Genetic Origins of Minoans and Mycenaeans

Pratt said:
Crete Armenoi is more southeastern than Tuscans (Tuscans are a western version of Greek_Thessaloniki in Lazaridis' PCA). Crete Armenoi is closer to modern Greeks, or just intermediate between Greek_Thessaloniki and Sicilians. Anyway, Lazaridis has said that Crete Armenoi is a low quality sample, can't be labelled Minoan or Mycenaean.
Click to expand...

There is a trend though. Since it is post Mycenean it may be closer to classical era Greeks and it has more Northern admixture.
 
Dianatomia said:
There is a trend though. Since it is post Mycenean it may be closer to classical era Greeks and it has more Northern admixture.
Click to expand...

There's a trend only if more ancient dna shows she wasn't an anomaly.
 
Pratt said:
Has anyone already uploaded Minoans and Mycenaeans on GEDmatch?




Crete Armenoi is more southeastern than Tuscans (Tuscans are a western version of Greek_Thessaloniki in Lazaridis' PCA). Crete Armenoi is closer to modern Greeks, or just intermediate between Greek_Thessaloniki and Sicilians. Anyway, Lazaridis has said that Crete Armenoi is a low quality sample, can't be labelled Minoan or Mycenaean.


WK6QnI2.png
Click to expand...

Thank you Pratt. Do you know where this tweet appeared?

It's nitpicking, but I think some Tuscans are north of Thessaloniki, as well as west.
 
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Fire Haired14
Stone Henge and the Minoan civilization were created by very close relatives, mind blowing. Both were 70-80% EEF.

Another interesting thing is both the Minoans and the Egyptians were indigenous to their separate regions. Egyptians mostly Levant_Neo, Minoans mostly Anatolia_Neo. Both were indigenous, descended from the primitive stone age people that lived in their regions 1,000s of years earlier.

Papadimitriou;516246]I had said that the megalithic European passage tombs and the 'tomb of Agamemnon' are conceptually similar.[/QUOTE]

Yes, both very good observations. That hadn't immediately occurred to me.

People need to get over it, already.

Ancient Greeks weren't Nordic, they weren't Corded Ware (or Slavic) or anything similar. (I don't get the point of the pictures of Brad Pitt btw. What's the difference before and after?)

Ancient Egyptians weren't SSA either.

These kinds of agendas don't belong in discussions of population genetics.
 
Pratt, you're right of course but it seems to be closest to Tuscans and mainland Greeks of all populations on a PCA but with some differences to both. David of Eurogenes made one with non-projected samples:
yztc6dl.png


The Armenoi sample seems to be shifted towards the direction of various Beaker and Corded samples relative to the Mycenaean cluster.
 
Angela said:
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Fire Haired14
Stone Henge and the Minoan civilization were created by very close relatives, mind blowing. Both were 70-80% EEF.

Another interesting thing is both the Minoans and the Egyptians were indigenous to their separate regions. Egyptians mostly Levant_Neo, Minoans mostly Anatolia_Neo. Both were indigenous, descended from the primitive stone age people that lived in their regions 1,000s of years earlier.

Papadimitriou;516246]I had said that the megalithic European passage tombs and the 'tomb of Agamemnon' are conceptually similar.
Click to expand...

Yes, both very good observations. That hadn't immediately occurred to me.

People need to get over it, already.

Ancient Greeks weren't Nordic, they weren't Corded Ware (or Slavic) or anything similar. (I don't get the point of the pictures of Brad Pitt btw. What's the difference before and after?)

Ancient Egyptians weren't SSA either.

These kinds of agendas don't belong in discussions of population genetics.[/QUOTE]

Brad Pit is injured by an arrow in the second one.....


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Angela said:
Ancient Greeks weren't Nordic (or Slavic), they weren't Corded Ware or anything similar. (I don't get the point of the pictures of Brad Pitt btw. What's the difference before and after.)
Click to expand...

First gif tried to portray the smug fantasy of those who project nordic/slavic on to ancient greek ruling classes via "steppe'ing" them.

Second gif is Brad Pitt's portrayal of Achilles being pierced with an arrow, i.e. the march of science annihilating the nordicist fantasy and simplification of world history.

On a meta level, the movie Troy(2004) was full of this type of stuff so I felt it extra appropriate.
 
Johane Derite said:
First gif tried to portray the smug fantasy of those who project nordic/slavic on to ancient greek ruling classes via "steppe'ing" them.

Second gif is Brad Pitt's portrayal of Achilles being pierced with an arrow, i.e. the march of science annihilating the nordicist fantasy and simplification of world history.

On a meta level, the movie Troy(2004) was full of this type of stuff so I felt it extra appropriate.
Click to expand...

Ah, now I get it. :)

That movie was an abomination in terms of historicity on numerous levels, and even Brad Pitt's body couldn't save it for me, and it's a very nice body indeed.
 
Angela said:
Ah, now I get it. :)

That movie was an abomination in terms of historicity on numerous levels, and Brad Pitt's body couldn't save it.
Click to expand...
300 was more accurate, in terms of historicity, even with persian depicted orcs ;)
 
Angela said:
Yes, both very good observations. That hadn't immediately occurred to me.

People need to get over it, already.

Ancient Greeks weren't Nordic, they weren't Corded Ware (or Slavic) or anything similar. (I don't get the point of the pictures of Brad Pitt btw. What's the difference before and after?)

Ancient Egyptians weren't SSA either.

These kinds of agendas don't belong in discussions of population genetics.
Click to expand...

Thus far we have seen:

Lebanese largely share a genetic continuity with Canaanites.

Britons largely shared a genetic continuity with Celts during the Roman Period. Genetics in England changed with the arrival and admixture with groups like the the Anglo-Saxons, and Normans. While the Romans and Vikings only left a marginal genetic impact.

Modern Greeks largely share a genetic continuity with the Mycenaean and Minoans. Moreover, Cyprus, Albania, Sicily, and Southern Italy have similar genetic continuity.

Egyptians retained their genetic continuity throughout the Roman Period. The shift towards more Yoruba admixture occurred during the Middle Ages.

So far it seems to me that the Roman Empire didn’t have a huge impact on changing the genetics of many places it occupied.
 
Johane Derite said:
Cultural and technological transmission can occur without genetic transmission.
Chariots and sword making technology can be sold and reverse engineered to the ruling classes of other societies, yeah?

David Reich makes this point at the 32 minute mark of this video. He uses the spread of beakers among heterogenous populations to
demonstrate that people copy each others ideas:

Click to expand...

yes, but there was also a language switch
Minoan language is not deciphered yet, because it is not related to Greek/proto-Greek

whatever transmission there was and how it occured, it left a very deep impact
 
bicicleur said:
yes, but there was also a language switch
Minoan language is not deciphered yet, because it is not related to Greek/proto-Greek

whatever transmission there was and how it occured, it left a very deep impact
Click to expand...
That what they thought about Linear B before it got translated.

Just because Linear A hasnt translated yet, doesnt mean that it is foreign.

You logically leap, making identical mistakes of past researchers about Linear B
 
IronSide said:
I feel good for some reason :) Congratulations to all who predicted the Y-haplogroups before, very well done.

What can these results tell us about the origin of some of the Minoans social and religious practices like bull leaping and the goddesses they shared with the Indus Valley Civilisation? We had this discussion before, and it didn't help that there was no proof of the Minoans "eastern" ancestry, until now.

The component that these two ancient populations shared was the Iran Neolithic/CHG like admixture, and so we can theorize for the existence of a "proto culture" for an expanding people, very much like the Proto Indo-Europeans, migrating east, west, and north, from that part of the world.

The migration east was in my opinion, with the advance of agriculture, based on the age of the J2 lineages of South Asia, they seem to be older than the subclades that migrated west, which date to the beginning of the Bronze Age. If we were to assume the existence of this ancestral "proto-culture" then can we predict that their languages were also related? of course, we don't know anything about both languages and it may have been the language of the locals, with no language replacement.
Click to expand...

and what culture could this proto-culture be that predates both Minoan and Indus Valley?
can you identify such culture with bull-leaping and godesses?
if I recall well, there are some speculations about Elamite and Dravidian languages ..
 
Jovialis said:
Thus far we have seen:

Lebanese largely share a genetic continuity with Canaanites.

Britons largely shared a genetic continuity with Celts during the Roman Period. Population in England changed with the arrival of groups like the the Anglo-Saxons, and Normans. While the Romans and Vikings only left a marginal genetic impact.

Modern Greeks largely share a genetic continuity with the Mycenaean and Minoans. Moreover, Cyprus, Albania, Sicily, and Southern Italy have similar genetic continuity.

Egyptians retained their genetic continuity throughout the Roman Period. The shift towards more Yoruba admixture occurred during the Middle Ages.

So far it seems to me that the Roman Empire didn’t have a huge impact on changing the genetics of many places it occupied.
Click to expand...

I would agree with that, except that we don't have ancient dna from Sicily or Southern Italy or Albania for that matter. We'll see about those.

The Romans didn't want to move out of Italy it seems to me. They had no interest in living in Britain by and large, or along the Danube. Spain, and certainly southern France were probably different. They certainly liked Southern Italy. Two thousand years later, I was the same. I didn't want to move either, and I'm still going back someday, at least for half the year even after all my time here. I might even settle in the south. The north is changing too fast. :)

Seriously, what the Romans did was conquer. Then they instituted a process of Romanization, whereby they co-opted the local elites. Let us have our monopolies, of which you'll get your share, pay your taxes, use Latin for official business, and you can keep your local tongues (didn't last, btw, but it wasn't because the Romans mandated it, just the natural way of things), your local customs, and even your local gods, as long as you pay homage to the god of the Roman state to show your ultimate fealty to Rome.

By the time that Rome fell, there were people who identified as "Romans" in England, Gaul, Spain, even Greece, who weren't Roman at all genetically.

Now, soldiers from the Empire did go to far away places, take common law wives, and stay, or not, after their decades long service was over. However, in most places their dna was only a trickle, tinkering with the edges of the total genome of these places.

As I've said ad nauseam, big genetic change comes from significant folk migrations.
 
Angela said:
Now, soldiers from the Empire did go to far away places, take common law wives, and stay, or not, after their decades long service was over. However, in most places their dna was only a trickle, tinkering with the edges of the total genome of these places.
Click to expand...

This site is a good resource. Its a "Digital Atlas of the Roman Empire"
http://dare.ht.lu.se/
 
Angela said:
Indeed. Chariots spread all the way to Egypt very quickly as these things go. Did they have lots of steppe ancestry too? Anyone who hasn't read the Egyptian ancient dna paper shouldn't answer. :)
Click to expand...

do you have a date for the 1st Egyptian charriots?
IMO the Mittanni were the 1st to spread charriots in the Levantine and Anatolian area, and the technical vocabulary they used was borrowed from Indic language
the Mittanni empire was built upon being the 1st with charriots in the area
it was from the Mittanni that the Egyptians and the Hittites copied charriots, which led to the downfall of the same Mittanni empire
even the early Hittites didn't have charriots - at least there is no proof of that, but a lot has been speculated by Orientalists
the Mittanni postdate the Myceaneans and they also postdate the BMAC downfall which IMO the most likely caused by Indic people related to those that introduced the charriot into the Mittanni court
it is very unlikely though that the Mittanni themselves spoke an Indic language and I also suspect that the genetic impact of those few Indic people into the Mittanni was very significant
with the Myceneans a language shift along with the introduction of swords and charriots (only as ceremonial status symbol) is likely - I don't think those neolithic Greeks spoke an IE language and neither did the Minoans
I am aware that there is a lot of speculation here but that seems the most plausible explanation to me

check this : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kikkuli

Kikkuli was the Hurrian "master horse trainer" (assussanni, virtually Sanskrit aśva-sana-) of the land Mitanni" (LÚA-AŠ-ŠU-UŠ-ŠA-AN-NI ŠA KUR URUMI-IT-TA-AN-NI) and author of a chariothorse training text written in the Hittite language, dating to the Hittite New Kingdom (around 1400 BCE). The text is notable both for the information it provides about the development of Indo-European languages and for its content.

he was Hurrian, but the technical vocabulary he used to introduce chariothorse training was Indic
the proper training of horses for battle may have been more dificult than the actual construction techniques to build the chariots
 
Leandros said:
300 was more accurate, in terms of historicity, even with persian depicted orcs ;)
Click to expand...

More accurate for Greeks. (Except for Michael Fassbender: I like him a lot, but ancient Greek?) Of course, they had to darken Gerard Butler's hair, eyes, skin, and probably fiddle with his nose. They couldn't find a Southern European descended actor to bulk up like that? Whatever...

They took, as you imply, a lot of license with the Persians. Some of the troops were also decidedly Middle Eastern looking to me, all those black robes etc. Not that the Persians wouldn't have had a lot of troops from all over their Empire, but there was a lot of signalling going on.

maxresdefault.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 1169273 times.

Back
Top