Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

I have answered both you and Angela above. I don't share dogmatic views about the Mycenaean or the Minoans since there have been recent tests and blogs proving exactly who and what they are including their EEF ( early South Eastern European/Anatolian ) farmer input. The point of the thread was the genetic origins of the origins of the Mycenaean and Minoan so it's on topic and completely founded. I am only quoting what I have read on websites and blogs. If you disagree with it I suggest you take it up with them not me.

Part of the issue though is that you're referring to both ethnolinguistic groups and groups that happen to live in a certain geographic place by the same names, for example, Greeks. You're calling both the ethnolinguistic group AND the people that lived in Greece 5000 years ago "Greeks". This is confusing. Yes, Greeks have Neolithic Farmer ancestry (as do many groups), but those people were not Greeks. They pre-date the Greeks. The Minoans and Pelasgians may not have been "Greeks" (we aren't sure because, as you know, we don't know what languages they spoke), but they contributed to the Greek ethnogensis. The Mycenaeans were Greeks because we know for a fact that they spoke a dialect of the Greek language. It's difficult for people to understand what you're trying to say because you're using terms that can have a few different meanings interchangeably. No, the first Greeks were not from the Middle East. But the pre-Greek people that lived in the land known as Greece were from the Middle East, at least partially. The first Greeks (i.e. Greek-speakers) are from a Steppe-derived population. As you know, these Greek-speakers entered the land we call Greece from either the north or from the northeast and mixed with the previous inhabitants of Greece, many of whom had Neolithic Farmer ancestry.

Another example, Turks. Hittites, Luwians, Hurrians, Armenians, Greeks, etc. were/are not Turks. The land wasn't called Turkey. They didn't speak Turkish (although Armenians and Greeks did learn Turkish within the last thousand years). There was no concept of "Turk" in the region because there were no Turks there.

I don't want this to come off like I am attacking you, but you need to be very particular and consistent with your terminology.
 
@Demetrios, can you perhaps give any information regarding your theories about the origins of the Pontic Greeks (Pontians) of the southeastern Black Sea coast? Thank you!
 
@Demetrios, can you perhaps give any information regarding your theories about the origins of the Pontic Greeks (Pontians) of the southeastern Black Sea coast? Thank you!
Yes. By the way, i did mention this earlier as well. The first time Pontian Greeks appear historically in the region of Pontus was in the 8th century BCE, with the establishment of Sinope (city) by Ionian Greeks from Miletus (city). These were the first Pontian Greeks. Now if go earlier, we do see mythological and archaeological elements which do suggest an early presence of Greeks on the Pontus coasts, like the ones we have previously discussed, but i see this more as trading relations. The first historical and substantial effort of colonization in the region, that we know of, happened during and after the 8th century BCE. Here is a nice map to give you a perspective.
1280px-Greek_colonies_of_the_Euxine_Sea.svg.jpg

Pontian as a distinct identity begins with Mithridates I of Pontus, who seceded from the Antigonid part of the former Persian Empire and proclaimed the Graeco-Persian "Kingdom of Pontus" in 281 BCE. He is also referred to as Κτίστης/Ctistes (Builder) as in the "Builder" of Pontus. Furthermore, many of these colonies later received additional Greek migrants during the Byzantine period, and in the case of the southeastern Black Sea there was also some intermixing with the Laz people after the 13th century CE.
 
So do you believe those Western Black Sea cities are the earlier Greek settlements?

Is the 9th century BCE the earliest we can trace the Pontians?

Did the Urartians ever mention Greek speakers, that you are aware of?

Pontic Greeks are pretty close genetically to Armenians. To me, their accent/inflections sounds very Armenian (almost like Armenian being spoken with "the wrong" words). I know Pontic Greek is a very distinct dialect--what is it's relationship to, say, Mycenaean or Homeric Greek?
 
You write, "So do you believe those Western Black Sea cities are the earlier Greek settlements? Is the 9th century BCE the earliest we can trace the Pontians?".
Historically yes, they are the earliest we can account for. The 8th century BCE is the earliest we can trace actual Greek establishment in the broader region of Pontus. Again, this doesn't mean Greeks didn't migrate earlier. There are elements that suggest that maybe they did, but it is also not certain.

You write, "
Did the Urartians ever mention Greek speakers, that you are aware of?".

Personally i am not aware of any such records.

You write, "
Pontic Greeks are pretty close genetically to Armenians. To me, their accent/inflections sounds very Armenian (almost like Armenian being spoken with "the wrong" words). I know Pontic Greek is a very distinct dialect--what is it's relationship to, say, Mycenaean or Homeric Greek?".

Pontian Greeks have inherited more Anatolian genes as a result of living close to the aforementioned Laz as well as Armenian people who were present in the area. But it really depends with the Pontians, they are not all the same. In my view they are somewhat intermediate between mainland Greek and Anatolian populations, and today even closer to Greek. But there are also Pontians who today live in Armenia, these could certainly be closer to Armenians. As for their dialect, it also depends. There are small variations, but Pontic Greek is generally viewed as a descendant of the Ionic branch of ancient Greek. The respective Wikipedia article does provide a lot of information on it, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontic_Greek. One point of note is that the Ophitic variant of Pontic Greek has been identified as the living language that is closest to Ancient Greek. The Ophitic variant was originally spoken in the Of valley, east of Trabzon. Today this very important and endangered variant is being spoken by Pontic Greek Muslims in the eastern districts of Trabzon Province and in the western İkizdere district of Rize province. It is also being spoken by Pontic Greek refugees that today live in the village of Nea Trapezounta, Pieria (Central Macedonia).

On another note, did you read about the whole-genome sequencing of 38 individuals from the Roopkund Lake (also known as Skeleton Lake), located at an altitude of 5020 meters in the Himalayas? The paper was published a week ago. What's interesting about it, is that from these 38 individuals that were tested, 14 had Greek-like ancestry. The hypotheses of these people ending up there are many, what's your take on it? Despite the fact of the Greek-like individuals being dated at approximately 1800 CE, i have my reasons to believe they must have been descendants of the Indo-Greek kingdom, which was established by Greeks long after Alexander the Great who didn't manage to push as far into India. Here is the study if you want to go over it, "Ancient DNA from the skeletons of Roopkund Lake reveals Mediterranean migrants in India" (
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6702210/). Keep in mind that Roopkund Lake is home to skeletons belonging to as many as 800 people (that weren't tested), hence the name Skeleton Lake.
 
Thanks for the information. I've read the Wikipedia sources, but you have a very good knowledge about Greek-history, so I wanted to know your thoughts. What are Pontians relationships to Cappadocian Greeks? I mean, genetically.

The Ophitic dialect is the one that I believe I was referring to as sounding like Armenian to me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcAYP4irSyQ

Perhaps Ophitic is the closest living language to a Greco-Armenian language? Alternately, it could just be because these people lived relatively close to Armenians for a long period of time. Compare it to Hamshen Armenian, which is an ancient dialect of Western Armenian spoken in the same region, partially by Islamicized Armenians. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcu0GWHdv2w

Apparently, there is a city or region called Halt in Of/Ophious. The Armenian version of this name of this region may have been Khaltik' and the Greek Chaldoi (and a Urartian version: Khalitu). This is off topic, but interesting to me as you brought up Of.

Regarding those Himalayan skeletons, I read about that a few weeks ago. Absolutely fascinating. I had the same theory as you as to their origins--Indo-Greeks. However, this would mean that they stayed remarkably genetically isolated for quite a long time (perhaps a religious group?). The only other things I can think is that they were the descendants of Greek merchants along the Silk Road or from some Roman (of Greek descent?) legion. Or maybe they were from some Gurjieffian cult (this suggestion is mostly meant to be a joke).

The Roopkund_B cluster is more puzzling. It is tempting to hypothesize that the Roopkund_B individuals descend from Indo-Greek populations established after the time of Alexander the Great, who may have contributed ancestry to some present-day groups like the Kalash21.

I had actually considered the Kalash too, but from what I remember, they probably are not significantly descended from Greeks according to genetic studies, even though their legends suggest that they are.

The only other thing I can think of is that there was supposedly a Hindu community in Armenia in the early 1st century BCE. This community disappeared when Christianity was established and nobody is really sure what happened to them. Maybe there were some Greeks who had converted to Hinduism too and these Armenian and Greek Hindus established some colony somewhere and survived into relative modernity? This seems unlikely to me though. I do believe that the Hindu Armenians were in a region that would have had Greeks as well though (apparently one community was in Odzun, which is in Lori province, a region that was home to Pontic Greeks well into the 20th century): https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...-for-over-2000-years/articleshow/66126182.cms

https://frontline.thehindu.com/static/html/fl2315/stories/20060811000106600.htm
 
You probably already picked this up, but Khalitu/Khaltik' again sounds like Hatti, Chaylbes, Halys, Hayasa, Khaldi, Hayk, Kartvelian, etc. We know that Khalitu was a separate place from Hatti, but was adjacent to it. Perhaps all of these relate to "metal" as you suggested before.
 
You write, "Thanks for the information. I've read the Wikipedia sources, but you have a very good knowledge about Greek-history, so I wanted to know your thoughts. What are Pontians relationships to Cappadocian Greeks? I mean, genetically.".
Genetically there doesn't appear to be much connection between Cappadocian and Pontian Greeks. For example, have a look at a figure from the "Genetics of the peloponnesean populations and the theory of extinction of the medieval peloponnesean Greeks" study, focus on "b". By the way, as a side note, the descendants of Cappadocian Greeks amount to approximately 50,000 while the descendants of Pontian Greeks living in Greece to approximately 400,000. Far more Pontian Greeks live outside Greece than in Greece.
ejhg201718f3.jpg

You write, "The Ophitic dialect is the one that I believe I was referring to as sounding like Armenian to me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcAYP4irSyQ".

To tell you the truth i cannot accurately assess the phonological relationship between the two, being unfamiliar with Armenian. But listening to the video below as well, i did get a feel of some Greek words. Do we know anything about the amount of Greek loanwords in Hamshen Armenian?

You write, "Perhaps Ophitic is the closest living language to a Greco-Armenian language? Alternately, it could just be because these people lived relatively close to Armenians for a long period of time. Compare it to Hamshen Armenian, which is an ancient dialect of Western Armenian spoken in the same region, partially by Islamicized Armenians. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcu0GWHdv2w".

Ophitic is a descendant of Ionic Greek (which belongs to one of the three main divisions of ancient Greek, namely the Eastern division), therefore we cannot be referring to it as a Graeco-Armenian language, along the lines of some kind of proto-language. Your second hypothesis seems more likely, or could even be because of Hellenic assimilation of Armenians (similar to the Laz) which could have introduced some of these phonological elements, if indeed actual.

You write, "Apparently, there is a city or region called Halt in Of/Ophious. The Armenian version of this name of this region may have been Khaltik' and the Greek Chaldoi (and a Urartian version: Khalitu). This is off topic, but interesting to me as you brought up Of.

You probably already picked this up, but Khalitu/Khaltik' again sounds like Hatti, Chaylbes, Halys, Hayasa, Khaldi, Hayk, Kartvelian, etc. We know that Khalitu was a separate place from Hatti, but was adjacent to it. Perhaps all of these relate to "metal" as you suggested before.".
Yeah, i do believe it could be related to what i mentioned in post #1333 of this thread, https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page54?p=584010&viewfull=1#post584010.


You
write, "Regarding those Himalayan skeletons, I read about that a few weeks ago. Absolutely fascinating. I had the same theory as you as to their origins--Indo-Greeks. However, this would mean that they stayed remarkably genetically isolated for quite a long time (perhaps a religious group?). The only other things I can think is that they were the descendants of Greek merchants along the Silk Road or from some Roman (of Greek descent?) legion. Or maybe they were from some Gurjieffian cult (this suggestion is mostly meant to be a joke).

"The Roopkund_B cluster is more puzzling. It is tempting to hypothesize that the Roopkund_B individuals descend from Indo-Greek populations established after the time of Alexander the Great, who may have contributed ancestry to some present-day groups like the Kalash."
I had actually considered the Kalash too, but from what I remember, they probably are not significantly descended from Greeks according to genetic studies, even though their legends suggest that they are.
".

I personally think it more likely to have been an isolated religious community descended from the Indo-Greeks, that faithfully participated in this Hindu pilgrimage. Furthermore, i have read in a number of relating articles that the 38 tested individuals included children and elderly people, with none being family relatives, which would nullify the expedition hypothesis relating to a recent migration and would also suggest the presence of more Greek-like individuals among the 300-800 people that weren't tested.


As for Gurdjieff, lol, but i could also accept it as a case if the samples were dated a little later, but it appears they are a century older of when Gurdjieff began his spiritual work. Furthermore, i would expect higher variance among the Mediterranean group if it was the case.

Last, indeed Kalash appear to be genetically more related with the Indo-Iranian migrations in the region, not so much the Greek one. In any case, culturally they do appear affected. Also, if anything, the Kalash appear more associated with the "Roopkund A" group, and in fact, figure 2d of the study shows a group from a region in Northern Pakistan (where Kalash live), as the one being the closest to the "Roopkund A" group.


You write, "The only other thing I can think of is that there was supposedly a Hindu community in Armenia in the early 1st century BCE. This community disappeared when Christianity was established and nobody is really sure what happened to them. Maybe there were some Greeks who had converted to Hinduism too and these Armenian and Greek Hindus established some colony somewhere and survived into relative modernity? This seems unlikely to me though. I do believe that the Hindu Armenians were in a region that would have had Greeks as well though (apparently one community was in Odzun, which is in Lori province, a region that was home to Pontic Greeks well into the 20th century):

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/66126182.cms
https://frontline.thehindu.com/stati...1000106600.htm".

I also believe it is highly unlikely.
 
Thanks for the tables. When it says "Asia Minor" (i.e the green triangles) I'm assuming this means Greeks from what is now Western Turkey, correct? So it appears that Pontics, and especially Cappadocians, are distinct populations. I wonder if Cappadocians are Hellenized "natives" (i.e. Hattians, Hittites, Luwians, etc). I'd be interesting to see how all these populations compare to ancient populations from the region.

I'm not sure if Hemshen Armenian has more Greek loanwords than other Western Armenian dialects, but to me, I can recognize a lot of it as Armenian, just maybe with a slightly strange pronunciation of Armenian words and a lot of Turkish mixed in (probably more than other Armenian dialects). https://www.academia.edu/300652/Homshetsma_The_language_of_the_Armenians_of_Hamshen. Side note, I do think the following statement by Vaux is kind of ironic though:
Homshetsma therefore gives us one of our only glimpses of Armenian in its 'pure' form, untainted by loanwords from Classical Armenian and not stripped of the Turkish component of its lexicon.
I understand what he is trying to say--that Hamshen Armenian gives us a glimpse of pre-20th century colloquial Armenian dialects, but to call it "pure" Armenian because it still has Turkish loanwords that haven't been replaced by actual Armenian words seems like an oxymoron and misleading.

As far as the other theories regarding these Indo-Greek skeletons, I think the theory that you, the study, and I all postulated is the best one. The other explanations I suggests were admittedly stretches. I was just trying to think of alternate reasons why Greek-like people might end up in India. So if they were an endogamous, homogenous Greek ethno-religious group in India, which is what it seems like, there should be some record of them, I'd imagine. These skeletons are not that old.
 
You write, "Thanks for the tables. When it says "Asia Minor" (i.e the green triangles) I'm assuming this means Greeks from what is now Western Turkey, correct? So it appears that Pontics, and especially Cappadocians, are distinct populations. I wonder if Cappadocians are Hellenized "natives" (i.e. Hattians, Hittites, Luwians, etc). I'd be interesting to see how all these populations compare to ancient populations from the region.".
Yes, by Asia Minor the PCA essentially refers to the Greeks of Western Anatolia (Smyrna, Constantinople, Antalya, etc.). Furthermore, Cappadocian Greeks, appear to be closer to Cypriots, based on a PCA i saw a year ago but cannot seem to find it. As for your second question, i believe the answer lies somewhere in the middle. As aforementioned in another comment i made a few pages ago, we see that Mycenaean Greeks had established an early presence in Pamphylia and Cilicia. But the first historical settlement of Greeks in the region must have taken place during the early Hellenistic era. I have read the following for example from "Hellenism and the East: Contacts and interrelations from Alexander to the Roman conquest (1978)", page 119, "
Between these two areas cities were set up along the old Persian 'royal road' from Sardis to Cilicia. This strip of Greek colonies was located between the mountainous regions of Pisidia, Cilicia and Cappadocia, which remained largely unconquered or were ruled by native vassals. Another row of cities lined the seacoast from Rhodes eastwards.". But, Hellenization of the earlier locals is certain as well in addition to the Greek migrants, especially during the 2nd century BCE. So, my view is that they were probably a hybrid. Last, as to how all these modern populations compare to ancient populations from the region, maybe someone who knows how to make PCAs can help us with it.


You write, "
I'm not sure if Hemshen Armenian has more Greek loanwords than other Western Armenian dialects, but to me, I can recognize a lot of it as Armenian, just maybe with a slightly strange pronunciation of Armenian words and a lot of Turkish mixed in (probably more than other Armenian dialects). https://www.academia.edu/300652/Homs...ans_of_Hamshen. Side note, I do think the following statement by Vaux is kind of ironic though:
"Homshetsma therefore gives us one of our only glimpses of Armenian in its 'pure' form, untainted by loanwords from Classical Armenian and not stripped of the Turkish component of its lexicon."

I understand what he is trying to say--that Hamshen Armenian gives us a glimpse of pre-20th century colloquial Armenian dialects, but to call it "pure" Armenian because it still has Turkish loanwords that haven't been replaced by actual Armenian words seems like an oxymoron and misleading.".
Yeah, i found it ironic as well and likewise know where he's coming from with that statement.


You write, "
As far as the other theories regarding these Indo-Greek skeletons, I think the theory that you, the study, and I all postulated is the best one. The other explanations I suggests were admittedly stretches. I was just trying to think of alternate reasons why Greek-like people might end up in India. So if they were an endogamous, homogenous Greek ethno-religious group in India, which is what it seems like, there should be some record of them, I'd imagine. These skeletons are not that old.".

Maybe they had even lost their language, therefore i don't know whether we could indeed find a record of them. What is certain though, was the conversion of Greeks to local religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Zoroastrianism. In the case of Buddhism for example, their contribution and influence was essential.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhist_art
The onl
y other thing that could maybe help validate this hypothesis would be to assess the entire genetic make-up of the Uttarakhand State of India, in which Roopkund Lake is located, or even just the regions/villages that traditionally participate in the pilgrimage of "Nanda Devi Raj Jat", that is held once every 12 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanda_Devi_Raj_Jat
 
Phrygian were related to Greeks is that your point well I guess as for the other stuff of what they were the link I posted explains it

Phrygians weren't related to Greeks. Proto Phrygians were related with Illyrians, whom invaded Anatolia at the end of the bronze age. Their later language was influenced from the greek one the same as Armenian.
 
A) nobody said Anatolian languages were Semitic.

B) Luwian was not from 3000 BCE. Anatolian IE languages are thought to have split off from the main body of PIE around 3000 BCE.

No, probably the split occurred circa 4200-4000bce. Exactly the time when PF7562 split from its sister ydna, L23. This is why we don't find any steppe related autosomal ancestry in Hittite skeletons.
 
Phrygians weren't related to Greeks. Proto Phrygians were related with Illyrians, whom invaded Anatolia at the end of the bronze age. Their later language was influenced from the greek one the same as Armenian.
Phrygians, were an IE people who most probably were related with the Bryges and eventually had migrated from the Balkans during the Bronze Age collapse, at least that's one hypothesis. Therefore they were related to Greeks, Thracians, Illyrians, etc.. Furthermore, there was no historical association of Bryges or Phrygians for that matter to Illyrians, but rather there was with Thracians. Last, records of their language sharing similarities with Greek existed well before the Hellenistic era, in which Greeks heavily expanded East and influenced the indigenous Anatolians. In fact, we have Phrygian inscriptions beginning from the 8th century BCE, and it is based on those inscriptions that linguists have classified Phrygian as a language most closely related to Greek and Armenian.
 
I'm not angry but you're totally misrepresenting what I wrote. I never tried to "explain" that to you (what are you even referring to?) or to anybody else. I'm very confused by your criticisms/reading of what I wrote.

It's not historically inaccurate to suggest that various Greek and Anatolian "tribes" spoke Indo-European. I asked people what they thought the Minoans spoke. You misunderstood this. Greek IS Indo-European and Anatolian WAS Indo-European anyhow.

Anatolian is both a linguistic term and a geographic term. Turks are technically Anatolians because they live in Anatolia. Have you ever heard of Anatolian Greeks? You even used the term "Anatolian Armenians" yourself. You also seem to use Anatolia in the geographic sense in your most recent comment.

Hattians were not Indo-European. But they seemed to have had early contact with Indo-Europeans, something that is accepted at least as far as the Hittites go. All that I said was that I suspected that they had contacts with Indo-Europeans prior to 1600 BCE, whether this contact was with Anatolians IE or somebody else (and I used a source from a Hittite scholar to support this). Hurrians were not Indo-European, unless Laroche, Fournet, and Bomhard are correct (in which case, they belong to the first branch to break off), but they are generally accepted as having early contact with/influence from/influence on Indo-Europeans...Armenians, Hittites, Luwians.

If you want to be picky, Hurrians are not "native" Anatolians. They either come from Armenia, Georgia, Iran, or Syria...none of which are in Anatolia. We don't know where they Hittites came from--either the Steppes, Armenia, Iran, or the Balkans. None of which are Anatolia. The only NATIVE Anatolians would be the Hattians, if you really want to be truly picky.

So no, nothing that I said is controversial at all. You're the one confusing Hattians and Hurrians, arguing that Greeks never went to the Middle East but only influenced (or were influenced by) the alphabet there, that Hurrians only lived in "Anatolian Armenia", that the majority of Indo-European languages come from Greece, Armenia, Anatolia. None of these points are remotely accepted by researchers.

As for the record, Hittites didn't came from the steppes. They had no steppe related ancestry. Even their IE language differed from the rest of IE languages.
 
Phrygians, were an IE people who most probably were related with the Bryges and eventually had migrated from the Balkans during the Bronze Age collapse, at least that's one hypothesis. Therefore they were related to Greeks, Thracians, Illyrians, etc.. Furthermore, there was no historical association of Bryges or Phrygians for that matter to Illyrians, but rather there was with Thracians. Last, records of their language sharing similarities with Greek existed well before the Hellenistic era, in which Greeks heavily expanded East and influenced the indigenous Anatolians. In fact, we have Phrygian inscriptions beginning from the 8th century BCE, and it is based on those inscriptions that linguists have classified Phrygian as a language most closely related to Greek and Armenian.

According to ancient writers, Phrygians migrated in Anatolia from the Balkans. The Illyrian tribe, Brygians were still there during the classical Greek times.

Armenian is a satem language, and I don't see how it can be closely related with the Greek one. Influence and common origin are two different things. Ydna pinpoints to a common origin between Armenian and Albanian (Z2103). According to linguists the only IE branch closest to Albanian is Armenian. Proto Albanian and proto Armenian used to be neighbors in very pre historic times. Most probably bronze age.
 
Have any evidence proving that the Hittites were haplotype PF7562 ?
What else they might be! Any ethnic IE group within the IE family bear a distinct ydna haplotype. And PF7562 corresponds very well with the possible time split of Anatolian languages from their IE other branch, whom were the haplotype L23. (Yanmaya steppe people)
The ydna split, corresponds with the language split; circa 4200-4000bce.
 
Definitely, if we want today to have a better view on ydna of ancient Myceneans , the better place or people to look at would be Greek Cypriots. Forget about the rest of the modern Greeks. Too much water flowing there.
 
You write, "According to ancient writers, Phrygians migrated in Anatolia from the Balkans. The Illyrian tribe, Brygians were still there during the classical Greek times.".
There is no historical mention of Bryges being an Illyrian tribe. Balkan-wise, there has only been an association of them with the Thracians. I am expecting some sources for what you write. For example, in Herodotus' Histories (Book 6, Paragraph 45) we read, "While thus it fared with the fleet, on land Mardonius and his army were attacked in their camp during the night by the Brygi, a tribe of Thracians; and here vast numbers of the Persians were slain, and even Mardonius himself received a wound. The Brygi, nevertheless, did not succeed in maintaining their own freedom...". By the way, nobody said they were not around during the Classical times. The above comment by Herodotus proves that they were, in addition to being associated with Thracians, not Illyrians.

You write, "
Armenian is a satem language, and I don't see how it can be closely related with the Greek one. Influence and common origin are two different things.".
Armenian is actually obscure in terms of the centum/satem division. In any case, what you have to understand is that the Graeco-Armenian grouping is in the end a hypothesis. I have even pointed to that myself in a previous comment, https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34414-Genetic-Origins-of-Minoans-and-Mycenaeans/page53?p=583888&viewfull=1#post583888 (10th paragraph/segment). And in the case of Armenian you also have to consider another possibility that @Maciamo had written, namely "The language (Armenian) was later satemised due to the long influence of Indo-Iranian languages, for example during the Mitanni (Indo-Aryan ruling class) period (c. 1500-1200 BCE) and during the Achaemenid Empire (550–330 BCE) when the region was part of the Satrapy of Armenia (the first historical state to be called 'Armenia')". The first scenario would require an early proto-Armenian migration, while the second falls in line with any scenario/hypothesis. Therefore indeed, influence and common origin are two different things, and in the end nothing is certain.

Furthermore, take note that the Phrygian language for which we have plenty of records, is classified as Centum.


You write, "
Ydna pinpoints to a common origin between Armenian and Albanian (Z2103).".
R1b-Z2103 is found in considerable frequencies throughout Anatolia, the Balkans, and Italy. It doesn't really say much on its own in regards to an Armenian/Albanian relation. The origin of R1b-Z2103 appears to be the Poltavka culture, which i reason that members of it in addition to members from Catacomb, must have brought it in the Balkans. Or it could have even followed a southern Transcaucasian/Anatolian route, as it has been suggested.

You write, "
According to linguists the only IE branch closest to Albanian is Armenian. Proto Albanian and proto Armenian used to be neighbors in very pre historic times. Most probably bronze age.".
Actually Greek, Albanian, and Armenian are thought by many to be all related and there is even a hypothetical broader Balkanic grouping that includes all of them.
Holm IE SLRD tree 'hand'.jpg


You write, "
Definitely, if we want today to have a better view on ydna of ancient Myceneans , the better place or people to look at would be Greek Cypriots. Forget about the rest of the modern Greeks. Too much water flowing there.".
I don't quite catch your meaning. Have you actually went through the "Genetic origins of the Minoans and Mycenaeans" study, not just in terms of their Y-DNA, but mtDNA and atDNA as well?
 
You write, "Thanks for the tables. When it says "Asia Minor" (i.e the green triangles) I'm assuming this means Greeks from what is now Western Turkey, correct? So it appears that Pontics, and especially Cappadocians, are distinct populations. I wonder if Cappadocians are Hellenized "natives" (i.e. Hattians, Hittites, Luwians, etc). I'd be interesting to see how all these populations compare to ancient populations from the region.".
Yes, by Asia Minor the PCA essentially refers to the Greeks of Western Anatolia (Smyrna, Constantinople, Antalya, etc.). Furthermore, Cappadocian Greeks, appear to be closer to Cypriots, based on a PCA i saw a year ago but cannot seem to find it. As for your second question, i believe the answer lies somewhere in the middle. As aforementioned in another comment i made a few pages ago, we see that Mycenaean Greeks had established an early presence in Pamphylia and Cilicia. But the first historical settlement of Greeks in the region must have taken place during the early Hellenistic era. I have read the following for example from "Hellenism and the East: Contacts and interrelations from Alexander to the Roman conquest (1978)", page 119, "
Between these two areas cities were set up along the old Persian 'royal road' from Sardis to Cilicia. This strip of Greek colonies was located between the mountainous regions of Pisidia, Cilicia and Cappadocia, which remained largely unconquered or were ruled by native vassals. Another row of cities lined the seacoast from Rhodes eastwards.". But, Hellenization of the earlier locals is certain as well in addition to the Greek migrants, especially during the 2nd century BCE. So, my view is that they were probably a hybrid. Last, as to how all these modern populations compare to ancient populations from the region, maybe someone who knows how to make PCAs can help us with it.


You write, "
I'm not sure if Hemshen Armenian has more Greek loanwords than other Western Armenian dialects, but to me, I can recognize a lot of it as Armenian, just maybe with a slightly strange pronunciation of Armenian words and a lot of Turkish mixed in (probably more than other Armenian dialects). https://www.academia.edu/300652/Homs...ans_of_Hamshen. Side note, I do think the following statement by Vaux is kind of ironic though:
"Homshetsma therefore gives us one of our only glimpses of Armenian in its 'pure' form, untainted by loanwords from Classical Armenian and not stripped of the Turkish component of its lexicon."

I understand what he is trying to say--that Hamshen Armenian gives us a glimpse of pre-20th century colloquial Armenian dialects, but to call it "pure" Armenian because it still has Turkish loanwords that haven't been replaced by actual Armenian words seems like an oxymoron and misleading.".
Yeah, i found it ironic as well and likewise know where he's coming from with that statement.


You write, "
As far as the other theories regarding these Indo-Greek skeletons, I think the theory that you, the study, and I all postulated is the best one. The other explanations I suggests were admittedly stretches. I was just trying to think of alternate reasons why Greek-like people might end up in India. So if they were an endogamous, homogenous Greek ethno-religious group in India, which is what it seems like, there should be some record of them, I'd imagine. These skeletons are not that old.".

Maybe they had even lost their language, therefore i don't know whether we could indeed find a record of them. What is certain though, was the conversion of Greeks to local religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Zoroastrianism. In the case of Buddhism for example, their contribution and influence was essential.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhist_art
The onl
y other thing that could maybe help validate this hypothesis would be to assess the entire genetic make-up of the Uttarakhand State of India, in which Roopkund Lake is located, or even just the regions/villages that traditionally participate in the pilgrimage of "Nanda Devi Raj Jat", that is held once every 12 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanda_Devi_Raj_Jat

At the beginning of the seventh century, the Cimmerians invaded Urartu, Cappadocia, and Phrygia. The Phrygian king Midas appears to have been defeated in 696/695 by the invaders and committed suicide. While the Cimmerians settled on the plains of Cappadocia, Midas' kingdom was taken over by a dynasty that was based in Sardes, Lydia.

Cimmerians are North-Caucasus people, they settled in Anatolia, in Cappadocia
 

This thread has been viewed 1161958 times.

Back
Top