Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

But your sources are not valid comparison since you aren't just including ftdna. Gjenetika is voluntary and while we have a lot of personal tests with respect to frequency, there arent that many ngs tests or deeper tests beyond 37 markers comparatively.

I included only Gjenetika because your sample is large enough, I couldn't bother to go through studies and pick up these clusters individually but the percentage would have been similar. For Montenegrins the sample from the sutdy is also good at 404. And it can be seen they had good samples, because only recently some of haplotypes from that study have been appearing. I wanted more samples with STR's for Bulgarian sample so I took into account more sources.
But you are nitpicking, I remember how common are some clusters like BY4461 and FGC11450's in Arberesh study.

Secondly, you have actual studies with proper protocol from the bulgarian side (Karachanak bulgarian Y chromosome diversity for example). Their studies specifically aim to maximise penetration of as many clades as possible, so they are not gonna choose for example 26 tests to do of the Berisha clan or something like that, whereas in gjenetika this is what has happened so you get the same result many times as it is a voluntary project and many people from the same clan do the test even if there are already people of that clan.

Nope in Bulgarian regional study they only tested E-V13, others from that study were assigned to the cluster by myself because I know V13 clades so well. And I might say I made no mistakes there as some of those clusters are so well defined and they usually match Bulgarians from FTDNA.

Your own cluster is very common in Kosovo Albanians. In that study on a sample of 113, still about 12% I think were of your cluster. So your cluster is well represented in Kosovo regardless of what methodology is applied.

Secondly, a big percentage of those clades in bulgarians will be ex-albanians.

Utterly baseless based upon my analysis. I mean look: 60 % of Albanians are of those 6 clusters, you'd expect Bulgarians also to carry them to a large degree and that's not the case. In Bulgarians no cluster is that significant which is in line with high diversity there.

All the contemproary linguists, even matzinger who argues for Albanian language not being illyrian but balkan hinterland language, says that proto-Albanian does not fit thracian.

Well from some things I read it doesn't indeed.

You seem to be pushing for thracian as proto-Albanian, but what is your linguistic evidence for this?

No, I don't. I know many spoke on that topic, but there are numerous problems for that. Someone better try looking at Orel's proto-Albanian and compare that to Illyrian, Thracian etc. Albanian might have some connection to some other languages potentially too. How about some Paeonian connection?

At poreklo (and by some Serbian linguists I might add) Thracian theory is pushed to make Albanians into migrants. So that Slavs/Serbs have been there before Albanians.
 
Well yes E-V13 seems definitely Cardium related. And it was found in multiple Cardium sites, Dalmatia, Spain, and also some L618 from Sopot might be Cardium related because Sopot culture had Cardium connection. Autosomally Dalmatian E-L618 and others seem to have had minor Natufian like element, some have calculated about 3 % of Iberomaurisian-like. Generally they were close to Barcin Neolithic. More Eastern than usual EEF. But I can tell you they might have been alot more culturally "NA/Natufian", I mentioned some element of burial. They only buried chiefs and important individuals, others were left to be eaten in wilderness by animals etc. That practice is only attested in Maasai according to archaeologist who wrote about Dalmatian Cardium culture.

I remember some discussions on poreklo about V13's and some would downplay its presence in Albanians by saying "they aren't Illyrian anyway, they are Pelasgian etc". And few even believed that E-V13 descend of Pelasgians from Greece who were assimilated into Vlachs and who spread in Roman era around the Balkans. So non-Greek, non-Illyrian, non-Thracian, but "Neolithic". Some of those "I people" really really dislike E-V13. I've noticed some phenomenon as "I" are mostly non-IE they try to make up non-IEness by being "oldest in Europe", and so they are "lot older than E-V13" etc. In particular I remember one Y3120 mod saying V13 being "non-Greek, non-Illyrian, non-Thracian but Neolithic who disintegrated under IE pressure", I asked him if they "disintegrated" how come they thrived at that particular time. Some projection here as it is I-CTS10228 who disintegrated as they have only one branch-off in 2900 years before the Y3120 expansion.

About some Albanians having bad feelings toward V13, probably influenced by the fact that E-V13 in general is high in Greeks while J-L283 or BY611 are not (except mostly Arvanites).
The North African cultural practices which were present in the Cardium Culture are certainly interesting. I was aware of the Maasai practice of leaving their dead in the open due to their belief that burials are bad for the earth, but I wasn't aware that it was only chieftains who got buried. Interestingly, the Maasai oral traditions state that they came from North Africa and their language is usually classified within Nilo-Saharic (a language group which seems to have originated somewhere in Northern Africa).

The Albanians who try to hate on V13 are usually those from Pro-White forums. They try to make themselves seem as white as possible and so attack anything which doesn't seem white. V13 in their eyes doesn't seem white due to it supposedly being "African" or "black" originally. It's complete nonsense and just stupid to say the least.
 
The North African cultural practices which were present in the Cardium Culture are certainly interesting. I was aware of the Maasai practice of leaving their dead in the open due to their belief that burials are bad for the earth, but I wasn't aware that it was only chieftains who got buried. Interestingly, the Maasai oral traditions state that they came from North Africa and their language is usually classified within Nilo-Saharic (a language group which seems to have originated somewhere in Northern Africa).

This practice is weird because only Maasai had it but there are others more important ones which actually might represent some very clear proof of V13 involvement. Still likely V13 arrived from the Levant and descend of Natufians (in a direct way), E-M78 was found in Pre Pottery Neolithic B, and autosomally Dalmatian Cardiums seem to show stronger affinity to PPNB than other EEF's. Nilo-Saharan family is also considered by some not to be real family. Maasai have some V12's which are related to main Somali lineage.

The Albanians who try to hate on V13 are usually those from Pro-White forums. They try to make themselves seem as white as possible and so attack anything which doesn't seem white. V13 in their eyes doesn't seem white due to it supposedly being "African" or "black" originally. It's complete nonsense and just stupid to say the least.

Well E-M35 might have been originally Ancestral North African which is a very distant relative to some proto Bantu's but still very different to them (TMRCA 42 K ybp). But if its about "white" Dalmatian E-L618 8000 years ago had the mutation for light skin, and Old Europeans were not "white", they were black skinned light eyed WHG's. Actually other Dalmatian C-V20 also had it but the 3rd person (female) with little bit of WHG ancestry did not!!! She also had multiple blue eyes mutations due to WHG ancestry. Like 10 k years ago there were no "white people" on the planet. Hg R is of Asian distant origin being related to Amerindian and proto-Turkic Q, but similar thing happened between the original clades of one of most dominant language families Afroasiatic and Indoeuropean. E-M35 pastoralists wandered around taking wives of Eurasians for Milleniums, same happened with R's who took so many WHG genes to make up their new "EHG" and then eradicate the ones whose genes they took.
 
What, pray tell, do the last dozens of posts have to do with the origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans?

Get back on topic, please.

If you want to discuss these topics, find an appropriate thread and copy paste your discussions there.
 
Utterly baseless based upon my analysis. I mean look: 60 % of Albanians are of those 6 clusters, you'd expect Bulgarians also to carry them to a large degree and that's not the case. In Bulgarians no cluster is that significant which is in line with high diversity there.

Check page 152 of Katicic's Ancient Languages of the Balkans. Also, don't forget Shtip, which even Matzinger accepts must have had proto Albanian speakers, and that there are at least 4 towns in Bulgaria today that are named "Arbanasi" and identify as bulgarians today, let alone monasteries and more less obvious Albanian toponyms.


But, we should move this discussion to another thread, we can agree that for the most part, EV13 is not a really greek lineage and was most likely not in mycenaeans. I stand by the Illyrian proper theory which seems to be the central in between thracian and delmato-pannonian, with its eastern branches mostly absorbed into bulgarians in early medieval times, and western branches put under more bottleneck pressure .
 
with its eastern branches mostly absorbed into bulgarians in early medieval times, and western branches put under more bottleneck pressure .

You are as hopelessly deluded as a parachutist with a couple of large holes in his parachute expecting a soft landing. :LOL::useless:


Now back to the topic. Some J2a clades found in Crete (FTDNA):
J-Z39482 in 3 Greeks (under M319), these look very Minoan
J-S15439>Z40068 (predicted), should be Minoan as well
J-Z2227, nothing under predicted.
 
Something I worked on.

1. Six most common E-V13 clusters in Albanians represent 60.8 % of Albanian E-V13 linegaes...

2. Six most common E-V13 clusters in Montenegrins represent 72.0 % of Montenegrin E-V13 linegaes...

3. Six most common E-V13 clusters in Bulgarians represent 17.0 % of Bulgarian E-V13 linegaes...

You know this is largely a reflection of clan lineage domination and expansion in the last 500-800 years. Greek and Bulgarian E-V13 obviously would not be affected by this. That is not how diversity works in relation to historical presence btw.
 
Montenegrins are an interesting case as NONE of their most common E-V13 clusters is native to Montenegro (Vasojevici likely came from Herzegovina, others from SE). None of these go past Middle Ages. There are some natives like Šaranci (who are maybe PH1246) etc but they are not common.
I don't think so. They may in fact be from farther south hence their relations to Albanian clans. You have now Bukimiri belonging to their cluster, who were natives in Malesi e Madhe (Kuqi/Trieshi region). Good part of these clusters migrated up north during Ottoman period..

Same thing for Kuqi, Bjelopavlici and Bjelica clusters. Also add to that the PH2180 fellas.
 
OK.

If you guys don't stop all these off topic Albanian discussions I will close the thread temporarily and I will also delete all these posts.

ENOUGH.
 
.
Very interesting posts guys.
I will just deal with the tittle of the thread which is allready "strange" for me and I mean by that: -How different could they be?
More or less I have allready express my opinion at other threads, ( for Griffin warrior and for the engraved funeral items) I dont want to repeat myself ,as
also not to prove something to anybody.

I believe that they are not dramatically so different from the biological perspective for the issue, as for example it may be for the differences beetween them
if compared as composed and advanced societies.

Someone could say that the absolut indication for the question -to whom they are-, is their genetic profile. (haplogroups etc, etc.) Unfortunatelly for them the
samples are few to have a concrete conclusion from that aspect. So if it is not unstable to build on theories up on few findings, at least is bit silly to consider
that civilizations emerged from "special" or -what's next -, from not so special "haplogroups;
-Please guys...


Allthough all that new informations of the "newborn" science (genetics;) look indisputable, the fancy coloured maps, the long lettered and numberd codes, etc
etc. we are very far to conclude safely for a population, if not also for an individual iself.


At least for my case:
"...I am not a number(haplogroup), I'm a free mαn..." :grin:

I was about to give you a downthumb for this post, but I did not because I think it has been written without "malice". Maybe I misunderstood your post?
You may think what you want, but I think the aim of this thread and the whole genetic thing attached to it is to find out if some important enough modification in genes, so surely a demic external input, is involved in the cultural and linguistical change, whatever the weight of it. As almost all our threads here. How much can genetics help us to understand history changes?
Sure, everyones can think it's without importance. Life runs, and we pass, all of us, and our civilisations too in someway. So, it would be better to stay without to think or have questions?
If you are a free man, your are lucky.
just a technical point: if a population is stable and homogenous, 5 autosomal ADN is enough to have a correct sketche. For uniparental haplo's it's an other question.
No offense, it is not my gaol.
 
Nm, let's do get back on the subject.
 
I was about to give you a downthumb for this post, but I did not because I think it has been written without "malice". Maybe I misunderstood your post?
You may think what you want, but I think the aim of this thread and the whole genetic thing attached to it is to find out if some important enough modification in genes, so surely a demic external input, is involved in the cultural and linguistical change, whatever the weight of it. As almost all our threads here. How much can genetics help us to understand history changes?
Sure, everyones can think it's without importance. Life runs, and we pass, all of us, and our civilisations too in someway. So, it would be better to stay without to think or have questions?
If you are a free man, your are lucky.
just a technical point: if a population is stable and homogenous, 5 autosomal ADN is enough to have a correct sketche. For uniparental haplo's it's an other question.
No offense, it is not my gaol.

My point was that people dont sprew like carrots as well the cultures and civilizations. I meant by that, that all civilizations are mix of two or more other previous ones. I think is more simple now and sorry for my English.
The genetics is not my forte, so I dont carry any heavy opinion for the matter and I dont participate to any threads of that kind for that raeson, allthough I inform my self from the forums, like reading a newspaper. -My posts are few and sorry for being naive.., but malicious; Sorry.


Anyway, thanks for the technical points. I suppose that would be helpfull as well for the more experted members...
Also I would like to guaranty you that I never said that: The biological aspect of the matter it is without "importance", as well I would never recommend someone not to "think" or stay without "questions". Not at all, but the opposite amd I am clear about that.
I just said that is more philosophical than biological the question "Who I am" or "Who we are" or "Who are they..." because at the end of the story we are all engaged to that giving "name things".I meant that the genetic profile of a person is not the absolut criterion of the big question -"who am I ?"


The line "I am not a number, I am a free man" is from a movie...
I personally I am not yet "free" like all of us I suppose, but sure I am lucky.
I didn;t offended because I think that you missed my really point and maybe the reason is my bad english.
I did not derailed the thread.
Best luck to your goals, and thanks for the "interaction".
 
@ΠΑΝΑΞ

OK for kind answer.
I did not opposed to your views, but the most of us was/is aware of this psychological philosophical aspect of culture.
I had understood your english, for the most!
But anybody can and may open a thread on these non-genetical aspect.
Good week-end.
 
I saw this posted in another forum by Johane Derite, and seems very interesting and in line with the finds in the paper discussed here.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
It is interesting, hence why i forwarded you to my old post, which dwells deeper into this. Aegean and Caucasian/Transcaucasian relations go very deep. Furthermore, the so-called "eastern" (Caucasus/Iran-related) or CHG (Caucasian Hunter-Gatherer) autosomal component which is mentioned in the "Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans" study, as having been inherited by both Minoans and Mycenaeans in the range of ~9–32% (predating the steppe IE migration), seems to be related as well. So does the considerable introduction of Y-DNA J2a, probably some time during the Eneolithic/EBA periods. Let me remind you that the oldest sample of J2a found, belongs to a Mesolithic individual from the "Kotias Klde" cave of western Georgia, which is also one of the two samples used universally to autosomally represent the CHGs (Caucasian Hunter-Gatherers) as a cluster. The second is a Palaeolithic individual from the "Satsurblia" cave of western Georgia, but he belonged to Y-DNA J1. In addition, there seems to be association with Hurro-Urartians as well, and a central one i might add, if we consider the mythological elements that are aforementioned in my "old post", but also the linguistic work of Peter van Soesbergen (http://minoanscript.nl/) in relation to Minoan Linear A. There are also toponyms such as the region of "Βιάννος" (Viannos) in southern Crete which could be a cognate of the Urartian regional endonym "Biainili/Viainili" that also relates to Lake Van (around which their Kingdom was based). Last, we most probably also have a cognate for the Hurrian endonym "Khurrites" in Greek mythology/history, namely the "Κουρήτες" (Kourites), out of which the Cretan endonym "Κρήτες" (Krites) stems.
 
It is interesting, hence why i forwarded you to my old post, which dwells deeper into this. Aegean and Caucasian/Transcaucasian relations go very deep. Furthermore, the so-called "eastern" (Caucasus/Iran-related) or CHG (Caucasian Hunter-Gatherer) autosomal component which is mentioned in the "Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans" study, as having been inherited by both Minoans and Mycenaeans in the range of ~9–32% (predating the steppe IE migration), seems to be related as well. So does the considerable introduction of Y-DNA J2a, probably some time during the Eneolithic/EBA periods. Let me remind you that the oldest sample of J2a found, belongs to a Mesolithic individual from the "Kotias Klde" cave of western Georgia, which is also one of the two samples used universally to autosomally represent the CHGs (Caucasian Hunter-Gatherers) as a cluster. The second is a Palaeolithic individual from the "Satsurblia" cave of western Georgia, but he belonged to Y-DNA J1. In addition, there seems to be association with Hurro-Urartians as well, and a central one i might add, if we consider the mythological elements that are aforementioned in my "old post", but also the linguistic work of Peter van Soesbergen (http://minoanscript.nl/) in relation to Minoan Linear A. There are also toponyms such as the region of "Βιάννος" (Viannos) in southern Crete which could be a cognate of the Urartian regional endonym "Biainili/Viainili" that also relates to Lake Van (around which their Kingdom was based). Last, we most probably also have a cognate for the Hurrian endonym "Khurrites" in Greek mythology/history, namely the "Κουρήτες" (Kourites), out of which the Cretan endonym "Κρήτες" (Krites) stems.

Very interesting stuff, Demetrios!

A few other possible connections that I've read:

The Urartian god Khaldi (sometimes written Haldi) may have been related to Helios, the -di possibly being the Classical Armenian word for "god." It should be noted that Khaldi is presumed to be a loan into the Urartian pantheon, possibly from the Akkadians.

There is a theory that Artemis was of Hurrian origins. (https://pies.ucla.edu/IESV/1/VVI_Horse.pdf)

There is a theory that Diana was a form of Anahid (perhaps the name was considered too holy and said backwards--Diana backwards is Anaid).

Nearly identical grave goods were found in Trialeti-Vanadzor (proto-Armenian?) burials as in Mycenaean Greek burials. Incidentally, Trialeti is in Georgia and Vanadzor is in northern Armenia, near the Georgian border.

There is a somewhat popular, but far from universally accepted, theory that Hurro-Urartian was somehow connected to Etruscan. If they made it to Italy why couldn't some of them have stayed in the Greek islands along the way?
 
Just saw the above Trialeti link. Researchers seem to be veering toward Trialeti-Vanadzor being Indo-European, or at least having an Indo-European element. I think it's very likely that they were the Proto-Armenians. They expanded throughout modern Armenian and about as far west as Erzerum, Turkey. Soon after they "disappeared" Hayasa-Azzi materialized in modern NE Turkey. I suspect that Trialeti-Vanadzor either transitioned into Hayasa (perhaps the tribes confederated to protect themselves from the Hittites and/or Assyrians) in the mid-2nd millennium BCE or were already called Hayasa, but the Hittite records from the mid-2nd millennium are merely the first (or first surviving) records of that name. Hayasa is presumably a Hittite rendering of Hayk'/Hayastan, both Armenian names for Armenia.

The question is, did Trialeti-Vanadzor, if indeed Indo-European, come from the direct north or come from the west. The potentially Armenian-like DNA component in the Mycenaean genetic results suggests to me that it's possible that the Greco-Armenians came from the north. However, they could also have come from eastern Europe.

Have there been DNA analysis of Trialeti-Vanadzor specimen?
 

This thread has been viewed 1158604 times.

Back
Top