Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 80 of 81 FirstFirst ... 307078798081 LastLast
Results 1,976 to 2,000 of 2002

Thread: Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

  1. #1976
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,953
    Points
    369,772
    Level
    100
    Points: 369,772, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    The estimates for Ashkenazi Jews in terms of "ancestry" usually run from 30-40% "Levantine".

    However, it's true they plot somewhere need Cypriots.

    We need samples from the last centuries BC and the first centuries of Anno Domini to figure it out.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  2. #1977
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,528
    Points
    43,504
    Level
    64
    Points: 43,504, Level: 64
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 746
    Overall activity: 99.1%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    I do not want to start a war, but come on..

    at least in my heritage is clear central European.



    at least 40-50% of Greeks show a 0.01 to 25% Askenazi mark.
    and most ask or wonder,
    yet it is very common,

    but if I follow by 'the letter of the rule' I may 1/8 to 1/4 of Greeks is from Askenazi ancestry!!!!!

    I think, that the term of the mark as Askenazi gives wrong impression, to many people.

    watch the video to see,
    ΟΘΕΝ ΑΙΔΩΣ OY EINAI
    ΑΤΗ ΛΑΜΒΑΝΕΙΝ ΑΥΤΟΙΣ
    ΥΒΡΙΣ ΓΕΝΝΑΤΑΙ
    ΝΕΜΕΣΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΙΣΗ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΟΥΣΙ ΔΕ

    When there is no shame
    Divine blindness conquers them
    Hybris (abuse, opprombium) is born
    Nemesis and punishment follows.

    Εχε υπομονη Ηρωα
    Η τιμωρια δεν αργει.

  3. #1978
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    .........
    You write, "It's important to know the variation as well, both for understanding source populations and levels of admixture, and for comparison to other ancient and modern samples.".
    Are you referring to the ultimate vs proximate sources? The supplementary info had an interesting input.
    "We use the simulated individuals by studying statistics of the form f4(Mycenaean, Simulated; A, B), where (A, B) is a pair from the All++ set, excluding Mycenaeans, and the source populations (Table S2.27). By observing the maximum Z-score (in absolute value) of these statistics we can see whether the pair (Mycenaean, Simulated) is symmetrically related to the (A, B) pairs, and see which actual mixture proportions produce Simulated populations that best approximate the Mycenaeans. In Extended Data Fig. 6 we plot these Z-scores, together with the qpAdm estimates; the two estimates are within 2-21% of each other and are qualitatively similar in supporting the idea that the substratum population (Anatolia_N or Minoan_Lasithi) is the major component in the ancestry of Mycenaeans, on top of which was added ancestry from either a steppe-related ‘northern’ or Armenia-related ‘eastern’ population.
    The simulation framework also allows us to compare different models directly. Suppose that there are two models (Simulated1, Simulated2) and we wish to examine whether either of them is a better description of a population of interest (in this case, Mycenaeans). We test f4(Simulated1, Simulated2; Mycenaean, Chimp), which directly determines whether the observed Mycenaeans shares more alleles with one or the other of the two models. When we apply this intuition to the best models for the Mycenaeans (Extended Data Fig. 6), we observe that none of them clearly outperforms the others as there are no statistics with |Z|>3 (Table S2.28). However, we do notice that the model 79%Minoan_Lasithi+21%Europe_LNBA tends to share more drift with Mycenaeans (at the |Z|>2 level). Europe_LNBA is a diverse group of steppe-admixed Late Neolithic/Bronze Age individuals from mainland Europe, and we think that the further study of areas to the north of Greece might identify a surrogate for this admixture event – if, indeed, the Minoan_Lasithi+Europe_LNBA model represents the true history.".

    You write, "Now, there's no historical evidence whatsoever for migrations from the Levant proper. The authors found only a tiny bit, if I remember correctly, in the average of the Mycenaeans.".
    The authors didn't find any Levantine ancestry either among the Mycenaeans or the Minoans. They did find some among Bronze Age southwestern Anatolians though (sidenote: of the three samples listed in the Extended Data Table 1, there is one male and he belonged to the J1 Y-DNA haplogroup). Specifically the paper states, "the Bronze Age southwestern Anatolians may have had ~6% ancestry related to Neolithic Levantine populations.". But for Minoans and Mycenaeans it states, "Other proposed migrations, such as settlement by Egyptian or Phoenician colonists are not discernible in our data, as there is no measurable Levantine or African influence in the Minoans and Myceneans". And indeed there isn't, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5565772/table/T3/?report=objectonly.

    You write, "When it comes to populations like the people of Crete, or even Cyprus, are we then looking only at Bronze Age admixture from non-Levantines rather than more recent admixture from true Levantine populations?
    What application would that have to southern Italian populations?".
    There was an interesting study back in 2017, namely "Ancient and recent admixture layers in Sicily and Southern Italy trace multiple migration routes along the Mediterranean" (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-01802-4.pdf). It stated:
    "In particular, Sicily and Southern Italy (SSI) appear as belonging to a wide and homogeneous genetic domain, which is shared by large portions of the present-day South-Eastern Euro-Mediterranean area, extending from Sicily to Cyprus, through Crete, Aegean-Dodecanese and Anatolian Greek Islands. We will refer to this domain as 'Mediterranean genetic continuum'.". The same paper also identifies traces of Post-Neolithic Caucasus and Near-Eastern related ancestries. We already know of the Caucasus-related ancestry among the Minoans and Mycenaeans and the absence of Near-Eastern ancestry among them, but a Near-Eastern trace among the modern populations of the "Mediterranean genetic continuum" would suggest a more recent admixture event. At least, i thought initially, until i saw that in their admixture projection of ancient individuals that Near-Eastern component was also present in a similar/identical frequency among the Neolithic Anatolians, Eneolithic LBK, Eneolithic Hungary, etc.., therefore i don't know why they refer to the Near-Eastern respective ancestry as Post-Neolithic, when it appears to have been Neolithic or Eneolithic, and associated with the pre-IE farmers. In any case, they also stated, "These movements were associated to the diffusion of Early-Neolithic Farmers and to the introgression of Bronze Age Steppe herders (Yamnaya).", therefore not so recent in any case.

    By the way, the rest of the modern Greeks and Albanians are slightly differentiated due to their relatively higher Slavic admixture that they inherited during the Middle Ages, although they are still close nonetheless. As the paper stated, "
    Population expansions during the Middle Ages, for instance those related to the Slavic migrations, could have affected Albania and Continental Greece at least indirectly as a result of subsequent population contacts. We may therefore hypothesize that present-day mainland Greek and Southern Balkan populations detached from a genetic background originally shared with the ‘Mediterranean genetic continuum’ (i.e. Southern Italy and the Mediterranean Greek-islands) after these recent events which interested the Balkan Peninsula in historical times.".

    This "Mediterranean genetic continuum" also includes many of the western Jews, even though they aren't mentioned directly.

    In the case of western Jews, that "Mediterranean genetic continuum" is also visible in all of the Ashkenazim's G25 individual sample maps that i have seen in this thread (we have briefly touched upon it in the past), https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?18960-G25-Distance-Maps-To-Modern-Europeans. For example, look here:
    https://i.imgur.com/pJUAPnx.png (Ashkenazi Jew)
    https://i.imgur.com/4A24RoT.png (Ashkenazi Jew)
    https://i.imgur.com/bXr7Ma0.png (Ashkenazi Jew)
    https://i.imgur.com/07wfCMM.png (Ashkenazi Jew)
    https://i.imgur.com/x62usfM.png (Ashkenazi Jew)
    https://i.imgur.com/t6vcpl6.png (Romaniote Jew)
    https://i.imgur.com/uDQD7Bo.png (Greek Cypriot)
    Here is also a map with Imperial Romans, who were differentiated from Iron/Republic-era Romans, as the city absorbed more and more eastern-Mediterranean (or Mycenaean-like) and Near-Eastern populations,
    https://i.imgur.com/Vhssjk4.png. This is also evident in the recent "Ancient Rome: A genetic crossroads of Europe and the Mediterranean" (2019) paper, https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/366/6466/708/F2.large.jpg. Last, here is the respective Mycenaean map for comparison, https://i.imgur.com/wdxz9BI.png.

    Now, as to how and why western Jews autosomally diverged from their original Levantine macro-cluster, there are a number of hypotheses. It is almost certain that some must have coalesced in Greek-inhabited areas, but to what extent i am not sure. Take special notice of the fact that in the past Judaism used to be very proselytist (actually the word proselytism originally referred to Judaism conversion). If i recall correctly, Judaism only ceased proselytizing under imposition by its relative sects an
    d the Roman Empire. Along these lines have a look at the following map showing that in the 1-2nd centuries CE, the Jewish diaspora was mainly concentrated in Greek-inhabited areas, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Image-Diaspora_synagogues_in_Antiquity.png. A second map i found in Wikipedia lists these following paths, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/Jewishdiaspora.png. Then there is also the hypothesis that western Jews (especially Ashkenazim Jews) tend to cluster in the aforementioned "Mediterranean genetic continuum" because they have a bit more northern European admixture compared to other Levantine populations, and thus this mix would place them close to southern Italians and Greek islanders. The origin of western Jews is a very big subject with plenty of hypotheses, sometimes contradicting.

  4. #1979
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,953
    Points
    369,772
    Level
    100
    Points: 369,772, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Specifically the paper states, "the Bronze Age southwestern Anatolians may have had ~6% ancestry related to Neolithic Levantine populations.". But for Minoans and Mycenaeans it states, "Other proposed migrations, such as settlement by Egyptian or Phoenician colonists are not discernible in our data, as there is no measurable Levantine or African influence in the Minoans and Myceneans"
    All the more odd that Samaritans show up as part of the admixture, and Jews, and even Cypriots, who the amateur community in particular maintain have quite a bit of "Levantine" ancestry.

    Indeed, when speaking of "Near Eastern" ancestry, one should be including Anatolian Neolithic, which is present to one degree or another in all Europeans. The term shouldn't be used to refer only to post Neolithic migrations.

    I think everyone knows that the Slavic migrations had an impact on both Albanian and Greek genetics. The question is how much.

    Thanks, but we've discussed the Antonio et al paper at length.

    We also all know by this point that Ashkenazi Jews are most like the people of Cyprus, Crete, and southern Italy. It's how they got that way that has to be answered more definitively.

    We've discussed extensively whether conversion played a big part. I'm skeptical, given Ashkenazi ydna, that there were a lot of male converts. As to whether it was a female influx through conversion of non-Jewish wives, I think more extensive mtDna analysis has to be done. There are lots of papers on the subject, but this is not the thread for that discussion.

  5. #1980
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    All the more odd that Samaritans show up as part of the admixture, and Jews, and even Cypriots, who the amateur community in particular maintain have quite a bit of "Levantine" ancestry.

    Indeed, when speaking of "Near Eastern" ancestry, one should be including Anatolian Neolithic, which is present to one degree or another in all Europeans. The term shouldn't be used to refer only to post Neolithic migrations.

    I think everyone knows that the Slavic migrations had an impact on both Albanian and Greek genetics. The question is how much.

    Thanks, but we've discussed the Antonio et al paper at length.

    We also all know by this point that Ashkenazi Jews are most like the people of Cyprus, Crete, and southern Italy. It's how they got that way that has to be answered more definitively.

    We've discussed extensively whether conversion played a big part. I'm skeptical, given Ashkenazi ydna, that there were a lot of male converts. As to whether it was a female influx through conversion of non-Jewish wives, I think more extensive mtDna analysis has to be done. There are lots of papers on the subject, but this is not the thread for that discussion.
    I included the four Mycenaean samples (I9006, I9033, I9010, I9041) and the Armenoi (I9123) one in a Eurogenes K15 PCA, and that's what came out. The purple ones are the Mycenaeans, the circled purple is the Mycenaean who got the Samaritan result, and the gold one is the Armenoi sample.

    Regarding the western-Jewish/southern-Italian/Cypriot/Cretan affinity, there was an interesting discussion here,
    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?14484-Could-Western-Jews-(Ash-and-Seph-)-descend-from-Aegeans-and-Levantine-admixture, which you probably already know of. Haven't gone through much of it, just 5 pages, but still some interesting ideas.

  6. #1981
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,953
    Points
    369,772
    Level
    100
    Points: 369,772, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Demetrios View Post
    I included the four Mycenaean samples (I9006, I9033, I9010, I9041) and the Armenoi (I9123) one in a Eurogenes K15 PCA, and that's what came out. The purple ones are the Mycenaeans, the circled purple is the Mycenaean who got the Samaritan result, and the gold one is the Armenoi sample.

    Regarding the western-Jewish/southern-Italian/Cypriot/Cretan affinity, there was an interesting discussion here,
    https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?14484-Could-Western-Jews-(Ash-and-Seph-)-descend-from-Aegeans-and-Levantine-admixture, which you probably already know of. Haven't gone through much of it, just 5 pages, but still some interesting ideas.
    Interesting. Thanks.

    In the Dodecad calculator the Armenoi sample comes out more Tuscan than Abruzzese, and the Mycenaeans are closer to the Ashkenazim, but we're in the same general ball park. Two of those Mycenaeans are very close to Italian Jews. Perhaps quite a bit of Mycenaean like Southern Italian admixture in them.

    No Island Greeks in there?

  7. #1982
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Interesting. Thanks.

    In the Dodecad calculator the Armenoi sample comes out more Tuscan than Abruzzese, and the Mycenaeans are closer to the Ashkenazim, but we're in the same general ball park. Two of those Mycenaeans are very close to Italian Jews. Perhaps quite a bit of Mycenaean like Southern Italian admixture in them.

    No Island Greeks in there?
    Here is a print-screen from a video that included Cretan samples in the same PCA.

  8. #1983
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    The scientist replied back. It seems we will have to wait for the aforementioned paper. My translation of the message.
    "Good morning Demetrios,


    As the program officially launches in a short time from now, and several institutions will be participating (ephorate of antiquities, university, etc), and there are also additional
    samples for analysis, i can't give you a good estimate. I'd say within two-three years.

    Sincerely,
    Nikos"

  9. #1984
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    12-03-12
    Posts
    228
    Points
    7,931
    Level
    26
    Points: 7,931, Level: 26
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 219
    Overall activity: 18.0%


    Ethnic group
    Greek
    Country: Netherlands



    Okey Demetrios. Thank you. So in three years time we will know if some Dorians had some fun with Mycenaean women. And if that Armenoi sample mentioned above was a modern mainland Greek which came too early.

  10. #1985
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    44
    Posts
    669
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

    A recent book 2017 that indicates the south Caucasian origin of the Proto-Greek speakersIMG_3925.jpgIMG_4192.jpgIMG_4193.jpg


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia ForumIMG_4194.jpgIMG_4195.jpg

  11. #1986
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    44
    Posts
    669
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by blevins13 View Post
    A recent book 2017 that indicates the south Caucasian origin of the Proto-Greek speakersIMG_3925.jpgIMG_4192.jpgIMG_4193.jpg


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia ForumIMG_4194.jpgIMG_4195.jpg
    Considering the above ... this seems less probable.....



    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
    Attached Images Attached Images

  12. #1987
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by blevins13 View Post
    .
    The author is either ignorant of additional crucial information that relate, very shallow in terms of information from different scientific fields (linguistic, archaeological, mythological, etc), or you haven't cropped all of the relevant pages in order to extract what the author actually elaborates on in previous and subsequent pages. I don't accuse you since you cannot include every page here, but it would be nice to have the previous page in case it relates and provides additional relevant information.

    We have already discussed many pages ago that the southern Caucasus had established close relations with the Aegean, not from the 1600 BCE, but rather from the 3rd millennium BCE, which would and did include Cretan/Minoan contact as well, and of course Mycenaeans (proto-Arcadocypriot branch of the Greeks, not proto-Greeks) (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page51?p=583559&viewfull=1#post583559). There appears to have also been an Anatolian IE presence in Greece, that predated the arrival of the Greeks in central and southern Greece (recall the three pre-Greek maps i share here - https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page74?p=594240&viewfull=1#post594240), as well as a Hurrian presence (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page52?p=583622&viewfull=1#post583622). Do read these posts.
    Sidenote: In this last old post of mine i quickly only traced one mistake or view that i don't have any more, namely that of the Hurrian association with the Northeast Caucasian people, while today i have a different view that associates it with IEs (either Anatolian or a different early branch), which i briefly mentioned in page 66, namely "As a sidenote to this, Hurrian seems to possess a huge amount of common roots with PIE, to the point that some scholars even suggest that Hurro-Urartian derived from PIE. Look for example at French linguist Arnaud Fournet, https://www.academia.edu/40055347/PIE_roots_in_Hurrian.".

    In my updated view (since i have learned additional things since our last discussion on the subject), i find the Balkan route of Graeco-Phrygian almost certain. And even though the Balkan route is almost a certainty, the details are more complex. For example, in a previous comment of mine some pages ago i had totally excluded the use of tumuli among proto-Greeks and rather viewed it as a later adoption through trade with the western Balkans. I now have a somewhat different view, but not exclusive to proto-Greek.

    The question we need to answer in my opinion, is who introduced the horse to Greece? The oldest horse bones in Lerna (Argolis) are dated shortly after 2000 BCE. But the earliest indication of horse knowledge in the southwestern Balkans is a horse-shaped scepter found at Porodin (ancient Pelagonia) around 2500 BCE. The logical conclusion is to suppose that the one who brought the horse to ancient Pelagonia from the steppes later introduced it into Greece.
    https://i.ibb.co/ryYnd7G/horse-porodin-lerna.png
    The Porodin Culture where the horse-shaped scepter was found belongs to the cultural horizon of Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno in Pelagonia, which is considered a branch of the Sălcuța-Krivodol-Bubanj Eneolithic complex that extends around the tripoint border of Romania-Serbia-Bulgaria and formed sometime after 3000 BCE. The culture of Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno also relates to the culture of Maliq II which in turn exhibits some relations with Thessaly.
    https://i.ibb.co/R3kGCVY/c5a1upljevac-bakarno-gumno.png
    https://i.ibb.co/t8HypZM/skb-sm2.png
    I present a map with the names of the aforementioned cultures to make it easier for you. The red route represents the "journey of the horse".
    https://i.ibb.co/4t6dD90/skb-sm.png
    Returning to linguistics, Vladimir Georgiev observed that the so-called "pre-Hellenic" toponymes are becoming less and less as we move to the north and west of the Greek peninsula and disappear completely into Epirus where there are only Greek.
    https://i.ibb.co/VvNkpXH/georgiev-nwgreece.png
    This led him to conclude that northwestern Greece was the home of the proto-Greeks shortly before they spread into the main Greek peninsula.
    Here i also have to mention what has been designated as the "Četina phenomenon", that we have already touched upon in previous comments relating to the early tumuli of Greece. At the same time that the horse descends to Greece, on the east coast of the Adriatic, a coastal civilization is formed that begins to export its pottery after 2200 BCE, through maritime trade. During these last 200 years of the 3rd millennium BCE the emergence of Četina pottery is intensified in the Peloponnese to such an extent that it has prompted Joseph Maran to assume the position of the establishment of naval populations in the region. Their motive was of course the Peloponnese’s location to link the maritime trade of the Adriatic-Ionian axis with the Aegean and the eastern Mediterranean. The map below is from a Joseph Maran article, it didn't originally include the arrow, namely it was added.
    https://i.ibb.co/CwZRnHr/cetcult.png
    https://i.ibb.co/qr31NY5/maran-cetina-migration.png
    If one accepts the Maran hypothesis then the entry of the Proto-Greeks into southern Greece may hypothetically have arisen through the encouragement of the Četina traders. That is, the latter may have used the former as an equestrian army in which they conquered the naval bases of the Peloponnese that interested them. My view is that Vučedol/Četina were very likely linguistically related to the Balkano-Lower Danubian aforementioned complex at these early stages, within a broader Graeco-Phrygian continuum (which would possibly also include pre-proto-Albanian). I also like the Vučedol/Četina, especially concerning the proto-Mycenaeans/proto-Arcadocypriots, because of all the latter's tumuli having a coastal pattern (the apparent connection to Montenegro). Seamanship of both is also something that attracts me, although this last one could largely be of Minoan influence as well.
    We may also consider the Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno-Maliq complex by its own, which would better compliment Georgiev. In their original northwestern position, speakers of the Proto-Greek language would form a language continuum with the speakers of the Proto-Phrygian language residing in their respective northeast. In this early phase there were neither Greek nor Phrygian languages, but two poles within a Graeco-Phrygian continuum (Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno-Maliq). Although the main Phrygian bulk migrated to Asia Minor shortly before 1000 BCE, the ancient Greek authors recorded traditions that place Phrygians first inhabiting Macedonia and southern Illyria, as well as reports of Brygian (Phrygian) surviving pockets in those areas. The Ohrid and Prespa lakes seem to have been the original Graeco-Phrygian boundary, hence why southwest of those lakes we find Epirotic Greek-speaking tribes. I attempted to use the previous map i shared, this time including some of the traditions regarding the historical presence of Greeks and Brygians/Phrygians, in order to try and make things more clear. The black-dotted line represents the border of Greek presence, while the purple-dotted line represents the border of Brygian/Phrygian surviving pockets as recorded by Greek authors. Regarding Greek presence, i excluded the Greek colonies north of Epirus, the Greek colonies of Chalkidiki, as well as later expansions of the Doric Macedonian ruling class towards Macedonia, bearing in mind that they all happened during the Iron Age and thus not deemed original presence. I also took the time to point out on the map each of the traditions that refer to Brygian/Phrygian presence, and where exactly. The region i have marked with a question mark between Epidamnus/Dyrrachium and Epirus might have been either Greek or Brygian/Phrygian before the Illyrian migration pushed everyone to the South or East and created this grey zone. I personally believe they were Dorians (Greeks) inhabiting this region originally, and then migrated towards the South.
    https://i.ibb.co/gSSRcbv/skb-sm-Greek-and-Phrygian-presence.png
    Compare and contrast with the Georgiev proto-Greek map. Doesn't have to be perfect (it actually is if we include some other toponyms), but you get the idea.
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Proto_Greek_Area_reconstruction.png

    In summary, the Balkano-Lower Danubian complex (also known as Sălcuța-Krivodol-Bubanj and subsequent Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno-Maliq), in addition to Vučedol and Četina are all crucial in my opinion in terms of the Graeco-Phrygians, proto-Greeks, and even the proto-Mycenaean/proto-Arcadocypriot Greek branch exclusively. Furthermore, the Balkano-Lower Danubian complex (approximately sometime after 3000 until 2100 BCE) is also contemporary to the Vučedol and the early Četina cultures. The introduction of the early Greek tumuli are also related with them, even though i didn't expand on it above. Last, regarding the Balkano-Lower Danubian complex we also have its pseudo-Minyan ware (mentioned in a page/image i shared above) which seems to be the predecessor of the Minyan ware (
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minyan_ware) later found in Greece (initially Tiryns of Argolis), which perfectly ties on with the seeming horse transmission from Porodin (ancient Pelagonia) to Argolis.

    The above is too much as it is. I don't actually want to expand more into the subject these days because i am studying, but do contemplate the above information on your own.

  13. #1988
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    44
    Posts
    669
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

    Quote Originally Posted by Demetrios View Post
    The author is either ignorant of additional crucial information that relate, very shallow in terms of information from different scientific fields (linguistic, archaeological, mythological, etc), or you haven't cropped all of the relevant pages in order to extract what the author actually elaborates on in previous and subsequent pages. I don't accuse you since you cannot include every page here, but it would be nice to have the previous page in case it relates and provides additional relevant information.

    We have already discussed many pages ago that the southern Caucasus had established close relations with the Aegean, not from the 1600 BCE, but rather from the 3rd millennium BCE, which would and did include Cretan/Minoan contact as well, and of course Mycenaeans (proto-Arcadocypriot branch of the Greeks, not proto-Greeks) (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page51?p=583559&viewfull=1#post583559). There appears to have also been an Anatolian IE presence in Greece, that predated the arrival of the Greeks in central and southern Greece (recall the three pre-Greek maps i share here - https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page74?p=594240&viewfull=1#post594240), as well as a Hurrian presence (https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page52?p=583622&viewfull=1#post583622). Do read these posts.
    Sidenote: In this last old post of mine i quickly only traced one mistake or view that i don't have any more, namely that of the Hurrian association with the Northeast Caucasian people, while today i have a different view that associates it with IEs (either Anatolian or a different early branch), which i briefly mentioned in page 66, namely "As a sidenote to this, Hurrian seems to possess a huge amount of common roots with PIE, to the point that some scholars even suggest that Hurro-Urartian derived from PIE. Look for example at French linguist Arnaud Fournet, https://www.academia.edu/40055347/PIE_roots_in_Hurrian.".

    In my updated view (since i have learned additional things since our last discussion on the subject), i find the Balkan route of Graeco-Phrygian almost certain. And even though the Balkan route is almost a certainty, the details are more complex. For example, in a previous comment of mine some pages ago i had totally excluded the use of tumuli among proto-Greeks and rather viewed it as a later adoption through trade with the western Balkans. I now have a somewhat different view, but not exclusive to proto-Greek.

    The question we need to answer in my opinion, is who introduced the horse to Greece? The oldest horse bones in Lerna (Argolis) are dated shortly after 2000 BCE. But the earliest indication of horse knowledge in the southwestern Balkans is a horse-shaped scepter found at Porodin (ancient Pelagonia) around 2500 BCE. The logical conclusion is to suppose that the one who brought the horse to ancient Pelagonia from the steppes later introduced it into Greece.
    https://i.ibb.co/ryYnd7G/horse-porodin-lerna.png
    The Porodin Culture where the horse-shaped scepter was found belongs to the cultural horizon of Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno in Pelagonia, which is considered a branch of the Sălcuța-Krivodol-Bubanj Eneolithic complex that extends around the tripoint border of Romania-Serbia-Bulgaria and formed sometime after 3000 BCE. The culture of Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno also relates to the culture of Maliq II which in turn exhibits some relations with Thessaly.
    https://i.ibb.co/R3kGCVY/c5a1upljevac-bakarno-gumno.png
    https://i.ibb.co/t8HypZM/skb-sm2.png
    I present a map with the names of the aforementioned cultures to make it easier for you. The red route represents the "journey of the horse".
    https://i.ibb.co/4t6dD90/skb-sm.png
    Returning to linguistics, Vladimir Georgiev observed that the so-called "pre-Hellenic" toponymes are becoming less and less as we move to the north and west of the Greek peninsula and disappear completely into Epirus where there are only Greek.
    https://i.ibb.co/VvNkpXH/georgiev-nwgreece.png
    This led him to conclude that northwestern Greece was the home of the proto-Greeks shortly before they spread into the main Greek peninsula.
    Here i also have to mention what has been designated as the "Četina phenomenon", that we have already touched upon in previous comments relating to the early tumuli of Greece. At the same time that the horse descends to Greece, on the east coast of the Adriatic, a coastal civilization is formed that begins to export its pottery after 2200 BCE, through maritime trade. During these last 200 years of the 3rd millennium BCE the emergence of Četina pottery is intensified in the Peloponnese to such an extent that it has prompted Joseph Maran to assume the position of the establishment of naval populations in the region. Their motive was of course the Peloponnese’s location to link the maritime trade of the Adriatic-Ionian axis with the Aegean and the eastern Mediterranean. The map below is from a Joseph Maran article, it didn't originally include the arrow, namely it was added.
    https://i.ibb.co/CwZRnHr/cetcult.png
    https://i.ibb.co/qr31NY5/maran-cetina-migration.png
    If one accepts the Maran hypothesis then the entry of the Proto-Greeks into southern Greece may hypothetically have arisen through the encouragement of the Četina traders. That is, the latter may have used the former as an equestrian army in which they conquered the naval bases of the Peloponnese that interested them. My view is that Vučedol/Četina were very likely linguistically related to the Balkano-Lower Danubian aforementioned complex at these early stages, within a broader Graeco-Phrygian continuum (which would possibly also include pre-proto-Albanian). I also like the Vučedol/Četina, especially concerning the proto-Mycenaeans/proto-Arcadocypriots, because of all the latter's tumuli having a coastal pattern (the apparent connection to Montenegro). Seamanship of both is also something that attracts me, although this last one could largely be of Minoan influence as well.
    We may also consider the Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno-Maliq complex by its own, which would better compliment Georgiev. In their original northwestern position, speakers of the Proto-Greek language would form a language continuum with the speakers of the Proto-Phrygian language residing in their respective northeast. In this early phase there were neither Greek nor Phrygian languages, but two poles within a Graeco-Phrygian continuum (Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno-Maliq). Although the main Phrygian bulk migrated to Asia Minor shortly before 1000 BCE, the ancient Greek authors recorded traditions that place Phrygians first inhabiting Macedonia and southern Illyria, as well as reports of Brygian (Phrygian) surviving pockets in those areas. The Ohrid and Prespa lakes seem to have been the original Graeco-Phrygian boundary, hence why southwest of those lakes we find Epirotic Greek-speaking tribes. I attempted to use the previous map i shared, this time including some of the traditions regarding the historical presence of Greeks and Brygians/Phrygians, in order to try and make things more clear. The black-dotted line represents the border of Greek presence, while the purple-dotted line represents the border of Brygian/Phrygian surviving pockets as recorded by Greek authors. Regarding Greek presence, i excluded the Greek colonies north of Epirus, the Greek colonies of Chalkidiki, as well as later expansions of the Doric Macedonian ruling class towards Macedonia, bearing in mind that they all happened during the Iron Age and thus not deemed original presence. I also took the time to point out on the map each of the traditions that refer to Brygian/Phrygian presence, and where exactly. The region i have marked with a question mark between Epidamnus/Dyrrachium and Epirus might have been either Greek or Brygian/Phrygian before the Illyrian migration pushed everyone to the South or East and created this grey zone. I personally believe they were Dorians (Greeks) inhabiting this region originally, and then migrated towards the South.
    https://i.ibb.co/gSSRcbv/skb-sm-Greek-and-Phrygian-presence.png
    Compare and contrast with the Georgiev proto-Greek map. Doesn't have to be perfect (it actually is if we include some other toponyms), but you get the idea.
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Proto_Greek_Area_reconstruction.png

    In summary, the Balkano-Lower Danubian complex (also known as Sălcuța-Krivodol-Bubanj and subsequent Šupljevec-Bakarno Gumno-Maliq), in addition to Vučedol and Četina are all crucial in my opinion in terms of the Graeco-Phrygians, proto-Greeks, and even the proto-Mycenaean/proto-Arcadocypriot Greek branch exclusively. Furthermore, the Balkano-Lower Danubian complex (approximately sometime after 3000 until 2100 BCE) is also contemporary to the Vučedol and the early Četina cultures. The introduction of the early Greek tumuli are also related with them, even though i didn't expand on it above. Last, regarding the Balkano-Lower Danubian complex we also have its pseudo-Minyan ware (mentioned in a page/image i shared above) which seems to be the predecessor of the Minyan ware (
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minyan_ware) later found in Greece (initially Tiryns of Argolis), which perfectly ties on with the seeming horse transmission from Porodin (ancient Pelagonia) to Argolis.

    The above is too much as it is. I don't actually want to expand more into the subject these days because i am studying, but do contemplate the above information on your own.
    The previous page that starts the conclusions.
    Here you go.....:IMG_4199.jpg
    IMG_4201.jpg
    Or buy this book and evaluate if I am missleading you

    IMG_4200.jpg


    While your conclusion that Robert Drews Is ignorant is far from truth.
    You may say that he is wrong if you have similar expertise.

    I have always thought that the Anatolian route is more probable for the Proto-Greeks.



    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
    Attached Images Attached Images

  14. #1989
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by blevins13 View Post
    .
    I didn't write that you are misleading me, i actually emphasized that i am not accusing you for not uploading more pages. I also wrote that i cannot evaluate the credibility of his views without studying how he comes to such a conclusion. With all that said, Robert Drews actually writes in the last page, "The linguistic possibilities and impossibilities are far beyond my ability to see, and i must hope that an Indo-Europeanist will explore them.". I believe you take his word very seriously even though he is not an Indo-Europeanist and he says so. What you also excluded from your message is that Robert Drews places the homeland of PIE in the Armenian highlands, hence why he might be trying to explain the expansion of Graeco-Phrygian from southern Caucasus by giving too much value in what were probably trade relations between Aegean-Caucasus, i presume. Do you agree with that as well, namely for PIE to have originated from Armenia? Do you also agree with his view that Graeco-Phrygian has Indo-Iranian roots, because that is quite a stretch from a linguistic point of view. It is different to claim that the two groups are related, and different to claim origin of the former from the latter. For example, Graeco-Phrygian was centum, Indo-Iranian was satem. If i understand correctly, he also writes that Indo-Iranian originated somewhere within the modern region of Kurdistan, namely below Aras/Araxes river and upper Tigris river. You agree with that as well? Last, he also seems to disregard analysis of Greek dialects which are crucial for answering the origin of the Greeks (1600 BCE is too late for proto-Greek). By the way, does he mention any of the archaeological evidence that i shared in the previous post anywhere in his book? Because i personally do mention archaeological similarities between south Caucasus and the Aegean, which shows i am not ignorant of them. In the end, it appears Drews doesn't take a holistic approach to the question, which can easily derail you into all kinds of false conclusions. Anyway, you may believe what you want in the end. Just like with the case of Hammond and his tumuli analysis of Greece which is totally outdated bearing in mind that quite many examples of tumuli use exist in Greece after 1400 BCE.

  15. #1990
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    44
    Posts
    669
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Demetrios View Post
    I didn't write that you are misleading me, i actually emphasized that i am not accusing you for not uploading more pages. I also wrote that i cannot evaluate the credibility of his views without studying how he comes to such a conclusion. With all that said, Robert Drews actually writes in the last page, "The linguistic possibilities and impossibilities are far beyond my ability to see, and i must hope that an Indo-Europeanist will explore them.". I believe you take his word very seriously even though he is not an Indo-Europeanist and he says so. What you also excluded from your message is that Robert Drews places the homeland of PIE in the Armenian highlands, hence why he might be trying to explain the expansion of Graeco-Phrygian from southern Caucasus by giving too much value in what were probably trade relations between Aegean-Caucasus, i presume. Do you agree with that as well, namely for PIE to have originated from Armenia? Do you also agree with his view that Graeco-Phrygian has Indo-Iranian roots, because that is quite a stretch from a linguistic point of view. It is different to claim that the two groups are related, and different to claim origin of the former from the latter. For example, Graeco-Phrygian was centum, Indo-Iranian was satem. If i understand correctly, he also writes that Indo-Iranian originated somewhere within the modern region of Kurdistan, namely below Aras/Araxes river and upper Tigris river. You agree with that as well? Last, he also seems to disregard analysis of Greek dialects which are crucial for answering the origin of the Greeks (1600 BCE is too late for proto-Greek). By the way, does he mention any of the archaeological evidence that i shared in the previous post anywhere in his book? Because i personally do mention archaeological similarities between south Caucasus and the Aegean, which shows i am not ignorant of them. In the end, it appears Drews doesn't take a holistic approach to the question, which can easily derail you into all kinds of false conclusions. Anyway, you may believe what you want in the end. Just like with the case of Hammond and his tumuli analysis of Greece which is totally outdated bearing in mind that quite many examples of tumuli use exist in Greece after 1400 BCE.
    I can’t post the whole book here, it will be against copyright rules, you can buy and read it. What the book argues in general is the following.....his argument seemed reasonable in my eyes......

    IMG_4202.jpgIMG_4203.jpgIMG_4204.jpg


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

  16. #1991
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    44
    Posts
    669
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

    If someone has read this book, it will be nice to have their opinions.


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

  17. #1992
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by blevins13 View Post
    I can’t post the whole book here, it will be against copyright rules, you can buy and read it. What the book argues in general is the following.....his argument seemed reasonable in my eyes......

    IMG_4202.jpgIMG_4203.jpgIMG_4204.jpg


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
    I will be honest with you. I cannot afford to buy that book now, nor does it attract my interest after reading these few pages you shared. I don't think there is any serious Indo-Europeanist that would claim for the Indo-Europeanization of Europe to have taken place after 1600 BCE, that's way too late.

  18. #1993
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    44
    Posts
    669
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Demetrios View Post
    I will be honest with you. I cannot afford to buy that book now, nor does it attract my interest after reading these few pages you shared. I don't think there is any serious Indo-Europeanist that would claim for the Indo-Europeanization of Europe to have taken place after 1600 BCE, that's way too late.
    Thanks for being honest, and without reading the bases of his argument, you claimed that the author (an academic) was ignorant, not holistic, and probably not to be taken seriously.....



    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

  19. #1994
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by blevins13 View Post
    Thanks for being honest, and without reading the bases of his argument, you claimed that the author (an academic) was ignorant, not holistic, and probably not to be taken seriously.....



    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
    Find me another serious academic that claims for the Indo-Europeanization of Europe to have began after 1600 BCE, or for Indo-Iranian to have originated in modern-day Kurdistan, or for Graeco-Phrygian to have originated from Indo-Iranian. Even his view on PIE originating in Armenia is not mainstream. Up until now, nothing from the pages you shared has attracted my interest in order to invest money and time in this book. And i asked, you who have supposedly read the book whether the author includes any of the archaeological evidence mentioned in comment #1987, all of which are validated by academics as well. If he doesn't then he is probably ignorant of them. Last, being an academic doesn't make you foolproof, therefore please don't use this as some kind of validation concerning his views. Most academics studying Indo-Europeans would disagree with the aforementioned views/conclusions of this guy.

  20. #1995
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    44
    Posts
    669
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Demetrios View Post
    There is indeed a Classical Greek sample from ancient Ambracia (southern Epirus) shown in this following presentation, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGKZKoH4yv0 (after 15:14), with Y-DNA as R1b1b (or R-P297) and mtDNA as H2a1. The date of the sample was 478-430 BCE.
    Since Drews is not serious scholar, than let’s go back to this one and listen what is an haplogroup......enjoy.


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

  21. #1996
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by blevins13 View Post
    Since Drews is not serious scholar, than let’s go back to this one and listen what is an haplogroup......enjoy.


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
    Enjoy what?

  22. #1997
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,516
    Points
    29,412
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,412, Level: 52
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 338
    Overall activity: 34.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Demetrios View Post
    As a sidenote to this, Hurrian seems to possess a huge amount of common roots with PIE, to the point that some scholars even suggest that Hurro-Urartian derived from PIE. Look for example at French linguist Arnaud Fournet,
    I have been arguing with this for a very very long time. Hurrian being some kind of pre Northeast Caucasian language is merely a theory not backed by allot of evidence. it is generally still considered as an isolate language and if there is one thing what we know. Isolated language simply means in many cases, it hasn't been yet identified correctly. However culturewise all the way down to their deities they simply have too many elements that speak for a early PIE or at least related root. From the Thunder God Teshub, who predates the Hittite equivalent Taru. Yes we could argue the Hittite's simply adopted him from the Hattis but how could that be the case with the Celtic version Taranis and the Nordic Thor?
    And that is just one example.

  23. #1998
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience PointsThree Friends
    Demetrios's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-02-18
    Location
    Ἀθῆναι
    Posts
    373
    Points
    9,301
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,301, Level: 28
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Ἕλλην
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    I have been arguing with this for a very very long time. Hurrian being some kind of pre Northeast Caucasian language is merely a theory not backed by allot of evidence. it is generally still considered as an isolate language and if there is one thing what we know. Isolated language simply means in many cases, it hasn't been yet identified correctly. However culturewise all the way down to their deities they simply have too many elements that speak for a early PIE or at least related root. From the Thunder God Teshub, who predates the Hittite equivalent Taru. Yes we could argue the Hittite's simply adopted him from the Hattis but how could that be the case with the Celtic version Taranis and the Nordic Thor?
    And that is just one example.
    Therefore you also agree, that's nice to read. But let's not diminish the role of Caucasian in the formation of PIE at least. An author that agrees with the IE classification of Hurro-Urartian, and mentioned in Fournet's paper as a co-author of another paper, namely Allan Bomhard, has also written the following paper, "The Origins of Proto-Indo-European: The Caucasian Substrate Hypothesis" (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335676918_The_Origins_of_Proto-Indo-European_The_Caucasian_Substrate_Hypothesis_JIES_V olume_47_Number_1_2_SpringSummer_2019_pre-print). I have personally discussed this hypothesis with a couple of linguists and they find it very likable. The famous Indo-Europeanist David Anthony cautiously supports his views as well. Furthermore, the 2013 paper by Natalia Shishlina entitled "The Steppe and the Caucasus during the Bronze Age: Mutual Relations and Mutual Enrichments" fully corroborates his views as does the 2016 paper by Vjacheslav Chirikba entitled "From North to North West: How North-West Caucasian Evolved from North Caucasian". Autosomal DNA also seems to corroborate a crucial relation between PIEs and Caucasian people.

  24. #1999
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    blevins13's Avatar
    Join Date
    14-10-16
    Location
    Tirana
    Age
    44
    Posts
    669
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-Z2103>BY611
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H7i1

    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.

    Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    I have been arguing with this for a very very long time. Hurrian being some kind of pre Northeast Caucasian language is merely a theory not backed by allot of evidence. it is generally still considered as an isolate language and if there is one thing what we know. Isolated language simply means in many cases, it hasn't been yet identified correctly. However culturewise all the way down to their deities they simply have too many elements that speak for a early PIE or at least related root. From the Thunder God Teshub, who predates the Hittite equivalent Taru. Yes we could argue the Hittite's simply adopted him from the Hattis but how could that be the case with the Celtic version Taranis and the Nordic Thor?
    And that is just one example.
    Drews who is clearly more specialized military history, backdates the movement of the carriers of the Celtic and italic language in the Carpathian Basin around 1600 BC with the logic that only than the horses the chariotes and the bronze weapons became a factor in the battle field. Drews indicate that they showed up in northern Italy around 1,500 BC. Hopefully the members who know more about Italian history can shed some light on this.


    Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
    Last edited by blevins13; 09-03-20 at 22:42.

  25. #2000
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,516
    Points
    29,412
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,412, Level: 52
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 338
    Overall activity: 34.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Demetrios View Post
    Therefore you also agree, that's nice to read. But let's not diminish the role of Caucasian in the formation of PIE at least.
    I am not diminishing that in fact Hurro_Urarteaen and Manneaen are the best candidates that show this early connection between some Caucasian groups and IE.

    One of the most irrefutable connections imo is simply the deity Teshub. Some historians/linguists have tried it with the vague explaination that Teshub might be influenced by an Indo European group(the Hurro_Urarteaens having adopted him to their culture) but which people should that be? Hurrian Teshub clearly predates any other version of this Thunder Deity be it Hittite, Greek, Celtic or Germanic versions.
    So for me at least there is absolutely no way this theory could work out. The Hurrian version predates all the other by at least 1000 years.

Page 80 of 81 FirstFirst ... 307078798081 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •