Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

[Fire Haired14]

Nobody knows their genetic origin yet. They could be Levantine, they could be Greek, who knows for certain?

They lived in the Levant so I think that's where their ancestry was from.

Why are Bronze Age Levantines more European than moderns?

Neither are very European. I'm pretty sure modern Levanties were found to have a Steppe signal that was none existent in the Bronze age Levanties. So I guess if anything modern Levanties are more European.

And just because they established a kingdom in the levant doesn't imply they're Levantine. I think the French or English built a kingdom in Jerusalem during the crusades, right? But we all know they aren't middle eastern.

It's not comparable. If we question the indigenous status of Philistines why not question the indigenous status of the ancient Chinese or Assyrians or whoever else.

 

[Fire Haired14]

You would think that before pontificating and making predictions people would at least do a Wiki search to educate themselves to a bare minimum, wouldn't you?

I actually did skim through Wikipedia right before I posted a response. I read that the Agean thing is just a theory and not accepted fact. It's possible I just don't accept it, hence my responses to you.

At least enough to know the difference between Canaanites and Philistines and Phoenicians, and maybe to get a bit of a handle on the Sea People phenomenon.

The PH in the begging confused me. In my memory I confused Philistine with Phoenician. I googled Phoenician and read they spoke a Semitic language. Confusing Phoenician with Philistine your suggestion sounded absurd.

 

[IronSide]

Fire Haired, Sorry I'm too lazy to make an argument, I think they were Aegean and at the least foreign to Canaan, Wikipedia already has something useful:

[h=3]Material culture and Aegean archaeology[edit][/h]Many scholars have interpreted the ceramic and technological evidence attested to by archaeology as being associated with the Philistine advent in the area as strongly suggestive that they formed part of a large scale immigration to southern Canaan, probably from Anatolia and Cyprus, in the 12th century BCE.^[69]However, scholars such as London, Brug, Bunimovitz, H. Weippert, and Noort, among others, have noted the "difficulty of associating pots with people", proposing alternative suggestions such as potters following their markets or technology transfer, and emphasize the continuities with the local world in the material remains of the coastal area identified with "Philistines", rather than the differences emerging from the presence of Cypriote and/or Aegean/ Mycenaean influences. The view is summed up in the idea that 'Kings come and go, but the pots remain', suggesting that the foreign Aegean elements in the Philistine population may have been a minority.^[70][71]
The proposed connection between Mycenaean culture and Philistine culture was further documented by finds at the excavation of Ashdod, Ekron, Ashkelon, and more recently Gath, four of the five Philistine cities in Canaan. The fifth city is Gaza. Especially notable is the early Philistine pottery, a locally made version of the Aegean Mycenaean Late Helladic IIIC pottery, which is decorated in shades of brown and black. This later developed into the distinctive Philistine pottery of the Iron Age I, with black and red decorations on white slip known as Philistine Bichrome ware.^[72] Also of particular interest is a large, well-constructed building covering 240 square metres (2,600 sq ft), discovered at Ekron. Its walls are broad, designed to support a second storey, and its wide, elaborate entrance leads to a large hall, partly covered with a roof supported on a row of columns. In the floor of the hall is a circular hearth paved with pebbles, as is typical in Mycenaean megaron hall buildings; other unusual architectural features are paved benches and podiums. Among the finds are three small bronze wheels with eight spokes. Such wheels are known to have been used for portable cultic stands in the Aegean region during this period, and it is therefore assumed that this building served cultic functions. Further evidence concerns an inscription in Ekron to PYGN or PYTN, which some have suggested refers to "Potnia", the title given to an ancient Mycenaean goddess. Excavations in Ashkelon, Ekron, and Gath reveal dog and pig bones which show signs of having been butchered, implying that these animals were part of the residents' diet.^[73][74] Among other findings there are wineries where fermented wine was produced, as well as loom weights resembling those of Mycenaean sites in Greece.^[75]
Material culture evidence, primarily pottery styles, indicates that the Philistines originally settled in a few sites in the south, such as Ashkelon, Ashdod and Ekron.^[76] It was not until several decades later, about 1150 BC, that they expanded into surrounding areas such as the Yarkon region to the north (the area of modern Jaffa, where there were Philistine farmsteads at Tel Gerisa and Aphek, and a larger settlement at Tel Qasile).^[76] Most scholars therefore believe that the settlement of the Philistines took place in two stages. In the first, dated to the reign of Ramesses III, they were limited to the coastal plain, the region of the Five Cities; in the second, dated to the collapse of Egyptian hegemony in southern Canaan, their influence spread inland beyond the coast.^[77] During the 10th to 7th centuries BC the distinctiveness of the material culture appears to have been absorbed with that of surrounding peoples.^[78]
[h=4]Burial practices[edit][/h]The Leon Levy Expedition, consisting of archaeologists from Harvard University, Boston College, Wheaton College in Illinois and Troy University in Alabama, conducted a 30-year investigation of the burial practices of the Philistines, by excavating a Philistine cemetery containing more than 150 burials dating from the 11th to 8th century BCE Tel Ashkelon. The expedition withheld announcing the results of the excavations for three years, until their work was completed, concerned about the reaction of ultra-Orthodox Jewish protesters, who are known to protest against excavations, arguing that such digging violates Jewish religious law, by potentially disturbing Jewish remains in the excavation area. In July 2016, the expedition finally announced the results of their excavation.^[79]
Archaeological evidence, provided by architecture, burial arrangements, ceramics, and pottery fragments inscribed with non-Semitic writing, indicates that the Philistines were not native to Canaan. Most of the 150 dead were buried in oval-shaped graves, some were interred in ashlar chamber tombs, while there were 4 who were cremated. These burial arrangements were very common to the Aegean cultures, but not to the one indigenous to Canaan. Lawrence Stager of Harvard University believes that Philistines came to Canaan by ships before the Battle of the Delta circa 1175 BCE. DNA was extracted from the skeletons for archaeogenetic population analysis.^[16]

[h=3]Language[edit][/h]Main article: Philistine language
Nothing is known for certain about the language of the Philistines. Pottery fragments from the period of around 1500-1000 BCE have been found bearing inscriptions in non-Semitic languages, including one in a Cypro-Minoan script.^[81] The Bible does not mention any language problems between the Israelites and the Philistines, as it does with other groups up to the Babylonian occupation.^[82] Later, Nehemiah 13:23-24 writing under the Achaemenids records that when Judean men intermarried women from Moab, Ammon and Philistine cities, half the offspring of Judean marriages with women from Ashdod could speak only their mother tongue, Ašdôdît, not Judean Hebrew (Yehûdît); although by then this language might have been an Aramaic dialect.^[83] There is some limited evidence in favour of the assumption that the Philistines were originally either Indo-European-speakers from Greece or Luwian speakers from the coast of Asia Minor, on the basis of some Philistine-related words found in the Bible not appearing to be related to other Semitic languages.^[84] Such theory suggests that the Semitic elements in the language were borrowed from their neighbours in the region. For example, the Philistine word for captain, "seren", may be related to the Greek word tyrannos (thought by linguists to have been borrowed by the Greeks from an Anatolian language, such as Luwian or Lydian^[84]). Although most Philistine names are Semitic (such as Ahimelech, Mitinti, Hanun, and Dagon)^[82] some of the Philistine names, such as Goliath, Achish, and Phicol, appear to be of non-Semitic origin, and Indo-European etymologies have been suggested. Recently, an inscription dating to the late 10th/early 9th centuries BC with two names, very similar to one of the suggested etymologies of the popular Philistine name Goliath (Lydian Alyattes, or perhaps Greek Kalliades) was found in the excavations at Gath.

 

[Yetos]

The PH in the begging confused me. In my memory I confused Philistine with Phoenician. I googled Phoenician and read they spoke a Semitic language. Confusing Phoenician with Philistine your suggestion sounded absurd.

Phoenician, Canaanites, Phillistines are not the same

 

[Fluffy]

@Angela,

Once again, there's no need for insults. I don't deserve this. It's a shame you a moderator behave in this way. You clearly have a bias and hate against me like you do against Davidski. No matter what we see you attack us. You know I'm one of the few members of Eupedia who contributes with original thoughts and work. I contribute to all kinds of discussion. Moderators are supposed to treat such members with respect.

Tell that to Anthrogenica.

 

[davef]

Tell that to Anthrogenica.

I'll admit, anthrogenica is kinda dull and boring, it's like a glorified test results (from gedmatch, DNA land) repository.

 

[Jovialis]

Several theories are given about the origins of the Philistines. Some biblical passages connect the Philistines to other biblical groups such as Caphtorim and the Cherethites and Pelethites, which have both been identified with Crete^[9]which has led to the tradition of an Aegean origin,^[10] although this theory has been disputed.^[11][12][13] In 2016, a large Philistine cemetery was discovered, containing more than 150 dead buried in oval-shaped graves, indicating an Aegean origin, which is yet to be confirmed by genetic testing.<sup>[9][14][15][16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines</sup>

There's already a thread dedicated to this topic. The oval-shaped graves point to Aegean origin. In the linked thread I pointed out that the Sea Peoples invasion into the Levant may actually be mass migration; according to the lecture I posted. I think given the modern historical interpretations, it is very plausible that they were migrants from the island of Crete; part of the confederation of Sea people invaders.

The murals on Ramses III's tomb indicate that the Sea People were in in fact not only a movement of warriors, but also of families and livestock.

Map of the world according to the Hebrews, and the location of Caphtorim

 

[I1a3_Young]

I think the biblical grouping is interesting to see how the populations were perceived at the time. The medians were in the Japheth group, the Greek and more "IE" like group.

Shem was the Semitic group and Ham was cursed. I think they listed Canaanites and Philistines under the "cursed" group despite similar DNA to justify their rivalry with them. At this point I'm expecting the Philistine DNA to come back mostly Semitic.

 

[Ygorbr]

I confused Philistines with Phoenicians. Anyways, Philistines certainly weren't from the Agean.

Why "certainly weren't"? If the very plausible assumption that Philistines were descended from coastal seamen, probably one of the Sea Peoples, then the best hypotheses - and the ones that most scholars now consider at least worth investigating - are that they came from somewhere in the Aegean Sea/Eastern Mediterranean. In my opinion, they were either from further north in the Levant/Asia Minor (maybe Luwians or another Anatolian people?) or from the coast of Greece/South Balkans.

 

[Fire Haired14]

Phoenician, Canaanites, Phillistines are not the same

Sure. In my last post I confused Phillistines with Semetic speaking Phoencians. It's possible Phillistines were from Agean.

 

[Yetos]

I think the biblical grouping is interesting to see how the populations were perceived at the time. The medians were in the Japheth group, the Greek and more "IE" like group.

Shem was the Semitic group and Ham was cursed. I think they listed Canaanites and Philistines under the "cursed" group despite similar DNA to justify their rivalry with them. At this point I'm expecting the Philistine DNA to come back mostly Semitic.

Do not mix the Phillistine Pentapolis
with the Chanaanites Pentapolis

it is not the same,

And Phillistines were not Greek with the inner term
but from the same stock of Minoans and Aegeans or minor Asians as recent archaiology tends for 'come from' theory'

There was a population like Hatti
WHICH THE BIBLE DID NOT CONNECT WITH SEM OR JAPHETH

 

[Pygmalion]

It's not comparable. If we question the indigenous status of Philistines why not question the indigenous status of the ancient Chinese or Assyrians or whoever else.

Because there is both material and textual evidence of an eastward migration from either Cyprus/Cilicia or the Aegean, probably from both towards the Levant, this view is supported by the majority of archaeologists, the Peleset only start being recorded with the migration of the sea peoples and their failed invasion of Egypt, when the Peleset are listed numerous times among other invading sea peoples' tribes.

Before then, they were unkown in the Levant, they weren't present in any Egyptian or Near Eastern document, they only start appearing in record after the sea peoples' invasion, which is both reported by textual (Egptian record most of all but also some Ugaritic and Hittitie ones) and material evidence: massive amounts of Aegean and Cypriot pottery in the Levant, especially in the Philistine pentapoleis, Philistine city being re-built in Aegean/Cypriot fashion, Philistine burials being oval pits like Cypriot ones, Philistines using Cypro Minoan script, bringing Aegean features and practice like Aegean hearths, European breed pigs, Philistines being armed exactly like the contemporary Cypriot warrior depictions, the list is long, there is massive evidence for a westward migration from Cyprus and the Aegean to the Levant, the Philistines were not native to it, it's difficult to say where they were from: Cyprus probably, but maybe they were mixed Cypro/Aegean, to what extent were they mixed? This is impossible to tell, what is certain is that they came from the west, by the time of the war against the Hebrews they were mixed with the native Canaanite of course.

The fact that they were allied to other sea peoples, who were notoriously a confederation of many different ethnic groups, makes it hard to establish what ethnicity they were exactly.

 

[Jovialis]

Tell that to Anthrogenica.

I really don't know this place, but apparently they have some malware.

 

[Pax Augusta]

I really don't know this place, but apparently they have some malware.

Yes, they have. Furthermore there moderators are completely absent.

 

[davef]

Yes, they have. Furthermore there moderators are completely absent.

That site is utterly boring. Most of the threads there aren't very informative or interesting.

 

[Pratt]

nMonte with the same samples from davidski's global 10, and the same kind of models. Greeks are northern Greeks, I've not understood if they are the same used by davidski. These I'm using are already quite northern-shifted. I would like to see also the results for other Greeks and Greek islanders. Even Italian_Bergamo can be modelled as 42% Slav and Tuscans as 31.4% Slav, but Greeks here get 29.1 which is a percentage closer to reality. I think that Slav indicates more steppe-like ancestry than true Slavic ancestors, whether or not these stats really mean something.


Greek

Anatolia_BA 49.2
Unetice 34.3
Iceman_MN 16.4

Mycenaean 67.15
Unetice 30.10
England_Roman_outlier 2.75

Mycenaean 62.5
Slav_Czech 29.1
Iran_ChL 8.3

____

Italian_Bergamo

Unetice 43.2
Iceman_MN 34.3
Anatolia_BA 22.4

Mycenaean 52.2
Unetice 45.9
England_Roman_outlier 1.9

Mycenaean 57.4
Slav_Czech 42.6
Iran_ChL 0.0

___

Italian_Tuscan

Anatolia_BA 42.4
Unetice 35.5
Iceman_MN 22.1

Mycenaean 52.70
Unetice 37.85
England_Roman_outlier 9.45

Mycenaean 62.4
Slav_Czech 31.4
Iran_ChL 6.2


____

Italian_South

Anatolia_BA 66.5
Iceman_MN 18.1
Unetice 15.4

Mycenaean 46.0
England_Roman_outlier 30.1
Unetice 23.9

Mycenaean 78.8
Iran_ChL 12.2
Slav_Czech 9.0

Italians with German Bell Beaker instead of Unetice


Italian_Bergamo

Bell_Beaker_Germany 47.9
Iceman_MN 29.3
Anatolia_BA 22.8


Italian_Tuscan

Anatolia_BA 41.4
Bell_Beaker_Germany 40.2
Iceman_MN 18.4


Replicating Davidski's models, the results for other Greeks (samples from davidski's global 10). Unfortunately there are no Greek islanders.


Greek_Macedonia

Mycenaean 44.9
Unetice 39.5
England_Roman_outlier 15.6


Greek_Macedonia

Anatolia_BA 59.6
Unetice 40.4
Iceman_MN 0.0


Greek_Macedonia

Mycenaean 47.2
Slav_Czech 33.2
Iran_ChL 19.6


Greek_Thessaly

Mycenaean 53.15
Unetice 39.80
England_Roman_outlier 7.05


Greek_Thessaly

Anatolia_BA 41.6
Unetice 39.8
Iceman_MN 18.6


Greek_Thessaly

Mycenaean 56.90
Slav_Czech 35.45
Iran_ChL 7.65


Greek_Peloponnese

Mycenaean 54.5
Unetice 35.1
England_Roman_outlier 10.4


Greek_Peloponnese

Anatolia_BA 49.8
Unetice 35.0
Iceman_MN 15.2


Greek_Peloponnese

Mycenaean 60.40
Slav_Czech 29.75
Iran_ChL 9.85

_____


Mycenaean is mostly EEF with CHG and a minority of EHG.

Mycenaean

Barcin_N 75.5
CHG 17.8
EHG 6.7


Mycenaean

Barcin_N 75.2
CHG 13.4
Yamnaya_Samara 11.5


Every 10% of England_Roman_outlier corresponds roughly to 6% Natufian, 3% CHG and 1% EEF


England_Roman_outlier

Natufian 62.2
CHG 27.6
Barcin_N 10.2


I still do not understand the sense of using samples like the Mycenaean and the England_Roman_outlier. What can they ever reveal to us? I think almost nothing.

 

[Angela]

Italians with German Bell Beaker instead of Unetice


Italian_Bergamo

Bell_Beaker_Germany 47.9
Iceman_MN 29.3
Anatolia_BA 22.8


Italian_Tuscan

Anatolia_BA 41.4
Bell_Beaker_Germany 40.2
Iceman_MN 18.4


Replicating Davidski's models, the results for other Greeks (samples from davidski's global 10). Unfortunately there are no Greek islanders.


Greek_Macedonia

Mycenaean 44.9
Unetice 39.5
England_Roman_outlier 15.6


Greek_Macedonia

Anatolia_BA 59.6
Unetice 40.4
Iceman_MN 0.0


Greek_Macedonia

Mycenaean 47.2
Slav_Czech 33.2
Iran_ChL 19.6


Greek_Thessaly

Mycenaean 53.15
Unetice 39.80
England_Roman_outlier 7.05


Greek_Thessaly

Anatolia_BA 41.6
Unetice 39.8
Iceman_MN 18.6


Greek_Thessaly

Mycenaean 56.90
Slav_Czech 35.45
Iran_ChL 7.65


Greek_Peloponnese

Mycenaean 54.5
Unetice 35.1
England_Roman_outlier 10.4


Greek_Peloponnese

Anatolia_BA 49.8
Unetice 35.0
Iceman_MN 15.2


Greek_Peloponnese

Mycenaean 60.40
Slav_Czech 29.75
Iran_ChL 9.85

_____


Mycenaean is mostly EEF with CHG and a minority of EHG.

Mycenaean

Barcin_N 75.5
CHG 17.8
EHG 6.7


Mycenaean

Barcin_N 75.2
CHG 13.4
Yamnaya_Samara 11.5


Every 10% of England_Roman_outlier corresponds roughly to 6% Natufian, 3% CHG and 1% EEF


England_Roman_outlier

Natufian 62.2
CHG 27.6
Barcin_N 10.2


I still do not understand the sense of using samples like the Mycenaean and the England_Roman_outlier. What can they ever reveal to us? I think almost nothing.

I'm not sure I understand your objection to using the Mycenaeans for the Greeks, at least. That is the most proximate ancient sample we have for them so far, yes?

I suppose they're using it for Italians as a stand in for a broader Southern European population that might have been already impacted by populations like the Anatolia Chalcolithic, but not yet by more northern steppe admixed groups? I wonder if anyone has tried to model Italians as something like Anatolia Chalcolithic/Otzi-Remedello/Unetice-Bell Beaker.

The models have different levels of fit. Which had the best fit in your modeling for the various groups?

I think what Davidski was trying to do with Roman outlier was to show some sort of Levant like admixture in Italians dating from the Roman era, from slaves, etc. Whether that happened or not I don't know. Strange, though, if that's the case, that Greeks can wind up with 15% of it. More Levant like alleles might have been part of Bronze Age movements for all we know right now, depending on the composition of the precise group that moved into southeastern Europe.

That's the problem with all of this. We may not yet have the precise, proximate ancient samples to figure this all out.

 

[davef]

Greek Peloponnese from Pratt's post (I would guess most Greeks average out genetically as this group):

Mycenaean-60
Czech-30
Iran-10

Not an exact result bc i faced difficulty copy pasting from my phone

Macedonian:

Mycenaean-47
Czech-33
Iran-20

Davidski's Greek:

Mycenaean-46
Czech-43
Iran-11

Not very close to most Greeks genetically. It's way off.

 

[Angela]

Who says Davidski's is correct, or any more correct? First of all, we don't know which Greek sample Davidski used. At least in Pratt's list the different areas are labeled.

Second of all, no goodness of fit statistics are supplied for any of these.

It's stupid, imo, to use a mix of ancient and modern samples. So, using Czech can be misleading. You can see the difficulty because you can label Tuscans as 31% Czech, for goodness' sakes, and there was no Slavic migration to Italy.

Your Macedonian numbers don't resemble anything published in this thread, nor are Macedonians the only "Greek" population.

 

[Angela]

^^To prove the point, see below. It's also interesting in light of the fact that Tuscans and far northern Greeks usually plot near one another.

Tuscan:
Mycenaean 62.4
Slav_Czech 31.4
Iran_ChL 6.2

Greek_Macedonia

Mycenaean 47.2
Slav_Czech 33.2
Iran_ChL 19.6

Greek_Thessaly

Mycenaean 56.90
Slav_Czech 35.45
Iran_ChL 7.65