Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

[Sile]

True, in regards to the Latins. I hate to mis-speak in regards to Romans as a legal term, and the original Latins, who founded Rome.

However, wouldn't Ashkenazi Jews moving so close on the PCA to the Mycenaean, from their Middle Eastern origin, indicate something about the population in Italia at large? particularly after 70 AD.

Also, I found this to be interesting, when looking at all of this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Italy

who are the latins?

We know by history that up to to celtic invasion of northern italy ~530BC........the etruscans held Rome and Naples , all these lands where under the etruscans.

Some old historians claim the latins as a southern branch of the etruscans , especially since etruscans owned this land for over 200 years

 

[Sile]

I find it astonishing that people state the term south european, north european etc based on todays national borders .............very problematic ...............it should reflect the latitude and longitude of Europe to reference these terms

 

[Angela]

I find it astonishing that people state the term south european, north european etc based on todays national borders .............very problematic ...............it should reflect the latitude and longitude of Europe to reference these terms

Please see post #338 above or any history/archaeology book of ancient Italy.

I find it astonishing that people state the term south european, north european etc based on todays national borders .............very problematic ...............it should reflect the latitude and longitude of Europe to reference these terms

I find it astonishing how little you know about anything, including genetics.

 

[Sile]

Please see post #338 above or any history/archaeology book of ancient Italy.



I find it astonishing how little you know about anything, including genetics.

tick for top

likewise for you on bottom

 

[bicicleur 2]

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;

don't jump to conclusions to hastily
Greeks don't have to come from Armenia in order to be related
Greeks and Armenians may have a common ancestor
and Greeks went to Greece and Armenians to Armenia

many scenarios are possible

 

[Sakattack]

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

True. We don't have anything proven, we just know that the Dorians we of Greek stock, because of the language. Nothing more. We can freely express our suppositions, alongside with some arguments, but up to a point.
For the Mycenaeans it has been the same more or less, and many (including myself) were surprised that they were so much Minoan-like.

There is only but one way to prove it. It's DNA. Other than that, we can only speculate.

True. So before we take anything as granted and group populations like you had, according to zero evidence, let's wait for DNA to speak.

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

 

[Milan.M]

don't jump to conclusions to hastily
Greeks don't have to come from Armenia in order to be related
Greeks and Armenians may have a common ancestor
and Greeks went to Greece and Armenians to Armenia

many scenarios are possible

I do not jump to conclusions it is what i believe to be true,it is what make sense to me,people jump to conclusions about steppe too but many scenarios are possible.

 

[Sile]

True. We don't have anything proven, we just know that the Dorians we of Greek stock, because of the language. Nothing more. We can freely express our suppositions, alongside with some arguments, but up to a point.
For the Mycenaeans it has been the same more or less, and many (including myself) were surprised that they were so much Minoan-like. True. So before we take anything as granted and group populations like you had, according to zero evidence, let's wait for DNA to speak.
Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

thanks
based on homers info.........we can conclude that the myceneans are solely based on linguistics as this was how it was done in the past ( ancient times ).
the map below shows the only mycenean areas .........( the added ones by me , ie, Dorians, macedonians are based on liinguistic)
url=https://postimages.org/]

[/url]
since dorian is based on what some call NW-greek , then we must assume as you state, the Dorians are Greek and are where I placed them on the map

 

[Sakattack]

thanks
based on homers info.........we can conclude that the myceneans are solely based on linguistics as this was how it was done in the past ( ancient times ).
the map below shows the only mycenean areas .........( the added ones by me , ie, Dorians, macedonians are based on liinguistic)
url=https://postimages.org/]

[/url]
since dorian is based on what some call NW-greek , then we must assume as you state, the Dorians are Greek and are where I placed them on the map

We have no proof that the Dorians we Nothern or Western Greeks. Homer doesn't say so.
What we have is their presence in the Mycenaean Centers after the latter civilization collapsed.
As for the map you posted, says "Turkiye" in Asia Minor, how funny for that period?
Don't run to conclusions my friend.

Sent from my Robin using Tapatalk

 

[bicicleur 2]

Kalash and other tribes in Afganistan, Turks?

should they look like 3-6 ka IE steppe people?

 

[bicicleur 2]

I do not jump to conclusions it is what i believe to be true,it is what make sense to me,people jump to conclusions about steppe too but many scenarios are possible.

you're free to believe and to speculate
and it might be the truth
as long as you realise it might be false too

that's all I'm saying

 

[Angela]

don't jump to conclusions to hastily
Greeks don't have to come from Armenia in order to be related
Greeks and Armenians may have a common ancestor
and Greeks went to Greece and Armenians to Armenia

many scenarios are possible

Indeed. I don't see how we amateurs can pick one scenario over another when the researchers, after extensive statistical modeling, aren't sure. We need the long awaited dna from the Caucasus, as well as testing of more proximate populations from the Balkans and Anatolia.

Unfortunately, linguistics can only tell us so much, because there's no gene for languages that we can track through ancient dna. It's all supposition. Knowing that Armenian is close to Greek won't give us the answers. All it tells us is that the people who spoke those precursors of the Indo-European languages at one time lived in proximity to one another. They could both have traveled down through the Balkans on route to their ultimate destinations as many linguists have believed, they could both have moved from eastern Anatolia (after moving down through the Caucasus), or they could have split and gone in different directions.

It's too early to come to conclusions, in my opinion.

The Kalash, Afghans, etc. are probably at most half steppe; the remainder is local ancestry, so obviously, no, they're not good proxies.

 

[Ygorbr]

We know by history that up to to celtic invasion of northern italy ~530BC........the etruscans held Rome and Naples , all these lands where under the etruscans.

AFAIK the Celtic invasion of Northern Italy (at least the Gaulish one, which was the last big wave of Celtic expansion associated with the La Tène culture) happened later, around the 4th century BC. Also, lands like Rome and Naples were under Etruscan rule and influence, but weren't Etruscan in language and culture. They possibly were Etruscan or more generally Tyrrhenian-speaking (especially in the case of Rome, so close to Etruscan Veii and other important Etruscan cities) before the Italic expansion, which doesn't seem to have happened very early in Central/Southern Italy, rather after 1,000 BC. It's likely that Latins established over an Etruscan substrate, but their forebears (part of them, anyway) definitely came from northern and possibly northeastern lands (Austria, Slovenia, Croatia?).

 

[Ygorbr]

these pics don't represent IE tribes that were on the steppe 6 - 3 ka
they were repleced by Turkish tribes

I don't know if that's right. I mean, firstly, Central Asian Turks heavily diluted into Scytho-Sarmatian genes (in general Turkic peoples of the Eurasian steppes, except for Kazakhs and a few others, have at least 40%-50% West Eurasian ancestry and are heavy in R1a Y-DNA). Then, secondly, the Kalash and Iranic Afghans weren't replaced by Turks at all, but mixed with them. Anyway, I also don't think Kalash and Afghans are a good representation of what IE tribes must've looked like. Their admixture isn't found in any modern people, AFAIK. But if I had to bet on how they looked like in terms of pigmentation, I'd definitely go for a typical Caucasian look: white, but not very pale and relatively sun-tanned; dark eyes and dark hair with the occasional light hair/eyes. We already know they were definitely less depigmented than CW people and modern Europeans, so I'm pretty sure they looked more like Armenians and Bulgarians than Brits or Poles.

 

[Pax Augusta]

AFAIK the Celtic invasion of Northern Italy (at least the Gaulish one, which was the last big wave of Celtic expansion associated with the La Tène culture) happened later, around the 4th century BC.

The invasion of 4th century BC is Gaulish, and is the last wave of Celtic migrations to north Italy. Proto-Celtic cultures flourished in north Italy from 14th/13th century BC: Scamozzina and Canegrate and then Golasecca, oftern merged with the local Ligurians. Scamozzina and Canegrate likely from Hallstatt culture, Golasecca from La Tène culture.

Also, lands like Rome and Naples were under Etruscan rule and influence, but weren't Etruscan in language and culture. They possibly were Etruscan or more generally Tyrrhenian-speaking (especially in the case of Rome, so close to Etruscan Veii and other important Etruscan cities) before the Italic expansion, which doesn't seem to have happened very early in Central/Southern Italy, rather after 1,000 BC.

Naples was never under the Etruscan rule and influence, Etruscans controlled other towns in Campania. The Etruscan rule in Campania was a conseguence of the earlier Villanovian expansion to south Italy, it's not due to a presumed Tyrrhenian element. Just as it occurred roughly in northern Italy, cities controlled by the Etruscans in Campania coincide with the previous Villanovian settlements. But unfortunately the Etruscans were defeated and expelled around 4th century BC from Oscans and other local populations.

 

[davef]

It would be neat if someone created a gedmatch Mycenaean/Minoan calculator

 

[Yetos]

should they look like 3-6 ka IE steppe people?

Certainly Not Turks,

if they should look like steppe as Before 6 000 years?

who knows?
But Surely are IE till Today, offcourse more Indo than 6ky and more N Europe than 6ky
certainly not Turkic as in Khazakstan or Uzbekistan steppe,

 

[Aaron1981]

I suspect the Mycenaean element is still Europe_LNBA + local Minoan from the previous phases. That's why it's not full on steppe, nor can it be modeled full EHG. The Central European population at the time already had large amounts of EEF, such as the Bell Beaker ones. I think Bell Beaker will be a far better approximation of this ancestry than Corded Ware, but perhaps that just my biased take on it.

 

[Yetos]

οκ

I am about to pass some Data from wiki,
about Cretans,

Cretan languages,

Homer writes

ἄλλη δ' ἄλλων γλῶσσα μεμιγμένη· ἐν μὲν Ἀχαιοί,
ἐν δ' Ἐτεόκρητες μεγαλήτορες, ἐν δὲ Κύδωνες
Δωριέες τε τριχάϊκες δῖοί τε Πελασγοί·

Achaioi Eteo-Cretans Kydones Dorians Pelasgians

by Strabo
Kydones Dorians Eteo-Cretans.

 

[MOESAN]

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.

OK for Sergi, thanks for well tempered answer (it's not always the case). BTW I think I mistook him for another old antrhopologist of Italy.
Concerning cephalic index, the most of the methodologies errors don't change dramatically the results as a whole, when pops are different enough. It's true the statement was a bit unprecise and too general, but southern Italy presented for the most lower cephalic indexes; what is not sufficient to help to settle reliable evaluations of mixtures in pops.
I can understand "intellectual" italian (so close to french or the reverse) but I don't need to read about Sergi, I rely on you.