Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43

Thread: Phoenician mtdna from sardinia

  1. #1
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    922

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Presefardi -BY96055
    MtDNA haplogroup
    from plovdiv h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    3 members found this post helpful.

    Phoenician mtdna from sardinia

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0190169

    :)

    to bad they didn't checked for y dna
    we could have known once and for all what was the y haplogroups of pheonicians
    without speculating

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-08-17
    Posts
    176


    Country: Italy



    So, what are the implications of this?

    According to the article this is evidence that native Nuragic Sardinians were integrated in these Phoenician communities in the island, which was already suggested before by scholars and pretty obvious. But apparently there is also evidence for "European" lineages in Phoenician sites in Lebanon, so was there a migration of native Sardinians eastwards too?

    We know there is archaeological evidence for Nuragic Sardinian presence in the first layers of Carthage and Utica in North Africa, but also in Iberian sites like Huelva and Malaga, and before that in bronze age Cyprus which was later settled by Phoenicians.

  3. #3
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,174


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 members found this post helpful.
    I haven't read it yet, although I will. How do they know that the "Phoenician" mtDna isn't just Neolithic or Bronze Age mtdna which arrived earlier? Did they drill down deep into the sub-clades and date them?

    I also want to read what they mean by "European" mtDna.

    Zalloua has rather a history of making claims that don't always hold up, like in the paper where he claimed that yDna J2 in France as well as other places was a signature of the Phoenicians. We now know it was apparently a signature of the Mycenaeans too, so it's much more complicated than he envisioned, and we don't know which groups spread which sub-clades of J2 to different areas.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18976729


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

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    533


    Country: Greece



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by kingjohn View Post
    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0190169

    :)

    to bad they didn't checked for y dna
    we could have known once and for all what was the y haplogroups of pheonicians
    without speculating
    If they had just sampled Sardinians we wouldn't be able to tell what is definitely Phoenician and what isn't.

    Pausanias mentions Carthaginians used Iberian and Libyan* mercenaries, btw.

    *And I don't know who were those 'Libyans' and what haplogroups they could have had. I am not sure if they spoke languages related to Berber or if they could have been related to Ligures (Ligyans) and if Libyans and Ligures could have been related etc. He mentions that Libyans inhabited Corsica.

    We need samples from Ancient North Africa too (before the Phoenician expansion).

    Either way, that is what Pausanias had written:
    VOTIVE OFFERINGS AT DELPHI (CONTINUED)

    [10.17.1] XVII. Of the non-Greeks in the west, the people of Sardinia have sent a bronze statue of him after whom they are called. In size and prosperity Sardinia is the equal of the most celebrated islands. What the ancient name was that the natives give it I do not know, but those of the Greeks who sailed there to trade called it Ichnussa, because the shape of the island is very like a man's footprint (ichnos). Its length is one thousand one hundred and twenty stades, and its breadth extends to four hundred and twenty.
    SARDINIA (MYTHICAL HISTORY)

    [10.17.2] The first sailors to cross to the island are said to have been Libyans. Their leader was Sardus, son of Maceris, the Maceris surnamed Heracles by the Egyptians and Libyans. Maceris himself was celebrated chiefly for his journey to Delphi, but Sardus it was who led the Libyans to Ichnussa, and after him the island was renamed. However, the Libyan army did not expel the aboriginals, who received the invaders as settlers through compulsion rather than in goodwill. Neither the Libyans nor the native population knew how to build cities. They dwelt in scattered groups, where chance found them a home in cabins or caves.
    [10.17.3] Years after the Libyans, there came to the island from Greece Aristaeus and his followers. Aristaeus is said to have been a son of Apollo and Cyrene, and they say that, deeply grieved by the fate of Actaeon, and vexed alike with Boeotia and the whole of Greece, he migrated to Sardinia.
    [10.17.4] Others think that Daedalus too ran away from Camicus on this occasion, because of the invasion of the Cretans, and took a part in the colony that Aristaeus led to Sardinia. But it is nonsense to think that Daedalus, a contemporary of Oedipus, king of Thebes, had a part in a colony or anything else along with Aristaeus, who married Autonoe, the daughter of Cadmus. At any rate, these colonists too founded no city, the reason being, I think, that neither in numbers nor in strength were they capable of the task.
    [10.17.5] After Aristaeus the Iberians crossed to Sardinia, under Norax as leader of the expedition, and they founded the city of Nora. The tradition is that this was the first city in the island, and they say that Norax was a son of Erytheia, the daughter of Geryones, with Hermes for his father. A fourth component part of the population was the army of Iolaus, consisting of Thespians and men from Attica, which put in at Sardinia and founded Olbia; by themselves the Athenians founded Ogryle, either in commemoration of one of their parishes in the home-land, or else because one Ogrylus himself took part in the expedition. Be this as it may, there are still today places in Sardinia called Iolaia, and Iolaus is worshipped by the inhabitants.
    [10.17.6] When Troy was taken, among those Trojans who fled were those who escaped with Aeneas. A part of them, carried from their course by winds, reached Sardinia and intermarried with the Greeks already settled there. But the non-Greek element were prevented from coming to blows with the Greeks and Trojans, for the two enemies were evenly matched in all warlike equipment, while the river Thorsus, flowing between their territories, made both equally afraid to cross it.
    [10.17.7] However, many years afterwards the Libyans crossed again to the island with a stronger army, and began a war against the Greeks. The Greeks were utterly destroyed, or only a few of them survived. The Trojans made their escape to the high parts of the island, and occupied mountains difficult to climb, being precipitous and protected by stakes. Even at the present day they are called Ilians, but in figure, in the fashion of their arms, and in their mode of living generally, they are like the Libyans.
    SARDINIA (HISTORY)

    [10.17.8] Not far distant from Sardinia is an island, called Cyrnus by the Greeks, but Corsica by the Libyans who inhabit it. A large part of the population, oppressed by civil strife, left it and came to Sardinia; there they took up their abode, confining themselves to the highlands. The Sardinians, however, call them by the name of Corsicans, which they brought with them from home.
    [10.17.9] When the Carthaginians were at the height of their sea power, they overcame all in Sardinia except the Ilians and Corsicans, who were kept from slavery by the strength of the mountains. These Carthaginians, like those who preceded them, founded cities in the island, namely, Caralis and Sulci. Some of the Carthaginian mercenaries, either Libyans or Iberians, quarrelled about the booty, mutinied in a passion, and added to the number of the highland settlers. Their name in the Cyrnian language is Balari, which is the Cyrnian word for fugitives.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-08-17
    Posts
    176


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    If they had just sampled Sardinians we wouldn't be able to tell what is definitely Phoenician and what isn't.

    Pausanias mentions Carthaginians used Iberian and Libyan* mercenaries, btw.

    *And I don't know who were those 'Libyans' and what haplogroups they could have had. I am not sure if they spoke languages related to Berber or if they could have been related to Ligures (Ligyans) and if Libyans and Ligures could have been related etc. He mentions that Libyans inhabited Corsica.

    We need samples from Ancient North Africa too (before the Phoenician expansion).

    Either way, that is what Pausanias had written:

    I would take what Greek historians said with a grain of salt, they tended to attribute every civilized feature of the foreign people to themselves, for instance they claimed that the Nuragic civilization itself was Greek, from Diodorus:

    "When he had completed the labors, because according to the oracle of the god it was advisable that before passing between the gods he sent a colony to Sardinia and put the sons he had had from the Tespiadi in charge, Heracles decided to send, with the children , his nephew Iolaus, since they were all very young.It seems to us necessary to speak before the birth of children in order to be able to make the discourse of the colony more clearly. Tespio, a man of illustrious lineage, of Athens, son of Erechtheus king of the homonymous region, fathered 50 children from numerous wives.
    When Heracles was still young but already had an extraordinary physical strength, Tespio wished his daughters had offspring from him. So he invited them to a sacrifice: he offered a splendid feast and sent his daughters one by one. He joined with all, made them pregnant and became the father of 50 children who took the common denomination from the Tespiadi. When they reached the virile age, Heracles decided to send them to the colony in Sardinia, according to the oracle."

    "Then Iolaus, constituted the colony, sent to call from Sicily Daedalus, and he built great works that remained until our times (about 90 BC) called, by their architect Dedalea.


    He also built large and sumptuous gymnasiums and set up courts and all the other things that lead to prosperity. He called Iolaei the inhabitants by imposing their name on himself, with the agreement of the Tespiadi who gave him this privilege as a father.


    Because of his solicitude towards them they were driven to such benevolence as to give him the title of progenitor as a title: therefore in the successive epochs those who offer sacrifices to this god invoke him as father Iolaus, in the same way that the Persians invoke Cyrus."

    Then Pseudo Aristoteles said the same things:


    "- It is said that on the island of Sardinia there are buildings modeled according to the ancient Hellenic tradition, and many other splendid buildings, and buildings with domed vault with extraordinary proportions ratio.It is believed that these works were raised by Iolaus son of Ificle in the time when, taking with him the Tespiadi sons of Heracles, he transferred the colony to take it away from their places of origin to those districts, because he procured these for the parentado of Heracles , to which any land was located to the West believed belonged [...].
    They then say that Sardinia has been, in ancient times, prosperous and dispensing of every product: in fact they tell that Aristeus, who - it is still said - in his time had been the most expert among men in the art of cultivating the fields, were the lord in these places; before Aristeus these places were occupied by many and large birds [...]"

    While interestingly enough Strabo considered the natives to be Tyrrhenians:
    :

    - It is said that Iolaus, leading some of Heracles' sons, came here and they lived together with the Barbarians who occupied the island at the time: they were Tyrrhenians, but then the dominion passed to the Phoenicians coming from Carthage, with whom they fought against the Romans. Subsequently defeated, everything passed under Roman rule.

    One of the oldest Greek accounts about Sardinia is that of Simonides of Ceos (VIth century bc):

    "Simonides of Ceo's testimony according to which Talos, before entering the service of Minos in Crete, would have resided in Sardinia, provoking on the island the death of many natives, presumably due to the bloody modalities of the death that was inflicted upon them, at the moment of the death they gnashed their teeth, the expression "Sardonic laughter" came from this event according to him"

    http://www.academia.edu/31565243/Tal..._e_la_Sardegna

    53 Sardinian vessels dating to the bronze age were found in Crete so it's possible this testified the prehistoric contacts between the two islands

  6. #6
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,174


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Bottom line: there's no overlap between the ancient mtDna from "Phoenicia" and from Sardinia. The conclusions are drawn from the presence of three mtDna samples from ancient Sardinia which the authors believe could have come from Phoenicia based upon other factors.

    From the paper:
    ". We only found one haplotype (H3) shared between pre-Phoenician and Phoenician era samples from Sardinia and this can be seen in the network analysis (Fig 2A). However, we do not find many mutations separating haplotypes from all the three groups, particularly those in haplogroup H. Two clades (the K1 and U5 haplogroups) contain samples from pre-Phoenician Sardinians only, whereas the W5, N1b1a5 and X2b clades contain only Phoenician Sardinians, and appear to be distant from any pre-Phoenician Sardinian samples and thus we suggest that these are likely Phoenician samples. The T2b3 sample from Beirut is only two mutations removed from a pre-Phoenician Sardinian sample and does not appear to be an indigenous Lebanese lineage but rather a foreign introduction to the Beirut Phoenician population. We carried out DAPC analyses to investigate genetic structuring within our sampling. DAPC performs discriminant analyses (DA) on principle components (PC). Generally, DA resolves between population relationships while ignoring within population variation [28]. DAPC uses PCA to resolve within population variation and then performs a DA to resolve between population structure [28]. The two DAPC plots (one discriminant function and two discriminant functions) support the pattern found in the network analysis, identifying overlapping signatures of Lebanese samples with the Sardinian Phoenicians, with a clear pre-Phoenician component of the population (Fig 2B and 2C). We see that most Phoenician-era samples cluster closely together with pre-Phoenician samples."

    I'm not sure I'd make that leap, since none of those appear among their ancient "Phoenician" samples.

    "The most common haplogroup seen in our ancient Lebanese and Sardinian samples was the superhaplogroup H, identified in 7 of 14 samples (50%). Five of the Monte Sirai samples (50%) were identified as having H haplotypes (H+16311, H1e1a6, H1bn, H3, and H5d). Haplogroups H1, H3 and H5 are all thought to have a Southwest European origin and to have spread from there after the LGM [42Two of the four ancient Lebanese samples belong to haplogroup H (sub-groups H and H34) and a third belongs to the sister clade, R0.]. There were no shared haplotypes between the ancient samples of Lebanon and those from Monte Sirai. However, all sequences belonging to haplogroups H and R0 (ancient samples of Lebanon and Sardinia, and Monte Sirai) are very closely related as they are separated by only few mutations (Fig 2A). Olivieri et al. [15] also report high levels of H subgroups in their ancient samples (38%) with several closely related lineages to our Monte Sirai samples (HV0j1, H1, H1e1, H1e1a, H3, H3u and H5a)."

    I don't see how any of the above is dispositive of any particular connection.

    J1c is held to be "Sardinian".

    On the so-called Phoenician lineages possibly present in Sardinia, of which there are three:

    "The presence of one sample from Monte Sirai, MS10578, a 6 to 12-year-old child that has an N1b1a5 haplotype is of particular interest. Haplogroup N lineages are rare in modern Sardinians. Recently, however, four individuals were identified carrying haplogroup N1b1a9, which appears to be a Sardinian specific haplogroup [15]. The coalescence ages of this haplogroup are estimated to be 7.3–9.4 Ky, so this may have been a pre-Neolithic introduction to the island. N1b1a5, however, is more recent (Olivieri et al. [15] Fig 3), dating to 2.5 Ky, which aligns nicely with a Phoenician/Punic introduction. Brandt et al. [45] suggest that N is a marker of Western European Hunter Gatherers as it has been found in Mesolithic samples from Portugal and a Palaeolithic sample in Southern Italy. Ancient samples with haplogroup N1a have been found in early Neolithic sites from Spain and Germany [41], but N1b has not been recorded in Neolithic samples outside of the Levant with two exceptions from Anatolia dating to 6500–6200 BCE [48, 50] and between 7500–5800 calBCE [51]. N1b is a relatively common haplogroup in Lebanon, with 9 of the 87 (10%) modern samples we sequenced carrying N1b1a subtypes. While we have not found any N1b in our ancient Lebanese samples, it is not unlikely that this haplogroup was introduced to Sardinia via Phoenician contact, either directly from the Levant or via Phoenician/Punic settlements in North Africa, for example Carthage. Fig 3Ashows that N1b1a lineages have been identified in modern Tunisians [52, 53] and in a modern Moroccan [52], as well as in a modern individual from Sicily, another island with known Phoenician settlement [54]."

    I think this is down to a maybe or possible migration with Phoenicians. The authors themselves seem rather tentative.

    "the archaeological sample from Monte Sirai, MS10581, a young female included in a group burial, is, as far as we know, the first W5 identified in Sardinia. The age of W5 has been estimated to be 12.2 Ky [56], and while W5 is most commonly found in Northern Central Europe and Britain today (Fig 3B), a basal W5 lineage was identified in a Moroccan Berber [56], which clusters most closely with our Phoenician sample. Our ancient result from Monte Sirai is indeed significant and establishes a minimum date of late 5th century BCE for haplogroup W5 in the Mediterranean region and, given the Phoenician trade networks, could explain the presence of W5 in North Africa."

    They may be on firmer ground here. I'd be interested to hear what other folks think.

    "Sample MS10587 from Monte Sirai belonged to haplogroup X2b, with an extra mutation at position 226C. Mathiesen et al. [48] report this same signature in a sample (I1499) from Garadna, Hungary dating to 5210–5010 calBCE (see S5 Fig). X2b has also been recorded in an early Neolithic sample from Revenia, Greece, dated to 6438–6264 calBCE [57]. Haplogroup X is relatively rare in Europe, generally found at frequencies of less than 1%. The highest frequencies of X in Europe are reported in Catalonia, the Pyrenees and southern Portugal, at about 2.5%. It is found at relatively high frequencies in Druze from the Levant, where it reaches frequencies of up to 15%, including subtype X2b (Fig 3C), though we did not identify X haplotypes in any of our modern Lebanese samples. It is possible that X2b was a Phoenician haplogroup introduced to Sardinia either directly from Lebanon or via North Africa, though an earlier, early Neolithic introduction, perhaps via a maritime route [58] cannot be rejected.

    I'm not convinced by the above at all, since it could just as easily have arrived in the Neolithic.

    MtDna is not my specialty, so I'm willing to be persuaded, but I would give this a one, maybe two might have arrived with the Phoenicians. I'll have to check to see what percentage these represent of modern Sardinian mtDna.

  7. #7
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    922

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Presefardi -BY96055
    MtDNA haplogroup
    from plovdiv h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    they should have tested y dna in the pheonician sites in sardinia
    more than likely that the pheonician sailors were mostly man not woman

    regards
    adam

    p.s
    h3 was more than likely absorbed by the pheonicians in sardinia
    because h3u was found in 3000-3800 bc sardinian
    it probably neolithic in sardinia pre -pheonician :)

  8. #8
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,174


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by kingjohn View Post
    they should have tested y dna in the pheonician sites in sardinia
    more than likely that the pheonician sailors were mostly man not woman

    regards
    adam

    p.s
    h3 was more than likely absorbed by the pheonicians in sardinia
    because h3u was found in 3000-3800 bc sardinian
    it probably neolithic in sardinia pre -pheonician :)
    Nothing about the Phoenician "colonies" indicates that they were colonies like those of the Greeks. Everything I've seen indicates that they were more like trading posts. I think it would be unlikely that they brought very many women with them, and this paper doesn't convince me otherwise.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-08-17
    Posts
    176


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Nothing about the Phoenician "colonies" indicates that they were colonies like those of the Greeks. Everything I've seen indicates that they were more like trading posts. I think it would be unlikely that they brought very many women with them, and this paper doesn't convince me otherwise.
    Precisely, they came in small numbers and integrated into the local population peacefully, while Greek colonists came in huge numbers and violently according to their own sources.

  10. #10
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,174


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Pygmalion View Post
    Precisely, they came in small numbers and integrated into the local population peacefully, while Greek colonists came in huge numbers and violently according to their own sources.
    Most large folk migrations include some degree of violence because there is more disruption and the "natives" are not going to be happy about giving up their land. That's to be expected. The Amerindians were relatively friendly when the Europeans were few. That changed.
    I think the comparison to the Phoenicians might be something like the British and French and German colonialism of the 19th century. The Greek colonization was more like the Boers.
    However, I just started reading "Carthage Must Be Destroyed" by Richard Miles. (I got tired of it looking at me accusingly from my bed-stand! ) I'll be interested to see if there was a change after the Levant fell to the Assyrians. I'm already braced, from the reviews, for a pretty partisan take on it. He's definitely " Team Carthage". It's a pity, imo, when historians do this; it makes their conclusions suspect.
    https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...estroyed-miles
    Last edited by bicicleur; 12-01-18 at 09:20.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-08-17
    Posts
    176


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Most large folk migrations include some degree of violence because there is more disruption and the "natives" are not going to be happy about giving up their land. That's to be expected. The Amerindians were relatively friendly when the Europeans were few. That changed.

    I think the comparison to the Phoenicians might be something like the British and French and German colonialism of the 19th century. The Greek colonization was more like the Boers.

    However, I just started reading "Carthage Must Be Destroyed" by Richard Miles. (I got tired of it looking at me accusingly from my bed-stand! ) I'll be interested to see if there was a change after the Levant fell to the Assyrians. I'm already braced, from the reviews, for a pretty partisan take on it. He's definitely " Team Carthage". It's a pity, imo, when historians do this; it makes their conclusions suspect.

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...estroyed-miles
    Yes but I don't know how much the parallel between Phoenicians in South Europe and Europeans in America fits, from a military technology standpoint they were more or less on the same level, with Iberians and Sardinians using Atlantic bronze cut and slash swords, bronze spearheads and arrowheads and even using some iron blades occasionally, while when Europeans conquered the Americans they had fire weapons and steel armor vs obsidian clubs.

  12. #12
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,174


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Pygmalion View Post
    Yes but I don't know how much the parallel between Phoenicians in South Europe and Europeans in America fits, from a military technology standpoint they were more or less on the same level, with Iberians and Sardinians using Atlantic bronze cut and slash swords, bronze spearheads and arrowheads and even using some iron daggers occasionally, while when Europeans conquered the Americans they had fire weapons and steel armor vs obsidian clubs.
    Obviously, everyone knows that there was a disparity in technology in the Americas versus the situation in the Bronze Age in Europe. That wasn't my point.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    533


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Pygmalion View Post
    I would take what Greek historians said with a grain of salt, they tended to attribute every civilized feature of the foreign people to themselves, for instance they claimed that the Nuragic civilization itself was Greek, from Diodorus:
    This isn't true about Pausanias, though.

    He says, for example:

    The first sailors (including Greeks) didn't have the knowledge or the ability to create cities.

    The first city was founded by Iberians.
    After Aristaeus the Iberians crossed to Sardinia, under Norax as leader of the expedition, and they founded the city of Nora. The tradition is that this was the first city in the island,
    After that Greeks founded Olbia and Ogryle.
    A fourth component part of the population was the army of Iolaus, consisting of Thespians and men from Attica, which put in at Sardinia and founded Olbia; by themselves the Athenians founded Ogryle
    Later Trojans moved and settled with the Greeks
    When Troy was taken, among those Trojans who fled were those who escaped with Aeneas. A part of them, carried from their course by winds, reached Sardinia and intermarried with the Greeks already settled there.
    But later
    The Greeks were utterly destroyed, or only a few of them survived. The Trojans made their escape to the high parts of the island, and occupied mountains difficult to climb, being precipitous and protected by stakes.
    From the things written in ancient sources people take with a grain of salt whatever they don't like usually.

  14. #14
    Advisor bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,731


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    From the things written in ancient sources people take with a grain of salt whatever they don't like usually.
    nevertheless they should be taken with a big grain of salt

  15. #15
    Advisor bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,731


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Most large folk migrations include some degree of violence because there is more disruption and the "natives" are not going to be happy about giving up their land. That's to be expected. The Amerindians were relatively friendly when the Europeans were few. That changed.
    I think the comparison to the Phoenicians might be something like the British and French and German colonialism of the 19th century. The Greek colonization was more like the Boers.
    However, I just started reading "Carthage Must Be Destroyed" by Richard Miles. (I got tired of it looking at me accusingly from my bed-stand! ) I'll be interested to see if there was a change after the Levant fell to the Assyrians. I'm already braced, from the reviews, for a pretty partisan take on it. He's definitely " Team Carthage". It's a pity, imo, when historians do this; it makes their conclusions suspect.
    https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...estroyed-miles
    weren't the Boers going inland to work the fields and raise cattle, while the Greeks often founded a colony on an island or a peninsula with the goal of just trading with the locals?

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    24-04-15
    Posts
    115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-V13

    Country: United Arab Emirates



    I believe that both cases of how Phoenicians and Greeks created colonies should be treated in a case to case basis.

    Greeks werent always moving en masse to a new colony unless they were driven out of their homeland but external factors. In my cases what we call Greek colonies were simply more developed cities that had relations with Greek city-states and traded a lot with them, eventually even hosting Greek merchants but in no way they constituted the majority.

    Then you have cases when 10,000 Greeks moved to a certain of Magna Graecia for example, so the same could be said about Phoenicians.

    The problem with Greeks is that how could you possibly measure their actual genetic imput on the Balkans and South Italy when both peoples were almost genetically identical since earlier eras.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-08-17
    Posts
    176


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    This isn't true about Pausanias, though.

    He says, for example:

    The first sailors (including Greeks) didn't have the knowledge or the ability to create cities.

    The first city was founded by Iberians.


    After that Greeks founded Olbia and Ogryle.


    Later Trojans moved and settled with the Greeks


    But later


    From the things written in ancient sources people take with a grain of salt whatever they don't like usually.
    Well, I take what they said with a grain of salt because I know most of what they said about Iberian and Sardinian history is wrong.

    For instance Nora is not the oldest city in Sardinia, Since Solky, which was a Tyrian colony and not a Carthaginian one is older by over a century, and so is Monte Sirai itself, or depending on the definition of city Nuragic proto-urban centers like Sant'Imbenia or Serri are even older, furthermore Nora certainly wasn't founded by Iberians, the oldest layers of the city belong to the Phoenician culture, and there is not a single fragment of Iberian pottery anywhere in the whole island, so no evidence of stable Iberian presence in Sardinia, while the contrary isn't true as archaeologists have found and are still recently discovering Nuragic pottery in many Iberian sites dating to as far as the Xth century bc, so the migration took place in the opposite direction.

    Then the chronology of the supposed Greek founding of Olbia is all wrong, since the city only dates back to the Punic era (late 6-early 5th century bc), and was Punic, the presence of a Greek settlement prior to that is hotly debated and if there was any it was in the 7th century bc, certainly not during the period of the Trojan war.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    533


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Pygmalion View Post
    Well, I take what they said with a grain of salt because I know most of what they said about Iberian and Sardinian history is wrong.

    For instance Nora is not the oldest city in Sardinia, Since Solky, which was a Tyrian colony and not a Carthaginian one is older by over a century, and so is Monte Sirai itself, or depending on the definition of city Nuragic proto-urban centers like Sant'Imbenia or Serri are even older, furthermore Nora certainly wasn't founded by Iberians, the oldest layers of the city belong to the Phoenician culture, and there is not a single fragment of Iberian pottery anywhere in the whole island, so no evidence of stable Iberian presence in Sardinia, while the contrary isn't true as archaeologists have found and are still recently discovering Nuragic pottery in many Iberian sites dating to as far as the Xth century bc, so the migration took place in the opposite direction.

    Then the chronology of the supposed Greek founding of Olbia is all wrong, since the city only dates back to the Punic era (late 6-early 5th century bc), and was Punic, the presence of a Greek settlement prior to that is hotly debated and if there was any it was in the 7th century bc, certainly not during the period of the Trojan war.
    The problem with what you write is that I didn't say that what Pausanias said was true. (I posted it mainly because he had said that Carthaginians used Iberian and Libyan mercenaries which is something that I don't believe someone would make up)

    But if Greeks in general "tended to attribute every civilized feature of the foreign people to themselves" (which isn't true), you should wonder why he said that the first city was founded by Iberians. What he had heard or saw to reach that conclusion?

    And then, why he said the people of the island (even those who according to him mainly descended from Trojans) had a mode of living similar to the 'Libyans'? And who were those Libyans?

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-08-17
    Posts
    176


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    The problem with what you write is that I didn't say that what Pausanias said was true. (I posted it mainly because he had said that Carthaginians used Iberian and Libyan mercenaries which is something that I don't believe someone would make up)

    But if Greeks in general "tended to attribute every civilized feature of the foreign people to themselves" (which isn't true), you should wonder why he said that the first city was founded by Iberians. What he had heard or saw to reach that conclusion?

    And then, why he said the people of the island (even those who according to him mainly descended from Trojans) had a mode of living similar to the 'Libyans'? And who were those Libyans?
    There was a tradition among ancient historians, especially among those in the Roman era, to think that the indigenous inhabitants of Sardinia were Libyans or came from Libya, Cicero for instance in his "Pro Scauro" oration repeated in many instances that Sardinians were a mix of Phoenicians and Africans, and that Sardinia was the same as Africa.
    Perhaps it's because Sardinians spoke Punic, we know that Sardinian cities were of Phoenician culture and that Punic was still spoken at least until the 2nd century AD as testified by bilingual inscriptions found in the island, as you probably know modern Sardinians are the direct descendants of Neolithic settlers from Europe so now we know that the theory about their North Africa origins isn't true and North African admixture is insignificant among Sardinians.
    The only historian to break this tradition was Strabo who claimed the natives were Thyrrenians.

  20. #20
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,174


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Actually, no, not everyone decides what to take with a grain of salt in the ancient sources depending on some sort of agenda. I take everything they say about absolutely everything with a grain of salt, and, in fact, never use their writings to support any argument whatsoever, unless I include a lot of caveats, because it's all just too unreliable, at least when they're relaying the "history" of events before their own time.

    In those cases they're just relaying rumors, or myths, not things they actually witnessed or for which they have some sort of documentary evidence.

    I don't know where people get this idea that they were "historians" in the sense we use that word today, and even today we have to examine the accounts of modern historians very carefully in terms of their sources.

    Now we don't have to rely on this kind of "evidence" any more, because we have ancient dna, and it has already falsified some of the things written by these authors.

    The Sardinians are actually a prime example. We now know their genetic composition, and any claim that they are "African", or "Libyan" in the sense of "North African" is completely falsified. That alone should tell you that to rely on these authors for "ethnic" information is absurd.

    Also, as the paper itself points out, the Phoenician impact, such as it was, was in the southwestern tip of the island. It did not extend island wide. Whatever any recoverable y dna might show about these Phoenician settlements, the authors have not shown any extensive intrusion of foreign mtDna, which would support the fact that this was not a folk migration.

    @Zanatis,
    I would be very interested to know your sources for the proposition that the Phoenicians established colonies which were more than trading outposts, i.e. the result of folk migrations, that expanded their territorial range etc.

  21. #21
    Regular Member alexfritz's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-17
    Posts
    100

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a CTS11962+L1029+
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H80

    Ethnic group
    german/italian
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Pygmalion View Post
    There was a tradition among ancient historians, especially among those in the Roman era, to think that the indigenous inhabitants of Sardinia were Libyans or came from Libya, Cicero for instance in his "Pro Scauro" oration repeated in many instances that Sardinians were a mix of Phoenicians and Africans, and that Sardinia was the same as Africa. Perhaps it's because Sardinians spoke Punic, we know that Sardinian cities were of Phoenician culture and that Punic was still spoken at least until the 2nd century AD as testified by bilingual inscriptions found in the island, as you probably know modern Sardinians are the direct descendants of Neolithic settlers from Europe so now we know that the theory about their North Africa origins isn't true and North African admixture is insignificant among Sardinians. The only historian to break this tradition was Strabo who claimed the natives were Thyrrenians.
    that is the point in specifics about Cicero 'pro scauro' in has to be viewed in a special context, a lawyer defending his client M.A.Scaurus by highlighting implying the sardinians to be punic/carthaginian meaning enemy in character not ethno-cultural; what i have puzzled together so far is that of course Carthage itself being settled by Phoenicians from the Mediterranean coast of the Levant; The native Libyans (aka Berbers) were always an integral part of Carthage as it becomes clear when just looking at Carthaginian armies from Himera(early 5th century BC)>2nd Punic-war(late 3rd century BC); Another peoples that became an integral part of the Phoenicians in the west and later Carthage were the Iberians (South and West Iberia) amongst whom many Phoenician colonies existed as early as the late Bronze-age/~900BC; Nancy H. Demand - The Mediterranean Context of Early Greek History (2011)
    phoe1.png

    What further illustrates the role of the non-Phoenician peoples i.e. Libyans and Iberians in the context of Carthage, is the historical settlement of Phoenician/Punic colonies on Sardinia; In Pausanias (X/XVII) we are informed that the Phoenician/Punic colonies were first settled by Libyans sailing under Sardo (a semi-mythical person) and than Nora was founded by Iberians sailing under Norax; Archaeologically Phoenician/Punic colonies started to exist in Sardinia since the 8th/7th century BC (Aubet 2001/p.236) and are seemingly all coastal; Pausanias also mentions that the Iberians and Libyans at one point revolted from the Carthaginians (rule) on Sardinia, yet the Nora-stele of the 8th century BC clearly illustrates that the language in use (adm) was Phoenician, plus that the island/(or people) was known as Sherden [SRDN] app after Sardo who established the first Phoenician/Punic colonies if it does however apply to an ethnonym than it could even be a recorded endonym;



    the 'tophets' of sardinia are also very valuable for ccarthaginian/phoenician child sacrifice myth or reality? tophets have also been excavated in numerous other Phoenician/Punic colonies such as at Motya in Sicily but especially on Sardinia (Tharros/Nora/Sulcis/Monte Sirai); It seems to depend on the inscription of the stele with stelae that have the inscriptions of mlk 'dm designate urns with human remains and stelae with the inscriptions mlk 'mr or molchomor designate urns with animal (usually lamb/sheep) remains; Francesca Stavrakopoulou - King Manasseh and Child Sacrifice: Biblical Distortions of Historical Realities (2004)
    Ro_P.png

  22. #22
    Regular Member alexfritz's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-12-17
    Posts
    100

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a CTS11962+L1029+
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H80

    Ethnic group
    german/italian
    Country: Germany



    add to #21 @pygmalion
    i would not say it as such about north-african admixture, what i have seen so far is this, there are two types of north-african components, Tunisian_Berber a most unadmixed component whether EUR or SSA (Henn et al / Botigue et al / Quinto-Sanchez et al) and the Mozabite/Saharawi component which is SSA admixed. Of course modern North African groups display a large Berber ancestry yet only if the Tun_Berber is the sole component but if one factors in also the Saharawi/Mozabite component than modern North Africans tend to be overwhelmingly of the latter instead of the former Old?Berber (Henn et al K=8 / Botigue et al K=6) whereas Sardinians do not seem to correspond to the Mozabite/Saharawi component as in Günther et al http://www.pnas.org/content/112/38/11917/F3.large.jpg < http://www.pnas.org/content/112/38/11917.full
    but do to the old Tun_Berber component as in Shriner et al/Paschou et al;

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    533


    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Pygmalion View Post
    There was a tradition among ancient historians, especially among those in the Roman era, to think that the indigenous inhabitants of Sardinia were Libyans or came from Libya, Cicero for instance in his "Pro Scauro" oration repeated in many instances that Sardinians were a mix of Phoenicians and Africans, and that Sardinia was the same as Africa.
    Perhaps it's because Sardinians spoke Punic, we know that Sardinian cities were of Phoenician culture and that Punic was still spoken at least until the 2nd century AD as testified by bilingual inscriptions found in the island, as you probably know modern Sardinians are the direct descendants of Neolithic settlers from Europe so now we know that the theory about their North Africa origins isn't true and North African admixture is insignificant among Sardinians.
    The only historian to break this tradition was Strabo who claimed the natives were Thyrrenians.
    But I don't believe modern Northern Africans are representative of the people whom he had labeled 'Libyans'. [I think it is apparent from my first post. The first time I read it I found confusing the fact he mentions that Libyans came from Corsica to Sardinia. That's why I had wondered in the past if a copying mistake is possible and if he could have originally written 'Ligyans' (=Ligures).]

    Apart from that concerning Sardinians their mostly EEF genetic profile seems probably consistent with (some) ancestry from the Trojans. [Based on what he writes we would expect the people of the mountainous regions to be more Trojan-like.]

    By the way, I have made the choice to believe that myths are probably based on real events, so I consider the myth of Aeneas for example to be a result of a real movement (though not necessarily a movement that made a big impact).

    The term Tyrrhenian (Tursenian) is used inconsistently in ancient sources. I will check how Strabo uses it.

    --------
    People from Europe (especially Germanics and some Slavs) often used medieval Greek sources to construct their national myths. When they managed to make those myths appear as facts they started attacking the sources they have used.
    --------
    Among ancient authors Herodotus is one who has suffered the most. If you don't believe it, see that article.
    The author is Korean (which is important) and he doesn't try to prove that everything Herodotus had written was true or that he was unbiased.

    https://www.academia.edu/10885180/HE...D_SIGNIFICANCE

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    29-05-17
    Posts
    107

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-M222
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1A

    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    This isn't true about Pausanias, though.

    He says, for example:

    The first sailors (including Greeks) didn't have the knowledge or the ability to create cities.

    The first city was founded by Iberians.


    After that Greeks founded Olbia and Ogryle.


    Later Trojans moved and settled with the Greeks


    But later


    From the things written in ancient sources people take with a grain of salt whatever they don't like usually.
    Guys its all in britain Greeks founded Albian and Argyle after kicking out the trojans.
    Didnt they all (most) of the greeks have blonde hair ? My guess Germanic celts invading britain.
    They chased them all the way to the mountains in northern scotland.
    It was about control of tin mining in cornwall.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-08-17
    Posts
    176


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    But I don't believe modern Northern Africans are representative of the people whom he had labeled 'Libyans'. [I think it is apparent from my first post. The first time I read it I found confusing the fact he mentions that Libyans came from Corsica to Sardinia. That's why I had wondered in the past if a copying mistake is possible and if he could have originally written 'Ligyans' (=Ligures).]

    Apart from that concerning Sardinians their mostly EEF genetic profile seems probably consistent with (some) ancestry from the Trojans. [Based on what he writes we would expect the people of the mountainous regions to be more Trojan-like.]

    By the way, I have made the choice to believe that myths are probably based on real events, so I consider the myth of Aeneas for example to be a result of a real movement (though not necessarily a movement that made a big impact).

    The term Tyrrhenian (Tursenian) is used inconsistently in ancient sources. I will check how Strabo uses it.

    --------
    People from Europe (especially Germanics and some Slavs) often used medieval Greek sources to construct their national myths. When they managed to make those myths appear as facts they started attacking the sources they have used.
    --------
    Among ancient authors Herodotus is one who has suffered the most. If you don't believe it, see that article.
    The author is Korean (which is important) and he doesn't try to prove that everything Herodotus had written was true or that he was unbiased.

    https://www.academia.edu/10885180/HE...D_SIGNIFICANCE
    I doubt any Trojan settled in Sardinia, first of all while there is evidence for direct contacts between Sardina, Cyprus and Crete during the bronze age there is none for Troy or Anatolia as far as I know, the reason why Trojans were said to have settled in Sardinia is probably the same as why they were often brought up for other people like the Romans, it was a very popular myth and the story about Trojan refugees settling in the West was used to unify Mediterranean people, just like later religion also fulfilled the purpose of unifying people through a common mythology, same goes for other myths like Hercules who was said to have sent a colony to Sardinia and to have gone to Iberia for his labors.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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