@ Angela,
It was indeed a woman in the elite burial in Peristeria.
This is from Jean Manco's page:
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/copperbronzeagedna.shtml
Yes, I9033 was a woman from an elite Mycenaean burial in Peristeria, Peloponnese.
Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans
- Thread starter Angela
- Start date
Yes, I9033 was a woman from an elite Mycenaean burial in Peristeria, Peloponnese.
Jovialis
Advisor
- Messages
- 9,310
- Reaction score
- 5,860
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R-PF7566 (R-Y227216)
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H6a1b7
The four Mycenaeans are different from each other, to begin with. And Mycenaeans are no more similar to Albanians or the Tuscans or the southern Italians than to Greeks or Greek islanders. This similarity is exaggerated, because the Mycenaeans remain distinct from modern populations. And in any case, this similarity does not mean a genetic legacy of the Mycenaeans in modern populations.
I doubt the people that made the study exaggerated.
Where is your PCA from?
Edit: lol voted down for posting a part of the paper. Obviously it comes from a poster with zero integrity since it in no way affected my rep. Keep reaching for straws trying to prove the paper wrong.
Last edited:
Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
Please stop basing your conclusions totally on PCAs, even if they are easier for non-statisticians to understand. That is only one tool. READ THE PAPER and supplement carefully please. Also, just generally, how seriously one is to take these analyses depends very much on who created it and what their reputation is for massaging the data to show what they want it to show.
If you believe that, why did you post a PCA which shows the opposite? Of course the Mycenaeans don't match any modern population. What does that have to do with it? There have been migrations since then. Any definitive answer as to why some Italians are closer to them than the Greeks still requires getting hold of ancient Italian samples. Take the English as an example. Bronze Age people in Britain and Ireland are distinct from modern populations. Are you going to say that there was no continuity in the British Isles from the Bronze Age to the present? There is, in fact, such continuity, even if something like the Danish/Anglo-Saxon invasions account for about 30% of the English genome. Why is it always the southern European countries which have to have no continuity?
This is inconsistent reasoning, which always smells like agenda to me.
That's absolutely nonsensical and illogical. You have a heavily EEF, minority steppe, modern Greek speaking population living in the exact same area as heavily EEF, minority steppe Greek speaking Mycenaneans but there's absolutely no continuity? Where did the Mycenaeans go? Are you going back to the totally discredited idea that there was total population replacement in Greece?
Now, I agree that some of that EEF may have come with subsequent migrants like the Slavic speaking peoples, but for your idea to work those Slavic speakers would have had to have also been in very high proportion EEF to get the levels we see today, and we know that isn't the case.
Now, if what you're trying imperfectly to say is that Southern Italians are not predominantly descended from Mycenaean type people, that's a different kettle of fish. Some input is likely, given the massive Greek migration to southern Italy and Greece, but a lot of it is probably from ancient gene flow from the Balkans to Italy starting with the Neolithic. As I said, other things may become clear with ancient Italian dna.
If you believe that, why did you post a PCA which shows the opposite? Of course the Mycenaeans don't match any modern population. What does that have to do with it? There have been migrations since then. Any definitive answer as to why some Italians are closer to them than the Greeks still requires getting hold of ancient Italian samples. Take the English as an example. Bronze Age people in Britain and Ireland are distinct from modern populations. Are you going to say that there was no continuity in the British Isles from the Bronze Age to the present? There is, in fact, such continuity, even if something like the Danish/Anglo-Saxon invasions account for about 30% of the English genome. Why is it always the southern European countries which have to have no continuity?
This is inconsistent reasoning, which always smells like agenda to me.
That's absolutely nonsensical and illogical. You have a heavily EEF, minority steppe, modern Greek speaking population living in the exact same area as heavily EEF, minority steppe Greek speaking Mycenaneans but there's absolutely no continuity? Where did the Mycenaeans go? Are you going back to the totally discredited idea that there was total population replacement in Greece?
Now, I agree that some of that EEF may have come with subsequent migrants like the Slavic speaking peoples, but for your idea to work those Slavic speakers would have had to have also been in very high proportion EEF to get the levels we see today, and we know that isn't the case.
Now, if what you're trying imperfectly to say is that Southern Italians are not predominantly descended from Mycenaean type people, that's a different kettle of fish. Some input is likely, given the massive Greek migration to southern Italy and Greece, but a lot of it is probably from ancient gene flow from the Balkans to Italy starting with the Neolithic. As I said, other things may become clear with ancient Italian dna.
Last edited:
I was just interested because the page in nature.com is locked.
Pax Augusta
Elite member
In Tuscans this "northern ancestry" is mostly proto-Villanovan/Villanovan/Urnfield ancestry.
davef
Princess
I doubt the people that made the study exaggerated.
Where is your PCA from?
Edit: lol voted down for posting a part of the paper. Obviously it comes from a poster with zero integrity since it in no way affected my rep. Keep reaching for straws trying to prove the paper wrong.
i don't see how anyone could take offense to what's highlighted there
Dianatomia
Regular Member
- Messages
- 403
- Reaction score
- 131
- Points
- 43
- Ethnic group
- Greek
Look at it this way. Three out of four Mycenaeans are closer to modern Greeks than they are to the other Mycenaean (I9010). The latter fits right in with the Minoans. Even if we include the fourth, the Mycenaean average is very close to modern Greeks. Some modern Greeks are further apart from each other than the Mycenaean average is from Greek populations. And we don't even have specimens of Mycenaeans from Northern Greece. So I guess the continuity depends on which glasses you put on. I mean, if modern Greeks would be overlapping with their Bronze Age ancestors, to me that would be surreal. I will be highly surprised if the Classical Greeks are overlapping with the Mycenaeans.
In any case, it is clear, modern Greeks are not identical to Mycenaeans. But one can make a safe scientific assumption that it is their primary source of ancestry.
Last edited:
davef
Princess
Why are people arguing against this? Do they find it a big shame to descend from them or something? If so, there's always the ancient DNA study crisis hotline. It's the best and most reliable way to connect to a counselor specializing in this
condition.
Seriously, what's the fuss?
Edit: Lol I was probably neg rated by the same guy who neg rated jovialis.
Last edited:
Source: https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Ancie...ns-as-their-ancestors/answer/Michael-Zhang-16
First, let’s clarify some terms. When modern historians speak of the Myceneans, they mean inhabitants of the powerful Late Bronze Age civilization that flourished around the Aegean sea around 1600–1100 BC. This civilization was Greek, in the sense that they spoke Greek; whether the inhabitants were ancestors of the classical Greeks, we do not know. It had several power centers, such as Pylos, Mycenae, Midea, Tiryns, and Thebes, of which Mycenae is the most prominent. This civilization had rich and highly centralized states, as revealed by its grand palaces and golden grave goods. It also had extensive trade links with each other and with the Near East, as evidenced by the uniformity of pottery found at different sites.
Beginning around 1200 BC, a series of terrible events begin to happen that would destroy this civilization and many others around the Mediterranean. Pylos and Midea are destroyed. Mycenae is reduced to a small and insignificant village. Tiryns survived, but its palace did not. Writing is completely lost throughout the Greek world. The population plummets. Pottery is not only much less advanced, but is distinct from city to city, indicating the lack of trade. Greece, after suffering this Bronze Age collapse, is now in the Dark Ages.
When Greece emerged from the Dark Ages 300 years later, around 800 BC, the new civilization is completely different. The writing system now uses a different script, adapted from that of the Phoenicians. Instead of highly centralized monarchies, Greece is now divided into thousands of city states, each with their own form of government. The Greeks living after the Dark Ages knew nothing about the Mycenean civilization that preceded them except bits and pieces preserved in legend, like the Iliad and Odyssey. The world depicted in these epics, however, is a poor and seemingly illiterate society where kings have relatively limited power. Nowhere in the Iliad or Odyssey does anyone read or write, for example, and even the queens (Helen, Penelope) weave in their spare time. While there are unquestionably some remnants of Mycenean civilization in these epics—including the Trojan War, which most historians believe actually happened—the world depicted is mostly that of the Dark Ages.
To the Classical Greeks, therefore, Mycenae was a small town that had no special significance. I’ll let 5th century BC Athenian historian Thucydides explain:
Now Mycenae may have been a small place, and many of the towns of that age may appear comparatively insignificant, but no exact observer would therefore feel justified in rejecting the estimate given by the poets and by tradition of the magnitude of the armament.
And here is Thucydides on what happened after the Trojan War:
''Even after the Trojan War, Hellas was still engaged in removing and settling, and thus could not attain to the quiet which must precede growth. The late return of the Hellenes from Ilium caused many revolutions, and factions ensued almost everywhere; and it was the citizens thus driven into exile who founded the cities. Sixty years after the capture of Ilium, the modern Boeotians were driven out of Arne by the Thessalians, and settled in the present Boeotia, the former Cadmeis; though there was a division of them there before, some of whom joined the expedition to Ilium. Twenty years later, the Dorians and the Heraclids became masters of Peloponnese; so that much had to be done and many years had to elapse before Hellas could attain to a durable tranquillity undisturbed by removals, and could begin to send out colonies, as Athens did to Ionia and most of the islands, and the Peloponnesians to most of Italy and Sicily and some places in the rest of Hellas. All these places were founded subsequently to the war with Troy.
But as the power of Hellas grew, and the acquisition of wealth became more an object, the revenues of the states increasing, tyrannies were by their means established almost everywhere- the old form of government being hereditary monarchy with definite prerogatives- and Hellas began to fit out fleets and apply herself more closely to the sea. It is said that the Corinthians were the first to approach the modern style of naval architecture, and that Corinth was the first place in Hellas where galleys were built; and we have Ameinocles, a Corinthian shipwright, making four ships for the Samians. Dating from the end of this war, it is nearly three hundred years ago that Ameinocles went to Samos. Again, the earliest sea-fight in history was between the Corinthians and Corcyraeans; this was about two hundred and sixty years ago, dating from the same time.''
As you can see, Thucydides didn’t know about the Mycenaean civilization, the collapse that it experienced, or the dramatic discontinuity that the Dark Ages represented. In his account, nothing dramatic happens between the Trojan War (which he probably believed to have happened circa 1200 BC) and Ameinocles going to Samos (around 700 BC).
Enough about the Mycenaeans. Who did the classical Greeks think they were descended from?
They divided themselves into 4 main tribes: Ionians, Dorians, Aeolians, and Achaeans. The Ionians inhabited Athens and cities along the western coast of modern Turkey. Both Herodotus and Strabo agree that they are of Athenian descent (which is not to say that they’re right). The Dorians inhabited mostly the Peloponnese, and were said to have migrated from the north-western parts of Greece. The Aeolians were said to originate from Thessaly; Boetians were allegedly descended from a group of Aeolians driven from Thessaly, as Thucydides tells us in the quote above. The Achaeans are the most fascinating bunch. Homer uses “Achaeans” as a generic term for all Greeks, but the classical Greeks used it to refer to people inhabiting the region of Achaea in the Peloponnese. According to Herodotus and Pausanias, these people were originally from Argolis and Laconia before moving to Achaea. One hypothesis for the Bronze Age collapse (the Dorian Invasion) is that the Dorians came down into Greece, driving out the Achaeans that originally lived there and forcing them to flee to defensible mountainous regions. The region of Achaea, under this hypothesis, is where they fled, and the classical Greeks’ Achaeans are the descendants of these refugees.
First, let’s clarify some terms. When modern historians speak of the Myceneans, they mean inhabitants of the powerful Late Bronze Age civilization that flourished around the Aegean sea around 1600–1100 BC. This civilization was Greek, in the sense that they spoke Greek; whether the inhabitants were ancestors of the classical Greeks, we do not know. It had several power centers, such as Pylos, Mycenae, Midea, Tiryns, and Thebes, of which Mycenae is the most prominent. This civilization had rich and highly centralized states, as revealed by its grand palaces and golden grave goods. It also had extensive trade links with each other and with the Near East, as evidenced by the uniformity of pottery found at different sites.
Beginning around 1200 BC, a series of terrible events begin to happen that would destroy this civilization and many others around the Mediterranean. Pylos and Midea are destroyed. Mycenae is reduced to a small and insignificant village. Tiryns survived, but its palace did not. Writing is completely lost throughout the Greek world. The population plummets. Pottery is not only much less advanced, but is distinct from city to city, indicating the lack of trade. Greece, after suffering this Bronze Age collapse, is now in the Dark Ages.
When Greece emerged from the Dark Ages 300 years later, around 800 BC, the new civilization is completely different. The writing system now uses a different script, adapted from that of the Phoenicians. Instead of highly centralized monarchies, Greece is now divided into thousands of city states, each with their own form of government. The Greeks living after the Dark Ages knew nothing about the Mycenean civilization that preceded them except bits and pieces preserved in legend, like the Iliad and Odyssey. The world depicted in these epics, however, is a poor and seemingly illiterate society where kings have relatively limited power. Nowhere in the Iliad or Odyssey does anyone read or write, for example, and even the queens (Helen, Penelope) weave in their spare time. While there are unquestionably some remnants of Mycenean civilization in these epics—including the Trojan War, which most historians believe actually happened—the world depicted is mostly that of the Dark Ages.
To the Classical Greeks, therefore, Mycenae was a small town that had no special significance. I’ll let 5th century BC Athenian historian Thucydides explain:
Now Mycenae may have been a small place, and many of the towns of that age may appear comparatively insignificant, but no exact observer would therefore feel justified in rejecting the estimate given by the poets and by tradition of the magnitude of the armament.
And here is Thucydides on what happened after the Trojan War:
''Even after the Trojan War, Hellas was still engaged in removing and settling, and thus could not attain to the quiet which must precede growth. The late return of the Hellenes from Ilium caused many revolutions, and factions ensued almost everywhere; and it was the citizens thus driven into exile who founded the cities. Sixty years after the capture of Ilium, the modern Boeotians were driven out of Arne by the Thessalians, and settled in the present Boeotia, the former Cadmeis; though there was a division of them there before, some of whom joined the expedition to Ilium. Twenty years later, the Dorians and the Heraclids became masters of Peloponnese; so that much had to be done and many years had to elapse before Hellas could attain to a durable tranquillity undisturbed by removals, and could begin to send out colonies, as Athens did to Ionia and most of the islands, and the Peloponnesians to most of Italy and Sicily and some places in the rest of Hellas. All these places were founded subsequently to the war with Troy.
But as the power of Hellas grew, and the acquisition of wealth became more an object, the revenues of the states increasing, tyrannies were by their means established almost everywhere- the old form of government being hereditary monarchy with definite prerogatives- and Hellas began to fit out fleets and apply herself more closely to the sea. It is said that the Corinthians were the first to approach the modern style of naval architecture, and that Corinth was the first place in Hellas where galleys were built; and we have Ameinocles, a Corinthian shipwright, making four ships for the Samians. Dating from the end of this war, it is nearly three hundred years ago that Ameinocles went to Samos. Again, the earliest sea-fight in history was between the Corinthians and Corcyraeans; this was about two hundred and sixty years ago, dating from the same time.''
As you can see, Thucydides didn’t know about the Mycenaean civilization, the collapse that it experienced, or the dramatic discontinuity that the Dark Ages represented. In his account, nothing dramatic happens between the Trojan War (which he probably believed to have happened circa 1200 BC) and Ameinocles going to Samos (around 700 BC).
Enough about the Mycenaeans. Who did the classical Greeks think they were descended from?
They divided themselves into 4 main tribes: Ionians, Dorians, Aeolians, and Achaeans. The Ionians inhabited Athens and cities along the western coast of modern Turkey. Both Herodotus and Strabo agree that they are of Athenian descent (which is not to say that they’re right). The Dorians inhabited mostly the Peloponnese, and were said to have migrated from the north-western parts of Greece. The Aeolians were said to originate from Thessaly; Boetians were allegedly descended from a group of Aeolians driven from Thessaly, as Thucydides tells us in the quote above. The Achaeans are the most fascinating bunch. Homer uses “Achaeans” as a generic term for all Greeks, but the classical Greeks used it to refer to people inhabiting the region of Achaea in the Peloponnese. According to Herodotus and Pausanias, these people were originally from Argolis and Laconia before moving to Achaea. One hypothesis for the Bronze Age collapse (the Dorian Invasion) is that the Dorians came down into Greece, driving out the Achaeans that originally lived there and forcing them to flee to defensible mountainous regions. The region of Achaea, under this hypothesis, is where they fled, and the classical Greeks’ Achaeans are the descendants of these refugees.
Dianatomia
Regular Member
- Messages
- 403
- Reaction score
- 131
- Points
- 43
- Ethnic group
- Greek
So basically what Thucydides claims is that there were population replacements starting around 1200 BC. Some tribes from Thessaly and Epirus (possible also parts of Macedonia), also called Dorians and Aeolians (the latter of whom produced the Boeotians) went South and settled and/or sometimes ruled over the people who lived there before. These native people, some of whom are displaced, are referred to by Thucydides as Achaeans, but to us they would be the descendants of the Mycenaeans.
One more thing. Ofcourse to a classical Greek, Mycenae would be a small place. The demographics of the Bronze Age was very different from the Classical world. The latter was much more densely populated. The population tripled or quadrupled. As such, different political systems were made up.
One more thing. Ofcourse to a classical Greek, Mycenae would be a small place. The demographics of the Bronze Age was very different from the Classical world. The latter was much more densely populated. The population tripled or quadrupled. As such, different political systems were made up.
Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
On the contrary, they don't want modern Greeks to be descended from them. Some of it is holdover Nordic claptrap, the rest is typical Balkan nonsense. One word: ignore.
When we find ancient Dorian and Ionian DNA I will be convinced. Facts are facts.I do not believe the old Greeks were Nordic.
And I did not neg rate anyone. However with all J in Crete I highly doubt if the Dorians did massive replacement in Mycenaean populace.
How do you explain the replacement of the writing system?
And I did not neg rate anyone. However with all J in Crete I highly doubt if the Dorians did massive replacement in Mycenaean populace.
How do you explain the replacement of the writing system?
Angela
Elite member
- Messages
- 21,823
- Reaction score
- 12,329
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
Oh, and I'm sure there's a Sikelliot sock or two around who doesn't want to admit that in some analyses the Southern Italians and Sicilians are more like the Mycenaeans than are the modern mainland Greeks. I mean, what were all those 50,000 posts FOR, after all!
By typical Balkan nonsense I mean something like Classical Greeks are really Albanians. It just goes on and on. Like I said, just ignore.
Ygorcs
Active member
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 812
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Multiracial Brazilian
Ways of life of a dominant and influential group can be transmitted to many subsequent generations and even reinforced by them due to their prestige, even if the genetic inprint ends up being not only small, but progressively lower as time passes by.
I'm not surprised at all by the low steppe admixture in the Mycenaeans. That doesn't mean they don't have a direct relationship with the Ukrainian steppe IE, especially if you keep in your mind that Southeastern Europe and Greece in particular was possibly the most populated region in Europe in the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age. Let's just imagine this hypothetical but very possible scenario:
1st step: a West Ukrainian IE (Pre-Greek) group, 90% EMBA_steppe, migrates to densely populated Moldavia/Dobruja, assimilating and acculturating a 90% EEF population. They have a 40% contribution to the future population.
>>> 2nd step: several generations later, some of that 58% EEF + 42% Steppe population migrates to southern Thrace, near the Aegean coast, where it conquers and absorbs into its increasingly powerful tribal confederation a 70% EEF + 30% CHG population, and they contribute to 50% of the future population.
>>>> 3rd step: That population, now only 21% steppe-like, migrates even further into Greece proper, also very populous for its time, and as they make a mostly military and political conquest with a male biased influx of people, they mix again with the local 80%+20% CHG population. They make an important contribution to the local population, around 40%.
So, now, we have the Mycenean Greeks. What % of the steppe admixture remains in this people with direct connections with the Indo-Europeans? Only 8%. Yet, each of their ancestor tribes in the Balkans always had 40% to 50% of ethnic Indo-European ancestry.
Last edited:
Oh, and I'm sure there's a Sikelliot sock or two around who doesn't want to admit that in some analyses the Southern Italians and Sicilians are more like the Mycenaeans than are the modern mainland Greeks. I mean, what were all those 50,000 posts FOR, after all!
By typical Balkan nonsense I mean something like Classical Greeks are really Albanians. It just goes on and on. Like I said, just ignore.
This one does not apply to me.
--Why did the Hellenes abandon the Mycenaean alphabet and adopted a new one from Phoenicians?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_B
DuPidh
Banned
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 51
- Points
- 0
Ok! I was in mood of not continuing the discussion in this thread, but because of you I am making this comment, the last one:
Here is what I think: The whole story about the glory of Hellenes of antiquity is an overblown balloon.
What is today called Hellenistic culture is in fact a local people, non Hellene, Mycenaean like people culture, Minoan like people culture, which I hope you would agree, were not Hellenes. They had their own writing system, their beginning art and architecture. For reason we would never know, the writing system Hellenes brought was embraced by other populations, non Hellene stock, and makes it wrongly appear today that everything created at that time was work of the people calling themselves Hellene, by the virtue of alphabet. The same way, because Macedonians of antiquity used Hellenistic Alphabet are being called Greeks by some, regardless the overwhelming evidence of them speaking another language
What makes me thinking this way: Its the genetic data brought in light by later studding's and history
From history we know that Hellenes had distant kinship with Armenians (both languages are related).
We also know from history Hellenes were in vicinity of Phoenicians (Hellenic alphabet is an improved version of Phoenician alphabet) Phoenician alphabet is proved is a lot older than Hellenic alphabet. Also Hellenic language shares a great number of word roots from Egyptian. This places the Hellenes somewhere in today's Syria, Iraq region.
Knowing all this stuff, had Hellenes been a majority, today's Greeks genetically should have been closer to Armenians, Western Turks, Syrians, Lebaneese-------But instead is close to Toucans, Albanians. This tells me that dominant gene pool of Greeks is non Hellenic, Hellenes were a tiny minority, pre Heellenic tribes were robed of their achievments
davef
Princess
Toucans??? Lol
DuPidh
Banned
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 51
- Points
- 0
Toscans, it was changed by the software without my consent
This thread has been viewed 1169652 times.