The genomic history of the Aegean palatial civilizations.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Blaming the fall of the Western Roman Empire entirely to the Germanic tribes isn‘t completely correct. Some historians say that moral decay, the male Roman population becoming lazy and diseases weakened the Empire. So, Rome was in decline before the Germanics sounded the death kneel, gave the final blow to it. The thing is, that at one point, the empire was split into Western and Eastern empires. And the center of the Empire was not Rome anymore but Constantinople. So, the center of the Empire moved to the East, thus all the money, funds, innovation, and relevance, too. This move made the Western Empire a nonpriority and there wasn‘t much investment in that part of the Empire, thus its development started stagnating. Keep in mind that Germanic tribespeople became the bulk of the soldiers/mercenaries in West Rome. They were fighting against other German barbarians to stop their invasion and to secure the border. So, Germanic tribes made sure that the Western Empire didn‘t collapse earlier than it did. Furthermore, the Goths were not that destructive. The Vandals were, but they were outmatched by the Huns. To Romans, the Huns were the most savage of the savages.


The bottom line is, that Rome had many issues. Eastern Rome became more important than the Western part. Hence, West Rome was pretty abandoned, lacked funds, and wasn‘t well-governed. Due to the lack of funds, the empire was unable to maintain its massive landholdings, and invading forces began to conquer them slowly, over time.

Actualy the Visigoths had been betrayed very badly by the Romans twice :

First when they were allowed to cross the Danube :

In 376, the Thervings came under increasing pressure from the Huns, who had already conquered their kinsmen, the Greuthungi. Fritigern asked Valens to allow the Thervingi to cross the northern Roman border and settle in Moesia or Thracia, with the Danube River and Roman frontier forts protecting them from the Huns. Valens agreed to permit Fritigern's followers to enter the empire. In return, they would be subject to military service, but would be treated the same as other Roman subjects. As it turned out, neither happened. Meanwhile, Athanaric and many of his followers retreated to Caucaland ("the Highlands", presumably the Eastern Carpathians and Transylvania).
During the autumn of 376, the Romans helped Alavivus and Fritigern's people cross the Danube and settle in the province of Moesia. In the winter of 376/7, a famine hit the areas settled by the Thervingi and their appeals for help went unanswered.[6] The Roman governors of the area, Lupicinus and Maximus, treated them badly. They sold them food only at extremely high prices, which forced many Goths to sell their children as slaves. They invited several Thervingi leaders to a feast, in which they killed some and took others hostage. Alavivus most likely remained a hostage, but Fritigern was able to escape and he became leader of the Thervingi. Soon he declared war on the Roman Empire.

Second during and after the Battle of Frigidus :

By 392, Alaric had entered Roman military service, which coincided with a reduction of hostilities between Goths and Romans.[17] In 394, he led a Gothic force that helped Emperor Theodosius defeat the Frankish usurper Arbogast—fighting at the behest of Eugenius—at the Battle of Frigidus.[18] Despite sacrificing around 10,000 of his men, who had been victims of Theodosius' callous tactical decision to overwhelm the enemies front lines using Gothic foederati,[19] Alaric received little recognition from the emperor. Alaric was among the few who survived the protracted and bloody affair.[20] Many Romans considered it their "gain" and a victory that so many Goths had died during the Battle of Frigidus River.[21] Recent biographer, Douglas Boin, posits that seeing ten thousand of his (Alaric's) dead kinsmen likely elicited questions about what kind of ruler Theodosius actually had been and whether remaining in direct Roman service was best for men like him.[22] Refused the reward he expected, which included a promotion to the position of Magister militum and command of regular Roman units, Alaric mutinied and began to march against Constantinople.

That is how Rome called the rage of the Visigoths over themselves, resulting in the sack of Rome in 410.

 
For those who are interested, the article is here.

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(21)00370-6

fx1.jpg




It seems that what Giannopoylos describes as coming of the Hellenes (IE branch)
what Georgiev believes as Proto-Greek Language,
seems to be working model.

Maybe the model could be factional also with Lazarides papper, about Myceneans and Minoans.
 
Interesting. Given the results it is safe to assume that some differences between mainland Greeks and Greek islanders (as well as Sicilians and South Italians) are not solely due to medieval migrations, but also due to Bronze Age and (quite likely) Iron Age migrations.

That said, it seems to me quite of a coincidence that say, Thessalians are very identical to these Helladic Greeks. What probably happened is that the levels of Steppe admixture have remained the same regarding of some inevitable migrations. There were migrations from Northern Greece to Southern Greece and the way around. I can think of the Dorian invasion, as well as the Ionian colonies in Northern Greece. So the Steppe admixture was somewhat more diluted during the Classical Age. But the absorption of Slavs in the Middle Ages elevated the Steppe admixture levels once again.
 
Pastoral Semitic speakers also had their form of male democracy. Phoenician city-states too.

You may find it in North American Indian tribes as well, but how this relates to my point. The discussion was exchange between steppe people and European farmers or not?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Actualy the Visigoths had been betrayed very badly by the Romans twice :

First when they were allowed to cross the Danube :

In 376, the Thervings came under increasing pressure from the Huns, who had already conquered their kinsmen, the Greuthungi. Fritigern asked Valens to allow the Thervingi to cross the northern Roman border and settle in Moesia or Thracia, with the Danube River and Roman frontier forts protecting them from the Huns. Valens agreed to permit Fritigern's followers to enter the empire. In return, they would be subject to military service, but would be treated the same as other Roman subjects. As it turned out, neither happened. Meanwhile, Athanaric and many of his followers retreated to Caucaland ("the Highlands", presumably the Eastern Carpathians and Transylvania).
During the autumn of 376, the Romans helped Alavivus and Fritigern's people cross the Danube and settle in the province of Moesia. In the winter of 376/7, a famine hit the areas settled by the Thervingi and their appeals for help went unanswered.[6] The Roman governors of the area, Lupicinus and Maximus, treated them badly. They sold them food only at extremely high prices, which forced many Goths to sell their children as slaves. They invited several Thervingi leaders to a feast, in which they killed some and took others hostage. Alavivus most likely remained a hostage, but Fritigern was able to escape and he became leader of the Thervingi. Soon he declared war on the Roman Empire.

Second during and after the Battle of Frigidus :

By 392, Alaric had entered Roman military service, which coincided with a reduction of hostilities between Goths and Romans.[17] In 394, he led a Gothic force that helped Emperor Theodosius defeat the Frankish usurper Arbogast—fighting at the behest of Eugenius—at the Battle of Frigidus.[18] Despite sacrificing around 10,000 of his men, who had been victims of Theodosius' callous tactical decision to overwhelm the enemies front lines using Gothic foederati,[19] Alaric received little recognition from the emperor. Alaric was among the few who survived the protracted and bloody affair.[20] Many Romans considered it their "gain" and a victory that so many Goths had died during the Battle of Frigidus River.[21] Recent biographer, Douglas Boin, posits that seeing ten thousand of his (Alaric's) dead kinsmen likely elicited questions about what kind of ruler Theodosius actually had been and whether remaining in direct Roman service was best for men like him.[22] Refused the reward he expected, which included a promotion to the position of Magister militum and command of regular Roman units, Alaric mutinied and began to march against Constantinople.

That is how Rome called the rage of the Visigoths over themselves, resulting in the sack of Rome in 410.


Right. This from the man who once hinted that starving people from the Middle East trying to reach Europe by boat should be allowed to drown, and doesn't want even one starving child to be let into his country, a country, by the way, which accepted lots of Middle Easterners when they needed cheap labor, but he wants them now to all be sent back.

Do you hear yourself? Do you have any self-awareness whatsoever? You say the Roman government deserved to have its whole civilization crushed, a civilization from which a huge chunk of Europe benefited and was loyal to, for behavior you've advocated in your own time by your countrymen against Middle Easterners and Africans. Of all the hypocrisy...

Looking at it strictly as a matter of practicality, do you think Rome could have absorbed all the starving Barbarian hordes fleeing from the Huns?

You don't even realize that these Roman officials could have been Gauls or border Gemans who might have been your ancestors. Do you think they were Italians on those borders by that time?
 
I don't even know how to respond to this 'goddam steppe brutes!' thread.

I wasn't aware you were constrained to come here or to read the thread.
 
Blaming the fall of the Western Roman Empire entirely to the Germanic tribes isn‘t completely correct. Some historians say that moral decay, the male Roman population becoming lazy and diseases weakened the Empire. So, Rome was in decline before the Germanics sounded the death kneel, gave the final blow to it. The thing is, that at one point, the empire was split into Western and Eastern empires. And the center of the Empire was not Rome anymore but Constantinople. So, the center of the Empire moved to the East, thus all the money, funds, innovation, and relevance, too. This move made the Western Empire a nonpriority and there wasn‘t much investment in that part of the Empire, thus its development started stagnating. Keep in mind that Germanic tribespeople became the bulk of the soldiers/mercenaries in West Rome. They were fighting against other German barbarians to stop their invasion and to secure the border. So, Germanic tribes made sure that the Western Empire didn‘t collapse earlier than it did. Furthermore, the Goths were not that destructive. The Vandals were, but they were outmatched by the Huns. To Romans, the Huns were the most savage of the savages.


The bottom line is, that Rome had many issues. Eastern Rome became more important than the Western part. Hence, West Rome was pretty abandoned, lacked funds, and wasn‘t well-governed. Due to the lack of funds, the empire was unable to maintain its massive landholdings, and invading forces began to conquer them slowly, over time.

I'm quite familiar with the elementary school version.

One of the reasons, btw, for the move of the capital to the east was because the western Empire was under constant attack from attacking tribes to the east. Too expensive to keep fighting them off.

I would remind you that the Eastern Empire also had many issues, but they survived for another 1000 years because the hordes mostly poured into and devoured the west.

Their time would come, of course, no empire lasts forever, but the fall of any civilization to barbaric invaders from the periphery is never a cause for rejoicing. Like I said, I'm always for the civilized core, no matter the ethnicity involved.
 
I think you're right.
The ability to learn from others and adapt.
Otherwise they couldn't survive.
They did more than just survive.

You should know after my thousands of posts here that I don't state as fact something that I cannot prove.

See:
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~rnoyer/courses/51/AegeanBronzeAge.pdf

Is the University of Pennsylvania a good enough source for you? Note the word DESTRUCTION.

Also please read the following article.

https://www.greek-thesaurus.gr/p1b.html

How many times does it have to be proved to you, pray tell?

"The development observable during the second phase of the Early Bronze Age comes to an end during the third and last phase of the Period (2200-2000 B.C.). Evident are destructions, the abandonment of settlements and a general disorganisation that has been traditionally associated with the incursion of new populations. The Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600 B.C.) is characterised initially by an economic and cultural decline,as can be seen in the poor remains of the settlements and in the poverty of the burials."


 
Gene-flow from steppe individuals into Cucuteni-Trypillia associated populations indicates long-standing contacts and gradual admixture-Alexander Immel (2.019)-

Recently, it was hypothesized that due to their high population densities, the CTC megasettlements served as a focus point for the emergence and large-scale radiation of Y. pestis lineages across Eurasia during the Neolithic. Amongst the four Moldovan specimens, we did not detect any signals of a Y. pestis infection, although the three individuals from Pocrovca were discovered in a multiple burial (without any traces of violence), which would render death due to an epidemic event plausible. Interestingly, we detected steppe-related ancestry in the Late Eneolithic CTC burials from the Republic of Moldova. The presence of this component suggests moderate genetic influx from individuals affiliated with steppe cultures into the CTC associated gene-pool as early as 3500 BCE; at the same time, archaeological evidence display an increase of quantity of Tripolyerelated finds in the steppe area. Thus, the steppe component had arrived in the eastern part of the continent in farmer communities well before it first appeared in the west, i.e. in the Corded Ware people around 2800 BCE. This finding establishes eastern Europe as an old genetic contact zone between locals and incoming steppe people, which is supported by two other early dating specimens from Ukraine

One likely source population that could have introduced the steppe ancestry component into the CTC gene-pool might have been individuals associated with the eastern Eurasian M****ithic, e.g. the Ukraine M****ithic people, Eastern hunter-gatherers or even later-dating Yamnaya steppe pastoralists. However, this hypothesis challenges a previously published scenario of Yamnaya horsemen massively migrating in war into central Europe

NO Yersinia pestis and NO massive migrations

Yeah, all those derived R1b men and R1a men just dropped out of spaceships or something.

For goodness' sakes.

Is this the kind of poster this site is now attracting?
 
don't you think it's good that alexander immel participates in some way in this forum? - he is a prestigious european researcher, to my knowledge, he has never said that R1a and R1b are Martians.
 
Right. This from the man who once hinted that starving people from the Middle East trying to reach Europe by boat should be allowed to drown, and doesn't want even one starving child to be let into his country, a country, by the way, which accepted lots of Middle Easterners when they needed cheap labor, but he wants them now to all be sent back.

Do you hear yourself? Do you have any self-awareness whatsoever? You say the Roman government deserved to have its whole civilization crushed, a civilization from which a huge chunk of Europe benefited and was loyal to, for behavior you've advocated in your own time by your countrymen against Middle Easterners and Africans. Of all the hypocrisy...

Looking at it strictly as a matter of practicality, do you think Rome could have absorbed all the starving Barbarian hordes fleeing from the Huns?

You don't even realize that these Roman officials could have been Gauls or border Gemans who might have been your ancestors. Do you think they were Italians on those borders by that time?

first of all you're twisting my words and changing the subject, this way can go on and on and on

second you told just 1 or 2 days ago that everyone within the whole Roman empire was a Roman
and do you think people in Italy weren't cheering the death of 10.000 Visigoths ?
 
You should know after my thousands of posts here that I don't state as fact something that I cannot prove.

See:
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~rnoyer/courses/51/AegeanBronzeAge.pdf

Is the University of Pennsylvania a good enough source for you? Note the word DESTRUCTION.

Also please read the following article.

https://www.greek-thesaurus.gr/p1b.html

How many times does it have to be proved to you, pray tell?

"The development observable during the second phase of the Early Bronze Age comes to an end during the third and last phase of the Period (2200-2000 B.C.). Evident are destructions, the abandonment of settlements and a general disorganisation that has been traditionally associated with the incursion of new populations. The Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600 B.C.) is characterised initially by an economic and cultural decline,as can be seen in the poor remains of the settlements and in the poverty of the burials."



traditionally associated with : meaning : we have no proof but people like you always blaim the steppe people

do you have more details : when exactly and in what parts of Greece did the destructions happen?

and what about the diseases you claim?
 
I wasn't aware you were constrained to come here or to read the thread.

maybe we should stick to the facts of the thread and stop phantasising about those brute herders from the steppe with all kinds of diseases

you're highjacking the thread
 
first of all you're twisting my words and changing the subject, this way can go on and on and on

second you told just 1 or 2 days ago that everyone within the whole Roman empire was a Roman
and do you think people in Italy weren't cheering the death of 10.000 Visigoths ?

You're the one who brought up the Visigoths and how the refusal to let in and feed the starving Germanic tribes justified the destruction of all of Europe within the Empire. You expect that to go un-answered? You expect everyone to ignore all the things you said about not letting in any of the refugees from war torn Syria or other places around the world and the hypocrisy that shows?

You also conveniently forget that the Germanics they did let in were among the first to take up the sword against those people who heeded their begging and let them in. A lot of them WERE let in and re-settled. Your researching is highly selective. Just like Arminius.

See:
https://www.quora.com/Did-Arminius-...-German-auxiliaries-serving-in-the-Roman-army

Even the Germanics who were in the army and had sworn oaths to the Empire turned on Rome. Letting them in was like letting in tens of thousands of armed Syrian and Iraqi soldiers into Europe. It was a stupid idea. They should have remembered the example of Arminius.

main-qimg-36e25fc57ef6d0aa0ff1f1049e4ee152


What I described happened in ALL those areas in Europe. Do you get it? The documentation is absolutely crystal clear.

You also persist in not understanding the cultural transformation of Europe. I have pointed you to articles and books showing that within three generations people in Britannia, Spain, France, BELGICA, considered themselves ROMANS. That was their identity first and foremost. Then, if asked, they might name their region. People who would say they were from Italia had a certain prestige, but that's it.

This is what having an agenda is like. All the proof in the world can be submitted, but they just won't accept it because it disturbs their world view.

If it turns out that some or a lot of the Sea Peoples were Italian you don't think I would acknowledge the destruction they wrought and side with the great civilizations which they brought down?
 
traditionally associated with : meaning : we have no proof but people like you always blaim the steppe people

do you have more details : when exactly and in what parts of Greece did the destructions happen?

and what about the diseases you claim?

You asked for proof. I provided it, including the teaching curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania. You think these scholars are not basing their conclusions on ARCHAEOLOGY? They described what those archaeologists found.

It's clear you won't believe it because you don't want to believe it. You'll have some excuse for every paper I present so why should I bother.

Since you claim it's not true, find published papers that support your point of view.
 
maybe we should stick to the facts of the thread and stop phantasising about those brute herders from the steppe with all kinds of diseases

you're highjacking the thread

I'M highjacking the thread? You're the one making nonsensical claims and asking questions, and, btw, throwing out ad hominids all over the place.

I'm merely answering the questions you post. You just don't like the factual answers because they prove you wrong.

Stop it and there will be no need for me to respond.
 
You asked for proof. I provided it, including the teaching curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania. You think these scholars are not basing their conclusions on ARCHAEOLOGY? They described what those archaeologists found.

It's clear you won't believe it because you don't want to believe it. You'll have some excuse for every paper I present so why should I bother.

Since you claim it's not true, find published papers that support your point of view.

the papers don't provide any proof, not even a claim

they say the destructions are traditionaly associated with invading steppe people

they don't endorse this claim themselves

and nothing about diseases

we can go on and on like this

unless if you come up with something more substantial, I rest my case
 
the papers don't provide any proof, not even a claim

they say the destructions are traditionaly associated with invading steppe people

they don't endorse this claim themselves

and nothing about diseases

we can go on and on like this

unless if you come up with something more substantial, I rest my case

You don't get to rest your case with a complete fabrication. Or maybe you just didn't bother to read it?

Read carefully now...

Who arrived at that time, Bicicleur??? Are you freaking kidding me? Plus, later on it specifically mentions migrations.

"To this same period belong the graves of Leukas in the Ionian Sea, with their rich funerary equipment. In Mainland Greece, Boeotian Orchomenos beside the Kopais lake, Lerna in the Argolid and Aegina are among the important centres of this time -for the well-known Neolithic sites such as Sesklo and Lianokladi we have less evidence. In Attica there are many small but important settlements such as Raphina, Askitario and Ag. Kosmas. The imported objects found in these settlements provide evidence of their habitual communication with the Cyclades.

The development observable during the second phase of the Early Bronze Age comes to an end during the third and last phase of the Period (2200-2000 B.C.). Evident are destructions, the abandonment of settlements and a general disorganisation that has been traditionally associated with the incursion of new populations. The Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600 B.C.) is characterised initially by an economic and cultural decline,as can be seen in the poor remains of the settlements and in the poverty of the burials. "


From now on you are on permanent ignore as far as I'm considered. There is no profit to discussions with people who are uninformed, illogical, biased, and refuse to be persuaded of the truth because of their biases.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 117515 times.

Back
Top