 14.72
6 Ashkenazi (Dodecad) 15.47
7 Ashkenazy_Jews (Behar) 15.81
8 Greek (Dodecad) 16.06
9 Sephardic_Jews (Behar) 16.16
10 O_Italian (Dodecad) 17.76
11 Morocco_Jews (Behar) 18.17
12 North_Italian (HGDP) 20.37
13 N_Italian (Dodecad) 21.35
14 Cypriots (Behar) 22.41
15 Baleares (1000Genomes) 28.39
16 Turkish (Dodecad) 28.44
17 Andalucia (1000Genomes) 29.42
18 Bulgarians (Yunusbayev) 29.63
19 Murcia (1000Genomes) 30.01
20 Bulgarian (Dodecad) 30.25

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
3 78.1% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 21.9% Sardinian (HGDP) @ 7.29
4 78.5% Sicilian (Dodecad) + 21.5% Sardinian (HGDP) @ 7.43

Considering how old these samples are, the goodness of fit is rather amazing.

And these are admixture calculators based on modern populations, hardly the most sophisticated analysis.

Maybe I'll have to reconsider...I did always like Odysseus at least, even if I could never stand Agamemnon and Menelaus. :)

Was someone actually touting a fit of 24 as good?

What oh what does Sikeliot think? Oh, maybe he's gone out to drown his sorrows.:)
 
Angela let me see what you get with K36 Oracle.

This one is not available on GEDmatch of course.

the Eurogenes 36 ludicrously only gives me 22% Italian.

You mean "Italian" genetic component, not actual Italian ancestry?

Because nobody in Italy scores 100% of "Italian" out of 36 components.

Actually around 20% is pretty normal for most of Italian regions:

Distribution of K36 "Italian" component in modern populations

italian-eurogenes-k36.jpg
 
K36 gives you 22% "Italian" and K12b gives you... 0%. :)

===================

Some ancient North Italians in K36:

Remedello RISE489 (2908-2578 BC), GEDmatch kit T135721:

Basque 9.34
Iberian 28.02
Italian 28.18
West_Med 34.46

Remedello RISE486 (2134-1773 BC), GEDmatch kit T319214:

Arabian 11.50
Basque 8.83
East_Balkan 5.43
Iberian 19.02
Italian 22.71
West_Med 32.51

Some ancient Iberians in K36:

http://i.imgur.com/6oDTFfD.png

6oDTFfD.png
 
Homer: "There is a land called Crete, in the midst of the wine-dark sea, a fair, rich land, begirt with water, and therein are many men, past counting, and ninety cities. They have not all the same speech, but their tongues are mixed. There dwell Achaeans, there great-hearted native Cretans, there Cydonians, and Dorians of waving plumes, and goodly Pelasgians."

Where the Dorians came from: "the Pelasgians ... were once neighbors of the people now called Dorians, and at that time inhabited the country which now is called Thessalian." (Herodotus)

J2 were predominately the Minoans so cross them off as Dorians and they did not come from the north. J1 did not come from the North either. Neither did E1b1b.

Northern Greece is 16% I2a and 22.5% total I. It is 13% R1b. And 18% R1a. The homeland of the Dorians, according to Herodotus.

Crete is 5-10% R1b-S28 and 5-10% R1b-ht35. 9% R1a. 7% I2a and 12% total I.

There is a good chance the Dorians were I2a, with their homeland in the north.

A good percentage of R1b-S28 were Celtic POWs turned Roman slaves and freed throughout the centuries. R1b-ht35 is anatolian and did not come from the north. Not many are saying R1a are the Dorians. That leaves I2a.
Your theory has many holes in it and makes no sense.

Many people make the same mistake of lumping all J2 together, you probably did it out of intent. There are many clades of them stemming from: J2a1, J2a2, J2b1, J2b2.

Dorians were most likely R1b-L23 brother-clade with a minority of J2b2-L283 carriers.

R1b-ht35 in Anatolia is of Northern, Indo-European/Yamnaya origin aka predominantly North European and partly West Asian. It was strongly based in the Pontic Steppe and spread across the non-Slavic Balkans + around the shores of Pontic Sea.

I2a1b-"Din" is Slavic as the oldest sample of it has only been found in Medieval Poland.
 
There are reasonable people with whom one can have a reasonable debate, and then there are "the others", people whose only interest is in pushing some noxious, race or ethnicity based agenda, who are best just ignored.

As for the Eurogenes calculators, I don't know about Greeks but they're all horrible at predicting Italian ancestry. The best any have ever given me is around 5-6, Bergamo and TSI. That's what happens when you load your calculator to show increased East European for everybody, along with a lot of other problems. It's going to throw all the other calculations off.

MDLP isn't much better in most cases, although one of them does get that I'm closest to the Piemonte/Emilia sample, but still only in the high 4's. Some others say I'm Greek, so totally wrong, given all my "western" ancestry, but most important, it shows there's absolutely no consistency between runs.

The old and now outdated dodecad calculator is still the best for most southern Europeans, imo, giving me around a 2 for best fit.

That's why I don't bother with gedmatch any more. Those calculators don't work for Italians, period. Oh, another example, the Eurogenes 36 ludicrously only gives me 22% Italian.

So, no surprise for me that these are the fits that Dodecad gets for one sample:

Dodecad K12b Oracle results:


#PopulationPercent
1 Atlantic_Med 40.33
2 Caucasus 40
3 Southwest_Asian 9.37
4 North_European 8.38
5 Gedrosia 1.82
6 Northwest_African 0.1

Single Population Sharing:

#Population (source)Distance
1 Sicilian (Dodecad) 11.77
2 S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) 11.83
3 C_Italian (Dodecad) 12.29
4 Tuscan (HGDP) 13.34
5 TSI30 (Metspalu) 14.72
6 Ashkenazi (Dodecad) 15.47
7 Ashkenazy_Jews (Behar) 15.81
8 Greek (Dodecad) 16.06
9 Sephardic_Jews (Behar) 16.16
10 O_Italian (Dodecad) 17.76
11 Morocco_Jews (Behar) 18.17
12 North_Italian (HGDP) 20.37
13 N_Italian (Dodecad) 21.35
14 Cypriots (Behar) 22.41
15 Baleares (1000Genomes) 28.39
16 Turkish (Dodecad) 28.44
17 Andalucia (1000Genomes) 29.42
18 Bulgarians (Yunusbayev) 29.63
19 Murcia (1000Genomes) 30.01
20 Bulgarian (Dodecad) 30.25

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
3 78.1% S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) + 21.9% Sardinian (HGDP) @ 7.29
4 78.5% Sicilian (Dodecad) + 21.5% Sardinian (HGDP) @ 7.43

Considering how old these samples are, the goodness of fit is rather amazing.

And these are admixture calculators based on modern populations, hardly the most sophisticated analysis.

Maybe I'll have to reconsider...I did always like Odysseus at least, even if I could never stand Agamemnon and Menelaus. :)

Was someone actually touting a fit of 24 as good?

What oh what does Sikeliot think? Oh, maybe he's gone out to drown his sorrows.:)

One thought here, Homer documented the fall of Troy but not the fall of Mycenae that considering its size should have been more glorious .......and happened later.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Can someone help an idiot out? I don't understand how (according to this chart) Thessalonikis are like Cypriots with just a small extra spread of red stuff (EHG or steppe or whatever pushes them north) and it looks like Cypriots and Thessalonkikis are closer to one of the Minoan groups (Lashi or whatever it's called). I wonder if that's true for other Greeks. I'll have to read it.
But I'll admit that my interpretation could be far off and I don't understand what the chart is telling us.
https://images.nature.com/full/natu...rent/images_supplementary/nature23310-sf1.jpg

Davef

Makedonians setlled Cyprus for centuries,
Cretans-Minoans had colonies at Makedonia (Skotina Bottiaeans etc)
 
Crete_Armenoi could be ethnically Dorian.

It postdates Dorian infiltration of Crete.

all samples are dated before Dorian descent,
Dorian descent is 911 BC +- method fault,

When we say aMinoan we do NOT mean Cretan but we mean until 1200-1100 BC
after 900 BC is Cretan, or Minoan style

when we say Mycenean we mean until 900 BC,
after that is peloponese or Greek Mycenean style

Minoan and Mycenean is before sea peoples,

 
Davef

Makedonians setlled Cyprus for centuries,
Cretans-Minoans had colonies at Makedonia (Skotina Bottiaeans etc)
Thanks for the help! I gave you an up vote!
 
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
try to understand it,

the previous thought was that Myceneans came from Danube at 2200 Bc about,
Lazarides papper turns upside NOT ONLY for Greece,
he is kicking ass of Malory's theories,

that is an earthquake even in what you believe until today, and most of us,

the North Agenda might be over for Greece, and not only,
do you understand how many PHD may get ruined?
Myceneans came with low steppe, and minoans got almost none.

all the results were expected from me,
except the scenario that Lazarides provides,
that Myceneans steppe came from Armenia,

try to understand,
 
"Mycenaeans do not form a clade (N=1) with any population of the All+ set (p-value for rank=0 < 1e-6). They can only be modelled as a 2-way mixture of Neolithic Anatolia and Chalcolithic orMiddle/Late Bronze Armenia (Table S2.13). This suggests that Mycenaeans could be a mixture ofearly Neolithic people (represented by the Neolithic Anatolian population) and further input from theeast related to populations of Armenia. This seemingly contradicts the results of our earlier modelingas a 3-way mixture of Anatolian Neolithic, Iran Neolithic or Caucasus hunter-gatherers, and EasternEuropean hunter-gatherers or Upper Paleolithic Siberians (Table S2.2), which suggests input fromboth the east (related to Iran) and north. "

"Interestingly, the proportion of ‘eastern’ and ‘northern’ ancestry inTable S2.26 are anti-correlated (r=-0.95) suggesting again that they both capture the same underlyingphenomenon. Table S2.26: 3-way mixture models. Left = (Mycenaean, A, B, C). The Right set is All++""

I doubt they would have included it at all if it wasn't the best model.

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.
 
Sorry I didn't get back to you on this Bicicleur; My only excuse is that I totally forgot about it.

Anyway, I think it's questionable that the intrusive element which appeared in Greece proper around 1600 could have brought chariots with them into Greece if they came from the north.

390px-Chariot_spread.png


As for the bronze swords, in the interest of time, I'll just use Wiki as it accords with everything I've ever read about the subject:

"Before bronze, stone (such as flint and obsidian) was used as the primary material for edged cutting tools and weapons. Stone, however, is very fragile, and therefore not practical to be used for swords. With the introduction of copper, and subsequently bronze, daggers could be made longer, leading to the sword.Thus, the development of the sword from the dagger was gradual, and in 2004 the first "swords" were claimed for the Early Bronze Age (c. 33rd to 31st centuries), based on finds at Arslantepe by Marcella Frangipane, professor of Prehistory and Protostory of the Near and Middle East at Sapienza University of Rome.[1][2][3] A cache of nine swords and daggers was found; they are composed of arsenic-copper alloy. Among them, three swords were beautifully inlaid with silver.
These are the weapons of a total length of 45 to 60 cm which could be described as either short swords, long daggers or gladius. Some other similar swords have been found in Turkey, and are described by Thomas Zimmermann.[4]
The sword remained extremely rare for another millennium, and became more widespread only with the closing of the 3rd millennium. The "swords" of this later period can still readily be interpreted as daggers, as with the copper specimen from Naxos (dated roughly 2800 to 2300 BC), with a length of just below 36 cm, but individual specimens of the Cycladic "copper swords" of the period around 2300 reach a length up to 60 cm. The first weapons that can be classified as swords without any ambiguity are those found in Minoan Crete, dated to about 1700 BC, which reach lengths of more than 100 cm. These are the "type A" swords of the Aegean Bronze Age."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age_sword

What? Alaca Höyük is quite conservative with regards to the first swords. There are also Maykop and Arslantepe (there's a whole stash dated to >3k BC). Later swords are found in Syria and Transcaucasia, then the Aegean. Not sure where you got the Carpathian thing from. It's just not true.
Later slashing swords spread in the opposite direction from North Italy.

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
 
The so called "Dorian Invasion" (doubtful if it occured at all) was around 1200. In Crete, even a little later. Here Lazaridis is talking about 1300-1400.

So you are only 100-200 years close :p Good effort!

The quality is not the worst, but is by far the worst among the samples, which I don't see you commenting at... There are GEDmatch kits for them too, in case you missed it!

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.
 
The DNA results are simply matching finely all prehistorical events, but some people come to get bizarre pictures from it.

The first EEF came with Neolithic people, the second CHG + J2 Y-DNA came with the second wave from Trans-Caucasus or Kurdistan which delivered in Europe Minoan, Pelasgian, Lemnian, Etruscan... 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:

By about the 15th century BC a massive volcanic explosion known as the Minoan eruption blew the island of Thera apart, casting more than four times the amount of ejecta as the explosion of Krakatoa and generating a tsunami in the enclosed Aegean that threw pumice up to 250 meters above sea level onto the slopes of Anaphi, 27 km to the east. Any fleet along the north shore of Crete was destroyed and John Chadwick suggests that the majority of Cretan fleets had kept the island secure from the Greek-speaking mainlanders. The sites, save Knossos, were destroyed by fires. Mycenaeans from the mainland took over Knossos, rebuilding some parts to suit them. They were in turn subsumed by a subsequent Dorian migration.

if the Minoan-Myceanean sample is providing an unexpected high level of WHG (in fact EHG) it could be attributed to being a low quality sample (with much more of her EEF component lost, and if so it would mean that such admixture event would be quite recent).
 

This thread has been viewed 1162290 times.

Back
Top