Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

Don't want to sound bossy, but we need to stay on topic. Let me end the discussion about Jews with a brief summary about European Jewish genetics based on the various articles I've read...

.50 levant (common sense Levant would be a source).
.35 Southern European (not Italian due to no IBD sharing with italians, it is most likely from an ancient Aegian islander population).
.15 Western and Eastern European from people who lived in those areas.
 
I think it's interesting to compare this study to this chart that was made for the study on Ancient Egyptian DNA.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694


The Ashkenazi Jews seem to cluster a lot closer to the Mycenaeans than they did to their ancestors in the middle East. Which means they must have heavily assimilated during the Roman times. The same may have been the case with the other Jewish groups within the empire. Note how close the Turkish Jews are as well; which I speculate comes from assimilation during the Byzantine Empire.

What does the Ashkenazi Jewish population's assimilation into Ancient Rome, bringing them closer to the Mycenaeans, tell us about the Romans? Perhaps Romans were close to the Mycenaeans.
Experts say that assimilation of Ashkenazi, mixing Jews with South European, happened after Roman Empire. Probably Early Medieval times. Where they plot today is helped by 15% of their North European autosomal. Otherwise they would plot closer to Turkish Jews or Sephardic.
 
Exactly, Sicilians have, along side Greek ancestry, received mixtures from both Southern (Phoenician, Arab) as well as Northern populations (Dorians?, Normans, Romans etc) and have as such retained the same North-Southern analogy as the Myceneans. Jews were obviously more Southern and received Northern admixtures to come close to the Myceneans. Western Anatolia has received (among others) Turkic admixture, so Western Turks plot quite far away from Myceneans/Minoans. Mainland Greece has had mainly northern (Dorian? and Slavic) admixture and they plot more Northern. Although we still need more Mycenean samples from different parts of Greece. Because that female example with more northern ancestry raises some question marks.
I really don't understand why - with no facts - we label the Dorians "northern", when we are taking taking about a Greek pop. We simply have no clue, we only know they were Greeks.

Also, check modern Greeks from the de facto Dorian settlements of the antiquity: Dodecanese, Crete, Mani etc. This of course is speculation, but I don't see anything more "northern" on them, comparing with the other Greek groups. I would say the opposite.

33b1a58c91f1c303336f88d373ea89c1.jpg


Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk
 
Giuseppe Sergi isn't particularly reliabe.

Based on what?
The labelling more 'northern' or 'mediterranean' can be uncertain and prove the anthropologist is not too serious or precise, or he is biased (concerning Sergi I don't know), but the cephalic indexes data are reliable by themselves as a whole, what ever the period and the anthropology school. ATW we are a bit far from the topic here. And the anthropologic aspect, possibly misguiding, is not the node of this topic, which is DNA.
 
@Maciamo,

Do you have good data on % of various subclades of R1a, R1b, I2 and I1 in modern Greece?

I don't have the exact frequencies for the subclades, but I can tell you which deep clades are present in Greece. For R1a it's mostly M458 and CTS1211. R1a-Z93 is rare in Greece and I haven't seen any Germanic R1a yet. For I2, the vast majority is the Slavic I2a1b-CTS10228 + a bit of I2c. There is very little data for Greek I1, but it seems to be mostly Z63+. As for R1b, there is definitely U152, DF27, U106 and Z2103. The highest are U152 and Z2103.
 
Based on what?
The labelling more 'northern' or 'mediterranean' can be uncertain and prove the anthropologist is not too serious or precise, or he is biased (concerning Sergi I don't know), but the cephalic indexes data are reliable by themselves as a whole, what ever the period and the anthropology school. ATW we are a bit far from the topic here. And the anthropologic aspect, possibly misguiding, is not the node of this topic, which is DNA.

Based on the fact that Giuseppe Sergi was the counterpart of Nordicism, he was anti-Nordicist and a Fascist-Mediterranean who thought that the Mediterranean race was superior.

About Sergi
"Sergi è rievocato come precursore del razzismo fascista e pioniere della selezione artificiale della razza sulla rivista "la difesa dalla razza" diretta da Telesio Interlandi. Cfr. G. Landra, Gli studi della razza in Italia prima del razzismo, in "la difesa della razza" 8, 1939, pp 19-23."

("Sergi was recalled as the forerunner (precursor) of fascist racism and pioneer of artificial breed selection in the magazine "The Defense of Race" directed by Telesio Interlandi.")

There are so many Italian essays about him. If you read Italian, I can send you some title and link.
Generally speaking on the old anthropological studies, I recently read an anthropologist essay (of a guy who just finished his PhD 4/5 years ago). It explores the major studies of the past on ancient people of Italy, and what it says is that many data are useless because there is no consistency in the methodologies used even for craniometric measurements.
 
I really don't understand why - with no facts - we label the Dorians "northern", when we are taking taking about a Greek pop. We simply have no clue, we only know they were Greeks.

Also, check modern Greeks from the de facto Dorian settlements of the antiquity: Dodecanese, Crete, Mani etc. This of course is speculation, but I don't see anything more "northern" on them, comparing with the other Greek groups. I would say the opposite.

33b1a58c91f1c303336f88d373ea89c1.jpg


Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

The Dorians brought colonizers to Crete and the Dodecanese. They never displaced the essentially Minoan types on those islands. But they could have brought more Northern admixture there. Even though this may not be visible vis a vis other Greeks.
Basically, the Dorians came from the North of the mainland and displaced many populations of Greece. Many people migrated to the islands and went overseas to Western Anatolia. Aside from the fact that they came from the North, we do know that they spoke Indo-European, like the Myceneans. And the Myceneans did bring some Northern ancestry with them as well. Also, the Dorians were lesser developed than the Myceneans and they had no writing, which indicated to me that at least in part they were not local, or they didn't have any contact with the Southern Minoan people. In any case, they were Indo-European speakers. And two Indo-European waves is always more Indo-European ancestry than one Indo-european wave. Even if the Indo-European ancestry is deluded.

It is very difficult to know what happened after the Mycenean era, but this decline took several centuries. I think it may have had at least some impact on the population. I guess we have to wait for more results. Actually we need a lot more results from different localities to draw some conclusions.
 
these pics don't represent IE tribes that were on the steppe 6 - 3 ka
they were repleced by Turkish tribes

Kalash and other tribes in Afganistan, Turks?
 
"The origins of the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures have puzzled archaeologists for more than a century. We have assembled genome-wide data from 19 ancient individuals, including Minoans from Crete, Mycenaeans from mainland Greece, and their eastern neighbours from southwestern Anatolia. Here we show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean1, 2, and most of the remainder from ancient populations related to those of the Caucasus3 and Iran4, 5. However, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia6, 7, 8, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1, 6, 9 or Armenia4, 9. Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the Early Neolithic ancestry. Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations."

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature23310.html?foxtrotcallback=true



  1. least three-quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia.
  2. Caucasus
  3. Iran
  4. hunter–gatherers of eastern Europe or Siberia, introduced via a proximal source related to the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe or Armenia.


Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Levantine / MENA and European populations. They plot close to the Mycenaeans because of their mixture proportions, not due to being descended from a Mycenaean-like population. If ancient Italians ancestral to Jews were Mycenaean-like, modern Jews would be plotting halfway between the Levant and the Mycenaeans, rather than close to the latter. European ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews is more genetically northern than Mycenaeans.

I see what you're saying

Because Bronze Age Levantines, had strong Anatolian_N, and Iranian admixture as well. No doubt, the Jewish people in the bronze did too, in addition to Natufian. Hence why Ashkenazi Jews would plot closely on the PCA, despite not being directly related.

I guess the main difference is the lack of the Natufian component in the Mycenaeans, with even more Anatolian_N. As well as the other contributions that differentiate them.

Is it possible indo-Iranian contributed to Greek?

The Andronovo culture is the suggested candidate for the common Indo-Iranian culture ca. 2000 BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_languages

Mycenaean Greece (c. 1600–1100 BC).



Cth4psA.png
 
@Tomenable,

It's actually pretty surprising how much 374f Minoans had. It indicates they had pretty light skin but then there are paintings depicting people with brown skin. Like I've said before there's no super accurate way to determine someone's skin color from DNA.

IMO, ancestral-info makes it clear Steppe-rich groups are the source for the European blonde/blue eye complex but that doesn't mean they're the source for light skin.

And stop ranking people's worth according to color. Everyone can see what you're suggesting.

@Angela,

The female-light skin, male-dark skin thing obviously wasn't meant to reflect reality. Didn't the Egyptians do the same thing?

Precisely how do you know that it didn't reflect reality?

Most modern Southern Europeans possess snps which allow them to turn much darker after exposure to the sun.

The same man:

597baf564afb34455da8bccc8961b8e2.jpg


283461.jpg



Men, who would usually be doing the majority of the field work, would be on the training field, or on ships, would be constantly exposed to the sun, while women, especially the elite women or priestesses, much less so.

This was as true in Egypt as it was in ancient Greece.

There have also been papers that find a slight dysmorphia in terms of pigmentation between men and women.

It's certainly evident to me in populations like the Tuscans, for example, where, in my personal experience, women tend to be, on average, fairer than the men.

Anyway, the main point is that, based on the snps and on the predictive tool, the Mycenaeans (and the Minoans) accurately represented themselves in their art.

I'm not going to derail this thread by going into an extended rehash of de-pigmentation. I will just say that if the intrusive "mixing agent" that created the Mycenaeans came directly from the steppe/Yamnaya it absolutely didn't "lighten" the local population, which was relatively "light" already. As you note, the Minoans already had a lot of 374f.

You clearly seem to have forgotten what you used to know, and said, about pigmentation and Yamnaya in the past.

For the record, I certainly don't believe that people from Sintashta, who were indeed lighter, or Corded Ware people, took a jet from their areas to the Peloponnese. If the mixing agent came by way of the Balkans instead of Anatolia, which I think is probably more likely, then these people were mixed Balkanite populations.
 
@ Dianatomia

All these that you describe as facts, are just speculation.

The Dorians were a Greek population. We know nothing more.

I doubt they have been anything northern. But I also don't have facts to support it. In this, case, though, you are the one that should bring the facts on the table of their "Nothern" affinity ;)

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk
 
Precisely how do you know that it didn't reflect reality?

Most modern Southern Europeans possess snps which allow them to turn much darker after exposure to the sun.

The same man:

597baf564afb34455da8bccc8961b8e2.jpg


283461.jpg

Angela, I have it too.
I don't have my DNA tested but afaik there is no connection with southern Europe.
This feature is more outspoken for me than for other members of my family.
I don't get it by working the fields, it's by riding my bicycle. :cool-v:
 
@ Dianatomia

All these that you describe as facts, are just speculation.

The Dorians were a Greek population. We know nothing more.

I doubt they have been anything northern. But I also don't have facts to support it. In this, case, though, you are the one that should bring the facts on the table of their "Nothern" affinity ;)

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

What you have is some fairy tale from the past that might be true...but since no hard prove has been found yet ....there is room other hypotheses. I suspect that Doric tribes have more northern affinity as well...


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Many times i have said in this forum that the Greek language most probably came from Armenian territory somewhere in the Balkans,while all others were assuming directly from the steppe,now Lazaridis paper seem to support my hypothesis.
My quotes;
I favor the Greco-Aryan hypothesis,used in tandem with the Graeco-Armenian hypothesis, the Armenian language would also be included under the label Aryano-Greco-Armenic, splitting into proto-Greek/Phrygian and "Armeno-Aryan" (ancestor of Armenian and Indo-Iranian)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Aryan

So i think that the migration to Greece came from Anatolia,if this speakers will be associated with R1b,it will be with this subclade,but i doubt that they weren't admixed with other haplogroups.
Haplogroup-R1b-Z2103.png
That is what make more geographical sense to me,movement of people,language spread and historical sources as i believe to be true,including this subclade of R1b.At the end is irrelevant whether migration came from east or north,but they might have come from north of Caucasus into the Armenian teritory and that area around,but from there they moved in Greece already as different languages.The Greek-Armenian-Indo Iranian split i mention prior.Greek into West,whereas Armenian(middle) Indo Iranian in East migration,they most probably covered vast area of the steppes too with different haplogroups but same language group.
I agree that Armenian did not came from the Balkans,moreover I think that proto Greeks too arrived from that territory somewhere.
 
@ Dianatomia

All these that you describe as facts, are just speculation.

The Dorians were a Greek population. We know nothing more.

I doubt they have been anything northern. But I also don't have facts to support it. In this, case, though, you are the one that should bring the facts on the table of their "Nothern" affinity ;)

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

There is only but one way to prove it. It's DNA. Other than that, we can only speculate.
 
Angela, I have it too.
I don't have my DNA tested but afaik there is no connection with southern Europe.
This feature is more outspoken for me than for other members of my family.
I don't get it by working the fields, it's by riding my bicycle. :cool-v:

There you go, and I'm as Southern European as it gets genetically, and all I do is burn, blister, and peel. It's totally unfair as I love the sun and particularly the beach. Thank God for modern sunscreens and even so I wear the sun hats with the biggest brim I can find.

The snps involved do have a south/north, or even more so, a south/northwest distribution, but it's not always going to apply in individual cases.
 

This thread has been viewed 1169755 times.

Back
Top