Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

[Angela]

The discussion began with a "rumor" about samples from Serbia and Romania "AFTER" the Slavic migrations.

Now there are statements about Bronze Age Greeks being "diverse" autosomally. Some are even talking about classical Greeks.

Is this ONE paper?

Does it include ancient samples from the Mycenaean and immediate post-Mycenaean, Dark Age and Iron Age Greeks or not? If it doesn't it's all speculation.

If there are new samples from the Mycenaean and post Mycenaean period, and perhaps the Iron Age, and the range autosomally is from something like a person "like" Armenoi to people who have even less steppe than the Mycenaeans we already have we're talking about pretty Southern European people. I'm not impressed with the impact of the Indo-Europeans or Dorians, whoever they were, autosomally.

[blevins13]

for someone who never read the posts here in forum,
for someone that never accepts science,
but always provides his agenda,

for this guy, (you), there is no hope.

The origin of Hellenes from Vucedol is proven by Blegen at 1928.
Moreover Georgiev added the early creation of Hellenes from Greco-Brygians in this same path.

I am posting it once again,



and a summary in Greek,
I wish I could find it in English.






And for the rest.

Gibutas model for Greece seems a paradox, an atopon, except if Myceneans were IEnised
Renfrew theory seems better fit, but it is generally abandoned,
Ivanof & Camkrelidze theory seems quite interesting, especially for Myceneans and only Myceneans, mostly due to gennetics, but not for rest Hellenes,
Diakonov theory, no matter strange, is very suitable to the area.


Now Blevins13 ,
Say whatever you want, but It is proven to you by 2 sides, archaiological and linguistic. and waiting for genetics, That the branch of Selloi- Helloi-Hellenes of the later Greek nation is originated from Lower Danube, and Vucedol.

1928 it is a long way back. The north path from Vucidol seems wishful thinking, good luck with that.
If it proven why bother with genetic.....


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

[blevins13]

Earliest Doric inscription is from the 7th century BCE if i recall correctly, which is a century after the adaptation of the Phoenician abjad and the creation of the first Greek alphabet by the Euboean Ionian Greeks (most likely). I don't see how the rest of the questions relate here. For one, Corsican is a Tuscan dialect (Italic), not French, and Mongolians don't speak some distinct Chinese dialect of their own. Dorians spoke a distinct dialect from let's say the proto-Arcado-Cypriot dialect of Mycenaeans. Each Greek dialect has distinct characteristics and Doric for example has more conservative elements than Mycenaean Greek.

I don't have to prove something that is already established and being taught in the universities of the world.

No you don’t have to prove anything, but you engage me in this argument trying to convince me with language proof.
Probably like this guy:


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VL9whwwTK6I


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

[Yetos]

1928 it is a long way back. The north path from Vucidol seems wishful thinking, good luck with that.
If it proven why bother with genetic.....


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

hahahaha

once in an agenda, always in an agenda, that is YOU.from 1928 till 2013, the archaological proves are not scientifical collapse
Linguistic proves, added 2 decades after, and still not scientifical collapseEven if gennetic prove it, You will still deny genetics, just to 'sell' your agenda.

and the amazing, still you have no scientific prove that Dorians came at 900 BC from Haalstatbtw
thank Gods, science is not personal believes., and toxic people can not prove a thing.

[blevins13]

Earliest Doric inscription is from the 7th century BCE if i recall correctly, which is a century after the adaptation of the Phoenician abjad and the creation of the first Greek alphabet by the Euboean Ionian Greeks (most likely). I don't see how the rest of the questions relate here. For one, Corsican is a Tuscan dialect (Italic), not French, and Mongolians don't speak some distinct Chinese dialect of their own. Dorians spoke a distinct dialect from let's say the proto-Arcado-Cypriot dialect of Mycenaeans. Each Greek dialect has distinct characteristics and Doric for example has more conservative elements than Mycenaean Greek.

I don't have to prove something that is already established and being taught in the universities of the world.

Corsican adopted French in less than 100 to 200 years.....can this might have happened to dorians??!!! Maybe not, but E-V13 expansion raises some question here.

Mongolians conquered Chinese, but Chinese kept their language, Mongolians adopted chinese. Can this have happened, may not, there is 500 years gap to the first inscription of Dorian Greek.

We have other examples of hellenaised populations in antiquity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daorson

Can this might have happened to Dorians, certainly not.


So let’s accept that the shepherds of Pindus decided to change lifestyle and invade/migrate to Peloponnese.

I don’t buy this, not yet at least......and it seems that if I don’t buy this I have an agenda.
Than I accept to have an agenda than buying this theory, that seems that it has been proven already and tough in schools.



Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

[Yetos]

Corsican adopted French in less than 100 to 200 years.....can this might have happened to dorians??!!! Maybe not, but E-V13 expansion raises some question here.

Mongolians conquered Chinese, but Chinese kept their language, Mongolians adopted chinese. Can this have happened, may not, there is 500 years gap to the first inscription of Dorian Greek.

We have other examples of hellenaised populations in antiquity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daorson

Can this might have happened to Dorians, certainly not.


So let’s accept that the shepherds of Pindus decided to change lifestyle and invade/migrate to Peloponnese.

I don’t buy this, not yet at least......and it seems that if I don’t buy this I have an agenda.
Than I accept to have an agenda than buying this theory, that seems that it has been proven already and tough in schools.



Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

and still you are behind science,

THE FIRST DORIAN INSCRIPTION ARE THE DREROS LAW. ABOUT the years after Olympic games at OLYMPIA, AROUND 700 BC
AND IF DORIANS WERE NOT GREEKS, but Hellenised HOW THEY ACCEPT THEM AT OLYMPIC GAMES?
they conguered S Greece, Crete, expand to Italy, expand to Asia minor, but got Hellenised, before Olympic games? !!!!!



2 Descents to Greece

1. The Descent of Greco-Brygians and lower -South of Danube populations, before Myceneans
2, The Descent of Dorians or RETURN OF TEMENIDAE from mountains and continental Greece to S Greece, around 911 BC, after Mycenean collapse, to start the Greek unification movement.



have a good night Agenda man

I am not a Mycenean, but I am not dissapointed,
I hope you did not dissapointed when you learn that you are not.



btw
YOU STILL PROVIDE US NOT A SCIENTIFIC PROVE TO YOUR CLAIMS. ONLY YOUR AGENDA.
which probably is sourced by blind hate.

[Demetrios]

No you don’t have to prove anything, but you engage me in this argument trying to convince me with language proof.
Probably like this guy:


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VL9whwwTK6I


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

Exactly, i don't have to prove something that is already established and deep down you also know to be true. Last, trying to relate a character from a comedy to pretty much the academic community, that's what it has come down to.

[Demetrios]

Corsican adopted French in less than 100 to 200 years.....can this might have happened to dorians??!!! Maybe not, but E-V13 expansion raises some question here.

Mongolians conquered Chinese, but Chinese kept their language, Mongolians adopted chinese. Can this have happened, may not, there is 500 years gap to the first inscription of Dorian Greek.

We have other examples of hellenaised populations in antiquity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daorson

Can this might have happened to Dorians, certainly not.

So let’s accept that the shepherds of Pindus decided to change lifestyle and invade/migrate to Peloponnese.

I don’t buy this, not yet at least......and it seems that if I don’t buy this I have an agenda.
Than I accept to have an agenda than buying this theory, that seems that it has been proven already and tough in schools.

Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

French is simply the official language that arrived on the island with the new administration. There is no distinct form of French spoken by the Corsicans. At the same time almost half of the population continues to use the native Corsican dialect. There is nothing that relates to the ancient Greek dialects in this example.

Furthermore, there is no Dorian sample who has E-V13 as a paternal line. But then again it doesn't really matter. Because E-V13 likely grew in Greece as a result of a founder effect. Could be a Hallstatt migration that brought the most predominant subclades of it in Greece, but that population was obviously very small to the point that it didn't leave any noticeable linguistic substrate as aforementioned, and autosomal results will likely show it as well. Let's wait and see.

Mongolians adopted Chinese (the ones that did), exactly. They didn't create a distinct form of Chinese out of nowhere. You haven't yet suggested who taught Doric Greek to the Dorians by the way. Even Doric has its own subdivisions which is a whole other story.

[blevins13]

I am already familiar with that article. In short, there seems to have been a southward migration from northern Greek tribes such as the Dorians sometime during the Bronze Age collapse and Early Iron Age. This is the prevalent view today, and it makes sense linguistically. Listen to what Eric Cline mentions a couple of months ago in this small video that relates, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ2gT9HQy7Q. Also, take note of what is written here, https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page87?p=606408&viewfull=1#post606408.

I have read his book about 1177 BC, published in 2014, He says the same thing. Dorians did not destroy Mycenaean Civilization, maybe it was the seapeople or other things, there is no agreement about this. He propose a complex theory combining all factors. And in this havoc of climate change that triggers drought, famine, instability, invasion. And after all this the Dorians appeared, the shepherds of Pindus that changed life-style, and for this there Is evidence.

He states:

“We need to acknowledge first and foremost, as frequently noted in the preceding pages, that it is not always clear who, or what, caused the destruction of the Late Bronze Age cities, kingdoms, and empires of the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean.

Second, we need to admit that there is currently no scholarly consensus as to the cause or causes of the collapse of these multiple interconnected societies just over three thousand years ago; culprits recently blamed by scholars include “attacks by foreign enemies, social uprising, natural catastrophes, systems collapse, and changes in warfare”. It is therefore worth our time to reconsider, as scholars have done for approximately the past eighty years, what the possible causes might be. In so doing, however, we should objectively consider the available evidence that supports or fails to support each of the hypothetical possibilities.”


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

[Demetrios]

I have read his book about 1177 BC, published in 2014, He says the same thing. Dorians did not destroy Mycenaean Civilization, maybe it was the seapeople or other things, there is no agreement about this. He propose a complex theory combining all factors. And in this havoc of climate change that triggers drought, famine, instability, invasion. And after all this the Dorians appeared, the shepherds of Pindus that changed life-style, and for this there Is evidence.

He states:

“We need to acknowledge first and foremost, as frequently noted in the preceding pages, that it is not always clear who, or what, caused the destruction of the Late Bronze Age cities, kingdoms, and empires of the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean.

Second, we need to admit that there is currently no scholarly consensus as to the cause or causes of the collapse of these multiple interconnected societies just over three thousand years ago; culprits recently blamed by scholars include “attacks by foreign enemies, social uprising, natural catastrophes, systems collapse, and changes in warfare”. It is therefore worth our time to reconsider, as scholars have done for approximately the past eighty years, what the possible causes might be. In so doing, however, we should objectively consider the available evidence that supports or fails to support each of the hypothetical possibilities.”


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

I didn't share that video to open a discussion about the Bronze Age collapse (i have also seen two presentations by him where he expands on the subject), but just for the sections where he speaks about the Dorians not actually invading, but rather migrating as Greek tribes from the lands to the north of the Mycenaean (Achaean) civilization. He also mentions the Ionians, but i think the Ionians were present in Attica from before and didn't migrate in the LBA/EIA.

[iluvatar]

The discussion began with a "rumor" about samples from Serbia and Romania "AFTER" the Slavic migrations.

Now there are statements about Bronze Age Greeks being "diverse" autosomally. Some are even talking about classical Greeks.

Is this ONE paper?

Does it include ancient samples from the Mycenean and immediate post-Mycenean, Dark Age and Iron Age Greeks or not? If it doesn't it's all speculation.

If there are new samples from the Mycenaean and post Mycenaean period, and perhaps the Iron Age, and the range autosomally is from something like a person "like" Armenoi to people who have even less steppe than the Mycenaeans we already have we're talking about pretty Southern European people. I'm not impressed with the impact of the Indo-Europeans or Dorians, whoever they were, autosomally.

Different papers. Both rumors from Davidski. One paper has samples from medieval north Macedonia. The rumors about the Greeks were originally posted by Davidski and were shared by me since i thought they would be relevant (this is a thread about the Myceneans after all) and because Dorians were mentioned in the context of a medieval balkan paper for some reason.

I never made any statements about Mycenean and post Mycenean Greeks, just speculated based on the rumors, which may or may not turn out to be true. The only certain thing we can glean from this (again keeping in mind they are just rumors) is that bronze and later Greeks are heterogeneous (not necessarily in a more northern direction). Nothing i posted mentioned anything about ancient greeks beign very northern or not beign southern European. Based on these rumors the maximum steppe would still be less than moderns and for all we know could have peaked during the bronze age. Im posting them again here incase people missed them:

- Mesolithic Greeks are like Barcin farmers (or wrongly dated)

- Bronze Age samples range from quite a bit of steppe (clearly more than the current Myceneans) to basically none

- Iron Age/Hellenistic/Roman samples are also very heterogeneous, some clearly Anatolian

there were also other tidbits posted by Davidski that i cant be bothered to look for right now, some of which i posted previously

Again just rumors, don't shoot the messenger.

[blevins13]

Different papers. Both rumors from Davidski. One paper has samples from medieval north Macedonia. The rumors about the Greeks were originally posted by Davidski and were shared by me since i thought they would be relevant (this is a thread about the Mycenaeans after all) and because Dorians were mentioned in the context of a medieval balkan paper for some reason.

I never made any statements about Mycenean and post Mycenean Greeks, just speculated based on the rumors, which may or may not turn out to be true. The only certain thing we can glean from this (again keeping in mind they are just rumors) is that bronze and later Greeks are heterogeneous (not necessarily in a more northern direction). Nothing i posted mentioned anything about ancient greeks beign very northern or not beign southern European. Based on these rumors the maximum steppe would still be less than moderns and for all we know could have peaked during the bronze age. Im posting them again here incase people missed them:

- Mesolithic Greeks are like Barcin farmers (or wrongly dated)

- Bronze Age samples range from quite a bit of steppe (clearly more than the current Mycenaeans) to basically none

- Iron Age/Hellenistic/Roman samples are also very heterogeneous, some clearly Anatolian

there were also other tidbits posted by Davidski that i cant be bothered to look for right now, some of which i posted previously

Again just rumors, don't shoot the messenger.

Don’t worry man, just warm up with our Greek neighbors who get very touchy about Dorians. It is all good at the end no gas fields to share.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

[Yetos]

Don’t worry man, just warm up with our Greek neighbors who get very touchy about Dorians. It is all good at the end no gas fields to share.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

You are funny,
Even genetics components show a less Upper Danube culture admixture,

If Dorians were from Haalstat as you claim, then they should have higher Altay component,
But even today, after Slavic admixtures, The Altai component in Greeks is the lowest of Europe.
With all that mean, it makes no sence that Dorians were so Northener as Haalstat culture,
for in their settlements the Altai component would be higher.

But NO, for you only Agenda matters.

[Milan.M]

Svetoslav Stamov in his interview said that 200 to 500 samples are send from Bulgaria to David Reich if I heard correctly,that is from Bronze age,which he seems to associate the samples with Hittites,Troyans and Mycenaeans if they passed through Bulgaria,then late bronze and early IA and IA Thracians,with medieval Slavic and proto Bulgars,the paper should come out in 2021.

[Archetype0ne]

Svetoslav Stamov in his interview said that 200 to 500 samples are send from Bulgaria to David Reich if I heard correctly,that is from Bronze age,which he seems to associate the samples with Hittites,Troyans and Mycenaeans if they passed through Bulgaria,then late bronze and early IA and IA Thracians,with medieval Slavic and proto Bulgars,the paper should come out in 2021.

WOW. That is hype! I wonder why he considered them Hittites, Troyans and Mycenaeans, but if he is right its going to be very important results. Since AFAIK we lack Troyan DNA and Hittite for that matter.

[Milan.M]

WOW. That is hype! I wonder why he considered them Hittites, Troyans and Mycenaeans, but if he is right its going to be very important results. Since AFAIK we lack Troyan DNA and Hittite for that matter.

That's the route probably if they come from the steppe,but he says both hypothesis are going to be tested by Reich and Anthony whether they came from steppe or Caucasus trough Anatolia.

[blevins13]

That's the route probably if they come from the steppe,but he says both hypothesis are going to be tested by Reich and Anthony whether they came from steppe or Caucasus trough Anatolia.

Nothing to proven here because it is proven linguistically and archeologically. Greeks came form Vucedol didn’t they?



Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

[ihype02]

The discussion began with a "rumor" about samples from Serbia and Romania "AFTER" the Slavic migrations.
.

I don't know if it is after or during 7th century but I assumed after, because if Slavs were Serb-like before they entered Macedonia it would really look like a major replacement.
The samples are from North Macedonia.

[Milan.M]

I don't know if it is after or during 7th century but I assumed after, because if Slavs were Serb-like before they entered Macedonia it would really look like a major replacement.
The samples are from North Macedonia.

Yes if the migrating Slavs were Serb like then we see no difference until today,and if true I was saying this year's ago that the Slavs that came to Balkans came from near lower Danube and we're neither Polish or Russian like,rather Serb/Romanian like already with similar admixture,we will need also samples a bit prior migration to see what happened and I guess we will have them,but as Stamov said they are dealing with origin of Balkan Slavs so is probably migration period.

[Yetos]

At least 4 big branches of Slavs came to balkans,

1. Alpine Slavs widely known as Slovenes or Karantani (btw Karantani means also Montenegro) (Austria)
2. Severi Slavs came with Balgurs (Bulgars) and absorve them at the end (Ukraine)
3. Great Moravia Slavs, mainly expressed with modern Serbs and Croats (East Germany, Czechia, Hungary, Poland)
4. Antes a Slavic kingdom, tottaly absorved to or as Romania.

the Slavic tribes in Greece are mostly connected with Severi and Great Moravia.

[bigsnake49]

WOW. That is hype! I wonder why he considered them Hittites, Troyans and Mycenaeans, but if he is right its going to be very important results. Since AFAIK we lack Troyan DNA and Hittite for that matter.

That is certainly a lot of hype! How the heck do they know that samples from Bulgaria are from Troy or the Hittite Empire? All we know is that Troy of 1300-1100 BC was not very big, hardly the Troy of myth.

[Archetype0ne]

That is certainly a lot of hype! How the heck do they know that samples from Bulgaria are from Troy or the Hittite Empire? All we know is that Troy of 1300-1100 BC was not very big, hardly the Troy of myth.

I don't know, since the paper is not out till 2021, but we will see, I am sure the scientists are competent to test their hypothesis.
PS: What do you mean by not very big?
For the time we are talking about Troy was if not among the epicenters of civilization, one of the flowers of the mediteranean.

"The excavation of the lower city uncovered a water distribution system containing 160 metres (520 ft) of tunnels tapping sources higher up on the ridge. Dates from the floor deposits obtained by the Uranium-thorium dating method indicate that water was flowing through the tunnels "as early as the third millenium BC;" thus the early city made sure that it had an internal water supply.^[122] In 1280 BC a treaty between the reigning monarchs of the Hittite and Trojan states, Muwatalli II and Alaksandu of Wilusa respectively, invoked the water god, KASKAL_KUR, who was associated with an underground tunnel, adding weight to the theory that Wilusa is identical to archaeological Troy."

These people had internal water supply 5kya... I would not downplay their significance or their legend.
If you downplay their legend and prosperity might as well downplay Minoans and Mycenaeans to their West.

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







Troy was developing at least 1300 years by the time Mycenaean civilization appeared... Find me one city surpassing it in the region...

Was it comparable to modern Tokyo? xD But to say its greatness was a myth is ridiculous.

[torzio]

That is certainly a lot of hype! How the heck do they know that samples from Bulgaria are from Troy or the Hittite Empire? All we know is that Troy of 1300-1100 BC was not very big, hardly the Troy of myth.

I recall from last year that the war happened circa 1185BC

Troy was big with the bottom part of the town surrounded by wooden walls

The Trojans where a branch of the Thracian race cousins to dardanians and bithynians .............bithynia being an ancient Thracian province in Anatolia to the NE of Troy.
The Thracian language was spoken in what is now Bulgaria,^[9][10] Romania, North Macedonia, Northern Greece, European Turkey and in parts of Bithynia (North-Western Asiatic Turkey).

some say
https://www.polatkaya.net/Dardania_TATAR_OYI.html

They spoke a thracian-anatolian mix ...............and just because they found a Luwian and also a Hittite alphabetic tablets does not mean they spoke this language

[Archetype0ne]

some say
https://www.polatkaya.net/Dardania_TATAR_OYI.html

You might want to read the link you posted... There is less than 0 chance Troy etymology has anything to do with Tatars, or Turkic tribes. They predate them by 4000 years...
In that link only the first 1-2 paragraphs make sense, before it becomes a WTF thread xD

[torzio]

You might want to read the link you posted... There is less than 0 chance Troy etymology has anything to do with Tatars, or Turkic tribes. They predate them by 4000 years...
In that link only the first 1-2 paragraphs make sense, before it becomes a WTF thread xD

what you say is correct....there are too many stories about the trojan origin


IMO, they are a branch of thracians that migrated many many centuries before